HP: Michael Moore "Why I'm Posting Bail Money for Julian Assange"

[Ellis]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moore/why-im-posting-bail-money_b_796319.html

BY: Michael Moore

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 *****."

- Republican Mary Matalin

"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.

[PokerPacker]

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

Oh the irony of Wikileaks revealing that we're spying on the UN.

[JMS]

Oh the irony of Wikileaks revealing that we're spying on the UN.

I am just flabergasted that anybody in the 20th much less 21st century would be suprised about spys at the United Nations. or that Foreign Service officers are asked to make observational reports for intelligence agencies.... Hell I remember reading that we suspected 80% of the foreign service officers of the soviet union were intelligence officers back in the 1970's...

Michael Moore is a brave and smart guy... Hope he hasn't bitten off more than he can chew here.

[SnyderShrugged]

I feel icky but I kind of agree with mm in this.

Though I noticed he left the current admin and congressional leftys out of his rant.

[JMS]

I feel icky but I kind of agree with mm in this.

Though I noticed he left the current admin and congressional leftys out of his rant.

But I think the current admin are the folks being exposed by wikileaks. Don't think they go back to 2008. Am I correct?

[SnyderShrugged]

But I think the current admin are the folks being exposed by wikileaks. Don't think they go back to 2008. Am I correct?

I think so. But I meant that he didn't quote current admin officials and congress critters from the left who said similar things about going after assange

[Chicken Fried]

Assange is a terrorist. It's disgraceful he was given bail. Absolutely freakin disgraceful. His leaks are compromising our mission overseas. Americans will die because of it, if they already haven't. Yes, our government is corrupt and has lied every hour of the day, but you don't expose secrets that lead to the deaths of our soldiers and their reduced effectiveness in battle, in addition to our spies. Michael Moore thinks he's the cat's meow. He's an accomplice. This is all so disgusting I can't really write anything to do it justice.

[zoony]

I feel icky but I kind of agree with mm in this.

Though I noticed he left the current admin and congressional leftys out of his rant.

That's because he's a hack.

Though I do agree with him, too. Organizations like WikiLeaks can serve a valuable purpose on the global stage. If the US Government doesn't want them in business, do a better job with internal security. Yes, it is that simple.

[TheGoodBits]

Assange is a terrorist. It's disgraceful he was given bail. Absolutely freakin disgraceful. His leaks are compromising our mission overseas. Americans will die because of it, if they already haven't. Yes, our government is corrupt and has lied every hour of the day, but you don't expose secrets that lead to the deaths of our soldiers and their reduced effectiveness in battle, in addition to our spies. Michael Moore thinks he's the cat's meow. He's an accomplice. This is all so disgusting I can't really write anything to do it justice.

Do you have a shred of evidence to support that, or do you just have fun ranting?

[SnyderShrugged]

That's because he's a hack.

Though I do agree with him, too. Organizations like WikiLeaks can serve a valuable purpose on the global stage. If the US Government doesn't want them in business, do a better job with internal security. Yes, it is that simple.

We don't often agree but here we definitely do on all points

[zoony]

Assange is a terrorist. It's disgraceful he was given bail. Absolutely freakin disgraceful. His leaks are compromising our mission overseas. Americans will die because of it, if they already haven't. Yes, our government is corrupt and has lied every hour of the day, but you don't expose secrets that lead to the deaths of our soldiers and their reduced effectiveness in battle, in addition to our spies. Michael Moore thinks he's the cat's meow. He's an accomplice. This is all so disgusting I can't really write anything to do it justice.

I think you're correct to be upset. I just wonder why you're not upset at our government for being so sloppy as to let some random internet dude expose 1 million pages of state secrets. If my son were off fighting for this country I would be enraged at the incompetent and sloppy beaurocracies in Washington. What's their excuse? Not enough resources? lol. maddening.

[greenspandan]

by what definition is assange a terrorist? he's not engaging in violence in order to spread fear. i guess you could argue he's supplying info that terrorists could use (if so, please give an example) but by that definition pretty much all media outlets and half the internet including wikipedia would fall under the "terrorist" umbrella.

stating that he wants to hamper american intelligence operations does not make him a terrorist. also, i think the "americans will die because of this" aspect is really, really, really overhyped.

[Chicken Fried]

I think you're correct to be upset. I just wonder why you're not upset at our government for being so sloppy as to let some random internet dude expose 1 million pages of state secrets. If my son were off fighting for this country I would be enraged at the incompetent and sloppy beaurocracies in Washington. What's their excuse? Not enough resources? lol. maddening.

I am. Read my last hundred posts in the tailgate. Most of them pertain to how corrupt, inefficient, and wasteful our government is. Our government should never have allowed this, but the real criminals (in this case) are Julian Assange and Bradley Manning in addition to whoever else was involved.

[Bliz]

I think so. But I meant that he didn't quote current admin officials and congress critters from the left who said similar things about going after assange

I thought it made more sense the other way. In any case, the quotes were just good quotes. The point isn't to be fair, it's to find the most bombastic quotes possible.

But anyway, of the 6 people, 3 of them are dems. Leiberman is very well known, of course. Beckel is a Dem, if not a very well known one, and I believe Packer is a left-leaning journalist.

Although it doesn't have as much star power, that matches up reasonably against Palin, Matalin and King

[Chicken Fried]

Do you have a shred of evidence to support that, or do you just have fun ranting?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/7917955/Wikileaks-Afghanistan-Taliban-hunting-down-informants.html

In an interview with Channel 4 News, Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, said they were studying and investigating the report, adding “If they are US spies, then we know how to punish them.”

That's scary as hell.

The warning came as the US military's top officer, Admiral Mike Mullen said that Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, may already have blood on his hands following the leak of 92,000 classified documents relating to the war in Afghanistan by his website. "Mr Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family," he said.

I would trust an Admiral as to what is dangerous for our troops and what isn't.

Information from the documents could reveal:

Names and addresses of Afghans cooperating with Nato forces

Precise GPS locations of Afghans

Sources and methods of gathering intelligence

There you go, Greenspan.

Robert Gates, the US Defense Secretary, warned that sources identified in the documents now risked being "targeted for retribution" by insurgents in Afghanistan.

From the Secretary of Defense.

Earlier this week, Wikileaks published 90,000 documents – mostly reports detailing operations by American and other allied forces in Afghanistan between 2004 and 2009. The website is threatening to publish thousands more documents.

In his first comments on the massive leak, Mr Gates said that "the battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan partners, and may well damage our relationships and reputation in that key part of the world." "Intelligence sources and methods, as well as military tactics, techniques and procedures will become known to our adversaries," he added.

The massive leak jeopardised the trust vital to gathering intelligence in the "field", said Mr Gates, a former CIA director.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Micheal Moore is an arse.

[Koolblue13]

Wikileaks is Inf0wars lite.

[Mad Mike]

I hope Michael Moore dies a horrible, painful, slow death... right after his mouth is stapled shut. Same for Assange. **** them both.

[mcsluggo]

people that rejoice in this "transparency" have the same logic as people that think that democracy is supporting the right of 51% of people to take everything away from 49% of the people and distribute it amongst themselves. In my opinion it is a clear indication of simply being dumber than a booger.

[Burgold]

The thing is a resource like wikileaks can be a very useful tool if it is run by careful, responsible people. I don't get the feeling that's the case. When you are entrusted with important information that could be damaging that is a very heavy responsibility. You have to understand that and measure it and weigh it before acting. Breaking a story is cool. Being at the top of a controversy is exciting. These things should not be the first priority.

[SnyderShrugged]

people that rejoice in this "transparency" have the same logic as people that think that democracy is supporting the right of 51% of people to take everything away from 49% of the people and distribute it amongst themselves. In my opinion it is a clear indication of simply being dumber than a booger.

In what way are they analogous? I dont see it. Are you saying you would prefer our government be done totally in secret?

[Popeman38]

people that rejoice in this "transparency" have the same logic as people that think that democracy is supporting the right of 51% of people to take everything away from 49% of the people and distribute it amongst themselves. In my opinion it is a clear indication of simply being dumber than a booger.

This is the most awesome quote ever written in the Tailgate!

[SnyderShrugged]

If Assange is a terrorist, I have 2 questions.

A) why is he in jail on "no condom use" charges rather than detained in Gitmo?

Are all the thousands of media outlets who linked to and posted the documents for their audiences also terrorists?

A wise stateman's opinion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDp1izlMQT0&feature=player_embedded

[Chicken Fried]

If Assange is a terrorist, I have 2 questions.

A) why is he in jail on "no condom use" charges rather than detained in Gitmo?

Well unfortunately I don't think he's breaking US laws. He is not a US citizen, and the documents were leaked to him.

Are all the thousands of media outlets who linked to and posted the documents for their audiences also terrorists?

I wouldn't call them terrorists because once Assange leaked the documents, if someone really wanted it, they were going to get it somehow. I also don't know which documents they published. If any of those documents concerned our troops' safety, then yeah, they would be accomplices but to a lesser degree because, as I said, a terrorist would get it one way or another once it was leaked.

A wise stateman's opinion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDp1izlMQT0&feature=player_embedded

My list of politicians that I think have a clue was just decimated. I still support the Iraq war, and I let his opposition on that slide, but his speech was just dumb. He was basically using it as a platform to say why the Iraq war was uncalled for as well as to preach against the horrible decisions our government makes. That he calls Assange a messenger instead of something else is upsetting. If Assange was leaking documents about government corruption that could not harm our servicemen, I'd probably support it. But I can't see how anyone supports this.

SnyderShrugged, we're on the same page with almost every single issue. How can you justify supporting him when his little project is putting our military in significantly more danger?

[SnyderShrugged]

Well unfortunately I don't think he's breaking US laws. He is not a US citizen, and the documents were leaked to him.

I wouldn't call them terrorists because once Assange leaked the documents, if someone really wanted it, they were going to get it somehow. I also don't know which documents they published. If any of those documents concerned our troops' safety, then yeah, they would be accomplices but to a lesser degree because, as I said, a terrorist would get it one way or another once it was leaked.

My list of politicians that I think have a clue was just decimated. I still support the Iraq war, and I let his opposition on that slide, but his speech was just dumb. He was basically using it as a platform to say why the Iraq war was uncalled for as well as to preach against the horrible decisions our government makes. That he calls Assange a messenger instead of something else is upsetting. If Assange was leaking documents about government corruption that could not harm our servicemen, I'd probably support it. But I can't see how anyone supports this.

SnyderShrugged, we're on the same page with almost every single issue. How can you justify supporting him when his little project is putting our military in significantly more danger?

I understand your opinion. Just feel that the clandestine nature of our foreign policy undermines our troops way more than it being in the open.

for the record, I dont support Assange, but I also dont support foreign policy shenanigans. We need to stop playing world police and fix our own house, and soon.

btw, The war topic was the hardest neo-con attitude for me to kick.