Further thoughts…..I have found this discussion about Assange within the blogosphere really shocking with this belief (based on what…erm assumptions?) that these women are somewhat lying, along with commentators devaluing rape, or just denigrating and dismissing these women (CIA honeytrap is my favourite at the moment along with me being accused as being an “unbalanced radical feminist”). It gives as well, generally, licence for some blogs to denounce feminism as the class enemy, including comments like “no platform for feminists” and “feminists are men-haters”… Yada..Yada…
I have seen this stuff before and it’s sickening. Misogyny unbound, in these situations the misogynists do crawl out of the woodwork. You also find out what some so-called leftie men (not all btw many leftie blokes have made good insightful comments/posts both here and in the blogosphere) think of rape and sexual violence; hero of the people vs two women… Women lie QED especially when it’s one of your own. It also shows a noxious contempt for feminism and women’s liberation (but that’s a separate post…) which is flowing out of this debate and leaving one nasty stench. The smearing and denigrating of these women reminds me of allegations against Daniel Ortega and Jacob Zuma and how those women were condemned too.
Also there’s this picking away like vultures at testimonies of these two women from translated (badly) media stories , hear-say, naming the women, making assumptions about whether it’s rape or not, devaluing, denigrating and dismissing the allegations. by creating ill-thought and ill-judge articles. It makes the situation worse. And it also exposes lefties needing to defend the latest hero on the block without stopping to pause, to step back and to take stock of the allegations. Also making assumptions about the politics of these women, what they have written ….etc. etc. My own belief is so what? Doesn’t mean these women are lying. Pretty much throwing these women to the wolves with all this speculation. How about waiting to see the evidence before anyone pre-judges the situation? How about waiting and seeing the evidence tested in court?
Yes, the global establishment hate Assange because of Wikileaks, and yes I support him on that and Wikileaks. Yes the USA want him shut-up and the turbo-charged demand for extradition. Yes, all true. All worrying. All shocking. All terrible. All wrong.
BUT that doesn’t mean he hasn’t committed an offence. Surely these women deserve due process as well as Assange? We have to untangle Wikileaks and the attacks made by the global bourgeoise and the allegations made against Assange. The two have to be separated.
I completly agree from the evidence presented so far it doesnt seem like there is enough to say either innocent or guilty. So many things the defence could probably use too give reasonable doubt. I really dont know and its part of the problem with rape most of the time its two people who know each other in a room there is no easily verifiable evidence of force, its her word against his. Its grrr I really dont know how the hell you fix it you cant go for guilty unless proven innocent but the way things are at the moment its not working. There is no justice around the few rapes that are reported, but I am starting to go offtopic…
Fair point – we have to work on the assumption that it is possible the allegations might be true. I think you might be bending the stick too far the other way though in the way you dismiss the possibility of a ‘CIA honeytrap’ etc. The US are clearly out to get him, and they do have a degree of form with this type of stuff. It is perfectly possible that the current charges against Assange are either dropped or proved unfounded but in the meantime he is extradidted to the US to face a life sentance or the lynch mob for Wikileaks charges.
Clearly the left should argue that any charges against him should have no impact on the issue of wikileaks, but I think we need a bit more of a nuanced position in terms of how we relate to the charges that have been made.
Likewise clearly the left should try to protect the alleged victims of sexual assaults, but where one of the accusers has a long history with CIA funded anti-Castro campaigns, that does need some of scrutiny.
Simon, “but where one of the accusers has a long history with CIA funded anti-Castro campaigns, that does need some of scrutiny.”
Really? Can you supply the evidence is that just something you read somewhere? Surely as well the allegations against Assange need to be scrutinised as well? Frankly I am fed-up of this, I don’t know where I might be “bending the stick” in this all I have been arguing is that all parties get due process, on a more general point why is it when the Left discovers a new hero people seem to lose their facilities and disbelieve that they can’t do anything wrong? But they can, shouldn’t that be investigated as opposed to CIA honeytraps and women using “their sexuality to bring a good man down”… (that too has been said). This really has opened up a murky world of misogyny where many men have come out with blatant offensive crap about women and sexual violence, it is hideous and contemptible. And all this offensive crap (see Craig Murray) banging on about “radical feminists being hate filled”…. Firstly, it shows no grasp of understanding of the different threads of feminism… Secondly, no feminist writer I have seen has said that Assange did it. All is being requested is that the evidence is tested in court, and that we shouldn’t dismiss these allegations outright.
Is that too much to ask for? Seems so and to be brutally honest this debate has really shocked me as it has exposed a real vile, hideous and nasty level of misogyny. Stench is sickening and exposes too what some really think about the oppression of women when it is one of their heroes who get done.
Seen Craig Murray’s posts on Asasnge? http://bit.ly/eGdStP & http://bit.ly/fedHrB
Just briefly skimmed, so it’s the “feminists” out to get poor Assange. I have never ever rated Craig Murray that much. Radical feminists “hate filled”… it’s all so offensive bolloxs.
Yep! And as far I can see, the tweets that he bases a whole post on are tweets made before the allegations. Correct me if I’m wrong.
He’s not interested in evidence just bigging up his mate Assange cos great heroic men of the Left never ever do bad things….it’s just us “feminists with our hate filled ugly souls”….
Louise wrote “Really? Can you supply the evidence is that just something you read somewhere?”
try here
http://www.miscelaneasdecuba.net/web/article.asp?artID=1314
and here
http://www.miscelaneasdecuba.net/web/article.asp?artID=1315
I suppose this is something I ‘just read somewhere’ and could be written by someone falsely using her name, but I still think it needs some consideration.
Of course allegartions against Assange need to be looked at, but judging by the refusal of his bail compared to how similar cases of people not wanted by the US are treated, the chances of their being a fair trial aren’t looking that great.
“but I still think it needs some consideration.”
Same with the two women and their allegations. Fair trial for whom? Assange or the two women…..
I can’t see that you could have a fair trial that is only fair to one side. I don’t disagree about the mysogony in a lot of this debate either. Where I have a problem is where you say “shouldn’t that be investigated as opposed to CIA honeytraps” I don’t understand that it should be an either/or. I’m perfectly happy to accept the possibility that Assange might be guildty as charged, but can’t see why accepting that it might be possible rules out looking at the alternative possibility that he has been set up, presumably by the CIA.
The mainstream media dismisses the idea that the CIA could set someone up as crackpot conspiracy theories, but people on the left should understand that undermining people that the CIA view as a threat is a large part of what they exist for.
Look about the bail thing. This is a guy who leads a nomadic lifestyle never stays anywhere long. Keeps his location a secret. Doesnt use mobiles. Has no fixed address in the UK or close family/friends, and is accused of serious sex crimes its no wonder he has been denied bail I would be more worried if he hadn’t.
Ultimately the first thing that needs to be established in the investigation/trial is who is telling the truth the women or Julian or is it one of those cases where everyone is telling the truth but there was a fundimental misunderstanding of the situation beween the women and Julian, now once I could see that being possible but twice within a short space of time is low I would think. Once you establish who is lying or probably lying you can then maybe start thinking about motivations, personal jealousy or a desire to discredit Julian or wikileaks. Even if its a desire to discredit wikileaks or Julian thats not the same as saying it was the CIA I suppose he has other rivals and enemies out there.
I think JK hits the nail on the head. How can people start pontificating about what has happened until all the facts have been aired and both sides have had their say in the court case? People who rightly laid into the warmongers for jumping to conclusions based on nothing other than a preference for a particular outcome do just that in relation to the Swedish allegations. We rightly say that prime ministers and riot cops should answer for what they do: well so should everyone else. The only condition is that all sides get a fair hearing.
And this I think is spot-on from Libby Brooks:
“These models of leftwing and liberal opinion find themselves, intentionally or otherwise, shoulder to shoulder with a motley assemblage of conspiracy theorists and internet attack dogs that has been mauling the characters of Assange’s accusers since their complaints were first lodged in August. Barely established online niceties regarding the discussion of sexual assault cases were overturned: the women’s personal photographs, CVs and blogposts have been dredged for evidence of sexual deviance, mental instability and vengeful intent. Claes Borgström, the women’s lawyer, told the Guardian yesterday that his clients were “the victims of a crime, but they are looked upon as the perpetrators”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/09/nobody-gains-from-misogynist-defence-of-assange
[...] pernicious and divisive aspects of this debate has been the myth that those supporting Assange are men minimising sexual crimes, and that most women are more supportive of [...]
Further reading:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121006996.html
http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/07/olbermann-assange-and-the-holo