Support for Assange continues to shrink – 7 February 2012
The Guardian reports that Jemima Khan former close supporter of WikiLeaks founder accuses him of obfuscation, misinformation and demanding blinkered devotion.
Ms Khan put up a bail surety of £20,000 which she is reported to have forfeited when Assange absconded.
The offences of which he is accused and in respect of which his surrender is sought are alleged to have been committed in Stockholm against two women in August 2010. They include “sexual molestation” and, in one case, rape.
4 September 2012
BeautifulBurnout, 4 September 2012 11:04PM trying to re-write history in order to score points over Kawtara1
MrsB states about the bail jumping Julian Assange:
At this stage there is “probable cause” – in English law that is “reasonable grounds to suspect” that an offence has been committed.
I hope that clarifies the issue. I usually charge for this kind of legal advice, but seeing as it is you, you can buy me a pint instead. :p
But MrsB’s original legal advice was:
Will MrsB now post an apology to the two Swedish women she traduced?
I’m beginning the wonder whether MrsB is one of those who has lost her bail money.
And if any more evidence were required to condemn MrsB as a rape apologist, she goes on to say:
So rape victims who don’t immediately report the crime to the police are to be denied justice?
Is MrsB proposing a time limit – a couple of hours, two days, a week, or what?
Isn’t this is exactly what rapists and their lawyers have been arguing in court and out of court for decades?
28 August 2012
An interesting response to John Pilger’s New Statesman piece on Assange here:
This is a breathtaking article – breathtaking in its bigotry, breathtaking in the poverty of the research that went into it, breathtaking in its sheer lie-spinning. This is truly one of the worst pieces of ‘real’ journalism I have ever read.
26 August 2012
From Cath Elliott’s – Rape is not……
As we now know – in fact as we’ve known since about an hour after Stephens’ bizarre announcement – the lawyer got it wrong. Assange was and still is wanted for questioning in Sweden about allegations of rape, unlawful coercion, and sexual molestation. ‘Sex by surprise’ doesn’t even exist as a crime in Sweden, or indeed anywhere in the world, it’s simply a really rubbish mistranslation of the word ’överraskningssex’, which is a Swedish slang term for rape.
And here’s the rape apologist Backtothepoint: or is that just backtotheconfused?
If I woke up with someone even if we’d only had sex for the first time the night before, I would feel I could still assume enough consent to at least take them in my arms. If they showed no signs of stirring, I’d be a little worried and end up shaking them. If they still remained firmly unconscious, I’d probably call an ambulance.
I just can’t imagine someone undrugged continuing to sleep during penetration.
So according to you BTTP if they don’t wake up and they’ve not been rendered unconscious by drugs, they can’t have been raped?
and Backtothepoint again:
I’m delighted to have lived my youth at a time when you didn’t apparently have to get a permit signed and witnessed in triplicate to have sex with someone.
How many of us have never at some point in our lives drifted drowsily into sex on waking up with a partner and have we always checked it was OK with the other person first? I’ve pretty much always counted on being pushed away or grunted disapprovingly at if my attentions are unwelcome.
And is it possible for a woman to remain asleep while being entered without being drugged (I include alcohol in that)? As far as I can remember, every partner I’ve ever had has woken enough to react PDQ in one way or another on being touched intimately (as have I), let alone entered.
And here’s someone called Mspithy agreeing with him:
Yes, as a liberated woman who had been there done that too – but has no truck with rape, I agree. that this is a clumsy attempt to get someone for other reasons (just like the British Ambassador in the news – at last) is just so obvious one could weep that otherwise educated people can not see it for what it is – trumped up rubbish!
25 August 2012
From Cath Elliott’s – Assange, and feminism’s so-called male allies
That’s the narrative that suggests that Assange’s two accusers are part of some CIA inspired honey-trap and that the great man himself is the only victim here – a victim of some dark and covert plot. It’s also a narrative that says, yet again, that women who accuse men of rape are not to be believed, and that the rights of important men doing important work should trump a woman’s right to justice.
24 August 2012
From Today’s Guardian:
Lisa Longstaff, in We are Women Against Rape but we do not want Julian Assange extradited. 23 Aug 2012
It is not for us to decide whether or not the allegations are true and whether what happened amounts to rape or sexual violence – we don’t have all the facts and what has been said so far has not been tested.
Victims report rape assuming that their report will be acted on. Not tea and sympathy, but protection and justice.
Lisa Longstaff, in Rape victims don’t want tea and sympathy but protection and justice. 2 April 2009.
Despite decades of campaigning publicly and privately for the police to take rape seriously, all we have seen is a series of public relations exercises that change nothing. Rape continues to be deprioritised. Each time we complain we are told that rape is particularly difficult to prove.
There is a readiness to believe the man over the woman; to dismiss the word of any young woman who has been drinking or drugged, and even the word of children. There is a habit of delaying arrest for days, weeks or months while rapists continue to assault girls and women.
Lisa Longstaff, in The rapists’ best friend. 14 March 2010
Julie Bindel writes on Assange and Galloway on 21 August 2012:
What is depressing is that it is, in this instance, coming from men on the left – those who are supposed to be our comrades and allies. Yet again I am hearing loud and clear: “Yes dear, you can have your equality, but can you wait until we have ours first please?”
But sadly “men on the left” and indeed some “women on the left” – like Anne Tanner have too often taken the view that the demand for female equality has been and still is “identity politics”, that should be denied its legitimacy.
When feminism confronted the revolutionary movement, almost exclusively led by men, it was those men who rather than recognise feminism as an age old legitimate demand that women should have equality, instead, perverted its aims in an attempt to divert it into their own ‘revolutionary movement’. It was the men’s inability to recognise that even capitalist society could exist without patriarchy or indeed with matriarchy, that allowed them to assume that feminism and socialism were one and the same and as such the women should hold off with their demands until after the men had stormed the barricades and established the socialist state.
Fortunately feminists saw through this farrago of nonsense and went their own ways.
And from the same thread in response to my post, this one by Bochi:
I can remember that too, we got the same fed to gays, we were all supposed to sit on the picket line at Grunwicks waiting for the dawn of world revolution while the brilliant theorists of the party worked out the correct line. Indeed I can recall being told by one ageing communist that my sexuality was a “bourgeois aberration” which would disappear under a truly socialist society. Bollocks to that.
And what did AllyFogg contribute?
I’m not entirely sure what the point is here. It’s like one of those People Front of Judea meetings where someone stands up and says: “Sisters, we must stop fighting amongst ourselves and unite behind our common cause.” and everyone agrees for about 30 seconds, until they have to decide what the common cause actually is, at which point they all start fighting again.
It’s interesting looking back at CiF threads how Ally Fogg liked to turn anything he didn’t agree with into a Monty Pythonesque comedy. Which presumably is why he’s now pegged his tent so firmly in the Menz camp.
Ally Fogg is a CiF censor.
Here’s thaumaturge posting on YTU:
But Assange is only wanted for questioning; there have been no charges laid, and neither of the women actually accused him of rape; that was the prosecutor.
And there is no older trick in the rape denial repertoire than to blame the victim instead of the perpetrator .
If she thinks the highest court in the UK would send Assange back to Sweden merely to question him she needs to point us to where in the court’s judgement this appears.
23 August 2012
Backtothepoint, in defence of Assange and Dominique Strauss Kahn and in order to condemn Nafissatou Diallo, a poor, black, single mother immigrant, trade unionist, hotel cleaner wrote:
I forget who said the other day that if the DSK Sofitel affair had been a honeytrap organised by Sarkozy’s people, they would have used a better operative.
Well wouldn’t Nixon have used better burglars?
The bungling operative of course according to Backtothe point is Nafissatou Diallo.
And Backtothepoint, when the DSK affair first came to light, all but accused Sarkozy, the CIA, the management of the Sofitel hotel and the French Secret Service of conspiracy:
If I were writing a thriller, I might run with the idea of the CIA liking Sarkozy’s pro-Americanism. If they can try firing poison into Castro’s lemonade, I would have thought a sexual assault fit-up would be well within their capabilities.
On this morning’s Today programme (0:40:50), they mentioned the Mail saying that a UMP (Sarkozy’s party) activist apparently knew about the scandal before it happened. Anyone heard anything about that?
But Better burglars?
G. Gordon Liddy was the chief operative for the White House Plumbers unit that existed from July–September 1971, during Richard Nixon’s presidency. Separately, along with E. Howard Hunt, Liddy organized and directed the Watergate burglaries of the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate building in May and June 1972.
Gordon Liddy who recruited and trained the Watergate burglars was at age 29, the youngest Bureau Supervisor at FBI national headquarters in Washington, D.C., earning multiple commendations from Hoover, the notorious head of the FBI. He left the FBI in 1962 to practice international law in Manhattan. Liddy worked as a lawyer in New York City and a prosecutor in Dutchess County, New York. In 1966, he organized the arrest and unsuccessful trial of Timothy Leary.
22 August 2012
thaumaturge whose CiF avatar I believe, portrays her as a seductive temptress and who once posted, somewhat ironically, “I’m not really worried about the employment prospects of workers in the fashion industry” posts on YTU, in support of Assange,
Fully agree that Galloway’s comment is reprehensible.
But Assange is only wanted for questioning; there have been no charges laid, and neither of the women actually accused him of rape;
But Galloway and Assange are both denying that women who are asleep cannot be raped and you thaumaturge are agreeing with them.
One women states Assange raped her while she was asleep when she could not have given consent. Assange is being given the opportunity to return to Sweden to defend himself against this accusation before he is charged or allowed to go free. He admits to being in the woman’s bed and having sex, so the question he needs to answer is whether it was consensual. The entire legal process in the UK has been at his disposal for two years and despite some of the finest legal brains in the world (no not you MrsB), that process and those legal brains have decided he must return to Sweden.
If thaumaturge is also saying that women who are alseep cannot be raped, which is the only position open to her, then she puts herself in the same court as Galloway and Todd Akin whose claim, now retracted, was that raped women cannot get pregnant.
thaumaturge is one of the CiF censors.
19 August 2012
She posted five times on that thread yet despite Ally responding below the line fifteen times, he totally ignored her contributions.
I do know that earlier Backtothepoint accused ellymiranda of being me, (posting as Taxonomist), after I’d provided evidence of BeautifulBurnout, a senior female member of the UK’s legal profession, claiming that an accusation of rape was “a pile of steaming crap” and “stinks to high heaven”.
But then Julian Assange’s anti-US stance would I suggest, in MrsB’s eyes redeem him from involvement in just about any crime.
17 August 2012
As and when and if Julian Assange arrives in Ecuador, he might after having some time to reflect, conclude that it might just have been better to have risked spending a little time in one of Sweden’s civilised prisons, where he could also have reflected on his appalling attitude to women.
But in time he would have left as a free and reformed, or even unreformed individual.
Instead he has decided to become an unwanted guest in a country whose president has volunteered it for international opprobrium, by giving diplomatic protection to someone who has exhausted what is probably the world’s most extensive judicial process, but refused to accept it’s verdict.
In the meantime the two women who accuse him of attempted rape and sexual assault must abandon their constitutional rights to have their claims properly investigated.
Of course Comment is Free’s resident barrister, BeautifulBurnout decreed at the very beginning , with a rhetorical question, that this was all a pile of steaming crap.
To her credit, MontanaWildhack has stood alone against pro-Assange lobby on the UT, here posting on CiF:
There is a real likelihood of his extradition to the US to face torture and imprisonment. And that’s why everyone who is concerned with free speech and human rights should be letting the UK government know where they stand on this.
So Assange groupies keep saying, but no one has any credible evidence that this is anything other than a self-aggrandizing conspiracy fantasy on the part of Assange and his defenders.
No one has produced a single credible explanation of why Sweden would be more willing than the UK to extradite Assange to the US. If the UK is so much in the pocket of the US that they would be willing to “invade” the Ecuadoran embassy, then why the hell wouldn’t they be willing to extradite Assange directly to the US?
All of this fevered defence of Assange and cries of persecution is nothing more than paranoid anti-US hatred with a side order of misogyny.
18 July 2012
I posted a recommendation for Ally Fogg’s new blog a few days ago and yesterday sought his opinion about the recently most publicised rape story – that of Julian Assange. BeautifulBurnout stated her legal opinion when the matter first came to our notice, that the complaint of the two Swedish women was “a pile of steaming crap”.
And what is Ally’s response?:
I won’t have it here, not because I’m protecting anyone or stifling reasonable opinions, but because those posts of yours are the most brain-shrinkingly tedious comments I’ve ever encountered in my entire time on the internet.
I guess he’s probably forgotten this one, among many of mine that heap praise on his contributions over the years:
AllyF, responding to my pointing out that in the past he had defended his right to ogle any women who took his fancy:
To which my response as thevorticist, on 10 November 2011 at 1:31PM was:
Actually “appalling” was a bit over egging the pud, but it did at least catch your attention and again thanks for visiting this thread, as you’re really needed to counter some of the really sexist comments that have been posted here.
But your question – albeit one that I think you’d probably hoped might have been rhetorical.
Didn’t you write an article or maybe a comment about there been nothing wrong with “admiring” a strange, attractive woman’s breasts because it’s quite a normal a thing for men to do?
Or maybe that was someone else with a big C? If so please accept apologies.
Like I said you’re one of the few men here who regularly shows your feminist credentials and your defence of Julie Bindel is worthy of a mention in dispatches, by the way. But in my book, the man on the scaffolding wolf-whistling the women he’s never met, who’s going about her business and doesn’t need his unwanted attention, should be left unhindered, verbally, vocally and visually.
Response to coulrophobic, 10 November 2011 11:38AM
I’m back! (briefly)
And a great post AllyF – but as you hint, doubtless pearls before…..
And I fear we are fighting a rearguard action here – but in time we will win.
But it seems Ally Fogg is so insecure that he can’t even accept praise. But that only to be expected for the most brain-shrinkingly tedious posts.
3 July 2012
In my view, the US would find it easier to extradite Assange from Sweden than from the UK because Wikileaks servers are (or were) based in Sweden, so he has therefore committed an alleged offence against the US from Sweden – there is a legal (or alleged legal) nexus between Assange, Sweden and the US that does not exist between Assange, the UK and the US. The reason he went to Sweden in August 2010 was to ask for residency because Swedish residents would be protected by the domestic whistle-blower laws and, thus, he would have been safe………
Now apart from the fact that Assange isn’t a whistle-blower, but a whistle-blower’s publicist, what about the far stronger legal nexus between the two women and the UK, as defined by the European Arrest Warrant?
The two women were 27 and 31 at the time of the claimed offences, so both are young enough to be MrsBootstraps’s children. So if her daughter had come to her to complain about being raped by a visiting Australian businessman who had subsequently fled to Sweden, would she be telling her daughter her complaint was a “steaming pile of crap”?
Somehow I very much doubt it.
2 July 2012
So the Guardian is at last having to shuffle off the fence and agree that Assange should at very least face his accusers.
The readers’ editor on… reporting Julian Assange’s extradition battle:
It is always important for journalists to report with precision when dealing with criminal allegations
But nothing in the comments from BeautifulBurnout, defence and prosecution barrister, who when Assange was first brought to our atttention as somewhat less than the saviour of the world, posted:
Call me a tinfoil hatter if you like (and I wish I could remember KT’s neoligism for it), but does anyone else believe this pile of steaming crap?
So accusations of rape = “steaming crap”.
And as yet no retraction from the barrister who sees herself as the inheritor of George Carmen’s reputation – who had he survived, would doubtless have been on the side of the women Assange is accused of abusing.
1 July 2012
MontanaWildhack on YTU:
“The Americans” would like no such thing. For all I can tell, the government isn’t even too worked up about him any more. Never mind that a lot of ordinary Americans (and scads of slebs) think Assange is a hero.
I don’t know if people have noticed or not, but it is Sweden that wants Britain to extradite Assange, not the US. This notion that the charges in Sweden are just a ruse because Sweden will be happier to ship Joolz off to the USA so we can bung his pasty, blond ass in Gitmo is a fantasy concocted by Assange and his defence attorneys that flies in the face of reason.
Gary McKinnon? Richard O’Dwyer? How does it make any sense to believe the the UK would be more willing to offer up its own citizens to the American judicial system than Assange?
14 June 2012
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has failed in his bid to reopen his appeal against extradition to Sweden where he faces sex crime allegations.
Assange’s legal team now has 14 days to apply to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg to hear his case.
MrsBootstraps will doubtless be weeping on Backtothepoint’s shoulder.
And two Swedish women will have to wait for two more weeks to know whether they have any rights to have the man they claim has sexually assaulted them, questioned by a lawyer of MrsBootstraps standing. Or even one a tenth of her calibre.
3 June 2012
Rather poor article here by Amy Goodman about the UK supreme court’s decision to give Julian Assange 14 more days to fight his extradition to Sweden to face questioning about his alleged rape and sexual assault of two women.
I’m reminded of the conclusion of CiF’s leading legal mind, BeautifulBurnout when the case first broke, writing in response to this article – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange wanted by Interpol over rape case:
So BeautifulBurnout tells the world that the complaint to the police by two women about the sexual assaults they’ve suffered is a “pile of steaming crap”.