Julian Assange, wikileaks and these rape claims

[sherby]

I have just read the basis of the two rape claims against him.

How is it possible to issue a warrant for rape charges against him? Even going by the womens statements it isn't rape, there is no 'non-consensual' sex.

Am I missing something here or does it stink to high heaven?

I'm tempted to shoot the guy myself, just to give the conspiracy theorists a field day.

Then when the web crashes under the weight of traffic on "they-are-watching-you.com" I can pop up and say "wasnt the CIA. It was me. I was just bored of it dominating SKy News when I was hoping for a bit of Ashes coverage"

is this all theatre? Assange vs the State? What person would really do all this? Is this something out of a Batman script? Is the Joker involved?

Did anyone see the interview with the ex US Attorney General on Newsnight last night?

It was very interesting. It appeared to me that the Swedish allegations are indeed very convenient with regards to holding Assange. That's not say that the rape allegations are unfounded of course.

However, it does make me wonder whether or not these women would ever have had their case heard without the wikileaks connection.

Newsnight. The interview is about 9 minutes in.

Wubbly - interesting - thanks.

If it looks like shit and it smells like shit then it is shit

the problem is wikileaks has done nothing illegal (however you feel morally about their position) so he has to be neutered in another way, and this it a very effective way of doing just that.

It is extraordinary how blatant this is but there it is, the arrogance of a state beyond reproach - Wikileaks has, as far as Governments are concerned, compromised their security so you can bet your arse that noone will leap to his defence.

I am fucking shocked and outraged by this.

OK here's why I would not be that surprised to find out that Assange is a rapist.
To set up and run something like WIkileaks is the act of an arrogant and self-righteous individual. There isn't anything inherently wrong in being arrogant and self-righteous, sometimes people like this are very necessary to get important things done, bust the powerful, help the oppressed etc - and not all arrogant, self-righteous individuals are rapists.
However, there could be a tendency on behalf of a person like this to regard himself and his wishes as more important than anyone else and (given the raging sexism and misogyny that's common in leftwing men) particularly women, particularly 'uppity' women who might dare to disagree with the Sacred Noble Revolutionary Man or not take him as seriously as he takes himself) therefore decide that if he wants sex he's going to have sex, and not bother to treat the woman well eg ask her if she wants sex.

There's also the misogyistic monogamist sneering at the victims - that they conspired to accuse him of rape because they were jealous that he'd fucked them both - when it is actually rather more likely (particularly as these seem to have been feminist, leftwing activists rather than adolescents) that they got talking and discovered that he had raped them both and thought that if they both complained to the police, they might be taken more seriously than if only one of them did - one of the way rapists get outed is when women compare their experiences and realise that what happened to them was not their fault.

PLease note everyone (including lawyers) that I do not know any of the individuals involved and this is pure speculation.
But is it any worse than the speculation about the rape victims - that they are spiteful jealous liars in the pay of the government?

sgb you are magnificent

it would appear that people now think a reason women report rape (in addition to spite, boredom, shame) is because they are government shills who hate free speech

all obviously far more plausible reasons than 'because they were raped'

Read in the Times today that Woman A was/is employed by the Swedish Diplomatic service. To me at least, this lends weight to the theory that JA is being deliberately discredited.

Anybody remember or heard of Colin Wallace - British Intelligence Officer framed for murder back in the 70's. He was cleared of the charge which arose after he was thought to be leaking classified information to the press. Paul Foot wrote a book about it.

Luckily for assange courts really really really hate convicting anyone of rape

I am sure it will work out just fine for him

It's certainly very possible for a person to do both good things and bad (there have been threads before about finding out that one's favourite authors/artists/musicians/revolutionarys were variously guilty of theft, assault, rape, racism, sectarianism, homophobia and, for all I know, sex with farm animals). So what is probably closest to the truth in this case is that Assange is the sort of GoodGuy Rapist who doesn;t think of it as rape (who, after all, would spurn his mighty cock? Only a mad lying bitch...) but if it wasn't for the fact that various state agencies want to shut him up, the victims would have been told that there wasn't enough evidence to bring a case, sorry.

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty or is this not the case when it comes to rape allegations?

Claig, he's getting his money from supporters and donations. I suspect lawyers are lining up to represent him as this is such a high profile case where he may not have even broken any laws.

JA is now the victim, behind bars, waiting for something (a bit dubious??) to happen ... well done, there is no better way to win over the public! Has he just been tranformed into the hero? Excellent plot progression.

All the big players are shutting him out (Paypal, Amazon, Visa, Mastercard, etc.) because, umm, perhaps governments telling them to?). Governments, officials are being embarrassed in a facebooky sort of way. Goliath is looking wobbly.

I'm curious, does anyone think there is a smoking gun in the leaks? I'm starting to think the wimpy, witty and annoying kid with the big mouth got one up on the bully.

I'm enjoying this drama.

go SGB.

how about this: he is a dude from Wikileaks (npt the only dude) - and he happens to have an outstanding rape charge against him.

people who are plitically involved are not exempt from being twats, it would be naive to think so.

That US Attorney guy did actually refer to the rape accusations as 'less serious charges', although he did go on to correct himself later in the interview.

Less serious than what actually? What other crime is he supposed to have committed? I honestly think that if the US thought they could persue an extradition, they would be doing it and you can bet that the 'less serious charges' would be dropped in a second.

wubblybubbly- not necessarily- if the US wanted to extradite him for something which carried the death penalty they would be unable to do so because the EU will not extradite if that is a possibility and apparently treason and espionage are capital ofences

Daisy: If people can speculate that the victims are liars and government stooges etc, what's wrong with speculating as to whether the accused is guilty?

Sorry, that should have been 'alleged victims' as I said 'accused' rather than 'rapist'.
He is innocent until proven guilty, are his accusers automatially liars until proven otherwise? or is it not reasonable to assume, equally, that they are telling the truth unless proven liars given that we don't know.
If someone reports they have been robbed or beaten and the person who is accused of doing it is innocent until proven guilty, that doesn't mean that everyone gets busy blaming the victims and saying they must be making it up for insurance purposes or whatever. Even though it is possible that they might be lying for any number of reasons.

So, does anyone know if the Swedish state is upright and noble and has no truck with extraordinary rendition and helping out the US when they want to do something a bit dodgy?

Taleb and similar gurus tell is that we are now in a "bottom up" society and everything has changed and the State is no longer in control of info. Yeah right, pull the other one it's got bells on.

How does Assange get so much media time and interviews with Kirsty Wark? How come they don't interview the rest of wikileaks? They are pretending that Assange is some sort of champion of freedom, a knight against the State. All the big lawyers are queing up to help. Jemima appears and gives support. Pulling the wool?

Here's what I think is happening

Assange has pissed off a lot of people with his Wikileaks, because even though a lot of it is "no shit Sherlock", it could have unleashed a diplomatic nightmare that makes the Cuban crisis look like a playground spat.

Special forces of some countries (I have no idea which ones) have come across this rape charge and decided to resurrect it, despite the fact that in ordinary circumstances, they prob would have dropped it because chances of getting a conviction are low.

Even though they may not get a conviction, they will put some pressure on him and keep him out of circulation till they work out what to do about wikileaks. Plus mud sticks,so the champion of democracy suddenly aint looking so great.

I really dont think it's more complex than that.