Sweden will not challenge Assange bail

[The Straight Story]

Swedish authorities said Tuesday they would not challenge a British court's decision to grant bail to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who was granted bail a few hours earlier. He is wanted for alleged rape and sexual assault in Sweden.



http://www.english.rfi.fr/node/64805

[xchrom]

1. well - hmmm -- that's interesting. nt

[DJ13]

2. With the one woman leaving Sweden their flimsy case probably fell apart

[TorchTheWitch]

9. she didn't leave - that was a lie from one reporter

denied by her attorney in the same article and debunked by CBS the next day.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8300-503543_162-503543.html?keyword=anna+ardin
December 10, 2010 5:31 AM
Julian Assange Accuser "Still in Sweden"

The coordinator of a Christian outreach group in the West Bank denied reports Friday that one of two women accusing WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of sex offenses had left Sweden and traveled to a town in the Palestinian territory.

Australian news website "Crikey" reported on Thursday that Anna Ardin had traveled to the town of Yanoun, in the West Bank, with the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Jerusalem and Israel (EAPPI) earlier this week.

Ardin, however, "cancelled her participation because we anticipated this," program coordinator Pauline Nunu told CBSNews.com Friday morning in a telephone interview. "She's still in Sweden and she's not coming to Palestine."

---------

I'd be careful of trusting a journalist that doesn't fact check as well as an editor that doesn't either. The author of the lying Crikey piece, Guy Rundle, also has some quite disgusting views...

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/09/14/rundle-against-male-same-s-x-couple-adoption/
Rundle: against male same-sex couple adoption
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
by Guy Rundle

<snip>
The trouble is that really, the issue isn't and can't be constructed as a mere extension of consenting rights. Fundamental questions have to be asked about a fairly dramatic socio-legal change  —  and reflection on that would, I suggest, lead one to conclude that same-sex adoption  —  specifically male-couple adoption  —  should not be legalised.

---------

By the way, why is she required to stay in Sweden if her work calls her to other parts of the world or if she just wants to go on vacation to another country? Since when is the alleged victim required to remain in the country while the alleged accuser is not?

[Bragi]

3. Good, so the White House is backing off

Since it's obvious that the Dwedish prosecution is doing what the White House tells them on this matter, it is gratifying to see that the Obama administration may be backing off on their repulsive campaign against Assange.

[lunatica]

5. I'm willing to lay bets they're only backing off where the public can see

Orders have probably already gone out to all Embassies to spy on him and everyone who deals with him. I'm sure the CIA has open channels all over the place for information about his whereabouts.

[Bragi]

6. No doubt that's true

But I'm hoping that at least they are backing off their attempts to position him for extradition to, and imprisonment in, the U.S, regardless of the fact that he has broken no U.S laws.

[SharonRB]

4. Michael Moore sent the court $20,000 toward bail

Why I'm Posting Bail Money for Julian Assange (A statement from Michael Moore)

Tuesday, December 14th, 2010

Friends,

Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail.

Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars.

We were taken to war in Iraq on a lie. Hundreds of thousands are now dead. Just imagine if the men who planned this war crime back in 2002 had had a WikiLeaks to deal with. They might not have been able to pull it off. The only reason they thought they could get away with it was because they had a guaranteed cloak of secrecy. That guarantee has now been ripped from them, and I hope they are never able to operate in secret again.

So why is WikiLeaks, after performing such an important public service, under such vicious attack? Because they have outed and embarrassed those who have covered up the truth. The assault on them has been over the top:

**Sen. Joe Lieberman says WikiLeaks "has violated the Espionage Act."

**The New Yorker's George Packer calls Assange "super-secretive, thin-skinned, megalomaniacal."

**Sarah Palin claims he's "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands" whom we should pursue "with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders."

**Democrat Bob Beckel (Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign manager) said about Assange on Fox: "A dead man can't leak stuff ... there's only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch."

**Republican Mary Matalin says "he's a psychopath, a sociopath ... He's a terrorist."

**Rep. Peter A. King calls WikiLeaks a "terrorist organization."

And indeed they are! They exist to terrorize the liars and warmongers who have brought ruin to our nation and to others. Perhaps the next war won't be so easy because the tables have been turned -- and now it's Big Brother who's being watched ... by us!

WikiLeaks deserves our thanks for shining a huge spotlight on all this. But some in the corporate-owned press have dismissed the importance of WikiLeaks ("they've released little that's new!") or have painted them as simple anarchists ("WikiLeaks just releases everything without any editorial control!"). WikiLeaks exists, in part, because the mainstream media has failed to live up to its responsibility. The corporate owners have decimated newsrooms, making it impossible for good journalists to do their job. There's no time or money anymore for investigative journalism. Simply put, investors don't want those stories exposed. They like their secrets kept ... as secrets.

I ask you to imagine how much different our world would be if WikiLeaks had existed 10 years ago. Take a look at this photo. That's Mr. Bush about to be handed a "secret" document on August 6th, 2001. Its heading read: "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US." And on those pages it said the FBI had discovered "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings." Mr. Bush decided to ignore it and went fishing for the next four weeks.

But if that document had been leaked, how would you or I have reacted? What would Congress or the FAA have done? Was there not a greater chance that someone, somewhere would have done something if all of us knew about bin Laden's impending attack using hijacked planes?

But back then only a few people had access to that document. Because the secret was kept, a flight school instructor in San Diego who noticed that two Saudi students took no interest in takeoffs or landings, did nothing. Had he read about the bin Laden threat in the paper, might he have called the FBI? (Please read this essay by former FBI Agent Coleen Rowley, Time's 2002 co-Person of the Year, about her belief that had WikiLeaks been around in 2001, 9/11 might have been prevented.)

Or what if the public in 2003 had been able to read "secret" memos from Dick Cheney as he pressured the CIA to give him the "facts" he wanted in order to build his false case for war? If a WikiLeaks had revealed at that time that there were, in fact, no weapons of mass destruction, do you think that the war would have been launched -- or rather, wouldn't there have been calls for Cheney's arrest?

Openness, transparency -- these are among the few weapons the citizenry has to protect itself from the powerful and the corrupt. What if within days of August 4th, 1964 -- after the Pentagon had made up the lie that our ship was attacked by the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin -- there had been a WikiLeaks to tell the American people that the whole thing was made up? I guess 58,000 of our soldiers (and 2 million Vietnamese) might be alive today.

Instead, secrets killed them.

For those of you who think it's wrong to support Julian Assange because of the sexual assault allegations he's being held for, all I ask is that you not be naive about how the government works when it decides to go after its prey. Please -- never, ever believe the "official story." And regardless of Assange's guilt or innocence (see the strange nature of the allegations here), this man has the right to have bail posted and to defend himself. I have joined with filmmakers Ken Loach and John Pilger and writer Jemima Khan in putting up the bail money -- and we hope the judge will accept this and grant his release today.

Might WikiLeaks cause some unintended harm to diplomatic negotiations and U.S. interests around the world? Perhaps. But that's the price you pay when you and your government take us into a war based on a lie. Your punishment for misbehaving is that someone has to turn on all the lights in the room so that we can see what you're up to. You simply can't be trusted. So every cable, every email you write is now fair game. Sorry, but you brought this upon yourself. No one can hide from the truth now. No one can plot the next Big Lie if they know that they might be exposed.

And that is the best thing that WikiLeaks has done. WikiLeaks, God bless them, will save lives as a result of their actions. And any of you who join me in supporting them are committing a true act of patriotism. Period.

I stand today in absentia with Julian Assange in London and I ask the judge to grant him his release. I am willing to guarantee his return to court with the bail money I have wired to said court. I will not allow this injustice to continue unchallenged.

Yours,
Michael Moore
[e-mail]
MichaelMoore.com

P.S. You can read the statement I filed today in the London court here.

P.P.S. If you're reading this in London, please go support Julian Assange and WikiLeaks at a demonstration at 1 PM today, Tuesday the 14th, in front of the Westminster court.

[lunatica]

7. Michael Moore is a hero of mine

[Raschel]

8. He's "wanted"? How can he be wanted, when they have him? Plus he hasn't been charged with anything

[guruoo]

13. It's the hubris speaking...

Or as Bob Boudelang might say, "until the US gets him, he ain't really 'got'.

[guruoo]

10. Story scrubbed from the site

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4658555#4658601

[denem]

11. Down the memory hole : The got the memo.

[guruoo]

12. We'll have to watch WL for it!