Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
If this is inappropriate, it can be deleted by admin.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sat Dec 4th, 2010 at 06:44:01 AM EST
If not us, then who? If not now, then when?

Is ETF as complicated as it looks?

Align culture with our nature.

by ormondotvos (ormond no spam lmi net no spam) on Sat Dec 4th, 2010 at 06:07:04 PM EST
Two things the PTB want from us: submission to their goals, and fear of their retribution.

What's the way to contribute that helps the most?

Would the ACLU forward contributions?

Does his law firm have an address we can PayPal to?

Is there someone in London, or Sydney who can take these funds reliably?

Why is it so easy for banksters to transfer money covertly, and not us plebes?

Align culture with our nature.

by ormondotvos (ormond no spam lmi net no spam) on Sat Dec 4th, 2010 at 06:09:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Just want to point out that as far as criminal charges in Sweden goes, the government pays for the lawyers of the defence.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!
by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 01:45:03 PM EST
Even for an extradition fight?
by gk (g k quattro due due sette "at" gmail.com) on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 01:47:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think so, if you are fighting extradition from Sweden.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!
by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 01:51:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I was beginning to doubt the quality of Swedish justice.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 01:51:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The quality is one thing, price another.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!
by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 01:53:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's certainly going to be a tough prosecution case when the chief prosecutor in Stockholm has already dismissed all the charges - as I understand.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 02:06:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
During the course of the investigation the friday night on call prosecutor thought they had a case and issued an arrest warrant, the saturday prosecutor thought they did not and cancelled it. Later on the prosecutors office believed they had a case, filed with a court for häktning which is arrest while awaiting trial (Sweden does not use bail) and got it approved by local court, upheld by regional court and the supreme court has decided not try it.

So the case right now appears solid enough for trial to the prosecutor and the courts that approved arrest while waiting for trial. The to and forth in the early hours of the investigation is mostly irrelevant to the case now. (Shoddy journalism in the extreme to write about it as if it was not extremely preliminary, but that is another matter.)

If I was a betting person, I would bet that Assange would/will be acquitted, but that is just on the numbers. A minority of rape cases end with a conviction, as most rapes are not of the crazy-man-in-the-park variety, and establishing beyond reasonable doubt what happened in a room without witnesses is hard.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!

by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 03:55:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Interesting stuff here:

On Saturday 14 August at 14:00 she (Anna Ardin) wrote the following on her Twitter account.

'Julian wants to go to a crayfish party, anyone have a couple of available seats tonight or tomorrow? #fb'

Early on the morning of Sunday 15 August (02:00) she writes again at Twitter.

'Sitting outdoors at 02:00 and hardly freezing with the world's coolest smartest people, it's amazing! #fb'

When Anna Ardin files a police complaint against Julian Assange on 20 August these tweets are removed. Why? As far as I can tell, it's not common for victims of crime to delete blogs, clean up their cellphones, and try to get witnesses to attest to things that aren't true. Why is it so important to remove these particular tweets?

...
Julian lives in Anna Ardin's flat from 11 August until 19-20 August. During this time Julian and Anna have sex. Around 18-19 August Anna gets a call from a woman wanting to speak to Julian. When Anna realises that Julian's also had consensual sex with this woman, something happens. The two women who are both christians and are connected to the Brotherhood Movement and were at the seminar at the Brotherhood Movement realise immediately that Julian doesn't have any long term serious intentions with them. They decide after discussing the matter to file complaints against Julian Assange for sexual molestation.

It might seem strange that a christian social democrat feminist would avail herself of legislation to get revenge on a man who is 'unfaithful'. When you read about Anna Ardin's post about revenge,

http://www.samtycke.nu/2010/09/hamnerskn-fran-gotland/

 it's no longer strange. It's completely natural. Anna Ardin has for a long time wondered how she can exact revenge on a man who dumps her, is unfaithful. When the other woman turns up, she has the opportunity to do something about her ideas. Anna Ardin plans it all well. She gets another woman to make the actual rape accusation. A case of 'revenge by proxy'. And then she gets help from Claes Borgström who's done all he can to try to get Julian Assange put on trial, frenetically cheered on by the feminist blogs.

But the truth wins out in the end. Anna's perfect 7-Step Programme for Legal Revenge failed. One deletion too few. And the Google cache. Too bad, Anna. The ways of the Lord are truly mysterious.

http://rixstep.com/1/20101001,01.shtml



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 05:23:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My position is that we who were not present does not know anything about the case.

I think I'll quote what I wrote the other day as a comment in a thread at Feral Scholar:

Feral Scholar » Blog Archive » Wikileaks and Sex

your link goes to a certain male-dominated blog that argues that this is all about radical feminists that charges men with rape for fun and politics. Those guys and their ilk were out in force as soon as the charges were made public. Stan's description "We will re-hash the whole "how many rape accusations are false?" controversy, hear a lot of stuff in support of silly promiscuity-as-liberation riffs, competing victim claims from liberal men, the whole schmiel." fits very good.

Basically, a women who has written about revenge (in general terms in january) can not be raped in august. A women who has copied a list of things to think about if you want to revenge (point one includes thinking about wheter you do not want to forgive instead...) and also is a political feminist and a leftist to boot. Clearly, any rape charge from her must be false. And oh, she has edited her twitts, must be because it goes against her (not public) story she told the cops!

There are a bunch of guys in Sweden who wants to use this case to promote their anti-feminist agenda. Seriously, avoid getting dragged into this mess. They know as little as you do and they do have an agenda. If/when there is a trial all the records will be made public. Until then accept not to know.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!

by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 05:51:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Well, in this case the guy (Goran Ruding) says:

"If the prosecutors conclude that this is a case of false accusation, then hundreds of thousands of men who claim most rape complaints are false will win their argument. This will unfortunately also lead to making it much more difficult to get justice for real victims. That would be a catastrophe."

So doesn't quite fit your point.

See also, not from male Swedish anti-feminists:

When it comes to Assange rape case, the Swedes are making it up as they go along

by Melbourne barrister James D. Catlin, who acted for Julian Assange in London in October.

Apparently having consensual sex in Sweden without a condom is punishable by a term of imprisonment of a minimum of two years for rape. That is the basis for a reinstitution of rape charges against WikiLeaks figurehead Julian Assange that is destined to make Sweden and its justice system the laughing stock of the world and dramatically damage its reputation as a model of modernity.
...
In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange's honour at her flat after the "crime" and tweeted to her followers that she is with the "the world's coolest smartest people, it's amazing!". Go on the internet and see for yourself. That Ardin has sought unsuccessfully to delete these exculpatory tweets from the public record should be a matter of grave concern. That she has published on the internet a guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends ever graver. The exact content of Wilén's mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilén's nor Ardin's texts complain of rape.

But then neither Arden nor Wilén complained to the police but rather "sought advice", a technique in Sweden enabling citizens to avoid just punishment for making false complaints. They sought advice together, having collaborated and irrevocably tainted each other's evidence beforehand. Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact the Swedish newspaper Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange.
...

Of course, their celebrity lawyer Claes Borgström was questioned as to how the women themselves could be essentially contradicting the legal characterisation of Swedish prosecutors; a crime of non-consent by consent. Borgström's answer is emblematic of how divorced from reality this matter is. "They (the women) are not jurists". You need a law degree to know whether you have been r-ped or not in Sweden. In the context of such double think, the question of how the Swedish authorities propose to deal with victims who neither saw themselves as such nor acted as such is easily answered: You're not a Swedish lawyer so you wouldn't understand anyway. The consent of both women to sex with Assange has been confirmed by prosecutors.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/02/when-it-comes-to-assange-r-pe-case-the-swedes-are-making-it-up-a s-they-go-along/




Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 06:28:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Concern-trolling hardly shows lack of an agenda.

And lawyers are representing their clients pow, right?

But this is simpler then that: is there any reasonable way for anyone except those involved to know what happened before the trial?

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!

by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 06:37:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The laws of any nation, and potential sentences for actions against those laws, are the nation's own business. And ignorance of them rarely a defence. The concern here is the asymmetry of the investigative stage.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 02:39:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
As long as Assange is in the EU and suspected of rape I think under the terms of the European Arrest Warrant the evidence does not matter in the extradition process.

European Arrest Warrant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The issuing state must complete a form stating the nature of the offence and giving a short description of the circumstances surrounding the offence, details of the person sought and the applicable penalty. This form is then sent to the relevant receiving state if the issuing state knows the location of the person sought. If the issuing state does not know the location of the person sought, they will distribute the EAW to all member states via SIRENE and INTERPOL.[8]

Checking the Swedish implementation, evidence is only mentioned once, and that is when it comes to the risk of a suspect destroying evidence.

There are procedural grounds on which to fight an extradition, mostly related to getting a fair trial. One of the procedural grounds is that the crime shall carry a prison sentence in both countries, but that requirement is waived when it comes to a list of crimes, among them rape.

To be clear: nothing of what I have written here should be interpreted as being against donating to any of the funds. After all what is not used for defence lawyers in Sweden can be used for defending wikileakers elsewhere.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!

by A swedish kind of death on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 04:08:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But his expression of concern does suggest (OK ?) that he's not just just an anti-feminist and he's not (as I read it) saying anything as daft as: "a women who has written about revenge (in general terms in january) can not be raped in august".

"And lawyers are representing their clients pow, right?"

I AM aware of that. Surely you're not saying a person representing a client cannot put forward any reasonable arguments worth considering - especially in the case of someone in a situation like Assange's.

"But this is simpler then that: is there any reasonable way for anyone except those involved to know what happened before the trial?"

About some of what any jury might consider relevant evidence which might raise "reasonable doubts" ? Yes.  

Some of the stuff discovered so far does seem to raise suspicion in any reasonable person, especially given some of the other facts about the case which SEEM to have been established already: attempts to conceal relevant evidence, apparent lack of concern following the incident, etc. I'm not saying they are conclusive - but I do think they are relevant and as I put it: "interesting". So are the attempts at suppression of even references to the existing evidence:

In the beginning of September, I note that Anna Ardin has two identical 'miniblogs' - one at Twitter and the other at Bloggy.se. It looks as if Anna Ardin's tweets are posted to both blogs at the same time. The tweets that are deleted from Twitter are still visible at annaardin.bloggy.se. Anna missed the fact that she has to delete on each and every blog. Bad luck.

To see if Anna Ardin is really trying to hide her Twitter tweets, I post a comment to Sara Gunnerud's article WikiLeaks Heroes Can Also Do Stupid Things. The article is published at the Rebella blog, a social democratic feminist blog where Anna Ardin contributes and runs the website. In my comment I mention the deleted Twitter tweets. After five days, on 13 September, my comment is reviewed and removed directly. I then post a new comment where I mention that one can read the deleted Tweets at annaardin.bloggy.se. My comment is removed directly. A few hours later the entire Bloggy.se site is taken offline. When Bloggy.se reopens at 04:00 in the morning of 14 September, the tweets deleted from Twitter are also deleted from annaardin.bloggy.se.

But it's not as easy to remove things from the Internet as Anna Ardin thinks. Google takes snapshots of how web pages look - so called caches. If you search for the cached page for annaardin.bloggy.se you can see what it looked like on 19 August. (If the cache disappears, click here.)

http://www.samtycke.nu/doc/AnnaArdin_cache19aug.htm

 Then you can compare the page with how annaardin.bloggy.se and twitter.com/annaardin look.

As we can see, Anna Ardin is doing all she can to hide her tweets. Tweets that indicate Julian Assange is actually innocent of at least the charge of 'molestation' that he's been accused of. It looks like Anna Ardin is doing all she can to get Julian Assange convicted. By deleting and denying acquitting circumstances, she's perhaps making herself guilty of false accusation.

http://rixstep.com/1/20101001,01.shtml

Note the words "indicate", "looks like", "perhaps".


Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 05:19:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The whole proof that Ardin is revenge-obsessed seems to be that she in January translated this:

How to Get Legal Revenge | eHow.com

How to Get Legal Revenge

And called it interesting. That is the basis for this:

Assange Case: Evidence Destroyed Over and Over Again -- Rixstep Industry Watch

It might seem strange that a christian social democrat feminist would avail herself of legislation to get revenge on a man who is 'unfaithful'. When you read about Anna Ardin's post about revenge, it's no longer strange. It's completely natural. Anna Ardin has for a long time wondered how she can exact revenge on a man who dumps her, is unfaithful. When the other woman turns up, she has the opportunity to do something about her ideas. Anna Ardin plans it all well. She gets another woman to make the actual rape accusation. A case of 'revenge by proxy'. And then she gets help from Claes Borgström who's done all he can to try to get Julian Assange put on trial, frenetically cheered on by the feminist blogs.

It could be noted how the second woman involved is reduced to a tool in Ardin's quest.

I could go back and track the debate that started when the first arrest warrant was issued, and the search for any signs of conspiracy, and how a lot of fanboys latched on to the "feminists reports rape for fun" narrative within days of the charges, but one way or another it is always going to come back to "trust me, I read Swedish". Suffice to say, Stan Goff described it well:

Feral Scholar » Blog Archive » Wikileaks and Sex

Time will tell more and more about the sexual charges; and that's where we will see a lot of male anti-solidarity with women by men who support Assange, because they will carry their own gender bullshit into the defense of Assange - something he will have no control over, but which will be associated with the conduct of any trial.

It will not be nice for women who are active in the same circles with men who support what Assange has done, or who are active in various efforts that share support for Wikileaks actual accomplishment.

We will re-hash the whole "how many rape accusations are false?" controversy, hear a lot of stuff in support of silly promiscuity-as-liberation riffs, competing victim claims from liberal men, the whole schmiel. And once again, women - especially movement women - will feel the terrible distance they still have to go to be valued as much as men.

And the reason he can describe it so well without knowing any details is that it is all oh so familiar and predictable.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!

by A swedish kind of death on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 03:59:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It will not be nice for women who are active in the same circles with men who support what Assange has done

So Stan Goff already knows that Assange cannot possibly be innocent or falsely accused?

Has he given his evidence for this to the prosecution?

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 04:39:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, actually Goff believes Assange is innocent, so "has done" should be read as the political actions of Assange.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!
by A swedish kind of death on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 04:46:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ruding only speaks of "proof"  about  AA having deleted tweets concerning  her relation with Assange, which she clearly did.

You say she just translated the article and found it "interesting". She said more than that:

I've been thinking about some revenge over the last few days and came across a page which loosely translated is composed of the seven-point revenge instruction.

http://tinyurl.com/39tjtdx

That still seems to me relevant, but of course not in itself proof  of anything but the fact that she'd thought about revenge as more than just "interesting".

The Goff comment is about the way some people may behave in very general terms - at that level it might well be predictable but not very relevant to this discussion. I've been referring to specific things related to this case and which don't seem to come down to "trust me I read Swedish".

An important point by Goff:

I do know I've never heard of a sexual assault charge rocketing anyone to the top of the charts at Interpol, where Assange is now Most Wanted.



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 06:35:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ted Welch:
The Goff comment is about the way some people may behave in very general terms - at that level it might well be predictable but not very relevant to this discussion.
Goff's blog community is feminist - his comment is very relevant to the ongoing discussion on his blog to which the Assange case is incidental.

Of all the ways of organizing banking, the worst is the one we have today — Mervyn King, 25 October 2010
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 03:59:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Goff's blog community is feminist - his comment is very relevant to the ongoing discussion on his blog to which the Assange case is incidental.

Have you actually read it ? I don't see how you conclude that "Goff's blog community is feminist" and this is certainly false "discussion on his blog to which the Assange case is incidental". There are comments about the facts rather than feminist principles.  Goff IS concerned about the Assange case itself:


It could be true," is the true statement that gets planted with the(sic) even the false accusation.

Again, I trust reality to be what it is without my blessing; but if this is a tactic by the ruling class, it is more effective by far because it leaves that steady drip drip drip of doubt, no matter what.

So I want to acknowledge that if this is a tactic to cast a permanent shadow on Assange, it is an effective one; and if that shadow of doubt is then also meant to fall on the leaks themselves... again, it is a successful tactic.

From the comments:


robert wood:

Whether he committed rapes or not, the information wasn't leaked by him,it was leaked by people working for the government. Rape could really ruin his credibility. Lets just hope the accusations are false.

...
cabdriver:

If the info in this link is true, it may help to clarify the wider context for the allegation against Assange

http://radsoft.net/news/20101001,01.shtml

Winston Warfield:

Regardless of Assange's guilt or innocence (I believe he's been setup), it is, you're right, an effective public relations strategy to paint him as a rapist.



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 08:11:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ted Welch:
Have you actually read it ? I don't see how you conclude that "Goff's blog community is feminist" and this is certainly false "discussion on his blog to which the Assange case is incidental"
Oh, dear.

Yes, I used to read Feral Scolar with some regularity and, yes, gender issues are paramount in Goff's writing and in the community that blogs there.

Of all the ways of organizing banking, the worst is the one we have today — Mervyn King, 25 October 2010

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 08:17:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
For instance:

Feral Scholar » AA - Buy "Sex & War"

The notion that war is intrinsic to man's nature is dealt a powerful setback in Stan Goff's Sex and War. Goff, a former Special Forces sergeant, argues persuasively that rather than being born that way, men are made into killers by governments, corporations, and systems of power. Drawing both on his experiences in the military and on his reading of feminist writers such as Patricia Williams, bell hooks, and Chandra Mohanty" and as the father of a son stationed in Iraq Goff journeys through wars, ideologies, and cultures, revealing the transformation of men into killers. His story encompasses not just the battlefield and the book, but the Swift Boat Veterans controversy, the eros of George W. Bush, pornography, the Taliban, and gays and lesbians in the military. Goff's remarkable ability to connect his own personal experiences to contemporary feminist criticism makes for a provocative discussion of war and masculinity.


Of all the ways of organizing banking, the worst is the one we have today — Mervyn King, 25 October 2010
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 08:20:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
To ba fair, I see the latest blog entry in the category gender dates from November 2007. Tells you how long ago it's been since I've paid any regular attention to Goff. Back when I was in the US (pre-2005) his blog seemed very topical and I did read it regularly.

It does seem most of the latest entries are categorised under "General", that it, uncategorised.

Of all the ways of organizing banking, the worst is the one we have today — Mervyn King, 25 October 2010

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:05:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Fair enough :-)

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:14:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It is not, in and of itself, suspicious for people involved in legal proceedings in which their character might end up being questioned to pull down blogs and other opinion pieces from the internet. The content may or may not be relevant to her credibility as a witness, but that is for the courts of law to decide, not the courts of public opinion. Because in the courts of public opinion there are no formal guarantees in place to ensure that all who have relevant information to contribute can be heard, and those who simply wish to spread hearsay and speculation can be excluded.

By all means, go after the police's handling of the case. By all means, question the public prosecutors' motives and character. But if you have nothing good to say about a defendant or a witness, then hold your peace. Because there is no reason to believe that the courts of public opinion are better equipped to judge the character of a witness than to judge the guilt of a suspect - and the courts of public opinion have an atrocious track record on the latter point.

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 01:42:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Your comment and your signature are somewhat in conflict.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 01:46:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Though you have now quicky removed your sig..."Impeach Trichet"

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 01:47:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Huh? The sig is still there.

And there is no contradiction. Trichet is a policymaker, and his actions in that role are fair game for the courts of public opinion. Not because the courts of public opinion are well equipped to handle the misdeeds (or not) of policymakers in the line of duty, but because they are the only courts that are equipped to handle them at all. You can't use the courts of law to police the people who write the laws.

If Trichet had been accused of cruelty to fluffy bunnies, or of sleeping around on his wife, I would defend his right to not be hung out to dry in the press just as ardently as I defend Ardin's and Assange's right to the same thing. But he's being accused of misusing his power as a policymaker, and that's a different sort of ball game.

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 01:55:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My bad. I had never noticed before that signatures do not appear when perusing <recent comments>.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 04:16:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Here we go again :-)

Jake rides in on his high horse to pontificate about what we may discuss. It's a bit late buddy and the discussion about the women entirely understandable, given the status and situation of the accused. Naturally there was early discussion of whether this was some kind of US black op against Assange, then doubts were expressed about this as some things about the women became known which raises suspicions about the womans' accusations. Discussion of these issues is entirely understandable and part of the exercise of free speech - you know, just like supporting the worst possible interpretations of anything Sarkozy might say :-)

The fact that some public opinion  may be "atrocious" does not mean that all discussion of the possible motivations of people accusing others is "atrocious", it depends on the evidence and the arguments. The claim that the courts "guarantee" "that all who have relevant information to contribute can be heard, and those who simply wish to spread hearsay and speculation can be excluded" is laughable. Often the courts behave in an atrocious way.

We're not organising a lynch mob here, we're discussing some claims/evidence related to the case and the women making the accusations. The people you should be complaining about are powerful voices like Palin and Huckabee who have advocated his execution. If you have specific objections to some points made here feel free to say so - don't try telling us what we may and may not discuss.


Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 04:51:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The problem isn't discussing the possibility that these are false charges, it is the nature of the attack on the accusers and on the validity of the charges themselves, even if taken at face value.
by MarekNYC on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 05:08:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm sure some of the attacks on the women are very nasty and totally speculative, but not all of them are and they raise various problems of the reliability of the evidence, etc. and, given the person being accused are well worth discussing.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 05:13:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But that's the ones I've been criticizing here. As far as reliability of evidence goes, the only evidence I've seen so far is the accusation.  That IMO is plenty to launch a criminal accusation, but not enough on its own to take to trial, let alone convict.  I also object to citing nutcases who believe that the pedophilia scandal was orchestrated by the Elders of Zion as part of their plot to create a 'Judaic universe' and that in any case, there ain't no such thing as rape if it isn't reported absolutely immediately (he'll allow for 24hrs in really extreme cases).
by MarekNYC on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 05:33:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You said "it is the nature of the attack on the accusers" and my rather obvious point is that there isn't just one "attack", there are various questions being raised about the women, their accusations, attempted destruction of evidence, etc. and some of this is perfectly reasonable discussion and doesn't involve citing "nutcases.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 05:55:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What I objected to today did involve relying on the aforementioned nutcase.  My earlier ones have had to do with the uncritical citing of a defense attorney's spin on behalf of a client and arguments which implied that a)being starstruck should be considered to be consent to sex and b)that if someone has consented to sex with a person under one set of circumstances, they can't withdraw that consent under other ones with the same person.
by MarekNYC on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 06:04:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I didn't make a comment about what you'd said today, you made a comment in response to my comment on what JakeS said.

 I'm puzzled about why you don't see the simple difference between those you have been criticising and other, arguably more reasonable discussions of the women and their stories.

 What you have said about some people's comments and sources may well be very justified - but doesn't rule out the kind of questions some other people have been raising and which I think we're entitled to discuss if we wish to do so.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 06:21:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
the discussion about the women [is] entirely understandable, given the status and situation of the accused.

Understandable, perhaps. Defensible, less so.

In the first place, there is plenty enough muck to rack in the Swedish police without going after the witnesses. In fact, I would argue that going after the police is a more productive use of time, since unless the witnesses in question are serial filers of dubious accusations (something nobody seems to be claiming yet), the police mistakes (and/or mendaciousness) are the ones that are going to be repeated in the future.

In the second place, whatever the facts this sort of cases take a heavy emotional toll on witnesses and accusers, who will have the defence picking through their underwear drawer for public consumption in the courtroom. There is no need to add fuel to that particular fire.

One of the women in this case is less than perfectly blame-free, of course, since she was stupid enough to talk to the press. Whether that makes her fair game is a matter of taste, I suppose. But I'm inclined to think that such discussion should prominently feature the fact that she is the one who went public, so as to not give the impression that the accuser in every gossip-worthy crime will be put through that gauntlet just for going to the police with a case of possible criminal activity.

And in the third place, most of the impugning of her character and motives is weak tea, based on a large helping of speculation built on - being generous here - misunderstandings about how Sweden works.

Naturally there was early discussion of whether this was some kind of US black op against Assange,

But that's ludicrous, for a whole bunch of reasons.

Often the courts [of law] behave in an atrocious way.

Yeah, but their track record is a heap better than the courts of public opinion. A 50/50 chance of getting it right beats a 10 % chance, which is what I'd assign the general public - on a good day, if I feel generous.

We're not organising a lynch mob here,

I think you should discuss that claim with some people who have been sexually molested, and who have gone through the same process of having their motives and behaviour picked apart and reassembled by a professional nitpicker - sorry, lawyer - in order to most effectively undermine their credibility. Such deconstruction is a distasteful necessity for the courts, who have to make a good-faith effort to cast the defendant in the most charitable possible light before reaching a decision. But that does not mean that it is proper material for entertaining the general public.

Of course, and just to clear up any lingering confusion, this applies equally to all the newsies who are breathlessly reporting that Assange has been charged with sexual assault. That's not news. That's gossip page material, and if he ends up being acquitted, as remains the most likely scenario, then sensationalist newsies will have done him a real and shameful disservice. Needless to say, that goes double for those newsies who exaggerate the charges. But excessive credulity towards exaggerations of the charges does not seem to be a problem on European Tribune, while character attacks on the two women does.

The people you should be complaining about are powerful voices like Palin and Huckabee who have advocated his execution.

Yeah, and if there's anybody here who doesn't think Palin and Hucky belong in padded cells, dressed in long-sleeved sweaters, then I'd be happy to explain to them why murder is A Bad Thing. But really, I view support of murder and torture as sort of a litmus test for membership in civilised society, not a political position that I need to deconstruct just for the sake of deconstructing it.

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 10:17:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]


In the first place, there is plenty enough muck to rack in the Swedish police without going after the witnesses. In fact, I would argue that going after the police is a more productive use of time ...

Well, we don't know much about what the police have done, part from basic things like a senior prosecutor withdrawing charges against Assange soon after they were made - now reinstating them. Also particular cases can be of interest whether or not there is likely to be some pattern involved.

In the second place, whatever the facts this sort of cases take a heavy emotional toll on witnesses and accusers, who will have the defence picking through their underwear drawer for public consumption in the courtroom. There is no need to add fuel to that particular fire.

We're not sure the case will even come to court, Assange is fighting extradition - in the meantime some of us are curious about those making these allegations, given what's already been revealed in blogs and the media, the Guardian had quite a detailed article on it the other day.

One of the women in this case is less than perfectly blame-free, of course, since she was stupid enough to talk to the press. Whether that makes her fair game is a matter of taste, I suppose.

Quite.


But I'm inclined to think that such discussion should prominently feature the fact that she is the one who went public, so as to not give the impression that the accuser in every gossip-worthy crime will be put through that gauntlet just for going to the police with a case of possible criminal activity.

Maybe you could put that more clearly. It seems that she didn't just go to the police, she went to help the other woman and did not make an accusation (though now it seems she does) she asked the police for advice about her version of what had happened - knowing that they'd be likely to decide to make charges, but she would be immune from charges of making false accusations.


And in the third place, most of the impugning of her character and motives is weak tea, based on a large helping of speculation built on - being generous here - misunderstandings about how Sweden works.

"Most" is not all, even if your claim is true.



Often the courts [of law] behave in an atrocious way.

Yeah, but their track record is a heap better than the courts of public opinion. A 50/50 chance of getting it right beats a 10 % chance, which is what I'd assign the general public - on a good day, if I feel generous.

Obviously I'm not defending ANY kind of discussion, so points about public opinion in general are irrelevant.


We're not organising a lynch mob here,


I think you should discuss that claim with some people who have been sexually molested, and who have gone through the same process of having their motives and behaviour picked apart and reassembled by a professional nitpicker - sorry, lawyer - in order to most effectively undermine their credibility. Such deconstruction is a distasteful necessity for the courts, who have to make a good-faith effort to cast the defendant in the most charitable possible light before reaching a decision. But that does not mean that it is proper material for entertaining the general public.


Note the word "here" and deal with particular points made rather than yet more generalisations about how bad some discussion or questioning can be.


Of course, and just to clear up any lingering confusion, this applies equally to all the newsies who are breathlessly reporting that Assange has been charged with sexual assault. That's not news....

More holier-than-thou generalised waffle.


The people you should be complaining about are powerful voices like Palin and Huckabee who have advocated his execution.


Yeah, and if there's anybody here who doesn't think Palin and Hucky belong in padded cells, dressed in long-sleeved sweaters, then I'd be happy to explain to them why murder is A Bad Thing. But really, I view support of murder and torture as sort of a litmus test for membership in civilised society, not a political position that I need to deconstruct just for the sake of deconstructing it.


Who was talking about "deconstructing" anything ? Meanwhile others do think it's worth condemning such incitements to murder, far more important than just questioning the motives, given some of the facts revealed already, of women making serious allegations against Assange:

Two distinguished scholars and activists, Noam Chomsky and Peter Singer (and many others), signed an open letter to the Prime Minister of Australia on Tuesday, urging the government to condemn calls for Australian citizen and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to be assassinated.

...
"Dear Prime Minister,

We note with concern the increasingly violent rhetoric directed towards Julian Assange of WikiLeaks.

"We should treat Mr Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him," writes conservative columnist Jeffrey T Kuhner in the Washington Times.

William Kristol, former chief of staff to vice president Dan Quayle, asks, "Why can't we use our various assets to harass, snatch or neutralize Julian Assange and his collaborators, wherever they are?"

"Why isn't Julian Assange dead?" writes the prominent US pundit Jonah Goldberg.

"The CIA should have already killed Julian Assange," says John Hawkins on the Right Wing News site.

Sarah Palin, a likely presidential candidate, compares Assange to an Al Qaeda leader; Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator and potential presidential contender, accuses Assange of "terrorism".

And so on and so forth.
..."

http://qwstnevrythg.com/2010/12/chomsky-singer-declare-supp/




Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Wed Dec 8th, 2010 at 06:39:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Obviously I'm not defending ANY kind of discussion, so points about public opinion in general are irrelevant.

Quite. Because you've clearly demonstrated that your discourse is superior to the discourse among the rest of the uninformed public.

Note the word "here" and deal with particular points made rather than yet more generalisations

That doesn't help you at all. This subthread got started when you opined that Ardin's removal of some material in her name from the internet cast reasonable suspicion on her motives and credibility.

Removing statements from the internet which could be used to form the basis for character assassination is absolutely bog-standard practise for anybody involved in a court case. Any lawyer who does not advise his client to go to Google her own name and purge everything she can in the first three or so pages that might possibly be construed as damaging to her case should be fired for rank incompetence.

You're contributing to ill-informed and irresponsible speculation, based on pretending that the commonplace is somehow suspicious. That ill-informed and irresponsible speculation may happen to be accurate. But if it is it will be purely by the power of random chance, not because you've contributed any decent minimum of critical thinking to the problem.

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Dec 8th, 2010 at 07:06:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Note the word "here" and deal with particular points made rather than yet more generalisations

That doesn't help you at all. This subthread got started when you opined that Ardin's removal of some material in her name from the internet cast reasonable suspicion on her motives and credibility.
...
You're contributing to ill-informed and irresponsible speculation, based on pretending that the commonplace is somehow suspicious."


Deleting stuff MIGHt be commonly recommended, we have your word for it, Rudling disagrees:


As far as I can tell, it's not common for victims of crime to delete blogs, clean up their cellphones, and try to get witnesses to attest to things that aren't true. Why is it so important to remove these particular tweets?

Whether attempts to delete stuff are suspicious or not rather depends on what they attempt to delete. General stuff about one's private life is one thing, but deleting specific messages relating to her interaction with the accused, especially after the alleged offence, is quite another and I think a court might take a dim view of such attempted destruction of clearly relevant evidence. Then there is the translation of an article on how to get revenge (not just something she found generally "interesting" as you "speculated", but, as I pointed out, something she said she'd found after thinking about revenge for several days) which does seem suspicious in the circumstances- except of course to you, who is now doing the leaning over backwards.

Here's one of the latest additions to the "irresponsible speculation":


Awful as it is to doubt a woman's claims of sexual assault, any prosecution would seem to be on questionable ground. According to reports, one woman claims that a crime was committed against her because the consensual condom was broken, she says deliberately by Assange. Just weird, especially when she remained "thrilled" to be hosting a party for him the next day. (according to one of the tweets she attempted to delete TW).

Deborah Orr

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/09/deborah-orr-julian-assange-wikileaks



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Thu Dec 9th, 2010 at 11:50:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Come on Ted, you're quoting one of Assange's lawyers as an objective source? Yes, I know he's not his lawyer in this case, but that just makes it the second least objective possible source.  And he's spinning it just like you'd expect a defense attorney to do. Which is fine, that sort of BS is part of a lawyer's job.

The revenge stuff is irrelevant unless she talked about false rape accusations, in which case I'd agree that that would undermine her credibility (though it wouldn't means she was necessarily lying). Furthermore, the crime he is being charged with is, as I understand it, having sex without a condom after she had said she doesn't want to have sex without a condom.  She isn't claiming that she didn't want to have sex with him. Though even if she had been, nothing you've quoted would indicate that she was lying. I mean, since when does being thrilled at hanging out with someone famous indicate consent to sex?

Beyond that, I agree with skod that as is typical of acquaintance rape cases, it's very unlikely that there will be sufficient evidence to convict.

by MarekNYC on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 06:51:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
and partially pwned by skod.
by MarekNYC on Sun Dec 5th, 2010 at 06:55:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
"Come on Ted, you're quoting one of Assange's lawyers as an objective source?"

My point was that he isn't a male, Swedish anti-feminist. I think a better word for your point would be "disinterested", as I don't go along with the usual use of "objective" especially in US journalism as "balanced", "neutral", "disinterested", etc. For me it implies using evidence in a rational way to arrive at a conclusion.  Of course I don't think he's disinterested, but that doesn't mean what he says is of no relevance, his arguments are to be judged on their merits.

"The revenge stuff is irrelevant unless she talked about false rape accusations".

That seem to me to be an excessively narrow view of what might be relevant and I doubt if a jury would agree with you.  Cf.:


The cache of the translated article can be found here:

http://tinyurl.com/39tjtdx

Note that the article she refers to in the opening paragraph that inspired her is this eHow article, "How To Get Legal Revenge":

http://www.ehow.com/how_2296915_get-legal-revenge.html

The most incriminating part in the case of Assange is surely Step 3:

For example if you want revenge on someone who cheated or who dumped you, you should use a punishment with dating/sex/fidelity involved.

http://nicholasmead.com/2010/08/21/how-to-smear-a-hero/#comment-1566


Though even if she had been, nothing you've quoted would indicate that she was lying. I mean, since when does being thrilled at hanging out with someone famous indicate consent to sex?

Catlin says, I assume with some evidence for such an explicit published claim:

"The consent of both women to sex with Assange has been confirmed by prosecutors."

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.

by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Dec 6th, 2010 at 06:30:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't want to buy into the comments made about the motivation of either of the Swedish women who have complained to the police.

What I think is more important here is that media around the world have reported that Sweden is seeking Julian Assange's extradition on charges of rape or 'sex crimes'.

The term rape usually suggests sexual penetration without consent, or in a situation where someone is unable to consent because they are drugged, disabled or under age.  It conjures up images of violence.

It is interesting therefore to discover what the Swedish allegations involve. The Mail on Sunday has published details of the events outlined in police statements by the two Swedish women which confirm that Assange had consensual sex with each of them. It appears that the basis for allegations of `rape' or non-consensual sex is that under Swedish law it is compulsory to wear a condom. In one encounter, the condom broke and the woman concerned felt that this was a deliberate act by Assange. The other woman's statement apparently indicates that Assange had intercourse with her without using a condom although she had insisted on one. After the event she went out to buy food for his breakfast. Both women alluded favourably to their encounters in tweets or text messages.

Assuming this account is accurate, the handling of the case by Swedish authorities over a period of months seems strange at best. So strange that it would be easy to believe that those Swedish authorities have been arm-twisted into trying to bring a case against Assange. It may well end up, as Assange's Melbourne lawyer James Catlin claims, that "it is not Julian Assange that is on trial here but Sweden and its reputation as a modern and model country with rules of law".

by canberra boy (canberraboy1 at gmail dot com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 07:53:14 AM EST
Meanwhile, at FireDogLake:

Assange Accuser Worked with US-Funded, CIA-Tied Anti-Castro Group

Yesterday Alexander Cockburn reminded us of the news Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett broke at Counterpunch in September. Julian Assange's chief accuser in Sweden has a significant history of work with anti-Castro groups, at least one of which is US funded and openly supported by a former CIA agent convicted in the mass murder of seventy three Cubans on an airliner he was involved in blowing up.

Anna Ardin (the official complainant) is often described by the media as a "leftist". She has ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups. She published her anti-Castro diatribes (see here and here) in the Swedish-language publication Revista de Asignaturas Cubanas put out by Misceláneas de Cuba. From Oslo, Professor Michael Seltzer points out that this periodical is the product of a well-financed anti-Castro organization in Sweden. He further notes that the group is connected with Union Liberal Cubana led by Carlos Alberto Montaner whose CIA ties were exposed here.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 08:40:24 AM EST
Oh dear.

Could everyone in the media stop ignoring how political the witch-hunt for Assange has become?

Excellent catch.

by Nomad on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 08:52:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So according to Cockburn being anti-Castro and anti-communist means you're not a leftist?  The reverse shows would show that the person's critique of US policy is not founded in any concern with democracy, civil liberties, imperialism, or human rights, but that's another question. And are we really going to go play the six degrees of separation game that has long been used against left wing activists and those who protest against Israeli policies?  This is pathetic, not that I expect any better from Cockburn. And the fact that he is now apparently publishing the antisemitic (and misogynistic) nutjob PoS Israel Shamir (the original researcher here) doesn't improve my opinion.

It is possible that she is working for the US and lodged a false charge against Assange on their behalf.  It is also possible that Assange is guilty.  

by MarekNYC on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:21:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ThatBritGuy:
Carlos Alberto Montaner whose CIA ties were exposed here
Carlos Alberto Montaner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Montaner was born in Havana, Cuba, in 1943. After the Cuban Revolution of 1959, Montaner was imprisoned by the Cuban government on charges of participating in terrorist attacks and working with the CIA.[1] He later escaped from prison and left Cuba.[2] He has lived in Spain since 1970.[3]
That appears to be his only CIA ties, though the guy is a "Liberal" of the Vargas Llosa kind (right-wing liberal, but liberal nonetheless).

Of all the ways of organizing banking, the worst is the one we have today — Mervyn King, 25 October 2010
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:30:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
On April 16, 2010, Jean-Guy Allard, writing in Granma, the official newspaper of the Cuban Communist Party, asserted that Montaner had continued working for the CIA after leaving Cuba, up to the present time.[7] Allard also asserted that Montaner provided assistance to a bombing plot of the Cuban American National Foundation.[7]

Of course if he is a CIA asset, he's hardly likely to make this public.

But his profile as a media/propaganda asset certainly wouldn't be unusual.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:47:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So according to Cockburn being anti-Castro and anti-communist means you're not a leftist?

Being anti-Castro, anti-communist, and  - most significantly - having possible CIA funding and publishing connections would certainly be unusual for anyone on the left.

the person's critique of US policy is not founded in any concern with democracy, civil liberties, imperialism, or human rights, but that's another question.

When has the CIA or the US government ever shown any interest in democracy, civil liberties or human rights?

It is also possible that Assange is guilty.

Considering that no one seems to be sure exactly what Assange is supposed to be guilty of, and the prosecution has been started, stopped, restarted, stopped, and now restarted again in an entirely coincidental synchrony with the doc dumps, it's going to be an interesting trial to watch.

If there ever is a trial.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:38:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Being anti-Castro, anti-communist, and  - most significantly - having possible CIA funding and publishing connections would certainly be unusual for anyone on the left.

The 'connection' to the CIA, even if one is to take the accusations at face value, she has written for a publication which has worked with a group which may have ties to the CIA.  As for the rest, um, really? Being anti-communist is most unusual for the left?  Not among any leftist group I want to support, quite the reverse.  Furthermore, the article you are relying on is in turn based on one by a David Duke type nut. Not something one wants to rely on, and furthermore, something which indicates either a lack of familiarity with the source, or some rather nasty things about the person uncritically referencing it. If you prefer, it's like relying on a Marty Peretz piece in a context where the accused was a radical critic of Iran.

by MarekNYC on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:50:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So according to Cockburn being anti-Castro and anti-communist means you're not a leftist?  The reverse shows would show that the person's critique of US policy is not founded in any concern with democracy, civil liberties, imperialism, or human rights, but that's another question.

I wouldn't go quite that far. There's a difference between not supporting Castro and actively agitating against Castro. Unfortunately, the Cuban opposition in exile has a substantial credibility problem, because it contains some very vocal people who seem more interested in property rights than in human rights. So it's not completely beyond the pale for an American commentator to associate the anti-Castro movement with far-right Florida-based nutcases. That really is unfortunate, both because the nuts strike me as a small but vocal group that is not representative of the wider Cuban exile community, and because Cuba does have a serious problem with lack of democracy and human rights.

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 10:49:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, there is a serious problem with the make up of the US anti-Castro movement.  And by reverse I didn't mean 'doesn't actively support the anti-Castro movement' but is actually pro-Castro.  I personally see present day Castro's Cuba as a run of the mill mildly repressive dictatorship - it's late Franco Spain, not North Korea or even late seventies Chile.  However, if for whatever reasons someone wishes to expend energy in trying to raise political freedom issues regarding Cuba, I don't see anything wrong with that, in spite of the fact that if you do you're going to find yourself within a couple degrees of separation of some pretty nasty characters.  But that's true of a lot of other issues as well.  And I find it quite disturbing that there's still a minority among those who I see as on my political side that seem to see Castro's Cuba and Castro himself in a positive light.
by MarekNYC on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 11:17:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, there is a serious problem with the make up of the US anti-Castro movement.  And by reverse I didn't mean 'doesn't actively support the anti-Castro movement' but is actually pro-Castro.

OK. That was not altogether clear from your comment. My point was simply that the Swedish Cuban exile movement seems a lot less compromised than their American counterparts, so an American commentator drawing inferences based on that affiliation would tend to overestimate the probability that he was dealing with a wingnut.

And I find it quite disturbing that there's still a minority among those who I see as on my political side that seem to see Castro's Cuba and Castro himself in a positive light.

Well as you say, it beats Pinochet's Chile. Pinochet wannabes aren't a serious threat anymore, of course, but for people who received their political schooling in the '70s and '80s... and you know how often I complain that European Serious People keep being emotionally attached to NATO a good fifteen years after its sell-by date. I think the mechanism is similar, and just as unfortunate. Here's to hoping it'll go away on its own, once the Die Seriöse Leute start being people with no personal memory of the Soviet Union's existence.

- Jake

Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 11:39:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well now.

The chirp of crickets emerged from the hubbub as silence spread among the chattering partygoers.

There is a certain distinctive smell to CIA setups.
A good place to begin developing a more acute sense of smell is to read "A CIA Diary" by phillip Agee.
As a bare beginning, that's a good one.
Then, "The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence"  (Victor Marchetti, 1974) may also assist in olfactory education, while entertaining.
It's not a court of law here. We're discussing things that would not exist if it were possible to easly dismiss dismissed by sifting the easily available stuff.

This whole thing stinks. Powerfully.  

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 09:34:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
How do you differentiate between a Swedish member of the Soc-dem party and Swedish member of the left (formerly communist) party?

Answer: ask them about Cuba.

Assange accepted the invitation to speak at a seminar arranged by the christian wing of the Soc-dems. The Soc-dems are well-known anti-Castro, views many of them frequently publish, in all likelihood disproportionally so in CIA-funded papers. Thus Assange is a CIA asset. (Or not.)

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES!

by A swedish kind of death on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 11:28:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You might want to update your list:

European Tribune - Comments - Donate

1. Donate to Julian Assange Defence Fund
   2. Online Transfer via Credit Card
   3. Bank Transfer [option 1: everyone]
   4. Bank Transfer [option 2: tax deductible in Germany]
   5. Paypal via Wau Holland Foundation
   6. Postal Mail

1. Julian Assange Defence Fund

PostFinance blocked that account today:

Julian Assange's Swiss bank account closed | Media | The Guardian

"PostFinance has ended its business relationship with ... Julian Paul Assange," the bank said in a statement.

"The Australian citizen provided false information regarding his place of residence during the account opening process."

Well, duh, I understand that "place of residence" concerns is also one of the reasons invoked to deny bail to JA.

2. Online Transfer via Credit Card

No dice either:

WikiLeaks Cut by Visa, MasterCard - TheStreet

"Visa Europe has taken action to suspend Visa payment acceptance on WikiLeaks' website pending further investigation into the nature of its business and whether it contravenes Visa operating rules," a Visa spokesman said in an emailed statement.

MasterCard said that it was ceasing a relationship with WikiLeaks because of alleged illegal activity engagement by the site, according to a CNET report. A MasterCard spokesman said that it is "taking action to ensure that WikiLeaks can no longer accept MasterCard-branded products."

If Visa and MasterCard permanently blocks payments to WikiLeaks, electronic donations will be severely limited, with most transactions going through a web page hosted by Iceland-based DataCell.com and using a Visa credit card.

3. Bank Transfer - Option 1:
4. Bank Transfer [option 2: tax deductible in Germany]

These two banks, one in Iceland, one in Germany, still seem to be operating the accounts.

5. PayPal via Wau Holland Foundation
Blocked, as you mentioned.

6. Postal Mail
Still operating as far as we know.

by Bernard on Tue Dec 7th, 2010 at 12:39:03 PM EST
[BAD TASTE ALERT]

I volunteer to testify at his trial. As a sort of character witness.

In fact, I think his best line of defense is to underline the notion of rape as a cultural construct. As has been noted, a Swedish woman can not be sure whether she has been raped or not, without consulting a jurist. So what chance does an Australian man have?

Consider : in Australian culture, by agreeing to share a bed with a man, you implicitly consent to being penetrated, without a condom, in your sleep. This is the sort of thing that a well-educated, intelligent Swedish woman really ought to know.

So, the line of defense can be summed up as "well, he's an Australian. What did you expect? Flowers?"

And my participation would consist of reciting, as corroboration, any number of "Australian jokes", such as we tell in New Zealand.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Thu Dec 9th, 2010 at 07:53:51 AM EST
[eurogreen's Macho Moment of the Day™ Technology]

Of all the ways of organizing banking, the worst is the one we have today — Mervyn King, 25 October 2010
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Dec 9th, 2010 at 08:00:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
(no pun intended in the title - obviously)

What's an Australian's idea of foreplay?
You awake?

 What's a Tasmanians idea of foreplay?
You awake, mum?

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Thu Dec 9th, 2010 at 09:56:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
All this is ridiculous and so obviously made up. Once has to be really stupid or mean/not to see it/sorry guys.
Not to mention all the farce with consensual-non consensual sex with or without condom in Sweden so called law that has gone too far in regulating all the aspects of life, including  sex. I am a women and sex is either consensual or it's not consensual. There is no other way. If it is consensual there is no crime there...it's simple as that. Those two sluts were not forced in to the sex,not phisicaly or mentally , by their own telling. If condom broke it's a bad luck , what a lunatic can say that he broke it intentionally / go figure/.The other one by her own words asked for the condom to be used and consented to have sex after she was told he is not going to use it. And then after doing a party for him and all that stuff she went in to the police to ask for advice. What a slut.
What's wrong with you people who do not see things as obvious as this?
On the other hand you keep telling us that we should wait for courts to decide what's truth while man who may be very well innocent IS IN PRISON...denied his freedom while he is defending himself...WTF you are trying to tell us here...


Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind...Albert Einstein
by vbo on Fri Dec 10th, 2010 at 10:34:44 PM EST
That is pretty ugly vbo.  I'll note that you refer to a woman who may be making a false charge of rape or may be the victim of rape as a 'slut', while you do not do the same w/r to Assange, who may be the victim of a false charge or may be a rapist, but is by a gender neutral version of your standards twice as much of a 'slut' as the women.  The news reports vary, but according to a number of them one of women told Assange to stop and he refused, i.e. she expressly refused to consent to sex.  I'm curious, what do you think that the woman should do in this sort of case - gouge the man's eyes out perhaps?  In that case would she unquestionably be telling the truth and innocent of aggravated assault and bodily harm by reason of self defense?
by MarekNYC on Sat Dec 11th, 2010 at 01:54:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
i.e. she expressly refused to consent to sex.
---------
If so it was too late cause she already was an actor in CONSENSUAL sex. All tho I may think of such a thing that she could push him and stop sex immediately if she wanted him to stop really. It would not hurt him I suppose. That I suppose is one that had condom broken. What about the other one that was told that he is not using condom and still agreed to sex only to go to the police later
This all story is BS and yes those women are sluts in my eyes, not because they had sex with a man they did not have a chance to know better / considering a short time he spent with them / but because they try to make rape case of something that clearly was not rape. Why they are doing so I can imagine but really am not sure of the reason.
As for him, he is in this trouble and mess also because he is a slut of a kind /as a man who is sleeping around with women he does not know much about / and in a way he deserve it. What bothers me is the fact that he is not just another guy that sleeps around /and yet without condom, not to mention fact that he can contract diseases / but he is Wikileaks and as story of those women smell bad so the whole judicial procedure is bloody smelly. He should be able to defend himself as a free man. He was not violent by telling of those women. Instead he is in prison. If he is deported and if it's a truth that in Sweden there is no bail he could spend pretty long time in prison / maybe that's why they chosen Sweden for this exercise / and in the end they may find that he is innocent...but the purpose of all this will be already done...he will be removed from the scene for a long time so that they can destroy Wikileaks. I am not going to even mention what can happen to him in prison / real rape and even worse maybe  even death by another prisoner... which is a common thing /.
But whatever they do they will not stop these leaks ... if they even want it. While the world is going upside down whit criminal finance transactions of the few, people are concentrated on Wikileaks...that must be good entertainment for the masses.
I really can't see how all this seems to be OK with you...


Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind...Albert Einstein
by vbo on Sat Dec 11th, 2010 at 05:32:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Top Diaries

Occasional Series

24 July 2014
by dvx - Jul 23
58 comments