Witness: Manning bragged of changing history

Army Pfc. Bradley Manning is escorted from a security vehicle to a courthouse in Fort Meade, Md., Dec. 19, 2011. / AP Photo

FORT MEADE, Maryland - The Army intelligence analyst blamed for the biggest leak of secrets in U.S. history boastfully declared that he was changing history in a letter accompanying some of the data he allegedly sent to WikiLeaks, according to a witness in the military's case against Army Pfc. Bradley Manning.

"This is possibly one of the more significant documents of our time, removing the fog of war and revealing the true nature of 21st century asymmetric warfare. Have a good day," the file read.

The text, along with almost 500,000 classified battlefield reports, was on a data card that investigators found among Manning's belongings, according to digital-crimes investigator David Shaver.

The letter represented the most forceful piece of evidence yet introduced in a military hearing to determine whether the 24-year-old should be court martialed.

In a back-and-forth on the digital case against Manning, the prosecution said evidence showed that Manning communicated directly with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, sent the nearly 500,000 classified battlefield reports to the anti-secrecy website and bragged to someone else about leaking video of a 2007 helicopter attack to WikiLeaks.

Manning hearing focuses on digital footprints
"Emotional distress" key to Manning defense
Testimony on Manning's access to secrets

Investigators said in one May 2010 exchange between Manning and a mathematician named Eric Schmiedl.

"Are you familiar with WikiLeaks?" Manning allegedly asked.

"Yes, I am," Schmiedl wrote.

"I was the source of the July 12, 2007, video from the Apache Weapons Team which killed the two journalists and injured two kids," Manning wrote, according to the prosecution.

Throughout the hearing, Manning's defense lawyers countered that others had access to Manning's workplace computers and pressed Shaver into conceding that some files in a batch of 10,000 State Department cables on Manning's computer didn't match documents published by WikiLeaks. He said another 100,000 cables couldn't be matched to Manning's user profile. But it was unclear if the cross-examination damaged the prosecution's case in any way.

Until Monday, the defense largely focused on painting Manning as an emotionally troubled homosexual serving in the military's "don't ask, don't tell" era, and arguing that the classified material proved harmless in the open anyhow. Manning's lawyers have yet to acknowledge or deny his responsibility for the leak of hundreds of thousands of U.S. war and diplomatic cables, and a classified military video of an American helicopter attack in Iraq that killed 11 men.

In camouflaged Army fatigues and dark rimmed-glasses, Manning seemed to take it all in calmly. During one of several recesses, Manning leaned back and sat casually in his chair, chatting with a soldier from the defense team, gesturing with his hands, nodding his head and occasionally smiling. He sat up when attorneys re-entered the courtroom. And civilian attorney David Coombs put his arm around Manning's shoulder several times as they conferred during the proceedings.

Manning is accused of illegally leaking a trove of secret information that surfaced on WikiLeaks, a breach that rattled U.S. foreign relations and, according to the government, imperiled valuable military and diplomatic sources. Expected to last several more days, the hearing is intended to determine whether Manning should be court-martialed on 22 charges, including aiding the enemy. If convicted, he could face life in prison.

Paul Almanza, the presiding officer, twice removed spectators and reporters from the hearing Monday for sessions dealing with classified information. By ruling that the leaked diplomatic and military information should be protected — even though it has been published by media around the world — Almanza undermined the defense argument that no harm was done and the information might as well be public.

Manning supporters fumed. The defense already has appealed for Almanza to be removed from the case because of his civilian job with the Justice Department, which is conducting a separate investigation of WikiLeaks and Assange.

Almanza "is seeking to prevent journalists and the public from reporting on testimony related to materials that are already in the public domain," said a group called the Bradley Manning Support Network.

Two supporters had run-ins with military police Monday. Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg was escorted out of court when he approached Manning during a recess to introduce himself. He was later allowed to return. But Daniel Choi — a soldier kicked out of the military under the now-repealed policy against gays serving openly — was ejected from the base after allegedly ignoring a warning not to heckle military police, according to defense officials.

Shaver's testimony has illustrated how the government connected the dots in its case against Manning. One computer, Shaver explained, was used to streamline the downloading of cables with the apparent aim of "moving them out." The material was linked to the username "bradley.manning" or Manning's user profile. And the other computer was used to conduct scores of online searches for WikiLeaks and Assange, he said.

Manning's roommate in Baghdad, Spc. Eric S. Baker, also testified Monday. He said Manning told him early in their deployment that he was gay. Under cross-examination, Baker said he had told Manning it would be better, then, if they didn't speak to each other — bolstering the defense's depiction of Manning as emotionally distressed and ostracized or bullied by fellow soldiers.

Manning also is said to have upended furniture in fits of rage and exhibited a pattern of troubled behavior. But a supervisor refused to testify on why he was allowed to keep working with highly sensitive information.

The defense is expected to call at least three witnesses before Almanza makes his recommendation. The Army says it may then take several weeks for Maj. Gen. Michael Linnington as the commander of the Military District of Washington to decide if Manning will be court-martialed.

Linnington may choose other courses of action, including administrative punishment or dismissal of some or all counts. He also could add more charges based on evidence produced at the hearing.

[nuclearwaist]

first of all "betterusa"...our military takes an oath to uphold the CONSTITUTION against all enemies, both foreign and DOMESTIC!! not to our country. really, EXECUTED? for exposing WAR CRIMES? i can't imagine a more honorable act, or how to behave more true to the constitution of the united states than exactly the way mr manning acted. we've heard all your opinions about his sexuality, (which really should not be an issue for someone living in a free society), maybe if you got your heads out of his bed and into the facts of the war crimes committed you could do something about changing the situation. it disgusts me that so many americans feel the way you do, and they just don't "get it". the founding fathers must be spinning in their graves. allah help us!

[expatriate2]

Have we truly come to the state when one's loyalty to truth is lesser than loyalty to his nation? Can any of you deny that we were lied to countless times about the Iraq War? The earliest statements about its cause were later proven to be untrue. We were lied to about tortures and photos of the crimes against humanity happening in Guantamo were hidden from us. We were lied to about uranium from Nigeria. Cheney telling us "we know where they are" when speaking of the non-existent weapons of mass destruction was a lie. That U.S. agents removed 7,000 pages from Hussein's report on Iraq's weapons arsenal was revealed only in European newspapers. Our values about truth and loyalty appear here to be as confused as is the government's differentiation between news and propaganda.
The government and its military are not worried about the "enemy" seeing the content of the Afghan War Diary. They are worried that we will see it and learn the atrocities that characterized the war from its beginning. Ron Paul has reminded us that the atrocities began shortly after 9/11 when the Bush insiders celebrated in the White House because they now had a reason to invade Iraq. Permitting the world to see the video of the Apache helicopter crew gunning down innocents and then congratulating each other for the carnage they inflicted in no way endangered American troops. Seeing the corpses of small children being pulled from a riddled van did not place American soldiers in danger. Documents revealing the details of past events did not place anyone in danger. Those who would claim they did only echo the chants of the war mongers who supported the invasion of Iraq from its beginning.
Ask any veteran with combat experience if he was not also one of the victims of war. Words were never invented to describe the insanity and surreal savagery crowded into the brief moments of battle. Only those will understand war for what it is; the greatest expression of ignorance a government can express in the name of intelligent people. But prior to the invasion of Iraq we had the inner-circle of the White House, not one with military experience, placing our young men and women in real danger for motives only they understood and concealed. These were the traitors. These were those who should have been punished. These were the criminals on the world stage weaving their lies around personal interests and motives.

[truth_hound]

Whatever, it is not the job of a little puke to decide he is going to out the US Military. What kind of integrity is is when someone signs numerous documents clearly stating his responsibility when accepting a security clearance and then does whatever the internet tells him to do!

In other times he would already have been shot.

[truth_hound]

Could this sh#t bird look any more like the weasel that he is?

I hope Manning get's the book thrown at him.

Just another little punk who thinks he's a genius. His Momma must have told him a million times how great he is, now look at this pile of dung.

[Mortar1SG29]

True.

[betterusa]

He has no code of honor or loyalty to the country he took an oath to protect and serve.

He is a traitor and should be executed by firing squad!

[johnsmith9875]

The USA murders innocent iraqis and hides the video. Sounds like our problems are much deeper than some private who released a bit of truth to the public.

[Mortar1SG29]

John doesnt know what he is talking about.

[offthefence]

He'll last about 10 minutes in Levenworth. No worries.

[Mortar1SG29]

Exactly. Most of those guys there still have their sense of honor. That just screwed up (some type of physical violence, drugs, etc.

When they have a traitor in their midst...well, it will not be comfortable living for Manning.

[karek40]

We all know the government works behind the scenes and the tactics used are not always in line with what some believe to be correct. Some believe the end justifies the means, some do not. Masnning hasn't changed history or anything, he is a naive and will spend most if not all of his life behind bars or perhaps no life/dead.

[smittyc]

Manning changed his own history thats for sure. If he is not executed for treason he is going to spend a lifetime rotting in a military prison. He went out of his way to causse trouble. He really did give the enemy peoples names who were informers and other information that allowed the enemy to track and capture Americans who were risking their lives spying when he released those classified documents.

[johnsmith9875]

No, he released a bunch of embarassing diplomatic memos.

[involved_indi]

Manning is a traitor and deserves a traitor's reward. I hope he gets it.

[HappyHolidays1]

Well, I can understand that he will have hell to pay through his snubbing his nose at the UCMJ, but I certainly support the release of the info.

[mgunn89512]

Thank God for Manning who's release of the helicopter gunship confirms what we know but couldn't prove all along, that our killing is indiscriminate and malicious (even killing those trying to help the injured). These things should never be kept secret, if we don't have the stomach for the war then we shouldn't be there. We are always preaching transparency to other countries. We are maximally hypocritical.

[mgunn89512]

You'd be hard pressed to show how the enemy benefited from release of this video. And your example is a poor one as FUTURE bombing plans are not analogous to past communiques leaks.