This Assange business definitely uncovers certain peoples' priorities

[Dreamer Tatum]

Tweaking the US MIC not only makes him a "hero," but it also either absolves him of rape, entitles him to rape, or renders allegations of rape utterly meritless, and, in the process, entitles anyone skeptical of such allegations to any and all evidence of rape before admitting the mere possibility of rape.

Wow.

[The Magistrate]

1. Or, Sir, People May Simply have Kept themselves Informed, and Drawn Conclusions You Do Not Like

Your text for this short sermon could easily be turned against you....

"This Assange business definitely uncovers certain people's priorities. Acting against the US MIC not only makes him a rogue, but means any charge or slander against him should be treated as gospel fact, and in the process entitles anyone who believes such allegations to posture as one on the side of the angels rather than as someone shilling for government secrecy and the treating of journalism as espionage."

[Dreamer Tatum]

3. So much for erring on the side of the alleged rape victim

Next time a Republican is accused of rape, maybe he'll invoke the Assange Rule and
we (including you) will rally to his defense. Sir.

[The Magistrate]

7. Your Problem, Sir, Remains: You Claim People Are Not Examining Evidence And Drawing Conclusions

The fact that you do not like the conclusions does not make them wrong, unless you are claiming for yourself authoritative status of a degree that would make a Pope blush at the effrontery of the pretense.

But it would be interesting to watch you try and apply your claimed standard to a real case: there is one in Utah, at present, if recollection serves. Look into it, and get back to us with you try at the mirror game....

[Dreamer Tatum]

26. The fact that they are drawing conclusions based on politics is wrong.

As someone said downthread, accusations against Herman Cain were absolutely airtight and he belonged behind bars.

Accusations against Assange? Well, now, hang on. That man did something I LIKE. If he did something I LIKE, then how
credible can rape accusations be?

Sir.

[The Magistrate]

48. Again, Sir: They Are Drawing Conclusions You Do Not Like, Which Does Not Make them Wrong

You are yourself pressing a political point or two in your posts here, and would resent, doubtless, people stating that your conclusions in this matter simply followed your views, of other forum members or of the matter itself.

There is little point in going into your poor attempt to draw a false equivalency, as the circumstances and the charges were of very different character, were not alleged to be criminal, and did not eventuate in a man-hunt with some distinctly unusual features against a person there is no doubt whatever the United States regards as an enemy of the state, and is preparing criminal charges of great gravity against, charges that have nothing to do with sexual misconduct allegations.

[Dreamer Tatum]

50. As I said below, "sir," I give in. Anyone as great as Assange

has as much action coming to him as possible. Why, I'd offer my own backside to him if he would construe it as
thanks for his towering achievements.

[The Magistrate]

55. There Are More Dignified ways, Sir, To Own Up To Having lost The Point

You started out with a silly post, and carried on with posts getting sillier and sillier by the round....

[Dreamer Tatum]

59. I haven't lost any point. You've obscured it.

Since I cannot bear any more of your pompous "sirs," I'll leave you to polish the silver.

[The Magistrate]

64. Try Again Any Time, Sweet-Heart....

"My god, man, slap yourself and think!"

[Aerows]

136. Argument lost

You most certainly did not win that one.

[hifiguy]

166. You've been pwned and smacked down

about as thoroughly as possible. Time to fold the tents and decamp.

[tsuki]

144. Hear, Hear. nt

[HiPointDem]

11. i really hate how the establishment pushes a right-leaning agenda under the cover of women's/

minority issues.

Selling privatization of education as "civil rights"

Selling war and conquest as "women's rights"

Selling the security/surveillance state as "women's rights"

[leveymg]

54. Like humanitarian war, it's another failed, transparent attempt to reclaim the moral high ground

while getting rid of their enemies.

It's particularly appalling because it tries to make all well-intended people accessories. Worse than simple deception, like the Iraq WMD lies.

[HiPointDem]

56. "make well-intended people allies" = the most disgusting aspect. including the corollary, painting

opponents of the real goal (war, conquest, privatization) as chauvinists, racists, opponents of women, minorities, etc

disgusting, and an often-used tactic here.

[leveymg]

70. There's a smarmy quality to this charade. Smug, self-satisfied, Puritanical yet sleazy

[HiPointDem]

75. "puritanical yet sleazy" = yes. but the puritanism is fake, only the political sleaziness is real.

[kenny blankenship]

77. I disagree that people like Dreamer Tatum are "well intentioned"

I see no evidence of that.

What we have here is a Dollar General Lavrenti Beria, swinging its truncheon to enforce the cult of personality.

[Octafish]

169. A 'Dollar General Lavrenti Beria'

Are you equally interested in the Joe Kennedy/Nazi links?



No one names their kid "Lavrenti" anymore.

[riderinthestorm]

58. [phone]. nt

[hifiguy]

20. Well said, good sir.

[2pooped2pop]

76. Way to go. Good answer. n/t

[DirkGently]

149. Bingo. (nt)

[liberallibral]

2. I agree with Dreamer Tatum...

[Lionessa]

138. So you think a broken condom during consensual sex is rape?

And worthy of the risk of being renditioned/extradited to the US?

No matter how you spell or misspell it, I question your handle. Sound like a conservadem to me.

[Downwinder]

4. US nationals taking refuge in the Embassy

is OK.

An Archbishop taking refuge in an Embassy is OK.

Assange taking refuge in an Embassy is not OK?

[Dreamer Tatum]

5. He can hide under a pile of my dirty drawers if he wants.

Doesn't alter my thesis, which is that so long as you tweak the US MIC, some people will
dismiss the possibility that you might just be a filthy fucking rapist.

[truebrit71]

9. "filthy fucking rapist" careful...your bias is showing...

...

[Dreamer Tatum]

29. Gosh, sorry: he might be a FINE, UPSTANDING rapist. nt

[2pooped2pop]

94. and he might not be any kind of rapist

just saying

[Dreamer Tatum]

100. stipulated nt

[truebrit71]

125. Or he might not be a rapist at all...especially when you consider Sweden's sweeping definition...

...of that crime...

But by all means don't let that stop me from your hate-fest..

[HiPointDem]

12. gosh he's a "filthy fucking rapist" but he hasn't even been charged. yes, some people's

agenda's certainly do show.

[Dreamer Tatum]

28. I didn't say he was. I said he might be.

But we'll never know, because he'll never stand trial.

[frylock]

65. and you just "might" have an "agenda" yourself

[2pooped2pop]

90. gots to say that it kind of sounds like you

may be so pro womens rights that you see nothing else. If there is nothing about this story that seems amiss to you, then you need to take off your women's rights blinders and see the rest of the story.

Something is not right. Something more than an alleged rape is going on here.

[Quantess]

104. Dreamer Tatum is a staunch feminst, like, all the time!

That is the one thing Dreamer Tatum is famous for, for being pro womens rights. Yep. Affectionately known as "Dreamer Feminazi Tatum".

Just kidding, not really. Dreamer Tatum is generally pretty uninterested in things like sexual assault.

[2pooped2pop]

114. would not have guessed it by the way

Dreamer seems to demand that we all quit defending the lousy rapist.

Just one of the righteous police on DU then?

[Quantess]

122. All I will say is,

the rape accusation is just a cover for the true intentions. It is not the real reason why anyone wants Assange taken into custody. In my humble opinion, Dreamer Tatum is being just as disingenuous as the Swedish and American governments.

[2pooped2pop]

127. I agree the rape accusation is

most likely just a good excuse to get to him.

[HERVEPA]

105. You might be also? Neither of you have been charged.

[treestar]

91. This one makes no sense

If he's "never been charged" then why is he afraid to go to Sweden?

And if he did something so righteous by the US, why isn't he willing to face the consequences? True heroes do that.

[HiPointDem]

101. right, that's the ticket. it's really amusing to see all you folks twist yourselves up trying to

turn black into white.

assange's no hero -- that doesn't mean the uk & the us are either.

[randome]

103. Absolutely right.

But for this to be an international conspiracy to 'get' Assange because he 'proved' diplomats are sometimes untrustworthy, the following players need to be in synch:

U.K. government
U.S. government
Swedish government
Australia
Interpol
Swedish prosecutors
The 2 Swedish women
The entire U.K. appeals process that lasted 2 years.

Whatever assumptions any of us made, it seems more plausible that Assange is simply trying to hide from further questioning and an STD test.

[treestar]

152. Yep

That Julian rates a conspiracy of all those people! Why he practically brought the US down!

If we are so hot to get a hold of him and persecute him, why haven't we done it already is the question. We only want to persecute him if he comes from Sweden?

[Comrade Grumpy]

15. Well, you've certainly proven your point...

...although not in the way you think.

[hifiguy]

21. Well, we now where you stand on due process

and "innocent til proven guilty." You just outed yourself.

[Dreamer Tatum]

32. Due process is waiting for him.

If he ever stops hiding behind Ecuador's skirt.

[girl gone mad]

40. Sorry your attempts to smear Assange are failing so badly.

Next time, DietPepsi, try finding some women who didn't brag about banging him the day after they were "raped".

[Dreamer Tatum]

43. Chuckle. Yeah, I'm *trying* to smear Assange.

You caught me.

OK, I give - those whores got whatever they had coming to them, and that hero Assange drove it home reaaaaal nice.
If anything untoward happened, those whores asked for it.

Now that I've given in completely, let's crucify a common political enemy based on innuendo alone.

[2pooped2pop]

97. I haven't seen anyone saying anything nearly like that at all

except maybe you.

[EOTE]

119. When all you've got is ridiculous strawmen, you've lost the argument entirely.

Your lack of merit comes from the fact that you need to make up every single argument you attempt to tear down. What you've said has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that some of these rape charges have come from women who have bragged about the encounter on social media. But your argument seems to be par for the course in terms of the MIC apologists I've seen around here lately.

[movonne]

41. That's really going too far..how do you know he is

a rapist...if I remember right one of the girls changed her story...I'm not sure of this but the other girl dropped the charges...you are acting like he has already been convicted...he said he would go to Sweden if they would not send him to the US but they would not agree to that...

[Dreamer Tatum]

44. I didn't say he was. I said he might be.

Reading comprehension - look into it.

[frylock]

67. you might be one yourself..

who is to say.

[Dreamer Tatum]

71. If I'm accused, I'd stand trial.

I can't hide in an embassy.

[frylock]

79. none of the women involved has accused him..

in fact, they bragged of their involvment with assange over social media directly after the "rapes." what else you got?

[2pooped2pop]

80. I think the problem is

the credibility of the witness. She slept with him. But by morning, even still in the same bed, things changed? Asleep? Come on now. Passed out maybe but there is no way she did not awaken. Complaint that he pushed his naked penis against her? Perhaps that's where you left it when you fell into your deep slumber eh? And then once awake, it wasn't "get out of me you pig", but "you're not wearing a condom, you pig?"

And none of it has anything to do with wikileaks? Right?

Just a little off and certainly not like any rape I have heard of. Something is just not ringing the truth.

Of course I admit I could be wrong. I'm one of those people who think we haven't heard the truth about 9/11 either.

[LanternWaste]

85. I imagine your own biases are much more righteous t

I imagine your own biases are much more righteous than the biases of those who do not share your positions.

[2pooped2pop]

86. and some will call you a filthy fucking rapist

without being personally aware of the facts, it would seem. Seems some are puritans only in regards to what others do, not what they themselves do.

[2pooped2pop]

99. exactly!

more than just a rape accusation going on here.

[truebrit71]

6. Wow you should have been in the Olympics with leaps of logic like that...

...It certainly separates the 'L&O' crowd from those that see the bigger picture at work here..

[morningfog]

8. I love to see the list of individuals who have had international arrest warrants

issued against them solely for questioning regarding allegations.

He hasn't been charged. He is wanted for questioning in sexual assault. I certainly don't absolve him of anything. I also don't consider him guilty before he has even been charged, based only on accusations.

I think what is more telling is the lengths that multiple governments are going through to get an someone wanted only for questioning at this point. Of course, we all know that this is just to get a hold of him in order to charge him in connection to wikileaks.

[The Magistrate]

13. Someone In the Libyan Embassy, Years Ago, Sir, Shot From the Building And Killed A Police Officer

The shooter was known, and not only was the embassy never threatened with entry to arrest him, the shooter was escorted to depart the country for his homeland.

The behavior of the English government in this matter is so out of the ordinary that one is almost required to conclude there is some extraordinary cause behind it, which the ostensible charges against the man form no part of, save that they provide some poor pretext for action.

[Odin2005]

10. Anna Ardin denied that she was raped and is against Assange being charged.

[randome]

33. She did not deny it. She said she didn't want him charged with rape.

That's not the same thing. The main point for Sweden is to test Assange for STDs.

[xchrom]

14. shit is getting unhinged

it's just coincidence that he tweeks the MIC and gets {and he isn't charged with rape, you just want him to be} rapped with something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority

On 1 September 2010, Swedish Director of Public Prosecution Marianne Ny decided to resume the preliminary investigation concerning all of the original allegations. [16]
On 18 August 2010, Assange applied for a work and residence permit in Sweden.[17][18] On 18 October 2010, his request was denied.[18][17][19] He left Sweden on 27 September 2010[20]. The Swedish authorities have asserted that this is the same day that they notified Assange's lawyer of his imminent arrest[21].
On 18 November 2010, prosecutor Marianne Ny asked the local district court for a warrant for the arrest of Assange in order for him to be interviewed by the prosecutor.[22] As he was now living in England, the court ordered him detained (häktad) in absentia.[23][24] On appeal, the Svea Court of Appeal upheld the warrant on suspicion of rape, olaga tvång (duress/unlawful coercion), and two cases of sexuellt ofredande,[25][26][27][28] which has been variously translated as "sexual molestation",[29] "sexual assault",[30] "sexual misconduct", "sexual annoyance", "sexual unfreedom", "sexual misdemeanour", and "sexual harassment".[31][32][19][26][27] The Supreme Court of Sweden decided not to consider a further appeal as no principle was at stake.[citation needed][33] On 6 December 2010, Scotland Yard notified Assange that a valid European arrest warrant had been received.[34]
Assange has not yet been formally charged with any offence;[35] the prosecutor said that, in accordance with the Swedish legal system, formal charges will be laid only after extradition and a second round of questioning. The High Court found that the Swedish process has reached the stage of criminal proceedings, which would be equivalent to having been charged under English process[36].


http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4390050

Here are some facts:
1. Neither woman has stated Assange raped her.
2. Assange has not been charged with rape.
Here are some lies:
1. The women state that Assange raped them.
2. Assange has been charged with rape.
Here is the transcript of the interview referenced in the Naomi Wolf attack article that you have cited.
http://www.democracynow.org/seo/2010/12/20/naomi_wolf_vs_jac...
reply

[Marr]

16. Or, alternatively, "tweaking the US MIC" makes him guilty of rape until proven innocent.

You can play this cute little game both ways.

[treestar]

98. No you can't - that is not our legal standard and probably not Sweden's

It amazes me how worship of this guy blinds people. Even if he were brought to the big evil US, he'd get a trial for whatever he was accused of. And why hasn't the US done so already? Nothing stops it. It's not necessary that he be in Sweden rather than Britain.

This idiot is an attention prostitute of the worst kind. Paints himself as victim as many ways as he can figure out.

All he has to do is face the music.

Ellsberg went through the legal system.

[backscatter712]

17. That's right, he's guilty until proven innocent!

I mean, of course the UK would threaten an international incident by storming and violating the sovereignty of a foreign nation's embassy if all it was was a date rape charge!

In order to be properly feminist, we must absolutely dismiss the possibility that the whole date-rape thing was fabricated from whole cloth, with little evidence to back the allegations beyond "he-said-she-said." Otherwise, that demonstrates that we all hate women, right?

They'd let Pinochet be wined and dined for years under UK protection, but god forbid Assange ask for protection of his rights - that demands military action!

[Enrique]

18. you might care about the rape accusations

but that isn't what is motivating the governments.

[vaberella]

19. I don't agree with everything you say, but...

I notice that people choose the people they protect. When Hermain Cane was accused for sexual harassment everyone sided with the women. Assange is accused of rape---and he's defended and the rape victim is accused of lying.

[randome]

23. We all have biases, it's true.

Some work harder to remain objective but we can't completely escape what makes us who we are.

[riderinthestorm]

34. Except the women themselves aren't calling it "rape", nor did they want to press charges

[treestar]

92. Then let him go to Sweden

And deal with these non charges.

[riderinthestorm]

109. Sweden just has to agree to NOT extradite Assange to the US

And he'll go.

Since Sweden refuses, its pretty clear this isn't about these charges since if they really wanted to get to the bottom of these charges so badly, agreeing to this condition would be a no-brainer. Its about someone else's agenda (the US of course and Wikileaks) .

Furthermore, Sweden's exposure as our ally in CIA rendition indicates to me that they can't be trusted to be fair and impartial with this case (since Wikileaks exposed that too.)

[treestar]

151. Still, why demand that concession?

The US can extradite him any time right now and the whole time he was in the UK - makes no difference. He has no legal right to that concession from Sweden.

[riderinthestorm]

155. Why not?

Regardless, since Sweden's the one who believes they need him in Sweden for questioning and a blood test, it seem the legal route would necessarily go through there which is how its playing out.

[2pooped2pop]

106. didn't the rape victim admit to lying?

and with Cain, the people were crawling out of the wood work. It became less of a case of sexual harassment and more of case of an environment of sexual harassment. As though it was the standard and not the exception to the rule.

[ljm2002]

22. Yes it does reveal some people's priorities...

...some people seem to think that if an accusation is made against someone they dislike, then it must be true.

To many people here at DU, Assange is a "traitor to the US" even though he is not a citizen of the US. He is "guilty of espionage" even though he did not make any leaks himself, as he was in no position to do so. He is a "common criminal" even though he has not yet been charged with any crime. He obviously does not deserve the benefit of the doubt -- hey, he's not a US citizen so that doesn't apply anyway (note, however, this fact can be conveniently ignored when it comes to accusations of treason). The US is not after him because they haven't got him yet. There is no indication that the US wants to capture and try him, even though several high-ranking US officials including high-ranking politicians have stated they would like to do just that.

Yes, people's priorities are being revealed.

[Nye Bevan]

24. I don't know if he's guilty. I do want him to be tried, however.

Isn't that what a trial is for?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

39. Shouldn't he be charged first?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. Silencing whistleblowers is our government's priority in this case.

Not to mention a lot of other governments whose dealings have been exposed to the people.

[Dreamer Tatum]

36. My Point Proven, Part I. nt

[EOTE]

128. Actually, that seems to be the exact opposite of your point. NT

[librechik]

27. Karl Rove's involvement with Sweden's investigation of the Assange case puts

a giant red flag over any of the so-called allegations against Assange. How can anyone take these personal attack seriously after it is revealed they are motivated by Karl Rove's strategy?

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/karl-rove-swedish-connections-and-the-case-against-assange-andrew-kreig/

Has Karl Rove ever done anything that wasn't vicious criminal and dishonest, designed to destroy liberals rather than dialogue with them? No.

And there are many other prob;lems and anaomalies with the "case" against Assange

http://markcrispinmiller.com/2011/02/eight-big-problems-with-the-case-against-assange-must-read-by-naomi-wolf/

Stop with the disingenuous outrage about "rape". Last I heard rape was never consensual. Which has been the allegation from day 1. Consensual rape. Please.

[panader0]

38. ^^THIS^^

[hifiguy]

42. +1

If KKKarl is within 50 miles of any governmental action anywhere in the world, you can bet that it is as crooked as a dog's hind leg. This is the dead giveaway that something is rotten in the state of Sweden.

[riderinthestorm]

30. This case is about "rape" just like Clinton's impeachment was about "perjury"

Both cases are/were really attempts to stop highly effective people from interfering in the PTB.

[Dreamer Tatum]

35. My Point Proven, Part II. nt

[riderinthestorm]

37. Except the women themselves aren't calling it "rape", nor did they want to press charges

So what point do you think is being proven?

That the Swedish government is taking up the standard on behalf of these women? Suspiciously right after Wikileaks releases incriminating tapes of war crimes by the US? And that Sweden won't commit to a promise not to extradite Assange to the US?

That some of us smell the foul odor of a witch hunt?

[Dreamer Tatum]

47. I give up. The sheer awe of his towering heroism has overtaken me

and any sexual assault on his part either didn't happen, or was his just reward for being so goddamned awesome.

It feels so good to bask in the warmth of his glow.

[riderinthestorm]

53. No answer. Thanks for proving MY point nt

[frylock]

68. parts I, II, III, and Epilogue..

why would someone post this shit and be as unprepared to have some answers as our friend here?

[HiPointDem]

61. who is pursing the case since the women involved aren't?

[randome]

51. Here are the actual charges as provided by misanthrope.

And here is the link: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

1.
On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.
2.
On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.
3.
On 18th August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.
4.
On 17th August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state.
It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.

[riderinthestorm]

57. You know continuously re-publishing these allegations may ramp up your post count

But they're just that - allegations and since the women themselves didn't think Assange's actions rose to the level of rape, in fact they bragged about sleeping with Assange to their friends AND continued to party with him afterwards, its not really persuasive.

[randome]

66. Sweden wants him to take a DNA test.

The women -at least originally- wanted him to take an STD test. What is so hard to understand about this? Why is Assange hiding in an embassy? I really couldn't care less about the women's 'after party', unless you think that somehow excuses Assange's behavior.

The fact is that an extradition order has been ruled valid. The fact is that Assange spent 2 years trying to dodge this. He's not afraid for his life. He's afraid of being tested and facing the plaintiffs in the case.

[riderinthestorm]

72. You've been answered ad nauseum. Feel free to check out any of the dozens of replies to your posts

[Hissyspit]

74. Really, you're in his head? You spoke to him personally?

You know exactly what he is afraid of?

http://anniemachon.ch/annie_machon/2012/08/the-assange-witch-hunt.html

"The UK jus­ti­fies this by cit­ing the 1987 Dip­lo­matic and Con­su­lar Premises Act, a law appar­ently put in place fol­low­ing the 1984 shoot­ing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher from the Libyan Embassy in Lon­don.  The murder res­ul­ted in an 11-day siege, and the embassy staff even­tu­ally being expelled from the coun­try.  Nobody has yet been brought to justice for this murder.

It is hard to equate the grav­ity of the crime that brought about the 1987 legis­la­tion — the murder of a police­wo­man — with Assange’s situ­ation.  Des­pite the scream­ing head­lines, let us not for­get that he is merely wanted for ques­tion­ing in Sweden. Nev­er­the­less, the UK is pre­pared to over­turn all dip­lo­matic pro­tocol and cre­ate a dan­ger­ous inter­na­tional pre­ced­ent to 'get their man,' des­pite there being a clear lack of jus­ti­fic­a­tion under the terms of the ’87 Act.

Many people in the west­ern media remain puzzled about Assange’s fear of being held cap­tive in the Swedish legal sys­tem. But can we really trust Swedish justice when it has been flag­rantly politi­cised and manip­u­lated in the Assange case, as has been repeatedly well doc­u­mented. Indeed, the Swedish justice sys­tem has the highest rate per cap­ita of cases taken to the ECtHR for flout­ing Art­icle 6 — the right to a fair trial.

If Assange were extra­dited merely for ques­tion­ing by police — he has yet to be even charged with any crime in Sweden — there is a strong risk that the Swedes will just shove him straight on the next plane to the US under the legal terms of a 'tem­por­ary sur­render.' And in the US, a secret Grand Jury has been con­vened in Vir­ginia to find a law — any law — with which to pro­sec­ute Assange.  Hell, if the Yanks can’t find an exist­ing law, they will prob­ably write a new one just for him."

[Hissyspit]

60. Those aren't charges, they are accusations.

[randome]

108. Then why is he afraid to submit to a DNA test?z

The Swedish process works differently from ours. Questioning first to see if charges are merited.

[EOTE]

130. Who says he is? Simply because he won't return to Sweden? NT

[riderinthestorm]

157. I'm absolutely certain that Assange's lawyers have offered him to take the test in the UK

Just like they have offered for him to be questioned in the UK. The premise that he MUST go to Sweden for any of this has always been the sticking point. Its a ploy to get his physical self to Sweden in order to extradite to the US.

I know you already know this but answering the other poster over and over and over with their deliberate and willful refusal to "listen" is making me a bit crazy....

So I thought I'd try it out on a friendly audience.

[EOTE]

161. You're absolutely right.

And the mental gymnastics I'm seeing around here is rather sick. The line of logic typically seems to be: If Assange really is innocent, why won't he give himself up so he can either spend the rest of his life in jail or get disappeared by the U.S. government? Or perhaps: If Assange really is such a hero (I don't see many on his side using that term), why is it that he's holding onto some of these cables to save his own ass? Because we all know the only real heroes are martyrs, right?

[2pooped2pop]

113. dream on, dear Dreamer

You have proven your own point with your own agenda and viewpoint, much more than anyone else on this thread has done.

[treestar]

93. Why doesn't that apply to Herman Cain, then?

[riderinthestorm]

117. Sweden as a state actor is going after Assange

Sweden the state has not been a fair and impartial arbiter with Assange.

Sweden has been exposed as committing war crimes in assisting the CIA with rendition.

Sweden refuses to sign a non-extradition treaty so Assange can go to Sweden to answer these questions without fear of being extradited to the US.

Herman Cain has not been an international whistleblowing journalist who exposes war crimes by major MIC corporations and countries.


And this is like Herman Cain how? Sorry if the facts of this case are obscuring how Herman Cain's situation = Julian Assange's.

[SidDithers]

31. DU rec...nt

Sid

[ananda]

45. Oh please, give me a break!

If Assange is extradited, he will not be going down for "rape."

He will be disappeared according to USA interests.

[DeSwiss]

46. B.S. n/t

[leveymg]

49. You're putting the cart before the horse - the tweak of the US MIC likely led to the allegation.

An allegation doesn't prove the crime. It merely reinforces the impression that he's been targeted for retribution.

Assange has been neither convicted nor absolved. Don't read too much into other peoples' priorities or make intimations about that. You don't know.

[LadyHawkAZ]

52. Crap. Hogwash. Bunkum. Garbage.

This isn't about rape and never has been. Even if there had been a rape- which both women have denied- the behavior of the involved countries have buried any possibility of justice for it. Sweden is notorious for its horrible track record on rape- it has one of the worst rates of assault in the world and a horrible record of prosecution- but it's made an international case of Assange without even charging him. The UK is threatening to violate an embassy and risk an international incident on behalf of Sweden. Ecuador was in the right to offer him asylum.

And Americans have decided that no matter what else might be happening, he's a dirty filthy rapist because he's been accused and of course has no other side issues to worry about that might have made him run. You're right, many priorities have been uncovered.

[hifiguy]

63. Brava!

[grantcart]

62. I am not a fan of Assange but you have to be somewhat gullible to believe that these charges

don't have an astonishing level of coincidence.

Also the institutions are not independent arbiters of fact in this case but seem to be carrying out a rather clumsy effort to discredit him.

Now the fact that they are threatening piercing diplomatic convention to get a 'rapist' further discredits all of their other charges. It is obvious that they are after him because of his secrets not his alleged 'rapes'.

[The Magistrate]

69. Exactly, Sir

[Dreamer Tatum]

73. That's what Republicans said about the Herman Cain accusations.

The key difference, of course, is that THOSE were true, whereas the ones against Assange
are false.

Right?

[frylock]

82. the difference being that is was the WOMEN making those accusations against cain..

you have WILLFULLY ignored every post informing you that these women have not pressed any charges, nor have they made any claims accusing assange of rape. why is that?

[Dreamer Tatum]

83. One of the women said she didn't MEAN for him to be charged.

Didn't mean he shouldn't have been. Have you seen the charges?

Why won't he submit DNA? Why won't he comply?

[frylock]

107. why would he need to submit his DNA?

he never denied having sex with these women. what are they hoping to find by matching up DNA?

one of the women also blogged about how to get revenge against a cheating boyfriend. she also tweeted "Sitting outside; nearly freezing; with the world's coolest people; it's pretty amazing." while at a party she hosted in honor of assange AFTER the alleged rape. does any of that make sense to you?

[randome]

111. No, it doesn't.

Which means it makes no sense for her to have damaged the international conspiracy by saying it.

Your point falls apart.

And are you saying that because she partied afterwards that she somehow 'deserved' to be assaulted?

'Rape' may not be part of the equation any longer but DNA testing is.

An extradition order was issued. Interpol is behind it. Sweden is behind it. The U.K. appeals system is behind it.

[2pooped2pop]

121. I think they may be saying that women who are raped

don't usually brag about it at a party immediately after. They are usually very very very upset, confused, scared, angry, shamed and many other emotions but party is seldom the reaction, I would think.

[frylock]

126. i took your ass off of ignore to respond to your baseless bullshit..

as 2pooped was kind enough to point out, anyone with half a fucking brain would realize what i was saying is that someone that was raped typically isn't going to be hanging out with that person and boasting about "Sitting outside; nearly freezing; with the world's coolest people; it's pretty amazing" at a party that SHE is holding in HONER of the guy who just raped her. easy enough for you to understand now?

[randome]

84. Assange is wanted for questioning.

Interpol, the U.K. appeals process (for 2 years) and even Australia agree on this. The women initially made the complaint. They wanted him tested for STDs.

[frylock]

129. so fucking question him..

they don't have phones over there in sweden?

[grantcart]

87. The accusers in the Cain allegations had made official complaints and received a settlement

years before and only reported them when they thought he was about to reach power.

In this case two cases magically pop up at the point where he is begining to get more and more to the central nerve.

For the record there is a lot that I don't agree with him on, especially releasing secret discussions among diplomats, that should never be released under any circumstances if you believe in diplomacy, but having said that these charges are just to convenient not to raise an eyebrow.

On top of that is the British bluff to break into an Embassy and violate treaties. They aren't doing that, obviously, because he is a 'rapist'. Hell they have waited outside of embassies for mass murderers to come out.

Now their subsequent actions, coming quickyly after the amazing coincidence of new rape charges really undermines their whole approach, which has zero in common with Herman Cain.

[Old and In the Way]

95. Context is everything.

I'm really not surprised that Herm Cain is a horn dog, but I'm unaware of what he has done to thwart the interests of the MIC. I know what Assange has been accused of and I certainly understand why they want to try him in the court of public opinion for "rape". I've seen the "evidence" in multiple threads posted on DU....and, all I know is that I sincerely doubt there'd be any international action to grab Assange based on the amount of known facts that have been presented to date. Sad that some don't know how character assassination can be used to neutralize people who are trying to expose multinational corruption and wrong doing.

[EOTE]

133. Are you going for a gold medal in obtusity?

Because frankly you bring it to the level of an art. If you truly are this confused on the matter, I strongly suggest educating yourself before you make yourself look even more foolish.

[datasuspect]

165. so are you mad that Herman Cain was treated worse than Assange?

Or held to a different standard?

where are you coming from with this?

are you a Herman Cain supporter?

[treestar]

96. What's the point though

of the Swedish "persecution?"

Why does not the US directly extradite him, so it can engage its legal system against him (suddenly known as "persecution" because people like what this guy did?).

That would be more effective punishment than an indirect Swedish non-prosecution.

And rape is wrong, no matter what the timing.

[grantcart]

132. He has been very careful and it is unlikely that he broke any serious laws or they would

prosecute him.

Manning violated a security clearance and will be prosecuted.

Its not a crime to publish secrets in the US. If it were then the NYT would have been prosecuted for publishing the Pentagon Papers.

Also a prosecution could be very embarassing to any government because it would allow the defense to bring in and question witnesses.

Of course rape is wrong. False charges of rape are also wrong, Both things happen.

In this case while either is possible the fact that the British appear willing to breach an Embassy make it obvious that they are more interested in stopping him regardless of the cost than simply prosecuting a 'rapist'.

Of course both things could be true, but it is rather naive to believe that all of this activity is going on simply to prosecute him for rape, and I say that as someone who doesn't think that he should be able to continue without some restraint.

[villager]

78. Oh it most certainly does.

n/t

[LanternWaste]

81. I imagine many people can observe the leaks as one thing, an allegation of rape as a wholly separate

I imagine many people can observe the leaks as one thing, an allegation of rape as a wholly separate thing; and as such, can discuss the one or the other without predicating either on the other.

However, I do realize that for many people, it's much more convenient to their presumptions to merely conflate everything-- regardless of relevance to any one topic at hand.

[Bragi]

88. "Certain Peoples Priorities"?

The OP is magic. It begins with an incoherent reference to the MIC, and then uses the word "rape" five times in the same brief sentence. The unrelenting message discipline shown here is awesome. "Certain peoples' priorities" indeed. - B

[treestar]

89. We don't even know that what he did was so heroic, either

Same with Bradley Manning. It's appalling how people will make an automatic hero out of anyone simply because they damaged our government - in even a minor way. Do We the People really deserve that? It's one thing to be a right winger ridiculously "patriotic" and the opposite spectrum is to assume everything we do is wrong.

Some people are simply not willing to even entertain the question that these two might have done something wrong.

[randome]

102. And I have yet to hear anyone describe the damage Assange did.

The only consequences of his document dump have been the revelation that diplomats cannot always be trusted! Stunning, isn't it?

[Hissyspit]

123. "damage" is treestar and your word, not anyone else's.

Or is this an attempt at the "Wikileaks Is Terrible Because Of the Effects That They've Had But They're Irrelevent Because They've Had No Effect At All" talking point? That was a popular one with the PTB pundits.

You do realize that the diplomatic releases were not the only thing WikiLeaks has done?

[treestar]

148. How can someone violate our statutes and be supposedly not have to be prosecuted?

In fact, he considers himself persecuted because we don't cotton to his releasing and dumping this information?

We don't have to put up with that stuff. He could have done a lot of damage. He thwarted our national will as expressed in our elections and our elected government's decisions based on our laws.

[randome]

150. Wikileaks is great!

Assange is a flawed hero. Most heroes are.

[treestar]

147. True, he just dumped a bunch of stuff

It wasn't as if he was really exposing something particular, as Ellsberg was. And Ellsberg manned up and dealt with the criminal prosecution.

[Hissyspit]

120. Nice straw man/mischaracterization.

"It's appalling how people will make an automatic hero out of anyone simply because they damaged our government."

[2pooped2pop]

124. I don't think anyone is happy with anyone for damaging our Country

I think that some may be happy that someone, god damned anyone, is trying to put some truth out there. And most don't give a shit how he got the truth, just that he had the balls to get it and try to get it out.

[treestar]

146. It's such a scattershot approach

It is not trying to "hide the truth." That's just so general. Some stuff has to be classified. That's not trying to hide any truth. It's not a motive when they are classifying information of that kind. It's not a cover up.

People just assume our government, our elected government, is evil all the time, and that's just as extreme as right wingers who think we can do no wrong.

[2pooped2pop]

154. maybe you haven't been noticing the coup in America

somebody had to flush something out. The mother fuckers have been hell bent on destroying the country. Assange may or may not have gotten info that was useful, but whistle blowers should be protected not prosecuted.

He would not have been trying to expose shit if things hadn't already gone to hell in a hand basket. I applaud his efforts and hope to see anonymous or whoever has the ability do a whole lot more of it.

Their biggest secrets is how they are robbing and fucking the rest of us. How their greed has destroyed everything. That's the big states secrets they don't want you to know, not what operative was undercover in Iran for example.

[Puglover]

110. The sound of heads popping is such a beautiful thing!

Bravo for my adopted country and President Correa!

[lightcameron]

112. The UK government is doing the right thing.

Spot on.

[Hissyspit]

115. Nonsense.

[lightcameron]

118. He'll be living in that embassy forever.

If he tries to come out, he'll be arrested, as he should. Then he and his defence team can argue their interpretation of the rape law before the court.

That's how it'll happen. That is, unless he stays in that embassy forever.

Cheers!

[truebrit71]

131. The fuck it is...

...threatening to invade a sovereign embassy in order to seize a person that is solely wanted for questioning? Not a proven criminal, not a fugitive, but someone that the Swedes have said they want to 'question'....To paraphrase Sir Winston Churchill, 'Never before in the field of human conflict, has so much bullshit, been shoveled, by so many, for so few...'

Camerwrong and Hague are doing their master's bidding and nothing more...

[lightcameron]

145. They're abusing their privilege, so they've forfeited sovereignty.

[Hissyspit]

153. exactly are they "abusing the privilege?"

I thought the Ecuadorian foreign minister laid it out pretty clearly this morning how they weren't.

Was the U.S. abusing the privilege when they let that Catholic priest live in the Budapest embassy for 15 years?

[lightcameron]

156. Asylum? For RAPE accusations? Please.

That's not what asylum is for.

And if you knew your law or history, you'd know that it's ludicrous to compare an accused rapist to someone (the Catholic Cardinal) who was accused of conspiracy, treason, and offences against government.

I suppose that even if someone failed to research this case, they could simply err on the side of, say, taking rape charges seriously. Oh, and also learning a bit about the laws of Sweden -- how accusations work, how charges work, etc.

Start here if you'd like to learn something.

[riderinthestorm]

158. Storming an embassy over rape accusations?? Please.

That's never been done before if you knew your law or history. Overturning centuries of diplomatic law in order to arrest someone for questioning....


This is not about rape accusations which means Assange's asylum is for Wikileaks and his very public exposure of war crimes and other criminal activity by the PTB, and the setting up of a pipeline for the transmission of information of other whistleblowers and leakers.

[lightcameron]

163. You do know what you did there, right?

'This is not about rape accusations which means...'

You summarily dismiss the rape accusations, and then go on to make a baseless assumption. Why do people like to think this way? Surely you know you're deluding yourself.

[Hissyspit]

159. Yeah, I thought you didn't have anything.

I've been posting about this and researching it here for YEARS.

[The Magistrate]

160. You Know, Ma'am, Some People Just Come here for the Pizza....

[nadinbrzezinski]

168. Hold the peppers, might give him more gas

[lightcameron]

162. No substantive response. Figures.

By the way, putting 'YEARS' in all caps doesn't mitigate your lack of knowledge on this matter.

[Hissyspit]

170. Yeah...

I'm a complete idiot. By they way, I'm looking for the substance in your posts. (And here's "years" in lowercase for you.)

Technically, Cardinal Mindszenty had broken the law. He was found guilty of treason. There are parallels and there are not parallels.

U.K.'s current response has been absurd, absolutely absurd.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/uk-threat-ecuador-experts-mistake-17028638

In UK Threat on Ecuador, Experts See Mistake

By RAPHAEL SATTER Associated Press
LONDON August 17, 2012 (AP)

- snip -

Experts and ex-diplomats say Britain's Foreign Office, which warned Ecuador of a little known law that would allow it to side-step usual diplomatic protocols, messed up by issuing a threat it couldn't back up.

"It was a big mistake," said former British ambassador Oliver Miles. "It puts the British government in the position of asking for something illegitimate."

- snip -

The Ecuadoreans were outraged by the notes, accusing Britain of threatening to assault their embassy and calling a crisis meeting of the Union of South American Nations. The ripples from the controversy continued to spread Friday, with Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs saying in a brief message posted to Twitter that the issue raised questions about diplomatic protections.

Britain's Foreign Office insists its missive was "not a threat," something that Miles dismissed with a laugh. "If I tell you, 'I'm not threatening you but I DO have a very large stick here,' it's a question of semantics," he said.

Other diplomats and legal experts say British authorities should never have brought up the law.

And there is plenty of reason for fear of extradition to the U.S.

[truebrit71]

164. Bollocks...says who? The UK? Don't make me larf...

They are lapdogs for the US and nothing more...I didn't see them threatening to storm the Libyan embassy when a cop-killer was holed up inside...

[nadinbrzezinski]

167. Read the Geneva Convention

Both countries are signatories...or is it only valid when convenient?

[mike_c]

116. whatever happened to the UNREC button...?

[sabrina 1]

137. I don't know, I like these OPs which provide an opportunity to present FACTS and then

see who, once those facts are presented, actually cares about facts.

This OP eg, is so completely devoid of facts that it's almost amusing. To see someone judge others on their defense of the facts, when you yourself demonstrate so clearly that you are not in possession of any the facts, is sort of ironic to say the least.

[Posteritatis]

134. Would the UK threaten to attack an embassy over *any* other rape suspect?

I'm just a little doubtful.

It says as much about the government's priorities as the observers'.

[sabrina 1]

135. So he's been charged with Rape? When did this happen exactly?

But you're right about what it reveals about people. Some people we are discovering, when they have an agenda, have zero respect for the law.

It's been most revealing. Your OP eg, states he is a rapist, ignoring the fact that no charges have ever been filed against him.

But carry on. I like to know what principles people are willing to uphold and which ones are disposable.

Meantime could you show the charges and the evidence of what you claim in your OP?

[ArcticFox]

139. Most people understand this isn't about rape

If it were, then Swedish investigators would have interviewed him in the UK. If the Swedes had anything to go on, they would have filed charges.

Because the given reasons are unbelievable, a rational person must conclude that they are mere pretext.

[joeybee12]

140. Unrec...anyone who is following this should have grave suspicions

about the motove behind the alleged "victim."

[gollygee]

141. This is yet another issue where I'm torn

I want to see him investigated fully to see if indeed he is guilty. I don't want to see him have no consequences if indeed he is guilty of rape. But at the same time I recognize that he would not be treated like any other person accused of rape because this is really about punishing him for the whole wikileaks thing. I hate when politics get in the way of justice because I want this to just be about justice, and it will never be.

[gollygee]

142. Part of why I know this isn't about rape for the governments involved

is very sadly because they would probably never even prosecute this otherwise. Even if he said it happend as claimed, they'd dismiss it by calling it "date rape" or "gray rape" or something and he'd probably never even be charged. Again, there would most likely be no justice. It's all sad.

[TheKentuckian]

143. Anyone that buys this farce is dedicated to such. The unusual and without precedent

are beyond dubious.