December, 14 2010, 07:04am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Linda Schade
202-422-5780
Kevin Zeese
301-996-6582
Prominent Americans Oppose Prosecution and Extradition of Assange Americans Organize to Support WikiLeaks Transparency
WASHINGTON
In opposition to
efforts by the U.S. Attorney General Holder to extradite Julian Assange,
Editor in Chief of WikiLeaks, prominent authors, academics,
lawyers, whistleblower
activists concerned with eroding civil
liberties, government accountability, electronic freedom, opposition to
war, and protection of
whistleblowers have signed on to a strongly worded statement (below)
condemning 'U.S efforts to fraudulently criminalize the legitimate
journalism of Julian Assange...".
"This statement is the first step in an ongoing
campaign to support Julian
Assange, WikiLeaks and to re-assert the concept that the U.S. government
is
accountable to its citizens," said Linda Schade of
WikiLeaksisDemocracy.org. "We will not accept the
manipulation of
our legal system to criminalize a journalist; a free and independent
press is
non-negotiable." The project is planning an aggressive campaign
to support Assange and WikiLeaks and has hosted the statement online.
Among the
prominent signers are:
John Perry Barlow, Electronic Freedom
Foundation
Medea Benjamin, CODE PINK
William Blum, the Empire Report
Tim Carpenter, Progressive Democrats of America
Noam Chomsky, professor emeritus of linguistics at MIT, author and
political
activist Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, No FEAR Coalition
Daniel Ellsberg, author and former intelligence analyst who released the
Pentagon Papers
Jodie Evans, CODE PINK
Margaret Flowers, MD, health care reform advocate
Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report
Eric Garris, Antiwar.com
Mike Gogulski, Bradley Manning Support Network
Chris Hedges, Former New York Times
war correspondent and author
Jeff Paterson, Courage to Resist
Bill Quigley, Center for Constitutional Rights
Justin Raimondo, AntiWar.com
Coleen Rowley, whistle blower and former TIME Woman of the Year
Linda Schade, Voters for Peace, initiator WikiLeaks Is Democracy
Cindy Sheehan, Peace of the Action
Jeffrey St. Claire, Counterpunch
David Swanson, War is a Crime
Sue Udry, Defending Dissent
Harvey Wasserman, journalist, author, democracy activist
Naomi Wolf, author, democracy advocate and political activist
Colonel Ret. Ann Wright, retired military and U.S. Foreign Service
Kevin Zeese, Voters for Peace
Tariq Ali, historian, writer,
filmmaker, political activist and commentator.
Contact
information for some signers that represent the some of the different
types of people signing on is available below the Statement from
WikiLeaksIsDemocracy.org.
Statement From WikiLeaksIsDemocracy.org:
"We, the undersigned,
stand in
defense of Julian Assange, WikiLeaks and their actions to safeguard and
advance
democracy, transparency and government accountability, as protected
under the
First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Wikileaks performs an
invaluable
service to the broad U.S.
and global public with a commitment to the protection of human rights
and the
rule of law. Government representatives have issued serious and
unjustified threats against Mr. Assange and his non-profit media
organization
which serve only to maintain a cloak of secrecy around high crimes and
violations of international law, including torture, tampering with
democratically elected governments, illegal bombings and wars,
surveillance, mass
slaughter of innocent civilians and more.
We call on all governments, organizations,
and
individuals of conscience forcefully to condemn and reject all U.S.
efforts to fraudulently criminalize the
legitimate journalism of Julian Assange, WikiLeaks and related efforts
to
expose an increasingly lawless U.S.
government to the indispensable democratic requirement of public
scrutiny. True
or false, any charges which the Swedish government may pursue are
irrelevant to
the primacy of an independent free press.
Journalists should not be made into
criminals for
publishing materials critical of the government. Therefore, we reject
any
efforts to extradite Julian Assange to the United States or allied
client
states in relation to these matters. We condemn and reject every
incitement to
murder, incarcerate or in any way harm Mr. Assange. We encourage all
those with
information on corruption and violations of law to take courage from the
example of Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks by acting to expose all such
information into
the light of public and judicial review."
Suggested Contacts
The letter is being
signed from people with different backgrounds and experience. You are welcome to contact any of them. To
represent this breadth of view we recommend contacting the following
people:
1) John Perry Barlow
is a leader in the electronic freedom movement and is a co-founder of
the Electronic Freedom Foundation. He has written for a
diversity of publications, including Communications of the
ACM, Mondo 2000, The New York Times, and Time.
He has been on the masthead of Wired
magazine since it was founded. He is a former Wyoming rancher and
Grateful Dead
lyricist. His piece on the future of copyright,
"The Economy of Ideas," is taught in many law schools, and his
"Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace" is posted on thousands
of websites. He can be reached at barlow@eff.org. His phone nubers are 1-917-863-2037,
1800-654-4322 (both go to his mobile) or his landline 1-415-888-2241.
2) Daniel
Ellsberg is a former U.S. military analyst
who leaked the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret Pentagon analysis of the
Vietnam War tothe New York Times. He can be reached at ellsbergd1@gmail.com
3) Noted author Naomi Wolf's recent article on the US Espionage
Act and
WikiLeaks is linked here. She is an author and political consultant. She
is a leading spokesperson for the third-wave of the feminist movement
and an advocate for progressive causes most recently arguing that there
has
been a deterioration of democratic institutions in the United States.
Naomi Wolf can be contacted at naomirwolf@aol.com or 1-646-334-1290.
4) Kevin Zeese is the executive director of
Voters For
Peace, is an attorney and noted political activist who works on a wide
range of issues including war, torture accountability, economic justice
and corporate influence on American democracy (see also www.ProsperityAgenda.US).
Zeese served as Ralph Nader's
press secretary and spokesperson in 2004. He is widely quoted in the
media. His most recent article on
WikiLeaks, is Assange in the Grasp of U.S.
Empire, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-zeese/assange-in-the-grasp-of-u_b_794491.html.
Zeese can
be reached at KBZeese@gmail.com.
He can be reached by phone at 1-301-996-6582 (cell) or 1-443-708-8360
(office).
Linda Schade served as the founding
Executive Director of VotersForPeace,
and most recently as the Director of Program Development at the Center
for Climate Strategies. Ms. Schade is a 20-year
political veteran featured on CNN, Fox News, C-SPAN, Washington
Post, USA Today, NPR, Pacifica radio, and other media
outlets on her peace, justice and democracy work.
LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular