Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 97

Thread: Julian Assange arrested in London

  1. #76
    Elite Member Aella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    8,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Kill Me View Post
    I always host parties for my rapist or at least let them stay at my place for a bit, it's the polite thing to do.
    Right, because it's not like any rape victim in history has ever been initially in denial about what happened to her, or anything.

    Or that that there are women who stayed in relationships with partners who raped them, or anything.
    "Remember to always be yourself. Unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

    "The only thing more expensive than education is ignorance." -Benjamin Franklin

  2. #77
    Elite Member Just Kill Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    sucking on a blow pop and playing with electrodes
    Posts
    15,550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aella View Post
    Right, because it's not like any rape victim in history has ever been initially in denial about what happened to her, or anything.

    Or that that there are women who stayed in relationships with partners who raped them, or anything.
    Those are usually established relationships. These women honestly sound pissy because they got played when they wanted to act like political groupies. To have not one but two women that are just so confused and in denial that they keep their rapist at their home and even host a fucking party for them says something really sad about the female gender. No means no and if he doesn't comply then he needs to get the fuck out, you don't throw him a fucking party or let him stay for a week. This isn't Stockholm syndrome, these cases are an absolute joke. These women are fucking morons and Assange comes off like a fucking dickhole for whining about wearing a rubber, they deserve each other.
    KILLING ME WON'T BRING BACK YOUR GOD DAMNED HONEY!!!!!!!!!!

    Come on, let's have lots of drinks.

    Fuck you all, I'm going viral.

  3. #78
    Elite Member Aella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    8,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Kill Me View Post
    Those are usually established relationships. These women honestly sound pissy because they got played when they wanted to act like political groupies. To have not one but two women that are just so confused and in denial that they keep their rapist at their home and even host a fucking party for them says something really sad about the female gender. No means no and if he doesn't comply then he needs to get the fuck out, you don't throw him a fucking party or let him stay for a week. This isn't Stockholm syndrome, these cases are an absolute joke. These women are fucking morons and Assange comes off like a fucking dickhole for whining about wearing a rubber, they deserve each other.
    So, the women displaying incorrect behaviour after their rape says something about the whole female gender but Assange raping them says nothing about the male gender? Fascinating.

    I'm not even touching that last sentence.
    "Remember to always be yourself. Unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

    "The only thing more expensive than education is ignorance." -Benjamin Franklin

  4. #79
    Elite Member Just Kill Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    sucking on a blow pop and playing with electrodes
    Posts
    15,550

    Default

    The male gender...it says don't let them pull that shit. He's sleep fucking you w/out a rubber and won't put one on, get the fuck out.

    He's magically torn the rubber and doesn't stop to put one on once yall notice, get the fuck out.

    When things are no longer consensual and that shit continues then it better be by force, you don't throw a party or let them stay a week unless they have a gun to your head.

    I think these women are morons and Assange sounds like a major douche, a match made in heaven.
    Posted from my iPhone

  5. #80
    Hi! I'm New Here!
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default

    God, has anyone not read the reports, the police reports, the twitters, the blog postings? This is a complete stichup. He got laid, they got pissed, the feminist coppers convinced them they were victims of a crime...hell, they're still saying that if he had just agreed to have a STD test then they would never have gone to the police. Doesn't sound much like a rape case to me. And even more sad, he spent nearly 5 weeks in Sweden dealing with the first accusations, which were dropped by the prosecutor, and those charges were only reinstated by the lawyer, who is a former equality ombudsman who is a member of the opposition party and who has succesfully argued on dodgy sexual abuse cases. Claes Bergström is his name. He has an agenda, as does at least one of the women. What a crock of shit the whole thing is.

  6. #81
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    25,723

    Default

    It sounds more like it's Borgstrom than the CIA behind this: Lawyer: Assange's accusers support WikiLeaks - U.S. news - WikiLeaks in Security - msnbc.com Borgstrom was appointed Sweden's ombudsman for gender equality in 2000 by the Social Democratic government. He left the post in 2007, a year after the Social Democrats were ousted, and now runs a law firm with former Justice Minister Thomas Bodstrom. Even in gender-conscious Sweden, Borgstrom has raised eyebrows for speaking out so strongly against the male norms he says still pervade Swedish society. He has said all men bear a collective responsibility for the fact that some men abuse women. In 2006, he even proposed that Sweden withdraw from soccer's World Cup because of an expected surge in the sex trade in host nation Germany, where prostitution is legal. "What happens during the World Cup is that women are imported — in the full sense of the word — to meet the demands from the men going there to buy sex," Borgstrom told Swedish TV at the time. His proposal was rejected by the Swedish soccer federation and Sweden took part in the tournament as planned. Borgstrom has previously described his passion for women's rights and equality as bordering on an obsession. "Now that I really have put on my 'gender goggles' I see everything through them," he was quoted as saying in 2004 by the tabloid Aftonbladet. A 2009 study funded by the European Commission found Sweden had the highest rate of reported sex offenses among 24 European countries — 47 per 100,000 citizens — though only 10 percent led to convictions. The high number of complaints doesn't necessarily mean rape is more common in Sweden but that victims are just more likely to step forward, Borgstrom said. "We have better knowledge than other countries in the field of gender equality" he said. "That also means women don't accept certain things in the same way they do in other countries."

  7. #82
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aella View Post
    Right, because it's not like any rape victim in history has ever been initially in denial about what happened to her, or anything.

    Or that that there are women who stayed in relationships with partners who raped them, or anything.
    I agree and that is what has been bothering me about the whole thing. People have been quick to call these women liars and if they start to consider that Assange may be guilty then they start victim blaming.
    Housewife: one who is more married to a house than to the man she once thought it was all about

  8. #83
    Elite Member MontanaMama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Evading P6 & P7
    Posts
    13,465

    Default

    I wouldn't buy this as a rape story on a soap opera. These women are doing actual victims of rape an enormous disservice.

    Aella, I applaud your passion, but what part of the story/allegations is rape? I'm not finding it, but if I'm wrong, I'd like to be corrected.
    If i hear one more personal attack, i will type while drunk, then you can cry! - Bugdoll
    (716): I'd call her a cunt, but she doesn't seem to have the depth or warmth
    Quote Originally Posted by shedevilang View Post
    (Replying to MontanaMama) This is some of the smartest shit I ever read

  9. #84
    Elite Member Aella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    8,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MontanaMama View Post

    Aella, I applaud your passion, but what part of the story/allegations is rape? I'm not finding it, but if I'm wrong, I'd like to be corrected.
    The Guardian story I linked last page has a full breakdown.
    "Remember to always be yourself. Unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

    "The only thing more expensive than education is ignorance." -Benjamin Franklin

  10. #85
    A*O
    A*O is offline
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! A*O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Being Paula
    Posts
    30,395

    Default

    Knowing the number of Govts who really, REALLY hate this guy for what he's done to expose their lies then having him locked up for rape would be a very convenient way to shut him down especially on alleged rape charges which of course we aren't allowed to question these days. Anyone who alleges rape is given the benefit of the doubt. This guy is going to jail one way or another or he's going to meet with an unfortunate "accident". Watch this space....
    I've never liked lesbianism - it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
    Dame Edna Everage

    Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right.

  11. #86
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    25,723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A*O View Post
    Knowing the number of Govts who really, REALLY hate this guy for what he's done to expose their lies then having him locked up for rape would be a very convenient way to shut him down especially on alleged rape charges which of course we aren't allowed to question these days. Anyone who alleges rape is given the benefit of the doubt.
    Two things I want to say in response to this. 1) How are you not allowed to question rape charges? Isn't that what you are doing right here, a*O? 2) People who allege rape are not given the benefit of the doubt. If they were, then the accused would be jailed right away without a trial. As far as I can tell, Assange is being given a lot of benefit of the doubt.

    By the way, here is more on the story by The Guardian. A reporter is refuting a claim by Bianca Jagger that The Guardian "covered up" exculpatory evidence in the Swedish police report:



    Bianca Jagger last week launched a fierce attack on the Guardian for carrying my story about the evidence collected by Swedish police who have been investigating the claims of sexual assault by the founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange.

    At the heart of her attack is a repeated claim that we failed to publish exculpatory evidence contained in the police file. Those who have read her piece will have noticed that she does not cite one single example of this missing information. There are two reasons for this. First, she does not know what is in that police file, because she has not read it. Second, if she had, she would know that her claim is simply not true.

    The Guardian went out of their way to include exculpatory material, not just from the police file but also from previous comments made by Assange and his lawyers. They also sent Assange's lawyer a list of all the key points and delayed publication for days so that he had a chance to respond. Our story contains literally hundreds of words whose sole purpose is to reflect Assange's position.

    Jagger also insists that she has a right to know who leaked the file to the Guardian and says that the leak was part of "an obvious effort to conduct a smear campaign" against Assange. Setting aside for a moment the head-splitting hypocrisy that a supporter of WikiLeaks wants to hunt down the source of a leak, there are two similar problems with this claim. First, Jagger has no idea who leaked that file (and made no attempt to find out). Second, if she did know, she would discover that the source had no intention of smearing Assange in any way.

    I am not going to serve up that source's identity to satisfy Jagger's temper. A police file like that gets widely distributed. It happened to make its way quite legitimately into the hands of somebody I have come across in the past. This person has absolutely no connection with the Swedish prosecutor or the Swedish police or any other individual or organization with any kind of antipathy to Assange. The source passed it on, and I got it translated.

    Assange's UK lawyer tried very hard to persuade us to suppress the file. He argued that since Assange had been a source for our stories, we should 'protect' him. I reckon that that is an invitation to journalistic corruption, to hide information in order to curry favor with a source. We were right to publish.

    Jagger calls this 'trial by media'. I call it an attempt to inject some evidence into a global debate which has been fueled by speculation and misinformation. On August 21, when this story first broke, Assange used Twitter to spread the idea that the two women who had gone to the police were engaged in 'dirty tricks'. His lawyer subsequently claimed that a 'honeytrap' had been sprung. Assange's celebrity supporters have announced to the mass media that the allegations are 'without foundation', that 'there is no prima facie evidence'. These statements have gone around the world. Millions of well-meaning people have been persuaded to believe them. The two women, who have been identified on the Internet, have had their reputations ruined by the claim that they cruelly colluded to destroy an innocent man. The Swedish police and prosecutors have been held up to ridicule as corrupt and/or incompetent partners in the plot.

    Our story showed: first, that the Swedish police have found no evidence of any such dirty tricks (which would not surprise the conspiracy theorists); second, that in his interview with Swedish police on August 30, Assange himself never began to suggest that the allegations were any kind of dirty trick; third, that Assange's supporters in Stockholm had tried to find evidence and come up empty, concluding, as the Swedish WikiLeaks coordinator put it to us: "This is a normal police investigation. Let the police find out what actually happened. Of course, the enemies of WikiLeaks may try to use this, but it begins with the two women and Julian. It is not the CIA sending a woman in a short skirt."

    And by publishing our story, we achieved something: Julian Assange was forced to admit, in interviews with the London Times and with the BBC, that there is no evidence of a honeytrap. That matters very much. The news media don't want to report that -- there's a much better story in the dirty tricks. Some of the most active tweeters and the bloggers have not picked up on it -- they are much too happy with their conspiracy theories. The celebrity disciples like Bianca Jagger don't mention it. They simply move on to insist that there must be another conspiracy at work in the legal process. But the honeytrap story is dead: our story killed it. Whether or not Assange is guilty of a crime is a separate matter: the facts are not yet finally established, the law is not yet finally interpreted. At some point in this coming year, a court will decide that.

    There is one final point lurking in the background. Assange has been suggesting -- for example, in his interview with David Frost on Al Jazeera -- that all this is something to do with the fact that he and I fell out. It is true that at the beginning of August, I cut off contact with him in order to protest at several things he had done -- the first time I have cut off a source in 34 years as a reporter. This was nothing to do with the sex allegations in Sweden.

    His supporters tried to brief newspapers that it was an act of vengeance on my part to go out and find this police file. That fell at the first fence, because the file came to me: I never spent a single second looking for it. As an alternative decoy, Assange suggested in his interview with David Frost, that some malign force, possibly an intelligence agency, chose me as an outlet for the file, knowing that I could be relied on to write a negative story. That also falls at the first fence. The reality is that I didn't write the story which the Guardian published. The copy which I filed was completely re-written in the Guardian office, a commonplace event in a newsroom.
    Finally, I should mention what Jagger does not -- that I was the journalist who took it on himself back in June to track down Julian Assange and to persuade him not to post his latest collection of secrets on the WikiLeaks website but to hand them over to the Guardian and other news organizations. The publication of the Afghan and Iraqi war logs and then the diplomatic cables all flowed from that initiative. I did that because I think journalists should tell the truth about important things without being frightened, for example, by the government of the most powerful state on the planet.

    In exactly the same way, I think it was right to publish our story about the Swedish police file without being frightened by Julian Assange's lawyer or indeed by the clear prospect of being attacked online by people like Bianca Jagger. There are millions of them out there. They have come to a conclusion about Assange and the sex claims in Sweden and they are not interested in evidence. They tweet and blog in the most eye-wateringly aggressive tone and often, like Bianca Jagger, they do so without even the slightest connection to the truth.

    It has been a depressing experience to see some of those who were most furious at the global propaganda run by Bush and Rumsfeld now leading the cheers for a new campaign of misinformation, happy to be manipulated, content to recycle falsehood and distortion no matter what damage they may do.

  12. #87
    A*O
    A*O is offline
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! A*O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Being Paula
    Posts
    30,395

    Default

    Your blue (huh?) reaction is exactly what I'm talking about. This is what I mean about rape being such a convenient allegation because once the "r" word gets involved nobody dares question whether the charges are genuine, or whether they have been manipulated by agencies who want to see Julian Assange locked up and punished for exposing those same agencies and their dodgy activities.

    If he's guilty of rape then of course he must face the consequences but it seems very 'convenient' that the allegation arose around the time the Wikileaks floodgates opened and a lot of very embarrassing information was released without any law being broken which must have been extremely frustration to those whose activities were exposed. If they can't "get him" on other charges then try rape because nobody will dare question that.
    I've never liked lesbianism - it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
    Dame Edna Everage

    Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right.

  13. #88
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    People who allege rape are not given the benefit of the doubt. If they were, then the accused would be jailed right away without a trial.

    You think we should jail people accused of rape and hold them until trial? No bail?

    What do we then do with those who turn out to be falsely accused?

    Should we just do that to accused rapists? Not to those accused of other crimes?
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  14. #89
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by witchcurlgirl View Post
    You think we should jail people accused of rape and hold them until trial? No bail?

    What do we then do with those who turn out to be falsely accused?

    Should we just do that to accused rapists? Not to those accused of other crimes?
    I don't think that was meant to be taken literally, it was just making the point that rape victims aren't always believed, especially if their experience does not fit narrow definitions of rape and especially if the person does not fit peoples perception of a rape victim.
    Housewife: one who is more married to a house than to the man she once thought it was all about

  15. #90
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    25,723

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by witchcurlgirl View Post
    You think we should jail people accused of rape and hold them until trial? No bail?

    What do we then do with those who turn out to be falsely accused?

    Should we just do that to accused rapists? Not to those accused of other crimes?
    No, what I was saying was that if NOBODY was giving Assange the benefit of a doubt, he would have been jailed already. Assange is actually being given the benefit of the doubt accorded to people who have been accused, but are considered innocent until proven guilty. He is also being given the benefit of the doubt by a large part of the general public who don't like the timing of the charges and/or don't believe that having unprotected sex with someone who is asleep and can't give consent isn't rape.

    A*O:

    Your blue (huh?) reaction is exactly what I'm talking about. This is what I mean about rape being such a convenient allegation because once the "r" word gets involved nobody dares question whether the charges are genuine, or whether they have been manipulated by agencies who want to see Julian Assange locked up and punished for exposing those same agencies and their dodgy activities.

    If he's guilty of rape then of course he must face the consequences but it seems very 'convenient' that the allegation arose around the time the Wikileaks floodgates opened and a lot of very embarrassing information was released without any law being broken which must have been extremely frustration to those whose activities were exposed. If they can't "get him" on other charges then try rape because nobody will dare question that.
    The blue text was because I was having trouble with formatting. I don't think anyone in this thread has said that the charges of rape are so sacrosanct that someone can never question them. Not only have people here questioned the charges, but they questioned whether the acts described (sex without a condom despite the other person's protestations, and unprotected sex with someone while they were asleep) are really rape.

    The timing of the charges was unfortunate. It was posited earlier in this thread that just getting Assange in British or Swedish custody would either result in him being sent to America or even being killed. But neither happened. His bail was posted and he is out free, as far as I know.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Julian [Porn Star]
    By hustle4alivin in forum Hot Guys
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: April 7th, 2011, 05:45 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: December 7th, 2010, 01:40 PM
  3. Julian McMahon [Actor]
    By Grove in forum Hot Guys
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: December 14th, 2006, 11:49 AM
  4. Julian McMahon - Advocate Photoshoot
    By qazq in forum Magazines and Photoshoots
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 18th, 2006, 03:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •