Letters to Government

The letter below is coming of an Australian website in support of Julian Assagen. If you want to see the
original letter then please have a look at: 

2011-02-02 Open Letter To The Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard Re Julian Assange.
Submitted by Peter Kemp on Wed, 02/02/2011

Dear Prime Minister,

The world notes again your comments on Julian Assange reported in the Sydney Morning Herald, February 2nd 2011. It is pleasing that you would welcome him back to Australia but your statement that the government cannot do anything to assist him in that regard is not strictly correct and springs from a factual error in you saying “They are charges and they've got to be worked through proper process.” Prime Minister, in brief these are the relevant facts and applicable law: 1) Mr Assange has not ever been charged by Sweden or anybody else.2) The Swedish authorities have initiated an extradition process which is contrary to the European Arrest Warrant (“EAW”) system in that they want him back in Sweden for the purposes of investigation, not explicitly to charge him.3) The EAW is a fast track extradition process between EU member states brought into effect to allow decisions to be made between EU judicial systems, not between politicians.The European arrest warrant is a judicial decision issued by a Member State with a view to the arrest and surrender by another Member State of a requested person, for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution or executing a custodial sentence or detention order. Note Prime Minister, that UK explanatory document above extracted from EAW law says criminal prosecution, not criminal investigation, and you may recall that in Australian law, and in many other parts of the world, police can only hold a suspect for a limited time (eg NSW four hours plus time-outs) for the purposes of investigation only. Extradition for the stated purpose of investigation only is not only an abuse of the EAW system, it is also an abuse of Mr Assange’s human rights and brings in an arguable political dimension to the prosecution itself, contrary to the EAW’s legal prohibitions. You will also note the political dimensions of prosecutorial forum shopping in Mr Assange’s case: what one Swedish prosecutor dropped, another was pursuaded to reopen by a Swedish politician, Mr Claes Borgström.Sweden’s prosecutor Ms Ny, according to Mr Assange’s counsel, has apparently indicated that her intention is to hold Mr Assange in Sweden for the purposes of investigation, incommunicado, which means no bail allowed and Mr Assange would be without access to visitors legal or otherwise: this apparently is a matter of her own stated policy in sexual allegation matters. This is an intended breach of Mr Assanges’s human rights, should he be extradited, on top of another, the original breach of Swedish law, of their prosecutors releasing/confirming his name and the allegations to the Swedish media in 2010.Prime Minister, when an Australian national’s human rights are being trampled upon abroad, citizens expect our government to say or do something about it. It is not simply a matter of letting another nation’s legal processes continue when clearly they are abusive.It is likewise no longer a matter of pandering to the interests of the USA and allowing Australian citizens to be tortured as was Mamdouh Habib, by the recently promoted Vice President of Egypt no less, a matter that on legal suit by Mr Habib it is noted that the Australian government settled out of court recently with Commonwealth taxpayers money.While Sweden is by no means North Korea, would the Australian government keep silent on abuse of human rights, of an Australian citizen, prepetrated by the latter? Lastly, Prime Minister, you drew a distinction between the “moral force” of whistleblowing and indicated that Wikileaks was “not about making a moral case.” Wikileaks supporters would invite you Prime Minister, for example, to view the video “Collateral Murder” and consider whether or not Wikileaks was making a moral case against prima facie war crimes and/or crimes against humanity.We urge you Prime Minister to make the appropriate complaints to the Swedish government of their prosecutorial abusive treatment of Julian Assange, contrary to Swedish and European Human Rights law.

Yours Faithfully
Peter H Kemp
Solicitor of the Supreme Court of NSW.



I found the letter below on one of the Wikileaks support pages on Facebook. There are more then 400 pro WL
groups on Facebook.

Send a message to the President of The Supreme Court to express your concerns about the dangers democracy is facing.  Please forward this to all friends and then send it; with your name at the bottom, to:

To Lord Phillips
President of The Supreme Court,
Subject: A Plea to Protect the Civil Society and Democracy from a State Sponsored Plunge

Those who set a sweet happy home on fire would never be forgiven, but those who were in a position to stop and saw the conspiracy can never be excused. This universal consent is expected to be there even after 50-100 years from now. The democracies that we cherish today and the freedom enjoyed by individuals today, still make this world a sweet home with minor curable troubles.

We are not politicians, we are not activists, we are not whistle blowers; on the contrary we are ordinary, insensible, self-centered people who give more time to social network websites than reading newspapers and going through government policies. And today, such ignorant mass of people are forced to write a boring and not so funny letter to you because they see a conspiracy, a conspiracy to set a sweet happy home of democracies on fire. There may be reasons why others can’t see it but we can see the direct threat to the very concept of right to life, liberty, freedom and free-speech. When the most powerful states of the globe unite and stand up against one person or one press or a media or a website, it suggests more than just a violation of state made laws.

Laws have been made, altered, followed and defied in history, but such urgency from the global powers that we have been witnessing in the case of Julian Assange and Wikileaks is historic. And hence we see a larger conspiracy. It is a conspiracy that intends to kill any whistle blower who hurts the ego of a state very brutally.

We have some very simple questions today- “What happens tomorrow when a state would arrest a judge or jury for pronouncing a judgment which in state’s views compromises national security and exposes diplomatic secrets?”  What should assure us that what is happening today with the fourth pillar of democracy would not happen with the third pillar of democracy (i.e. judiciary)?

And if such situation arises, who would shout against the attack on the third pillar (judiciary), when you would have the fourth pillar already demolished?

If you already have a satisfactory answer to these questions then we all should go back to the clubs, discos and internet as there is no such threat to our sweet home democracy. But just in case you don’t have an answer to these questions then we have a situation where silence and inaction is a sin. Hence case of wikileaks, Julian Assange and Bradley Manning, which may well be just another case in the eyes of the law, need to be taken into larger perspective. We are not experts of law and philosophy; neither we are the authority to suggest what is the appropriate action that should be taken by whom, but consider us as kids above suspicion who are reporting to the guardian (you) of the family when they saw a conspiracy to set their sweet home on fire just when they were busy playing in the backyard.

Yours Faithful,


The letter below is coming of http://revolutiontruth.org/home

The idea is to tape this on video and send the video in to the abouve mentioned website

Open Letter to the United States Government Regarding WikiLeaks, Julian Assange and the Fundamental Tenets of Democracy and Open Societies

To President Obama, US Senators and Congressmen and women, Attorney General Eric Holder, the Department of Justice, and all of those involved in the attempt to prosecute Julian Assange, founder of the nonprofit news organization WikiLeaks.org:

We are a diverse group of people from around the world who have come together for a common purpose: to defend WikiLeaks, to ask the United States to cease its attempts to manufacture a case against Julian Assange, and to defend democratic principles and our fundamental rights guaranteed therein. We are professionals, homemakers, activists, students, and others who believe that government derives its power from the consent of the governed, as stipulated in the Declaration of Independence, but that citizens can only give meaningful consent if they are fully informed about their government’s actions. Nothing more violates American principles, which inspire both those of us who are and are not American citizens, than the idea that "government knows best" and has the right to deceive its own people.

The Wikileaks documents have revealed that the U.S. government has been keeping enormously important information secret from the American people, such as the fact that the U.S. government knew of the mass murder of civilians in Iraq even though it claimed it did not; that the U.S. government failed its legal responsibility as an occupying power by handing civilians over to Iraqi police units knowing they would be tortured and killed, even though it claimed it did not; that U.S. officials believe the Afghan government is corrupt and unpopular, even as they falsely claim to be fighting for democracy in Afghanistan; and that U.S. officials are extremely worried about the safety of Pakistan's nuclear stockpile, a potential matter of life and death that they have kept from the people of the world.

When the N.Y. Times released the Wikileaks "Afghan Logs" on July 25, its headline read: "View Is Bleaker than Official Portrayal of War in Afghanistan." This revealed, according to America’s "newspaper of record," that the U.S. Government was hiding the truth from its own people. Is it really right that the proud citizens of America should need Wikileaks to discover vital truths denied them by their own government?

U.S. officials claim they have a right to deceive the American people, and prosecute WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, on the grounds of "national security". But this information is clearly known to America’s enemies. It is the American people who have been denied it, information critical to their ability to make an informed decision as to whether or not to support their government's war-making, including putting their sons and daughters at grave risk of death or crippling injuries.

The U.S. Government claim that Wikileaks has endangered national security has been invalidated by its own Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, who has stated "is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest." The German Interior Minister has stated that "WikiLeaks is annoying, but not a threat", and the BBC has reported that "Wikileaks: US allies unruffled by embassy cable leaks."

The result of any U.S. government prosecution of Wikileaks and Julian Assange will be to restrict the truthful information American citizens receive about their government's foreign policy. But the U.S. cannot promote democracy abroad by limiting it at home.

We urge you to halt your undemocratic prosecution of Wikileaks; and to instead learn from it by providing the public with the honest and truthful information upon which democracy depends.


Dutch version of the open letter to US Government

Open Brief aan de regering van de Verenigde Staten van Amerika betreffende (met betrekking tot) Wikileaks Julian Assange, en de grondbeginselen van (of fundamentele leerstellingen) van een democratie en een open maatschappij.
Aan President Obama, de Senatoren van de VS, en alle Congresleden van het Huis van Afgevaardigden (het Congres van de Verenigde Staten), Procureur-generaal Eric Holder, het Amerikaanse Ministerie van Justitie, en allen die betrokken zijn bij de pogingen om een proces aan te spannen tegen (een gerechtelijke vervolging in te stellen tegen) Julian Assange oprichter van de non-profit organisatie Wikileaks.

Wij zijn een groep van mensen verspreidt over de hele wereld met hele diverse achtergronden die zich verenigd hebben met een gemeenschappelijk doel, het verdedigen van Wikileaks en om de regering van de Verenigde Staten te vragen om hun pogingen te staken een zaak tegen Julian Assange te fabriceren. Wij willen de democratische principes verdedigen en onze fundamentele burgerrechten.

Wij zijn werkende mensen, wij zijn huisvrouwen, activisten, studenten en anderen, die geloven dat de regering haar macht ontleent aan de toestemming van het volk.(aan de inwilliging van hen die bestuurt worden) zoals bepaald in de onafhankelijkheidsverklaring van de Verenigde Staten van Amerika. Maar dat burgers uitsluitend een gemeende betekenisvolle toestemming (inwilliging) kunnen geven wanneer ze volledig geïnformeerd zijn over de maatregelen (het gedrag - de handelswijze) van de regering. Niets schendt de Amerikaanse grondbeginselen, die zowel Amerikaanse burgers als ook niet Amerikanen inspireren, meer dan de gedachte dat "de regering het wel zal weten" en het recht heeft om zijn eigen mensen te misleiden (te bedriegen - in de maling te nemen - grapje).

De Wikileaks documenten hebben aan het licht gebracht (hebben onthult - hebben openbaart) dat de regering van de VS enorm belangrijke informatie geheim heeft gehouden voor de burgers van de Verenigde Staten zoals bijvoorbeeld het feit dat de US regering afwist van de massamoorden op burgers in Irak ondanks het feit dat men volhield, (beweerde) er niets vanaf te weten(er niet van op de hoogte te zijn) en dat de regering van de VS zijn wettelijke verplichting verzuimd heeft als een bezettingmacht toen men Irakese burgers overhandigde aan de Irakese politie, wetende (ervan op de hoogte zijnde) dat die burgers gemarteld en vermoord zouden worden.

Verder dat Amerikaanse regeringsfunctionarissen geloven dat de Afghaanse regering corrupt en weinig populair (ongeliefd) is, zelfs wanneer deze Afghaanse regering zo doet als of men vecht voor democratie in Afghanistan. Verder zijn US functionarissen extreem bezorgd over de veiligheid van de voorrad nucleaire wapens van Pakistan dat is een mogelijke zaak van leven en dood, die men verzwegen heeft van de burgers van de wereld.

Toen de New York Times op 26 juni 2010 de Wikileaks Afghaanse oorlogsberichten vrijgaf (publiceerde) was de krantenkop "De waarheid (de aanblik -het inzicht) is akelijker (troostelozer) dan de officiële versie van de oorlog in Afghanistan." Dit bracht volgens de Amerikaanse recordkrant aan het licht dat de Amerikaanse regering de waarheid verdoezelde (verstopte - trachtte te verbergen) voor zijn eigen mensen.

Is het nou werkelijk in orde (is het echt een goede zaak dat) dat de trotse burgers van de Verenigde Staten Wikileaks nodig hebben om belangrijke zaken te ontdekken die verborgen gehouden worden door de eigen regering (die de eigen regering probeert te verbergen)?

Functionarissen van de Verenigde Staten beweren dat men het recht heeft om de Amerikaanse burgers te misleiden en Wikileaks en Julian Assange te vervolgen vanwege redenen van nationale veiligheid. Maar de bewuste informatie is duidelijk al bekend bij Amerika's vijanden. Het zijn de Amerikaanse burgers die de informatie onthouden werd. (Typisch het zijn altijd de burgers die een oor aangenaaid krijgen).

Informatie die belangrijk is voor hun beoordelingsvermogen om een goed geïnformeerde beslissing te kunnen nemen of ze wel of niet het oorlogvoeren van hun regering willen ondersteunen, inclusieve het in ernstige gevaar brengen van hun zonen en dochters, gevaar van verwondingen die tot kreupelheid leiden of zelfs doodgaan.

De bewering van de Amerikaanse regering dat Wikileaks gevaarlijk zou zijn voor de nationale veiligheid (gevaar zou opleveren) werd teniet gedaan (ongeldig gemaakt) door haar eigen Minister van Defensie, Robert Gates die zei:
"Is dit gênant ? (beschamend), Ja.
Is dit lastig (onhandig) ? Ja.
Zijn er consequenties voor het buitenlandse beleid van de VS ? 

Ik denk tamelijk bescheiden ! "

De Minister van Binnenlandse zaken van Duitsland, Thomas de Maiziere heeft verklaard: "Wikileaks is vervelend (hinderlijk - lastig -ergerlijk) maar geen bedreiging." 
En de BBC heeft het volgende bericht (gemeld - uitgezonden): "De Amerikaanse bondgenoten blijven onverstoord door de Ambassade Kabel lekken." (klinkt niet dus - Cablegate lekken).

Het resultaat van alle vervolging van Julian Assange door de Amerikaanse regering zal zijn om eerlijke informatie te beperken (te begrenzen - te beknotten) die Amerikaanse burgers ontvangen over het buitenlandse beleid van hun regering. Maar de Amerikaanse regering kan niet de democratie in het buitenland bevorderen door de democratie in eigen land te begrenzen.

Wij dringen er bij U op aan om de ondemocratische vervolging van Wikileaks te stoppen en in de plaats daarvan lering te trekken uit deze situatie door het publiek te voorzien van de eerlijke en waarheidsgetrouwe informatie waar een democratie van afhankelijk is.