Assange Amazing Adventures of Captain Neo in Blonde Land.

[barracuda]

Robertson jokes that Assange would be under "mansion arrest" if he was bailed to Vaughan Smith's house, Mostrous tweets.

Check it out.



But it appears he won't be going anywhere for a while:

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.

[nathan28]

Oh shit! This means Vaughn Smith is in on the scam!!!



And John Pilger as well.

If it only takes a $5 donation to WL or the Assange/Manning legal defense funds to get on the membership rosters of the One World Government Globalist Marxist Feminist International Congress, I'd walk the cash to Iceland.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

If you think that the current movie fiction attention on a Swedish rebel girl is a coincidence with framing-up Julien Assange, congrats! You are a spook dupe!


http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... 29976/1023

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest
BY ROGER EBERT / October 27, 2010

.....
Her battle with herself is more suspenseful than her battle against her enemies, because enemies can be fought with and that provides release, but we spend much of "The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest" straining against Lisbeth's fear and sending her urgent telepathic messages about what she should do.
.....
Lisbeth is in grave danger, but in great part because of her damaged obstinacy, and that scares us more than any number of 6-foot-4 Nordic blond homicidal half-brothers.

So what has happened is that this uptight, ferocious, little gamine Lisbeth has won our hearts, and we care about these stories and think there had better be more.
.....

[seemslikeadream]

Person Of The Year


TIME Magazine readers - are there really some, still? - have voted Julian Assange Person of the Year. He got over twice the online votes as runner-up Recep Tayyip Ergodan of Turkey, followed by Lady Gaga and Messrs. Colbert and Stewart. Does this mean Assange gets out of jail now?

Update: Out on bail! And Michael Moore has put up bail money and offered his website and servers to help WikiLeaks "shine a spotlight" on "the liars and warmongers who have brought ruin to our nation."

Michael Moore's statement in court in London:

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 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.

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.



And Time's online poll results:

1. Julian Assange

2. Recep Tayyip Ergodan

3. Lady Gaga

4. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert

5. Glenn Beck

6. Barack Obama

7. Steve Jobs

8. The Chilean Miners

9. The Unemployed American

10. Mark Zuckerberg

[Plutonia]

Exclusive: The world's most wanted house guest

Why I'm sheltering Julian Assange, by Vaughan Smith

Wednesday, 15 December 2010

For the past fortnight, Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, has been at the centre of a global firestorm. Wanted by Interpol, by the Swedish police, even, briefly, by Scotland Yard, he has been called a terrorist and a revolutionary. Several leading American politicians and commentators have called for him to be killed, while Russia and China have also been loud in their condemnation. Yesterday, Assange appeared at City of Westminster magistrates’ court to fight extradition to Sweden on sex charges that he says are politically motivated. He was granted bail – subject to an appeal by Swedish prosecutors that could see him spend a further 48 hours in custody – on condition that he provides a security of £200,000 to the court, with a further £40,000 guaranteed in two sureties of £20,000 each – and that he spends between now and 11 January as the house guest of Captain Vaughan Smith, a former Grenadier Guard and founder of the journalists' Frontline Club.

He will be under curfew every day from 10pm to 2am and from 10am to 2pm and will be required to report daily to the police from 6pm to 8pm. He must spend every night at Cpt Smith's home and will be electronically tagged.

Mr Assange has for several months been staying as a guest of Cpt Smith and other members at the Frontline Club in London, which he founded seven years ago to stand for independence and transparency, and he has also stayed at Cpt Smith's home in Suffolk. Below is Cpt Smith's account of the past weeks...


Having watched Julian Assange give himself up last week to the British justice system, I took the decision that I would do whatever else it took to ensure that he is not denied his basic rights as a result of the anger of the powerful forces he has enraged.

This decision – which will result in one of the most unusual Christmases I have ever experienced – began to take shape last Monday night, as we gathered round a computer in my home, talking via Skype to Mark Stephens, Julian’s solicitor, in London.

This is how I remember the scene...

It is late in the evening. The screen periodically goes to sleep and Sue, a friend, keeps tapping the keyboard to keep it awake, relighting their faces.

Julian is completely still except his foot, which he rocks from side to side. I remember being told that he always did this when he was concentrating.

I feel that I am intruding, but Julian smiles at me. He does that: brings you in and makes you feel you are important to him when most of us would feel too preoccupied to do such a thing.

Julian is in front of a computer all the time. Immersed and uninterruptable; you feel you could arrive in a clown suit and he wouldn’t notice you.

But often you can gently greet him while he is typing furiously and he will immediately stop what he is doing and report developments for half an hour, well beyond the time you feel he should get back to his work.

The call is finished, and Julian is standing by the fireplace. Miles away. We start discussing the call. A couple of other friends and supporters are there too. Julian is still quiet but he is listening to us. The conversation dries up because the call to Mark has brought it all home.

There seemed to be other options, but they are all of straw. Julian dismisses each as it is suggested. He doesn’t want to look as if he has something to hide. The British police have said they want him and he is going in.

Sue and the other friends start discussing his statement. I get my camera set to film it for them and start working on the logistics. I don’t work for WikiLeaks, but I get drawn in. The police have given less time than expected and he cannot be late.

Julian sits on the sofa. Then he lies down. Then he sleeps. He’s been up for 48 hours. We don’t film any statement.

Then it is morning. He has to be at the police station at 9am, and Mark and the defence team need to see him at 7am. Sue and Jeremy are struggling to get Julian out of the building and trying to keep everyone’s spirits up by joking with him that he is never on time for anything.

We are all exhausted, and I can see that Sue is holding back tears as she bundles Julian into the car. Sue, Julian and I drive off but everyone expects us to be back by the evening.

We get to Mark’s home and it’s still dark. I notice a photographer getting his camera out of the boot of his car as we are about to park behind it, and we drive past. He deserved a picture for getting up that early on a cold morning to stake out Julian’s solicitor’s home, but he didn’t get it.

We meet Mark in a nearby greasy spoon and have breakfast in a back room. Julian is hungry, as he had no dinner last night. Mark gets straight into discussing the case and tells us that the police have changed the station that Julian is to report to.

Mark’s manner is grave but comforting and I can see that Julian and Sue are feeling the pressure. Sue goes out for another cigarette.

Jennifer joins us from Mark’s team and we drive to Kentish Town Police Station. Sue drives, Mark is on his mobile for most of the journey and we are all trying to be quiet. Julian is in the back, between Mark and Jennifer, on his computer, working on the statement.

I look at the familiar glow of the computer screen on Julian’s face, and after a while I notice the computer go to sleep. But Julian doesn’t switch it on again. He stares through it and I look away as I find myself feeling a surge of empathy for him. The statement is not finished as we arrive at the police station.

We drive through large blue gates and bland and besuited policemen and women are around the car. Mark and Julian get out and I try to observe while Sue struggles to park in the absurdly small parking space that she is directed to. I feel intimidated by the brutish ordinariness that this damned place exudes from every structure and person. I have visited police stations and prisons but never felt so uncomfortable before.

We are gathered behind Julian and Mark and a policeman reads out four Swedish charges, but I am not listening. Where I am standing, on one side, I can see Julian’s still face as he hears them. I admire his courage. He knows more clearly than anybody that he pressed the trigger long ago. Or, rather, the return key. The leaks are unstoppable whatever happens to him.

I ponder the disservice to Julian done by the media. With their stockings stuffed by WikiLeaks they dehumanise him with images printed and screened of a cold, calculating Machiavelli pulling strings from secret hideouts. The main hideout, of course, being the Frontline Club, where many of them have interviewed him.

They made him out to be the internet’s Bin Laden. The likeness might be poor, but that was OK because the colours were familiar and bright. Now the focus is on Julian’s court fight, instead of on the opaque political system that his leaks have exposed. The charges that Julian faces have already been dropped once, from a Swedish court that even Glenn Beck, the incendiary US Fox News TV host, rubbishes.

Julian is different to most of us. He is clever and obsessive but also funny and self-deprecating. But he has started something seismic but inevitable, a consequence of modern communications that cannot be stopped. One day we might be governed better as a result. Vengeance by the authorities is weakness here and will not help us face the challenges of the times.

I resolved then, and on that ugly spot, that I would never abandon Julian. It wasn’t any more about whether Wikileaks was right or wrong, for good or bad. It was about standing up to the bully and the question of whether our country, in these historic times really was the tolerant, independent and open place I had been brought up to believe it was and feel that it needs to be. If to fight for this country we will have to fight for its fundamental principles of justice then I declare my position in the ranks.

Vaughan Smith is the founder of the Frontline Club. He has personally stood surety for Julian Assange in court and provided his bail address. The names of Julian's supporters have been changed for their security

[seemslikeadream]

Rep. McDermott: Could WikiLeaks Have Prevented 9/11?
Posted on December 12, 2010 by Sam Husseini


Jesse Freeston of The Real News joined us on the Stakeout this weekend, asking Congressman McDermott (D-Wash.) his views on WikiLeaks. The Congressman couldn’t speak to the specific nature of the cables Freeston pointed out, but expressed a general sense of openness to the idea that the cables and WikiLeaks work would likely benefit the public. McDermott referenced an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times by Coleen Rowley and Bogdan Dzakovic, endorsing the idea that had there been an entity like WikiLeaks in the past, public whistleblowing that might have prevented 9/11 would have been more readily facilitated.

“I don’t know the facts — the legal facts — but I know the information that’s coming out is very important. I read an editorial in the Los Angeles Times, about the fact that had we had WikiLeaks in 2001, we may well not have had 9/11 occur.”

Rowley, a former FBI Special Agent and Division Counsel whose May 2002 memo described some of the FBI’s pre-9/11 failures, was named one of Time Magazine’s “Persons of the Year” in 2002.

McDermott continued: “The American people have the right to know. The most important of our freedoms is free speech. The First Amendment is what makes a democracy work. If the public doen’t know what’s going on, then they can’t vote intelligently and when the government wants to hide stuff, then the people are cut off from information.”

“…I certainly don’t think that they [WikiLeaks] were wrong until I hear the evidence and see what’s going on. I really think that people ought to be very careful on what they make as a judgment now.”

“I’m old enough to remember something called the Pentagon Papers, and those papers told us what was going on in Vietnam and why it never should have occurred or it should have ended.”

With these statements McDermott apparently became only the second U.S. government official to be positive about WikiLeaks’ disclosure of diplomatic cables, the other being Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tx), see and read his speech on the House floor.

[vanlose kid]

Mark Zuckerberg Named Time 2010 Person Of The Year, Beats Out Assange And Tea Party, Time Magazine About To Be DDOSed Into Oblivion

*

[JackRiddler]

.

New TIME slogan: We fart, you decide to care. I mean, the Luces are significant historical figures, in a rather negative sense, but the magazine -- like a new Soviet history encyclopedia, 52 times a year -- went under as a force 20 years ago, about four minutes after the Web got going. When did you ever hear of this magazine breaking a story, no matter how trivial or propagandistic? Who here has touched a physical copy of TIME at any point in the last decade? (Dentist's office doesn't count.) All that matters is the cover, which accounts for about 98 percent of the propaganda actually projected and received.

But since this Man o' War o' the Year thing was so hyped this time, I did venture a guess. I figured either they'd go for the corporate synergy with a potential Time-Warner partner like Zuckerberg, if they thought their "award" would help with that, or they'd crap out altogether and give it to Miracle Jesus the Chilean miners. Last few days I actually managed to forget the Tea Party existed, but that makes sense. There was never a chance they'd give their prize to Assange, and they let you know that by putting him on the cover last week.

.

[seemslikeadream]

The Media Gets It Wrong on WikiLeaks: It's About Broken Trust, Not Broken Condoms

In Any U.S. Prosecution Of WikiLeaks' Assange, Collusion Will Be Key Issue



U.S. Tries to Build Case for Conspiracy by WikiLeaks

[elfismiles]

In case anyone was uncertain who will play assange:

Actor Neil Patrick Harris: “I’m Assange’s Body Double”

http://www.dirtygarnet.com/?p=910


Separated at Birth: Julian Assange and Neil Patrick Harris

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/ ... arris.html


Julian Assange’s New Image: Just in Time to Talk About Those Rape Accusations

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/12/ju ... _just.html


The List: Casting Julian Assange

http://www.politico.com/click/stories/1 ... ange_.html


Neil Patrick Harris Totally Looks Like Julian Assange

http://cheezburger.com/kaptenblau/lolz/View/4196714496


Who Should Play Julian Assange in The WikiLeaks Movie?

http://www.gossipcop.com/actors-playing ... aks-movie/

[Plutonia]

WikiLeaks founder sought at Davos

* Published: 19/12/2010 at 10:08 PM
* Online news:

The head of the Davos economic forum said Sunday he would have liked WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to attend next month's summit of world political and business elites in the Swiss ski resort.

"I should invite him,'' Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum (WEF), told Sunday newspaper SonntagsZeitung. "But it is not possible as he is not allowed to leave Britain.''

Assange spent Sunday his third full day under "mansion arrest'' at a friend's house in Britain while he fights extradition to Sweden to face questioning in connection of allegations of sexual assault against two women.

"I will wait until Swedish justice clears him,'' Schwab said.

The 39-year-old Australian denies the charges against him and has vowed that his whistleblowing website will continue to publish secret US diplomatic cables, thousands of which it has already issued.

"WikiLeaks is the expression of a new reality,'' Schwab said.

"The balance between the private sphere and transparency has been radically altered. Governments, companies and decision-makers must accept to find themselves permanently in a glass room,'' he said.

"We will discuss this in Davos but our priority will be to draw the lessons and consequences of the financial crisis and debt,'' he added.

Schwab said 27 world leaders, including Russian President Dmitry Medvedev who will make the opening address, will take part in the forum which runs from January 26 to 30.

The annual meeting in the Swiss mountains was first held four decades ago and aims to bring leaders together to discuss the most pressing issues facing the world.

[seemslikeadream]

Street art based on Wikileaks' "Collateral Damage" video surfacing in San Francisco.

[seemslikeadream]

How Sweden, Likely at the Urging of the US, Used INTERPOL to Attack WikiLeaks
Submitted by mark karlin on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 12:37pm. EditorBlog
MARK KARLIN, BUZZFLASH EDITOR FOR TRUTHOUT

An examination of the INTERPOL web site would lead one to believe that Sweden intentionally heightened the media frenzy around the sex charges against Juilan Assange as compared to similar sex charges against others.

Why does BuzzFlash make this contention?

For several reasons, but first it is important to point out BuzzFlash's perspective on the charges themselves: Assange should answer to them, and we would hope that there would be a day that most governments, including Sweden, pursued sex charges by women with the vigor Sweden is pursuing Assange.

Yes, the US government is out to get Assange, and it is very possible that the Swedish government is using the charges to achieve a political goal of extraditing him to Sweden and then to the US, because extradition from the UK would take longer. But it is wrong to vilify the women who made the legal accusations. They have a right to have their claims taken seriously.

That being said, the international handling of the case by the Swedish government in relationship to Assange appears to be based more on Assange's role as head of WikiLeaks than how the charges would normally be handled via INTERPOL.

One of INTERPOL's duties for its member countries is to disseminate "wanted" information, at the request of a nation, to law enforcement agencies around the world. These are called "red notices" for fugitives. Some of the "wanted" individuals are online (on the INTERPOL web site) and many are not publicly posted at the request of the nation seeking the fugitive. But if you click the news section of the INTERPOL site and enter Assange into the search box, the only stories that come up are that Sweden wanted Assange's red notice to be made public:

INTERPOL has made public the Red Notice, or international wanted persons alert, for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the request of Swedish authorities who want to question him in connection with a number of sexual offences.

The Red Notice for the 39-year-old Australian, which was issued to law enforcement in all 188 INTERPOL member countries on 20 November, has now been made publicly available by INTERPOL following official authorization by Sweden.

Now, what appears curious about this is that it is highly unlikely that US intelligence agencies did not know exactly where Assange was. Assange leaves a high-tech trail everywhere he goes, and the CIA has had him under the most intense tracking, one can assume, for some time.

So, why then the need for a public "red alert" when Assange's whereabouts were almost certainly known? Because it helps tarnish him as a "fugitive" from justice and taints the revelations of WikiLeaks as a whole. It also hijacks what may or may not be valid sexual charges for international political purposes. Indeed, the INTERPOL news release was headlined: "Sweden authorizes INTERPOL to make public Red Notice for WikiLeaks founder." The headline does not even mention the name Julian Assange. It might as well be a red notice for WikiLeaks as an organization.

Tomorrow, BuzzFlash will further explore the curious Swedish government use of INTERPOL in what appears to be an international chess game regarding WikiLeaks and Assange.

Is the Swedish Government Acting as a Go-Between to Extradite Assange to the US?
Submitted by mark karlin on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 8:27pm. EditorBlog
MARK KARLIN, BUZZFLASH EDITOR FOR TRUTHOUT

Yesterday, BuzzFlash argued that Sweden - probably at the behest of the US - was exploiting the sex charges against Julian Assange to damage the reputation of WikiLeaks.

We also noted that BuzzFlash is not passing judgment on the accusations leveled against Assange (as detailed here in The Guardian UK) - and believes that, although the Swedish prosecutors have bungled the case (even dropping the charges at one point), the two women in Sweden have every right to make legal allegations if they believe them to be true. And Assange should answer for them through the legal process - not through the media. (It is important to note that Assange has not been charged with any crimes, as of yet. He is legally considered a fugitive from an ongoing investigation.)

While some progressives and pro-transparency advocates consider the sexual complaints to be a setup, BuzzFlash believes that there are two levels going on simultaneously: an appropriate legal investigation, and layered on top of it is the use of the case to achieve political goals to bring down WikiLeaks with Assange.

As we pointed out yesterday, Sweden requested an INTERPOL alert to 188 nations - at the highest public level - at a time when the CIA was most likely so close to Assange that their agents could hear him flush the toilet. The purpose of INTERPOL, in terms of international fugitives, is to inform countries that individuals are wanted by another nation so that the fugitive can be located. But that was entirely unnecessary in the case of Assange because, according to The Guardian UK, the British police knew where Assange was in the UK and were awaiting a new extradition request, because the Swedes had goofed up their first one. So, the Swedes knew that Assange was in Britain and that his lawyers had been negotiating with the British Police.

Indeed, Sweden was working closely with UK law enforcement at the time it directed INTERPOL to make the "red notice" for Assange public, thus ensuring maximum negative coverage from the media of WikiLeaks and Assange. What proof is there that Sweden was working with the UK? According to The Guardian UK:

Swedish authorities, who want to question Assange over sex offence allegations, issued a new warrant for his arrest. Mistakes in the original European arrest warrant sent by Swedish prosecutors to the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca) last month had prevented any move to apprehend the Australian.

Although British police know Assange's whereabouts, understood to be in the south-east of England, his lawyer said that by this afternoon there had been no attempt to contact him.

Mark Stephens said: "The police have given us an undertaking that they will contact us if they want to get in touch with Julian. At this point in time nobody has."

... The warrant, which is valid in all EU member states, requires the receiving member state to arrest and extradite the suspect within 90 days of arrest, or within 10 days if the arrested person consents to surrender. The warrant can only be issued for offences carrying a maximum penalty of 12 months or more.

This proves that the Swedish involvement with INTERPOL was theater, not in anyway necessary to the investigation into the sex charges or the arrest of Assange. Whatever the outcome of the sex charge investigation, it is highly likely that the Swedish government is playing politics with the case at the behest of the US, and this is the worst fear of advocates of government transparency.

Assange may or may not have violated Swedish law concerning his sexual relationships with two women, but there is a valid concern that his high-profile extradition from the UK would result in Sweden then extraditing him to the US.

In that case, the investigation sought by the two women charging him with sex crimes would be ill served.

Given that major papers in the US, including The New York Times, have revealed that the Department of Justice is trying to find grounds to indict Assange as, essentially, a terrorist and state secrets' thief - and that Bradley Manning is being held in harsh conditions to try and get him to implicate Assange as part of a conspiracy - it is not reassuring to see how Sweden used INTERPOL as a PR stunt to damage the image of WikiLeaks. Not reassuring at all.

[hava1]

Now it looks as though the prosecution/arrest in the UK, are protective custody against Israeli hitmen
In view of the announcement today about Israeli embarrassments ahead. Its rather sophisticated, if true to run a
Dry drill spun backwards...honey trap, hyped sexual charges, etc. mimick in reverse...

or maybe i am attributing too much to coincidence.
IN any case, the brutes are furious in the comment section.

[Plutonia]

IN any case, the brutes are furious in the comment section.

Link?