Assange is a hero: Jill Stein US Greens Presidential Candidate

Written By: - Date published: 9:54 am, August 24th, 2016 - 204 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, activism, colonialism, International, Media, Politics, uk politics, us politics, war - Tags:

Julian Assange and his organisation Wikileaks has been right on the front lines of the fight against the west’s now all pervasive military, security and surveillance state.

That position has put him in the firing line of both overt and covert attack by establishment loyalists, to the extent that he has spent the last few years of his life under virtual house arrest in the Ecuadorean embassy in London, with no prospect of either due process or fair trial.

Now, US Greens presidential candidate Jill Stein has drawn a very clear line by penning an op-ed in The Hill declaring Assange as a hero, and explicitly addressing the spurious claims of rape and sexual impropriety that the establishment has cleverly used to turn both the right wing and the left wing against him.

To my mind, Stein is a US Presidential candidate with more principled backbone than the rest of the field put together.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is a hero. Like Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, and other whistleblowers facing government persecution, Assange has sacrificed his personal comfort and safety to bring us the truth…

Many have asked how Greens, who count feminism among our ten key values, can support Assange when he’s been accused of rape. As a strong advocate for victims of sexual violence, I take this question seriously.

While countless media reports highlight the allegations against Assange, most people have never heard that an official UN report has declared the case against Assange to be unfounded. Three investigations have been dropped without charges ever having been filed. And the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has stated that Assange has been unlawfully detained and should be released. In light of these facts, it appears the allegations against Assange were a false pretext used by those who want to give him the Chelsea Manning treatment — or worse.

As the Presidential candidate of a party that has maintained principled criticism of powerful political, military and corporate institutions, I’ve gotten a first—hand look at how the establishment attacks people who challenge the status quo. These attacks are intended to brand their targets as pariahs and stigmatize anyone who dares to challenge this narrative.

That last line “These attacks are intended to brand their targets as pariahs and stigmatize anyone who dares to challenge this narrative” describes perfectly the smear and sneer campaign that the establishment routinely launches against whistleblowers.

They’ve also done it to Snowden (the high school drop out, army wash out and Russian secret agent) and to Manning (a sexually confused and disturbed young man who turned traitor against his own country).

What has also been fascinating is how many on the Left have fallen so easily and so quickly for these psy-op propagated smears.

204 comments on “Assange is a hero: Jill Stein US Greens Presidential Candidate ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. weka 1
    24 August 2016 at 10:12 am

    Great, another day of the promotion of rape culture on The Standard. I thought we might have gotten past this.

    I like Stein, and she is doing some great things. But like Assange, she is not perfect, and on this one she’s stumbled.

    It is possible to talk about the mistreatment of Assange, and the injustices around that, without promoting rape culture. Stein doesn’t get that, and some on ts don’t either, despite it having been spelled out over and over again.

    I now expect this thread to be filled with the pro and anti Assange fan boys arguing and missing the point and yet again rape being misused politically, which is highly ironic given the assertions that Assange is being falsely accused for political reasons.

    Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe some of the men on ts who get it will step up and address this issue and keep addressing it as long as it needs addressing. Maybe.

    • Colonial Viper 1.1
      24 August 2016 at 10:16 am

      I like Stein, and she is doing some great things. But like Assange, she is not perfect, and on this one she’s stumbled.

      Stein has been consistent in her support for Assange. This is not some one off “stumble.”

      I put this post up because as a prominent female left wing politician Jill Stein’s voice on this and on other issues needs to be heard, not shut down or marginalised.

      • weka 1.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 11:54 am

        I have no problem with Stein supporting Assange. That you think that’s what I mean demonstrates that you still don’t get it.

        • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1
          24 August 2016 at 11:59 am

          OK good to know that you have no issues with Stein coming out publicly in support of Assange.

          I thought from your first comment that Stein’s support of Assange was clear evidence in your mind that she does not understand rape culture.

          • weka 1.1.1.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 12:28 pm

            Stein appears to not understand how to talk about Assange without supporting rape culture.

            I’ve never had a problem with people wanting to support Assange. I’ve always challenged how that support gets expressed when it promotes rape culture or misuses rape politicially. Like you are doing here.

    • keith ross 1.2
      24 August 2016 at 10:59 am

      I see that you have not read the rest of the article . I have posted it here for you to see
      “While countless media reports highlight the allegations against Assange, most people have never heard that an official UN report has declared the case against Assange to be unfounded. Three investigations have been dropped without charges ever having been filed. And the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has stated that Assange has been unlawfully detained and should be released. In light of these facts, it appears the allegations against Assange were a false pretext used by those who want to give him the Chelsea Manning treatment — or worse ”
      Having followed this case closely I agree with the multiple investigations done by the Swedish authorities and the European Union investigation which found him totally innocent. They are not even trying to charge him with the crimes you mention they “just want to talk to him”.
      Promoting false accusations of rape or sexual assault is wrong and does a disservice to those who have truly suffered.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1
        24 August 2016 at 11:03 am

        Promoting false accusations of rape or sexual assault is wrong and does a disservice to those who have truly suffered.

        QFT

      • weka 1.2.2
        24 August 2016 at 11:59 am

        “Promoting false accusations of rape or sexual assault is wrong and does a disservice to those who have truly suffered.”

        I have read the article and I’m not promoting false accusations of rape. I am pointing out that it’s possible to talk about Assange without promoting rape culture and in this instance Stein failed. As did CV.

        The rate of false accusations is very small. The rate of rape is very high. Yet, still, in left wing spaces, it’s the safety of men that must be prioritised at the expense of women.

        I’m just going to keep saying it again and again. It’s possible to talk about the Assange case, whichever side you are on, without supporting rape culture. Big fail here.

        • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1
          24 August 2016 at 12:13 pm

          Please quote what has been written by myself in this post, or in the piece by Stein, or by any other commentator on this post, which ‘supports rape culture’.

          Otherwise, I’d ask you to desist from repeatedly making this claim.

          • weka 1.2.2.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 12:50 pm

            Rape culture does many things to undermine women’s accounts of rape, and one of them is to promote the idea that women lie about rape and can’t be trusted. Because of that, any conversation that frames women who say they have been raped as liars is highly political. Especially in left wing politics. It’s not just about Assange, or the two women, it’s about the culture in which women are raped and are not believed.

            I’m not saying Assange is a rapist. I’m saying there is no way to know, and that taking a political stance that the women are lying about rape is a bigger political stance that simply supporting Assange or trying to address the bullshit that the US does.

            So it’s not like Stein is going to come out with direct rape myths or promotion of rape. It’s that the way she has framed this is problematic if one wants to address rape culture.

            Stein believes that Assange didn’t rape, and that the accusations are false. As far as I can see there are two sentences in her piece that contain anything other than her personal belief that Assange is innocent and the women are liars,

            While countless media reports highlight the allegations against Assange, most people have never heard that an official UN report has declared the case against Assange to be unfounded. Three investigations have been dropped without charges ever having been filed.

            Hardly a compelling case backed up with evidence. What is the report? What are the investigations? We are supposed to take her word for it from a UN report that no-one else has heard of in one of the most controversial pieces of politics in our generation?

            So on the basis of that slim piece of information, alongside her obvious huge respect for Assange and Wikileaks, it looks to me like she basically got up in a US presidential campaign and said some women accused someone I like of rape and they lied. That is unconscionable for feminism and left wing politics.

            What she could have done instead is said that there is no way to know what happened to those women, that rape culture denies raped women a voice and that we need to be careful not to support that in this situation. And then she could have talked about how she believes that the state is trying to attack Wikileaks via Assange etc. Those things are no incompatible.

            Likewise, with you. You have a long history on ts of supporting rape culture, especially in the context of talking about Assange. It would have been possible to present Stein’s piece without misusing rape, but of course you too believe that the women lied and you are willing to use the situation for your own political ends irrespective of how that affects women who have been raped. That is also rape culture CV.

            • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1.1.1
              24 August 2016 at 2:17 pm

              I stand by my post weka, and I stand by Jill Stein’s op ed.

              Call it a post in support of rape culture if you like, but in reality it is a post opposing the mainstream smearing of whistleblowers like Assange, Manning and Snowden by any and every means possible.

              At least Jill Stein gets it.

              • Chooky …
                24 August 2016 at 4:48 pm

                +100 CV

              • weka …
                24 August 2016 at 6:14 pm

                That’s the reply of someone who cannot address the points.

                “Call it a post in support of rape culture if you like, but in reality it is a post opposing the mainstream smearing of whistleblowers like Assange, Manning and Snowden by any and every means possible.”

                As if those two things can’t happen simultaneously. That’s the bit you still don’t get. Or maybe you do, and you just don’t care and are willing to throw women and men who have been raped under the left wing political expediency bus.

            • Stephanie Rodgers 1.2.2.1.1.2
              24 August 2016 at 5:28 pm

              Hear hear, weka.

            • Richard Christie 1.2.2.1.1.3
              24 August 2016 at 6:55 pm

              Rape culture does many things to undermine women’s accounts of rape, and one of them is to promote the idea that women lie about rape and can’t be trusted. Because of that, any conversation that frames women who say they have been raped as liars is highly political.

              Fact: Some rape complaints are lies and therefore the complainants in these cases are liars.

              You don’t seem prepared to understand this fact and appear wrongly frame every mention of it as being an attempt to paint all rape complainants as liars.

              Here, read some examples of false complaints for yourself:

              http://peterellis.org.nz/FalseAllegations/index.htm

              • weka …
                24 August 2016 at 7:14 pm

                “You don’t seem prepared to understand this fact and appear wrongly frame every mention of it as being an attempt to paint all rape complainants as liars.”

                No. You’ve misunderstood my points. Please go back an reread what I have said. I’m happy to explain anything.

                See this graphic,

                http://theenlivenproject.com/the-truth-about-false-accusation/

                “The purpose of this graphic is to compare (primarily men’s) fear of being falsely accused of being a rapist to the many challenges around reporting, prosecuting, and punishing rapists.”

                Left wing men need to stop making men’s safety the most important thing. That doesn’t mean men’s safety isn’t important. We need to get out of the false dichotomy.

            • Anne 1.2.2.1.1.4
              24 August 2016 at 7:20 pm

              I’m not saying Assange is a rapist. I’m saying there is no way to know, and that taking a political stance that the women are lying about rape is a bigger political stance…

              Fair enough, but who is accusing these two Swedish women of lying? I recall reading that the women involved at some point stated quite clearly “they were not raped”. Is it not equally important to consider the strong possibility that the ‘authorities’ jacked-up the allegation by manipulating the young women and then lying about it? They would have done so to assist the American authorities who want an opportunity to ultimately have Assange deported to the USA so they can lock him up for revealing some of their dirty secrets.

              If anyone thinks that is far-fetched then they are ignorant of what goes on in the world of international political machinations.

              • Colonial Viper …
                24 August 2016 at 7:30 pm

                None of the self appointed moral guardians who have been making repeated exclamations of rape culture have even bothered to analyse how the authorities have used this situation to simultaneously undermine the rights of both Assange and the women complainants, in order to pursue their own power focussed geopolitical agenda.

                All they seem to care about is Assange the bad guy, and how dare anyone say anything positive about him without mentioning in the same breath that he is (in their own minds) guilty of being a probable rapist.

              • weka …
                24 August 2016 at 7:33 pm

                Hi Anne, nothing I have said precludes the possibility or even likelihood that the authorities are trying to take Assange down. It’s the positioning of this political imperative against women who say they have been raped that I object to, because it massively feeds into the rape culture idea that women routinely lie about rape. And that harms all women (and people in fact).

                The problem isn’t whether it’s possible tha Assange was set up. It’s the left still don’t know how to have that conversation without throwing rape victims under the bus politically.

                I recall reading that the women involved at some point stated quite clearly “they were not raped”.

                If you can find some credible evidence of that, I’d be interested. As it is, and after years of having the same argument again and again, I

    • marty mars 1.3
      24 August 2016 at 1:01 pm

      Weka I understand and support your view. And I think that this post is typical of the shit that goes down.

      CV – you support trump, wish Sanders was still there and now use stein to push your agenda. Oh and i know youll come across all innocent and bewildered – the truth is the truth you know it i know it and everything is fair game when players play – only for me its not a game, not even close.

      Last word from me – shame on you.

      • weka 1.3.1
        24 August 2016 at 1:50 pm

        Cheers marty.

        Using Stein like this does look like some of the lowest of politicking I’ve seen here in while.

        • Colonial Viper 1.3.1.1
          24 August 2016 at 2:23 pm

          I’m glad that a prominent female left wing politician like Stein can see that Assange has been deliberately and maliciously wronged by the powerful for their own geopolitical reasons.

          And I’m glad that Stein had the guts to pen an op-ed stating her support of Assange as a whistleblowing hero clearly and unequivocally.

          This isn’t “politicking”. This is letting people know that Stein strongly and publicly supports Assange. Her views match my views and I stand by them.

          • mike 1.3.1.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 2:50 pm

            It’s equivocation to call that man a hero.
            Whatever he is a hero he is not.
            http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b70da83fd111496dbdf015acbb7987fb/private-lives-are-exposed-wikileaks-spills-its-secrets

          • tom 1.3.1.1.2
            24 August 2016 at 3:27 pm

            Agree with you CV, this is madness if someone smears anyone by just making up crap, that they raped someone, that does not mean we cannot call a spade a spade and dismiss it as what is is, a smear. if you cannot do that it becomes an indefensible smear, and is a perfect waepon against anyone not just Assange.
            No one supports rape culture when they say it was made up and used as a smear, they have probably just read up about the situation, and anyone with half a brain will easily be able to see it for what it is… a massive smear, and you have to say it has worked for them, in that it has poisoned a lot of peoples thoughts on him and deterred people from taking Wikileaks more seriously, and has him detained for yrs illegally (according to UN).
            My family has been affected by rape so i understand how it can affect not just a person but an entire family/community, and the importance of taking it seriouslybut what your detractors seem to be saying is you cannot talk about rape being used a smear at it supports the rape culture, but the reality is it has been used as a smear, so if we cannot discuss that we actually cannot discuss Assange at all given his circumstances.
            Keep up the good work CV

            • Colonial Viper 1.3.1.1.2.1
              24 August 2016 at 4:53 pm

              Chur, tom.

            • Colonial Viper 1.3.1.1.2.2
              24 August 2016 at 4:55 pm

              One more thing, notice how the liberal left feels so at ease (and self-justified) with suppressing, censoring or causing the self-censoring of viewpoints and perspectives that they disagree with.

              • McFlock …
                24 August 2016 at 5:06 pm

                What, you mean like the perspective that society should be a safe space for rapists?

                • Colonial Viper …
                  24 August 2016 at 10:55 pm

                  Oh get real McFlock, you only think that Assange is a *probable* rapist,

                  • McFlock …
                    25 August 2016 at 11:37 am

                    Indeed. And Assangists’s constant rejection of even the possibility of his guilt makes life a little bitty bit safer for every rapist. Because comments do not exist in a vacuum.

              • weka …
                24 August 2016 at 6:19 pm

                “One more thing, notice how the liberal left feels so at ease (and self-justified) with suppressing, censoring or causing the self-censoring of viewpoints and perspectives that they disagree with.”

                That’s a very poor argument CV. You put up a post, the post has been critiqued. How have your viewpoints been suppressed or censored? In what ways have the comments here caused you to self-censor?

                • Colonial Viper …
                  24 August 2016 at 6:50 pm

                  By continuous shaming and name calling up and down this thread.

                  I’m amazed that someone as highly attuned and sensitive to language as you are haven’t noticed it.

                  • weka …
                    24 August 2016 at 7:26 pm

                    You start a conversation about Assange and directly state that he’s not a rapist, i.e the women lied, and you think there isn’t going to be a conversation about rape culture?

                    If you feel you are not supporting rape culture, then make the case.

                    And yes, supporting rape culture is something that makes people feel very uncomfortable. There is a long history here CV, it’s been going on on ts for years, and you have been a key player in that.

            • weka 1.3.1.1.2.3
              24 August 2016 at 6:17 pm

              “but what your detractors seem to be saying is you cannot talk about rape being used a smear at it supports the rape culture”

              Not at all. It is possible to talk about how false accusations of rape can be used against a person. It’s just that CV and some others in this thread don’t possess the ability or inclination to do so without supporting rape culture.

              • Colonial Viper …
                24 August 2016 at 7:10 pm

                Getting a bit sick of judgement happy self proclaimed rape culture experts who somehow think it their god given right to put people into categories and condemn them on a prosecutor, judge and jury basis.

      • miravox 1.3.2
        24 August 2016 at 7:20 pm

        +1 marty

        Thanks weka for your clarity of though around practice of rape culture and for constantly (unfortunately) calling it out on the TS. I know it’s not easy.

    • Observer Tokoroa 1.4
      25 August 2016 at 11:07 am

      .
      . Most normal males would abhor the monstrous, cowardly and inexcusable degradation dumped upon the two women who were staff in his office in Sweden.

      He slept with both those women. Because the accusations against him are serious, he has turned them over to his numerous illiterate followers to degrade and shred.

      The question I would like to ask of Jill Stein is whether Assange has hacked into her private and public life.

      It is reckless of the Greens to promote Jill Stein into any senior position when Julian Assange is her hero with gifted ability to hack into anyone anywhere. And having hacked, then arbitrate whether he will destroy the persons or not.

      He is after all, a person who steals information for a living.

      Has he hacked into The Standard ? Does anyone know?
      .

    • Xanthe 1.5
      26 August 2016 at 6:56 am

      Gawd weka dont be an ass!

  2. adam 2
    24 August 2016 at 10:19 am

    The treatment of Chelsea Manning has been bloody awful. And done on purpose to put off anyone even thinking about whistle blowing. This is straight out of the stasi playbook, threats and terror backed up with a few very public examples. If you talk to people who lived in East Germany, they never met anyone from the stasi, but they knew what it could do…

    • Colonial Viper 2.1
      24 August 2016 at 11:22 am

      They are even thinking of charging Manning with more crimes because of her attempted suicide.

      Can you bloody believe the US authorities.

  3. Anne 3
    24 August 2016 at 10:45 am

    That last line “These attacks are intended to brand their targets as pariahs and stigmatize anyone who dares to challenge this narrative” describes perfectly the smear and sneer campaign that the establishment routinely launches against whistleblowers.

    I can personally attest to the truth of this statement. In my case it was at the most minor end of the scale and involved only a small section of the NZ Public Service. Still, the outcome was much the same.

    Imo, no-one is in a position to categorically pronounce Assange guilty or not guilty of the sexual crime for which he has been accused. Only a court of law can establish that to any acceptable degree. Having said that, there is no doubt the situation is being used by the Establishment (in its broadest sense) to have him ‘captured’ and deported to the USA where he will not receive a fair trial, and will end up rotting in an American gaol.

    I salute Jill Stein’s bravery for the stand she has taken.

    • Colonial Viper 3.1
      24 August 2016 at 12:16 pm

      Hi Anne, I do appreciate you relaying your personal experience of how nastily and completely the status quo powers can turn on a person they decide has become an inconvenience to them.

      Too often these cases are dismissed by others as ‘conspiracy theories’ – right up to the point that it happens to someone that you know.

      • Anne 3.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 3:25 pm

        Thanks for your support CV. We have an associate in common (haven’t heard from him in a long while) so I think you may know a little more about it.

        Too often these cases are dismissed by others as ‘conspiracy theories’

        Yes, I had experience of that too. Distressing at the time but doesn’t bother me now.

  4. Draco T Bastard 4
    24 August 2016 at 11:02 am

    That last line “These attacks are intended to brand their targets as pariahs and stigmatize anyone who dares to challenge this narrative” describes perfectly the smear and sneer campaign that the establishment routinely launches against whistleblowers.

    Describes National’s Dirty Politics well too as well as the RWNJs attacks against scientists.

  5. dancerwaitakere 5
    24 August 2016 at 11:04 am

    Wikileaks has been involved in the release of details about teenage rape victims, it has outed queer men in Saudi Arabia and released the details of the partners of those with HIV.

    (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b70da83fd111496dbdf015acbb7987fb/private-lives-are-exposed-wikileaks-spills-its-secrets?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP)

    The international left needs to move away from hero worship and also distance itself from the likes of Assange who are harmful to our movement in too many ways. There are too many brilliant people, doing incredible work, who are actual heros. Lets elevate those voices instead of the ones that have been consistently harmful.

    • weka 5.1
      24 August 2016 at 12:23 pm

      There is their involvement in the release of the IDs of Turkish citizens too,

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zeynep-tufekci/wikileaks-erdogan-emails_b_11158792.html

      https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160725/11391635062/updated-wikileaks-leak-turkish-emails-reveals-private-details-raises-ethical-questions-not.shtml

      I don’t have a problem with heroes per se. It’s when they become above criticism that there is a problem. Or worse, when they are part of a culture that does damage elsewhere. This is a classic example.

      • adam 5.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 2:19 pm

        Thanks for the link weka, did you read the updated techdirt link?

        It seems the whole Turkish ID of women was not wikileaks at all, but Michael Best. “Through a somewhat convoluted set of circumstances, it appeared the files were associated with the Wikileaks leak when they were not — and then basically everyone just started calling each other names”

        I agree with the article though, the flame war with Zeynep Tufekci was bloody ridiculous. And their twitter people need to be stomped on.

        So in effect just another beat up against wiki leaks.

        Have to say I get the feeling that Zeynep Tufekci was used by huffington post to help discredit the leaks against h.r.c.

        • weka 5.1.1.1
          24 August 2016 at 3:22 pm

          Other people say that wikileaks did have a responsibility in this

          /shrug.

          • joe90 5.1.1.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 4:05 pm

            Have to say I get the feeling that Zeynep Tufekci was used by huffington post to help discredit the leaks against h.r.c.

            Oh do fuck off .

            After I contacted her, Zeynep said: “I actually never had a conclusion on who the uploader was, since it wasn’t central to my complaint about actions of Wikileaks: that they had misrepresented what the emails were, and that they had repeatedly publicized these doxing databases as “full data for our Turkey AKP emails + more”. I’m glad to see one party step up and take responsibility, but this doesn’t absolve Wikileaks of their role in all parts of this “leak” which never should have happened since it exposed no wrongdoing by a government or a powerful actor, merely the emails of ordinary people, and sensitive personal information of 20-30 million ordinary people. I tried to explain this directly to Wikileaks, but they blocked me after I started showing them tweets from Turkey’s leading anti-censorship activists who were disgusted and horrified by these actions, especially since they will now become a strong talking point for pro-censorship forces in Turkey.”

            https://glomardisclosure.com/2016/07/26/the-who-and-how-of-the-akp-hack-dump-and-wikileaks-release/

            • adam 5.1.1.1.1.1
              25 August 2016 at 9:34 am

              So Joe90 who else picked it up? And why has it not gone further?

              I’m not saying she did not have a point, just the timing and its use – were not to her and the people of Turkey’s advantage. And more to the advantage of h.r.c.

  6. Chooky 6
    24 August 2016 at 11:04 am

    +100 Anne re ” I salute Jill Stein’s bravery for the stand she has taken.”.

    …and no charges against Assange were laid by the women concerned …they said categorically he did not rape them

    • Anne 6.1
      24 August 2016 at 11:35 am

      … no charges against Assange were laid by the women concerned …they said categorically he did not rape them.

      I remember that. Short of publicly hearing them say it (and I suspect the authorities might have prevented them from doing so) I see no reason at this stage to disbelieve it. The truth will come out one day. It always does.

    • weka 6.2
      24 August 2016 at 1:22 pm

      “…and no charges against Assange were laid by the women concerned”

      I’m pretty sure that in Sweden citizens can’t lay charges.

      “they said categorically he did not rape them”

      Citation from a reliable source for that please.

      • Chooky 6.2.1
        24 August 2016 at 5:06 pm

        “Over the past year, new information has emerged that both women explicitly deny having been raped by Mr. Assange.”

        https://justice4assange.com/

        “The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has found that Julian Assange is being arbitrarily and unlawfully detained by Sweden and the United Kingdom; and that he must be immediately released and compensated. The Working Group spent sixteen months investigating the case before issuing the Opinion. The process was adversarial: the UK and Sweden took part by making submissions to the Working Group. …

        …What is the status of the US investigation against Mr. Assange?

        The US Department of Justice confirmed in its April 2014 court filings that the national security criminal investigation and “pending prosecution” proceed. The FBI is leading the investigation. A dozen other agencies have been involved. See here.

        …”What is the status of the Swedish investigation against Mr. Assange?

        Formally, it is at the stage of “preliminary investigation.” Mr. Assange has not been charged. The investigation was previously canceled with the explanation that there were no grounds to accuse Mr. Assange. The prosecutor has yet to decide whether the investigation should turn into a formal investigation or not.

        …”Is Mr. Assange accused of ’rape’?

        Over the past year, new information has emerged that both women explicitly deny having been raped by Mr. Assange. In a statement to the UK Supreme Court, the prosecutor acknowledged that the complainants wished only to ask the police for advice about HIV tests, having discovered they’d had both had sex with Mr. Assange. (There has never been an allegation Mr. Assange has HIV.) Neither of the women wished to lodge a formal complaint.

        The woman of whom Mr. Assange is accused of the offence of “lesser rape” (a technical term in Swedish law) sent an SMS to a friend saying that she “did not want to accuse JA [of] anything” and “it was the police who made up the charges”. The other woman tweeted in 2013 that she had never been raped. Both women’s testimonies say that they consented to the sex. A senior prosecutor already dismissed the ’rape’ accusation, saying that there were no grounds for accusing Mr. Assange on this basis.

        But a third prosecutor, lobbied by a politician who was running for attorney general, took over the investigation and resurrected the accusations against Mr. Assange. Due to the great number of incorrect reports of, it is best to rely on primary source documents in this matter, which are on the internet and the UK Supreme Court “Agreed Statements of Facts” agreed to by the UK, the Swedish authoritiesm and Mr. Assange’s legal team. (See here and here.)

        https://justice4assange.com/

        ( seems obvious it is a political setup)

        • Stephanie Rodgers 6.2.1.1
          24 August 2016 at 5:30 pm

          You were asked for a reliable source and you link to a website whose address is “justice4assange.com”? 🙄

          • Chooky 6.2.1.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 8:25 pm

            UN panel statement ?…and you choose to ignore this?

            • Stephanie Rodgers 6.2.1.1.1.1
              24 August 2016 at 10:07 pm

              You have not linked to a “UN panel statement”, you have linked to an explicitly pro-Assange site which, as I have noted in a comment below, is wilfully misinterpreting the report on arbitrary detention, which does not address the validity of the accusations, only the circumstances of Assange’s detention.

              Hence, you see, why they’re called “the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention”.

              • Chooky …
                25 August 2016 at 10:29 am

                For those ignorant of the UN ruling and unable to check the facts themselves:

                Directly from the United Nations

                ‘The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Deems the deprivation of liberty of Mr. Julian Assange as arbitrary’

                On 4 December 2015, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) adopted Opinion No. 54/2015, in which it considered that Mr. Julian Assange was arbitrarily detained by the Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In that opinion, the Working Group recognized that Mr. Assange is entitled to his freedom of movement and to compensation. The application was filed with the Working Group in September 2014. The Opinion 54/2015 was sent to the Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 22 January 2016 in accordance with the Working Group’s Methods of Work.

                – See more at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17012#sthash.0Gg7MTGi.dpuf

                ‘Julian Assange is in arbitrary detention, UN panel finds
                WikiLeaks chief, who is avoiding extradition by living in Ecuadorian embassy, has won UN backing’

                https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/04/julian-assange-wikileaks-arrest-friday-un-investigation

                ‘Britain ‘sets dangerous precedent’ by defying UN report on Assange
                Former chair of UN working group says it is rare for its rulings to result in the kind of personal attacks UK politicians have made’

                https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/24/britain-precedent-defy-un-report-julian-assange-politicians

                • weka …
                  25 August 2016 at 11:44 am

                  Still nothing that shows the women say they weren’t raped. Quelle suprise. This sub-thread is about that, not whether Assange is legitimately detained or not.

                  • Chooky …
                    25 August 2016 at 12:02 pm

                    actually I thought it was about the USA Greens Presidential candidate saying Assange was a hero

                    …and it was sabotaged by rape accusations ( by you and others)

                    … despite the UN looking into his case over several years and deciding he had been done an injustice

                    ‘Assange is a hero: Jill Stein US Greens Presidential Candidate’

                    • weka …
                      25 August 2016 at 12:10 pm

                      This SUB-THREAD is about you saying that the women say they weren’t raped, and not being able to back that up. You’ve been making shit up all this time and I’m going to keep naming it.

                      There is no way that CV could have put up a post on this topic that didn’t involve discussion of rape culture. If you think you or CV are not supporting rape culture, make the case.

                      “…and it was sabotaged by rape accusations ( by you and others)”

                      What?

                      “… despite the UN looking into his case over several years and deciding he had been done an injustice”

                      Which has nothing to do with the rape culture issue other than you using it as rape apology.

                • Stephanie Rodgers …
                  25 August 2016 at 10:46 pm

                  It is somehow genuinely funny that you think you’ve somehow refuted my points. You’ve proved them. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention does not at any point comment on the veracity of the accusations. Which is exactly what I said.

        • weka 6.2.1.2
          24 August 2016 at 6:27 pm

          The main reference in that article regarding what the woman said is Assange’s avadavit on Wikileaks and a link back to the article itself. So your evidence that the women said they hadn’t been raped is the statement of the man who is accused of raping them. Surely even you can see that that is bizarre.

          Like Stein’s article, it’s all hearsay and opinion. Unless you can provide some evidence that the two women have said that they weren’t raped, I’m going to call you on making shit up. I’ve called you a rape apologist before and will do it again.

          • TheExtremist 6.2.1.2.1
            24 August 2016 at 6:34 pm

            +1

            I fin myself agreeing with you a lot, weka

            • weka 6.2.1.2.1.1
              24 August 2016 at 7:00 pm

              Thanks TE. I appreciated your comment below as well.

              The lack of critical thinking in Chooky’s comment made my head spin.

              • TheExtremist …
                24 August 2016 at 7:07 pm

                This weird train of thought seems to afflicted a lot of lefties (or seemingly lefties) as of late.

                This weird anti-establishment position which clouds reason to the point of accepting as fact the unreasonable. I don’t like the establishment but I still manage to keep things in perspective.

                Very odd.

                (And thanks for your consistently well thought out comments.)

    • McFlock 6.3
      24 August 2016 at 1:41 pm

      From the extradition hearings:

      Although it is clear a decision has not been taken to charge him, that is because, under Swedish procedure, that decision is taken at a late stage with the trial following quickly thereafter. In England and Wales, a decision to charge is taken at a very early stage; there can be no doubt that if what Mr Assange had done had been done in England and Wales, he would have been charged and thus criminal proceedings would have been commenced. If the commencement of criminal proceedings were to be viewed in this way, it would be to look at Swedish procedure through the narrowest of eyes. On this basis, criminal proceedings have commenced against Mr Assange.

  7. save nz 7
    24 August 2016 at 11:09 am

    Great post. Good on Jill Stein for pointing out independent reports have cleared Assange. This is not about sexual violence it is about using that as a way to extradite Assange to the US for his role in revealing the ‘truth’ about the US military.

    The US military has billions of dollars are unaccounted for but nobody in the US Government seems to mind – who know what they are doing, who they are torturing and who they are framing to keep that slush fund going.

    Until the US government regains some sort of control of their military and actually has a plan about all that has gone wrong then who can trust them. Like the US police, who literally get away with murder, they need to clean up their act.

    The US government has helped manufacture the post truth politics and should not blame Trump for making things up, if propaganda has historically been more important than exploring the truth and punishing whistleblowers.

    US neoliberalism are creating a nation of gun wielding gullible fools, who have lost the ability to question, work with others and stay on a credible path.

    • Anne 7.1
      24 August 2016 at 11:44 am

      US neoliberalism are creating a nation of gun wielding gullible fools…

      Half a nation. The other half are reasonable and intelligent people. They need to get their act together and defeat the rednecks, the tea party and fundamentalist maniacs and the generally dumbed down and gullible.

      • Colonial Viper 7.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 11:53 am

        Was it the rednecks or the fundies who repealed Glass Steagal enabling the banksters and the GFC?

        Was it the rednecks or the fundies who passed NAFTA which destroyed millions of working class jobs and shifted profits to big corporations?

        Was it the rednecks or the fundies who allowed just a few corporations to own and dumb down 90% of all US media?

        Was it the rednecks or the fundies who decided to move NATO right to the borders of Russia?

        HINT – Bill Clinton signed off on all of the above.

      • save nz 7.1.2
        24 August 2016 at 12:29 pm

        Weirdly when you meet Americans outside of the US they are normally the nicest, well educated people – you just wonder, what the Fuck happens with their government policy???

        Maybe that’s whats happening to Kiwis, nice people, appalling government policy?

    • Draco T Bastard 7.2
      24 August 2016 at 1:54 pm

      Until the US government regains some sort of control of their military…

      The US government does have control of the US military. It’s just that the elected representatives don’t.

      Until the US government regains some sort of control of their military and actually has a plan about all that has gone wrong then who can trust them. Like the US police, who literally get away with murder, they need to clean up their act.

      The US has been a rogue nation throughout its history and the people in charge are quite happy for it to remain so.

    • Stephanie Rodgers 7.3
      24 August 2016 at 5:34 pm

      Independent reports have not “cleared Assange” and it is deliberately misleading for Stein or CV to say so.

      The report covers only the circumstances of Assange being detained in Sweden and the UK, and finds issues with the process. It does not address at all the credibility of the accusations against him.
      http://ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17012&LangID=E

      • weka 7.3.1
        24 August 2016 at 6:45 pm

        Thanks for doing the leg work in these comment Stephanie. I haven’t had the brain power or the will :-/

  8. Adrian 8
    24 August 2016 at 11:59 am

    Thanks for this piece, there is absolutely no question that Julian Assange is, and will be viewed historically as a major figure in shaping the public’s perception on world politics.
    I would urge any one interested in the case on Assange to visit here…
    https://justice4assange.com/Assange-Case-Fact-Checker.html

    Establishment politics (which of course includes the ‘soft left’) and MSM, as they stand today will never allow Stein anywhere near the White House that much is for sure, they fear progressive change above all else.

    Just look at the UK now, the Guardian (along with the rest) can hardly contain itself in it’s negative Corbyn coverage, and even when they are held to account, they arrogantly dismiss the criticism…

    Report on media bias re Corbyn..
    http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/pdf/JeremyCorbyn/Cobyn-Report-FINAL.pdf

    Gardian response…
    https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/jul/19/yes-jeremy-corbyn-has-suffered-a-bad-press-but-wheres-the-harm

    Although to end on a positive note, Sanders got more votes than Trump in the primary race…so at least lots of thinking progressives are seeing through the layers of misdirection and straight out propaganda from the MSM and often, it turns out from their own party hierarchy.

    Stein/Sanders 2020, now that would be an interesting election cycle.

    • Colonial Viper 8.1
      24 August 2016 at 12:04 pm

      Jill Stein has said that she will gladly step aside if Sanders wanted to run as the Green candidate. I wish he would.

      • save nz 8.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 12:30 pm

        @CV – same.

      • Adrian 8.1.2
        24 August 2016 at 12:40 pm

        I am not sure if now is the right timing, I think he would be better to run with her through the next cycle, come in hard with some in some serious momentum behind them. Hillary will of course have disappointed everyone who for what ever unfounded reason, thought she would help any one but her own class, the Republicans…well who knows.

  9. Sigh 9
    24 August 2016 at 12:12 pm

    What has this site become

    [lprent: A place for authors and commenters to express their views. Whining Ms Grundys with nothing substantive to say (like yourself) and who instead simply drop to being carping critics will tend to simply get their ability to comment removed. Read the about and the policy if you don’t understand what I just said. ]

    • save nz 9.1
      24 August 2016 at 12:30 pm

      @Sigh – a MSM replacement. Granny has been decommissioned as being obsolete.

      • Sigh 9.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 12:48 pm

        It seems to revel in being marginal. A bona fide fascist is running for president under the Republican ticket and there are posts boosting the marginal Green Party candidate. It’s bizarre stuff.

        • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.1
          24 August 2016 at 1:15 pm

          It seems to revel in being marginal.

          Better than being a pro-capitalist, pro-consumerism, industrial civilisation entranced running dog.

        • Adrian 9.1.1.2
          24 August 2016 at 1:29 pm

          What is more bizarre, is that that Hillary is not absolutely destroying Trump in the polls, I mean come on, Trump, who has done everything humanly possible to that himself, doesn’t that tell you something about Clinton?
          US politics has absolutely no credibility left, 6 out of 10 US voters actually hate both candidates.
          http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/poll-hillary-clinton-trump-voters-dislike-223504

          You know this whole narrative of being marginal if you don’t back some appalling politician, just because they are slightly less appalling than the other side, might work for you, however I think it is a flawed and ultimately dangerous logic.
          Look at where the western Left has ended up with this acquiescent attitude, toothless and spineless in the face of the well oiled neo liberal centre right/left machine.

          I dislike Trump of course, but at least he faces up to the public, when was the last time Clinton faced open questions? 262 days that how long.
          http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/08/21/john_dickerson_grills_clinton_campaign_manager_for_hillary_going_260_days_without_a_press_conference.html
          She has so many skeletons in the closet, and is so damaged as a candidate, her advisors will do anything to keep her from public scrutiny, as we are now witnessing.

          Want more of the same…vote for more of the same.

          Want change…vote change.

          • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.2.1
            24 August 2016 at 2:58 pm

            You probably saw this by Scott Adam on Trump and the polls?

            http://blog.dilbert.com/post/148949796271/polls-and-the-bs-detector

            You know this whole narrative of being marginal if you don’t back some appalling politician, just because they are slightly less appalling than the other side, might work for you, however I think it is a flawed and ultimately dangerous logic.

            I think large sections of both the American and UK public are truly over the power elite’s calls to keep voting in the least bad candidate.

            Prediction: as times get more desperate in the formerly privileged western nations, increasingly marginal and radical candidates are going to succeed on the political scene.

            • marty mars 9.1.1.2.1.1
              24 August 2016 at 6:41 pm

              “I think large sections of both the American and UK public are truly over the power elite’s calls to keep voting in the least bad candidate.”

              Isn’t that your call with trump? remember your inadequate defense of why you say vote for a climate change denier.

              edit – your prediction is straight JMG – please provide a credit and stop trying to take the credit for others originality.

              • Colonial Viper …
                24 August 2016 at 10:46 pm

                Isn’t that your call with trump? remember your inadequate defense of why you say vote for a climate change denier.

                I’ve never asked anyone to vote for Trump; I don’t know hardly any people able to vote in the US Presidential elections.

                edit – your prediction is straight JMG – please provide a credit and stop trying to take the credit for others originality.

                What are you, my university professor?

                Are you such a genius that everything you’ve written on politics and elections is original thought?

                • marty mars …
                  24 August 2016 at 10:57 pm

                  No need to get testy but that is pretty straight JMG isn’t it and as for not asking people to vote for trump – are you serious?

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    25 August 2016 at 10:41 am

                    I know hardly anyone eligible to vote in the US Presidential elections. Whom exactly did you think I was telling to go vote Trump?

                    Yes I support Trump ahead of Hillary, full stop. But I’ve never told a Hillary or Bernie supporter via TS to go vote for Trump instead.

  10. McFlock 10
    24 August 2016 at 12:52 pm

    I think Assange is a hero. Wikileaks took courage and vision to implement, has changed the world, and usually tries to be a force for good (although like all attempts, is imperfect).

    I also think Assange is probably a rapist.

    Not only that, I think that people who:

    misrepresent both the level of investigation and how far the process progressed by relying on a procedural difference of when suspects are charged in different legal systems; and/or

    portray as some sort of indication of lack of evidence the fact that Assange has been on the run long enough for the statute of limitations to run out on three suspected crimes so the investigations have been dropped; and/or

    allude to unidentified UN reports exonerating him without giving others enough information to see whether they’re making shit up to defend a rapist

    …are maintaining an environment where some men will feel (often quite accurately) able to rape other people with legal impunity. And for the cheap seats, that is called “supporting rape culture”.

  11. weka 11
    24 August 2016 at 1:10 pm

    You also don’t get it (and I suspect don’t understand what rape culture is), and are also promoting rape culture.

    “In left wing spaces, universal rights are prioritised.”

    Aka, what left wing men define as universal rights are prioritised.

    Edit, that was a reply to a comment that is not longer there.

  12. TheExtremist 12
    24 August 2016 at 2:42 pm

    “What has also been fascinating is how many on the Left have fallen so easily and so quickly for these psy-op propagated smears.”

    Says the guy who supports a racist and mysoginistic billionaire for president.

    • Colonial Viper 12.1
      24 August 2016 at 2:59 pm

      There you’ve fallen for another set of the power elite’s psy-op propagated smears.

      • TheExtremist 12.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 3:04 pm

        Dude, it isn’t a smear. It’s Trumps own fucking words.

        • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1
          24 August 2016 at 4:49 pm

          *Shrug*

          Easy win Trump Nov 2016.

          • TheExtremist 12.1.1.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 5:06 pm

            Donald Trumps blatant and open racism, mysoginy and bigotry….
            CV: “Shrug”

            Then the only conclusion is you, yourself, are a racist, sexist, bigot.

            Pathetic.

            • McFlock 12.1.1.1.1.1
              24 August 2016 at 5:12 pm

              nah, you’ve got him all wrong. He just wants to revolutionise the capitalist hegemony without in any way changing the social power structures that the hegemony created 🙂

              • TheExtremist …
                24 August 2016 at 5:16 pm

                And he’ll achieve that but introducing billions of dollars to the top 1% while demonising other religions and races.

                Left wing hero!

            • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1.1.2
              24 August 2016 at 5:16 pm

              Then the only conclusion is you, yourself, are a racist, sexist, bigot.

              Pathetic.

              I didn’t ask for your approval, and neither do I want it.

              • TheExtremist …
                24 August 2016 at 5:18 pm

                No you don’t need my approval. You don’t need anyone’s approval.

                Doesn’t mean you aren’t a racist, sexist, bigot though.

  13. Stephanie Rodgers 13
    24 August 2016 at 5:43 pm

    The cult of personality around Julian Assange is simply embarrassing.

    Whatever initial good Wikileaks has done has been thoroughly destroyed by his self-centered actions – and I’m not even talking about the accusations of sexual misconduct which led him to seek refuge in the embassy of a nation which regularly persecutes journalists and suppresses democratic freedoms.

    This year alone, as others have noted, Wikileaks has been wilfully complicit in endangering a million Turkish women by indiscriminately releasing their personal information, and endangering the lives of gay men and rape victims in Saudi Arabia. Because apparently the mission of holding state powers to account is too important to consider the lives of ordinary citizens.

    The Wikileaks Twitter account, which is presumed to be operated by Assange, does fuck-all these days except tweet bizarre conspiracy theories about Hilary Clinton.

    Julian Assange has absolutely no grounds to be remembered with the same respect we should give Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden – Manning, who was left unprepared and unsupported by Wikileaks and subsequently imprisoned, and Edward Snowden who had nothing to do with Wikileaks until Assange decided to insert himself into Snowden’s story.

    No hero.

    • Daveosaurus 13.1
      24 August 2016 at 5:46 pm

      Very well said.

    • TheExtremist 13.2
      24 August 2016 at 6:04 pm

      +1 +1 +1…. Ad infintim

    • weka 13.3
      24 August 2016 at 6:43 pm

      “Because apparently the mission of holding state powers to account is too important to consider the lives of ordinary citizens.”

      And interesting how that connects with the removed comment that said that on the left universal rights take priority over everything else. The Hero gets to decide what is important.

    • miravox 13.5
      24 August 2016 at 7:12 pm

      Exactly.

    • spikeyboy 13.6
      24 August 2016 at 8:33 pm

      Great conclusion to a well made argument. Thanks Stephanie, Weka et al

    • Colonial Viper 13.7
      24 August 2016 at 10:37 pm

      Julian Assange has absolutely no grounds to be remembered with the same respect we should give Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden – Manning, who was left unprepared and unsupported by Wikileaks and subsequently imprisoned, and Edward Snowden who had nothing to do with Wikileaks until Assange decided to insert himself into Snowden’s story.

      Sorry I completely disagree with you here. Not only does Julian Assange fully deserve the honour with which Jill Stein has ascribed him with, but you get other critical facts here wrong too.

      1) Chelsea Manning was hunted down and imprisoned by the Obama/Hillary Clinton White House. What exactly did you expect a small young organisation like wikileaks to be able to do against the US Federal Govt when the UN could do nothing to help Manning?

      2) Assange decided to “insert himself into Snowden’s story” – thereby saving Snowden from a fate worse than Chelsea Manning by giving Edward Snowden a life line in Hong Kong and both strategy and support to escape to Russia.

      Again – all credit to the work of Assange and wikileaks.

    • maninthemiddle 13.8
      26 August 2016 at 12:13 pm

      Agreed.

  14. Chooky 14
    24 August 2016 at 8:27 pm

    ‘Julian Assange: The Untold Story Of An Epic Struggle For Justice’ by John Pilger

    https://newmatilda.com/2015/07/31/julian-assange-untold-story-epic-struggle-justice/

    …”Neither woman claimed she had been raped. Indeed, both have denied they were raped and one of them has since tweeted, “I have not been raped.” That they were manipulated by police and their wishes ignored is evident – whatever their lawyers might say now. Certainly, they are victims of a saga which blights the reputation of Sweden itself.

    For Assange, his only trial has been trial by media. On August 20, 2010, the Swedish police opened a “rape investigation” and immediately – and unlawfully – told the Stockholm tabloids that there was a warrant for Assange’s arrest for the “rape of two women”. This was the news that went around the world…

    (seems like some would still like a trail by media…but this is more of a reflection on themselves and their own personal irrational twistedness)

  15. Adrian 15
    24 August 2016 at 9:40 pm

    It’s strange that the organization that has done probably more damage to the neo liberal project in this political war, that I thought most progressive activists on the left where in the middle of waging ( and if you haven’t noticed lately we are losing) than any other, is getting so absolutely destroyed here.
    Now Wikileaks isn’t perfect, sure, but to come out and attack it so vehemently it on this forum, now that is just depressing, I thought I was on whale oil. I mean we should be critiquing it, of course we should, that goes with out saying, but the level of hostility.

    Just start re-researching the history of their work, and you quickly start remembering the importance and the shear amount of leaks and revelations made under the safe umbrella of the Wikileaks organization.
    This organization has made power tremble with fear, for that alone, we have something to thank them for, well I do any way.

    • te reo putake 15.1
      24 August 2016 at 10:00 pm

      Adrian, you probably need to think about who Wikileaks target. It’s not those with real power, it’s not the 1%. Mostly, its the agencies of the state. Now, obviously, those state players can do damage, but the real enemy of humanity is capitalism not government. And Wikileaks don’t have the inclination, or perhaps the guts, to take on capital. In some ways, Wikileaks actually advance the interests of capital by attacking the structures of democracy. They contribute to the alienation of people from the democratic process. And, occasionally, they do real damage to the truly innocent.

      In my estimation Wikileaks is an immature, myopic organisation. They’ll occasionally do good, but mostly they’ll do nothing that really matters.

      • Stephanie Rodgers 15.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 10:18 pm

        The point that Wikileaks targets states instead of capital isn’t one I’d thought of before, thanks TRP.

        • Colonial Viper 15.1.1.1
          24 August 2016 at 10:27 pm

          Think of the TPP. Written by corporations, passed by politicians, enforced by states.

          Wikileaks has done plenty of releases around the TPP and TTIP.

          So already, TRP has it all wrong. States are rightfully targeted when they work for capitalism and corporations, instead of for citizens.

          • te reo putake 15.1.1.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 11:03 pm

            You might want to read my comment again, CV. I don’t have a problem with anyone exposing the bad things that governments do. A fair few of my posts here do exactly that, in a Kiwi context.

            Wikileaks does not actively target the real bad guys. Capitalism and corporations, as you put it. They’re not actually challenging the powers that be. That’s a significant weakness, IMO.

            • Colonial Viper 15.1.1.1.1.1
              24 August 2016 at 11:21 pm

              Odd then if they are not challenging the powers that be, that the powers that be are so very keen to cut off their funding, demonise them and to cut their founder Assange down at the knees.

              Or maybe you are wrong, and they are fulfilling their mission as a transparency organisation against the status quo power elite.

              • McFlock …
                25 August 2016 at 1:00 pm

                lol

                indeed – if wikileak is not really challenging the powers that be in an effective manner, then there’s no real need for them to target Assange with a plan to extract him from Sweden following his arrest on fabricated sexual assault charges. Which means that they’re just ordinary sexual assault allegations with no international ulterior purposes.

                Mighty nice house of cards you’ve got there…

        • te reo putake 15.1.1.2
          24 August 2016 at 11:08 pm

          Cheers, Stephanie! I reckon my oft mooted post on class, capital and freedom is way overdue. Maybe on the weekend, if real life doesn’t get in the way.

      • Colonial Viper 15.1.2
        24 August 2016 at 10:21 pm

        I wish that the Labour Party would stop signing off on National’s NSA approved spying legislation.

        But they do, so in this context, wikileaks is playing a vital role in maintaining democracy and transparency against the tide of western mainstream political parties intent on further empowering and feeding the military, security and surveillance state.

        It’s not those with real power, it’s not the 1%. Mostly, its the agencies of the state. Now, obviously, those state players can do damage, but the real enemy of humanity is capitalism not government.

        It’s sad that you are a full 55 years behind the times.

        In 1961 Eisenhower tried to warn us about the growing might of the Military-Industrial-Congressional complex. Tried to warn us that the tightening and mutually symbiotic relationship between large military/security corporations and the Federal Government meant that and clear bright lines would become increasingly blurred over time.

        And so it has, as the revolving door between corporate America and Washington DC spins faster and faster.

        Listen to the speech. You might learn something from it.

        It’s not those with real power, it’s not the 1%.

        The Clintons have collected hundreds of millions of dollars since leaving the White House. The largest sums of which since Hillary became Sec State.

        That puts the Clintons in the 1% of the 1%.

        • TheExtremist 15.1.2.1
          24 August 2016 at 10:59 pm

          But Trump is a man of the people.

          Jesus man, you set yourself up for ridicule

          • Colonial Viper 15.1.2.1.1
            24 August 2016 at 11:03 pm

            Of course Trump is a man of the people. Several thousand of them travel for miles all around small towns and small cities with only two or three days notice tops, to hear him speak for an hour.

            At least he is a man of the people compared to Hillary Clinton, who hides from the people (unless the people in question are multimillionaires and celebs).

            Jesus man, you set yourself up for ridicule

            No I think I do OK. BTW did you read about the $100,000 per ticket fund raiser arranged by the Rothschilds that Hillary Clinton just attended? She flew her private jet 20 miles (36 km) to get there.

            A real woman of the people, yes?

            • TheExtremist 15.1.2.1.1.1
              24 August 2016 at 11:21 pm

              Please see below. You are now banned off this post for your numerous ad homs against me, the author of this post. Cheers. CV.

      • adam 15.1.3
        25 August 2016 at 9:50 am

        Well anyone who fawns over the state at this stage is kidding themselves.

        It is through the instrument of the state that the 1% are able to do as much damage and destruction as they do.

        It is the state is at the blunt end of brute force against its citizens. Individuals and indeed corporations, don’t have police, the military, spy agencies, and the power to lock people up. That is the state.

        But if you want to live in a fantasy world were a left wing government in control of the state is any better, may I present the 4th and 5th labour governments as proof it is not.

    • Colonial Viper 15.2
      24 August 2016 at 10:08 pm

      Ironically, it is the identity politics/gender politics focused left which are proving themselves to be amongst the most intolerant and self righteous/self serving groups to be found anywhere on the political spectrum.

      Chris Hedges describes in vivid detail how the Left has mired itself in this disconnected morass where it can no longer tell friend from foe, reality from abstraction, in his book Death of the Liberal Class.

      • Chooky 15.2.1
        25 August 2016 at 10:43 am

        +100 CV … and it is very interesting who wants to accuse Assange despite the lack of charges from the women concerned, in fact their explicit denial of rape

        …i suspect some of Assange’s accusers and their vilification of those who support him are not genuinely for women’s rights at all

        …these women feminists/ activists against rape (see below)are however for Julian Assange and for justice

        ‘We are Women Against Rape but we do not want Julian Assange extradited’

        https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/women-against-rape-julian-assange

        • te reo putake 15.2.1.1
          25 August 2016 at 10:51 am

          Got a genuine link for that “explicit denial”, Chooky?

          • Chooky 15.2.1.1.1
            25 August 2016 at 11:00 am

            see Pilgers article ( sorry I don’t have the time or inclination to go and try and research Swedish police files or the tweets and statements made by the women directly….but there are enough international credible sources to say they explicitly denied rape and refused to make rape charges….I suggest you put the effort into reading all the links here)

            https://newmatilda.com/2015/07/31/julian-assange-untold-story-epic-struggle-justice/

            • te reo putake 15.2.1.1.1.1
              25 August 2016 at 11:03 am

              You could have just said ‘no’ 😉

              edit: One of the victims has taken umbrage at the UN’s recent statement on his ‘arbitrary detention’, saying it was “offensive”. She further said she wants “vindication”.

              “Assange should take responsibility and let the investigation move forward”.

              Not exactly an explicit denial, aye? It actually reads closer to a victim wanting to see her attacker face justice.

            • weka 15.2.1.1.1.2
              25 August 2016 at 11:59 am

              In other words, some people you like believe the women say they weren’t raped, but no-one seems to be able to verify that.

              Cite or it didn’t happen.

              • Chooky …
                25 August 2016 at 12:11 pm

                @ trp and weka ?…I have already cited from reputable sources eg Pilger who went into it in detail …that the women denied making rape charges

                https://newmatilda.com/2015/07/31/julian-assange-untold-story-epic-struggle-justice/

                …and quite frankly I prefer to believe the UN report which took several years and concluded he had been done an injustice

                …also you seem to be conveniently ignoring citations that indicate a smear campaign and political motivations

                • weka …
                  25 August 2016 at 12:33 pm

                  You made a very specific claim,

                  …and no charges against Assange were laid by the women concerned …they said categorically he did not rape them

                  The only evidence you have presented to support that is things like ‘this website says they said’, or ‘Pilger says they said’. That’s hearsay, not evidence.

                  If Pilger backs up his statement, you should be able to follow the links and provide the evidence here. But I’m done chasing up what you say. Basically you have spend a day lying about two women who say they were raped. That’s rape apology.

                  …and quite frankly I prefer to believe the UN report which took several years and concluded he had been done an injustice

                  Which doesn’t say that the woman say they weren’t raped.

                  …also you seem to be conveniently ignoring citations that indicate a smear campaign and political motivations

                  Now you are telling lies about me. Please stop.

                  • Xanthe …
                    26 August 2016 at 7:05 am

                    Weka you go and do your own bloody research if you want to spout self serving crap. It is well established that neither woman made rape claims! This whole mess is being pushed forward by a single twisted prosicutor with attitudes very much like your own. Get over it!

                    [Keep the abusive language to a minimum, please. It is not ‘well established’ that neither woman made rape claims. In fact, upthread there have been several comments saying that and no evidence provided to back it up and, in the alternative, I linked to a recent article in which one of the women is clearly looking forward to her day in court. So howabout you do your own research, rather than yell at commenters? If you can come back with something definitive, I think we’ll all be interested. And surprised. Cheers, TRP]

                    • xanthe …
                      26 August 2016 at 12:18 pm

                      [Cleaning up this thread – thanks CV]

                    • xanthe …
                      26 August 2016 at 1:30 pm

                      [Cleaning up this thread – thanks CV]

                    • xanthe …
                      26 August 2016 at 1:33 pm

                      [Cleaning up this thread – thanks CV]

                    • weka …
                      26 August 2016 at 1:51 pm

                      [Cleaning up this thread – thanks CV]

                    • xanthe …
                      26 August 2016 at 2:00 pm

                      [Cleaning up this thread – thanks CV]

                      Xanthe – enough for now please. Take some time to cool off now you have come to a better understanding of how some of the moderators work around here.

                    • weka …
                      26 August 2016 at 2:03 pm

                      ’SW’ felt she was “railroaded by police and others around her”:

                      Her SMS messages from the day of the police visit and immediately after, held by the Swedish authorities, state that she “did not want to put any charges on JA but that the police were keen on grabbing him” (14:26); and that she was “shocked when they arrested JA because she only wanted him to take a test” (17:06); that she “did not want to accuse JA for anything”; and at 22:25 that “it was the police who made up the charges”. This is corroborated by witness statements taken by Swedish authorities from friends of ’SW’, Marie Thorn and Hanna Rosquist. These statements include SW stating that she felt she had been “railroaded by police and others around her”.

                      6) The prosecution formally admitted that ’SW’ did not intend to make a complaint and only sought advice about STD tests:

                      Assuming that’s from the PDF, I would note that it’s about one of the women, not both. And that nothing there says that the women say they weren’t raped.

                      You said, “It is well established that neither woman made rape claims!”. I think what you mean is that in the case of one woman, she went to the police about somethign else, she didn’t go there to report rape. That’s not the same as her saying she wasn’t raped.

                      I’m not splitting hairs here. Let me just point out that in one of the previous conversations on this there were men who were challenging the idea that having intercourse with a woman while asleep is rape. Until the legislation was quoted to them (and then all the prevaricating starts). So I can see that a woman might also not know the legal definition of rape until someone who does know points it out. But if someone has intercourse with her while she is alseep, that is rape irrespective of whether she calls it that or not (unless she gave permission beforehand I guess).

                      So, the issue here is that multiple people have said that both of the women say they weren’t raped. Not that the women didn’t iniitally lay rape complaints, but that they have stated they weren’t raped. Not a single person has been able to provide evidence of that that is a reliable source (eg affadavit from the women). Until that happens, you are all speculating, and that’s the thing I am objecting to because it legitimises rape culture’s insistence that women’s stories are up for speculation.

                      You still have until the end of the day.

                      [Hi weka I am putting an end to the count down timer style of moderation on this thread. I think you have made your substantive points very clearly and validly so am leaving your last comment here up. But please if I can ask you not to participate in the moderation escalation game. CV]

                      [No worries, CV. However, Xanthe still has until the end of the day to prove the assertion. To avoid messing this thread up with uncomfortable truths, Xanthe should feel free to post the response in open mike. Xanthe is also welcome to withdraw the assertion. There’s no shame in being unable to prove the unprovable. TRP]

                      [TRP, I asked you politely in the moderator’s forum to not intrude on my post with this style of ‘high noon’ ultimatum moderation. I would ask that you respect that please. Stay away. CV]

                      [There was nothing polite about your request, nor any need to censor the comments from Xanthe and myself. The rules of TS around backing up assertions are clear. Xanthe at least tried to do so, but you censored their comment. You apparently didn’t like the simple truth that the exchange exposed. I’m happy to carry on the conversation with Xanthe on Open mike. It could be illuminating. TRP]

                    • xanthe …
                      26 August 2016 at 7:02 pm

                      Xanthe, I have read your comment and appreciate what you are attempting to do, but please do not comment on this post again. TRP is on the warpath for you for some reason so be sensible and keep your head down for now. CV

                      [No warpath. I’m simply asking Xanthe to provide proof for an unlikely claim they have made. That follows on from Xanthe abusing another commenter and telling them they need to do some research on the subject. Now Xanthe is being asked to do the same research they loudly insisted on. We’ll see how it turns out. TRP]

  16. Adrian 16
    24 August 2016 at 10:02 pm

    I have thought about it, quite a lot, and I disagree with you.
    But then if most of your information is sourced from the Guardian, or similar sources, I guess we are going disagree on quite a few current topics.

  17. Drowsy M. Kram 17
    24 August 2016 at 10:46 pm

    Julian Assange – a human first (to err is human), villain/personality/hero second.

    What they believe.

    Wonder if, during the 4+ years of his continuing asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, Mr Assange has ever privately regretted helping to establish WikiLeaks. Maybe he deserves everything he continues to get, but after reading the comments on this post the phrase “Kicking a man when he’s down.” came to mind.

    I’m not writing in defence of Jill Stein’s decision to label Julian Assange a hero. Or in defence of Assange, Manning, Snowden, and any number of anonymous whistle blowers who act (often at considerable personal risk) to shed a little light on how global elites operate (think Panama papers). Nor to minimise the collateral damage such actions inevitably cause. I literally can’t defend them, but trying to understand them may not be a complete waste of time. For example, the information in the ‘Early life’, ‘Hacking’, and ‘Programming’ sections of the Wikipedia entry on Assange was helpful in this regard.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange

    • Colonial Viper 17.1
      24 August 2016 at 10:59 pm

      Lots of lefties here see themselves as prosecutor, judge and jury all rolled into a self righteous one. It’s apparent throughout their their tone and demeanour. For them to try and understand a former near-child prodigy like Assange is asking way too much.

      • TheExtremist 17.1.1
        24 August 2016 at 11:02 pm

        Says the guy who supports an openly bigoted, sexist pig of a man who openly, and frequently, incites or implies violence against his political rivals.

        You have no moral soapbox to stand on here CV. In fact, outside a few non-thinking toadys you have pretty much only garnered disbelief and scorn.

        [Sadly, that’s now the last of your many ad homs against me on my own post. Banned off my post now. Cheers. CV]

  18. Observer Tokoroa 18
    25 August 2016 at 12:50 am

    .
    . Julian’s reluctance

    . It would have been so much simpler for Julian to have obeyed the summons to talk with the Police regarding his sexual activities with his two staff in Sweden.

    . That is a separate issue from his role as a whistle blower revealing documents that belong to sovereign States.

    . It is normal for honest people to defend themselves against serious accusations. The best way of doing that was to front up to the Swedish Authorities who formally requested to speak with him concerning aspects of his sexual actions carried out on two female nationals in Sweden.

    . He has avoided that.

    . His alleged concern is that talking with the authorities in Sweden would have seen him forcefully extradited to the USA. Even though at the time he was in Sweden by his own volition and had not been deported to anywhere.

    . Julian has many hundreds of thousands supporters. Vilifying Sweden on behalf of Julian for something Sweden has not done is a shaky plank on which to walk their hero.

    Further, it is not usual for a grown man and his many thousands of supporters to pour titanic abuse on women. Especially on women with whom Julian has slept.
    .
    As to whether revealing State Documents is a crime or not, is for each Nation to decide. I rather think that States will more likely continue to keep their sensitive documents secret for a period of decades, and then release them. The one thing we know is that no State is perfect. Not Sweden; not the USA; not New Zealand.

    .

  19. adam 19
    25 August 2016 at 10:32 am

    You know the sad thing about this post?

    Two other people were mentioned by Dr Stein, two.

    One who thought it was better to taker her own life rather than suffer at the hands of a brutal and the amoral state.

    And the other who took refuge in Russia – that’s right, Russia. The closest I can come too in ridiculous nature of that statement is: A gay rights activist seeking asylum in Saudi Arabia.

    But instead we get distracted by a rapist, who is to scared to stand trial because he will probably get 30 years or more for pissing off the 1% and there backers the USA and British state. No one is talking about justice, and the fact no side can have any resemblance of it whist the elephant is still in the room. And we are not talking about the elephant.

    Nothing is perfect, and mistakes happen. So why are people here so happy to let the state get away with the nasty evil things it does, and instead go after individuals? Whilst actually ignoring the other individuals caught up in this?

    • Colonial Viper 19.1
      25 August 2016 at 10:46 am

      But instead we get distracted by an alleged rapist, who is to scared to stand trial because he will probably get 30 years or more in a US military prison like Guantanamo for pissing off the 1% and there backers the USA and British state.

      I think the above is a bit more like it.

      Here, Putin speaks directly to the press about Edward Snowden, and how the CIA let Snowden “unprofessionally” escape their grasp.

  21. Chooky 21
    25 August 2016 at 11:12 am

    Why they want to get Assange …the real reasons…and why Jill Stein is a very brave woman for supporting him

    https://www.rt.com/shows/going-underground/354847-wikileaks-dnc-leaks-russia/

  22. marty mars 22
    25 August 2016 at 11:19 am

    So they are saying that clnton has a stronger relationship with Russia than trump – oh dear it is all so confused

    • Colonial Viper 22.1
      25 August 2016 at 11:26 am

      It was part of Hillary Clinton’s “pay for play” State Department.

      Certain US and Russian business interests who stood to greatly profit from the sale of American uranium mines to the Russians donated generously to the Clintons.

      Not surprisingly, Hillary’s State Dept signed off on the deal.

      The upshot of it all now is that Russians now own approx 20% of the US’s uranium reserves, and the Clinton Foundation is several million dollars richer.

      • marty mars 22.1.1
        25 August 2016 at 11:33 am

        So who is the bigger friend of Russia/putin, Clinton or trump?

        • Colonial Viper 22.1.1.1
          25 August 2016 at 12:10 pm

          Trump is a friend of the Russian nation and the Russian people; Hillary is a regime changing enemy of the Russian nation and the Russian people.

          • Chooky 22.1.1.1.1
            25 August 2016 at 12:19 pm

            +100 CV…lol…well put ! ( EXCELLENT POST and comments as usual)

            (…but unfortunately or fortunately i have to go now and leave you to it , to hold the fort for the courageous Jill Stein of the USA Green Party!)

            …I may yet vote Green on the strength of her, despite other annoying Greens

  23. tom 23
    25 August 2016 at 11:49 am

    Wow CV i feel for you man, a lot of Vitriol for a valid opinion, respect for putting up with it as much as you do.
    I do not 100% agree with all you say, especially around Trump, but can agree Hilary is so bad that is very negligible as to who is actually better, it is basically a moot point as both are so bad, is an indightment on the whole US political system IMO. I do think Trump will become part of establishment IF gets into power, but i know for a fact Hilary will/is. But Trump trumps hilary on crazy, and that is also a hard thing to do. I was all Sanders, so now sit with Stein and wish Sanders would move over to that ticket.
    On Assange though am fully with you, and am actually really surprised at the level of anti sentiment here towards Assange.
    For me the fact that john Pilger, Noam Chomsky, and many other very respected LW figures support Assange and would not do so if had any inkling he was at all guilty, is a biggie, as i know how thorough and ethical Pilger and Chomsky are, also the news i watch most is Democracy Now! (which is Must viewing for anyone who wants decent analysis against the establishment, their motto is ‘the exception to the rulers’) who also support Assange and have over the last 6 or so yrs done many excellent pieces on him, his circumstances, and interviews with him (multiple hr long specials) that are available, i understand, online on their webite, well worth watching to get a fuller picture that our MSM will not provide and an excellent antidote to the very manipulated and controlled narratives we in general get, even LWers with knowledge to, and intelligence to, read btwn lines.
    The fact that the victims have stated they were not raped, that was consensual, is pretty damning in itself, also that one is for not using a condom which in Swiss law can come under stat rape also indicates this. People have also said why has he not faced the music, well why would you when you know it is a setup to be incorrectly extradited to US and treated like Manning has been, and he has made himself available since the outset for interviews just not in Switzerland. A lot of unordinary protocol has been followed in this case as opposed to others of similar nature that are not politicised. The list goes on and on.

    • weka 23.1
      25 August 2016 at 12:06 pm

      “The fact that the victims have stated they were not raped”

      Citation needed. Link or it didn’t happen.

      • Colonial Viper 23.1.1
        25 August 2016 at 12:42 pm

        This account, which you will not like, makes it clear that the two women were initially most concerned about the following things:

        1) They discovered Assange was sleeping around.
        2) Broken condoms, non use of condoms.
        3) Fear of exposure to HIV.

        They did not consider that Assange had used force on them or had assaulted them.

        After reading this I can understand why the Swedish prosecutor initially dropped all charges against Assange.

        http://observer.com/2016/02/exclusive-new-docs-throw-doubt-on-julian-assange-rape-charges-in-stockholm/

        • weka 23.1.1.1
          25 August 2016 at 12:55 pm

          That isn’t evidence to support “The fact that the victims have stated they were not raped”. It’s yet another persons views on the issue, where that person is saying they read something, but aren’t quoting the actual evidence and are instead reporting their interpretaion. I’m looking for actual evidence that either of the women said “Assange didn’t rape me” or similar.

          You might want to consider that it’s common for women to be raped and not intially name it as rape, because they are in shock or are trying to rationalise away their distress or because what happened to them doesn’t fit rape culture definitions of rape or because if they use the word rape and apply it to what happened to them they won’t be able to cope. When you try and assess whether someone was raped, from a distance like this, and you use rape myths to support your assessment (“she didn’t call it rape at the time therefore it wasn’t rape”), then you are harming rape victims.

          • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.1.1
            25 August 2016 at 1:07 pm

            I’m going by the 2010 report signed off on by Swedish law enforcement authorities. The two female complainants said nothing about Assange using force on them, said nothing about the sex not being consensual, but did have concerns about his sleeping around and about condoms and the risk of HIV.

            When you try and assess whether someone was raped, from a distance like this, and you use rape myths to support your assessment (“she didn’t call it rape at the time therefore it wasn’t rape”), then you are harming rape victims.

            I don’t need you to keep acting as prosecutor, judge and jury, thanks.

            People can click on the Observer article and find out more about what the complainants, witnesses etc actually said, did and texted around the time Assange was said to have perpetrated the rapes.

          • tom 23.1.1.1.2
            26 August 2016 at 8:36 am

            Found a good interview from Democracy Now 20 dec 2010, covers pretty well what we have been discussing, is a debate btwn 2 feminists with opposing views on the subject, and they discuss in some detail the actual victims statements
            Online they have vast amounts of articles on Assange going all the way back to the beginning, i went thru last night and is a very interesting timeline, which i believe shows quite clearly is a smear, and the debate i have linked too even the lady who believes would be classed as rape believed was a smear also. Naomi Wolf is definately aligned with how i feel on the subject, and gives a good example that it is the US and Swiss Govts that are promoting rape culture by using this as a smear when lots of clear cut cases are not fought for nearly as hard, if at all.
            Also from this it does seem clear that it was consensual, and also that the victims went to police only to get a STD test done and the police then after hearing the story told them it was technically rape, and it escalated from there.

            part 1
            http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/20/naomi_wolf_vs_jaclyn_friedman_a

            part 2
            http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/20/part_iifeminists_debate_on_the_sexual_allegations_against_julian_assange

            • weka 23.1.1.1.2.1
              26 August 2016 at 8:56 am

              Do you understand the political issues of left wingers calling women who say they have been raped liars? And how that impacts on rape culture? That it legitimises questioning all women who have been raped whenever someone decides they don’t like her story of motivations. And that in the context of how massive a problem we give with rape that this is hugely problematic.

              I will have a look at your link later but I doubt it will change my position because I am not arguing against those things. I think most of the people who have responded to me are missing that critical point.

              • xanthe …
                26 August 2016 at 9:49 am

                Weka get a grip! no one here (who has actually done any research on the subject) is “calling women who say they have been raped liars” you are making stuff up to fit your preconceptions! NO ONE IS SAYING THESE WOMEN LIED !… got it ?

                What multiple people are saying based on multiple sources is that NO RAPE COMPLAINT WAS MADE ! by either woman. its all documented!

                One swedish prosecutor is lieing. Thats all it takes

                Please please take a half hour off from your busy schedual and go and search out the source documents

                instead of out of hand dismissal of freedom4assange.com how about you actually go there and browse the very full library of source documents they have provided.

              • tom …
                26 August 2016 at 10:45 am

                you lost me, i never said those things, this is ridiculous, please watch or read the links provided, they are feminist woman debating the issue from 2 sides of the argument.

                • weka …
                  26 August 2016 at 12:37 pm

                  um, you’ve lost me too.

                  “i never said those things”

                  What things?

                  You replied at 8:36am to a comment of mine, so I assumed you were addressing points I have made in the context of this subthread (otherwise you would have posted at the bottom of the thread). In that comment you made some statements eg that the Assange allegations are a smear, and that the acts were consensual. I have no idea if those things are true, and my point is that no-one else does either except for the women involved*. The whole time I have been commenting on this case (years), I have taken the position that whatever happened, it’s not ok to undermine rape victims as a class, nor promote rape culture. That unlies everything I am saying.

                  I’m sick of people assuming that because I argue that, that I somehow think Assange is a rapist, or that he wasn’t smeared etc. Which tells me that those people really haven’t understood what I am saying.

                  Edit *although if there is a smear the women may not know that, so what I am really saying is that people on the internet have no way of knowing if a woman has been raped or not, and because of the politics of rape culture, it’s not possible to debate whether they were raped or not without promoting rape culture. At least I’ve not seen evidence that it’s possible. There are really good reasons for this, and one of them is that people still believe they get to have a say in determining if any individual woman was raped or not. They don’t, and their attempts to do so enable rape culture and undermine rape victims in general.

                  • tom …
                    26 August 2016 at 1:02 pm

                    watch the link or dont it does not bother me really, but you asked for some links, i provided some, you did not watch them and said it may not change your mind anyways, so i am at a loss for words really.
                    As i said yesterday am not as patient as CV is, so i will not continue in this vain, if you want to discuss the issue that is fine, if you want to insinuate that i am supporting rape culture, and not even check the link, then i am out of here, i have better things to do.
                    Thanks

      • tom 23.1.2
        25 August 2016 at 1:22 pm

        I am not as patient as CV, forgive me. I have cited the sources of my info that i can without further researching the topic again, which i am not going to do for you, as i work FT and have not the time or inclination, check Pilgers writings on subject, watch the Democracy Now vids, also check Chomsky writings, as a start, they have the time and have used it beter than i to disassemble the garbage and get to the crux, and in my opinion are trustworthy in their analysis, knowing their work for last 30 yrs and not been let down by them yet.
        Other than that, where are you sources/citations for the victims categoically stating they have been raped, as i have seen quotes stating that they said was consensual have not seen quotes from them to state otherwise, that seems a good place to start. If the victims are saying they were then i would start to re look at it.

        Weka i appreciate what you say on a lot of topics on here but on this whole rape culture thing i really think you are going a bit off the rails with it, believing Assange has been smeared, from info gained from what i would say is reliable sources, is not supporting rape culture it is questioning the establishments version, as i said before if we cannot do that then it becomes the easiest smear in the world to use against enemies without the power to disseminate info like the establishment/elite do. I have been smeared for my professional work before by this type of establishement beat up, so know a little about how easy it can be for complete BS to be stacked against you, and how hard it is to unravel said BS once a co ordinated attack has been set up, and at the level of Assange the machinary operating against him is very very F…ing scary i can well imagine, and i mean really scary, poop in yr pants scary, wish you were dead scary, Manning scary, Guantamamo scary. And that is how the establishment like it, and why i second guess the whole saga

    • Colonial Viper 23.2
      25 August 2016 at 12:09 pm

      The female Swedish complainants have been utterly used by the powers that be, and their rights and agency trodden all over by authorities, IMO.

      If I were being serious, it’s clear that the Deep State runs the USA. The Oval Office has some, but strictly limited, level of influence.

      I would agree that Trump sometimes sounds more outlandish (“crazy” if you prefer) than Hillary.

      However I think that’s mainly because Hillary has had thirty years political practice learning how to filter the crap which pours out of her mouth.

      Whereas Trump is totally unfiltered and unpolished.

      Having said that I notice that his handlers are now making him stick to the teleprompter.

    • weka 24.1
      26 August 2016 at 12:42 pm

      What makes you think I think there aren’t problems with the case against Assange?

      I’m getting to the end of my patience with people misinterpreting my arguments here. I’m always happy to clarify and in the absence of peopel asking for clarification it’s starting to look like willful ignorance on the part of the people doing the misinterpration.

      • xanthe 24.1.1
        26 August 2016 at 12:52 pm

        weka

        this “Do you understand the political issues of left wingers calling women who say they have been raped liars? And how that impacts on rape culture? That it legitimises questioning all women who have been raped whenever someone decides they don’t like her story of motivations. And that in the context of how massive a problem we give with rape that this is hugely problematic. ”

        shows that you are shooting from the mouth without having first taken the trouble to understand what is happening ! . That quote above is about some other matter not relevant to this! it is thread hyjack . No one is talking here about “calling women liars” (apart from prosecuter ng)

        goto justice4assange.com and spend a half hour going through the extensive library of actual source documents they provide if you want to mouth off on the subject.

    • Chooky 24.2
      26 August 2016 at 8:41 pm

      +100 …very good link Xanthe…thankyou!

      ‘Something Rotten in the State of Sweden: 8 Big Problems with the ‘Case’ Against Assange’ by Naomi Wolf

      …Naomi Wolf is an academic feminist and a very influential American one. She states;

      …”Based on my 23 years of reporting on global rape law, and my five years of supporting women at rape crisis centers and battered women’s shelters, I can say with certainty that this case is not being treated as a normal rape or sexual assault case. New details from the Swedish police make this quite clear. Their transcript of the complaints against Assange is strikingly unlike the dozens of such transcripts that I have read throughout the years as an advocate for victims of sex crimes.”…

      …she puts the argument in support of Julian Assange by describing a judicial process which has been a jackup against Assange from the start

      … and coming from the very highest political levels in Sweden in collusion with the USA

      …it is obvious that extradition to the USA is the ultimate aim

      Naomi Wolfe concludes:

      …”Indeed, these are all major aberrations–suggesting that somebody at the top has interfered.

      And who is at the very top in Sweden? Players working with Karl Rove, who was a party to the Swedish government’s collusion in the Bush regime’s rendition/torture program. As Britain holds its hearings into Julian Assange’s fate, we must take careful note of that connection.”

  25. Observer Tokoroa 25
    27 August 2016 at 10:06 am

    . Naomi Wolfe and her Hero
    .
    . It is apparently not a problem for Naomi to worry about an incident(s) in which a probable philandering male refuses to wear protection and proceeds to penetrate a female.

    . As CV has written the narcissist in question is a child genius and therefore has the right to penetrate any woman without protection for her.

    . Sweden is evil because it doesn’t like the serious results of HIV and other STDs.

    I think that whether he is a Child Genius or just a thief, he should honestly face the music.

    I am also concerned as to whether he is hacking into the private documents of Girls. As well as other people of interest to him.

    Finally, it is not uncommon for some women to seek to please and cultivate men in trouble with the Police.

    I find Naomi Wolfe unconvincing. Trivial too. For we all know that protected sex is extremely important. Naomi doesn’t know? Yeh.

    .

    .

  26. Ross 26
    27 August 2016 at 4:42 pm

    Feminist Naomi Wolf is the last person I’d expect to support a rapist or alleged rapist, and that’s exactly what she has done in the Assange case.

    Weka and others who seem confused about what rape culture actually is would be advised to read what she has to say. While they’re at it, they might ponder why Swedish prosecutors have waited years to interview Assange when he’s been available to be interviewed. For a long time prosecutors said they had to interview him in Sweden. That was nonsense. If Swedish prosecutors are so concerned that Assange may have committed rape, why have they waited so long to question him? The clear inference is that prosecutors have another end in mind, and it’s got nothing to do with rape.

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

    “…during the same time Assange was asking (over and over again, ultimately over thirty times) to be questioned, only to be ignored by Marianne Ny, the same Swedish prosecution authority questioned 44 (forty-four) other people in Great Britain, whereof 18 (eighteen) as suspects, in criminal investigations.

    But Carl Bildt, Marianne Ny, and Sweden stuck to their story that questioning suspects abroad is either illegal or unconstitutional or both.”

    http://assangeinsweden.com/

  28. Ross 28
    27 August 2016 at 5:19 pm

    On the first day of a two-day extradition hearing at Belmarsh Magistrates Court in South East London, Brita Sundberg-Weitman, a former Swedish Appeal Court Judge, described the behaviour of Miss Ny as “extremely peculiar”.

    Giving evidence on behalf of Mr Assange’s legal team, Mrs Sundberg-Weitman said the Swedish prosecutor could have interviewed Mr Assange by telephone or via the internet video service Skype, without the need to force his return to Sweden.

    She said: “Miss Ny has a rather biased view against men in the treatment of sexual offence cases. They seem to take it for granted that everyone under prosecution is guilty. I honestly can’t understand her attitude. It looks malicious … I think maybe she wants to make him suffer.”

    The former judge, who is now an associate professor of Law at Stockholm, University, added that Miss Ny was “involved in sexual politics” which was “very much” a political issue in Sweden.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8308877/Julian-Assange-extradition-hearing-Swedish-prosecutor-is-biased-against-men.html

    [Enough victim blaming links, Ross. Ta, TRP]

    [TRP that link is to a legitimate mainstream news source. It is quite acceptable. Thanks for your input, but no thanks. CV]

    • Colonial Viper 28.1
      27 August 2016 at 5:27 pm

      Ny’s political mishandling of the case has already led to a whole lot of the charges against Assange being dropped.

    • Ross 28.2
      28 August 2016 at 7:39 am

      As discussed, links were requested. I have provided them. Make of them what you will.

      In this case Assange may well be the victim and I have not sought to blame him, although others have.

  29. Observer Tokoroa 29
    27 August 2016 at 7:43 pm

    .Accusations

    .I take it that any one who is a supporter of Julian Assange, would also run away from any official Authorities who wished to interview him or her.

    Not any other males were present when Mr Assange needed his sexual release. Only two women under- went his caring thoughtful love.

    Yet all the thousands of JA supporters write as if they were right there on the spot. Assange is not only a child genius. He is miraculous.
    .

    • Ross 29.1
      28 August 2016 at 7:43 am

      Assange has been available to be interviewed. But Swedish prosecutors have said they cannot interview him in London. What nonsense. Now they”ve conceded that, yes, they can interview him in London.

      http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6115696

      • Colonial Viper 29.1.1
        28 August 2016 at 8:50 am

        The Swedish authorities actually preferred to let most of the criminal charges against Assange lapse, rather than interview him in the UK.

        And this is the kicker: during this exact same time period Swedish officials have travelled to Britain and conducted the same kind of interviews of other suspected criminal offenders based in the UK. But they refused to do the same for Assange, instead preferring to let charges against him lapse.