Björn Hurtig, who is representing Mr Assange in Sweden, said the papers, which form part of the official Swedish investigation, reveal both women had ‘hidden agendas' and lied about being coerced into having sex with Mr Assange, 39.[SNIP]
Mr Hurtig said in an exclusive interview from his Stockholm office: ‘From what I have read, it is clear that the women are lying and that they had an agenda when they went to the police, which had nothing to do with a crime having taken place.
‘It was, I believe, more about jealousy and disappointment on their part. I can prove that at least one of them had very big expectations for something to happen with Julian.'
Julian Assange's rape allegations continued
Sun, 2010-12-12 14:02
#1
Cueball
Julian Assange's rape allegations continued
Sat, 2010-12-11 23:46
#2
Cueball
Research journalist and web-watcher Henk van Ess agrees, "In the last eight years Interpol has never been used to clear up a local sex offence. That raises questions."
Sun, 2010-12-12 00:47
#3
"The strong sense of women’s rights in Sweden means 53 rape allegations are reported per 100,000 people, the highest rate in Europe.
I could be wrong, but I get the sense that the writer sees this as a bad thing. Troublesome things, those women's rights.
Sun, 2010-12-12 01:11
#4
Cueball
Is that you feeling? How do you discern that from simply quoting statistics? Many people have noted that Sweden's broaders definition of what constitutes a rape charge results in more rape charges being laid. In any case. Assange's lawyer is in no way responsible for the context in which his words are placed.
I think it is becoming increasingly clear that the case against Assange is pretty weak, and that is the reason the prosecutor is afraid to bring forward the evidence in a criminal charge, and is instead depending on the European Arrest Warrant, which requires no evidence at all, to harass Assange.
I think the fact that Interpol has not been used in eight years to execute an extradition order on this kind of offense leads me to the conclusion that there is serious political interference in this issue.
What I also find interesting is the fact that while Assange is accused of coercion in 2 instances in a period of 48 hours (something that if true indicates habitual behaviour) there has not been other reports from other victims claiming that Assange coerced them as well. Surely if he did this thing twice in 48 hours, he does it all the time, and there would be someone else stepping forward to confirm this behaviour in support?
Sun, 2010-12-12 01:27
#5
In my opinon, Assange is innocent. The two women are attention seekers. What they are doing is sad and morally degrading.
Sun, 2010-12-12 02:26
#6
How do you discern that from simply quoting statistics?
As I said... my inference could very well be wrong.
But she didn't simply quote statistics. She declared that a "strong sense of women's rights" is the reason for those statistics.
And it comes within the context of a piece which is essentially nothing more than a platform for Assange's lawyer to cast aspersions on the two women, citing secret evidence which he can't reveal. No one else is quoted in the piece (aside from Assange by way of his lawyer), and nothing he states is challenged in any way, including this gem: 'This is not a banana republic,' he said. 'It’s just that when it comes to sex crimes, the police and prosecutors and members of the court seem to lose their ability to think logically.'
Surely if he did this thing twice in 48 hours, he does it all the time, and there would be someone else stepping forward to confirm this behaviour in support?
No, I really don't think that's a reasonable assumption.
Sun, 2010-12-12 02:30
#7
The two women are attention seekers. What they are doing is sad and morally degrading.
In my opinion, statements like this should be accompanied with some pretty unimpeachable evidence, or else they have no place in a pro-feminist forum.
Sun, 2010-12-12 02:31
#8
autoworker
Is that you feeling? How do you discern that from simply quoting statistics? Many people have noted that Sweden's broaders definition of what constitutes a rape charge results in more rape charges being laid. In any case. Assange's lawyer is in no way responsible for the context in which his words are placed.
I think it is becoming increasingly clear that the case against Assange is pretty weak, and that is the reason the prosecutor is afraid to bring forward the evidence in a criminal charge, and is instead depending on the European Arrest Warrant, which requires no evidence at all, to harass Assange.
I think the fact that Interpol has not been used in eight years to execute an extradition order on this kind of offense leads me to the conclusion that there is serious political interference in this issue.
What I also find interesting is the fact that while Assange is accused of coercion in 2 instances in a period of 48 hours (something that if true indicates habitual behaviour) there has not been other reports from other victims claiming that Assange coerced them as well. Surely if he did this thing twice in 48 hours, he does it all the time, and there would be someone else stepping forward to confirm this behaviour in support?
I can understand how a woman, upon discovering that she had had (perhaps unconcsiously) non-consentual, unprotected sex with a reputed philanderer, would somehow feel violated-- especially when she also discovers that another woman had experienced a similar encounter with that same person, within 48 hours, and who feels equally violated.
In the case of Julian Assange, perhaps the Swedish prosecutor is hoping that other women, who may have had similar experiences with our Promethean hero, and can identify with his alleged victims, will come forward (with candor and transparency) in support of the proceedings against him.
Sun, 2010-12-12 08:01
#9
Maysie
In my opinon, Assange is innocent. The two women are attention seekers. What they are doing is sad and morally degrading.
takeitslowly, this is a challenging issue to discuss from a progressive perspective. As a leftist and pro-feminist discussion board, statements like this, which reflect the simplistic mainstream view of this situation, are not okay, unless, as Freedom 55 has noted, there is evidence, which is a whole other slippery slope. Because there rarely is. Complainants of sexual assault allegations are almost always attacked regarding their characters, motivation, and other irrelevant issues. Regardless of the veracity of their complaints. That type of speculation is not okay on babble.
While not perfect, it's best to stick to the established facts that are out there about this particular information.
There are many archived and older threads in the feminist forum on the issue of rape. Check them out.
Sun, 2010-12-12 08:28
#10
I'm finding it very hard to believe that any progressive person would feel ambiguous about the campaign against Assange and Wikileaks because he may have (or may not have) committed sexual assault (or something different). Is it not possible to separate these accusations from the fact that Tom Flanagan and Sara Palin want him dead, and the more moderate factions want him behind bars with his vocal cords removed?
What if I find out he has been charged with paying his employees less than the legal minimum wage and otherwise treating them like dirt. Or that he denied the Holocaust in some letters to friends. Should that change my view of the Wikileaks issue in any way?
Sun, 2010-12-12 09:20
#11
No unionist, it should not. However, a lot of progressive of people seem to falling into a trap (possibly intentionally set) here and are talking about sexual assault and rape in a blame-the-victim manner.
I think the problem is that the accusations are not being separated from the Wikileaks situation. The comments I have read about these two women's motives, sexual assault/rape charges in general are disgusting (and rampant). I have seen this on countless progressive sites. Why can we not just damn the power-that-be, rather than attempts to impugn these women? The statement from Assange lawyer "It's just that when it comes to sex crimes, the police and prosecutors and members of the court seem to lose their ability to think logically." is a general statement on sexual assault/rape cases across the board, and is has nothing to do with Wikileaks or Assange's extremely unique circumstances. Obviously this lawyer (and Assange) have a problem with all of us irrational women who want people tried for sex crimes. Assange's lawyer goes on to say that he "knows" that the women are just angry because they wanted Assange to be their boyfriend or something. That is the oldest most offensive retort to rape charges around! I cannot believe you opened the thread with it.
Cueball, I dont' think this comment is ok either:
What I also find interesting is the fact that while Assange is accused of coercion in 2 instances in a period of 48 hours (something that if true indicates habitual behaviour) there has not been other reports from other victims claiming that Assange coerced them as well. Surely if he did this thing twice in 48 hours, he does it all the time, and there would be someone else stepping forward to confirm this behaviour in support?
It has nothing to do with Wikileaks and does not prove a damn thing! Why would any woman want to come forward with a rape or sexual assault allegation, especially in this situation? Despite all the accusations of these women being attention-seeking, morally degraded and just so angry that they did not "get" Assange, they are being treated and spoken of worse than any alleged rape victim I can remember in the media. If there is another woman out there who claim to have been raped (in the Swedish interpretation), why on Earth would she come forward in this environment?
I find that comment very anti-feminist, Cueball.
Sun, 2010-12-12 09:27
#12
Ghislaine, I fully agree with you about the anti-woman comments being made all over the place.
Sun, 2010-12-12 09:31
#13
Maysie
Ghislaine and Unionist, thank you.
I just read this thread in its entirety.
Cueball, your framing of the question "why haven't more women come forward if it's true" is anti-feminist. Stop it.
This bears repeating:
What if I find out he has been charged with paying his employees less than the legal minimum wage and otherwise treating them like dirt. Or that he denied the Holocaust in some letters to friends. Should that change my view of the Wikileaks issue in any way?
It's possible for someone to do some great, important amazing things, and to also do completely crappy, illegal bullshit things. It is indeed.
Sun, 2010-12-12 10:28
#14
Le T
I argree with Ghislaine and Unionist.
The fact that the attack on wikileaks and the sexual assault case against Assange are continually conflated by the media is a trap. We now have wikileaks supporters attacking women and rape laws and we have a media that usually attacks women and rape laws attacking wikileaks because of the alleged activities of its editor-in-chief.
It's the pragmatic use of "feminism" by the poweful. We saw similar attempts when we were encouraged to murder thousands of people in Afghanistan so that women would be free from oppression. Just like in the case of Afghanistan the media and governments don't really give a fuck about women in Afghanistan (evidenced in the way that they drop bombs on them and kill their children) the poerful dont really give a fuck about the two women in the Assange case, who will no-doubt have their lives ruined by this whole affair.
When was the last time that the personal conduct of an editor-in-chief of a mainstream news source was used to decide if that news source was doing a good job?
Should the National Post have been closed down after Conrad was found guilty?
Sun, 2010-12-12 12:33
#15
Cueball
Ghislaine and Unionist, thank you.
I just read this thread in its entirety.
Cueball, your framing of the question "why haven't more women come forward if it's true" is anti-feminist. Stop it.
This bears repeating:
What if I find out he has been charged with paying his employees less than the legal minimum wage and otherwise treating them like dirt. Or that he denied the Holocaust in some letters to friends. Should that change my view of the Wikileaks issue in any way?It's possible for someone to do some great, important amazing things, and to also do completely crappy, illegal bullshit things. It is indeed.
I think its pretty well established that when people are serial rapists new victims find the courage to come out and testify. Indeed, in the case of Arden, it seems her decision to come out against Assange follows this patern, since she originally only came out to offer moral support for the other woman, and later gave evidence in support of a charge relating to herself.
ALBUQUERQUE, NM {KRQE} - Albuquerque Police claim that a man they arrested for one rape is a serial rapist who may have dozens of victims.They now have evidence linking him to seven attacks on women, and they said that it's crucial that anyone else he may have assaulted contacts them.
Police said Russell Dwayne Ross preyed on the venerable, threatened his victims, and avoided capture for years.
Accused serial rapist's victims sought
Likewise, as we have seen, child victims of pedophiles, such as those victimized by people in authority, such as Priests, don't all come out at once. Usually one person steps forward with the accusssation, and then more follow. Obviously, this is partly to do with the fact that the victims don't know each other, or have no knowledge of what is happening among them, but the fact remains.
So, here we have a case where 2 women have come forward to accuse Julian Assange of rape in a very short period of time. Indeed, he is being charge with serial rape. Serial rapists exhibit habituated behaviour. So, incidents like these are likely to have occurred elsewhere, and the case has gotten substantial international media coverage, so it makes sense that Julian Assange's other victims know of these charges.
I don't think there is anything at all anti-feminist about noting that no one else has come forward to corroborate the fact that Assange is a serial rapist, habituated to coercion.
Of course this proves nothing, because people have legitimate reasons for avoiding the media spotlight, but this is yet another odd exception in this case. Perhaps Assange began his serial rape career in Stockholm.
Sun, 2010-12-12 12:57
#16
As far as I can tell, you are the only person in this thread engaging in the argument about whether Assange is a "serial rapist". People took you up on the complete red herring argument that you made in post #3, namely, that a person who had engaged in "coercion" against two persons in a short period of time would likely have targeted other victims as well. You have now morphed this into a bizarre comparison with sexual pradators.
Not every man who sexually assaults someone is a serial rapist.
Seriously, WTF???
Sun, 2010-12-12 13:14
#17
Actually, the problem with this thread is that it began with a quote from the Daily Mail. 
Is that allowed on babble?
Sun, 2010-12-12 13:33
#18
Cueball
He is alleged to have raped two people in the space of 48 hours. At what point does one become a "serial rapist"?
Sun, 2010-12-12 13:38
#19
I have to say - I disagree with them posting her photo in the article but hopefully this should clear up some of the misinformation being spread.
http://jezebel.com/5710277/assange-accuser-leaves-sweden-may-stop-helping-prosecution
she recently tweeted, "CIA agent, rabid feminist / Muslim lover, a Christian fundamentalist, frigid & fatally in love with a man, can you be all that at the same time ..."
According to the Guardian's account of his extradition bail hearing, the charges are:
1. Forcibly holding Ardin down while having sex with her.
2. Having sex with Ardin without a condom, despite her "express wish" that they use one. This may refer to the broken condom.
3. "Deliberate molestation" of Ardin four days after their first encounter. Crikey says this charge refers to Assange allegedly "pressing his erect penis into the complainant's back."
4. "Improperly exploiting" the fact that "Miss W" was asleep to have condomless sex with her.
Sun, 2010-12-12 14:01
#20
Cueball
I disagree with someone in the Swedish prosecutors office leaking any information at all about the case, before charges were laid. Still waiting for criminal charges and full disclosure of the evidence, so that we can look at the substantive facts, as opposed to feeding the internet gossip factory.
Sun, 2010-12-12 14:07
#21
Catchfire
I've changed the title of the thread to reflect babble policy. We don't blame the victims in rape allegations on a pro-feminist website.
Cueball, I hope it's clear that very few, if any, disagree with your argument when it takes the form of statistics like post #1 ("In the last eight years Interpol has never been used to clear up a local sex offence. That raises questions," etc.) But there has been much said on the misogynist tone and rhetorical strategies used by many defenders of Assange--for example, mocking Sweden's strong rape law, and demonizing two women who made complaints to the police before any of this was taken up by INTERPOL et al. When your allies are the Daily Mail, it's perhaps time to take stock of some of the dynamics at play here.
Sun, 2010-12-12 14:36
#22
Catchfire
My allies comment was a bit glib--obviously I respect and admire your principles, Cueball. My problem was with the way the discussion was framed, and the discourse it was channeling. The thread title was not "INTERPOL had hidden agenda, etc." but the "Victims." That is diversionary and anti-feminist. Do you want to start a thread title with this "quote"?
Ardin is a notorious radical feminist - but in a sense not necessarily known much outside Sweden. Feminism in some circles focuses on how men achieve social dominance through sex. Many of these Swedish radical feminists are militant lesbians who use fabricated stories of sexual harassment in an attempt to 'transform' society.
I got that quote from wlcentral.org. Shall we discuss the case from that point of view?
Sun, 2010-12-12 14:36
#23
Cueball
I thought that Babble was a place where people could have reasonable discussions about the facts, as they are reported without getting smeared by accusations about who their "alliies" are? Using a quoted statement from Assange's Swedish lawyer used in the title of a piece by the Daily Mail, does not make me an ally of the Daily Mail.
Am I accusing people on Babble who suggest that Assange might be guilty of being in alliance with Sarah Palin?
Have I ever even stated that there is no possibility that Assange is guilty, as accused? Nope. In fact, all I have done is point out that the grounds for prosecution seem very weak. That stands regardless of wether he is guilty or not.
Do you understand this point? The point about "reasonable doubt" and it pertinence to law? To argue that there is substantive evidence to suggest that there seems to be very little chance that the prosecution can prove their case beyond a "reasonable doubt", and that the determination to pursue the case despite the appearance that there is serious "reasonable doubt" indicates politicization of the case is not to say that Julian Assange is not guilty.
It is to say that a weak case is being prsecuted for political ends.
More so, I think it is absurd for you to change the thread title, when in fact it is a quote from Julian Assange's lawyer claiming that he has seen documents relating to the official prosecution. It is not in any way shape or form editorializing by the Daily Mail. It is what was said. It is a quote.
The fact that you think it is reasonable to delete quoted statements in the thread title from pertinent figures involved in the case is totally absurd. Your point is that we are not allowed to post statements for the defense, and only those that support the claims of the alleged victims? How is Assange's lawyer supposed to proceed? Say that they are telling the truth?
People do make false accussations. I am sorry that we are not allowed to discuss that possibility, or quote those who are the legal defenders who are asserting that the allegations are false.
Sun, 2010-12-12 14:51
#24
Cueball
I don't really care if anyone is calling Arden anything. We are discussing the issue, here, right now. We can only gain our information from what sources there are. In this case it is the Daily Mail. The thread title was a direct quote from Assange's lawyer saying that he has seen the evidence from the prosecution, and that he believes it indicates that the alleged victims are lying, and had ulterior motives.
What is the problem with posting statements from Assange's lawyers? No where in that statement did he say anything about Arden being a ball-busting radical feminist jihadist, or whatever is being said by others.
In fact the Daily Mail article describes Arden as a "political activist, in her 30's". Get a grip people.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:01
#25
Catchfire
Where did I say you couldn't post statements from Assange' Lawyers? I told you you couldn't start discussions based on whether or not a rape complainant had a "hidden agenda" (actually, the Mail calls her a "rape" complainant, complete with scare quotes). Question the validity of the case, question the hidden agenda of INTERPOL, Sweden, the UK, the US, or whoever. But we are not starting conversations or framing them in and around victim bashing or mocking rape law. I felt the thread title accomplished exactly that, so I changed it. It's no big deal. As you can see, your OP is otherwise unchanged.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:29
#26
Mr. Assange is obviously a very stout character to be able to withstand the controversy involved with his wikileaks. Its a logical assumption that the tenacious alpha male traits needed to leak sensitive information about the actions of the global meddler could also be utilised in an aggressive sexual manner.
Women have to interact with aggressive sexual males constantly, do they not? I assume Sweden's interpretation of sexual assault is intended to offer women protection from unwanted advances. Whether or not Mr. Assange is guilty, both sides are attempting to benefit from political advantage.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:30
#27
Cueball
You just deleted a statement from Assange's lawyer from the thread title. That is how you said I could not post statements from Assange's lawyer. The thread title in no way mocked the Swedish rape law. The thread title was this:
"Victims had hidden agendas ... and I've seen the proof says Julian Assange's lawyer"
It solely deals with the credibility of the witnessess. I am still waiting for you to come up with some other possible defense for Assange, other than the witnessess are lying because they have other motives. But it seems, one is not actually allowed to post the position of the defense, as proposed by Assange's Swedish lawyer, in the ONLY article that carries an interview with the defense lawyer.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:40
#28
Catchfire
Cueball, get a grip. I haven't said a damn thing about Assange's character. Dial back your aggression, and stop taking this so personally.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:42
#29
Cueball
Mr. Assange is obviously a very stout character to be able to withstand the controversy involved with his wikileaks. Its a logical assumption that the tenacious alpha male traits needed to leak sensitive information about the actions of the global meddler could also be utilized in an aggressive sexual manner.
Meanwhile, Catchfire, you and your allies like (Sarah Palin, Whoopi Goldberg) are perfectly free to engage in join the dots pop-psychology like the above in order to deconstruct Assange's failures of character on a regular basis, whereas, far be it from anyone to even post third party speculations on the psychological basis upon which some persons might falsely accuse Assange, because they, as alleged rape victims, can not have their integrity questioned.
Silencing the defense is the primary reason the sexual misconduct has traditionally been used as a device for marginalizing political opponents. Here on Rabble, we see how effective the technique is.
We are not even allowed to post the statements of his lawyer. His lawyer. Not some wacko out in the blogosphere, no his lawyers. statements restricted. Fine, critiwue those statements for content, but squashing them is absurd.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:48
#30
ceti
I don't know what axe -=+=- is grinding, but it is completely undermined by his/her side diatribe against Anonymous/4chan. Come off it, that site is crazy but those kids (mostly kids yes) are acting on their own. And if the idea is that they are wrong to retaliate to what they see as a far reaching power grab over the internet, then I think that is very telling about the opportunistic line of argument that is being used against Wikileaks here.
As for Manning, the situation is complicated by the fact that any acknowledgement of Manning as the source of the leak would get him executed. He of course is the hero if he did leak the information.
But I wanted to add that this thread is a putrid example of the same old path of personal destruction that infects "left" discourse. There are some very big stakes here (perhaps the biggest) that shouldn't be sidetracked, but indeed, that is exactly what the powers that be want, so you focus more on Julian Assange's alleged social failings than the future of freedom.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:51
#31
Cueball
Absolutely. There is nothing in the world, like a rape charge to get people to shut up.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:55
#32
Cueball
Roscoe just did. Speculations on Assange's character flaws are fair game: "tenacious alpha male traits"; "aggressive". But speculations on the character flaws of his accusers, or suggesting that they might have ulterior motives is an assault upon Swedish rape law. Ridiculous.
Even when it is coming from Assange's lawyer who is claiming that he has seen the body of evidence, not merely speculating idly, and with prejudice, about "women" and "radical feminists", none of which he did.
Sun, 2010-12-12 15:57
#33
Mr. Assange is obviously a very stout character to be able to withstand the controversy involved with his wikileaks. Its a logical assumption that the tenacious alpha male traits needed to leak sensitive information about the actions of the global meddler could also be utilised in an aggressive sexual manner.
Women have to interact with aggressive sexual males constantly, do they not? I assume Sweden's interpretation of sexual assault is intended to offer women protection from unwanted advances. Whether or not Mr. Assange is guilty, both sides are attempting to benefit from political advantage.
I'd go more with meglomania coupled with a persecution complex, instead of "alpha male" as a character description of Julian Assange.
His jet-set "rock star" lifestyle appears to have been funded by donations to the unaccountable, untransparent WikiLeaks (which has [i]never[/i] filed a financial statement in its 4 years of existence: who knows how much of its money Assange has spent on himself).
And as for his "alpha male" bravery in facing up to the governments of the world. The actual soldier who was brave enough to make the leak in the first place rots in jail, again while Assange travels the world basking in the glory of the leak (apparently spending the money earmarked to defend the original source on himself).
No "alpha male" here. Though apparently some have been taken in by the projection of this image.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:04
#34
Cueball
Perfect! Thank you. Another great example of completely baseless speculation and charachter assassination being used to vilify Assange on this web site. But of course, no one, but no one is allowed to speculate on the characters of his accusers, since that would be an anti-feminist attack upon Swedish rape law.
In fact, statements from his lawyer claiming that he has actually seen the evidence against Assange, must be deleted post haste.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:04
#35
Speculation about criminal cases before a trial is foolish and not much different than ignorant gossip.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:10
#36
The actual soldier who was brave enough to make the leak in the first place rots in jail, again [b]while Assange travels the world basking in the glory of the leak[/b] (apparently spending the money earmarked to defend the original source on himself).
Emphasis added. Now you're getting carried away by your own rhetoric. Assange is currently in custody in London. When the Swedish government finally got around to issuing an arrest warrant, Assange surrendered himself the same day and has been denied bail. I suspect he's having a hard time spending [i]anyone's[/i] money at the moment.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:12
#37
Cueball
According to Courage to Resist, Wikileaks is actually giving them double what they have collected on Bradley Manning's behalf.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:15
#38
Cueball
What criminal trial? There are no criminal charges. All of this discussion is based on heresay about charges that the Swedish prosecutor seems afraid to lay out. On the other hand, she is happy enough to put out an Interpol warrant for extradition using a legal process that does not require any evidence at all -- the first such case of such a legal device being used for a "local sex charge" in at least eight years.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:16
#39
Mr. Assange is obviously a very stout character to be able to withstand the controversy involved with his wikileaks. Its a logical assumption that the tenacious alpha male traits needed to leak sensitive information about the actions of the global meddler could also be utilized in an aggressive sexual manner.
Meanwhile, Catchfire, you and your allies like (Sarah Palin, Whoopi Goldberg) are perfectly free to engage in join the dots pop-psychology like the above in order to deconstruct Assange's failures of character on a regular basis, whereas, far be it from anyone to even post third party speculations on the psychological basis upon which some persons might falsely accuse Assange, because they, as alleged rape victims, can not have their integrity questioned.
Silencing the defense is the primary reason the sexual misconduct has traditionally been used as a device for marginalizing political opponents. Here on Rabble, we see how effective the technique is.
We are not even allowed to post the statements of his lawyer. His lawyer. Not some wacko out in the blogosphere, no his lawyers. statements restricted. Fine, critiwue those statements for content, but squashing them is absurd.
Mr. Cueball, I am not taking issue with your POV. Denouncing my opinions as "join the dots pop psychology" because you're in a snitfit over the lack of traction your arguments are getting is not helpful. I do not have the skills required to successfully navigate the minefield of feminist discussion and, from the attentions you attract, neither do you.
I believe that it is implausable that a prosecutor who is described as a radical feminist will not take advantage of Mr. Assange's public exposure to furthur her cause. Whether or not he is guilty, the soapbox is presented. Mr. Assange is not reticent to grasp any opportunity presented to furthur his ambitions either.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:16
#40
What criminal trial? There are no criminal charges. All of this discussion is based on heresay about charges that the Swedish prosecutor seems afraid to lay out. On the other hand, she is happy enough to put out an Interpol warrant for extradition using a legal process that does not require any evidence at all -- the first such case of such a legal device being used for a "local sex charge" in eight years.
you're clearly wrong - he surrended to arrest after charges were brought against him.
According to the Guardian's account of his extradition bail hearing, the charges are:
1. Forcibly holding Ardin down while having sex with her.
2. Having sex with Ardin without a condom, despite her "express wish" that they use one. This may refer to the broken condom.
3. "Deliberate molestation" of Ardin four days after their first encounter. Crikey says this charge refers to Assange allegedly "pressing his erect penis into the complainant's back."
4. "Improperly exploiting" the fact that "Miss W" was asleep to have condomless sex with her.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:20
#41
this is the exact quote
The first complainant, a Miss A, said she was the victim of "unlawful coercion" on the night of 14 August in Stockholm. The court heard Assange was alleged to have "forcefully" held her arms and used his bodyweight to hold her down. The second charge alleged he "sexually molested" her by having sex without using a condom, when it was her "express wish" that one should be used.
A third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August.
A fourth charge, relating to a Miss W, alleged that on 17 August, he "improperly exploited" the fact she was asleep to have sex with her without a condom.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:21
#42
OK, I was relating more to the personality traits that influence potential sexual behaviour but your analysis is apt. Megalomaniac wanker it is.Mr. Assange is obviously a very stout character to be able to withstand the controversy involved with his wikileaks. Its a logical assumption that the tenacious alpha male traits needed to leak sensitive information about the actions of the global meddler could also be utilised in an aggressive sexual manner.
Women have to interact with aggressive sexual males constantly, do they not? I assume Sweden's interpretation of sexual assault is intended to offer women protection from unwanted advances. Whether or not Mr. Assange is guilty, both sides are attempting to benefit from political advantage.
I'd go more with meglomania coupled with a persecution complex, instead of "alpha male" as a character description of Julian Assange.
His jet-set "rock star" lifestyle appears to have been funded by donations to the unaccountable, untransparent WikiLeaks (which has [i]never[/i] filed a financial statement in its 4 years of existence: who knows how much of its money Assange has spent on himself).
And as for his "alpha male" bravery in facing up to the governments of the world. The actual soldier who was brave enough to make the leak in the first place rots in jail, again while Assange travels the world basking in the glory of the leak (apparently spending the money earmarked to defend the original source on himself).
No "alpha male" here. Though apparently some have been taken in by the projection of this image.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:29
#43
Perfect! Thank you. Another great example of completely baseless speculation and charachter assassination being used to vilify Assange on this web site. But of course, no one, but no one is allowed to speculate on the characters of his accusers, since that would be an anti-feminist attack upon Swedish rape law.
In fact, statements from his lawyer claiming that he has actually seen the evidence against Assange, must be deleted post haste.
I'll offer to do some due diligence and present an equal level of baseless speculation and character assasination (within the guidelines of babble policy) on Mr. Assange's prosecution. This whole sex crimes circus is a sideshow that detracts from both the seriousness of crimes against women and Wikileaks' exposure of diplomatic malfeasance.
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:41
#44
The actual soldier who was brave enough to make the leak in the first place rots in jail, again [b]while Assange travels the world basking in the glory of the leak[/b] (apparently spending the money earmarked to defend the original source on himself).Emphasis added. Now you're getting carried away by your own rhetoric. Assange is currently in custody in London. When the Swedish government finally got around to issuing an arrest warrant, Assange surrendered himself the same day and has been denied bail. I suspect he's having a hard time spending [i]anyone's[/i] money at the moment.
WikiLeaks started collecting money in Manning's name in June and July of this year. They only promised to turn it over this week after Manning's team went to the media (and the funds still haven't arrived as of Friday).
That gives us a roughly six months during which Assange was free and able to spend (though I'm not sure what his globe-trotting, volunteer-shagging schedule was during that time).
Sun, 2010-12-12 16:42
#45
The best information about what was going on comes from Melbourne barrister James D. Catlin, who acted for Julian Assange in London in October. Of course this is one-sided. However there appears to be nothing to contradict this in the media storm raging in Sweden with statements from the prosecutors or the woman or their lawyer.
The women here are near to and over 30 and have international experience, some of it working in Swedish government embassies. There is no suggestion of drugs nor identity concealment. Far from it. Both women boasted of their celebrity connection to Assange after the events that they would now see him destroyed for.
That further evidence hasn't been confected to make the charges less absurd does Sweden no credit because it has no choice in the matter. The phenomena of social networking through the internet and mobile phones constrains Swedish authorities from augmenting the evidence against Assange because it would look even less credible in the face of tweets by Anna Ardin and SMS texts by Sofia Wilén boasting of their respective conquests after the "crimes".
In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange's honour at her flat after the "crime" and tweeted to her followers that she is with the "the world's coolest smartest people, it's amazing!". Go on the internet and see for yourself. That Ardin has sought unsuccessfully to delete these exculpatory tweets from the public record should be a matter of grave concern. That she has published on the internet a guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends ever graver. The exact content of Wilén's mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilén's nor Ardin's texts complain of rape.
But then neither Arden nor Wilén complained to the police but rather "sought advice", a technique in Sweden enabling citizens to avoid just punishment for making false complaints. They sought advice together, having collaborated and irrevocably tainted each other's evidence beforehand. Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact the Swedish newspaper Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange. They belong to the same political group and attended a public lecture given by Assange and organised by them. You can see Wilén on the YouTube video of the event even now.
http://thestandard.org.nz/marianne-ny-making-an-arse-of-swedish-law/
Sun, 2010-12-12 17:13
#46
Cueball
The actual soldier who was brave enough to make the leak in the first place rots in jail, again [b]while Assange travels the world basking in the glory of the leak[/b] (apparently spending the money earmarked to defend the original source on himself).Emphasis added. Now you're getting carried away by your own rhetoric. Assange is currently in custody in London. When the Swedish government finally got around to issuing an arrest warrant, Assange surrendered himself the same day and has been denied bail. I suspect he's having a hard time spending [i]anyone's[/i] money at the moment.
WikiLeaks started collecting money in Manning's name in June and July of this year. They only promised to turn it over this week after Manning's team went to the media (and the funds still haven't arrived as of Friday).
That gives us a roughly six months during which Assange was free and able to spend (though I'm not sure what his globe-trotting, volunteer-shagging schedule was during that time).
You really seem to have some difficulty with reading comrehension. Yes, Wikileaks was collecting money from the summer, but they didn't promised to hand it over until September, So, your statement is entirely misleading in suggesting that Wikileaks had asbsconded with money for Assange's personal use for 6 months, since Wikileaks is only 2 months late in making payment. Nor, do you account for the fact that Courage to Resist estimates Wikileaks could only have managed to collect $10,000, and they also state that they are expecting $20,000 from Wikileaks.
We have no idea what funds were received by Wikileaks in response to their appeal on Bradley's behalf. If I had to guess, I'd say a few grand--$10k max.
What part of adding and subtracting do you not get? If Wikileaks is giving twice the amount that they have collected on Manning's behalf, how could Assange be galivanting around Europe on Bradley Manning's dime? What is in fact happening is that Wikileaks is giving their own money to the Bradley Manning campaign.
In fact, all of your statements are defamatory concoctions. Indeed, Courage to Resist has made no allegations against Wikileaks on grounds of bad faith. What they did say was this, even though I am sure you will not read it because it doesn't fit in with your defamation campaign:
Mr. Patterson said Wikileaks' failure to pay was "unfortunate", but added: "I attribute it to their fiscal disarray as the world closed in on them. I have spent many years defending military personnel. My concern was that an Icelandic-Australian-Swedish website was never going to be able to provide the defence that was needed for Bradley."
But. You still repeat the same old crap over and over again. Can't read, can't add, what else is wrong with you?
Sun, 2010-12-12 17:27
#47
Cueball
What criminal trial? There are no criminal charges. All of this discussion is based on heresay about charges that the Swedish prosecutor seems afraid to lay out. On the other hand, she is happy enough to put out an Interpol warrant for extradition using a legal process that does not require any evidence at all -- the first such case of such a legal device being used for a "local sex charge" in eight years.
you're clearly wrong - he surrended to arrest after charges were brought against him.
According to the Guardian's account of his extradition bail hearing, the charges are:
1. Forcibly holding Ardin down while having sex with her.
2. Having sex with Ardin without a condom, despite her "express wish" that they use one. This may refer to the broken condom.
3. "Deliberate molestation" of Ardin four days after their first encounter. Crikey says this charge refers to Assange allegedly "pressing his erect penis into the complainant's back."
4. "Improperly exploiting" the fact that "Miss W" was asleep to have condomless sex with her.
No sorry you are wrong. No criminal charges have been brought against Assange. The arrest warrant for Assange was issued merely because the Swedish prosecution wants to question Assange.
The problem is the legel definition of "charge" and the coloquial usage of "charge" among lay persons and the press. The word charge is used interchangeably with "accusation" but it is not the same thing. The Swedish prosecutor has laid no criminal charges against Assange, as has been pointed out numerous times by his lawyers.
Assange faces allegations of rape and molestation in Sweden by two women, though he has not been charged.
Now of course, if charged the prosecutor would have to disclose her evidence, whereas with the Interpol warrant she need not offer any evidence at all in order to have him arrested, and as we see, held without bail.
Sun, 2010-12-12 22:31
#48
Catchfire
By the way, this "rockstar" label on Assange is a completely unsubstantiated smear job. On the contrary, people who actually know Assange (as opposed to journalists and spin doctors who find it makes a very attractive story and neat fit into the propaganda against him) say he is the opposite.
One of the things that should be our starting point ion discussions about the allegations against Assange is that no one knows anything about the case at all. His lawyers can't say, the prosecution won't say, and everything that has been said, has been said in the highly suspect, fickle and hegemonic court of public opinion; which is to say, no court at all.
Mon, 2010-12-13 00:07
#49
Cueball
I am still waiting for you to explain how one is supposed to be able to represent the case for the defense without running afoul with board moderation and being accused of anti-feminist framing and attacking Swedish rape laws, because the defense is impugning the credibility of the witnesses and accusing them of falsifying the facts.
As far as I can tell, any defense at all amounts to an attack upon Swedish rape laws, and in order to pass muster here, the lawyers for the defense have to submit to the allegations as true without being accused of being part of the anti-feminist backlash.
I am also waiting for you to retract your ridiculous assertion that Assange's lawyer mocked Swedish rape laws, and that the original thread title did the same, because of some supposed nefarious association with anti-feminist forces.
Mon, 2010-12-13 00:27
#50
Cueball
"We have heard from the Swedish authorities there has been a secretly empaneled grand jury in Alexandria...just over the river from Washington DC, next to the Pentagon," Stephens said. "They are currently investigating this, and indeed the Swedes we understand have said that if he comes to Sweden, they will defer their interest in him to the Americans. Now that shows some level of collusion and embarrassment, so it does seem to me what we have here is nothing more than holding charges...so ultimately they can get their mitts on him."
Assange Lawyer: U.S. Wants to Get Their "Mitts" on WikiLeaks Founder
Mon, 2010-12-13 01:15
#51
Diogenes
I'm with Cueball on this all the way. What should be a debate on the credibility of the charges and why these action have escalated to the Interpol level has been seriously sidetracked by thin skinned feminists more concerned about political correctness and advancing the cause than any due process or administration of justice. Cueball is being far more diplomatic here then any good lawyer would be in a court defending an alleged rapist. And a fair judge certainly would allow this line of questioning.
If any of these stories are true, especially about broken condoms, collusion of witnesses, and a change of heart where the defendant who is a guest of honor the day after the act is suddenly a rapist 2 days after the act, I have to ask why this is proceeding at all, especially at the Interpol level.
To argue that all of this information might be misinformation and that nothing is really known until it is disclosed in court is being nieve, ignorant, or stupid, I just can't decide which. Do you believe all journalists are just propaganda agents who will just make up anything? Kinda sounds all men are toads talk.
The critics of Cueball here are just as phony as the various governments involved in this very obvious railroad job.