Transparency Hypocrisy: Assange Outraged That His Police Files Leaked

Transparency Hero Julian Assange
Transparency Hero Julian Assange

Leaks leaks everywhere a leak. A condom leak, cable leaks, police file leaks, Expressen leaks. One of these things has been justified as transparency, the rest have been dismissed as revenge.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has a problem. Well, he has many problems but right now we’re focused on the matter of his value system. Mr Assange claims to stand for transparency, which is a noble mission, and under the guise of said transparency did last month release hundreds of secret diplomatic cables. Mr Assange was then hailed as a hero by the Left and a villain by the Right, with some crossover as high-ranking Democratic officials labeled Mr Assange a terrorist.

Then came the leak by the Swedish newspaper Expressen of two women’s reports to the police alleging that Mr Assange had had unprotected sex with them both and refused to take an AIDS test. This leak was denounced as being part of an agenda to destroy him for the cable dumps. So this leak was not OK.

Mr Assange was subsequently charged with rape of two women by Swedish officials for what was deemed “sex by surprise” or having sex with a broken condom or no condom when use of a condom had the condition of the women’s consent. Since then, the Left and Right came together to denounce these women and these charges as set-ups, mocking the women, and engaging in what can be deemed internet harassment by leaking their names and personal information which are supposed to be protected and private in rape cases.

In acts of blatant misogyny and hypocrisy, the women were called “honeypots” for the CIA and worse. This kind of simplistic thinking leaves no room for thoughtful realization that a person can be both a political hero and a rapist. Power often begets abuse of power.

But no one called foul on that leak. It seems the rights of these women were to be disregarded and dismissed as the public tried them and found them guilty of being revenge-seeking men haters. My, that’s new. I’m bowled over by the progressive nature of such attacks.

Naturally, I’m compelled to rejoice in the consistency of the liberal agenda which allows patriarchal fables to dominate its thinking while claiming superiority over the patriarchs running the world. White men coming after other white men and throwing women in the garbage who get in the way of their agenda because they’re the good guys. See, you’re supposed to just believe these guys when they tell you these women are evil. No need for leaks or facts here because there’s a cause at stake. Who cares if a few women get raped or not raped or humiliated and shamed internationally before the facts are even out. These are the same people who denounce our role in Afghanistan in part due to the horrific rapes of women there. So, are we pro-rape or anti-rape? Or is it that we get to decide who is a rapist and who isn’t based upon whether or not we agree with other things they’re doing?

Stop me when this blows your mind.

Then came the leak of Mr Assange’s police files by the Guardian UK, which provided proof of more damning evidence against him, wherein it’s alleged that he held one woman down in order to have sex with her and had sex with the other while she was sleeping. In both cases, the matter is complicated by previous sexual consent or consent predicated upon the use of a condom.

UK Press reports that the charges consist of:

“Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish authorities, told the court Assange was wanted in connection with four allegations. She said the first complainant, Miss A, said she was victim of “unlawful coercion” on the night of August 14 in Stockholm.
The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
The second charge alleged Assange “sexually molested” Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her “express wish” one should be used.
The third charge claimed Assange “deliberately molested” Miss A on August 18 “in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity”. The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on August 17 without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.”

And on December 18, 2010 the New York Times reported:

“But the details in the police report and dozens of interviews in recent months with people in Sweden linked to the case suggest that the Swedish case could be less flawed than Mr. Assange’s supporters have claimed.”

And then today, on Yahoo:

“Assange said the leak of the Swedish police report “was clearly designed to undermine my bail application.” He added: “Someone in authority clearly intended to keep Julian in prison.”

(Guardian investigations editor) Leigh defended (Guardian reporter Nick) Davies on Twitter Monday night, suggesting that The Guardian reporter actually kept out specific details from the police report while publishing what was deemed necessary for the story. That runs counter to Assange’s view that The Guardian treated him unfairly in how the paper covered the allegations.

“Nick left out a lot of graphic and damaging material in the allegations because he thought it would be too cruel to publish them,” Leigh said by phone.”

But this leak was denounced as part of an agenda and revenge seeking. Mr Assange accuses the Guardian UK of “selectively publishing” the facts. Where is the value of transparency now? How can Mr Assange decry the release of his police files and yet justify his release of hundreds of diplomatic cables? Mr Assange claims that the police files do not contain all of the facts. That is most likely true, but those facts will be presented in a court of law and ruled upon hopefully based on their merit. But is he suggesting that the cables he leaked tell the entire story? Did he release every single cable, the back-story and the motives of the authors or did he simply release the cables he was given and let the public decide for themselves?

The same argument that Mr Assange is using against his accusers (both of whom a friend of Mr Assange claims did not want to go to the police, they simply wanted him to take an AIDS test but he refused and then when he finally consented, the clinic was closed and the women went to the police) can be used against him. Mr Assange called for the resignation of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton right after the cable dumps. This could be seen as him having an agenda and using the cable dumps to accomplish it. This can also be dismissed as revenge against the US foreign policy or even a further attack on women if I can be given the same free rein as supporters of Mr Assange give attacks against his accusers. No, I’m not really making that argument, but it serves to demonstrate the outlandish belief that we can assign intent to people we don’t know before we even have the facts.

The fact is that we do NOT know the truth here. What we do know is that Mr Assange has performed a valuable service in the name of transparency but now seems to be anti-transparency when it’s his own reputation on the line.

We do know that the line of defense Mr Assange and his supporters are using against these women is nothing new. Their pictures have been leaked and they’ve been referred to as honeypots – the evil Eve seductresses out to get a good man. This tired, misogynistic and patriarchal attitude does nothing to discredit the allegations in my mind – if anything, hearing Mr Assange make these accusations makes me wonder more about his attitudes toward women.

We do know that we don’t have all of the facts here, and wise people would wait until we did before ruining the lives of two women or Mr Assange. But so eager are we to defend the Transparency Hero that we denounce the humanitarian’s approach to women’s rights and we justify, dismiss and discredit rather serious charges. We are so eager to defend this man that we throw these women under the bus, make jokes about “sex by surprise” and still somehow manage to call ourselves liberals.

Rape is not an uncommon event. Rape among people who know each other is even more common. This fact makes rape a complicated, messy charge and very difficult to prove. Does that mean it didn’t happen?

There are women that you know right now who are interacting with someone who raped them and acting like nothing happened. It’s called conditioning. Part of the reason rape is so under-reported is because women see other women like Mr Assange’s accusers being put through character assassination slaughter and they think better of going public. Many women say that reporting a rape is like being raped all over again. No one likes a whistle-blower, and isn’t that what a woman who has the courage to stand up to rape – especially by someone she knows – is? She’s blowing the whistle on a patriarchal belief system that her body doesn’t belong to her.

Having sex with someone without a condom when they require a condom is not OK. Painting these women out as sexy, agenda-driven Machiavellian spies is akin to putting black face on them. I’ll not denounce Mr Assange as a rapist because that would be incredibly unfair. That is for the court’s to decide. But the Left’s automatic defense of Mr Assange and resulting crucifixion of these women is a betrayal of our value system, a betrayal of women’s rights, and indicative of a childish mindset that can only conceive of people in black and white.

Statistically, you know several rapists and a few child molesters. You don’t know who they are, but you know them and they often do lots of great things for their community. They are often very powerful men. They often employ a lot of people. None of those facts exonerates them from abusing their power and treating a woman’s body like a depository for their need to exert their power and dominance.

It is not outside the realm of possibility that these charges are real. If you read the statements by the police and by Mr Assange’s own colleagues and friends, it’s difficult to dismiss them as a joke. It’s hard to take anyone seriously who automatically plays defense with something this serious while championing Mr Assange for his role in transparency and then denouncing the leaks of the reports against Mr Assange. If you’re going to have a value system you want taken seriously, it had best be consistent. In that regard, this debacle has been an utter fail on the part of many liberals and most certainly a failure in Mr Assange’s asserted value system of transparency.

Updated: Dec 21 10:35 PM with Yahoo Cutline quote

41 Replies to “Transparency Hypocrisy: Assange Outraged That His Police Files Leaked”

  1. If he were an American, what he did would not be called rape. From everything I have read there is no claim of forced sex, just sex without a condom. Sweden defines rape far more broadly than we do. Over there unwanted touching is also considered rape. At best here he would be tested and only charged were he found to be carrying any disease

    “In many countries, and in many people’s minds, rape means penetration, usually by a penis, into a mouth, vagina or anus. In Swedish rape law, the word can be used for acts called assault or bodily harm in other countries. ”

    In Sweden for instance, if a woman drinks and has sex, the next day she can declare rape even if her consent is proven

    But you are right in stating, we do not know which side is right. I am not going to take either sides part until the trial in Sweden, which very well may never happen, is over. I dont think Britain is going to let him go so the US can grind him up into Sausage and do what we do best. Create more Assange’s And we will continue to hear, unfortunately, “the cynical: ‘Nothing will change’, ‘the police are pigs’, immigrants are terrorists, girls are liars.”

    Quote from the Swedish article “A recent European Commission report identifying Sweden as the rape capital of Europe should be treated with a healthy dose of scepticism, argues sociologist Laura Agustín. ”

    http://www.thelocal.se/19376/20090511/

  2. Here’s the charges from the police files that were leaked which perhaps I should have included and will update with:

    “Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish authorities, told the court Assange was wanted in connection with four allegations. She said the first complainant, Miss A, said she was victim of “unlawful coercion” on the night of August 14 in Stockholm.
    The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
    The second charge alleged Assange “sexually molested” Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her “express wish” one should be used.
    The third charge claimed Assange “deliberately molested” Miss A on August 18 “in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity”. The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on August 17 without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.”

  3. Sarah, I hate to say this because we have always been like peas and carrots, but I think you are playing right into the hands of the Pentagon and international security apparatus here. It is just a little bit suspicious that these ‘sex by surprise’ charges (not actually rape from what I have read) came out right after this latest wikileaks release, don’t you think?

    To me, this is a very transparent campaign of character assassination that these pathetic black ops cowards engage in with alarming regularity. If Assange didn’t have the fame that he does, he would likely be ‘disappeared’ to a secret CIA prison in somewheria by now, or have met with an unfortunate ‘accident’.

    Stay focused on the leaks, ignore the psychological warfare brought to you by the military-industrial corporation.

  4. I updated it to show the police reports, Nov. I understand not everyone has read these, which I assumed they had.

    It is rape if he held a woman down and had sex with the other while she slept. And sex without a condom is not OK, especially when it’s alleged that he did something to it after putting it on with one woman and refused to wear one with the other.

    I’m not against Assange or the leaks but that doesn’t mean I agree with jumping on these women the way the Left has. The issues don’t have to be conflated and it is outrageous to me the way the Left has used misogyny to shut this down. Do not be so eager to defend him from a conspiracy that you join the Right in their attacks on women, please. We can defend Assange’s right to dump the cables without assuming these women are liars. That is my point.

    We’re on the same side of things. I’m simply asking to tone down the misogyny and not mistreat these women until the facts are out. Peas and carrots don’t always see eye to eye, but they do make a better vegetable course than either alone:-)

  5. It is not my intent to belittle these women or sex victims anywhere, but as someone who has experienced false allegations of harassment personally, I know the devastating effect the mere suggestion of this can have on someone. I am not quick to judge in these cases, I don’t assume guilt, but neither try to assume the charges or being made up or exaggerated either.

    That being said, this whole thing just seems waaay too fishy. Why were charges not filed in August? Why not October? Why did they suddenly occur right after the last wikileaks dump?

    I haven no evidence that the charges are *not* true either, but don’t want to fall into the trap of automatically thinking of Assange as some vial rapist every time wikileaks releases something embarrassing to the government, which seems to be their goal by at least carefully seeding this information.

  6. I talked to a very smart friend in the UK about this since they have a different perspective (read: better media since most accounts I’ve seen here simply repeat the same NYT article). Her top recommendation was also to wait for the court proceeding. However, apparently Assange has been a huge political celebrity in Europe for a while. Imagine a woman hosts Brad Pitt in her home, lets him know she’s available, then is hurt when he turns out to be not as wonderful in bed as she imagined. Maybe she even let him talk her into doing things she regrets, and now she is afraid of the consequences. It could have happened this way too.

    He acknowledges his own promiscuity, and he has been famous in Europe for a while. If he had these proclivities, doesn’t it seem odd that no one at all has spoken up before now? Maybe this was some kind of assault, but either way, the convenience of the timing has to be at least a little suspicious.

  7. I am suggesting that people wait until the court goes over the evidence. I am also suggesting that we do not need to engage in misogyny in order to search for the truth. Having worked with plenty of Hollywood types, I can assure everyone that this star boy meme goes both ways.

    There are many of them who take advantage of their power and abuse women on a regular basis and then claim that these women wanted a piece of them which is sometimes true but sometimes it’s not (not all women are the same and not all women want to sell themselves out) and then it’s a very sad story. These men also don’t think they need to wear condoms and would dismiss any suggestion as the woman’s problem. I am speaking out against this kind of misogyny. It is not uncommon that POWERFUL men do often have this cavalier sense of entitlement and not every woman wants to give the star boy a go while she’s sleeping:-)

    UK Guardian: “However, unredacted statements held by prosecutors in Stockholm, along with interviews with some of the central characters, shed fresh light on the hotly disputed sequence of events that has become the centre of a global storm.” Etc. All is not shiny and clean in this one. Why not wait before smearing these women?

  8. I can understand that and those are valid points. I do not want him seen as a rapist nor have I suggested that ever- that would be just as unfair as smearing these women.

    I also agree that this is suspicious timing. I would like to see this debated without using misogynistic terms (which you have never done) about these women AND the charges. Every time someone makes light of “sex by surprise” and demolishes these women, some scared woman is not going to report a real rape or a young girl learns to keep her mouth shut to get along. I don’t want to support that narrative.

  9. 1. Whatever happened to due process? Assange (rightly) refuses to publicly discuss his sex life, so he is now at a disadvantage.

    2. I’m not interested in wikileaks but I doubt they ever published the details of peoples’ sex lives.

    3. If the women were so freaked out, why have sex with him again? Both women did. He should have been smart enough to have the STD test when they first realized he ‘gets around’ so much, and demanded it of him; then they wouldn’t have gone to the police in an effort to force him.

    4. All this drama over a simple blood test. If someone you slept with wants you to have one, FGS have it- and make sure they do, too – or you never know where it might end up.

    5. An English journalist predicted back in about July that sooner or later Assange would be accused of pedophilia, the way wikileaks was going. He was a only a little wrong.

  10. “the public tried them and found them guilty of being revenge-seeking men haters”

    It’s a fact that one of the alleged victims, Anna Ardin, is a rabid feminist who authored a tract advising women on how to get revenge on male lovers. Do you expect the public to ignore this information?

  11. Finally someone sticks up for due process and women’s rights. These apologists don’t mind that the women have their personal lived made public which is a violation of their rights and this Guy above says the fact that she’s a feminist, he leaves out pro wiki leaks, is a reason to assume her guilt
    By that reasoning he’s guilty because he’d very promiscuous. Lol. Whatever
    This country is as backwards on women rights as it is racism

  12. Privacy for the state and privacy for the individual are obviously not the same thing and it is simple-minded to categorise it as hypocrisy.

    You may view it as such if you consider Assange’s philosophy to be top-to-bottom radical transparency; but that is not the case. His interest is in commercial and state secrets that are damaging to the public, not the personal lives of ordinary people. In none of the interviews I have read or seen has he said such. I would be interested to know of specific cases where he has said otherwise; radical transparency is something I do not agree with.

    It’s also worth considering what this situation means for a judicial system. There are clear reasons why much information surrounding a case is kept secret. Should the court of public opinion run riot, a defendant may find their peers already prejudiced against them.

    In this situation, it is not appropriate to crow about someone apparently being a hypocrite. Instead you should consider what it means for an individual — which in the future could be you, me or someone you know— to be accused of crime via the media, abetted by leaks on the part of the prosecution. How can anyone hope to get a fair trial in that case?

    The whole situation is a miserable mess. I am disgusted to see these women having their names dragged through the mud and the whole media circus — aided by both the Swedish prosecution and the CPS — surrounding the situation.

    This is an issue better settled quietly and privately. And if Assange is to be held to account, let it be so. But please, let’s at least all ask for fairness for all parties; it’s what any of us would hope for in the same situation.

  13. I had heard sex charges against after the first leak about Afghanistan. I had “assumed” they were prob trumped up to shut him up. He is embarrassing Diplomats after-all?
    But this latest sound like R-A-P-E to me. All of it any of it. And he is mad about the leaks? For himself or the girls?
    How Stupid for people to label them “honeypots” so it was ok what he did? Sarah I think you hit the nail on the head with this statement: “There are many of them who take advantage of their power and abuse women ”
    I do think that might be the case here.
    Of course we have to see how the trial proceeds but RAPE is rape I don’t care that they try to water it down in another country.
    If he is a sexual predator He should go to jail. Wikileaks or not. Are we the same people who are tired of Certain people with lots of money Getting away with stuff? But we will turn our head if its someone who has been label a “hero”?
    No, that is indeed hypocritical.

  14. “Leigh defended Davies on Twitter Monday night, suggesting that The Guardian reporter actually kept out specific details from the police report while publishing what was deemed necessary for the story. That runs counter to Assange’s view that The Guardian treated him unfairly in how the paper covered the allegations.

    “Nick left out a lot of graphic and damaging material in the allegations because he thought it would be too cruel to publish them,” Leigh said by phone.”

    As for the claim that his privacy rights aren’t the same as the cables- why not? He’s a public figure. He put other people’s lives at risk, not just their reputations. But now he’s exempt from his own values?

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20101221/ts_yblog_thecutline/wikileaks-assange-fires-back-at-the-guardian-to-competitor

    “We are an organization that does not promote leaking,” Assange said. “We’re an organization that promotes justice … that promotes justice through the mechanism of transparency and journalism.”

    Justice that comes from leaking documents. And speaking of justice, hadn’t he already disparaged the women in the press and when someone leaks the police files to balance his claims, now he says he’s anti leaking? Sorry. That doesn’t fly.

  15. “He also said the women accusing him of sex assault had worked themselves up into a “tizzy.” ” Oh yeah, he sounds like a real stand up guy. Not sorry I might have given you AIDS but “get over your tizzy”. He’s a sociopath. He did a good thing, but he’s gone nuts.

  16. Assange says these women are not “honeypots” set ups from the CIA – just women who were upset about STDs. Says his lawyer was misquoted.

  17. Its funny how you talk about women’s rights. how bout human rights? do you have any idea what the US is really doing in the middle east? do you have any idea what is has done for the last century? The US government and its army have committed more mass murder than any other entity on earth. Also, they’ve destroyed families, homes, tortured the innocent including children and women (and if you are naive enough to think the US army didn’t rape those women) then you are a hypocrite.

    So rape is okay as long as its not american or european women. But anywhere else, it’s okay right?

    Rape is the easiest charge to frame someone with. Especially in europe and the states where woman HAVE RIGHTS, and many men get unrightfully framed for rape because who isn’t going to believe a raped woman. But of course she’s not lying!! she’s been raped!! are you mad?!!?

    FOOLS.

    Thats what you are and everyone saying Assange is a sociopath blablabla (and you too Sarah jones), instead of wasting your time trying to make Assange look bad, getting all worked up because your feminism trigger is waiting to be pulled. Open your eyes!

    These charges are the most fabricated charges, so conveniently timed too. Coincidence? to simple minded people like you.. apparently so.

    How about you start fighting against your government and all the human rights violations it has committed, for all the babies that are born deformed or have been deformed by the use of lethal radioactive nuclear weapons? Or how about you stand up for something worthwhile and get out of your stupid little american bubble and see what is really going on in the world. Your government has brought devastation and destruction to millions worldwide.
    And it will continue, unless you do something about it.

    Was he supposed to take a written consent from the women before sleeping with them? and these claims that he put her down with his own weight? where is the proof of any of this? how do you find this credible? How could these POSSIBLE CLAIMS (and from first review clearly fabricated) be more important than REAL FACTS leaked about your horrifying nation?

    You people live in your own little world, and this is why everyone around the world thinks americans are stupid.

  18. Oh so even though on the 14th miss A got “molested” she still agreed to be in the same room with him on the 17th.

    Call me stupid but if your going to blame someone for sexually molesting you, why would you be with that same person 3 days later alone?

    And yet people still think these charges could be true. Ignorant people of course.

  19. Your argument seems to be that it’s ok to sacrifice the due process of the law for these two women in the name of larger human rights violations and yet women’s rights are an intrinsic part of human rights. You then proceed to conflate the WikiLeaks mission with this issue wrongly. It is possible to hold two disparate thoughts in your head at the same time and not reach a conclusion, but simply weigh the matter at hand and the laws involved.

    You then claim that we’re fools, while acting like one yourself by making such a statement, claiming to know the truth when that is impossible and failing to debate the issue at hand reasonably.

    The police report says he did those things. The courts will decide what proof there is of this. You don’t know the truth any more than any of us. Even Assange says it was not a set up by these women so this claim of yours is not accurate.

    The law is the law. Are you suggesting that he is above the law? If so, please justify that argument while remaining consistent with your belief that he did a good thing in outing other violations of human rights and those things should be answered for.

    Thanks for your feedback.

    PS I don’t see anyone here suggesting it’s OK for other women to be raped. In fact, I addressed that issue in my post. That was a strawman argument and an odd choice for someone who seems so sure that rape is an easy thing to frame someone with. The statistics on rape reporting and conviction say otherwise. I am very familiar with what the US is and has done. I am also very familiar with the high incidents of rape within our own military. That is precisely why I think it’s important to discuss this issue without smearing these women. They never asked fro this in the first place. One would think that if they were setting him up, they would have done a much better job of it and made it a black and white issue with video to boot. However, this point has been addressed by all parties and the conclusion is that they did not set him up. The police may have. That remains to be seen.

  20. You are obviously not familiar with the fact that 70-80 percent of rapes occur with people the woman knows and often she continues to interact with that person. That is a cultural problem that is exceptionally complicated and I understand, hard to grasp.

    That said, these women did not want him charged with rape. That was the choice of the police. There is no reason to go after them for what the police did. They did not want this. According to the reports and to Assange, they merely wanted him to take an AIDS / std test. In the telling of this to the police, the police determined that more serious charges were called for. Either they are gunning for Assange or they had reason for this. We don’t know this yet.

  21. Wow! Sarah you have done a great service here. You framed your argument perfectly and although no-one knows all the details, it occurs to me that regardless of the facts, these women are being used and abused. I personally support Assange, but this rape business complicates the story. The problem is these women being portrayed in a negative light. Too often, no, very often women are the victims and this is no different. Yes, the timing is suspicious, but the charges, although not proven, are serious. The comment that why would the woman be in the same room with Assange is typical of our male-dominated society. If it had been one woman with a history of false accusations, perhaps I would think differently. But more than one?

    Our society still devalues women as a matter of course. If Assange or any man has sex against the woman’s will, it is rape. A man will never understand it. False accusations happen all the time, but more than one indicates a pattern. Is Assange a rapist? I wasn’t there. Could the whole affair be a conspiracy to demean Assange? Very likely. But the insinuations that the women have done something wrong are nothing more than character assassination whether they are lying or not. It is the first response to find some fault with these women before the truth is known.

    Although I believe there are powers inclined to use any means to discredit Assange, calling these women honeypots or any other derogatory label is despicable. Let’s wait till all the facts are in and then if they are at fault and their accusations prove false, they can be addressed. The first response that the women have done something shows that we’ve not made much progress.

    This issue is complex, but automatically putting the women in a bad light is wrong…unless you’re a man.

  22. Excellent post, Sarah.

    A complex issue should be discussed with respect for its complexity. Too much of the debate about Assange has been simplistic and focused narrowly on each side’s specific ideological points — and damn the other inconvenient details which accompany the whole miserable issue.

    Complexity in an issue is disturbing to many people because they feel it lessens the strength or “purity” of their own opinion or ideological argument — and a self-serving reductionist need to simplify the issue ensues.

    Most importantly, recognition/acceptance of complexity and/or ambiguity in an issue is generally more a characteristic of intellectual honesty and maturity than a characteristic of a specific political (conservative or liberal) viewpoint. You obviously understand that while many others obviously don’t.

  23. Sam,

    How dare you attack Sarah! You speak as if you were in the room and know that anyone is making false accusations. Your rant that Sarah or anyone on this site does not address the moral and ethical malfeasance of the U.S. government shows your ignorance and course intellect. Feminism trigger? That one phrase typifies the mindset of a bigot.

    If you had read the article, you would recognize that Sarah said any rape is wrong, and to answer your question, yes, a man using his weight is rape. No-one knows the facts, and Sarah pointed this out. She also pointed out that these women are demonized without any factual evidence by the same people who demonize Assange for leaking information.

    You offend me with your attacks, and it is obvious that human rights are only valid if it fits your twisted narrative. You owe Ms. Jones an apology, but as usual, you man-trigger will not allow that.

  24. It’s great to see the Left in the First World had evolved to such a state of blissful progressitude that it isn’t above heavily implying a man, who to date stands without charges, let alone any conviction, is a child molester. I too would like to see more hard-hitting journalism from Sarah Jones exposing the patriarchal pedophilia ring that rules the very top of cryptographic organizations.

  25. Everywhere you go, they hear the music “crazy” in the BG. Child molesters? pedophiles? What a deviant mind you have.

  26. Rachel talked about the danger of minimizing rape allegations and allowing harm to come to women who report rape. Did you know that those two women are in hiding now, due to death threats?

    ” Can your suspicion about the forces arrayed against Julian Assange and Wikileaks — your suspicion about the timing and pursuit of these charges — coexist with respect for the women making these accusations against him and with a commitment to take rape allegations seriously, even when the person accused is someone that for other reasons you like?”

    Moore, who posted bail for Assange, said “Every woman who claims to have been sexually assaulted or raped has to be, must be, taken seriously. Those charges have to be investigated to the fullest extent possible. For too long, and too many women have been abused in our society, because they were not listened to, and they just got shoved aside… ”

    Then Keith Olbermann is on his Twitter saying it’s “misogynist” to characterize two women with date rape claims as being “in a tizzy,” which Assange did.

    Some of the progressive men are coming down from the tower to listen.

    Lastly, it’s a lie to say that these women “wrote many articles” about seeking revenge, when in fact what one of them did was translate and re-post an EHOW article.

    All of you clowns above who blasted these women and act like you know what you’re talking about, you’re all wrong. Dead wrong. Instead of admitting that you throw accusations around at the women who speak up. It seems calling someone a radical feminist is the worst you can come up with, as if this is BAD. There’s no excuse for your failure to take these charges seriously or your minimizing of women. Sometimes I am ashamed of the left.

  27. This public dialogue – loud, angry, oppositional and real – about the complex issues
    of rape and privacy, is substantial progress for our universal human rights agenda.
    Thank you, Sarah Jones, for holding the light on balance and process in the provocative, reactive areas of both sex and power.

    Sweeden is recognized for its advanced thought and policies about many social issues, including sexual behavior. Sweeden has accomplished what other nations are working towards – an articulation of rights and permissions in areas of shared intimacy. Because they have done so, their laws reflect a complex civility in ways that are surprising to Americans, who still struggle with basic issues of forced or violent rape,
    as well as patriarchial attitudes toward women.

    In fact, it is wrong for someone to have sex “with” another person in ways not commonly agreed upon; when the difference involves possible disease transmission, the issue is then considered legally.

    Additional perspective may be gained if we reverse the gender roles in this case, and hypothesize that a woman of international heroic/celebrity status, self-recognized as having many sexual partners, represented herself as sexually “protected,” but wasn’t, and proceeded to have unprotected sex with her unknowing but eager and (perhaps) otherwise willing partner(s), who, although responsible for their own
    behavior, have been deceived.

    If in fact, if this is what happened (and we don’t know yet, and like many comparable situations, may never know, perhaps because we shouldn’t), then this simple fact
    of possible disease transmission is in fact a legal issue. It supercedes celebrity status,
    initial consent issues and beliefs or political positions of any of the participants.

    It is an irony that the issue of leaks – deftly gathered in Ms. Jones’ article – spans
    national and international politics, the internet, sexual activity, national and individual deceptions, disease, privacy issues, women’s rights and journalism standards.

    This widely comprehensive event is compellingly interesting, and an opportunity to move forward. Ms. Jones and others are encouraging us to do that.

  28. Thank you. I am so glad when people get it. It’s about progressive thought and not vilifying people before the facts are out- and it’s about the way we discuss these issues.

  29. @terra

    Why are you working so hard to discredit this post? Are YOU sleeping with Julian Assange, or do you just want to? How does it feel to have your thoughts demeaned based on nothing more than gossip and idle speculation? What do child molesters have to do with this? That was a blatant strawman. If you think Assange’s rights are more important than that of the potential victims, I sincerely hope that you are never a victim of violent crime.

    Assange may be innocent, but Sarah Jones did not say he was guilty. Please learn to read. When you question Sarah, you are questioning the entire credibility of this site, and judging from the bogus arguments you have presented, you are not a credible source. I personally stand behind every single word of that article.

    Just because Keith Olbermann told you something doesn’t make it so, you poor sad pathetic sheep.

    P.S.- You can expect a retraction when HELL freezes over.

    P.P.S.- You’re banned. Please take the garbage that spews out of your keyboard elsewhere and stop polluting our site.

  30. Way to sling some big words around the fact that you didn’t actually say anything relevant to the matter at hand…

  31. Thanks, Jason,

    It’s about time that those who come here only to disrupt are banned. They offer nothing substantive to any debate, except their unrighteous outrage and talking points.

  32. @majii

    We are making some big changes in the way comments are handled here. We are also looking for a couple of comment moderators. If you are interested email me.

  33. This is helarious!

    “Power often begets abuse of power.” Ah, Lord Acton, a white male, may have to take credit for this paraphrase. He would grant you “subordinate credit.”

    I am a far left liberal and I denounce Assange . I desperately want to write a post about it, but I am too lazy.

  34. I think Glenn Greenwald said it best: “Simultaneously advocating government transparency and individual privacy isn’t hypocritical or inconsistent; it’s a key for basic liberty.”

    However, now that Nick Davies has written about excepts he selected from the police file, I believe the right thing to do would be to release the entire file — what Wikileaks calls the “raw source material.” It is their philosophy that raw source material should always be provided so that readers can check. When a writer only presents excerpts of the material and their opinion, what we most likely get is their particular bias.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.