The reason was he gave less then truthful info on the Assange rape allegations

I might add Mike Moore also was part of it

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/12/17/sady_doyle_olbermann_twitter

And people are always just attacking Fox news as biased and inaccurate  when they all are

I'm surprised Michael Moore would support Julian Assange.

What with Assange

A) Being a free market capitalist, EXACTLY the kind of person Moore usually hates.

B) Wikileaks just revelaesd that Sicko was such an inaccurate pile of garbage that Cuba actually banned it from their country because they mythical representation of Cuba's healthcare system was so great, they thought it might cause a public backlash... and that at the advanced screening, many doctors walked out in disgust over the lies.

Of course, knowing Michael Moore he's probably not really informed and just going off what HE wants to be the truth.

That said, these kind of people make me sick.

Smearing rape victims like pretty much EVERYONE has fucking done, and taking the side of the accused with no proof is pretty much one of the worst acts of misogny people commit.

I'd say the worst... and it happens waaaaay to often.

To see it come from the left is even more disturbing then normal.  It's just further proof to the

"It's ok, as long as it's OUR guy!" mentality.

Although, the humor is... Julian Assange ISN'T their guy.  They just think he is.

Julian Assange is more ideologically connected to Ron Paul then Keith Olberman.

My understanding is that all of the sex was agreed to by both parties involved and that he did nothing wrong.  That the women have brought false charges against him.  I don't know if that is a crime in Sweden.

Of course, I've not him or the women and I don't live there so maybe I'm wrong.

I learned this because I was listening to a conseravtive talk radio host that doesn't like Assange.  He was reading an article from a UK paper.

I don't know if I'd call Assange that but I get the same vibe from him.  He is very pro-liberty for someone from the land down under.  He even appears to be far more pro-liberty than the average American.

Wikileaks was just revealing the truth as far as it knew.  I cannot be blamed if doctors in Cuba think Michael Moore is a liar or something.

Anyway, I love how you ended your post :)

That's just what HE defines himself as.  He considers himself a "Free Market Libertarian"  I believe is the words he used.  It was Free Market SOMETHING.

Yeah, that was a Daily Mail article....

which a lot of people consider a tabloid....

and is REALLY outdated and based soley on HIS laywers.

What he is charged with is 1 count of rape, 2 counts of sexual coercian and 2 counts of milestation.  Definition of rape and sexual coercian to follow.

Section 1 (rape)

A person who by violence or threat which involves, or appears to
the threatened person to involve an imminent danger, forces another
person to have sexual intercourse or to engage in a comparable
sexual act, that having regard to the nature of the violation and the
circumstances in general, is comparable to enforced sexual
intercourse, shall be sentenced for rape to imprisonment for at least
two and at most six years. Causing helplessness or a similar state of
incapacitation shall be regarded as equivalent to violence.
If having regard to the nature of the violence or the threat and
the circumstances in general, the crime is considered less serious, a
sentence to imprisonment for at most four years shall be imposed.
If the crime is gross, a sentence to imprisonment for at least four
and at most ten years shall be imposed for gross rape. In assessing
whether the crime is gross, special consideration shall be given to
whether the violence involved a danger to life or whether the
perpetrator caused serious injury or serious illness or, having regard
to the method used or the victim's youth or other circumstances,
exhibited particular ruthlessness or brutality. (Law 1998:393)

Section 2 (Aka Sexual Coercian)
A person who, under circumstances other than those defined in
Section 1, makes someone engage in a sexual act by unlawful
coercion shall be sentenced for sexual coercion to imprisonment for
at most two years.
If the person who committed the act exhibited particular
ruthlessness or if the crime is otherwise considered gross, a sentence
of at least six months and at most four years shall be imposed for
gross sexual coercion. (Law 1992:147)

Found his exact quote for ya.  In a way it's the real "Capitalism: A love story"

You’ve developed a reputation as anti-establishment and anti-institution. Not at all. Creating a well-run establishment is a difficult thing to do, and I’ve been in countries where institutions are in a state of collapse, so I understand the difficulty of running a company. Institutions don’t come from nowhere. It’s not correct to put me in any one philosophical or economic camp, because I’ve learned from many. But one is American libertarianism, market libertarianism. So as far as markets are concerned I’m a libertarian, but I have enough expertise in politics and history to understand that a free market ends up as monopoly unless you force them to be free. WikiLeaks is designed to make capitalism more free and ethical.

Ironically I end up argueing against somebody I'd agree with on most issues, against people who would be demonizing him if they bothered to research his views.

Wrong

That is what Olbermann and Moore were saying read this:

http://slatest.slate.com/id/2278548/

That info is interesting.  It's hard to tell what happened but I didn't read any thing about a rape happening.  It is really hard to tell what, if any, laws were broken from reading that.  It certainly is a different take then I heard before.