Sitting in a doctor's waiting room for three hours yesterday morning, I had to listen to "Liberal" CNN chewing endlessly on the two stories of the morning: the terminal illness of Elizabeth Edwards and the sex crimes of Julian Assange. Whatever your opinion of the man and of Wikileaks; whether it's black and white or very mixed, as mine is, I think we have to disassociate the propriety of publishing government communications with what just might be another US government inspired crime of equivocation and slander.
CNN used the word rape, more times than I could count yesterday and true to their unjournalistic habits never once proposed to delve into exactly what acts, according to Swedish Law, the alleged rape of two " consenting" women consisted of, although they did establish the need to do so by repeating that both women had willingly had sex with the man from Wiki. A disturbing dissonance at least. It appears that in Sweden, it's rape, or more accurately even if more peculiar: "sex by surprise" not to use a condom, or even if the condom breaks, according to Swedish prosecutors. That's it and that means there are a hell of a lot of rapists out there, many of whom are gloating over the imprisonment of Mr. Assange for something that's a crime nowhere but Sweden. Even in that feminist paradise, it's only a $750. fine. So why is theUS so hell bent on extraditing him for something on the order of a speeding ticket and why are the media so intent on calling him a rapist?
So I'm going to suggest, in full expectation of the customary response, a conspiracy. It's not just that CNN and others are crying rape when it isn't, but CNN and others would have us completely oblivious to the identities of the willing but uncondomized women as though it didn't matter that they both may have ties to the US government, the CIA and organizations supported by them.
Is this another of the seemingly endless appeals to the end sanctifying the means and if so, can we call ourselves a free country when the laws are bent, spindled, folded and mutilated to create the crime? With all the synthetic furor in some conservative states, about applying foreign laws in the US, are the same conservatives gleefully doing just that in order to more readily conceal shady dealings? Can we call that rape too?
No, I'm not sure that Assenge was doing anyone a favor by revealing sensitive targets for terrorists, and if he was guilty of that, he's certainly no friend to the US, but the practice of trumping up charges and paying witnesses to make them is not new here and certainly not a foreign practice to political parties trying to cripple an opposing president, but there's a certain foul odor pervading the news reports and it's not just the smell of spilled beans. If one thing is sure, it's that we need some fresh air here and some real information before we can conclude that our "free" press is worth saving.
Capt. Fogg,
ReplyDeleteI have mixed feelings about the WikiLeaks matter, too. And no, the prosecutorial goings-on don't sound very impressive. One thing I noticed is how quickly some major commercial entities are reported to have the yanked plug on aspects of WikiLeaks' publishing ventures. What's ominous about that, I think, is the possibility that the same alleged pressure could eventually result in the shutting down and financial starvation of less controversial but still government-annoying efforts. In other words, say something "they" don't like, and you could end up having every entity that makes it possible for you to be online (or make money to support your efforts) pressured into treating you like a pariah and denying you access. That, I find troubling.
Wikileaks has it own shadowy secrets and while they proclaim to be some kind of voice of the people committed to exposing government abuse everywhere - the site looks more like a sophmoric and irresponsible document dump site. That they released all those diplomatic documents, while embarassing to certain parties, certainly did not place anyone in immediate danger although I'm sure they helped further damage diplomatic relations around the globe and helped further destabilize and already unstable world. It also did not prove any unethical behavior by any government - so what was the point? The reports published last year on their site that put American service people in direct and immenent danger was another matter entirely.
ReplyDeleteI agree this whole "rape" thing stinks of subterfuge. I don't like Assange, he strikes me as a self absorbed prat and I'd like to kick his ass for just being such a lowly worm. But that is not the real issue here; a far greater problem is the security breach by Americans who are supposed to be thoroughly investigated before being given such clearance status as to handle all these sensitive documents.
Rocky,
ReplyDeleteYes, it seems like the hyperbolic response on the gov's part stems partly from self-consciousness about how unsophisticated they still are with communications tech -- if they're going to be putting sensitive info online, how about first making sure solid systems are in place to prevent its becoming common knowledge? What is this? Is the password for entire government agencies "password" or "1234" or something? Oops! I may have just said too much there. Run, bloggingdino, run!
The party guilty of putting American service people in 'direct and imminent danger' are the politicians in Washington DC continuing to pursue a failed course of action.
ReplyDeletePersonally if we had to wait around for folks to do the right thing for reasons of which I approve of 100% and to top it off walk old ladies across the street then I'm afraid not much would ever change.
Assange is a hero in my book.
Asshole? Could be. But if anyone deserves his 'ass kicked' in this entire Middle East/GWOT fiasco it isn't him.
But I could easily suggest hundreds of others.
The law doesn't say that having sex without a condom constitutes rape (that would be pretty absurd). The charge stems from an allegation that Assange did not comply with the woman's request to stop having sex after the condom broke -- that is to say, she claims that she withdrew consent and he did not respect that. In the other case, it's claimed that he "did not comply with her appeals to stop when (the condom) was no longer in use" (quoting the linked article) -- same issue.
ReplyDeleteMore here, from a law professor.
I have no idea whether Assange is guilty or not, but that does make the charge less bizarre.
I intended to post the info that infidel753 shared. While I don't have a conclusion as to what crime if any Assange committed, we certainly cannot evaluate whether he violated Swedish law by applying American legal standards for defining rape.
ReplyDeleteAs infidel accurately notes the allegation is that Assange was less than cooperative with his use of a condom. Given that unprotected sex can be lethal I think that Sweden is ahead of the rest of us in making such willful behavior as refusing to stop a previously consensual act when asked due to the breaking o the condom or reusing to cease all sexual activity without benefit of the condom. By the way, even in an American court, once consent is withdrawn, there may be sufficient basis to support a finding of rape. No means no at any point that it is said.
The media reported rape as the charge but it appears that the actual allegation is sex by surprise.
As for the conspiracy theory, perhaps. Certainly the US has no reason to be fond of Assange. From the interviews of the man that I've watched, I find him a rather arrogant prig who is interested in profit more than journalism. However, that does not make him fodder for government attack. Given some of this government's less than stellar behavior in the past, I don't think that the notion that the US may be involved in Assange legal troubles in Sweden is implausible; however, I don't find the charges against him bizarre nor the result of feminism gone wild.
P.S. It is common not to identify the alleged victims of sexual assault in the media.
ReplyDeleteSheria and Infidel.
ReplyDeleteYes, that Makes it possible that he did something wrong enough to matter, but of course it's a charge that has to depend on the less than immaculate credibility of the other parties alone. I think they may have reason to lie.
I can't blame this on Swedish Feminism (sounds risque', non?) but it's a charge hard to substantiate - or to refute for that matter and that makes it a strange, easy to abuse law in my non-legal opinion.
Convenient and still suspicious and when the media screams RAPE we think of a more violent act and hear talk of extradition for sex crimes even though the penalty is relatively insignificant.
Maybe it's only sensationalism, maybe it's entrapment, maybe it was a set up for political reasons. I'm still not persuaded that the US is not trying to 'get him' in any way possible.
I'm not concerned that he may be a reprehensible guy and a danger to national security in this part of the matter. I am concerned that as in the case of another sleazoid like Larry Flint; if they can do this to him, they can do this to anyone who catches the government in a lie or deception.
"a far greater problem is the security breach by Americans who are supposed to be thoroughly investigated before being given such clearance status as to handle all these sensitive documents."
ReplyDeleteI can't be sure all the information was just given to Wikileaks and not hacked, but I can be sure CNN is still bleating "SEX CRIMES" in neon headlines and I'm going to use an understatement to call that hyperbole. None of us has any hard (no pun intended) evidence of wrongdoing and much reason to suspect the guy is deliberately being made an outlaw.
CNN tells us that colleges are informing students that reading what's now in the public domain is a thought crime and will prevent one from ever being hired by the Government. I hear the government agencies are threatening to fire employees for reading it on their own time. One certainly can't pass a security clearance without claiming you stifled your curiosity by refusing to read the news and profess a strong but uninformed hatred for Julian Assenge and all his pomps.
It still smells like 1984 in here and it will until I see that bastard Cheney in chains for treason in the form of exposing a CIA agent and critical investigation. Anything less makes my country a mockery of most any moral I can think of and much less than worthy of allegiance - under God, under Vishnu or under a steaming pile of putrid propaganda.