http://213.251.145.96/cable/2008/11/08STOCKHOLM748.html
"(S) As an alternative, Dr. Svensson asked the HSPD-6 team to inquire with Washington whether or not continued participation in the Visa Waiver Program was fundamentally contingent on signing a formal data sharing agreement or non-binding arrangement along the lines of the model shared with Sweden, or could the currently strong but informal arrangements satisfy DHS's requirements. More specifically, Faxborn and Waller suggested that Sweden's most problematic issue might be having access to the database, but in a brain-storming mode asked whether an arrangement could be reached that would formalize sharing of Swedish information on known and suspected terrorists, but STOCKHOLM 00000748 002.2 OF 002 would not/not include Sweden's access to the TSDB. The meeting concluded with promises for further consideration on both sides."

I got this sent to me Poriot saying it explained the Swedish court thing… I don’t get it.

He got bail.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/16/julian-assange-wikileaks

Yay! :)

He got bail and the ankle bracelet.
It appears Sweden has far different laws than Britain and that saw him out.
But why was he ever in?
The numbers are on his side, that is important America understands numbers.

Belly

In answer to your question, Assange has business contacts in Sweden and is there frequently.

See below:

"Media reports say Mr Assange was in Sweden last week to talk about his work and defend the decision by Wikileaks to publish the Afghan war logs. "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047025

That you could've discovered this fact for yourself, isn't worth noting - sh&t I just did.

Try reading the following instead of asking ignorant questions:

http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/julian-assange

Jewely, on Thursday, 16 December 2010 at 8:45:43 PM posted:

"I got this sent to me Poriot saying it explained
the Swedish court thing… I don’t get it."

Jewely posted a link which would appear to be a link to one of the leaked classified US diplomatic cables attributed to WikiLeaks. This was followed by an excerpt, paragraph 6, from that purported cable.

What I am interested in knowing is as to whether the link AND the excerpt were sent together to Jewely, or whether Jewely has read the whole cable displaying in the link and made the excerpt herself. My reason for asking this is that, having read the entire cable myself from the link provided, there can now be seen to be seemingly much more concerning intimations of perhaps recently intended action by the US with respect to 'snatching' Assange, an Australian citizen lawfully present recently in Sweden, outside of the due process of Swedish law, and transporting him against his will into US jurisdiction.

Paragraph 5. of that purported cable says, in part,:

"The [Swedish] M[inistry] O[f] J[ustice] team expressed their appreciation for the flexibility of the U.S. side in regards to memorializing any agreement. They expressed a strong degree of satisfaction with current informal information sharing arrangements with the U.S., and wondered whether the putative advantages of an [US] H[omeland] S[ecurity] P[residential] D[irective]-6 agreement for Sweden would be offset by the risk that these existing informal channels, which cover a wide range of law enforcement and anti-terrorism cooperation, would be scrutinized more intensely by [the Swedish] Parliament and perhaps jeopardized. ... "

Paragraph 7. interestingly concludes:

"... In the longer term, while a changed political environment in Sweden might be more conducive to a formal agreement with the U.S., there is a very clear G[overnment O[f] S[weden] belief that Sweden is not likely to be a direct target for terrorists and therefore has little to gain from an HSPD-6 agreement."

On 11 December Sweden experienced its first terrorist attack.



TBC