News Archive - 2012-03 (March 2012)

2012-03-03 #WikiLeaks News Update: #GIFiles coverage; Bradley #Manning updates; Other news

WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 455 days.
Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 452 days.
Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 649 days.

WikiLeaks News:

Image from WikiLeaks

  • The G.I. Files have been dominating the headlines. Here are some highlights:
  • There are numerous other revelations from the G.I. Files. For further coverage, check out Kevin Gosztola's on-going live-blog and various links included at the end of this update.
  • One of the biggest revelations to come out of the G.I. Files, was confirmation of a sealed indictment against Julian Assange. The US Department of Justice refuses to comment on this.
  • Transcript and video of WikiLeaks' press conference on the G.I. Files are available at WikiLeaks Press.
  • Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher has identified two Stratfor sources: James Casey and Penny Pritzker.

  • L'Espresso has published a new interview with Julian Assange in which he discusses topics including the current state of WikiLeaks, Obama, the sealed indictment against him.

  • NYT eXaminer has a new webpage dedicated to all their coverage of WikiLeaks.

  • Australian Senator Mark Arbib, revealed by WikiLeaks cables as a frequent US informant, has resigned.

  • Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair closed the RSA 2012 conference by denouncing WikiLeaks as "very bad and disgraceful."

  • Julian Assange will be participating in an online debate about The War on Drugs, March 13 at 7PM GMT.

  • Australian Greens Senator Scott Ludlam gave a speech to the senate regarding news of the sealed indictment against Julian Assange. He also addressed questions about it to the Prime Minister, which were answered by her representative.

  • WikiLeaks lawyer Jennifer Robinson says it's time for the Australian government to stand ground and protect Assange. She also wrote a piece on how, if she were Attorney General, she would protect Assange. The Australian published an article on her, "Julian Assange's homegrown hardnosed lawyer."

  • Ian Bailey won an appeal in Irish Supreme Court, which refused to extradite him to France since they only wanted to question him. The UK High Court did not accept this argument in Julian Assange's case.

  • Professor Ferrada-noli continues to analyse Sweden's on-going "trial by media" of Julian Assange. He was also on Swedish Radio1 to debate Expressen journalists, who have been claiming WikiLeaks is planning a smear campaign against Sweden.

  • Christine Assange urges the Australian people to make her son an election issue. She was also on ABC Radio discussing recent updates in Julian's case.

Bradley Manning News:

  • Bradley Manning's new mailing address is available at his attorney's website, along with instructions on what Bradley can and can't receive.

  • Bradley Manning is one of 231 nominees for the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize.

  • The Bradley Manning Support Network discussed the Washington Post featuring a Top Secret cable in a recent article, which highlights the government's hypocrisy on secrecy.

  • CCR's Michael Ratner was on The Real News discussing Bradley Manning's recent arraignment.

  • Veteran's for Peace is calling on the US Army to abandon all court martial proceedings against Bradley Manning.

  • A campaign has been started to raise money for a Bradley Manning billboard in Washington DC.

  • Bradley Manning Support Network's Rainey Reitman writes on why feminists and trans activists should support Bradley.

Further G.I. Files Coverage:

  • WikiLeaks has four articles available at its website on WikiLeaks-related G.I. Files.
  • Greg Mitchell covered the G.I. Files for the first four days.
  • Kristinn Hrafnsson was interviewed on Democracy Now! Michael Ratner was on at a later date discussing the sealed indictment.
  • Crikey: "The filth and the fury (and the catfood): Stratfor talks WikiLeaks"
  • The Young Turks: "WikiLeaks Stratfor emails devastating." Michael Hastings was also on to discuss Homeland Security's monitoring of the Occupy movement.
  • NYT eXaminer: "The Global Intelligence Files: The New York Times, A Postscript"
  • Analysis of Stratfor's use of WikiLeaks material, while harboring hatred for Assange
  • Tool to search through tweets with #GIFiles hashtag


Upcoming Dates & Events:

March 4: Julian Assange Supreme Court verdict expected after this date.

March 8: Daniel Ellsberg will speak at Princeton University at an event called "Secrets, Lies, and Leaks: From the Pentagon Papers to WikiLeaks."

March 13: Julian Assange to participate in online War on Drugs debate, 7PM GMT.

Mid-March: Julian Assange's TV Series to begin airing.

March 15: Bradley Manning's motion hearing, 10AM at Fort Meade.

March 17: "War on WikiLeaks" public forum at Bleeding Heart, Brisbane, 7PM. Speakers include Christine Assange and Scott Ludlam.

April 25: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.

May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

2012-03-05 Untitled Angst: the curse of lethargy in a time of monsters

Authored By: Nadim Fetaih


As Edmund Burke once wrote, “all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” It is time for Canada to shed the shackles of apathy and rise.

I have long been a proponent for a revolution in Canada. I have written many blog pieces to try and inspire the Canadian people and have stuck with my belief that Canada has the potential to once again become a leading force in the world, to inspire freedom and prosperity for people around the globe.

With recent events though, this belief has begun to chip away. My once strong resolve for hope has begun to decompose with the filth I have seen in not only the political spectrum, but the social spectrum as well. Within the past year alone we have seen so many repugnant acts by our political elite. Harper — our near dictatorial Prime Minister — has stepped beyond the bounds of his political mandate far too many times.

The most internationally known aspect of popular Canadian sentiments has been its exit from the Kyoto Protocol. This was not only a defeat to all those who have been fighting the oil tar sands development, but also to any Canadian who once believed we were leaders in the world. No, instead we boldly stated that we are nothing but puppets, selling our souls to international corporations at the expense of our health and environment.

In the process, we proved once more that we are nothing but a side-kick of our neighbors to the south — that unless our master, the United States of America, enters into an endeavor, neither will we.

Now, we are heading into talks with Israel and the U.S. to walk into yet another disastrous conflict, this time against Iran. Our soldiers have fought in two U.S.-provoked wars; Afghanistan and Iraq. They have killed and been killed. They have shed blood and been part of inevitable horrible acts from the catalyst that is war. Yet, we are willing to follow the imperialist United States into another bloody war, and for what?

Iran has no weapons of mass destruction. The only country which does have nuclear weapons in the region is the very country we are siding with. But, still, we are blindly following our puppet master into yet another war — a war with much more profound implications; a war which could hypothetically escalate into another major global conflict if Russia and China side with Iran (as they currently seem to be doing).

These two issues alone should be enough for mass protests, right? But wait, there is more.

Here in Canada, our ‘democratic’ process is being questioned. Not only because of the inherent problems with having an unproportional voting system, but rather because the ‘Harper Government’ willingly manipulated that very voting system. The conservative party hired a company to call registered voters. This on its own is not unusual, but the problem is that the company aimed to find out whom the voter was actually planning to vote for.

If they were planning to vote for the conservatives, they would be pressed to vote — if not, then many people would be given false information on where they needed to vote (referring to it a ‘change of venues’). This annulled opposition votes, as voters would simply end up in a voting area where they weren’t registered. Thousands of voters were called around our country — the most organized effort to obstruct ‘democracy’ in our country since its conception.

Currently, many laws and decisions have been made without any prior public debate — completely negating the idea of representative democracy. Some laws that are heading to our (primarily conservative) senate are the following:

  • Bill C-10: This omni-bus crime bill will make mandatory minimum sentences the norm in our country. This has been widely accepted as not only a waste of tax payer money (considering we will have to build ‘super prisons’ to house all the ‘criminals’), but also as a failed practice. It never led to a drop in the crime rate. It only ensures that petty criminals are imprisoned alongside the dangerous ones, encouraging further crime. The bill has even been denounced by the Texan governor — who has been telling our government that preventative measures and treatment of those ‘criminals’ is far more effective in lowering crime, as well as saving money
  • Bill C-30: This is the Canadian version of SOPA/PIPA — with an added twist. It will give our police force the right and authority to monitor our e-mails, web history, and private activity without warrants. It will allow the police to monitor our IP addresses and trace any activity back to our locations.
  • NDAA: the National Defense Authorization Act: This, many people will know, exists in the United States. What NDAA does is allow the military to indefinitely detain American citizens considered ‘terrorists’ or threats to the system. But wait, the recent integration of ‘security’ between Canada and the U.S. now makes it possible for the U.S. to charge any Canadian as well (most notably seen in the case of Mark Emery). This fact has now been underlined by the ‘Beyond the Borders: Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness’ act.
    These three laws have either passed (the NDAA), or are likely pass in the coming months (Bills C-10 and C-30). Our freedoms are slowly being taken away to ensure that any future attempts to revolt will be fought back with harsh measures not only from our own government, but from the U.S. government as well.

As if that weren’t enough, we are currently awaiting the presentation of our Federal and Provincial government budgets for this fiscal year. Much of this is being hidden from the people until the budgets are actually put up (and with majority governments across the board, it is unlikely that they will not be passed). These budgets bring austerity measures that will rock our country’s social foundation. Many are expecting billions of dollars to be taken away from our healthcare, our Old Age Pension, EI insurance and other social security nets we have been so used to.

All of this has been discussed as a means to ‘balance the budget’. But this is not truly the case. To add insult to injury, our Federal government will be spending hundreds of billions of dollars on fighter jets, battleships, super-prisons around the country and even a glass dome retrofitted to our Parliamentary building. All the while, economists around the country are warning of an impending second recession.

Our economy is stalling. Many people believe we will be the first country of the Western hemisphere to fall back into recession. No jobs have been created, even though the ‘Harper Government’ introduced the ‘Canadian Action Plan’, which has in reality done nothing but spend billions of dollars on new infrastructure projects that created no lasting change, nor any lasting jobs. When considering population growth, our economy is not growing — indeed, it is contracting.

Finally, our economy is entirely based on natural resource extraction — considered the most volatile market because it is entirely dependent on the conjuncture of the global economy and the market-based prices of these goods. Commodity speculation and a worldwide recession can cause these prices to drop at any moment, crippling our very economy. To top this all off, our economic dependence on the U.S. may just be the reason our recession could turn into depression.

But while all of that has transpired — and with all the information out there about the degradation of our nation, our economy, our social welfare system and our environment — the people have not stood up. Rather, they are just as lethargic as ever. Worse yet, they know the problems, they see the issues, and choose not to do anything about it.

Popular inaction in the face of injustice is worse than any governmental action that creates it. It is as a result of the people’s inability to say “NO” to the destruction of our freedoms that our government has the ability to destroy those freedoms to begin with. It is because of the inaction of well-educated people that we will soon see the worst of all imaginable worlds.

As Edmund Burke once put it, “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men [and women, sic] to do nothing.”

So while our government allows outside military forces to arrest our people on the basis of a vague and undefined ‘terrorist’ category, it is us who are to blame for any person indefinitely detained without trial. While our government will go to war with yet another country, potentially costing us billions of dollars and unspeakable amounts of lives, it is us who have allowed these deaths to occur by refusing to rise up in the face of such blatant insanity.

While our government passes laws giving unprecedented powers to the police, it is us who unwittingly gave up our rights, freedoms, and security. While our government (happily aided by multinational corporations) blindly leads us into a second depression, taking away our social-security programs in the process, it is us who have given our social programs away and who blindly follow our ‘leaders’ towards economic doom.

I am sick and tired of people using scapegoats. It is not immigration that is the problem. It is not the euro-crisis. It is not the criminals. And it is most definitely not the government. When looking for the problem in our country, why our future looks so bleak, why there are no jobs, why corporations are taking over, why police brutality is going up, why education is going down and why our healthcare system is ailing, you need only look in the mirror.

If we all face this very simple fact, then maybe, just maybe, we can stop our downward spiral. If we all accept that the onus is only on the people for not standing up for their rights, this spring and summer may just be our saving grace.

If not, our future will be exactly like Prime Minister Stephen Harper has decreed it to be: “You won’t recognize Canada when I get through with it.”

Nadim is a Canadian-Egyptian filmmaker. His first documentary,A Tale of Two Revolutions, is scheduled to be released later this year.

2012-03-06 #WikiLeaks News Update: #GIFiles; Updated events; Other news

WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 458 days.
Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 455 days.
Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 652 days.

WikiLeaks News:

Image from WikiLeaks

  • WikiLeaks continues to release more G.I. Files daily. Here is the latest coverage:
    • Stratfor sees New Zealand as holding little geopolitical importance.
    • Mossad assisted their Saudi counterparts with intelligence on Iran
    • Assad's mother is disappointed by his failures as Syrian President
    • Papua New Guinea's new PM, Peter O'Neill, is only interested in money
    • Stratfor believes Turkey's PM Erdogan has two years to live
  • Cabledrum has released a tool for searching through articles on the G.I. Files, using a tag-based system of Country, Language, and Publisher.
  • The story of Osama Bin Laden's body being taken to Dover, DE instead of being buried at sea is now being covered by many large news organizations including RT, Huffington Post, and The Telegraph.
  • Bhopal activist Indra Sinha wrote on discovering he was being spied on by Dow Chemical. This revelation has caused increased protests against Dow's sponsorship of the 2012 Olympics.
  • RT's The Keiser Report discussed the G.I. Files with Yes Men's Andy Bichlbaum as a guest.
  • Kevin Gosztola continues covering the G.I. Files in his live-blog at Firedoglake.

  • WikiLeaks issued a press release on the recent articles by Expressen which claim WikiLeaks is planning a smear campaign against Sweden. WikiLeaks says these claims are completely fabricated and calls for Thomas Mattson to "issue a full, front page retraction, or resign." Previously, Kristinn Hrafnsson wrote a piece for SVT saying WikiLeaks has no plans to defame Sweden. Expressen then declined to debate WikiLeaks on the issue.

  • WikiLeaks tweeted out a clarification saying, "WikiLeaks "dropped" the New York Times, the Guardian, Le Monde, El Pais-NOT the other way around." Specifically, they pointed out the abuse of censorship, The Guardian breaking "all 3 points of its contract and acting negligently," David Leigh's publication of the Cablegate password, and the New York Times killing its story on US Task Force 373. They did however note they continue to work with individual journalists from said organizations.

  • Geoffrey Robertson QC was on Sunrise discussing the topic "Should Australia help Assange?":

  • Göran Rudling, a witness at Julian Assange's February 2011 hearing at Belmarsh, wrote a detailed analysis on the condom submitted in the case which he believes to be falsified evidence.

  • Viggo Mortensen, known for his role as Aragorn in The Lord of the Rings triology, has listed Julian Assange as one of his heroes.

  • A short interview of Julian Assange is featured in a video of the premier of Europe's Last Dictator.

  • An Op-Ed in Sydney Morning Herald says that one of the first tasks for Foreign Affairs Minister Bob Carr is to demand basic respect in the treatment of Australian citizens, including Julian Assange. In 2010 Bob Carr called Assange "an under-educated egomania," in 2011 he sympathized with Assange for the Swedish allegations against him, and this year said Assange would be better off in an Australian court.

  • Christine Assange tweeted out a list of talking points to address MPs with, regarding her son's legal battles.

  • The UN Rapporteur on Torture called Bradley Manning's treatment at Quantico "cruel, inhuman, and degrading."


Upcoming Dates & Events:

March 7: Protest for Assange at DFAT in Sydney, 5PM.

March 8: Daniel Ellsberg will speak at Princeton University at an event called "Secrets, Lies, and Leaks: From the Pentagon Papers to WikiLeaks."

March 13: Julian Assange to participate in online War on Drugs debate, 7PM GMT.

Mid-March: Julian Assange's TV Series to begin airing.

March 15: Bradley Manning's motion hearing, 10AM at Fort Meade.

March 17: "War on WikiLeaks" public forum at Bleeding Heart, Brisbane, 7PM. Speakers include Christine Assange and Scott Ludlam.

April 25: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.

May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

2012-03-06 Christine Assange's Talking Points

UPDATE: See also Christine's Swedish Extradition FACTS from Christine Assange.

Christine Assange, mother of WikiLeaks founder and Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange, has spent many long months reaching out to supporters and urging them to contact their local political representatives. Recognising that many politicians still do not know the true story behind WikiLeaks and her son's legal battles, she asks supporters to give them the facts and request their assistance.

Christine has been using her @AssangeC Twitter account and the #fact4mp hashtag to post the following important talking points for supporters to disseminate:

1. WikiLeaks and Julian Assange have not been charged with any crime in any country in the world. See

2. WikiLeaks and Julian Assange have been recognized for quality investigative journalism with many prestigious awards, including:

- Julian was unanimously given the Sam Adams Award in 2010, for Integrity in Intelligence (Iraq War Logs) by a panel of retired senior U.S. military and intelligence officers.

- Julian won the Amnesty UK Media Award in 2009 for the "Cry of Blood" report into extrajudicial killings and disappearances in Kenya.

- Julian won The Economist magazine's Freedom of Expression Award in 2008.

- Julian won the Sydney Peace Foundation's Gold Medal in 2011 "For exceptional courage and initiative in pursuit of human rights". The Sydney Peace Foundation has only awarded 4 Gold Medals in 16 years, with Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama being 2 of the other 3 recipients.

- Julian won the Martha Gellhorn Prize For Journalism in 2011: "He is brave, determined and independent and a true agent of people not power... [WikiLeaks'] goal of justice through transparency is in the oldest and finest tradition of journalism."

- Julian won a Walkley Award for Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism in 2011.

See for more.

3. WikiLeaks has a perfect record regarding information reliability. No government has denied the authenticity of any documents.

4. WikiLeaks redacts its documents, so to date not one person has been physically harmed by its publications.

5. WikiLeaks exposes government and corporate corruption, fraud, shady deals, war crimes, torture, and kidnapping. It is in the public interest to know these things.

6. WikiLeaks partnered with The Guardian, New York Times, Der Spiegal, Le Monde, and El Pais to publish Cablegate. Why target only WikiLeaks?

7. WikiLeaks acts in accordance with traditional journalism. It publishes information given by various sources.

8. WikiLeaks acts like traditional media but protects its sources with a secure anonymous Drop Box.

9. WikiLeaks is a legal, legitimate, online news publisher, recognized as such by other journalist organizations worldwide. In 2012, WikiLeaks is partnering with nearly 100 media organisations around the world.

10. WikiLeaks is a non-profit independent publisher funded by donations from ordinary citizens from around the world. Because WikiLeaks believes in transparency its financial records are publicly accountable.

11. WikiLeaks goal is altruistic: "Justice Through Transparency." WikiLeaks is a catalyst for democracy movements around the world.

12. WikiLeaks launched in 2006 to provide safety for whistleblowers in Third World regimes and dictatorships, and to inform the world of their plight.

13. For the first four years, WikiLeaks published government and corporate wrong-doings from many countries.

14. In 2010 WikiLeaks received files for the U.S. Collateral Murder video, Afghan War Diaries, Iraq War logs, and U.S. Embassy cables.

15. The U.S. war videos and documents revealed war crimes, rorting, and lying by the U.S. government, regarding civilian casualties and war progress.

16. U.S. cables revealed government and corporate exploitation, bullying, and manipulation of other governments (as well as good actions by U.S. officials).

17. The cables revealed and confirmed to people WHO in their own governments and corporations was involved in shady wrong-doings.

18. WikiLeaks exposed the attempted ALP "Clean Feed" internet censorship plan for Australia.

19. The Australian government promoted "Clean Feed" as a way to filter child porn. The police opposed this as the images were peer-to-peer (not websites).

20. WikiLeaks published the "Clean Feed" blacklist, which included politically contentious sites, anti-abortion sites, and euthanasia sites as well as WikiLeaks.

21. "Clean Feed" was abandoned as a direct result of WikiLeaks' exposure of its fundamentally undemocratic political nature.

22. WikiLeaks exposed ALP Senator Mark Arbib as a protected source for the U.S. government for 4 years. Arbib was involved in an ALP coup that overthrew an elected Australian Prime Minister.

23. A 2007 WikiLeaks cable showed that the Australian government was risking the Great Barrier Reef, and secretly wavering penalties for U.S. tankers breaching laws in Torres Strait.

24. In line with WikiLeaks' harm minimization procedures, WikiLeaks asked the U.S. State Department to help with cable redactions. They refused.

25. Note the timing:

5/4/10 Collateral Murder video released
24/6/10 Gillard coup
25/7/10 Afghan Diaries released
20/8/10 Sex allegations surface
22/10/10 Iraq War logs released
28/11/10 Cablegate released

18 August 2010 (two days before the sex allegations) Anders Hellner, a senior policy adviser to the Swedish Foreign Policy Institute, told Swedish TV News Rapport: "The situation is escalating because an official Swedish party which is represented at the European Parliament (the Pirate Party, which had announced it would host WikiLeaks servers) is taking up what the U.S views is a very controversial role. The Americans are looking to stop this somehow."

26. After the Afghan War Diary release, Julian visited Sweden to obtain residency and base WikiLeaks there (because they have good whistleblower laws).

27. The U.S. was aware of more WikiLeaks releases to come and wrote threatening letters. Julian warned of entrapment plans.

28. Woman AA invited Julian to speak in Sweden at a seminar about Aphganistan in mid August 2010

29. Woman AA offered Julian her flat to stay in as she was going to be away but returned early.

30. Woman SW stated she went to seminar to meet Julian & invited him to stay at her place.

31. Both women have stated to police and media that sex was consensual and non-violent.

32. Exculpatory evidence (txts 2 friends) show women had no complaints re sex till finding out about each other.

33. Evidence (100+ txts btwn AA and SW) speak of revenge, making money, and ruining Julian's reputation by going to press.

34. AA takes SW to visit a police station, not close by, but where her friend officer Irmeli Krans works.

35. Officer Krans stayed back hours after shift ended to interview SW.

36. Swedish police breach all their own procedures interviewing women AA & SW.

37. Police interviews with women AA & SW were not recorded (against procedure).

38. SW was so upset that police were going to allege rape, she does not sign her interview statement.

39. SW has stated she felt "railroaded" into making the complaint.

40. In Sweden, consensual, non-violent sex can be legally defined as "rape".

41. On the same day, 1st prosecutor Maria Haljebo Kjellstrand unlawfully told the press Julian was wanted for rape.

42. Julian was not interviewed or informed. He found out in the tabloid newspaper "Expressen" that he was wanted for double rape.

43. Within hours there were millions of website hits for "Assange" + "rape" causing irreparable harm to Julian's reputation.

44. Next day, after reviewing the file, Stockholm's Chief Prosecutor Eva Finne threw out the rape allegation.

45. "I consider there are no grounds 4 suspecting he has committed rape," said Eva Finne, the Chief Prosecutor.

46. The investigation into the lesser allegations of harassment only continued.

47. Julian offered himself for interview on 30/8/10. Police promised not to unlawfully leak interview to the media again.

48. Julian's police interview unlawfully turned up in the tabloid Expressen again the next day.

49. Julian and his witnesses' interviews are videotaped while the women and their witnesses are not.

50. The witness list becomes unbalanced against Julian as police do not follow up interviews with his witnesses.

51. Police continue to leak file to tabloid media redacting sections favourable to Julian or unfavourable to women.

52. The interpreter in police interrogation Gun Von Krusenstjerna was not authorized by relevant authority.

53. Swedish Social Democrat politician Claus Borgstrum is appointed as lawyer for AA & SW.

54. Claus Borgstrum and partner Thomas Bodstrum run a thriving legal practice around rape cases.

55. Officer Krans, Borgstrum, Bodstrum and AA are all members of the Swedish Social Democrats Party.

56. One month after the Assange sex allegations, they all stood for election on a sexual offences reform platform.

57. Swedish judge Brita Sundberg-Weitman (retired) says: "Mr Borgstrum is a politician whose platform is associated with radical feminist activism, and he has developed a legal practice around acting for complainants in rape cases. In recent years, elements of the Social Democrats Party, including one of the complainants (AA) who is a well-known and aspiring social democrat politician, and her lawyer Mr Borgstrum and some public officials like Ms Ny, have taken the lead amending Swedish law, so as to try to make it more favourable to women. It is a fact that people like Marianne Ny and Claes Borgstrum have worked in co-operation to produce our new, more stringent sexual offences laws."

58. Borgstrum appealed the decision to dismiss the rape investigation to prosecutor Marianne Ny.

59. Julian Assange was not informed about the appeal, so he had no opportunity to make submissions.

60. On the 1st of September 2010, Marianne Ny granted the appeal and reinstated the rape investigation.

61. "It is completely false that we are afraid of Assange and therefore didn't want to file a complaint... He is not violent and I do not feel threatened by him," woman AA told Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet on 21st August 2010.

62. The alleged "deliberately torn" condom (submitted as evidence by AA) contained NO DNA from either AA or JA.

63. There are significant differences between the SW's original statement and the one that was released to the media.

64. Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet's application for access to police file was granted on Sept 1st 2010. Julian's Swedish lawyer Mr Hurtig's applications for access to the police file (in September-November) were denied.

65. Julian remained in Sweden for 5 weeks to answer the allegations against him. Through his lawyer, Mr Hurtig, Julian made proactive attempts to arrange an interview with the Swedish prosecutor. Prosecutor Ny refused all Julian's offers for interview before giving him permission to leave Sweden on September 15th 2010.

66. In September 22nd 2010, an interview was finally agreed to by Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny for September 29th 2010. The US Pentagon announced a 120 man team dedicated to "taking action" against WikiLeaks, ahead of the release of the Iraq War Logs and Cablegate. Julian was maintaining a low profile regarding threats to his security and could not be contacted and informed of the September 29th interview date. Julian left Sweden on September 27th 2010 for a pre-arranged business meeting with Cablegate media partner Der Spiegel. Julian didn't "flee" Sweden. He stayed in Sweden a total of 37 days, after these allegations delayed his business overseas. He left with official Swedish permission.

67. On September 29th 2010, Julian phoned his lawyer to report that his luggage (including three laptops) had disappeared on the Stolkholm-Berlin flight. His Swedish lawyer Mr Hurtig then informed Julian (for the first time) of the 28th September interview. Julian offered to return to Sweden for an interview on the 9th or 10th of October. This was rejected because it was the weekend. Julian then offered to return to Sweden on October 11th 2010. This was rejected as "too far away".

68. In October-November 2010, Julian was in London working on the Iraq War Logs release and preparing for Cablegate with media partners The Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, El Pais, and the New York Times. The WikLeaks Iraq War Logs were released on October 23rd 2010. On October 27th, the CIA refused to either confirm or deny suggestions of plans to assassinate Julian. Julian had been staying at the Frontline Club (a London club for journalists) during much of October and November 2010. He conducted several talks during this period, including an address at the UN in Geneva.

69. In October-November 2010 Julian's UK lawyers offered him for interview under the Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) Scheme between the UK and Sweden. Swedish prosecutor Ny refused all Julian's offers for interview by the usual MLA protocol.

70. On November 2nd 2010, Julian's lawyers informed U.K police that he could be contacted through them for the legal process.

71. Despite refusing to interview Julian for seven weeks, Sweden was granted a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) to question him (November 18th, 2010).

72. Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny also sought to have Julian held incommunicado pending a future trial.

73. An EAW is used for prosecution, not questioning. Julian's EAW is highly irregular. "An EAW should not be used for the purposes of investigation." - UK Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights, June 2011.

74. November 20th 2010 Despite being informed of Julian Assange's whereabouts, Sweden authorized Interpol to make a PUBLIC Red Notice for him.

75. "I consider it inappropriate and disproportionate that Ms Ny sought an Interpol Arrest Warrant and EAW for Mr Assange" said expert witness (retired) Swedish judge Britta Sundberg-Weitman. The only recent example of Sweden issuing an Interpol Red Notice and an EAW for a sex offence involved a repeat offending paedophile.

76. November 26th 2010 Sweden issued an EAW for Julian (2 days before WikiLeaks started publishing Cablegate). This would have lead to Julian's arrest within 10 days but the warrant was invalid and had to be re-issued on December 2nd 2010.

77. November 27th 2010 The U.S State Department sent an intimidating letter in reply to a letter from Julian requesting input regarding harm minimization from Cablegate.

78. November 28th 2010 WikiLeaks commenced publishing the U.S. diplomatic cables (a.k.a. Cablegate).

79. WikiLeaks US cables revealed secret dealings between U.S. and Swedish officials to bypass the democratic process in Sweden. Sweden secretly agreed to allow U.S. access to large amounts of data on Swedish citizens. Swedish MP Camilla Lindberg resigned in protest, declaring: "By selling out its own people, the government has sought to curry the favour of the U.S. Little by little we continue to dismantle democracy."

80. Karl Rove, former political adviser to U.S. President George Bush, is a political adviser to Swedish Prime Minister Fredrick Reinfeldt. Rove quit U.S. politics in disgrace after orchestrating vicious smear campaigns against political opponents. Karl Rove is also good friends with Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt.

81. November 29th 2010: U.S. politicians 'declared war' on Wikieaks:

"Assange is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency as Al Qaeda?" - Sarah Palin.

"I would look at this as a military issue, with potentially military action against him and his organization." - Tom Shaffer, former Defence Intelligence Agency official, Fox News.

"Anything less than execution is too kind a penalty." - Mike Huckabee, Republican Presidential candidate.

82. November 30th 2010: Interpol issued a Red Notice for Julian Paul Assange to 188 countries.

83. More threats from politicians:

"Well, I think Assange should be assassinated, actually. I think Obama should put out a contract and maybe use a drone or something. ... I would not feel unhappy if Assange 'disappeared'." - Tom Flannagan, former senior adviser to Canadian PM, November 30th 2010.

"We're at war. I hope (US Attorney General) Eric Holder... will... get our laws in line with being at war." - Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, November 30th 2010.

Julian Assange should be "prosecuted as a terrorist." - Senator Rick Santorum, GOP presidential candidate, November 30th 2010.

"He should be treated as an enemy combatant. WikiLeaks should be closed down." - Newt Gingrich, 5 December 2010.

"A dead man can't leak stuff... Illegally shoot the son of a bitch." - Bob Beckel, Fox News, December 6th 2010.

84. December 7th 2010: Obama administration pressures Paypal, Visa and Mastercard to block donations to WikiLeaks, shutting off 95% of their funds. Western Union and Bank of America followed soon afterwards. In early December 2010 Paypal also froze 60,000 euros of WikiLeaks donations held by the German charity Wau Holland Foundation.

On December 6th 2010 Julian's Defence Fund (containing 31,000 euros) was frozen by Swiss Bank Post Finance. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and UN Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression condemned the WikiLeaks blockade.

"The financial blockade is a free speech issue," said Trevor Timm, activist for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "The government, realizing they couldn't charge WikiLeaks with a crime for publishing classified information - because all newspapers do that - decided to pressure private companies like Amazon, Visa, and MasterCard into banning WikiLeaks."

The suppression of donations is essentially an end-run around the First Amendment, asserted Timm. "The government is not technically doing the censoring - they're leaving the dirty work to private corporations. Mainstream newspapers like the New York Times print classified information all the time... Mainstream newspapers like The New York Times or the Wall Street Journal print classified information all the time. It's been happening for decades, and no one has ever been prosecuted for it."

On January 14th 2011 the U.S.Treasury declined Senator Peter King's request to blacklist WikiLeaks or Assange as there were no grounds to do so.

In July 2011 WikiLeaks lodged a complaint about the financial blockade with the European Commissioner for infringement of EU Anti-Trust Laws. They are still awaiting an answer.

It is estimated that since the blockade WikiLeaks has been prevented from receiving over $20 million in donations.

85. The U.S government also pressured Internet providers to terminate services to WikiLeaks. For example, on December 1st 2010, Amazon removed WikiLeaks from their storage servers. On December 2nd the DNS register serving stopped pointing to the domain. On December 20th Apple removed an app that allowed iPhone users to search WikiLeaks cables.

86. December 5th 2010 Prosecutor Ny mislead the public by stating: "Both British and Swedish law prevent me from questioning Assange in London." She made the same allegation in a December 3rd interview with TIME magazine.

The use of a video link is an established protocol per Swedish ruling (SC-NJA (2007) 337), which also states that it is disproportionate to issue EAW's for questioning when a person is co-operating. The proper, proportionate, and legal means of requesting a person for questioning in UK is through the Mutual Legal Assistance Scheme. Since Julian's UK house arrest in 2010, Swedish prosecutor Ny has rejected ALL his offers to be interviewed at Scotland Yard or the Swedish Embassy.

87. On December 7th 2010 Julian went voluntarily with his lawyer to the Kentish Town police station in London to answer the EAW. The EAW was the first document Julian received from Swedish Prosecutors in English (a translation was provided by UK police). This was also the first time Julian had been informed in writing of the specific allegations and potential charges against him.

88. The EAW and Interpol Red Notice were issued just before and executed just after Cablegate began publishing. Had Julian returned to Sweden in October/November he would have been held incommunicado in prison and we may not have seen Cablegate.

89. On December 7th 2010 Julian went into voluntary custody in the UK. He spent ten days in solitary confinement in the maximum security Wandsworth Prison. Bail of £180,000 was put up for Julian, but Sweden opposed bail and Judge Riddle refused it.

90. December 8th 2010 The Independent newspaper cited "diplomatic sources" confirming informal talks between Sweden and the US about extraditing Julian.

Michael Mukasey, a former U.S. Attorney General stated: "When one is accused of a very serious crime, it is common to hold him in respect of a lesser crime, while you assemble evidence of a second crime." (The Guardian 7/12/10)

91. On December 14th 2010 Julian was granted bail of $374,000 (cash and sureties) and surrendered his passport. He was placed under house arrest with a nightly curfew, fitted with an electronic ankle tracking device, and ordered to report daily to the local police station. The Swedish government opposed bail and filed an appeal, so Julian went back to prison for 48 hrs till the appeal hearing on December 16th 2010. Sweden lost the appeal and Julian was released on bail till the EAW hearing, set down for January 11th 2011.


A UK Supreme Court decision on extradition to Sweden is expected shortly after Easter (perhaps May). Christine Assange has asked supporters to protest REGARDLESS of the UK decision on extradition to Sweden, as a U.S. extradition request is also expected. Protests are being organised:

- WORLDWIDE outside Australian embassies,

- In AUSTRALIAN CITIES outside DFAT offices in Australian cities, and

- In AUSTRALIAN REGIONAL AREAS outside local MPs regional offices.

These protest will take place on day after the announcement (or on Monday if it's announced on a Friday - a date for the verdict is expected to be announced on the @UKSupremeCourt twitter feed).

More Links:

UK Supreme Court Agreed Statement of Facts (i.e. facts agreed by Swedish authorities):

Former Australian diplomat Tony Kevin's brief to Australian MPs on political agenda, U.S and Sweden, entrapment:

Lawyer Jen Robinson brief to Australian MPs on facts, timeline, players, concerns re Sweden fit up re WikiLeaks:

Lawyer Peter Kemp brief to Australian MPs 2/3/11 re breaches of legal and human rights, political agendas, extradition:

Comprehensive verifiable facts and media resources on Swedish extradition and US Extradition:

OzWikiWatch, a site to help Australians contact their MPs and Senators and build a register of political support of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks:

Follow Christine Assange @AssangeC on Twitter for more. In Australia, follow the @AusFOWL twitter feed to keep up to date with protests and news.

2012-03-07 Press Release for Motion Hearing at Fort Meade, March 15, US vs PFC Bradley #Manning

Below is a March 1, 2012 United States Department of Defense Press Release for an upcoming Motion Hearing in the legal proceedings for U.S. Government vs. PFC Bradley Manning:

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


The U.S. Army Military District of Washington
Guardians of the Nation’s Capital

DATE: March 1, 2012


FORT LESLEY J. MCNAIR, D.C. – The military judge has scheduled a motion hearing in the case of United States vs. Pfc. Bradley E. Manning, beginning on Thursday, March 15 at 10 a.m., at Fort George G. Meade, Md.

Pfc. Manning is charged with aiding the enemy; wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the internet knowing that it is accessible to the enemy; theft of public property or records; transmitting defense information; fraud and related activity in connection with computers; and for violating Army Regulations 25-2 “Information Assurance” and 380-5 “Department of the Army Information Security Program.”

If convicted of all charges, Manning would face a maximum punishment of reduction to the lowest enlisted pay grade, E-1; total forfeiture of all pay and allowances; confinement for life; and a dishonorable discharge.

Media queries and information on credentialing for the arraignment may be emailed to the U.S. Army Military District of Washington Public Affairs Office at


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

2012-03-10 #WikiLeaks News Update: #GIFiles coverage; Other news

WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 462 days.
Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 459 days.
Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 656 days.

WikiLeaks News:

Image from WikiLeaks

  • WikiLeaks continues to release more G.I. Files daily. Here is the latest coverage:
    • Undercover NATO troops are already in Syria despite denials from their parent governments
    • Corrupt Venezuelan officials are stifling local production in favor of imports
    • Russia tried to prevent Polish President Kaczynski from landing in Smolensk to force him to miss a Katyn massacre memorial service
    • Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez betrayed the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) to appease generals
  • An Op-Ed in Al Jazeera looks at the rise of Stratfor and their actual functionality.
  • New Zealand is angered by the negative comments by Stratfor members about their role in global diplomacy.
  • The release of the Stratfor emails have caused the resignation of Emre from TUSIAD.
  • Turkish PM Erdoğan is suing WikiLeaks partner Taraf for an editorial piece which Erdoğan's lawyers claim contained "very serious insults."
  • A senior U.S. State Department official has denied claims from Stratfor emails that Osama Bin Laden's body was flown to the United States.

  • The Daily Mail issued a correction 10 months after falsely claiming WikiLeaks hacked into security services and published information which got people killed. WikiLeaks tweeted that they currently have over 80 press complaints lodged with the Press Complaints Commission.

  • The Levenson Inquiry has asked WikiLeaks for a submission on corruption in the UK press to which they have submitted over 100 pages.

  • Former State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley cited a WikiLeaks cable on Yemen during a panel discussion on the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki.

  • A transcript of a WikiLeaks seminar held in Houston, TX in January is now available. Speakers included Geoffrey Robertson QC and Eric Schmitt, as well as a panel which discussed the possibility of Julian Assange being charged in the U.S.

  • EFF's Trevor Timm wrote on how the Obama Administration's crackdown on whistleblowers is hurting both press freedom and foreign policy.

  • In December 2010, when Cablegate first began coming out, about 1% of all tweets were about WikiLeaks. This caused WikiLeaks to stop trending on Twitter, as Twitter saw WikiLeaks as the new normal.

  • A cyber-security bill proposed by Rep. Mike Rogers is broad enough to use against WikiLeaks and The Pirate Bay.

  • Dennis Kucinich was on The Alyona Show discussing WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning. He commented that he would consider reading WikiLeaks' Guantanamo files to Congress to get the information on the Congressional Record.

  • An Op-Ed in the East Orlando Sun writes on how, by attacking WikiLeaks and Assange, the government is making journalism illegal.

Julian Assange News:

  • Julian Assange was on ABC Radio discussing his upcoming Supreme Court verdict. Audio and transcript of the interview are available.

  • Protests are planned for Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane the day after Julian Assange's verdict is handed down. Two fliers are available for the protest in black and white.

Bradley Manning News:

  • Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks discussed the UN Rapporteur on Torture's condemnation of Bradley Manning's treatment and called for Bradley's freedom:

  • Glenn Greenwald wrote an article on the history of condemnations against Bradley Manning's treatment, including the UN Rapporteur on Torture's recent comments.

  • Russia urged the U.S. to respect the human rights of Bradley Manning.


Upcoming Dates & Events:

March 13: Julian Assange to participate in online War on Drugs debate, 7PM GMT.

Mid-March: Julian Assange's TV Series to begin airing.

March 15: Bradley Manning's motion hearing, 10AM at Fort Meade.

March 16: Vigil for Bradley Manning at the US Embassy in London, 5PM.

March 17: "War on WikiLeaks" public forum at Bleeding Heart, Brisbane, 7PM. Speakers include Christine Assange and Scott Ludlam.

April 25: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.

May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

2012-03-10 Interview with Chase Madar, journalist and author of The Passion of Bradley #Manning

Chase Madar is the author of the recently published book, The Passion of Bradley Manning. Madar is a civil rights attorney, who also writes for the London Review of Books, Le Monde diplomatique, The American Conservative (where he is a contributing editor), CounterPunch and TomDispatch. He can be found on twitter at @ChMadar.

2012-03-12 #WikiLeaks News Update: MP speaks out for #Assange; UN condemns #Manning's treatment; Other news

WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 465 days.
Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 462 days.
Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 659 days.

WikiLeaks News:

  • Australian MP Jamie Parker gave a speech to the Parliament of New South Wales about WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning, calling on new Foreign Minister Bob Carr to reject the Australian Government's position and be an advocate for Assange.

  • Der Spiegel journalist Holger Stark addressed MasterCard about their continued financial blockade against WikiLeaks, to which their spokesman replied, "Our position didn't change. I'm not able to give further explanations. […] There will be no explanation."

  • Chris Hedges wrote on how the Supreme Court is likely to endorse Obama's war on whistleblowers. In the article, Daniel Ellsberg is quoted as saying, "Everything that Richard Nixon did to me, for which he faced impeachment and prosecution, which led to his resignation, is now legal under the Patriot Act, the FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] amendment act, the National Defense Authorization Act."

  • A full video of Daniel Ellsberg's March 8 talk "Secrets, Lies, and Leaks: From the Pentagon Papers to WikiLeaks" is now available at Princeton University's website.

  • Dazzlepod has created a keyword-based search engine for WikiLeaks' G.I. Files.

  • People are creating Friends of WikiLeaks Twitter accounts to help organize support for WikiLeaks. Currently, there are accounts for Australia, Frankfurt, and Berlin.

Julian Assange News:

  • Megan Kinninment interviewed Christine Assange and wrote about her courage in fighting for her son's safety and freedom. Liberte-info also did an in-depth interview with Christine about the case against her son and what citizens can do to help.

  • M15 whistleblower Annie Machon wrote about the delay in reform of UK extradition laws, and how they may be purposefully delaying it until the extradition of Julian Assange.

  • Dave Phillips has created a "Most Wanted" list of hard evidence which has yet to surface in Sweden's case against Julian Assange, including various statements and SMS messages.

  • A petition has been created on Avaaz calling upon Australian politicians to protect Julian Assange.

Bradley Manning News:

  • The UN Rapporteur on Torture has formally denounced the US Government of cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment toward Bradley Manning after a 14-month investigation. His full statements on Manning are available on pages 74 and 75 of his full report on torture.

  • The Reporters Committee has written a letter to the US Department of Defense—signed by 46 news media organizations and associations—which urges the implementation of regulations providing timely access to court records during Bradley Manning's court martial.

  • A vigil is planned for Bradley Manning on the date of his next court hearing at Fort Meade, March 15 at 7AM.


Upcoming Dates & Events:

March 13: Julian Assange to participate in online War on Drugs debate, 7PM GMT.

Mid-March: Julian Assange's TV Series to begin airing.

March 15: Bradley Manning's motion hearing, 10AM at Fort Meade.Vigil planned for 7AM.

March 16: Vigil for Bradley Manning at the US Embassy in London, 5PM.

March 17: "War on WikiLeaks" public forum at Bleeding Heart, Brisbane, 7PM. Speakers include Christine Assange and Scott Ludlam.

April 25: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.

May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

2012-03-15 #WikiLeaks News Update: #Manning's motion hearing; #BeatTheBlockade; Other news

WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 468 days.
Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 464 days.
Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 662 days.

Bradley Manning News:

  • Bradley Manning's motion hearing began today. Here are some major developments:
    • The defense filed a motion to dismiss charges against Manning based on the government withholding important evidence
    • The prosecution did not receive some important emails related to the case because their spam filter blocked anything with the word "WikiLeaks"
    • The enemy Manning is accused of aiding has been identified as Al-Qaeda
    • It is possible that Manning will testify about being videotaped at Quantico
    • The hearing will continue at 10AM tomorrow, March 16
    • For in-depth coverage of the hearing see Kevin Gosztola's live-blog and Alexa O'Brien's transcript

  • David House was on MSNBC's The Dylan Ratigan Show discussing Bradley Manning's motion hearing.

  • Alexa O'Brien interviewed Denver Nicks, author of the upcoming book "Private: Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks, and the Biggest Exposure of Official Secrets in American History."

WikiLeaks News:

  • A new campaign entitled "Beat the Blockade" has been created to help overcome the unlawful financial blockade against WikiLeaks. On April 5 they are asking everyone to donate at least $5 to WikiLeaks.

  • The US State Department is looking to fire Peter Van Buren, a foreign service officer, based on 8 charges including linking to WikiLeaks cables and disclosing classified information.

  • Obama is insisting that journalist Abdulelah Haider Shaye be kept in a Yemeni prison. Among other things, Shaye revealed the US was conducting drone strikes in Yemen, information which was later vindicated by a WikiLeaks cable.

  • WikiLeaks cables show that US Diplomats have been complaining of harassment from the Venezuelan government since 2006.

  • Emails between Stratfor employees and top Google executives show that Google was involved in "regime change" in the Middle East.

  • Referencing a WikiLeaks cable on Chinese investment in Australia, Chris Berg writes about how comments by Craig Emerson MP should not be taken at face value.

Julian Assange News:

  • Julian Assange participated in an online debate about the War on Drugs. He begins speaking around 1:37:00. Transcript of his remarks is also available.

  • Julian Assange's upcoming TV show "The World Tomorrow" will be distributed by Journeyman Pictures.

  • Australian Greens Senator Scott Ludlam wrote an article discussing the real risks that Julian Assange faces if extradited to the US.

  • An article in New Matilda discusses what Australian MPs know about the allegations against Assange from a briefing they were given a year ago.

  • Christine Assange was on ABC North Coast NSW radio and ABC NewsRadio Drive discussing Julian Assange's upcoming Supreme Court verdict, the threat of US extradition, and her pursuit of justice for her son.

  • Stop the War Coalition Sydney has information on all the rallies planned in Australia after Julian Assange's Supreme Court verdict is handed down.


Upcoming Dates & Events:

March 16: Bradley Manning's motion hearing continues at Fort Meade, 10AM.

March 16: Vigil for Bradley Manning at the US Embassy in London, 5PM.

March 17: "War on WikiLeaks" public forum at Bleeding Heart, Brisbane, 7PM. Speakers include Christine Assange and Scott Ludlam.

Mid-March: Julian Assange's TV Series to begin airing.

April 5: Beat the Blockade against WikiLeaks by donating at least $5.

April 25: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.

May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

2012-03-15 Denver Nicks about his upcoming #Manning book, entitled Private, with undisclosed chat logs.

I recently spoke with journalist and author, Denver Nicks, about his upcoming book, Private: Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks, and the Biggest Exposure of Official Secrets in American History. Nicks says that he has an agreement with one of his sources to publish the book after the verdict, and that it contains previously undisclosed chat logs. You can find Denver Nicks on Twitter @DenverNicks

2012-03-15 Full Transcript #Manning Motion Hearing Fort Meade, MD March 15, 2012 Day One

Full Transcript March 15, 2012

This transcript was typed from the press pool at Bradley Manning's motion hearing on March 15, 2012 at Fort Meade, MD.

This transcript may have errors and is incomplete in that there was no way for me to capture every word, or every sentence.

Please send corrections to

Bradley Manning's Motion Hearing is held in same court room as his Article 32 Pretrial Hearing. You can read transcripts from the first three days of that proceeding, as well as transcript of his Arraignment here.

An AFP reporter informed me that the room where the press pool views the legal proceedings, Smallwood Hall, at Fort Meade, MD is also the location where Press views Guantanamo (GTMO) military tribunals via satellite.


  • General Court Martial Convening Authority: Maj. Gen. Michael S. Linnington
  • Commander of the U.S. Army Garrison, joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall: Col. Carl R. Coffman
  • Commander of U.S. Army Headquarters Command Battalion: Lt. Col. Eric Fleming
  • Military Judge: Col. Denise R. Lind
  • Prosecution: Captain Ashden Fein, Captain Joe Morrow, Captain Angel Overgaard, Capt. Hunter Whyte
  • Defense: Mr. David Coombs, Major Matthew Kemkes and Captain Paul Bouchard

9:38 a.m. proceedings begin.

All Rise.

Judge Lind: Please be seated. Court is called to order. It appears that all parties are present with the exception of Major Matthew Kemkes [Defense]. Is that correct?

Defense (Coombs): That is correct.

Judge Lind asks PFC Bradley Manning about his consent concerning counsel [which does not changed since Manning identified David Coombs, Major Matthew Kemkes and Captain Paul Bouchard as his counsel at the Arraignment]. Lind asks, and Manning consents to Major Matthew Kemkes absence today.

Judge Lind: All right. I would like to begin by doing a little house keeping. Some of the things that have occurred is that we met in chambers for an R.C.M. [Rules for Court Martial] 802 conference, which concern logistics and issues, which we will now synopsize for the record.

At the R.C.M. 802 parties agreed to review the Court Publicity Order; Defense Motion for Deposition; Government's Due Diligence under Brady… Government says it will take additional time because of the voluminous amount of documents involved in the disclosure… Defense advised regarding Speedy Trial… Any one want to supplement regarding what happened?

Fein (Prosecution): No, your Honor.

Coombs (Defense): No, your Honor.

[This symbol indicates missed transcription.]

Judge Lind continues her recitation of the R.C.M. 802 conference for entry into the Court record.

Judge Lind: When the Government spoke about Brady search, the Government said they had not found any Brady material even though they looked for a year.

Fein (Prosecution): Correct. Evolving…

Judge Lind: Next up Publicity Order, which is Appellant Exhibit 11. Is that correct? Any objection to Appellant Exhibit 11?

Explanation of Publicity Order which sets parameters for counsel during trial around the press.

Judge Lind discusses what was spoken of in the R.C.M. 802 meetings. Namely, Government and Defense Protective Orders; a Bill of Particulars; Defense Motion to Compel Discovery; and a Defense Motion to Compel Deposition.

Judge Lind: After the arraignment the Government learned that it had not been receiving emails [See Arraignment Transcript]. And the Court notes, Government will use an alternate email address. Government had a server issue. Captain Ashden Fein (Prosecution) please explain.

Fein (Prosecution): After realizing that the Prosecution did not receive emails, we contacted and worked with the IT department. Certain emails were blocked because they were marked as spam. The spam filter is now checked every day before 10:00 a.m.

Fein (Prosecution) explains specifics regarding a regime for spam filter checking.

Judge Lind: Protective Order for Classified Information, the email has been marked Appellate Exhibit 18. Parties agreed to confer to mutually acceptable Protective Orders. Both sides had proposed Protective Orders. Defense requested a Protective Order, and then went through its request regarding due diligence under Brady. Want to add anything?

Coombs (Defense): Just M'am that once we understood the Government's position on what they did, then we removed our request that Government show a list of what they had done in order to do due diligence regarding understanding of Brady…was no ability that Government complied with due diligence.

Fein (Prosecution): Government would be able to proffer motion...


Coombs (Defense): Defense is not willing to waive Bradey due diligence.

Judge Lind: All these emails are being captured by the Government and will be part of the record. Government was advise that it must provide a Bill of Particulars. Government did with the exception of three.

Judge Lind continues her recitation of the R.C.M 802 conferences regarding logistics, and asks for Supplements from Defense and Prosecution regarding her record for the court.

Judge Lind: Government did not receive before the Arraignment a legal rational for the Court to consider an ex parte Supplement at arraignment…Government was asked if it objected in a March 6th telephonic R.C.M 802 at Government's request…following issues: Bill of Particulars; Response to an ex parte Supplement; discussion of Case Management Order; and Protective Order(s)

Next a discussion of classified info.

Judge Lind: This case deals with classified info. There are over three million pages of documentation in this case. Has the classified information been disclosed to Defense?

Coombs (Defense): Government has indicated charge documents. We have not received…

Fein (Prosecution): Defense has received… There are a few pieces of information not disclosed, but they do not fall within those number to properly protect.

Judge Lind: Does the Government intend to provide all the information?

Fein (Prosecution): Yes, with the exception for information that is classified.

Judge Lind: Are there other disclosure issues with classified information?

Fein (Prosecution): Yes, your Honor.

Judge Lind: The Government has a calendar for three phases. Do you plan to invoke 505 privilege?

Fein (Prosecution): …do not intend to invoke privilege…

An exchange takes place regarding this issue of 505 privilege. [505 refers to "Evidentiary privilege. Military Rule of Evidence 505 (Mil. R. Evid. 505) covers situations where classified information may be an issue in a case. The rules sets out specific notice and handling requirements when classified information may become an issue and how to handle evidentiary hearings. Also, the Services have developed regulations for the appointment of a Court Security Officer, courtroom security requirements, and access to closed sessions of court. Here is a summary of an article about this complicated rule of evidence."]

Judge Lind: Government in camera review request…use of classified info. I don't see a provision in your time line. When does the Defense envision that occurs?

Coombs (Defense): Defense sent you an email explaining that, namely when Government provides discovery. At that point. The in camera review depends on Government.

Judge Lind: …extended response you gave me….also asked Government, does the Government know if the evidence intended to compel is classified or not?

Fein (Prosecution): Yes. Some of it is classified. The Encase forensic images of hard drives in TSCIF. Government did identify some drives that have not been turned over, because they were used in a classified TSCIF. So, they are considered classified.

Judge Lind: In camera…both gave two weeks for review. Is that realistic considering the volume?

Fein (Prosecution): Don't think its reasonable.

Judge Lind: How long…?

Coombs (Defense): Believe if the Government actually produced…must have over thirty days… You would have thirty days...

Judge Lind: Where will I need to travel to ?

Fein (Prosecution): Offices and SCIFS in D.C.

Judge Lind: Anything else parties wish to put on record...?

Coombs (Defense): No.

Fein (Prosecution): Wait a minute… (Looks at his papers.) No, your Honor.

Judge Lind: Let us move now to Defense Motion for Bill of Particulars. Defense Motion and Government response. Defense replied. We have those marked as the next Appellate Exhibit. Defense…

There is a discussion of the trial schedule.

I am going to build in time into Court calendar for briefs. I need more than a day to go through filings.

Coombs (Defense): Filed 802…your Honor talked about that Defense could file a reply. Something we could talk about…built in time frame…if you can specify which Motions. Motion hearings take a month. Too much time and would impact my client who has already been in Pretrial confinement...

Judge Lind: I am sensitive of Pretrial confinement…very concern about his [Bradley Manning] right. We can't hand voluminous filings that the Court needs to address. If their are going to be fillings, I need to build in times...

Coombs (Defense): Which Motions are realistic things…?

Judge Lind: I am not in any way wishing to constrain filings. I just need to build in time. O.K. Defense request for Bill of Particulars, and if everyone has responded lets go through that. PFC Manning has been charged…

Lind enumerates the charges and types of charges and explains what a Bill of Particulars is.

Judge Lind: Bill of Particulars. Nature of charges to prepare for trial. Purpose of Bill of Particulars, is that it should not be used for discovery. Government responded to all of the Defense request of Bill of Particular except three items: Response was as follows…appears to be one…the Government submitted two documents in response to Defense's Bill of Particulars…Enclosures one through three…[to Prosecution] I would like all Enclosures filed along with the motion. Do you have those…?

Judge Lind: Going to go through Bill of Particulars. [Lind spoke very quickly, so I will summarize…]

  • Defense Question, "Who is the alleged enemy?" Prosecution Answer: "Al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula."
  • Defense Question, "What was the indirect means?" Prosecution Answer: WikiLeaks Web site.
  • Defense Question: "How did he communicate to the enemy? Prosecution Answer: "Indirectly through the WikiLeaks Web site."
  • Defense Question: "What is the unauthorized software? Prosecution Answer: "WGET"
  • [Missed Question.] Prosecution Answer: "Accused attempted FTP USER Account Password"
  • Defense Question: "Which computer?" Prosecution: "….on SIPRNET"
  • Defense Question: "How did he use the system improperly?" Prosecution Answer: "Downloaded Global Address List using SIPRNET."

[Remaining specifics obtained from Fort Meade Public Affairs spokesman afterwards.]

  • Spec 5 charge 2, 52 records. Spec 7, charge 2, 37 records. Spec 9 of charge 2, 5 records.
  • Spec 10, 13 records. Spec 13 at 16 records
  • Spec 4, 6, 8, 16...all dealing with 641. That is steal, purloined, and converted theory. Government has to come back and rely on one or all three.

Lind continues and she reads the Government's Bill of Particulars: "Bill of Particulars" believe Government disputes answering 13 and 14 of Charge 2.

Prosecution gives Judge Lind a redacted Charge Sheet.

Judge Lind: Specification number 13 regards "knowingly exceeded unauthorized access…obtained info...more than 75 State Cables" Specification number 14...Feb 2010…"knowingly exceeded unauthorized access concerning Reykjavik 13" [to Defense] Does the Government have to prove how?

Coombs (Defense): We are not looking for legal theory. We are looking for facts. We ask how he committed offense, we are not asking for theory, we are asking for facts. For example, are they saying he hack into Net Centric Diplomacy database?


Coombs (Defense): By means of such conduct? Whatever such conduct is?

Judge Lind: Is the Government alleging any particular way this occurred?

Prosecution: Defense is looking for legal theory or when he logged into SIPRNET computer.

Coombs (Defense): By means of such conduct. in the Article 32 testimony…PFC Manning, as 35 Fox, his boss gave him location to Net Centric database. When they allege "by means of such conduct," what are they alleging? So that we understand what we are defending against? If it's just that he went to the Net Centric database… or is it, "No, we have prove that he cracked in." And, then presumably by expert testimony. Defense is in the position of not being able to prepare. We would have to see what evidence in order to prepare to address a charge. It is a fundamental precept to tell the accused what he did that was a violation of the law. No different than Article 104, namely "indirect means" Well what does that mean? Which they did answer, saying "by giving the information to WikiLeaks."

Judge Lind: O.K. Government do you have a theory of means?

Prosecution: Manning had name and password. On the certain occasion that he obtain these documents he was exceeding authorized access. There is no means. No mystery how he got on. Mr. Coombs is focusing on Net Centric… When he [Manning] access to do certain things, not by means…

Judge Lind: So your means is that he accessed computer to do certain things...?

Prosecution: They are part of the specification of obtaining these cables and transmitting to WikiLeaks.

Judge Lind: Spec 2 and 3 "adding unauthorized software" How is the Government alleging the software added? You are not asking what…you are asking how?

Coombs (Defense): So, I am not asking for mechanism. We have our own forensic expert who can talk about how, which is limited by the forensic information given by the Government. We believe this same program would be on other computers. Are they saying he hacked into the administrative privileges in order to add the software? Or that he ran the program from a CD, and "that" is added? Or that he put it on the desktop, and therefore that is how? Again, this goes back to being able to prepare the Defense. So, all I want to know…in what manner are you saying that he added the unauthorized software? Added the software to computers…are you saying he used an external CD, but the actual act of adding untag software goes back to unfair surprise. We are not asking for entire proof, but when they say he added…?

Judge Lind: Is that an element the Government has to prove…?

Coombs (Defense): Yes, they have to prove it has not been authorized.

Judge Lind: Do they have to prove how or that is was added…?

Coombs (Defense): That is what they have to prove. How are they saying it was added?

Judge Lind: Government, do you know that…?

Prosecution: I don't think we can provide mechanics of how it was added. Again, we are not required to show how. Only that it was there.

Judge Lind: Do you know how he did it?

Prosecution: No, I don't think we do. But we do know that it was physically present on the computer.

Coombs (Defense): Are they saying is that is actually on the computer? So they charged my client with adding unauthorized software. There is a computer with WGET. Is it really on the computer? If it shows that it was run from a CD or the program is sitting on the desktop as executable file…?

Prosecution: Your Honor, there is a forensic report on this. It was cited…00211037 accused primary computer.

Judge Lind: Do you have the base report?

Coombs (Defense): Yes.

Judge Lind: If you have it on the forensic report, then you don't need it in Bill of Particulars?

Coombs (Defense): The nature how they say it was added...

Judge Lind: Government does the forensic report address that…

Prosecution: Don't know.

Judge Lind: Is that expert available to the Defense? Can Defense call this expert...?

Prosecution: Yes.

Judge Lind: Not adding to Bill of Particulars. Next. Manning…"converted"…question was, "What theory is the theory Government relying on?" [to Defense] Want to elaborate?

Coombs (Defense): 641 under three theories "steal, purloin, and knowingly convert" Government seem to limit to steal or knowingly convert. We are asking what they are alleging. That he stole and knowingly converted? Does it apply to each of the offenses? 22 separate charges for one act? If purloin is different that stealing? If they do in fact have an allegation, so we know what to prepare against. Or the requirements for knowingly converting? Building difference for required proof. If the Government is in fact saying…If their theory that they are saying is that he stole these items, don't hide the ball. Let the Defense know what is alleged.

Judge Lind: I looked at the various…and looking at them they seemed to…

Coombs (Defense): There is case law for purloined… I can provide that later. Purloined is stealing through deception.

Judge Lind: What about steal or convert? Meaning, take money or profit for someone else. That seems to make the definition the same.

Coombs (Defense): 5th circuit is not a good circuit. Federal case law to show conversion. Goes to common law tort of conversion. Show that the person is taking property so that owner is deprived of use and value of it.

Judge Lind: Government, is there a difference?

Prosecution: In 5th circuit there is. Instructions…we will get to that later on.

Judge Lind: Does the Government have a particular theory…?

Prosecution: We would consider steal and purloin to be the same.

Judge Lind: The case law…if you would provide that to Government, and if there is a clear theory on which you are proceeding let the Defense know. If it's one theory for one specification, please let the defense know.

Prosecution: I think this could probably be resolved with constructions.

Judge Lind: If its is like in the military where steal as taking, holding, or obtaining…three different theories...

Lind explains differences.

Judge Lind: Perhaps by 23 of March.

Prosecution: Yes, M'am.

Coombs (Defense): Yes, M'am.

Judge Lind: Anything else on Bill of Particulars? Let's move on to the Defense Motion to Compel Discovery. Let's begin with the ex parte filing. Mr. Coombs please first of all announce for record…ex parte means Government doesn't get to see it [because it might reveal Defense legal theory].

Coombs (Defense): With regards to ex parte, Defense filed an ex parte giving evidence that we are filing… Government sought clarification if it was a Motion or Supplement. We gave them information. Then Government asked for clarity that it was Supplement, also that the Court Secretary would review. Then, that it did not contain classified information. We then asked Government if they objected. Fein said, "No objection." Afterwards we figured out that the Government's email was blocked because of the word "WikiLeaks" The Government did not receive that email. Email was about if I can consider an ex parte filing. The Government was not prejudiced by that. What we were providing and how we were providing, not sure if the Court could consider. So now they want you to revisit. That the Government provide justification to revisit why you should not consider ex parte

[Summary of Coombs argument:

  • Failed to file justification for you to revisit ruling.
  • Inexplicable authority for your request.
  • They acknowledge that either are considerations for you to concede the ex parte filing…


Judge Lind: Government?

Prosecution (Overgaard): We would have objected. We did not get those emails. We did know they were filing. The Government thought they were filing the how instead of the why? Encase forensic images. The "why" would be to show materiality or evidence. The "why" the Defense is going to use when Government did not object. So the Government is not objecting to the legal theory…well the Government would based on caselaw…Defense needs to make a preliminary showing of materiality or evidence.

Judge Lind: Defense?

Coombs (Defense): Government never filed. Are you asking under Brady or under a specific item…?

Prosecution (Overgaard): if I may in point number six. They did not want to say how each request is relevant or necessary. It doesn't give Government opportunity to object.

Judge Lind goes on and cites case law. Gives both the Defense and Prosecution argument. Lind denies the ex parte supplement to the discovery motion that at this point is still being considered.

Judge Lind: Defense Motion to Compel Discovery, Appellate 8. Prosecution Response, Appellate 15, eight Enclosures. And the Defense Reply to Prosecution Response to Defense Discovery Request, Appellate 26.

Prosecution: Additionally U.S. gave Court reporter a Supplement that should have been included in the disclosure.

Judge Lind: Any objection?

Coombs (Defense): No.

Judge Lind: Copy for me?

Prosecution: Yes, M'am.

Judge Lind: Sworn Statement Master Sergeant Brian Paki (sp.) Appellant Exhibit 16. Alright Defense lets begin saying for record what are you request…?

Coombs (Defense): For the Defense's Motion indicate both R.C.M. 701 A2 items requested that you compel discovery of…

Judge Lind: I don't mean to interrupt you… I need the Manual for Court Martial.

Coombs (Defense): Under R.C.M. 701… Asked for Court to Compel Discovery under 701 A2. That would be "helpful" for pretrial of Defense 701 A6. Military version of Brady. We detailed those in Motion to Compel Discovery. Give the Court the 12 separate discovery request...

Judge Lind: Proceed...

Coombs (Defense): The Government does not seem to understand the discovery obligations under Brady… Second…

Coombs starts to cite Rules For Court Martial and case law around discovery versus production rules.

Coombs (Defense): With regards to first.. Brady requires under R.C.M. 701 A6, based on Government's response, military Brady is broader than military standard. Trial must provide information even favorable to the accused or that might reduce punishment. We are asking for damage assessments.

Judge Lind: What is the evidentiary basis?

Coombs (Defense): And, also the ex parte filing.

Coombs (Defense): On the issue of Brady requirement. Look at public statements of both Secretary Clinton and Gates that "no sources have been compromised"

Judge Lind: What enclosure was that?

Coombs (Defense): Motion to Compel Discovery…? Don't have it in front of me.

Judge Lind: I do. It is enclosure articles…Washington Post…

Coombs (Defense): And, even if you set aside damage assessment. In our R.C.M. 802 [Conference], the Prosecution says they have been "looking high and low for Brady" "Even going to the Department of Agriculture"… They have stated here they haven't found any Brady material. They think it is the smoking gun. And, that is not the standard in the federal case law. Under R.C.M. 701 A2 Government must disclose material. Case law in this instance means "helpful". I have included a timely article by Aaron Carpenter (sp.) who wrote about discovery obligations under R.C.M. 701 and 703. All that is is required that it is "helpful" to adequately prepare. Under 12 separate discovery request Government continually denied, saying "the US will not provide" Authority is R.C.M 701 A2 for file a motion to compel discovery. Why have they not provided…? They site 703 and indicate that it is not relevant, but THAT is a production rule for trial, not a discovery rule for Pretrial. Government is holding us to 703. If the Government says, "We want to be relieved of our obligation," they haven't done that. Relying on wrong rule under 701A 2 they must produce that item, or any item that may assist us in preparing our case…

Judge Lind: I want to hear from the Defense. What is your position on other agencies?

Coombs (Defense): This is not some random agency, and, so therefore requirement for Brady is to go to that Agency for Brady search. There is a Brady obligation laid on the Government's doorstep. A lot of these items give a more onerous requirement, but again the Government reply on 703. That explains why they haven't found any Brady material. They rely on an appellate standard for Brady. Third aspect, namely Government doesn't understand basic requirement for classified information either. Hard drives collected from SCIF say whether they are discoverable.

Judge Lind: Are they controlled by the Department of Defense?

Coombs (Defense): Yes. If they don't want to turn over…

Coombs cites case law and argument.

Coombs (Defense): They say looking for production and not discovery. The Government doesn't do that because they are taking the constitution…Article 46…access to witnesses in evidence…statutory requirements. We have been in discovery for two years.

Coombs (Defense): The discovery rule shall provide this. It is open, broad, and liberal. How can you say don't have specificity, and then say its not relevant? They say Department of State has not completed damage assessment, but "that" is not their obligation. If it is there and you asked for it… They say we never finish damage assessment. Government is just avoiding discovery obligation. Third page 12 to 14…"We are unaware of forensic evidence." They never state that they looked. The Government continues to hide behind complexity and working with multiple agencies. We cannot overlook impact that has had. The Government doesn't understand Brady. The Government doesn't understand R.C.M. 701 A2. And, the Government doesn't seem to be doing… They say in Case Management Order is gonna take 45 to 60 days with the OCA to do classification review. That should have been done a long time ago. They should be coordinating with the OCA. "Defense is asking…do you have it?" They are actually still at the stage where they have to go back to agency, which they roughly estimate; and then they have to determine if their is a privilege. if the Government understood how classified information worked…could give something that should have been done in advance. I don't know what the Government could say. They then say we provided over X thousand pages of discovery. It is not about amount…

Coombs cites case law

Coombs (Defense): Yesterday, at 7:35 p.m., Government says we notified civilian counsel that we dropped a CD with discovery. Look at the timing…impeachment info [Refers to information that questions credibility of witness.] on Adrian Lamo..for twelve pages.

Judge Lind: Please remember I just joined this case. Who is Adrian Lamo…?

Coombs (Defense): R.C.M. 701 F is production. 701 isn't just classified. Doesn't mandate that you actually give this.

There is a discussion regarding the Rules for Court Martial and the Manual of Court Martial

Coombs (Defense): Two years into this case… Take the Encase forensic images. They have given classified info. They have given images with my clients user profile on it. Our computer forensic experts need at least 3 months, and within my motion, I ask that they preserve it. CCIU asked for these images to be preserved. And, so they spotted this as a source of info, but again the information, they cite 703, namely asking is there purpose for that and that is a problem.

Judge Lind: Coombs a few questions has to be material…FOIA request…what evidence do I have?

Coombs (Defense): Going to go into ex parte issues… What I specifically requested you cannot ignore… Material means "helpful", and it doesn't have to be "helpful"…

Judge Lind: US versus Graner (sp.) does not say that…. What did the government give you regarding FOIA?

Coombs (Defense): Any FOIA requests for that same information…helpful (regards Apache video)…is that it would assist in our theory and presentation of the case…could go into detail…but ex parte… And, I asked the court… Even the Graner (sp.) case… Look at the requirement and standards…

Judge Lind: That means everything is discoverable...

Coombs (Defense): When you go to a specifically requested item…disclose to the defense Brady standard…

There is a discussion between Coombs and Lind regarding case law for discovery versus production of evidence, then there is an exchange with Coombs over the idea of "custody and control" regarding the interagency multi investigation as it related to this case and discovery.

Coombs (Defense): If they give us the discovery that we have been asking for, we would need six months to review, and for two years they have been ruling incorrectly...

Judge Lind: FOIA Specification 2, Charge 2… R.C.M. 701 G discussion…how favorable to Defense?

Coombs (Defense): No.

Judge Lind: This evidence is relevant, material, or favorable. Production of the standpoint to compel…then you need to show me…what is that with the FOIA requests.

Prosecution: We produced the the FOIA requests.

Coombs (Defense): This is something we have been asking for.

Judge Lind: The Government is telling me they gave it to you.


Judge Lind: Government says Quantico video doesn't exist.

Coombs (Defense): How my client was treated, we believe the relevancy. Does not exhaust. We believe it does exist. Being video taped at the time this was happened. Government says we were provided two video, but we were not provided the correct videos.

Judge Lind: Now I don't have any evidence.

Coombs (Defense): We can provide evidence your Honor…

In discussions after this proceeding in the Press Pool, there was discussion with the Fort Meade, MD Public Affairs Officer about Manning taking the stand in this particular instance.

Judge Lind: I can't order something to be produced that the Government says doesn't exists.

The matter is put for later review by the presiding Judge.

Judge Lind: Encase forensic images relevance materiality?

Coombs (Defense): Materiality in this case means "helpful". These other computers or the computers of other 35 Foxes. It is a common practice to supplement machines with other programs. During Article 32, witness testimony said that they added mIRC chat, which was unauthorized. But also added other software. A common practice to add various programs that were not authorized that were considered command mission essential and WGET was one of them. So the program would be found on other computers that did not have.

Judge Lind: Now what evidence do I have of that…?

Coombs (Defense): Your Honor again, it would it be helpful to the defense…various witnesses said they aded mIRC chat… Mr. Milliman is a D6A. He would say that mIRC was unauthorized, but again here this is not a relevancy of having the information be admission able. Having these Encase images would be helpful to verify. We believe it would be common to see WGET as executable file. Not added as a software. Like you don't need user authorization. He had authorization to put it would be direct defense to the charge…

Judge Lind: That program and other programs?

Coombs (Defense): Done by direction of S2 and OIC…our E6 and does…mission essential… Milliman says that is common.

Judge Lind: Can I have a transcript?

Coombs (Defense): There is no transcript.

Judge Lind: Summary transcript.

Judge Lind: Doesn't exist.

Judge Lind: I am willing to listen to the tapes.

Coombs (Defense): That would be fine your Honor.

Judge Lind: [to Prosecution] Do you dispute this testimony?

Prosecution (Fein): Yes.

Fein (Prosecution) argues that the authorization came from the chain of command, not evidence of software on computers.


Judge Lind: I'll listen to it. [Audio Recording.]

Coombs (Defense): Again, Encase images…even if those Encase didn't have mIRC chat, then this would be helpful to defense. Again, 701 A2 trial counsel. Other people had added mIRC chat…

Judge Lind: What is mIRC chat…?

Judge Lind: From when to when?

Coombs (Defense): Oct 2009 to May 2010.

Judge Lind: Approximately 20 to 30 computers?

Coombs (Defense): Yes.

Judge Lind: Anything else with the Encase forensic images?

Judge Lind: Let's move onto Damage Assessments. Let's go through each article you had had. Let's go through relevance and materiality.

Coombs (Defense): What would be "helpful" to have those damage assessments to know what they say?

Judge Lind: Why?

Coombs (Defense): Minimal… Helpful to defense merits. If it is helpful to prove information could cause damage. And, we cite it within our motion. They are not determined that, that element of satisfied. So the Government would probably do thorough and Official Classification Authority (OCA) of the damage assessment. Position from our expert could not caused damage. So then you would have opinion. Relevant if presented to a panel. You have dueling experts. But you have a damage assessment done by the Original Classification Authority. Risks associated with that information.

Coombs (Defense): Gates indicates no sources and methods were compromised from SIGACT release. You have clearly Brady over the hurdle. Helpful to preparation of Defense. And, again I don't want to beat a dead horse. The issue at this point is that this is an argument to compel discovery. If the Government understood what has been missed; what they asked for in their Case Management Order…they need 45 to 60 days. Equity orders and that is indicative a much larger failure of discovery. This so adversely prejudice my client there is really no way to fix that. And, again without hearing their reasons. Once I hear that a motion to dismiss or some other relief.

Judge Lind: Anything else?

Coombs (Defense): No.

Prosecution: We agree with defense, but if its classified it pitfalls outside 706. We are required through Brady progeny to find exculpatory; search any information…and further under Gabriel (sp.). But exculpatory…701 A6 does not apply to classified information, and today is the first time we have been in front of a Judge.

Judge Lind: What is your authority regarding 505 and 701 ?

Prosecution: 701. Information is not subject to disclosure…gives the Government the option to voluntarily disclose information…there is an unjust result…then the Government says we are not withholding Brady material…if it is unclassified…then absolutely…US Army Crimes Investigative Division (CID); Department of State Diplomatic Service (DSS); FBI…US has turned over the information…even some that is classified, including the CID case files. We asked DSS to turn over their files. FBI any material pertaining to accused, but if that info is classified requires 505, and then we needed judge. MRE 505 void doesn't have gatekeeper function built in. When you are dealing with voluminous classified material, we can't respond to every request.

A discussion ensues as to standard for relevance required to disclose classified information.

Prosecution: Encase forensic images requested by Defense is within Department of Defense, but it is classified. Some factual showing for materiality total drives reason. The unit redeployed July 2010, and, pulled from the redeployment all computers with a user profile of Bradley Manning. Any of those drives they collected. Then the unit was free to discard and DX all the procedures post deployment any additional drives in September 2010. Defense request to preserve Encase was made in September 2011 when the unit was down range. Keeps all theater equipment. We notified CID, FBI, and 2/10 Mountain. Identified 181 hard-drives. And out of those serial numbers 13 hard drives that were in the SCIF when the unit was deployed. CID had one other drive. We had not given to Defense because it is classified. Would have to be reviewed by OCA. Then authority granted to turn over based on if you rule it is relevant and necessary. Based on your ruling we will get the approval for 505.

Judge Lind: Damage assessments?

Prosecution: As we have provided in case management order…Government has provided as enclosure…as search and preserve…outside military authority and classified. If it is Brady we have to turn it over, adjudicate when we are going to litigate classified evidence….damage assessments themselves they are living documents…doesn't mean that that damage can't happen the next day. Defense has asked for four damage assessments… Department of State has not completed damage assessment.

Judge Lind: Is that what you are asking…?

Coombs (Defense): No.


Prosecution: Department of State (DoS) has not completed. CIA and the WikiLeaks Task Force have completed theirs, but they are classified outside Department of Defense authority. Information Review Task Force (IRTF)...DIA has completed damage but it is classified.

Judge Lind: DOJ?

Prosecution: Doesn't exists.

Judge Lind: Do you dispute that?

Coombs (Defense): If the Department of State hasn't done anything…in review of information…was part of the later investigation since late 2009 time frame.

Judge Lind: Anything else?

Prosecution: FBI… Defense Requested Discovery… We do intend to and are ready to hand Defense after we get a Protective Order…

Judge Lind: Gathered...?

Prosecution: Yes. Office of National Intelligence (ONI) agency or department. In the event I looked a the proposal for six weeks. So that hasn't been done… So the US has maintained that it is not relevant.

Judge Lind: 505 E1…

Discussion of Prosecution's theory of 505 Privilege related to classified information.

Judge Lind: Standard in MRE 505 F…? Talks about relevant and necessary, but says nothing about sentencing?

Prosecution: I need a moment to review. The standard is higher under 505 I4D because it is for use at trial.

Judge Lind: How do you get there…?

Prosecution: We are making a more liberal determination…if the Defense gives 505 H. We are only talking about the access to the Defense to get the information.

Judge Lind: Anything else...?

Coombs (Defense): Government response clearly indicates they do not understand… They say it is classified then relevant and necessary. They say they provided plenty of classified information and that classified information trumps all Brady. That may be for the Brady aspect. That Brady standard, the other 90 pages. The information Defense would need is a fundamental precept, and discovery is done by Government under 701. 701 still controls Bradley under 701 A6. A2 guidance control is classified. Then they have to go to correct procedure. Well OCA is gonna invoke privilege. We understand requirements. We now are going to tell your Honor we are invoking privilege any of that in their reply motion. They try to piece meal, but the one clear factor… I think the damage assessment…they haven't even thought through the loops to get through the Defense. We started this process in the 2010 time frame…over a year for this 45 to 60 days. The other aspect…Why did you set appellate for Brady the Government has so helplessly messed up that prejudiced my client. Defense is filing Motion to Dismiss all Charges with Prejudice based on Prosecutions messing up discovery so horribly.

…special magistrate…

Judge Lind: Who has the authority?


Coombs (Defense): Other problem…is that this is beyond two years under wrong standard.

Prosecution: Defense is relying on open file discovery rules. We were waiting to deal with a Judge for classified MRE 505GI. We can disclose information, and that is the only information we are talking about, because it is classified.

Recess called.

Judge Lind: Motion to Compel Deposition.

Coombs (Defense): You have everything but [the letter] C, in ex parte.

Judge Lind: Appellate Exhibit 15…are you talking about Reply or…?

Prosecution (Overgaard): No, M'am.


Coombs (Defense): Defense requested each OCA's as an essential witnesses. They were improperly denied at the Article 32. Government impeded access. They were essential witnesses at Article 32 hearing, because for over a year trial was delayed on getting OCA determinations. Once we had that Article 32 began. We had to obtain OCA…vital.

Judge Lind: How so?

Coombs (Defense): Government doesn't recognize Diaz decision and Morrison decision..controlling on how matter is held…what procedures they needed to invoke…either knew or should have known could caused damage. So when you take a look at the OCA determinations. these were determinations to base privileges on, but also identify damage. We as Defense should have access to those. If the OCA's can articulate why it would cause damage, then Defense would like to cross examine, and should have been able to at the Article 32, rather than waiting for trial. These are things the Government fought hard for the presentation of their case. They cannot fight hard on one hand and not on the other.

We should have been able to have equal access. Second, we should have had access to them and the Article 32 Investigating Officer said they were relevant but were unavailable, and ruled that the cost outweighed their testimony. Two of the OCA were located at the Fort Meade. So, when they made determinations, we should have equal access to them. They gave classification determination based upon evidence in this case. These witnesses were not even inquired if they could attend. Investigating Officer just took the Government's position that witnesses were unavailable. Again, we cannot bring these witnesses because they were too important. Investigating Officer says, no reason to do deposition because they are available for trial.

Coombs then cites Chestnut, and goes through a list of all the requests denied.

So here we are now at the Pretrial stages, with a substantial Pretrial right of PFC Manning. There can be no doubt it is vital of Government's case, then vital to the Defense. We went to Government after second denial and asked, "Please give us contact info for civilian OCA's" Government said, "No." I said, can you please explain your response in light of Article 36. They then said, "Sure." We waited a month…then nothing. Then it was a point of contact you would have to work through. Attachment C to our motion… You may have two requirements then another hurdle. We have to go through "regulations for the civilian witnesses" Specify, what we want to talk to them about. Then run it up the flag pole to see if granted…then after another added hurdle…at least one Federal court…Federal district case…Government came back…2A would apply if just Defense trying to reach out. I ask the Government to provide me with whatever requirement these OCA's would have.

Judge Lind: When did you ask?

Judge Lind: About two weeks ago with regards to civilian OCA to even have access to them. Each one of them: example, Captain James [Kulky] (sp.), these are not the type of people you just pick up the phone and call. In my motion I say, these are interviews that are going to have to take place, based upon the subject matter, and Defense will be forced travel.

Judge Lind: Telephone…?

Coombs (Defense): No telephone allowed.

Judge Lind: Secure line…?

Coombs (Defense): Also need documents. With the Department of Atate OCA we need to take each of the 166 charge documents and talk about those documents. Has he seen anything…ask deposition for all OCA's…get done particular location in this general…Board 6 envisions. Clearly important witnesses related to charges.

Prosecution (Overgaard): The Investigating Officer ruled that significance did not outweigh difficulty.

Judge Lind: If Defense request for trial…impediment?

Prosecution (Overgaard): No impediment…addressing specific arguments…standard at Article 32… IO use the proper standard in Ledbetter… His reasons for determining…

Judge Lind: So, these witnesses…classification now or time at offense?

Prosecution (Overgaard): At time of classification. Executive Order 13526 specific individuals are authorized to do these classification reviews. So they are simply they have nothing to do with input. They are reviews if the document is classified based on an executive order.

Judge Lind: What is the Government's position re U.S. v Diaz?

Prosecution (Overgaard): Defense cites…to talk about mens rea…793FO…willful…transmit or cause to be communicated…how to establish mens rea.

Overgaard (Prosecution) goes on to say that Defense could have had telephonic, provided they were available. She says that Defense had contact information. That these individials were high ranking individuals, so coordination with individuals does take time. Overgaard says, initially, the Government states they were not witnesses, because these witnesses are not individuals, they are witnesses by position as OCA's

Judge Lind: Why would position preclude...?

Prosecution (Overgaard): For efficiency purposes. The Government will get the contact info for all relevant individuals.

Prosecution (Fein): Centralized decision making… House keeping rules for court martial processes, means all Government officials are under special notice…to the Motion to Compel Discovery.

Judge Lind: So of all of the witnesses…the Department of Defense witnesses doesn't apply…?

Prosecution (Fein): Those Donegan [RADM Donegan, USCENTCOM], Schmidle [Lt. Gen. Robert E. Schmidle, Jr., U.S. Cyber Command deputy commander], Woods [Rear Adm. David B. Woods
Commander, Joint Task Force Guantanamo] , and two remaining OCA's …they fall outside authority of Department of Defense. 2E regulations, not a method…an administrative rule. Should the Defense…we will champion. If you order depositions, they would follow house keeping rules. If that is the route they want to go…they prepare the request…after they submit the request…

Judge Lind: That involves two witnesses?

Prosecution (Fein): Not witnesses. Proponents.

Judge Lind: Anything else from either side…?

Coombs (Defense): No.

Judge Lind: Is there anything else that I need to address today, before we recess…?

A discussion occurs as to time of proceedings next day. Results in it being set one hour ahead at 10:00 a.m. following day.

2012-03-15 Global Spring: Towards an advanced and mature world civilisation | Another World, Now!

Authored by OrsanS for GAIA

Our current civilization, based on the dominance of a capitalist mode of production relations and other social relations is in large portion an outcome of or strongly determined by the principal relationships in this mode, including ‘foreign’ relations between human societies.

The rising people’s grassroots movement openly and clearly challenges and wants to change these relationships at a global scale.

This conscious ‘demand’ of the peoples is being unsuccessfully undermined by the mainstream media.

The existence of astonishing number of alternative visions for the aftermath of the approaching collapse is the proof of this: the gift economy, solidarity economy, participatory economy, resource based economy, commons based economy, and many more.

The material basis that gives way to such visions to be born is the actual changes have taken place in productive forces since the 70s.

The rapid change in communication and transportation technologies and, more importantly, the impact of these changes on social relations, culture, language, etc. have transformed the society itself: the primary productive force we have.

Since the invention of the internet and fast mass transportation we have observed the rise of peer to peer networks, in which individual nodes can link up each other freely, without necessity of hubs/gate keepers. And it is, in principle, possible within these networks to appropriate the necessary knowledge of the total system nodes are involved.

Since then ‘networks’ OCCUPY THE SPACE both in reality and in our daily languages. But distributed p2p networks have brought about a massive potential for a global change in group dynamics and so power relationships.

This process of networking of society has been linked tightly to the process of transnationalisation of the production, culture and social relations among people.

However, the developments in the productive forces did not coincide with the necessary changes in the production relations -production, ownership and distribution. In order to adjust this and prevent exhaustion elite had to deliver necessary changes in the superstructure - governance, jurisdiction culture. This had to be done from above with the adaptation called ‘capitalist restructuring’ and ‘global good governance’. This become the period we know as Neoliberal Era: the creation of free world market, financialisation, flexibilisation, and global governance from above and massive exploitation and natural destruction.

The mismatch between the changing configuration of productive forces AND existing dominant production relations [and related modes of social relations and political/cultural super structure belongs to them] had to explode, and this happened within 2007-2008.

In the same period, we have seen the rise of the hyper connectivity among people. The web 2.0, although owned by capital, significantly contributed to the rising global mass movement against the collective offensive of the state elite and capital forces towards the poor and ordinary working people.

Today, with the rise of 3D printing, distributed solar, wind, thermo energy productions, and other distributable production/manufacturing technologies, it is first time in the human history we have the material conditions to achieve an equal, just and peaceful human civilization across the planet.

In order to achieve this we needed to form distributed p2p assembles of the people’s from bottom up. This process has started and spread in 2011 globally.

OCCUPATION OF THE WORLD in 2012 will be about a REAL and TOTAL change in mode of production. So production, distribution, consumption, and ownership relations and governance mechanisms we had at hand, which so far empowered only %1 against the %99 and served for their statuesque, will be altered.

We will re-occupy every where and everything! Not only streets and squares but the system globally. We will be embedding p2p mode of production into our camps. We will be spreading the new free culture by sharing all we have in commons for free.

Lets bring all the forces together towards May 2012 and make Global Spring happen, for the people we love, and for the future generations!

Let 2011 and 2012 be remembered as the years in which the ancient regime has fallen and a mature and advanced human civilization was born.

Let our generation be the maker of this change.

Hasta la victoria siempre!

Another World, Now!

2012-03-16 Full Transcript #Manning Motion Hearing Fort Meade, MD March 16, 2012 Day Two

Full Transcript March 16, 2012

This transcript was typed from the press pool at Bradley Manning's motion hearing on March 16, 2012 at Fort Meade, MD.

This transcript may have errors and is incomplete in that there was no way for me to capture every word, or every sentence.

Please send corrections to

Bradley Manning's motion hearing is held in same court room as his Article 32 Pretrial Hearing.

You can also read:


  • General Court Martial Convening Authority: Maj. Gen. Michael S. Linnington
  • Commander of the U.S. Army Garrison, joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall: Col. Carl R. Coffman
  • Commander of U.S. Army Headquarters Command Battalion: Lt. Col. Eric Fleming
  • Military Judge: Col. Denise R. Lind
  • Prosecution: Captain Ashden Fein, Captain Joe Morrow, Captain Angel Overgaard, Capt. Hunter Whyte
  • Defense: Mr. David Coombs, Major Matthew Kemkes and Captain Paul Bouchard

Proceedings were delayed until 13:00 because Defense and Prosecution were in Chambers with Judge Denise Lind hashing out a Court Protective Order.

All Rise.

Court is called to order.

Judge Lind We are starting late today, because the parties and Court were going over a Protective Order regarding the handling of classified information. Both parties had filed orders marked as Appellate Exhibits...


Judge Lind: Looking at Appellate Exhibit 4, under 505...Appellate Exhibit 5 [The Prosecution's Motion for Protective Order] and I believe supplements as well... Alright, I am looking at Appellate Exhibit 22, Supplement for Military Relief...Supplement for Prosecution...Appellate Exhibit 18 is the Supplement...Appellate Exhibit 23...any additional Government response to 505?

Prosecution: Captain Ashden Fein: Yes, the Prosecution's...

Judge Lind: Appellate Exhibit 13, under 505...

Fein (Prosecution): Appellate Exhibit 22, Supplement to 505... Also Appellate Exhibit 18, Supplement to the Prosecution's Motion for Protection...

Judge Lind: I have 18...Appellate Exhibit 18, 13, 22, and 23...correct?

Fein (Prosecution): Yes.

Defense: Mr. David Coombs: Yes.

Judge Lind: As I said earlier, we have spent a good part of day going over all of these motions for Protective Orders, as well as Protective Orders proposed by both sides, and we have finalized a Protective Order that I believe best balances protection of classified info for national security and the rights of the accused.

Secretary hands Judge Lind a document.

Judge Lind: I need to sign it. That would be Appellate Exhibit 32. The other two outstanding things are a ruling on Motion to Compel Depositions, the Motion to Compel Discovery is under advisement. Defense is submitting further evidence...send it via email to parties...and it will be addressed in open court at next session. Other evidence...?

Fein (Prosecution): Government might also submit evidence.

Judge Lind: Defense Moves to Compel Deposition...

Judge Lind reads her ruling which is broken down into sections that explain the motion, the defense argument, and her ruling.

[Judge Lind reads very quickly and so I could not type out every word or sentence that she said. Here is what I captured:

Defense has asked for the oral deposition of the following individuals:

The Judge continues reading background information in her ruling.

  • She states that Culky (sp.) and Rolland (sp.) were considered "essential witnesses" by the Defense for the Article 32 Pretrial Hearing.
  • Judge Lind then reads the lists of charges.
  • Lind reads excerpts from the Article 32 Pretrial Investigating Officers previously unavailable rulings on Defense's Witness List [See Numbers 39 to 45, then 48 could be Robert Rolland (sp.)] and Motion to Compel Witnesses from the Article 32 Pretrial Hearing.
  • Judge Lind reads that Paul Almanza, the Investigating Officer at the Article 32 Pretrial Hearing did not find Culky (sp.) a "relevant" witness for that hearing.
  • Lind continues, and cites the Investigating Officer's ruling that the question as to whether or not the three Apache videos were classified or the fact that the Government is not alleging that they are classified was not "relevant" for the Article 32 Pretrial Hearing.
  • Lind then cites the Pretrial Investigating Officer's ruling that Rear Admiral Kevin Donegan, USCENTCOM, Director of Operations was not reasonably available.
  • Lind continues as cites Almaza's ruling that Mr. Betts, U. S. Cyber Command, Chief Classification Officer was also "not reasonably" available and that the testimony did not "outweigh" his appearance.
  • Lind continues and reads that the Pretrial Investigating Officer, Paul Almanza, also considered Robert E. Schmidle, Deputy Commander, U. S. Cyber Command testimony to not outweigh the difficulty of expense to government operations.
  • Lind continues and reads the Article 32 Pretrial Investigating Officer's ruling on Vice Admiral Robert S. Harward, deputy commander, U.S. Central Command, saying "not reasonably available; and also Almanza's ruling on Mr. Patrick F. Kennedy, Under Secretary, Management, Department of State and Rear Adm. David B. Woods, Commander, Joint Task Force Guantanamo.
  • [NB Robert Rolland (sp.) is never mentioned again, which likely means Rolland was redacted from open Court. It is my opinion that Rolland (sp.) is witness Number 48 on the Defense's Pretrial Witness List.]

Judge concludes by denying Defense Motion to Compel Depositions.

  • Line rules that the Investigating Officer's determination of the witnesses reasonable availability in Article 32 Pretrial was not Improper, as the defense had argued.
  • Lind says she bases her own ruling on the Pretrial Article 32 rules in that the Investigating Officer, Paul Almanza, performed the "correct balance test, depositions only allowed in cases used to preserve essential testimony."
  • Lind says that affidavits can be considered sworn statements under Section 28, 1746.

Judge Lind continues:

Judge Lind: Government had offered OCA by telephonic. Regarding Discovery Request for three civilian witnesses [missed]...Regarding Defenses request of 1 February 2012, Defense received on 29 Feb 2012 the contact info of Mr. Betts....Defense disputes 2E applies...Article 9, R.C.M. the interest of justice the motion is denied.

Judge Lind concludes with business of the Court:

  • Date for next proceeding is April 24 to 26 at 9:00 a.m. at Fort Meade, MD.
  • Lind says that "what is to be worked on there not decided" but based on her previous remarks this day concerning the Motion to Compel Discovery:

    Motion to Compel Discovery is under advisement. Defense is submitting further evidence...send it via email to parties...and will be addressed in open court at next session."

    It is therefore reasonable to assume that will in fact take place at the next session. A spokesperson for Public Affairs Office at Fort Meade said in Q&A that would mean Manning might testify concerning the Quantico video of his interrogation and stripping that Defense files a preservation request on January 19, 2011; but that Prosecution claims does not exist.

    Notes on the Quantico Video of Manning Stripping and Interrogation:

    • January 18, 2010: Defense alleges that PFC Manning is interrogated and stripped by Guards at Quantico, and that the incident is videotaped. (See Manning Defense Request for Evidence and Article 138 Complaint and Article 138 Complaint Rebuttal)
    • "4.) On 18 January 2011, over the recommendation of Capt. Hocter [BRIG PSYCHIATRIST] and the defense psychiatrist, Capt. Brian Moore, [FORMER QUANTICO BRIG COMMANDER] CWO4 Averhart placed me under suicide risk. The suicide risk means that I sit in my cell for 24 hours a day. I am stripped of all clothing with the exception of my underwear. My prescription eyeglasses are taken away from me. I am forced to sit in essential blindness with the exception of the times that I am reading or given limited television privileges. During those times, my glasses are returned to me. Additionally, there is a guard sitting outside my cell watching me at all times." (Source: Bradley Manning, Article 138 Complaint)

    • January 19, 2011: Defense files preservation of evidence request with the government and a request for the production of the video of Manning being stripped and interrogated. (See: Manning Defense Request for Evidence and Defense Compel the Production of Evidence for Manning Article 32
    • "On January 18, 2011, defense was notified that PFC Manning at the direction of XXXXXXXXXX[FORMER QUANTICO BRIG COMMANDER] [CWO4 AVERHART], was placed in suicide risk. This decision was made over the recommendations of XXXXXXXXXX [CAPT. HOCTER] [BRIG PSYCHIATRIST] and the defense appointed XXXXXXXXXX [PSYCHIATRIST] [CAPT. BRIAN MOORE]. When PFC Manning was being ordered to surrender his clothes as part of the unnecessary suicide risk, the Brig made the decision to videotape this event along with an interrogation of PFC Manning by XXXXXXXXXX [WHO IS THIS?] and others. On 19 January 2011, the defense filed a preservation of evidence request with the government and a request for the production of the video. The government has yet to respond to the defense request. The defense believes the video will support PFC Manning's claim of unlawful pretrial punishment." (Source: Manning Defense Request for Evidence)

    • November 30, 2011: Government responds to request for Quantico video that it "will provide all matters requested that are it is possession no later than 2 December 2011."
    • "a. The video of PFC Manning being ordered to surrender his clothing at the direction of and his subsequent interrogation on 18 January 2011. Given the fact the defense filed a preservation of evidence request on 19 January 201 1 - nearly one year ago - the government has no excuse for not providing the video . See Appendix A. The video is clearly within the possession of the government and should have already been produced. The government has responded that it 'will provide all matters requested that are it is possession no later than 2 December 201 1.'" (Source: Defense Compel the Production of Evidence for Manning Article 32)

    • March 15, 2012: At the Motion Hearing, we learn that the Government provided two videos to Defense, but that according to Defense they are not the right videos.
    • [April 24 to 26, 2012]: The Court will take up the issue of the Quantico video:
    • Judge Lind: Government says Quantico video doesn't exist.

      Coombs (Defense): How my client was treated, we believe the relevancy. Does not exhaust. We believe it does exist. Being video taped at the time this was happened. Government says we were provided two video, but we were not provided the correct videos.

      Judge Lind: Now I don't have any evidence.

      Coombs (Defense): We can provide evidence your Honor...

      In discussions after this proceeding in the Press Pool, there was discussion with the Forte Meade, MD Public Affairs Officer about Manning taking the stand in this particular instance.

      Judge Lind: I can't order something to be produced that the Government says doesn't exists.

      The matter is put for later review by the presiding Judge. (Source: Full Transcript March 15, 2012, Motion Hearing, Day One)

    • March 16, 2012: Judge Lind says that the Motion to Compel Discovery which concerns the Quantico video is under advisement (See above).
    • Judge Lind: Motion to Compel Discovery is under advisement. Defense is submitting further evidence...send it via email to parties...and will be addressed in open court at next session. Other evidence...?

      Fein (Prosecution): Government might also submit evidence...

    Other Notes:

    • The Government chose Fort Meade, MD as the location of the Manning legal proceedings. "The government's claim that the cost and burden is too great to require the production and personal appearance of relevant and necessary witnesses is not justified. It was the government's decision to conduct this Article 32 investigation at Fort Meade." (Source: Request to Compel the Production of the Witnesses)
  • 2012-03-17 #WikiLeaks News Update: #Assange4Senate; #Manning's motion hearing; Other news

    WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 470 days.
    Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 467 days.
    Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 665 days.

    WikiLeaks News:

    • Mainstream Media organizations have been misquoting and misinterpreting our purpose and work here at WL Central. Please note that we are an organization wholly independent of WikiLeaks.

    • Stratfor hired Robert D. Kaplan, longtime national correspondent with The Atlantic, as their chief geopolitical strategist to help them bounce back after WikiLeaks began releasing their emails.

    • Andy Worthington released Part 33 of his 70-part in-depth series covering the WikiLeaks Guantanamo Files.

    • World Socialist Web Site published a new interview with Julian Assange in which he discusses the attacks on WikiLeaks and his upcoming Supreme Court verdict.

    • BBC Two will air a new program, "WikiLeaks: The Secret Life of a Superpower," on March 21 at 9PM. The program will focus on what Cablegate has revealed about struggles within US diplomacy.

    • Peter Van Buren, a US State Department employee, was on The Alyona Show discussing the termination notice he received which was based on eight charges, including linking to WikiLeaks on his blog.

    • A panel was held in Brisbane entitled "The War on WikiLeaks" with speakers Christine Assange, Scott Ludlam, Peter Black, and Nicole Jensen. Full video of the panel is available, though the quality is rather low.

    Julian Assange News:

    • WikiLeaks announced via Twitter that Julian Assange has decided to run for the Australian Senate:

      WikiLeaks will also be fielding a candidate to run against Julia Gillard in her home seat of Lalor. The name of this candidate as well as the state Julian Assange will be running for will be announced at a later time.

      Shortly after mainstream media picked up on Julian Assange's decision to run, it became a featured topic on Twitter's Discover page.

      For further information about how Julian Assange can run for Senate while under house arrest in the UK, see Peter Kemp's article on the subject.

    • WikiLeaks is asking supporters to spread an open letter to UK Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg which brings attention to the issues of the UK's extradition agreements, focusing on the case of Julian Assange.

    • German Friends of WikiLeaks has written an open letter to the Australian Ambassador in Berlin urging the Australian Government to provide protection for Julian Assange.

    Bradley Manning News:

    • Bradley Manning's motion hearing continued into its second and final day. Here are the major developments:
      • Secret conferencing between the prosecution, defense, and judge was held until 1PM. During this time, they agreed upon a protective order for classified information which was signed and submitted to the record
      • The judge denied the defense's motion from yesterday to compel depositions from OCAs (original classification authorities)
      • The next set of pre-trial hearings is scheduled for April 24-26, though the actual trial date is yet to be established
      • For in-depth coverage of Day 2 see Kevin Gosztola's live-blog at Firedoglake and Nathan Fuller's report at the Bradley Manning Support Network

    • An under-reported development in Bradley Manning's case is that the prosecution appeared to indicate they do not plan to argue that Manning broke into government computers; he accessed them using his assigned password. This is contrary to previous claims by the government from Manning's hearing in December.

    • The Young Turks discussed Bradley Manning's motion hearing, commenting that if American mainstream media reports that he aided Al-Qaeda by leaking documents then most Americans will believe it.

    • Zack Pesavento of the Bradley Manning Support Network was on RT America discussing Bradley Manning's motion hearing and how he's been punished before trial.

    • Ethan McCord, soldier seen on the ground in the 'Collateral Muder' video, wrote an appeal calling for Bradley Manning's defense.

    • National Theatre Wales is producing a play about Bradley Manning which will open at Manning's former school, Tasker Milward comprehensive.


    Upcoming Dates & Events:

    March 21: "WikiLeaks: The Secret Life of a Superpower" to air on BBC Two, 9PM.

    Mid-March: Julian Assange's TV Series to begin airing.

    April 5: Beat the Blockade against WikiLeaks by donating at least $5.

    April 24: Bradley Manning's next set of pre-trial hearings.

    April 25: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.

    May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

    May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

    2012-03-18 'Old media' striking out and tripping up again

    It has come to our attention that members of the mainstream media are both misquoting this site and misunderstanding what this site represents.

    In a piece published 17 March 2012 at Adelaide Now, Samantha Maiden states the following.

    An article posted on the WikiLeaks website predicted that, if successful, "ASIO would have a collective heart attack".

    This is simply irresponsible journalism. The article in question was not published at the WikiLeaks website. It was published here.

    Author Peter Kemp is speculating into how well an Assange seat in Canberra would go over, what with the different mindsets of the WikiLeaks generation and the older generation in the Australian capital. He writes:

    I anticipate seismic shifts, interesting and amusing scenarios/battles if Julian Assange is elected. Day one for example: "No, you not are allowed to connect a Tor relay server to the Parliamentary internet system. ASIO would have a collective heart attack."

    It's patently obvious what Peter was getting at. It's also embarrassingly obvious that Samantha Maiden completely missed the point, and for no good reason.

    Not to be outdone by the Herald Sun organisation, the Murdocrats tried the same thing.

    The organisation released a document on Twitter they claimed held the answer that would allow him to run while under house arrest.

    And the article leads back to the same article at this site.

    Not to be outdone by Maiden and the Murdocrats, Sydney Morning Herald's Misha Schubert joins in the 'fun'.

    WikiLeaks is also flirting with the idea of establishing its own political party, declaring it ''not only feasible but likely given the support levels in Australia''.

    No, Misha. WikiLeaks might be flirting with the idea, but they haven't declared anything. You're taking a quote from this site out of context and appropriating it to WikiLeaks, and that is incorrect.

    But let the yanks get in the picture! Here's 'commentary staff writer' Joel Gehrke of the Washington Examiner with the 'Assange for the senate' story - and Gehrke does the same inexcusable thing.

    The Wikileaks website WL Central floated the idea of a "Wikileaks Party" for Assange's candidacy in January.

    It might be a bit much to ask those journalists who remain with the 'old media' to do their own fact-checking. It might seem a bit much to presume they don't just copy and paste from other articles online. But we at WL Central remain optimistic.

    WL Central is an independent WikiLeaks news resource. Writers at WL Central are very protective of their journalistic integrity. But it seems at times that such a concept is lost on the 'old media'.

    2012-03-18 Interview w Naomi Colvin on UN Rpt on Torture & Euro advocacy for US political prisoner #Manning

    I recently spoke with Naomi Colvin of the UK Friends of Bradley Manning and Occupy London about the UN Special Rapporteur Report on Torture as it concerns Bradley Manning, as well as European sentiment and advocacy for the U.S. political prisoner and alleged whistleblower. You can find Naomi on twitter at @auerfeld

    2012-03-18 Interview with Kevin Gozstola, Is media coverage of #Manning timid & recent demands for access?

    I recently spoke with Kevin Gosztola, journalist and blogger at The Dissenter at FDL. We spoke about media coverage of Bradley Manning's legal proceedings, as well as the recent demand by a coalition of 46 media organizations for access to Court records. You can find Kevin on twitter @kgosztola.

    2012-03-18 The word as virus: Myth-making in the syndication age

    My general theory since 1971 has been that the Word is literally a virus, and that it has not been recognized as such because it has achieved a state of relatively stable symbiosis with its human host ... the Word clearly bears the single identifying feature of virus: it is an organism with no internal function other than to replicate itself.
    - William Seward Burroughs, The Adding Machine

    Anyone who has ever played the child's game of "Telephone" -- also called "Chinese Whispers" -- knows how readily the "grapevine" breeds distortion, as mistakes and deliberate misstatements can take on lives of their own. Often the mainstream news media acts as an adult version of this exercise in group error. In the system of mass news dissemination via major syndication agencies like Reuters and the Associated Press (AP), inaccuracies eventually become accepted "fact," and mistake morphs into meme and myth. A sole news service like AP is like "Telephone" on steroids, as it can easily distribute a single falsehood to more than 15,000 subscribers who then accept it as fact. Herein danger lies; for, in these days of trial by media, one person's fate and freedom may depend on a question as to which myth has more traction.

    A cautionary example: in 1994, the AP fired its Washington bureau reporter Christopher Newton, after allegedly discovering that the journalist had fabricated scores of news sources over two years' time. Noting that "Newton cited nonexistent academic sources at Harvard, Princeton, Penn, Vanderbilt, Chicago, Cal, Texas, Texas Tech, New Mexico, Colorado, and George Washington before a reference to a phantom Stanford source finally exposed him," a writer at speculated that Newton evaded earlier detection because of the banality of his fabrications: "Unlike onetime Slate contributor Jay Forman, who added lies to a story to make it sound more exciting, Newton took the opposite tack, making the stories less interesting—if that's possible—by inserting insipid invented quotations that read like blurred type."

    But a less innocuous actor can do serious damage, especially when the mass dissemination of private agendas parades as "news reporting." When, late last month, WikiLeaks began publishing its cache of over 5 million emails from the "global intelligence" corporation Stratfor, it also revealed that the would-be spy company "did secret deals with dozens of media organisations and journalists – from Reuters to the Kiev Post." Although Reuters spokesman David Girardin disclaimed knowledge of specific collusion between his organization and Stratfor, another source observed that, since the dawn of the "war on terror," Stratfor had become "a highly sought after informant for major Western media organizations like Bloomberg, Associated Press, Reuters, The New York Times, and the BBC."

    In announcing its news, the WikiLeaks press release continued: "While it is acceptable for journalists to swap information or be paid by other media organisations, because Stratfor is a private intelligence organisation that services governments and private clients these relationships are corrupt or corrupting." Certainly, the fact that Stratfor's purported client roster heavily favors U.S. military and intelligence agencies -- as well as private military contractors -- may cause some to wonder whether some of the "news" reported from Stratfor to Reuters may be more accurately described as paid propaganda, which is then distributed daily to thousands of media outlets that then print the stories verbatim.

    In fact, the hostility evident in the thousands of Stratfor emails discussing ways in which to destroy WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange may account for the virulence and oft-repeated distortions that have consistently accompanied widespread media reporting on WikiLeaks and Assange. Indeed, the apparent chain of command from the U.S. government, to Stratfor, to Reuters and other news services, and then to many thousands of subscribers, appears viral in nature -- as misstatements repeated thousands of times infect even independent news sources. Common examples include blatant untruths (now widely accepted as fact) that Assange has been charged with a crime, and that his accusers are former WikiLeaks volunteers. A recent addition to this stable is a VEXNEWS blog post perpetuating the myth of Assange as an anarchic vagabond "wandering the world with a backpack, laptop and bad attitude, encouraging hackers to bust into confidential information networks and vigorously allegedly declining condom use with hand-picked Scandinavian groupies." Ascribing the opinion of one WL Central journalist to the WikiLeaks organization, the same source also parrots the popular misperception that WikiLeaks and the WL Central blog are affiliated.

    Since it has now become clear that this long-standing error has gone viral into myth, we at WL Central feel compelled to clarify that our blog is an independent group that is not directly associated with the WikiLeaks organization.

    2012-03-22 #WikiLeaks News Update

    WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 474 days.
    Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 471 days.
    Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 669 days.

    WikiLeaks News:

    • WikiLeaks issued a press release offering to host a discussion on the future of Malaysia between Prime Minister Najib Razak, Anwar Ibrahim, and Raja Petra. Shortly after, Anwar Ibrahim accepted the invitation.

    • BBC Two aired the first part of a new special, "WikiLeaks: The Secret Life of a Superpower." The documentary focuses on Cablegate revelations and the effects it had around the world. Part two will air March 28 at 9:00PM GMT.

    • According to emails from Stratfor, a U.S. mercenary "took part" in the killing of Muammar Gaddafi, after which he was sent to assist the Syrian opposition.

    • Stratfor VP Fred Burton, a man considered one of the top U.S. counter-terrorism experts, uses an immense amount of racist slurs when referring to Arab, African-American, and Chinese people.

    • An article in NYU Local analyses WikiLeaks cables about Joseph Kony and the LRA (Lord's Resistance Army), asking the question, "Does the U.S. allow the Ugandan Government to commit war crimes?" There are nearly 600 WikiLeaks cables which mention the LRA, a dozen of which mention the Invisible Children organization.

    • Firedoglake's Kevin Gosztola analyses Homeland Security's role in the crackdown on Occupy protests using information gained from FOIA requests and Stratfor emails.

    • Polls from Essential Report show that the majority of Australians still support WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. They also show that only 22% of Australians believe Julian Assange is receiving proper assistance from the government.

    • The Australian Government seems to have a form letter they send out in response to inquiries about WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, which states at the end, "I do not intend to speak publicly about this matter."

    • An excerpt from "The Phone Hacking Scandal: Journalism on Trial" details the poor performance by serious media, including The Guardian, in relation to coverage of the WikiLeaks cables.

    • Australian Greens MP Jamie Parker gave a speech in support of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning.

    • A judge has lifted the Twitter ban on the "Anonymous 14" who are under indictment for their alleged involvement in "Operation Avenge Assange," which was an attack on PayPal after they suspended WikiLeaks' account after the release of Cablegate.

    • WikiLeaks Press has released its coverage of WikiLeaks News from 23-29 February.

    • The Minnesota Committee to Stop FBI Repression expressed its solidarity with WikiLeaks and Julian Assange.

    Julian Assange News:

    • World-wide rallies are planned after Julian Assange's Supreme Court verdict is handed down. A complete list of the rallies is available here.

    • Justice for Assange has a new section which covers the destruction of evidence by complainant AA in the Assange case.

    • Green Senator Scott Ludlam and Christine Assange were interviewed after a forum in Brisbane about Julian Assange, the threat of his extradition, and his decision to run for the Australian Senate. Sydney Morning Herald summarized Christine's speech from the forum.

    • Christine Assange was on Triple J Hack radio discussing her son's upcoming Supreme Court verdict and his decision to run for Australian Senate.

    • An article in Crikey discusses Julian Assange's decision to run for Australian Senate and looks at the statistics he would need in order to win a seat.

    Bradley Manning News:

    • Bradley Manning won the popular vote of Global Exchange's 10th annual Human Rights Award, leading with over 16,000 votes.

    • Kevin Zeese of the Bradley Manning Support Network, who attended Manning's recent motion hearings, wrote an article on the prosecution being "incurably infected" by government misconduct.

    • General Martin Dempsey has mimicked President Obama by declaring Bradley Manning guilty before trial. The Bradley Manning Support Network asks people to call him and demand he retract his statements.

    • The Center for Constitutional Rights demands that the press and public be given immediate access to documents and information filed in Bradley Manning's case.

    • The upcoming play "The Radicalization of Bradley Manning" will be live-streamed and feature interactive hyperlinks which coincide with the script.


    Upcoming Dates & Events:

    March 28: Part two of "WikiLeaks: The Secret Life of a Superpower" to air on BBC Two, 9PM.

    Mid-March: Julian Assange's TV Series to begin airing.

    April 5: Beat the Blockade against WikiLeaks by donating at least $5.

    April 12-28: Performances of "The Radicalization of Bradley Manning" held between these dates in schools across Wales.

    April 24: Bradley Manning's next set of pre-trial hearings.

    April 25: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.

    May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

    May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

    2012-03-22 WikiLeaks Truck artist Clark Stoeckley sketches #Manning Motion Hearing #FreeBrad

    Below is a series of drawings sketched by artist, Clark Stoeckley, at the Motion Hearing for U.S. v. PFC Bradley Manning on March 15 and 16, 2012 at Fort Meade, MD.

    Stoeckley was situated either in the courtroom gallery or in the media operations center, where a live video feed of the proceedings was broadcast.

    Bradley Manning has been held without trial since May 29, 2010. Former State Department spokesperson, P.J. Crowley, described Manning's treatment by the U.S. as "ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid." Crowley also said, the "exercise of power in today's challenging times and relentless media environment must be prudent and consistent with our laws and values."

    The same week that Crowley was forced to resign for his remarks, Stoeckley adorned a former U-Haul box-truck with the WikiLeaks hourglass logo and signage reading: "Release Bradley Manning" and "WikiLeaks Top Secret Mobile Information Collection Unit".

    Stoeckley drove the now world famous WikiLeaks Truck around the White House, and was subsequently arrested and interrogated by Secret Service, despite his never having been charged with a crime.

    Stoeckley WikiLeaks Truck has been a staple of Occupy Wall Street since September 17, delivering food and supplies to the revolution in New York, D.C., Boston, Philadelphia, and Newark.

    Stoeckley, a New York City based artist, activist, and performer, works in wide variety of media and under several monikers. A recent graduate from Brooklyn College's Performance and Interactive Media Arts program, he now teaches painting, drawing, and digital art at Bloomfield College in New Jersey.

    Though widely covered by the news, the WikiLeaks Truck is rarely noticed by the Art press. However, Stoeckley’s was featured in "The Joke's on Us" in the December 2011 issue of ARTnews The article described a hoax lecture that Stoeckley delivered on New York City pranksters wearing NYPD Vandal Squad Task Force uniform.

    Stoeckley’s art has been shown in the Pratt Manhattan Gallery; Emily Harvey Foundation Gallery; Contemporary Art Museum St. Louis; and the Detroit Institute of Art. You can find Clark Stoeckley on Twitter @WikiLeaksTruck

    In the series below, Stoeckley starts with rough pencil sketches, then darkens those lines with ink, and fills the page with colored pencil. He then scans the drawing and works in Photoshop.

    The series contains:

    • Bradley Manning Portrait
    • David Coombs (frontal/color)
    • Judge Lind (frontal/color)
    • Prosecutor (side/color)
    • Female friend of Prosecution (side/color)
    • David Coombs and Judge Lind (side/B&W)
    • Prosecution (side/B&W)
    • Prosecutor sitting (side/color)
    • Camoflage Soldier (side/color)










    2012-03-24 On financial blockades as a political tool for censorship

    In an interview published this week in Law.Com, general counsel for the Washington DC based nonprofit Center for Democracy & Technology, David Sohn, discusses the protests against SOPA and PIPA, including the January 18 internet blackout action. In general, he disparages the methods proposed in the bills for shutting down sites that are alleged to be copyright infringers, claiming concern over the likelihood that ISPs put into policing roles will take a more risk averse approach in shutting down sites, resulting in a curtailment of freedom of expression. However when he is asked how he would balance the right to free speech on the Internet with the need to curtail online IP theft, his response is:

    The portions of the bills that worked were those that took a follow-the-money approach by cutting off the funding support for rogue websites. WikiLeaks provides an instructive example. All of the efforts to make it disappear didn't work, but what did work was the financial blockade that made it impossible for WikiLeaks to fund the bandwidth it needed to run.

    Putting aside his misguided claim that WikiLeaks actually ceased operating after the financial blockade was imposed on them in December 2010, his comments do in other ways properly reflect the grim reality. What Sohn is referring to here are the provisions in SOPA / PIPA that prohibit any site accused of piracy from doing business with other services, such as PayPal or any advertising platform. Almost precisely what was done to WikiLeaks having their relationships cut off not only with PayPal, but also with Visa, MasterCard, Bank of America and Western Union - resulting in the loss of 95% of their income from donations - their only income - for the last 15 months.

    Almost the same thing, but not quite. The difference being that these penalties, had SOPA / PIPA not been halted (for now) by a massive global internet campaign in January, would have been applied under law. Under Section 102 of SOPA, the Attorney General would be empowered to order American companies from doing business with any alleged infringing web site. In the case of the withdrawal of services for WikiLeaks, no such lawful basis can be found. Vague references to 'Terms of service' are about as much explanation as anyone has been given.

    In a panel discussion in January 2011 co-founder of PayPal Peter Thiel acknowledges that they and other companies are essentially acting under pressure from the government in the WikiLeaks and other cases - where perhaps, in his words, a more 'heroic CEO' would make the right moral choice, most will succumb to the 'incredible pressure to cave'. Further describing justifications by companies of the action against WikiLeaks, he goes on:

    You've got various forms of corporate boilerplate ..when you peel it back maybe it doesn't mean quite as much

    - Peter Thiel, speaking at the Churchill Club, January 2011, on the question 'Did WikiLeaks stand a a chance?':

    Of course the blockade has been orchestrated by an enraged and embarrassed US Government, coming as it did immediately after the release of the CableGate archive. This is patently obvious to even the most credulous of observers. It has been politically motivated, and carried out without due process. And yet, concerningly for what we believe to be democratic societies in which we follow the rule of law, these companies' actions have been allowed to stand. Recently Australian Greens Senator Scott Ludlam called on anyone who used one of these services to go to the company with a complaint:

    I’m using your services, I was pretty happy with them, but you have removed my freedom to deal with a legitimate organisation that hasn’t been convicted of a crime in any country. What on earth are you doing? Is that even legal? Should I write to the competition regulator? Or will you just lift the blockade and be reasonable?

    - Senator Scott Ludlam, speaking at the WikiLeaks, Assange and Democracy Forum, February 17 2012, Sydney:

    In addition to writing to, phoning and lobbying these companies and our financial regulators, there is something else that any of us can do to object to the financial blockade of WikiLeaks: use one of the remaining available methods to support them and donate. Recently a campaign was launched to "donate five bucks to WikiLeaks on April 5". By taking action together and on a single day, a strong message will be sent that extrajudicial censorship of a publishing organisation that delivers us the truth will not be tolerated. By speaking with a united voice the internet stopped SOPA/PIPA in their tracks. It's time to do the same for the corporates who are telling us how we can and can't spend our money, and who won't own up as to why.

    Visit the website or follow @beattheblockade to learn more.

    2012-03-27 Polish CIA prison: Secret Service reveals files on collaboration with the CIA to prosecution [UPDATE 2]

    This article is solely based on publicly available information. The author of this article is not and never has been affiliated with WikiLeaks, and does not have, and never had inside information on their operations. The article reflects the views of the author only.

    The former head of the Polish Secret Service, Zbigniew Siemiątkowski, is accused of false imprisonment and corporeal punishment of prisoners of war in breech of international law, Gazeta Wyborcza and Polish state broadcaster TVP report. These accusations were made by Warsaw prosecutors on the 10th of January 2012. For unknown reasons, the case was moved from Warsaw to Krakow a few days later.

    Siemiątkowski remains silent, and indicated that he would do so in the future, to protect the safety of the country.

    Based on three sources within the prosecution and the Secret Service, the news outlets report that these accusations were made after the Secret Service revealed their files regarding their collaboration with the CIA during the first years of the war on terror to the prosecutors at the end of 2011.

    It has been alleged that the Polish Secret Service made a building on the grounds of their training camp in a remote part of Masovia available to the CIA. The existence of such a camp is supported by flight logs of a nearby airport, which are publicly available, listing CIA flights.

    Siemiątkowski now is a lecturer at the institute of Political Studies and Journalism of prestigious Warsaw University. He teaches history of political thought.

    For our previous extensive coverage of the case, please see this link.


    The EU has now issued a press release, entitled: "US secret prisons in Europe: a 'law of silence' among governments". Today, a public hearing on the CIA rendition network was held at the European Parliament. Those responsible for public inquiries in Denmark, Lithuania, Poland and Romania were unable to attend, with apologies.

    Last June, the EU issued a resolution reminding member states not to cover up CIA rendition.

    UPDATE 2:

    In early March 2012, Siemiątkowski was found guilty of false imprisonment of a politician, who was detained by a state protection agency. He is currently serving a three year suspended sentence.

    This is not his first conflict with the law. In 2007, he was found guilty of keeping classified agency documents at his home. He served a three year suspended sentence.

    Photos of Stare Kiejkuty

    2012-03-28 Photos of Stare Kiejkuty

    Aerial view of Stare Kiejkuty, including "villa in the woods":

    View Larger Map

    Street view, driving route 58 in North Eastern direction:

    2012-03-29 Polish CIA prison: political influence on the investigation

    PM Donald Tusk has now commented on the investigation into the CIA black site in Stare Kiejkuty. According to news agency PAP, he is constantly in touch with President Bronisław Komorowski and General Prosecutor Andrzej Seremet regarding the matter.

    He added that the prosecutors investigating the case were "not released from their obvious duty of care for the interests of the country."

    He also said: "As far as it is possible for the government, we will be trying to prevent any negative consequences of the investigation and the elucidation of the case, but it will come to light. Nobody can prevent this, neither in Poland nor on the other side of the ocean."

    In further remarks, he warned all those working on the case not to leak, to be imprecise or overzealous.

    The case was moved to a different jurisdiction, after the former head of the Secret Service, Zbigniew Siemiątkowski, had been interrogated under caution, and accused of crimes against humanity.

    Siemiątkowski is currently serving a three year suspended sentence for an unrelated case. He has another previous conviction, and currently works a lecturer at Warsaw University.

    Previous coverage of the case.

    Council of Europe report on the complicity of European countries in CIA rendition.

    Photos of Stare Kiejkuty, including the secluded building in the woods.

    2012-03-31 #WikiLeaks News Update & Upcoming Events

    WikiLeaks has been financially blockaded without process for 483 days.
    Julian Assange has been detained without charge for 480 days.
    Bradley Manning has been imprisoned without trial for 677 days.

    WikiLeaks News:

    • The Australian Government recently renewed its attacks against WikiLeaks by condemning the organization as "reckless, irresponsible and potentially dangerous" as well as delaying the release of Australian diplomatic cables on Julian Assange until his extradition case has been decided.

    • New laws have passed in Australia which make it difficult for organizations like WikiLeaks to operate, including an extradition law which makes it easier for foreign governments to request extradition of Australians and a new spying law which broadens ASIO's reach.

    • BBC aired the second episode of its documentary "WikiLeaks: The Secret Life of a Superpower."

    • Cabledrum has indexed nearly 800 articles on WikiLeaks' Global Intelligence Files from 37 countries.

    • Emails from Stratfor show that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was a Stratfor source from 2007 to 2010.

    • In a speech about unpunished crimes against humanity, lawyer Geoffrey Robertson mentioned a WikiLeaks cable which discussed Iran being prepared to delay its nuclear program if it could get its hands on the PMOI (People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran).

    • Kristinn Hrafnsson spoke at the Polis International Journalism conference where he said WikiLeaks is not finished in its publications and gets requests every day from media outlets wanting to be partners.

    • US attorney and extradition expert Douglas McNabb and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges were on RT discussing the US's relentless pursuit of Julian Assange and the implications for whistleblowers and journalists.

    • An article in Binzaman looked at the five "silliest" examples of WikiLeaks being banned: The Pentagon's ban of WikiLeaks, the U.S. Air Force's ban of the Guardian and New York Times, the Library of Congress banning access to WikiLeaks, President Obama banning federal employees from WikiLeaks, and American researchers in Antarctica being banned from WikiLeaks.

    • A supporter began a WikiLeaks poster campaign called "Wanna Know?" Every week a new poster with a new fact will be posted.

    Julian Assange News:

    • Julian Assange was on ABC Late Night Live Radio where he talked about his extradition hearing, how WikiLeaks is running, his upcoming television show, and his run for senate. Transcript is also available.

    • Julian Assange was interviewed about his announcement to run for senate where he discussed political figures he admired, his priorities, and his views on national and international politics.

    • ABC's The Drum held a poll about Julian Assange's announcement to run for Senate.
      If Julian Assange stood for the Senate in your state:
      • I'd vote for him: 54%
      • It wouldn't change my vote: 31%
      • I'd move 12%
      • Who's Julian Assange? 2%
      • 9738 votes counted

    • The Liberal Democrats believe they are the party perfectly suited for Julian Assange.

    • Reuters published an article commenting on the Australian Senate being "no legal haven" for Julian Assange. In regards to the article, Philip Dorling, who published the first comments from Julian Assange after his announcement of his run for senate, noted "Assange isn't looking for a legal hideout."

    • Mark Lee Hunter wrote an article about the constant attacks on Julian Assange, especially by those who have worked with him, and how they are not helpful for journalism.

    • Professor Marcello Ferrada-noli was on RT discussing Julian Assange's extradition case. Transcript of the interview is available at his blog.

    • In a revamp of community sentencing, the UK is going to electronically tag over 100,000 offenders. Julian Assange has been tagged for nearly 500 days even though he has not been charged with any crime.

    • Christine Assange was on 2UE radio calling on Australian FM Bob Carr to seek a timely conclusion to Julian's house arrest.

    • Naomi Wolf declined a meeting to interview Julian Assange for fear that it could be construed as "aiding a terrorist" under the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act). Testimony from Birgitta Jónsdottir said she herself was afraid of arrest due to association with WikiLeaks.

    Bradley Manning News:

    • An article in Business Insider showed how the U.S. Government had greater transparency with the Guantanamo trials than they have with Bradley Manning's court martial. The U.S. Government remains opposed to efforts to make Bradley Manning's court martial more transparent. (See also: David Coomb's full statement at the Bradley Manning Support Network.)

    • The Nation's Greg Mitchell and Firedoglake's Kevin Gosztola have published a new e-book entitled "Truth and Consequences: The U.S. vs. Bradley Manning" which is available at Amazon for $3.99. An excerpt is available via The Nation.

    • Salon's Glenn Greenwald compared the pre-trial confinement of Bradley Manning, who spent 10 months in cruel and inhumane treatment at Quantico Marine Base before being transferred to Ft. Leavenworth, with that of Sgt. Robert Bales, prime suspect in the slaughter of 17 Afghan civilians, who was immediately placed in Ft. Leavenworth.

    • While Bradley Manning is being declared guilty before trial by generals, the defense attorney of Sgt. Robert Bales, alleged to have slaughtered 17 Afghan civilians, is receiving letters from generals wishing him luck in defending his client.

    • A federal court ruled that David House is allowed to continue his lawsuit against the federal government over a boarder search-and-seizure related to his relationship with Bradley Manning. He was on The Alyona Show to discuss the matter. (See also a statement on the issue from the Bradley Manning Support Network.)

    • The Bradley Manning Support Network is asking people to stand with Bradley during his next set of hearings, April 24-26.

    • After receiving inquiries about Bradley Manning's location, David E. Coombs said he will be held at Fort Leavenworth until his next hearing and is doing well.

    • Video of Daniel Ellsberg speaking at the Occupy the Truth whistleblower conference is now available.


    Upcoming Dates & Events:

    April 4: Julian Assange's May 2011 Hay Festival talk airs on Sky Arts1, 2PM.

    April 5: Beat the Blockade against WikiLeaks by donating at least $5.

    April 8: Julian Assange's Supreme Court verdict expected to be handed down just after this date.

    April 12-28: Performances of "The Radicalization of Bradley Manning" held between these dates in schools across Wales.

    April 17: WikiLeaks' 500th day of financial blockade without process.

    April 19: "WikiLeaks, Assange, and Defending Democracy" panel at BMW Edge in Melbourne, 6:30PM, with Christine Assange, Scott Ludlam, Lizzie O'Shea, Bernard Keane, and Greg Barns.

    April 20: Julian Assange's 500th day of detainment without charge.

    April 23: Bradley Manning's 700th day of imprisonment without trial.

    April 24-26: Bradley Manning's next set of pre-trial hearings.

    April 27-28: Kristinn Hrafnsson to speak at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy at panels "Whistleblowers and anonymous leaks: can the media do without them?" (27/4) and "Dossier WikiLeaks. Segreti italiani" (28/4).

    May 23: Julian Assange to speak at Enterprise Information Management Congress 2012 in The Netherlands.

    May 27: "Incident in New Baghdad" to air on The Documentary Channel, 8PM.

    2012-03-31 From Social Media to Moral Awakening; Bradley Manning and the Age of Conscience

    Original picture by Nikhil Kirsh, Creative Rendering by idlewild606

    James Madison once said, "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives". Madison recognized that accurate knowledge is essential for each person to take charge of their own lives. With the explosive growth of social media like Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, we now have access to more information than any other time in the history of this planet. Through the Internet, pictures, news and ideas travel around the globe like the speed of light. Social networks are creating avenues of free communication that move beyond centralized systems of information distribution.

    WikiLeaks's chief editor, Julian Assange pointed to Madison's idea that pertinent information is critical for the public to perform as a check and balance to those in power. Elsewhere he spoke of how concealed information has the greatest potential for just reform because those who hide it spend a lot of energy and resources in that concealment for a reason. He pointed out that this signal of suppression is a sign of opportunity and that exposing this information could lead to reform. The online collective Anonymous is also standing up for freedom of speech and assembly and for the conviction that public control of the flow of information is essential for any society to guard against the inevitability of corruption.

    This insurgency of information sharing set the stage for Arab revolutions and the Occupy Movement. Effective political discourse such as the recent online protests against the US government censorship bills showed how openly shared information can quickly mobilize and fuel collective action against oppressive regimes and their policies. Madison was right: Knowledge is power. Perhaps this is the first time in history that his ideal is being enacted on a broad scale. The recent BBC documentary WikiLeaks: Secret Life of a Superpower attributed the spark for revolutions in the Arab World to WikiLeaks revelations, showing how US cable leaks shared through social networking sites in 2010 became a powerful force that finally toppled the corrupt Tunisian dictator Ben Ali.

    But the explosion of social media alone has not been enough to explain what led to these momentous events. Information by itself is not knowledge. Many people have been aware of US and NATO war crimes and other injustices around the world that are often perpetrated by their own governments. Yet most have acted as if they are powerless. They remain apathetic spectators, continuing their familiar routine in life. Even in Tunisia, before the WikiLeaks revelations, Tunisians knew how corrupt their government was, but seemed to have accepted it as if nothing could be done.

    In a recent article on AlterNet, clinical psychologist Bruce E. Levine described the likely cause of this inaction with what he refers to as the abuse syndrome. He posed the question "Can people become so broken that truths of how they are being screwed do not 'set them free' but instead further demoralize them?" He noted how people in the US were abused by the corporate takeover of every aspect of their lives and one common response to the abuse was to just shut down.

    When people become broken, they cannot act on truths of injustice. Furthermore, when people have become broken, more truths about how they have been victimized can lead to shame about how they have allowed it. And shame, like fear, is one more way we become even more psychologically broken.

    Then what could overcome this victim mentality? Levine claimed that encouragement, small victories and examples of others successfully challenging abusive actions are essential. Information itself, no matter how accurate or revealing does not create the spark of empowerment. Public understanding of a particular incident reported in the news was not the only thing that brought the impulse for deep change. It is also not simply the result of eyewitness accounts tweeted by citizen journalists. What was concealed were facts and remain so even after they are revealed to the public. But something else arose in 2010 and has since become a major force for catharsis and uprising. What so inspired people to fight back?

    On the first day of Bradley Manning's pretrial hearing America's most famous whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg traced the impulse behind these movements that have quickly risen as tides of change for our time:

    The Time magazine cover gives...... an anonymous protester, as "Person of the Year," but it is possible to put a face and a name to that picture of "Person of the Year"." And the American face I would put on that is Private Bradley Manning... And, the combination of the WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning exposures in Tunis and the exemplification of that by Mohamed Bouazizi led to the... non violent protests...

    The spark of transformation might have started with this young US private. Bradley Manning stood up with the courage to blow the whistle on war crimes and ongoing abuse of civilians in US Middle East military occupations. Then, Julian Assange's unflinching commitment to transparency and to honor the intentions of WikiLeaks's source fanned the spark into a flame. When information is suppressed, it becomes stagnant. The human will to liberate it brings it into movement. In this case, the release itself became a powerful communication, conveying not only the truth, but also the conviction of the messenger. The message was his faith that ordinary people could change history. In the alleged chat log with Adrian Lamo that led to Manning's arrest, Manning expressed this faith and how it led him to release the biggest document leak in human history.

    (1:11:54 PM) bradass87: and ... its important that it gets out ... i feel, for some bizarre reason

    (1:12:02 PM) bradass87: it might actually change something

    (02:21:18 AM) bradass87: and god knows what happens now ....

    (o2:22:27 AM) bradass87: hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms

    (o2:23:06 AM) bradass87: if not... than we're doomed

    (02:23:18 AM) bradass87: as a species

    Information that is freed becomes something more than just facts; it becomes a message or story whose gentle lips tremble with urgency, aching to speak. What was revealed in the Collateral Murder video appeared for some like a scene from a video game. For them, authentic images that graphically showing the gravity and soullessness of war was blocked with repeated National Security rhetoric of RPGs, enemy combatants and terrorists. This created a picture of justification for killing the ordinary people in a van; a father driving his kids to school. Yet for many, these images broke down along with the euphemism of collateral damage and they began to feel and see the horrendous incident from the eyes of the victims. Here was something that overcame the propaganda: information that might have otherwise remained as dry abstract fact was transformed into stimulus for an internal shift in a large section of the global population.

    Was it alleged whistleblower Bradley Manning's conscience and courage that triggered this awakening? Conscience is generally understood as individual discernment between right and wrong. But what is conscience really? Jungian psychoanalyst Edward Edinger in elucidating the etymology of the word conscience he related it to the concept of consciousness:

    Conscious derives from con or cum, meaning 'with' or 'together,' and scire,'to know' or 'to see'. It has the same derivation as conscience. Thus the root meaning of both consciousness and conscience is 'knowing with' or 'seeing with' an 'other'. In contrast, the word science, which also derives from scire, means simply knowing, i.e., knowing without 'withness.' ... The experience of knowing with can be understood to mean the ability to participate in a knowing process simultaneously as subject and object, as knower and known. This is only possible within a relationship to an object that can also be a subject. (p. 36)

    Conscience first engages empathic imagination, breaking down walls of separation. One starts to feel the other's pain as if it is ones own. To act from conscience means to speak from this place of being with the other, in a voice that is no longer separate, but shared compassionately as We.

    Alleged leaker Bradley Manning began to see the everyday reality in Iraq from the perspective of the other and he felt the suffering of people not unlike himself in the scenes of those war crimes enacted in New Baghdad and all around the Middle East. Perhaps in that moment, he began knowing with and seeing with those he had been trained to see as the other, those who have been been methodically demonized by a corporate state war of terror. If he was the source of those documents, his act of whistle-blowing was truly a deed of conscience. He was willing to risk death to reach out from this place of his shared humanity.

    People heard the voice of unspoken conscience. Manning's message filled many with courage and hope. It was as if one heart was responding to another. US army specialist Ethan McCord, the soldier in the Collateral Murder video who rescued the wounded children came forward after viewing the video.

    He shared with the world the moment when his conscience called him to act; running back to the van to rescue the little boy. This was his moment where that artificial wall between 'enemy combatant' and soldier crumbled. Later, in standing up for Manning, he said:

    If PFC Bradley Manning did what he is accused of, he is a hero of mine; not because he's perfect or because he never struggled with personal or family relationships-most of us do-but because in the midst of it all he had the courage to act on his conscience.

    Ethan is one of those courageous people who were touched by Manning's courage. He was like many others who joined the larger current of conscience that had been quietly calling.

    People around the world started to speak as if they were responding to this call. In Tunisia, a fruit vender named Bouzizi committed self-immolation. From then on it snowballed. In Egypt, on January 18, Asmaa Mahfouz recorded a video log, urging her compatriots to join her and gather in solidarity at Tahrir Square. Tens of thousands of Egyptians responded to her call, which ultimately led to Muburak being driven out.

    These uprisings around the world spread like wildfire from one person to the other, each responding to the message spoken from a voice within that recalls our deep ties to humanity. Around the world we are seeing the birth of ordinary heroes; people acting out of conscience. Each person's courage invites the other to what is quickly becoming a global movement; "We Are the 99%!" At people's mic in Occupy, each takes turn to speak. Instead of a charismatic leader being the voice, each person is becoming a leader in their own life through echoing of other's words, passing on the message of intrinsic connection and common values.

    As spring approaches in the US, people are retaking Liberty Square in NYC on its 6 month anniversary. Far from any war zone here people are uniting and affirming their connection in response to the recent shooting of 17 year old Trayvon Martin.

    Rev. Glenn Dames, pastor of St. James AME Church in Titusville spoke up for justice over that killing on DemocracyNow!:

    I think what we're doing now is we're making sure that we, in essence, bring his voice back from the grave, .... we have become Trayvon Martin's voice across the state, across the nation, even internationally.

    And the following day, collective action around the world became the voice of Trayvon Martin. #MillionHoodies hashtag grew and outcry spread around the world. People across racial lines took to the streets in Union Square and all around the country demanding the shooter's arrest. His death had become our own. Thousands rallied in Sanford, Florida. Rev. Al Sharpton spoke how "Trayvon could have been any one of our sons. Trayvon could have been any one of us".

    Twitter feeds flooded with passionate voices. People's response of compassion and outrage at the lack of justice for the killer went viral and lifted social morale to a new level. We are all Mohamed Bouazizi and Khaled Said. We are all Julian Assange, all Bradley Manning, Scott Olsen, and Trayvon Martin.

    It is not social media nor the sharing of information itself that started the Arab spring and the SOPA-PIPA-ACTA mass protests. It is an awakening of the heart responding to the call of the other, a sense of knowing that goes beyond individual concerns to a larger whole. This is transforming the simple sharing of information into a shield of knowledge that can meet the sword of illegitimate corporate power and police brutality.

    The Age of Enlightenment brought the birth of individuality and made it possible for mankind to explore the outer world and evolve powerful technology and science. With the Age of Information came the ability to connect and share aspects of the world at an increasing speed. Now the moment has arrived. We are entering an Age of Moral Awakening. It is a different kind of Enlightenment in which humanity finds the light of self-knowledge in relationship to the other. This coming age of conscience breeds fear in those that cling to the power structures of the past. With passage of laws such as NDAA and the recent Anti-Protest bill, the US government reaction to Occupy is simple testimony to their fear of the people, the true source of all power.

    Those who abuse power have tried to shut down the Internet and other streams of communication. They imprison journalists to try and lock up the story. They are putting whistle-blowers behind bars, to silence them by naming them traitors and terrorists and trying to outlaw journalism with the Espionage Act. Indeed, the Obama administration has already prosecuted whistleblowers more than all other previous presidents combined. Bradley Manning has been incarcerated without due process for more than 600 days. Julian Assange is on a house arrest without charge for over 500 days in very real danger of prosecution in the US in a desperate attempt by the US government to chill others from communicating the truth.

    They can try to keep people separate and fearful through mass surveillance and wars. Yet, there is something that those addicted to power do not know; that is the origin of true knowledge runs deeper in the shared roots of our humanity. This empowered intranet that connects all of us cannot be broken. No one can shut down the once awakened conscience.

    Bradley Manning may have been just one person, a single spark in history. His fire of conscience might be fragile and appear erasable. Yet, the flame has already spread. His moral courage was like a tiny light in the darkness before the dawn. People around the world are uniting. Each person's conscience is becoming a torch that shines into and transforms the darkness. The true battle is here. No entrenched power can win this because the most powerful force of all is finally awakening.


    Edinger. E. E. (1984). The creation of consciousness: Jung's myth for modern man. Toronto: Inner City Books.