General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums‘I was targeted after I made Assange sex crime claim’ says accuser of Wikileaks founder
Swedish woman tells of her ordeal after making allegations against WikiLeaks founder
Kevin Rawlinson
Sunday 12 May 2013
... “Three years ago I was the victim of an assault. Former allies, political opponents, the Sweden Democrats, anti-feminists, Jew-haters, the man’s friends and mother quickly decided that there was something fishy. That I lied,” she wrote on her blog ...
She wrote that, after the alleged assault, everything “that I, or someone who could be assumed to be close to me, had said that could be turned to my disadvantage was raised as evidence of my guilt, my crime and my being incapable of telling the truth. Everything I had said that was to my advantage in that context was deemed invalidated, or was met with silence” ...
Numerous articles have appeared online speculating both about the veracity of the women’s claims, and the some have claimed agenda lies behind them. And some of the Assange supporters who have turned up to the west London embassy building for his public appearances have been known to bring placards denigrating the Wikileaks founder’s accusers ...
Mr Assange’s mother Christine Assange has also launched attacks on those who have opposed her son for his refusal to go to Sweden ... Writing on Twitter, she called them “rabid irrational frenzied ‘feminists’ ” ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/i-was-targeted-after-i-made-assange-sex-crime-claim-says-accuser-of-wikileaks-founder-8613006.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)It's very unusual for women to invent allegations like this. And besides, another victim also came forward.
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)and talking points to further right-wing policies and talking points here on DU, your post isn't surprising:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=469820
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10022138443#post8
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021309645#post5
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=330943
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=903143
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2336513
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2336679
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1160833
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Quite frankly, the suggestion that a woman falsely reported rape is the right wing idea, not the belief that she is being truthful.
Fanboi worship of Assange has led some folks into despicable territory in terms of women's rights.
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)The accusations of rape in Assange's case deal solely on in whether or not he was wearing a condom during what both women acknowledge was consensual sexual activity.
http://blog.sfgate.com/abraham/2010/12/05/wikileaks-julian-assange-rape-charge-for-not-using-condoms/
The “charges” that now amount to “heresay evidence” surround the alleged non-use of a condom while having consensual sex with both women. The real source of the overall problem, aside from the American Government’s desire to silence him, seems to stem from Assange’s apparent Playboy behavior in having sex with both women within four days. According to Catlin, failing to use a condom in Sweden can be considered rape.
Now, if Assange really did do what he is accused of doing (not wearing a condom and failing to tell his partners), that would indeed make him a world-class slimeball and, under Swedish law, guilty of rape. But you're trying to both make this sound like this is in the same category as standard forcible rape and to portray yourself as some Champion of Women's Rights, which it isn't and which you likely are not as much as you pompously want us to believe.
stevenleser: "Quite frankly, the suggestion that a woman falsely reported rape is the right wing idea, not the belief that she is being truthful."
So is a) making crap up by putting words in people's mouths (my post didn't accuse anyone of falsely reporting rape); and b) implying that a person's guilt is confirmed by the nature of an accusation rather than through a court of law.
stevenleser: "your ad-hominem...(your) Fanboi worship"
Really?
marshall
(6,706 posts)There's rape, and there's "rape-rape."
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)And yes, really. You reflexively went ad-hominem and you have fanboi worship of Assange.
Flying Squirrel
(3,041 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)But the first two are posts in which I am agreeing with the position that the ACLU has taken on the issue.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)...but it won't do a fucking thing to change the fact that the women who spoke against Assange have been subjected to a shit-ton of crap from people who one might reasonably expect NOT to be blurting anti-feminist horseshit.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Down with sloppy freedom. Hooray for the Patriot Act and domestic surveillance.
struggle4progress
(126,151 posts)WikiLeaks – whose mission statement was “to produce a more just society based upon truth” – has been guilty of the same obfuscation and misinformation as those it sought to expose, while its supporters are expected to follow, unquestioningly, in blinkered, cultish devotion.
By Jemima Khan
Published 06 February 2013 13:15
The list of alienated and disaffected allies is long: some say they fell out over redactions, some over broken deals, some over money, some over ownership and control. The roll-call includes Assange’s earliest WikiLeaks collaborators, Daniel Domscheit-Berg and “The Architect”, the anonymous technical whizz behind much of the WikiLeaks platform. It also features the journalists with whom he worked on the leaked cables: Nick Davies, David Leigh and Luke Harding of the Guardian; the New York Times team; James Ball; and the Freedom of Information campaigner Heather Brooke. Then there are his former lawyer Mark Stephens; Jamie Byng of Canongate Books, who paid him a reported £500,000 advance for a ghostwritten autobiography for which Assange withdrew his co-operation before publication; the Channel 4 team that made a documentary about him which resulted in his unsuccessful complaint to Ofcom that it was unfair and had invaded his privacy; and his former WikiLeaks team in Iceland ...
It may well be that the serious allegations of sexual assault and rape are not substantiated in court, but I have come to the conclusion that these are all matters for Swedish due process and that Assange is undermining both himself and his own transparency agenda – as well as doing the US department of justice a favour – by making his refusal to answer questions in Sweden into a human rights issue. There have been three rounds in the UK courts and the UK courts have upheld the European Arrest Warrant in his name three times. The women in question have human rights, too, and need resolution. Assange’s noble cause and his wish to avoid a US court does not trump their right to be heard in a Swedish court.
I don’t regret putting up bail money for Assange but I did it so that he would be released while awaiting trial, not so that he could avoid answering to the allegations ...
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)before the Assange-alistas weigh in.
They'll be regaling everyone with what a great guy he is, and how no one should be allowed to speak a word against him.
You'll recognize many of them as the same people who call Obama supporters idol worshipers who can't take a word of criticism against their hero.
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)Because as I recall, it was having consensual sex without a condom. which is not a crime in the US.
So I see blame of Assange as being equivalent to to the heinous crime of drinking beer in Saudi Arabia. Its a crime to drink beer in that Islamic country, though not here. So I don't call people who drink beer their criminals, because I judge them by the laws of this country.
struggle4progress
(126,151 posts)as alleged in the case, would constitute rape in the UK, as it does in Sweden
The UK court rulings are available online. Follow links here: http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)what his crime was, or anything else about the man.
I simply made the observation that the Assange-alistas on this board will tolerate not a single word uttered against their hero - and many of them are the same people who call Obama supporters mindless 'idol worshipers', incapable of finding fault with him.
I come not to bury Assange, nor to praise him. As always, I come to savor the irony.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And all Julian has to do is answer to the charges. The idea he'll be hung by the US without trial is BS.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
JI7
(93,616 posts)napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)Don't they know corporations are people? That they have privacy rights? He should be convicted for his sex crimes (that aren't illegal in the US) To send a message.
Leave the military and multinationals alone!
Lol.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)And obviously anyone who would make such a comment is a fervent supporter of corporate rule...
Could you possibly make a more vacuous, irrelevant response...?
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)Hmm. How about I read about rape statistics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics
And I pick a random stat. How about this one:
Other research has found that about 80,000 American children are sexually abused each year.[9] It has been estimated that one in six American women has been or will be sexually assaulted during her life.[10] Largely because of child and prison rape, approximately ten percent of reported rape victims are male.[11]
Now dividing 80,00 by 365, I discover that 219 children are sexually abused in the US each day. But to be really vacuous, I decide to ignore ALL of those cases, and focus on an overseas situation, which was originally reported as consensual sex without a condom, involving a whistle blower journalist, who reported information leaked by Bradley Manning showing the murder of journalists.
http://www.collateralmurder.com/
I then try to cop a self righteous attitude about ignoring the 160,000 US children assaulted since the time of the Assange allegations, by focusing on this one vague case involving a whistle blower as the only rape case worth talking about.
Seriously, how's that for vacuous? Did I win? Did I make a more vacuous post than before???
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)I particularly liked the part where you pretend that not mentioning other instances of rape means that one considers the case that is actually the subject of the thread the only important one. Straw man, fallacy of argument, and deflection, all in one! Gotta love efficiency...
Pure comedy gold.
Parable Arable
(126 posts)Because I'd like there to be debate about the degree to which a government should be transparent with it's people. That being said, I'm not going to try and defend or condemn his personal life. If he indeed did commit this sex crime, then I'll view him in a more contemptible light, but not because of his occupation.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)It's a violent crime.
Parable Arable
(126 posts)I apologize for my misuse of words.
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)He was convicted of not using a condom when the partner thought he was, which is a sex crime in Sweden but not in the US.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)He won't stand trial for the crime. Why do you think he has been hiding out in Ecuador? He's like that Max Factor guy who hid out for decades. That he hides from the law hardly is a point in his favor.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)BainsBane
(57,757 posts)You think it's funny he is charged with rape. Hardly a surprise. He's only fleeing prosecution for violent crimes against a woman. It's not like her life or the lives of the other women he will continue to prey upon actually matter. They are only women. 
struggle4progress
(126,151 posts)him for rape and other alleged crimes
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)burnodo
(2,017 posts)but in THIS case, with weak allegations, all the sudden they care?
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
WikiLeaks founder and editor-in-chief Julian Assange has been fighting a long legal battle regarding multiple rape allegations against him in Sweden, but his lawyer conceded Tuesday that he didn’t want to “challenge whether (the accusers) felt Assange’s conduct was disrespectful, discourteous, disturbing or even pushing at the boundaries of what they felt comfortable with,” The Guardian reported.
Well, that sounds nice enough.
One of the women said that Assange initiated intercourse with her while she was sleeping, and that he was not wearing a condom, which the woman had already told him she did not want. Assange’s defense said that because she eventually agreed to continue the sex, the whole incident should be considered consensual...
The classic 'Her lips said NO, but her eyes said YES' defense.
Another woman claimed that Assange had tried to have unprotected sex with her, and she couldn’t physically hold him off. As Ben Emmerson, Assange’s lawyer described, she “tried several times to reach for a condom, which Assange had stopped her from doing by holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her with his penis without using a condom. (She) says that she felt about to cry since she was held down and could not reach a condom and felt this could end badly.”
I suggest we call Todd Akin to discover his opinion on that.
In his opening argument in today’s London extradition hearing, Emmerson took a more sympathetic stance toward the accusers, and said “Nothing I say should be taken as denigrating the complainant, the genuineness of their feelings of regret, to trivialize their experience.”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/12/assanges-lawyer-admits-sex-acts-were-disturbing-disrespectful/
Their 'feelings of regret' because they:
Really did want it!
Really did not want it!
Are frigid prudes but ashamed to admit it!
Are lusty ladies who were outted to the world!
Are in trouble with the world for being promiscous!
Are in trouble with the world for lying about this!
Are CIA spies!
Are (fill in the blank)!
That story is nearly 2 years old but I'd heard none of these details. What a mess.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)When they see women as worthless, they aren't concerned about crimes against them.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)I'm not convinced it is about seeing women as worthless. Assange is playing the victim of dark forces, a crusader saving humanity. Anyone who questions his quest is part of the enemy.
These women are standing in the way of his being free to save the day so they must be bad guys. That's beyond questioning them.
But those who read that third paragraph and do not see a crime has taken place, even when his own attorney agrees to those facts, does have a problem.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)the charges against Assange with Clinton in the oval office. What do you think that says about a person's view of women?
Tarheel_Dem
(31,454 posts)I find it highly hypocritical that his defenders only see conspiracy where Assange is concerned, especially the ones who run around these boards screeching about "justice" for everybody else, yet they defend this sick f**k.
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)the Julian Assange swooners can't defend a rapist, so they have to attack the victim.
Sid
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Propaganda and bullshit.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)instead of hiding out he would have the chance to clear his name. He chose to flee prosecution. I wonder how many women he has raped since then. They rarely just rape one person.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)He became America's #1 enemy, and suddenly rape allegations appeared. Nice try.
There was a good rundown by a British paper poking holes in these allegations. I hate conspiracy theories too, but this sounded way too fishy. All the hallmarks of CIA.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts) LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)there seem to be far too many agendas here.
The worst for me is that Sweden refuses to make any concession on interrogating him. Despite Assange's offer to be interrogated in the embassy (and before anywhere in Britain), they absolutely insist he walks into a small country with an extradition treaty with the US. No compromise, they are demanding he enter that country. Not to arrest, just to question. Even more curiously, they insist that they will NOT guarantee him immunity from extradition if he does come for questioning. My Swedish friend said she's never seen to many politicians and high-ranking bureaucrats scramble for an allegation like this, let alone just for questioning.
Fishy as fuck.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)My personal take (based, obviously, on utterly inadequate info, just like most anyone not directly involved with this case)? There was a sexual crime committed...AND the powers-that-be are very much out to string him up. The two aren't mutually-exclusive. If you're going to be a huge thorn in the side of the entrenched powers, you CAN'T give them something to hang you with.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)from extradition, like you, my view is that he SHOULD stand trial in Sweden. I'm comfortable with the Swedish justice system to get it right.
My reluctance came with Swedish intransigence on anything halting the extradition scenario. If he gets extradited to the US, Bradley Manning Part 2. Gitmo or some dungeon where he'll never see the light again.
azureblue
(2,728 posts)is in both cases the women let Assange stay with them a few days after the "Sex Crime" was supposedly committed. Then, they let a few weeks go by, then, somehow, they connected with each other, discussed the matter, and charges of not using a condom were filed. Note that a law against not using a condom was passed to cut down on STD transmission, NOT to be warped into charges of rape. This is the important point that those who choose to attack Assange ignore. Under Swedish law, it is categorized as a "Sex Crime" because it occurs (duh) when having sex. Note that the original charge was simply a finable offense.
The Swedish prosecutor then dismissed the charges for lack of evidence, that is, the sequence of events, mainly letting Assange stay a few days, then each having a congenial breakfast with him, the morning after, after the alleged crime was committed, did not lend credence to the women's stories. Then, another prosecutor, who had no connection at all with the jursidiction, popped up and charged Assange with a sex crime, and, and here is the giveaway, chose not to accept Assange's offer, while he was still in Sweden and planning a trip to the UK, to come in and give a statement, but somehow, the new Swedish prosecutor let Assange go to the UK, then chose to make an international incident over it. Further, Assange offered to make his statement via CCTV from the Embassy, but the Swedish prosecutor refused, even though it is common in Europe and the UK to take statements in minor legal matters this way.
The women are certainly being hounded, but the timing, and delays in filing charges, make them have "unclean hands". Placed in light of the wikileaks time line, things get even more suspicious, leading one to consider that they may have been put up to it, so that Assange could end up in US hands. You have to remember that the US had nothing at all to get Assange into custody until this charge of not using a rubber came along. We are not in a position to second guess or suppose, but, considering how Assange is being maligned by the media and the US, these women are getting off pretty lightly.
Those that howl "rapist!", given these facts about the case, are either misled, self deluded, or trolls.
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)Rape of multi-national corporations! Rape of the military through his website which released secrets!
Oh, he wasn't charged of rape by the women? He was charged of failure to use a condom, which is not a crime in the US? That's not important!
end sarcasm .
I'm as afraid of conspiracy as the next guy, but if one is at play here, its to make Assange look good in the eyes of thinking people. And I'm very much effected by it.
PEace.
struggle4progress
(126,151 posts)complaint from the investigation. Through their lawyer, the women then asked that the rape allegation be included in the investigation. Several days later, it was re-included
http://www.aklagare.se/In-English/Media/The-Assange-Matter/The-Assange-Matter/
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)Is not failing to wear a condom. What completely bullshit. Like a court is going to issue an extradition order for failing to use a condom?
"On 18 November 2010 the Stockholm District Court upheld an arrest warrant against Assange on suspicion of rape, unlawful coercion and three cases of sexual molestation.[2] The warrant was appealed to the Svea Court of Appeal which upheld it but lowered it to suspicion of rape (less serious crime), unlawful coercion and two cases of sexual molestation rather than three, [3] and the warrant was also appealed to the Supreme Court of Sweden,[4] which decided not to hear the case. At this time Assange had been living in the United Kingdom for 1–2 months. An extradition hearing took place in an English court in February 2011 to consider an application by Swedish authorities for the extradition of Assange to Sweden."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)That's shocking. Those allegations will effect my opinion of who I vote for. I am going to vote for this sensible man, George W Bush, instead of the fellow offender, Al Gore.
Millions of dead Iraqis over false claims of WMD? What's a bunch of dead brown people against the holy crime of Bill Clinton putting his weeny in the wrong place. Weeny positioning really must be the foundation of global politics.
You see friend, eventually you come to an awareness of the political manipulations. The murder of journalists by US military, as leaked by wikileaks, comes to hold greater relevance than the nature of dick placement by the leader of the organization who leaked those videos.
Watch the videos:
http://www.collateralmurder.com/
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)He had sex. Assange is accused of rape and fled prosecution. That you cannot tell the difference is disturbing. One is a voluntary interaction with another human being. The other is a violent crime. That you can't tell the difference is profoundly disturbing.
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)How these rapes:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/11/3391545/rape-in-us-military-conduct-unbecoming.html
Despite military officials’ protests that sexual assault won’t be tolerated, a Department of Defense study, released, ironically, just after Mr. Krusinski’s arrest, says the message just isn’t getting through. Indeed, the number of reported rapes grew to 3,374 last year from 3,192 in 2011. Those numbers only scratch the surface.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/11/3391545/rape-in-us-military-conduct-unbecoming.html#storylink=cpy
So have their been 3,374 posts from you from each of the military women raped? Or are you focused on this one "rapist" who leaked military secrets showing the assassination of journalists by the military. I think we both know the answer here.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)Including about that recent report, actually. Do you go into those threads and talk about Bill Clinton's willy as well?
I don't pretend rape is the same as consensual sex, as you have here. I know more than I want to about you. You've made very clear exactly who you are.
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)Well, you better lay them cards down and cash in. I think what you're going to find is a great big handful of monopoly money. Go ahead, take it to the bank. Try to cash it in.
Here are the facts: You're here speaking out against a whistle blower as a rapist, when the circumstances are very questionable. You're not giving the same attention to the many rape cases that effect women every day as you are to this same whistle blower. That reveals to any clear thinking person a political motivation for your focus on this one individual. The majority of the world sees this motivation with Assange.
There are compelling arguments for prosecuting Assange based on leaking classified information. That's the right way forward for anyone who feels damaged by his actions. But this clown show of redirection is exactly that. Its entertaining, its exciting, but if you're expecting to make a lasting moral impression of it you are, I am sad to say, going to fall strait on your face.
PEace!
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)with Monica Lewinsky is the same as rape. I know that you do not care that he is charged with a crime of violence against a woman because you happen to like the guy and you think it's just a sex scandal.
The only reason the circumstances are "questionable" is because Assange is hiding from the law, as sexual predators do. He could face prosecution and clear his name, if he were actually innocent. But he's too important to be held to the same laws as ordinary people. Instead he will hide out in Ecuador and continue to prey upon women. What do their lives mean compared to a "great man." Since you see no difference between consensual sex between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewisnksy and criminal charges of rape, you don't care. Women don't have the right to say no to men you admire. What do their lives matter compared to a "great man" like Assange. They are only women after all.
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)I'm questioning the validity of the rape charge. And I'm comparing the whole thing to the Lewinsky affair, because it represents the same distortion of scale that happen there, where we were asked to condemn a president and all his policies for a marital indiscretion.
What do I mean by matters of scale? Look at this story:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/air-force-lt-col-jeffrey-krusinski-mum-after-court-on-sexual-battery-case/
Krusinski, the Air Force officer who was in charge of sexual assault prevention but has himself been charged with groping a woman, appeared at the Arlington County, Virginia, courthouse Thursday afternoon to receive a trial date.
And ask yourself, with thousands of rapes in the military a year and most unreported, what kind of culture leads to a situation where the guy in charge of the sexual assault program is convicted of sexual misconduct.
The culture is a "snitches lie in ditches" culture. Its a culture that sees to it that whistle blowers like Bradley Manning, and the journalist he leaked to Julian Assange, pay in a very public way. That culture fosters things like sexual assaults, none of which receive the attention of the overseas Assange case. The persecution of Aaron Swartz, Wikileaks, and all the rest of the people fighting for openness and disclosure is a perpetuation of the exact culture of secrecy in which victims are silenced
Maybe Assange is guilty, I don't know. But when I see his work this work marginalized due to focusing on his alleged sexual misconduct, it raises big red flags for me.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)and excellent summary -
Generic Other
(29,080 posts)This will prove that the Swedish prosecutor's only desire is to bring Assange to justice over a rape accusation, not as an extralegal means to bring him to the US. The witnesses most certainly will face tough questions in court about their actions and subsequent motivations for pressing charges against him. This is not an open and shut case. False rape accusations are a very serious crime in my mind. I have spent time as an advocate for women who had been sexually assaulted. This allegation does not fit the definition of rape in my opinion. There was no assault or threat made. The victims did not report the alleged crime. They continued to allow Assange to stay in their homes. One of the alleged victims had breakfast with him the next morning without even mentioning his "crime." So what are the damages? No one got an STD. No one got pregnant. No one was physically harmed. A condom was torn. There was no police report for almost a week after. The two women changed their stories after consulting with each other, and they further conspired to try and profit off their case. They have credibility problems that make them problematic witnesses. Also the US and Sweden have done nothing to make it clear the charges are not politically motivated. If you were on a jury, how would you decide? Me? I could not vote to convict under the circumstances.
"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.
"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden
Statement from Women Against Rape:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/women-against-rape-julian-assange
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And know that he is a factual rapist too...but I guess we are far removed from innocent until proven guilty and we can know deep in a person's soul just by reading news stories and reading blogs...but then it was rape he is accused of...the not wearing a condom kind of rape, which is an automatic guilty right there...cause women never lie.
It is a whole new world we live in now...where emotions are all the evidence needed.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)99% of the people who "take a stand" on this issue (as IF such a thing could be done with no facts) are simply doing to for ulterior motives.
Full stop.
boilerbabe
(2,214 posts)proven innocent! I guess it depends on who is president at the time. 
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Instead, I've been told they've cooked up a complicated conspiracy to get him extradited to Sweden before they indict him, because apparently indicting him while he was in the UK would have been too obvious.
Response to Bonobo (Reply #26)
Nye Bevan This message was self-deleted by its author.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)makes it rather difficult to determine legal guilt, don't you think? When he hides from prosecution, he voluntarily forfeits the benefit of the doubt.
azureblue
(2,728 posts)how you got from getting charged with not using a condom, an offense that, in Sweden, carries a small fine, to rape?
Matariki
(18,775 posts)And I'm sure they have the budget to pay people to smear Assange on the interwebs as well.
Given that the Pentagon is going all out with Bradley Manning's circus trial - the largest in Pentagon history. I'm sure they're spending dollars to spread anti Assange and Manning propaganda.
It makes me ashamed of the government we have.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)I agree wholeheartedly with Dr. West - Assange is a courageous freedom fighter being smeared by the Pentagon and the U.S.
http://www.smileyandwest.com/this-weeks-show/the-conversation-julian-assange/
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)who think they have a right to decide who they have sex with. Give them the vote and they never shut up.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)No shit it's "fishy".
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/12/what-are-julian-assanges-sex-charges-all-about
"The two Swedish women who accuse WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of sexual misconduct were at first not seeking to bring charges against him. They just wanted to track him down and persuade him to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases, according to several people in contact with his entourage at the time."
struggle4progress
(126,151 posts)you've had plenty of time to sort out the chronology. The original complaints contained a rape allegation, and when that aspect of the investigation was dropped the women objected through their lawyer and the rape complaint was added back into the investigation
August 17 - Assange reportedly has sex with ''Miss W'' ...
Between August 17 and 20 - The two women are said to have shared concerns ...
Julian Assange rape accusations: timeline
– Den andra kvinnan ville anmäla för våldtäkt. Jag gav min berättelse som vittnesmål till hennes berättelse och för att stötta henne.
30-åriga kvinnan: Jag utsattes för övergrepp
Berättar om anklagelserna mot Wikileaks grundare Julian Assange
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article7652935.ab
... 20 August 2010 The duty prosecutor orders the arrest of Julian Assange, suspected of rape and molestation ...
25 August 2010 The prosecutor takes a decision to terminate the preliminary investigation concerning suspected rape ...
27 August 2010 Lawyer Claes Borgström, legal representative of the women who reported Julian Assange, requests a review of the prosecutor's decision to terminate the preliminary investigation concerning rape ...
1 September 2010 Marianne Ny, Director of Public Prosecution, takes a decision to resume the preliminary investigation concerning the suspected rape. The preliminary investigation on sexual molestation is expanded to cover all the events in the crime reports ...
... 18 November 2010 Stockholm District Court approves a request to detain Mr Assange for questioning on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion ...
... On November 20, the Stockholm Criminal Court issues an international arrest warrant for Assange, stating he is suspected of several counts of rape, sexual molestation and illegal use of force ...
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)But for different reasons.
Anita Hill was similarly smeared by powerful people to keep her silent.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)nt
ucrdem
(15,720 posts)and doesn't plan to:
WASHINGTON | Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:34pm EDT
(Reuters) - Despite claims by Julian Assange that Washington is plotting to extradite and execute him, U.S. and European government sources say the United States has issued no criminal charges against the WikiLeaks founder and has launched no attempt to extradite him.
Moreover, Obama administration officials remain divided over the wisdom of prosecuting Assange, the sources said, and the likelihood of U.S. criminal charges against him is probably receding rather than growing.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/22/us-wikileaks-assange-usa-idUSBRE87L12W20120822
So Assange's fears of extradition to the US are unfounded.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)struggle4progress
(126,151 posts)published documents that came into his possession innocently, free speech considerations should protect him. There are suggestions of activities allowing less innocent interpretations of his motives and behavior, that might actually support (say) espionage charges
If he ends up extradited to Sweden from the UK, a forward extradition to the US would require the concurrence of both Sweden and the UK and could be contested in both Swedish and UK courts
Such an extradition request would be governed by the principle of dual criminality, according to which countries do not honor extradition requests if the alleged act would not be a crime in the country from which extradition is sought
The UK usually honors US extradition requests, but espionage against the US is arguably not a crime in the UK or Sweden. Swedish law law does not allow extradition for alleged political or military crimes. And Sweden has extraordinarily broad transparency laws, which perhaps explains why Assange had an application pending for permanent resident status there when the rape investigation began. So espionage allegations would be quite unlikely to result in forward extradition to the US from Sweden
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)How many of the people in Guantanamo are charged? Some of them are listed for release for doing nothing, and yet are still in there.
I do not trust the security wing of our government at all. Our military and intelligence community act with impunity, like Roman caesars. They could shoot Assange in the back of the head on live TV and the uncaring, uninterested American people would give them a pass. As long as some general gave a press conference insisting Assange was a threat, the bobblehead voters would lap it up.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The actual legal situation of classified information is tricky. He didn't obtain it through deception, so he's not breaking US law by publishing it (whoever provided it to him probably did, though).
Matariki
(18,775 posts)which is what Assange and his lawyers fear is likely. Especially with Bradley Manning's trial coming up. You should listen to the interview with him by Cornell West. It was on NPR yesterday. It's quite informative.
ucrdem
(15,720 posts)On a quick search all I can find are dire warnings from Assange and sympathetic writers like West speculating about retaliatory US designs. But I can't find any actual designs.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)
Defense: Whom else did you uncover doing wrongdoing?
Mander: Seven other civilians. The FBI is potentially involved. I do not know what the FBI has determined.
Defense: Do they include the founders, owners, or managers of WikiLeaks? Was WikiLeaks in this case?
Mander: Yes they are involved in certain aspects.
Defense: Is it your determination...would you agree that my client would have been unable to do this by himself?
Mander: Depends on charge. 'Something by himself' ...other charges require interaction with others.
Defense: Did my client possess the ability to upload from his cubical in Iraq?
Mander: Yes. He could have upload to multiple sites.
Defense: Would he not also require the cooperation of others to post to (indecipherable)?
Mander: Not if he owned site.
http://www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/wikileaks/grand_jury/wikileaks_grand_jury_seven_civilians_targeted_by_fbi_for_criminal_activity_and_espionage.html
ucrdem
(15,720 posts)and Assange isn't in the US Army. This is about Manning, and Mander doesn't mention Assange anyway, so if this is all there is, there really isn't anything is there?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Cha
(319,076 posts)Mr Assange’s mother Christine Assange has also launched attacks on those who have opposed her son for his refusal to go to Sweden ... Writing on Twitter, she called them “rabid irrational frenzied ‘feminists’ ” ...
I find the Swedish Woman's story credible that Assange's supporters would want to smear the messenger. I've seen it on here.
thanks for the report, struggle4progress.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)BainsBane
(57,757 posts)and, if guilty, to blame for the assault itself. I see him as a sexual predator using political supporters so he can hide like a coward.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)I am quite fond of some leaders for their idealism; some of our presidents hold a special place in my heart for what they have said or done. At the same time, I do not love everything a POTUS is charged to do in his position.
By some standards, all leaders have committed crimes against humanity or the planet. That is their lot in life that they have gone into and may regret it. We have the luxury of being able to stand from afar and judge. They don't, anymore than the woman in 'Sophie's Choice' did.
Assange's actions with those women is not about Wikileaks. For him to hide behind the organization is wrong. His first response was he already knew TPTB would try to smear him, so why did he jump in bed?
That is something I learned when I became politically active in college and beyond. Wild days had be put behind, they would sully the cause, so to speak. As a man who claimed to know how dangerous it was, he is either not telling the truth of the danger...
Or not telling the truth about the assault. He is supposed to be a brilliant man, why endanger himself that way?
The immediate spin after this does not sound honest. And after reading the account, which was not refuted by his attorney, I have less sympathy for him. I'm sad some can't separate their vision of their hero from the human. All make mistakes but a noble cause doesn't exist to cover up our personal indiscretions.
Go Vols
(5,902 posts)
Tien1985
(923 posts)It's not right, but it was predictable.
I like wikileaks and I am staunchly FOR transparency. It doesn't escape me that the allegations came after the wikileaks bust. That doesn't make me assume the allegations are false, just that they would have gotten no attention or consideration prior to. THAT is a problem. I'm not going to try and argue, here, that not using a condom when your partner(s) asks/tells you to isn't rape. That's despicable, and having that conversation is just another dusty artifact of rape culture.
Yup--had Assange never been found out as a leader of wikileaks, these charges probably would never have materialized or would have been ignored. What does that say about rape?
People who do good things also sometimes do bad things. People who do wonderful, brave things, also sometimes do horrible, depraved things. Doing something good doesn't cancel out rape. Doing something horrific doesn't negate one's humanity--thus, many progressives are against the death penalty.
Why are we treating this as an either or?
riqster
(13,986 posts)If some anonymous preeve does what Assange is accused of to a child; a servicewoman; a teenager; a woman, or even a man, why, DU rises up in rage at the crime and its alleged perpetrator.
But since it's Assange, suddenly victim-blaming, slut-shaming and other disgusting behaviors are OK, huh?
No. Those behaviors are never OK. No matter the identities of the criminal or the victim, it is never a good thing to let one's politics cause one to lionize an accused rapist and trash a rape victim.
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)
Sid
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)He would have never faced those charges in the US.
riqster
(13,986 posts)When we travel to other countries, we must abide by their laws. I found that out in the course of my travels.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)(sex outside of marriage) would subject her to harsh punishment or death. Would you then advocate that she voluntarily return to such a country to face her trial and punishment?
riqster
(13,986 posts)...by more than one country, I'd start smelling a rat. Male or female.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Rank hypocrisy.
Some are so totally consumed in their conspiratorial thinking that they can easily rationalize such hypocritical nonsense.
riqster
(13,986 posts)"This woman was a KGB/CIA/OSS/Interpol secret agent, seducing the saintly Assange so as to ruin blahblahblahblah".
CTers give me hives.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,454 posts)prosecution for this, and he should have his day in court, but he'd have to take his trick ass back to Sweden for that to ever happen. :applause
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Or the Sandusky case? Or any other *actual* rape case? Because I don't recall seeing you so obsessed with those.
Yet you obsessively post any negative article you find about a man who is wanted for questioning for sex without a condom - and who also, coincidentally published whistleblowers' information about U.S. misdeeds in an illegal war.
Surely your obsession isn't really about Assange being wanted for questioning by Sweden, but is in fact related to the whistleblowing. If you were honest.
It seems that you're on a mission to smear Assange and are attempting to eat away at any support he has among progressives. In fact it's pretty obvious to most people here. So as always, I have to ask - why?
polly7
(20,582 posts)
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)Assange is the only probable rapist it's fashionable to defend on DU, so it's quite right to focus on pointing out that yes, he probably is a rapist, and that the people attacking his probable victims are hypocritical scum.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)And how does the case go from two women wanting Assange to get an STD test to certain people on DU flippantly using the word 'rapist' as if it was fact?
I call bullshit.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)Assange hasn't been convicted of that in a court of law, and clearly should not be imprisoned unless he is, but there are two separate women claiming he did it to them.
That he released US state secrets may be relevant to the motivation of his pursuers, but not to the justice of their cause.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Period.
The whole......"it wasn't rape, rape" nonsense is just bizarre.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,454 posts)And s4p may stop posting about this if Julian will ever return to face his accusers, like all the other cases you cited. Justice has taken it's course in Steubenville, and in the Sandusky case. But Assange seems unwilling, for his own conspiratorial reasons, to face his accusers. Sounds like Julian is all for transparency, unless he's the victim of it.
Nine
(1,741 posts)Holding someone down and trying to penetrate them as they are struggling, as described (according to Rawstory) by Assange's own lawyer is attempted rape in my book.
Initiating sex with a partner who is asleep or unconscious (as Rawstory suggests Assange's own defense concedes to) is actual rape in my book. You cannot consent to such as thing "retroactively."
freshwest
(53,661 posts)BainsBane
(57,757 posts)If only those people do not admire are subject to criminal prosecution, then laws against sexual assault mean nothing.