UPDATE: JULIAN ASSANGE Freed!

WikiLeaks' Assange granted bail

By Jeremy Kirk
December 14, 2010 10:48 AM ET


IDG News Service - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was granted bail on Tuesday in a London court, but the police will keep his passport and he'll have to wear an electronic tag, according to the BBC.
Assange will also have to adhere to a curfew, which will be monitored via the tagging device.
Swedish prosecutors who issued the arrest warrant in order to question Assange on rape charges will appeal the bail ruling, and have two hours to do so. In the meantime, Assange will remain in custody.
A number of celebrities have committed to contributing to Assange's bail, which was set at £200,000 (US$320,000) in Westminster Magistrates Court.
A full extradition hearing is expected in eight to ten weeks, while the extradition process could drag out for a year.
Assange turned himself in to U.K. police last week after Sweden issued a warrant for his arrest. He is wanted for questioning related to rape accusations by two women whom Assange admits have sexual relations with in August.
Assange has been imprisoned since Dec. 7 when the Westminster Magistrates Court denied him bail, saying he was a flight risk due to his frequent traveling and loose ties to the U.K. Assange gave a post office box address in Australia when asked for a point of contact.
Assange and his legal team have stated they believe the Swedish prosecutors' pursuit is tied to WikiLeaks' release of U.S. diplomatic cables, which angered the U.S. government but drew praise from others.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is investigating Assange and WikiLeaks. It has been suggested the U.S. could file charges against him under the Espionage Act.
The secret documents are believed to have come from Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, who has been charged by the U.S. Army with mishandling and transferring classified information in connection with the cables and a video of an Apache helicopter shooting civilians in Iraq.

 

but still in custody pending a legal maneuver by the swedes....they have 1 hour ...if they succeed Julian will
remain
in custody

 

he is still in custody pending a last minute move[appeal]by the Swedish prosecutor...they have less than 1 hour

 

I'm a fan of the sweedish bikini team.
But I'm going to take this as a warning.
When it comes to sweedish women it's best to adopt a look and don't touch attitude.
Because they take the idea of high maintenance to who new level.

 

I think small penis might be a disappointment to some but I don't think it has become statutory that you have a big hard one. It is a guess only.

It is interesting to me that the accusations serve to demonstrate someone guilty long before a determination by the court has been made. It is either the women, Assange, or the Swedish prosecutor. This point may not be so glamorous as exposing government secrets but it is an equal affront to the integrity of cordial and sane relations. Everyone becomes subject to suspicion.

 

Considering the terms of his release on bail, must wear an electronic tag, live at a registered address, report to police every evening and observe two four-hour curfews each day, 380,000 dollars is a serious rip.

 

Assange appears to be the victim of a criminal consortium of governments. the more they pursue him the more they dignify the leaks they are objecting to. Where are the "doomsday" leaks?

 

Swedish authorities said Tuesday they will appeal a British judge's decision to grant bail for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
The decision means the 39-year-old Australian will remain behind bars for at least another 48 hours.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's relief at his bail ruling evaporated when Swedish authorities announced they would be appealing it, his lawyer Mark Stephens told reporters. (Lennart Preiss/Associated Press) Britain's High Court will now hear the Swedish appeal, although it is not clear when.


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/12/14/wikileaks-assange-bail.html#ixzz1875YCI4F​

 

Michael Moore is speaking out on Julian's behalf now. I am very happy to hear that.

 

what exactly are the doomsday leaks? I've heard a few mentions of them.

 

I can only answer that after they've been released. There's lots of wild speculation going around as to their nature but without hard info it would be irresponsible for me to make such unfounded assertions.

 

Email from Michael Moore:

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, [and] 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 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CXAiOmAJKs"]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
MMFlint@aol.com
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.


Join Mike's Mailing List | Follow Mike on Twitter | Join Mike's Facebook Group | Become Mike's MySpace Friend

| ​

Subscribe | Unsubscribe

​

 

julllian assange is a hero, free the man for he speaks truth!

 

And after they let him go they should give him a medal.

You know, I've gone full circle about this whole subject of 'national security'. I used to think it was more or less justified for governments to keep these kinds of secrets, the rationale being that a lot of harm could be done if these types of documents leaked out. But I slowly came to realize that all these governments (particularly the US) are doing is consistently lying to their own people, covering up the real intentions for their actions, making their citizens pay for them-and this kind of behavior is the real threat to national security! (and international as well)

And so I say, enough! If a government's citizens don't deserve to know the truth about it's actions or the motives behind them, then that government doesn't deserve the allegiance of its citizens or their financial support (in the form of taxation) either.