Julian Assange: rapist or not?

[Checkmite]

you count RIAA as an interested party?

Your article explicitly says it was Spanish copyright holders who "repeatedly asked for" that action, not the RIAA.

US agricompanies?

Your article says that action was internally recommended, but it doesn't say anything about it having actually been implemented. Nor are there any independent media reports of terroristic or protest raids on EU biotech seed repositories during the time period mentioned (or any subsequent time).

Maybe less than 'humanitarian groups' (which ones?) but for sure more than official US sources were owning up to... despite actually knowing the number...

Your article says the "new deaths" are an unitemized mixture of caused by US military, caused by foreign troops, caused by Iraqi military and law enforcement, and caused by Iraqi civilian sectarian violence. Until there's some breakdown of numbers that specifies which of those were the responsibility of the US military, I'll say "underwhelmed".

 

[JihadJane]

...but setting that aside, what about my opinion is an appeal to authority, pray tell?

PhantomWolf made an appeal to authority on your behalf. You also, rather bizarrely, wrote:

Based on my experience, I would say we view him as little more than an annoying little attention whore who is constantly jumping up and down shouting, "look at me, look at me, I'm standing up to eeeeeeebil guvmints!!"

Do a lot of intelligence officers talk about eeeeeeebil guvmints in their spare time? If so, their job title should be altered to something more appropriate. Play workers?

The government does not censor the personal opinions of its workers, CE; contrary to what you and many other CTers believe, the US is not a dictatorship.

That's not how government (and press) censorship works in the US. People like yourself are employed because your opinions were deemed acceptable when you were given the job. In other words, they don't have to tell you what to think because you already think like them. Were you to become a whistleblower, however, you would soon discover that the government is very keen to censor your opinions.

The neglect and abuse from the progressive leftists here towards rape victims is horrifying. You shame yourselves.

Regards from Norway

This looks like crude concern trolling.

It also exploits the two women involved (who have not claimed to have been raped by Assange) for the sake of cheap political point scoring. Shame on you, eirik!

 

[uke2se]

PhantomWolf made an appeal to authority on your behalf. You also, rather bizarrely, wrote:

No he didn't. He simply stated that Sabrina's opinion counts higher than yours, which is true.

Do a lot of intelligence officers talk about eeeeeeebil guvmints in their spare time? If so, their job title should be altered to something more appropriate. Play workers?

Probably just those dealing with conspiratards in their spare time.

That's not how government (and press) censorship works in the US. People like yourself are employed because your opinions were deemed acceptable when you were given the job. In other words, they don't have to tell you what to think because you already think like them. Were you to become a whistleblower, however, you would soon discover that the government is very keen to censor your opinions.

The arrogance of you telling Sabrina what her employment situation is like, and how things work were she works is astounding.

This looks like crude concern trolling.

It's not. It's true.

It also exploits the two women involved (who have not claimed to have been raped by Assange) for the sake of cheap political point scoring. Shame on you, eirik!

Sure they have. They described what happened. What happened counts as rape. Ergo, they have claimed to have been raped by Assange.

 

[BenBurch]

Ecuadore has offered to make a deal with Sweden. If they guarantee he won't be turned over to the USA, then he will go to Sweden.

And we know that Sweden literally cannot make any such guarantee.

 

[uke2se]

And we know that Sweden literally cannot make any such guarantee.

Well, they could, but that would be a dictatorial move from them. No wonder all our Putin-lovers think it's reasonable.

 

[BenBurch]

Well, they could, but that would be a dictatorial move from them. No wonder all our Putin-lovers think it's reasonable.

Does the government have the power to make a guarantee and have it stick? In the USA, if we have a treaty, it is law.

 

[Korren]

The hatred from the US commentators here towards him is palpable. Just sayin.

"US commentators"? You don't think you might have suffered a bout of selection bias there?

 

[Korren]

Does the government have the power to make a guarantee and have it stick?

Well, technically I suppose the Swedish government could terminate their extradition treaty with the USA and thus make it possible to extend the guarantee, but realistically, no.

 

[uke2se]

Does the government have the power to make a guarantee and have it stick? In the USA, if we have a treaty, it is law.

No, they are not allowed by law to override the judiciary system. That's why I called it a dictatorial move.

 

[eirik]

It also exploits the two women involved (who have not claimed to have been raped by Assange) for the sake of cheap political point scoring. Shame on you, eirik!

Uh, off course they have claimed to have been raped. What a strange thing to say. I guess you must be living and breathing in the chomskyite blogosphere, where no information or reason can penetrate unless it suits your radical political leanings.

Second, I'm talking about a rape case, as should you. You and the Assange acolytes are the one making it into a grand political conspiracy. You are shaming the political left by going after rape victims, so there are really no political points left to be made.

 

[JihadJane]

Uh, off course they have claimed to have been raped. What a strange thing to say. I guess you must be living and breathing in the chomskyite blogosphere, where no information or reason can penetrate unless it suits your radical political leanings.

Neither woman has claimed to have been raped. Check your facts.

Second, I'm talking about a rape case, as should you. You and the Assange acolytes are the one making it into a grand political conspiracy. You are shaming the political left by going after rape victims, so there are really no political points left to be made.

Here is a letter about this casehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-rape-allegations-freedom-of-speech?INTCMP=SRCH to the UK newspaper, The Guardian, from Katrin Axelsson, Women Against Rape:

Many women in both Sweden and Britain will wonder at the unusual zeal with which Julian Assange is being pursued for rape allegations (Report, 8 December). Women in Sweden don't fare better than we do in Britain when it comes to rape. Though Sweden has the highest per capita number of reported rapes in Europe and these have quadrupled in the last 20 years, conviction rates have decreased. On 23 April 2010 Carina Hägg and Nalin Pekgul (respectively MP and chairwoman of Social Democratic Women in Sweden) wrote in the Göteborgs-Posten that "up to 90% of all reported rapes never get to court. In 2006 six people were convicted of rape though almost 4,000 people were reported". They endorsed Amnesty International's call for an independent inquiry to examine the rape cases that had been closed and the quality of the original investigations.

Assange, who it seems has no criminal convictions, was refused bail in England despite sureties of more than £120,000. Yet bail following rape allegations is routine. For two years we have been supporting a woman who suffered rape and domestic violence from a man previously convicted after attempting to murder an ex-partner and her children – he was granted bail while police investigated.

There is a long tradition of the use of rape and sexual assault for political agendas that have nothing to do with women's safety. In the south of the US, the lynching of black men was often justified on grounds that they had raped or even looked at a white woman. Women don't take kindly to our demand for safety being misused, while rape continues to be neglected at best or protected at worst.

 

[BenBurch]

LOL!

 

[a_unique_person]

And we know that Sweden literally cannot make any such guarantee.

Why not? Extradition is entirely up to the country. If Sweden does make that guarantee, then he has no excuse to not go there.

 

[a_unique_person]

If the US wanted him I'm sure they could come up with a charge and a request for extradition the UK would have been happy to help with, the notion that deporting him to Sweden is some devious plot is just bizarre.

The whole case is bizarre. The amount of time, money and effort put into one man for what is, in the global scheme of things, a relatively minor matter, is truly bizarre. Other people in similar situations have been 'interviewed' remotely, or by Swedish officers going to the other country where they live.

* I am not downplaying the seriousness of rape allegations, I am saying that even in the case of a lower level sexual assault such as this, I do not believe that such measures would be resorted to by the Swedes or the GB authorities to extradite the person in question.

 

[theprestige]

Why not? Extradition is entirely up to the country. If Sweden does make that guarantee, then he has no excuse to not go there.

Assange already has no excuse to not go there.

This request is essentially a request that Sweden conduct an exhaustive investigation of Assange's entire history, and conclude beyond reasonable doubt that there is no possible valid reason why the US might request his extradition in the future--that if the US were to request his extradition tomorrow, the Swedish government could be confident that there is no evidence or reasoning the US could conceivably provide, that would justify his extradition.

It's ludicrous on it's face, and that's without even considering that Sweden would have to prove a negative.

You haven't actually thought it through, have you?

 

[Korren]

Why not? Extradition is entirely up to the country. If Sweden does make that guarantee, then he has no excuse to not go there.

Because extradition is processed by the courts, not the government (regjering).

The courts are not allowed to make any such guarantees -- they have to obey the law and are not allowed to make their decisions based on what's political convenient.

The government does not have the power to overrule or dictate court decisions. Neither does it have the power to pass legislation.

Checks and balances. Sweden has them.

 

[barium]

Neither woman has claimed to have been raped. Check your facts.

I've only read this in very old news articles from back when the main source was Assanges attorneys. Later articles using the womens attorney as a source seems to contradict this.

Here is a letter about this casehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-rape-allegations-freedom-of-speech?INTCMP=SRCH to the UK newspaper, The Guardian, from Katrin Axelsson, Women Against Rape:

According to statistics from The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, 226 persons were convicted of rape in 2006. From six claimed in the article. Close enough I guess?

 

[Korren]

The whole case is bizarre. The amount of time, money and effort put into one man for what is, in the global scheme of things, a relatively minor matter, is truly bizarre. Other people in similar situations have been 'interviewed' remotely, or by Swedish officers going to the other country where they live.

I think you're overestimating the amount of time and money Sweden has spent on this. It's the UK which has had to cover most of the cost for Assange's legal effort thus far.

 

[eirik]

I've only read this in very old news articles from back when the main source was Assanges attorneys. Later articles using the womens attorney as a source seems to contradict this.



According to statistics from The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, 226 persons were convicted of rape in 2006. From six claimed in the article. Close enough I guess?

But it's in swedish. Then it's ok to lie about it, no one will ever know..

 

[uke2se]

Neither woman has claimed to have been raped. Check your facts.

In fact, they both did. Check your facts, or rather, your logic.

Here is a letter about this casehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-rape-allegations-freedom-of-speech?INTCMP=SRCH to the UK newspaper, The Guardian, from Katrin Axelsson, Women Against Rape:

That has nothing to do with the post you quoted.