Julian Assange Rape Accusation Thread

  Quote

Julian #Assange left the Royal Courts of Justice in Vaughan Smith's white armoured landrover. Replete with bullet holes from Bosnia

(mark stephens, his lawyer, on twitter)

apparently he just gave another statement outside the frontline club, a club for journos.

This is pretty good:

The world's most wanted house guest by Vaughan Smith

http://frontlineclub.com/news/2010/12/the-worlds-most-wanted-house-guest-by-vaughan-smith.html

And this is , well ...

The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

http://gawker.com/5714043/

By this comment is genius http://gawker.com/comment/34193362/

  On 12/16/2010 at 9:05 PM, zazen said:

And this is , well ...

The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

http://gawker.com/5714043/

By this comment is genius http://gawker.com/comment/34193362/

between this and the okcupid story, i predict many self-facepalms in julian's future

there's a lot of uproar in feminist circles about people dismissing the rape charges and whatnot, found this quote by michael moore to address that uproar pretty well

  Quote

For those of you who think it’s wrong to support Julian Assange because of the sexual assault allegations he’s being held for, all I ask is that you not be naive about how the government works when it decides to go after its prey. Please — never, ever believe the “official story.” And regardless of Assange’s guilt or innocence (see the strange nature of the allegations here), this man has the right to have bail posted and to defend himself. I have joined with filmmakers Ken Loach and John Pilger and writer Jemima Khan in putting up the bail money — and we hope the judge will accept this and grant his release today.

still not a michael moore fan, but well said.

  On 12/16/2010 at 10:01 PM, disparaissant said:

there's a lot of uproar in feminist circles about people dismissing the rape charges and whatnot, found this quote by michael moore to address that uproar pretty well

OTOH, naomi wolf has sort-of defended assange, and slated the accusers saying that they are devaluing the worth of rape claims for people who actually have been raped.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/jaccuse-sweden-britain-an_b_795899.html

yeah i saw that, and i saw a load of uberfems calling her a traitor and other shit.

honestly, he might be a bit of a shitbag in the ladies department, but even the ladies in question are not calling this rape. so, given that, and given the stuff pointed out in that naomi wolf article, the conspiracy theorist in me is going "oh, yeah. this is exactly why they chose this particular crime to pin on him. progressives go nuts when it comes to rape. throw rape charges and BAM discredited."

like honestly, some of the people i used to respect when it came to feminism are just going bananas over this, it's ludicrous. he hasn't even been charged, he's just wanted for questioning. and yet, to some people, he's already admitted outright to brutally raping then slitting the throats of these girls.

Apparently he was just live on newsnight but I didn't see it - anyone?

edit: seeing tweets like this though:

  Quote

Good grief get Kirstie Wark off #Newsnight; exclusive live interview with #assange and she's making a right mess. Atrocious #journalism

  Quote

God knows why @bbcnewsnight bothered to interview #Assange, if she wasn't going to let him speak #bbcfail #newsnight

Here's the newsnight interview

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NouXB5JACCw

good stuff zazen. i missed this.

that rocking motion is borderline aspie-tastic, and kinda hypnotic.

he does nothing to discourage the egomaniac claims here. but he defends himself pretty well.

halway through it but he comes across well...articulate and unflappable...but that woman is SO FUCKING ANNOYING

edit: i think he's rocking back and forth because he looks fucking cold...why did they have him outside?

  On 12/17/2010 at 1:53 AM, lumpenprol said:

halway through it but he comes across well...articulate and unflappable...but that woman is SO FUCKING ANNOYING

 

She straight up says "your sexual misconduct". What a fucking moron

he does seem to take a long time to finish a thought though.

I think he handled that pretty well, although the combination of him rocking and her grating voice made it very hard to watch.

I like how level headed he is, he isn't just ranting 'conspiracy!', he's careful to point out in this video (and the channel 4 interview) that its a complex situation... "That is not to say that that this originated - we dont have proof of that - that this originated as an attempt to attack [wikileaks], but certainly once it was underway it has been used very agressively to attack [wikileaks]"

The OKCupid profile has now been made un-public, but its still there if you sign in to OKCupid.

Interesting. Does that mean he's still up for dating?

  On 12/17/2010 at 2:02 AM, zazen said:

The OKCupid profile has now been made un-public, but its still there if you sign in to OKCupid.

 

Interesting. Does that mean he's still up for dating?

no, it means that he saw the story, did a million s , and logged in to okcupid for the first time since 2006

  On 12/17/2010 at 2:05 AM, kaini said:

  On 12/17/2010 at 2:02 AM, zazen said:

The OKCupid profile has now been made un-public, but its still there if you sign in to OKCupid.

 

Interesting. Does that mean he's still up for dating?

 

no, it means that he saw the story, did a million s , and logged in to okcupid for the first time since 2006

I assumed he'd delete the whole thing.

Also, the 'last online at' date hasn't changed. Curious.

  On 12/17/2010 at 1:56 AM, verticalhold said:

  On 12/17/2010 at 1:53 AM, lumpenprol said:

halway through it but he comes across well...articulate and unflappable...but that woman is SO FUCKING ANNOYING

 

 

She straight up says "your sexual misconduct". What a fucking moron

kirsty wark is a cunt of the highest order. she's more aggressive than sky's kay burley, if that is possible.

she's the sort of woman who pats herself on the back for grilling assange, goes home and watches The View, eats a bowl of ice cream before bed whilst reading Toni Morrison, then pops a few xanax to keep from crying herself to sleep, alone.

  On 12/16/2010 at 10:01 PM, disparaissant said:

there's a lot of uproar in feminist circles about people dismissing the rape charges and whatnot, found this quote by michael moore to address that uproar pretty well

  Quote

For those of you who think it’s wrong to support Julian Assange because of the sexual assault allegations he’s being held for, all I ask is that you not be naive about how the government works when it decides to go after its prey. Please — never, ever believe the “official story.” And regardless of Assange’s guilt or innocence (see the strange nature of the allegations here), this man has the right to have bail posted and to defend himself. I have joined with filmmakers Ken Loach and John Pilger and writer Jemima Khan in putting up the bail money — and we hope the judge will accept this and grant his release today.

still not a michael moore fan, but well said.

I really liked the quote of some random feminist chick that was printed in a newspaper here today: She basically said that the proof that the whole assange persecution is just utterly ridiculous is that in her 30-something years of looking after victims of sexual assault all over the world, not once has it occured that an offender has been persecuted by two countries at the same time, let alone being put in jail for nothing more than being only suspected of the crime.

  On 12/14/2010 at 7:36 PM, o00o said:

  On 12/14/2010 at 7:06 PM, roasty said:

J'Accuse: Sweden, Britain, and Interpol Insult Rape Victims Worldwide

 

also..

 

  Quote

Although Sweden has the highest reported rape rate in Europe and one of the highest in the world, it issued only 2 interpol alerts for sexual crimes this year. One for Julian Assange, and one for a multiple-offense child molester.

source

 

this is beyond words...

life

  On 12/17/2010 at 1:53 AM, lumpenprol said:

...but that woman is SO FUCKING ANNOYING

 

edit: i think he's rocking back and forth because he looks fucking cold...why did they have him outside?

Exactly. It's as if she isn't listening to anything he is saying. After he explains what is going on, she continues to question him as if he had committed the crimes and asks him a question about how his misconduct is affecting Wikileaks.

welp this whole assange rape thing has really helped me find out who among my feminist friends is a complete nutter. people who i previously thought to be rational people are now saying "IF THESE WOMEN SAID HE RAPED THEM, THEN HE RAPED THEM. END OF! IF YOU SAY OTHERWISE, YOU ARE A TOOL OF THE PATRIARCHY"

like, i agree that the justice system has some SERIOUS problems when it comes to successfully convicting rapists, but they are going for the throat with this one, and even when you take into account the fact that most major governments want him out of the picture, they can't even get charges filed, let alone a conviction. christ. ugh.

  On 12/18/2010 at 12:25 AM, disparaissant said:

welp this whole assange rape thing has really helped me find out who among my feminist friends is a complete nutter. people who i previously thought to be rational people are now saying "IF THESE WOMEN SAID HE RAPED THEM, THEN HE RAPED THEM. END OF! IF YOU SAY OTHERWISE, YOU ARE A TOOL OF THE PATRIARCHY"

like, i agree that the justice system has some SERIOUS problems when it comes to successfully convicting rapists, but they are going for the throat with this one, and even when you take into account the fact that most major governments want him out of the picture, they can't even get charges filed, let alone a conviction. christ. ugh.

that's interesting and it's too bad people let themselves be driven by visceral emotions generated by (or at least provoked) the mainstream media (or worse, the united states government). I find the same frustration among pretty much anybody who still subscribes to the war on terror. Calling someone a rapist or a terrorist pretty much halts any chance for a rational debate at that point on

actual quotes

  Quote

And there you have it. EVEN IF HE DID ACTUALLY RAPE THEM, the women saying in a court of law that they were raped are not enough evidence to convict him.

 

WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK. What evidence is satisfactory? Video? Having the shit beat out of you? Oh but wait, that only proves you had the shit beat out of you. That doesn’t prove you were raped. So … that leaves … video? Eye witnesses? And how often do rape cases have video or eye witnesses? Exactly.

 

This is why rapists are hardly ever convicted or serve jail time. This fucking attitude right here.

 

It’s just SO FUCKING REASSURING to know that if I am raped, I am not sufficient evidence to get a conviction. Because I am OBVIOUSLY LYING, I’m sure. I mean, I’m just a vindictive feminist out to bring someone down, and I totally want THE ENTIRE WORLD TO KNOW about things like my sexual history, etc., which will inevitably come up in stories about my rape allegations. Hey, maybe I work for the CIA! YOU NEVER KNOW!!

 

RAPE ACCUSERS JUST DO IT FOR THE FUN, AMIRIGHT?

my response

  Quote

this is literally the most ludicrous argument i have seen, and i once had a 6 hour argument with my roommate about whether or not gasoline can explode. six hours. and i even showed him a video of a ford pinto being rear-ended. and that didn’t even convince him.

 

yes lets make it so that all you need to do is say someone raped you to get a guaranteed conviction. that’s not overcorrecting or anything. yes, there is a massive problem with the justice system when it comes to rape accusations, but holy hell, making it so that anyone can be convicted on someone’s word alone is just… mind-bogglingly stupid.

 

a testimony is not just a black and white “he raped me/he didn’t rape me” situation. there are myriad variables that go into determining whether someone’s testimony is sufficient enough to press actual charges against someone. stuff like alibis, story changes, details of events; all of these are important in determining whether or not someone’s testimony is sufficient enough to formally accuse someone of a heinous crime. and, i’m sorry, but in this case - even though most major governments in the world want him out of the picture - it seems apparent that the testimonies alone were not sufficient in charging assange.

 

this isn’t the end of the world, though! he’s only out on bail. the investigation continues, and there may well be enough evidence uncovered to charge or even convict him. who knows? i certainly don’t. no one does. so, until he is actually convicted, i’ll do him the favour of not outright calling him a rapist. is that really so out there? is it so utterly impossibly hard to maybe hold off on judging someone - on either side of this situation - until we actually have details on the situation?

 

fuck.

 

also, i’m not even going to get into it, but given how the judicial system is skewed against people of colour, how do you think making it so that all one needs is a victim’s testimony to get a conviction would really work out? just some food for thought, there.

lost all the italics (there was a BUNCH of angry italics) but you get the idea. it's been a frustrating day and i have lost friends for daring to say that maybe, just maybe, we should wait until we hear what evidence there is against him to start calling him a rapist. christ almighty.

but he looks like a rapist...