Double bonus!!11!!!!

Now the narrative can run that he’s a hideous person with no integrity–and his accuser was silenced through the intimidation of his fellow travelers in the anti-American liberal elite media.

Lest any of us thought the Borg was benign…that tennis player from the 70s was just a front to distract us!

Man, I really hope no US intelligence agencies were involved in this smear campaign because what a bunch of incompetent bozos to generate charges that couldn’t even hold up to scrutiny for a full 24 hours.

Uh, not only did he not rape anybody (unless def sec Gates considers the exposure of his innermost “i love the smell of dead afghan children in the morning” desires as constituting rape), he’s also not Swedish, but Australian. For some reason the accusation against him was made in Sweden in connection with his recent visit there. But, no, not a rapist, and not a Swede, either.

If I were a betting man I’d take odds on their next attempt to take him down — something involving an affair, maybe a child or a goat, perhaps… no, wait, that’ll make him look too much like a Republican. Maybe they’ll start calling him a closet Muslim — yeah, that’s the ticket…

Bonus: in order to obtain the protection of Swedish law, he became an official journalist by becoming a columnist for Aftonbladet, which is a familiar name to readers of the trilogy.

Midterm grades for the CIA:
Timing: A-
Originality: D+
Execution: F

And here you thought that Enemy of the State was fiction.

It’s out there, all right, but this blew up on the perps so quickly that the only ones who will believe it to be anything but an amateur-night attempt to discredit Wikileaks are the same crew that think Obama is an Islamofacist, baby-eating goat fucker.

Hard to make this stick when you have this, via Craig Murray:

Julian Assange wins Sam Adams Award for Integrity

The award is judged by a group of retired senior US military and intelligence personnel, and past winners. This year the award to Julian Assange was unanimous.

the only ones who will believe it to be anything but an amateur-night attempt to discredit Wikileaks are the same crew that think Obama is an Islamofacist, baby-eating goat fucker.

In other words, most Republicans and all Faux News viewers.

Also known as 27% of the population.

I think that this represents a clarion call for donation to Wikileaks because this is affirmation that Mr. Assange is ruffling the right feathers.

An astounding exercise, just to show they could. How the Swedes let themselves be involved buggers the imagination.

Assange raped me too; I think. Just puttin it out there.

Also Scott Ritter, couldn’t find Iraqi Nukes so he’s a Pedophile. I think.

Well, I really hope that poor man gets hold of a horcrux soon because the CIA or somebody out there is trying to fry his ass. Even though old Cheney is pulse-lessly still living in some undisclosed location, those aspens are continuing to turn. I find this all totally creepy…

corpwaldo – According to the original BBCNews link TBogg has above, the alleged molestations allegedly took alleged place in Sweden, where Assange was visiting. (Also, I love “buggers the imagination”!)

Cheney is in that man-sized safe. Mark my words. Assange needs at the very least a Sneakoscope.

Speaking of leaks, seems Shakira has gotten herself into some cold water, and the results are well….you just gotta see for yourselves:

http://www.popeater.com/2010/08/21/shakirabarcelonafountain/

Authorities are saying they will be inspecting the video for “infringements.” Ahem. Too. Also.

If anything will let JuiceBoxJebuzTebow unwrap him little JimmieDeanSausageAndEggs it’ll be Shakira’s ass….

Fortunately for Timmy, Shakira dotes on crying babies…..

This would be par for the course for the CIA. Remember the exploding cigars that were supposed to kill Castro? Keystone Kops are solid citizens compared to the CIA.

More generally, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet on Assange. I’d be surprised if he lives out the year. An arranged ‘suicide’ would seem to be the solution of choice.

I read about the rape accusation this morning and my first thought was “How transparent can they get?” I mean, it was so obviously a smear that when I later read that the arrest warrant had been withdrawn, (please, like THAT ever happens), the only surprise was how quickly that came along. I would have expected them to leave it out there for a couple of news cycles at least.

I heard he eats babies. Well SOME people are saying that.

I think Matt Simmons would have felt better right now if he’d merely been accused of rape, uh, groping, uh consensual sex for too long or something….

Speaking of The Da Vinci Code, Assange looks a bit albino-like. Does he wear contact? Seriously, this rape charge reminds me of Scott Ritter after his Iraq/WMD charges.

I sent the link a couple of days ago who someone pointed out to me, that made his death out to be suspicious, to my friend in Houston who has lots of contacts. She never got back to me. I’ll jiggle her again.

dont fly in small planes Julian

i lurve the intertubes!

Personally, I’d like to get the names and histories of the two women that came forward with these accusations. Oh, that’s right, it’s OK to drag a man’s name through the mud, but you can’t dare look into the possible integrity or motivations of the women making these accusations. In this age of equality, when can we actually be fair? When can women stop hiding behind archaic laws intended to protect the innocent and fragile victim? *sigh*

A 20 and 30 year old woman, both make the same accusations. Wow. Just wow, it is a shame it is highly unlikely that this won’t be pursued to its logical conclusion. How about false rape charges being filed by Mr. Assange?

First thing I heard about this, thoughts of what they tried to Nader came to mind. Obviously the circumstances are a little different, but same nonsense.

Archaic? Please.

Rape shield laws are evidentiary; they exclude evidence of the accuser’s past sexual conduct. There are many, many cases in which this kind of evidence gets in anyway, through innuendo or what have you — even in cases in which the rapists videotaped the proceedings, or there were witnesses. You can’t rape a slut, after all, and if she was drinking at a party, or wearing that, or what have you, she’s a slut, right?

In any event, you’re reaching entirely the wrong conclusion and looking at entirely the wrong target. You want to make these women pay, right? Well, let’s think for a minute here: someone clearly wants to bring Assange down, and if they can’t do it by discrediting him, they’ll find other ways. They’ve gotten the Swedish police or security police involved somehow (I’m a little unclear on whether they’re in on it or whether they made the arrest based on complaining witness information).

So. You have possible CIA involvement, possible police involvement in destroying Assange. Do you really think that the two women who made these accusations were acting independently? Maybe they were bought off, maybe they were threatened, but given how badly the U.S. government wants Assange out of the way, do you really imagine they were completely acting on their own here? And if not, don’t you think it’s a better idea to find out who put them up to it than pursue your little woman-hating revenge fantasy?

Stieg Larsson didn’t call the first book “Men Who Hate Women” for nothing.

Everyone knows that he was with Elvis at the time. No way they could accuse Elvis, so Julian got nailed. Those Repugs, they may be diabolical, but they have their idols.

Nice shaming language, unfortunately I’m just looking for equality.

Equality?

When men are raped at the rate women are outside of prison, when the rate for conviction for violent crimes against men is as low as it is for rape, when male victims of violent crimes are blamed for bringing it all on themselves like women are when they report rape, when men’s wardrobes and sexual histories are used against them, then you’ll have achieved equality with women. And won’t that be the day.

But, noted: you care more about sticking it to the two women involved than finding out who put them up to it and what the price was.

FWIW:

William Scott Ritter, Jr. (born July 15, 1961, Gainesville, Florida) is noted for his role as a chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998, and later for his criticism of United States foreign policy in the Middle East. Prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003, Ritter publicly argued that Iraq possessed no significant weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). He became a popular anti-war figure and talk show commentator as a result of his stance. Since 2001, Ritter was arrested several times on charges related to sexual exploitation of minors.

[Wikipedia]

It’s obvious we aren’t going to see eye to eye on this matter. As much as you may wish to deny it, the criminal justice system is completely unfair to men. From family court to criminal law, men are predators and women and children are victims. It is never innocent until proven guilty for men, but the exact opposite.

Rape shield laws may protect women from revealing their sexual history, but unfortunately it clouds the ability of the jury to fully understand the context and motivation for the events leading up to the “rape” accusation. You dance around this matter saying how things “slip out”, but providing such blanket protection to the accuser, you hamstring the defense from proving their case. False accusations of rape for revenge or otherwise do happen and are not as rare as one would think.

In the case of Julian Assange, I would like to know if these women are prostitutes. Looking at how past events such as this historically have been used to attempt at discrediting people like Ralph Nader. Rape shield laws prevent the full discovery of the motivations for the accusations and/or whether or not other factors played a role in them going to the police to report the incident.

Hmm, fundraising opportunity… wikileaks should buy “dead peasant insurance” on Assange (employers have an insurable interest in their employees, otherwise, you can’t buy insurance on another person’s life), and use it to solicit contributions… Give X amount and you can get XX back if the CIA whacks Julian. :o)

Yeah, not sure how legitimate those claims are…interesting that they started in 2001.

You might want to rephrase that so it doesn’t come off so much like ‘white male privilege’ as an argument.
Because what mambotaxi is saying is the way it is for women, and women have been getting the short end of that stick for decades if not centuries.

I disagree with you and Mambo entirely, but we obviously both have our own viewpoint and there is no point in extending this any further.

Ok I’m taking bets.

1) Air Plane accident
2) Arrested and killed in prison
3) Car accident
4) Falls off a boat
5) Stumbles into the center of the street
6) Stumbles in front of a train/subway car
7) Mysterious illness
8) Disappears without a trace
9) Slips and falls in his kitchen…onto a knife…50 times.
10) Left the gas line on while cooking….on a hot plate (The cia are genius!)

And the long shot…
11) Radioactive Potatoe

@Pjevans I read a horror story about a young employee at a japanese space program that got onto a subway, was accused of groping, the police harassed him in a jail cell for a while, the girl admitted to making it up, the police released him….then continued harassing him to get him to confess to something he didn’t do…

He committed suicide.

I’ve also read stories about how british guys can’t help lost kids find buildings or there parents without being being questioned by police.

Some old guy got arrested for picking up his grandchild at a beach because they thought he was a predator.

Yea women had it bad, but there’s some serious ****ery going on today.

I heard that Lisbeth Salander and retired Stockholm police detective Martin Beck are teaming up to investigate.

I will eat my own shorts if the accusers weren’t coerced. I suppose it is possible that two women independently accused Julian of exactly the same crimes of their own volition, just as it is possible that Julian actually committed the crime. But the likelyhood of either of those possibilities seems vanishingly small, to anybody familiar with the history of the CIA. Or just anybody familiar with the concept of ratfucking. Or just anybody with a brain.

Which means the dittoheads & the teabeckers & the barbiebots are already convinced that Julian fucked a box full of blind eight-year-old war orphans on pay-per-view, and that the withdrawal of the charges is due to pressure from the Kenyan Usurper, or The New World Order, or Al Gore is fat, or something.

Agenda much?

A good example of life imitating art.

But the sheer stupidity of the CIA here is great evidence of the need to privatize the CIA (is this a kind of blowback?)…this was just so mickey mouse…when corporate behemoths want to kill someone they just do it, doesn’t matter whether they are a true journalist or not.

After his (next) death, or imprisonment in Guatanomo, we will insist on a movie and talk about how tragic it all is.

Our wars will continue…

total mis-information

The “justice system” is very imperfect for all – but the females are relatively much more disadvantaged. I tried to understand where you were coming from – your agenda – and concluded divorce court blues. In Mass for years the wife had custody and got support with little the husband could do about it. That has changed greatly with the money again flowing to the male more than the female and joint custody the preferred solution. There is also the possibility your view coming from law student planning on being in the defense bar – and wanting “tools for a fair defense” – not realizing “fair” is a concept that changes over time. We currently find it hard to prosecute and convict rapists because “I want to know if she was a prostitute” thinking is in the jury room (or was when I was on the jury). I am not impressed with that way of thinking – and believe sex workers have a right to not be raped.

“mambotaxi” at reply #33 had the correct view, in my opinion.

…what a bunch of incompetent bozos to generate charges that couldn’t even hold up to scrutiny for a full 24 hours.

That nails it! It’s the same bunch that floated the “Saddam seeking uranium from Niger” memo. Their overlords have retired to gated communities in TX, so they didn’t have the PR smarts to leak insinuations for a few months first, but it’s the same MO.

I apologize Papau, I had written out a response, but I decided not to post it. Let me just say as with Mambotaxi, I disagree with you. Perhaps I am naive, but the prosecution of both criminal and family law looks far from just from my perspective. It is indeed far from ideal, but as with so much we rally against in these forums, it is unlikely to change, and if it does, it won’t be anytime soon.

…already convinced that Julian fucked a box full of blind eight-year-old war orphans [who were white and christian] on pay-per-view…

Added a bit. It’s really the only part teabaggers and Repubs care about. They couldn’t care less about blind war orphans if those first two criteria aren’t met first.

I’m glad that I’m not the only one who found his death to be highly suspicious.

Oh, and since we’re 50 comments in and no one has done it yet: fuck fucking Cokie Roberts.

I’m thinking an auto erotic accident involving hanging in a hotel closet.

With an exploding cigar nearby…just in case.

LOL… great posts ( mostly) & good to see I’m not the only one going WTF??? Assange is an Aussie but is alleged to have been in Sweden raping someone or other. How convenient!! I was also amazed that this charge was retracted so quickly. Assange better watch his back. As for possible ways to get Assange “out of the way” maybe the Swedes have been sub-contracted to give Assange a ” heart attack” ala Steig Larsson. There are some who say that the Swedish secret services were uncomfortable with Larsson’s books & arranged his heart attack. Assange better keep a keen eye on what he eats & drinks. Just saying….

Common Dreams has taken this story (which called down an avalanche of comments) off its front page.
They shouldn’t have. This story should stay out there. (Kokie Roberts is as right about this as she is about anything else. The story’s not about Assange any more.)

I believe everything you say in your post. I don’t, however, believe Assange did it.

I was going to reply that you caught wirerat1 off base…for which you tag him out, not stomp him into a quivering bloody mass. On further reading, however…stomp.

Please. Rape is such an emotionally charged crime that by default as a society, we rally around the victim regardless of the history that brought her to that place. In a just world, a fair examination of any and all parties involved in litigation would be a fair and reasonable request. To arbitrarily exclude one party’s history from examination right of the bat is a miscarriage of justice. After all, it is OK to drag a man’s name through the mud with a rape accusation, but if in the defense of that charge, a woman’s history is sacrosanct, then you’ve flipped the whole notion of “innocent until proven guilty” on its head. By default, we as a society trust women to not abuse that “special status” that they’re given to make such accusations, but rarely is justice carried out in a similar manner in the case of a false accusation.

I would just ask you to switch men for women in any and all of these “special” laws or protections we extend to one party and say if roles were reversed, would we consider this reasonable? Or does it hold up to a reality check?

Go ahead, start with the emotionally charged rhetoric about prostitutes needing protection and all that, but I can also point at a myriad of men who have falsely been accused of rape and rarely if ever do they recover to the same standing which they had before the charge. I see accusers go with a slap on the wrist and being labeled “victims” or “crying out for help”, but rarely is much thought given the aftermath of the accusation alone.

Obviously, justice is not perfect. We try to live in a country ruled by law which is crafted by fallible individuals. We all respond to emotionally charged issues differently and as such it is reasonable to assume that people have different views on these matters. Rape shield laws may serve a valid purpose, but is far from ideal considering the undue burden it puts on the accused.

I’m done, not revisiting this thread again.

You ought to read the (very long) exchange about this kind of thing that’s been going on over at slacktivist. It might be enlightening.

Personal opinion:
The Swedish police decided to drop the charges because their investigation showed that
(1) the women who made the complaints weren’t who they said they were, or
(2) the women who made the complaints were never in the same place at the same time as Assange
(Note that these are not mutually exclusive.)

We rally around the victim as a default in this society? What society are you living in, because it sounds like a nice one, one where nobody ever says that a woman was asking for it by doing one of a thousand innumerable things that anyone does in the course of living, like wearing clothes, or walking down the street, or talking to someone, or getting a little drunk, or being alone with a friend.

Uhm, sure. Tell that to the woman who accused Kobe Bryant of rape, or Mike Tyson. The defense in the Mike Tyson rape trial tried to say she consented to sex because she “removed her undergarments” while in the room; she actually took off her panty shield. That’s rallying around the victim?

Why in the blue hell is the reporting rate so low, then, let alone conviction rates? How is it that the men who gang-raped a woman on a pool table and videotaped the whole thing are walking free because while she was drunk, she opened her eyes a couple of times on tape, so the jury thought she must have wanted it or she wouldnt’ be there?

You clearly don’t know squat about how rape shield laws work. Rape is sex without consent; the only reason to introduce evidence of a victim’s past sexual behavior is to introduce the idea to the jury that she’s said yes in the past, so she must have said yes this time. To invalidate the evidence of lack of consent. When that of course is just misogynist bullshit; consent must be given each time, regardless of the victim’s sexual past with the accused or with anyone else.

Your real problem seems to be with truthfulness, since you seem to view women as liars by default. But criminal procedure already allows the defense attorneys to try to impeach the credibility of witnesses. The only thing they can’t do is introduce the victim’s past sexual conduct as a way to impeach her credibility, except under very specific circumstances.

What we have in the Assange case doesn’t even have anything to do with the accuser’s sexual history, in any event (and it’s Sweden, FFS; American judicial rules don’t apply). And as I asked you earlier, why don’t you want to find out who’s behind the accusers? Even if they’re prostitutes, they’re not working for free; who’s paying them. Follow the fucking money, dude.

Stories like this give Peggy (irresponsible speculation) Nooner little tears of joy.