Julian Assange Discussion
- Thread starter ocean59
- Start date
ElizabethDempsey
Jedi
The following article mentions that Julian Assange's lawyer has connections to Rothschilds:
_http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/blog/sullivan/wikileaks-assanges-lawyer-has-connections-rothschilds
_http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/blog/sullivan/wikileaks-assanges-lawyer-has-connections-rothschilds
ElizabethDempsey
Jedi
Here are some interviews that Julian Assange has given since he was released on bail. I haven't had a chance to watch them yet, so I can't make any comment.
_http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/399087/watch%3A_julian_assange%27s_fascinating_post-bail_interviews/
_http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/399087/watch%3A_julian_assange%27s_fascinating_post-bail_interviews/
More details of the allegations here. I'm just flabbergasted at the naivete and hubris of Assange and the people who are sticking with him. They are all in WAY over their heads and apparently still don't know it. Someone save us from people like this, they are a curse to any truth movement.
Gonzo
The Living Force
Hi Perceval,
I apologize that I have not been able to find the time to write a decent response to your comments until now.
Yes, I actually think people read all of a thread, except possible for extremely long ones, and I think they should. Otherwise they won't know what has been discussed and possibly introduce concepts that have already been discussed thereby creating noise and increasing the amount of energy others need to expend to read the thread. This was the principle I was trying to convey.
Although this forum is supposed to be dedicated to research, I understand it is also an information and experience sharing network for certain aspects of the Work, including dealing with emotional, psychological, spiritual and physical areas.
Therefore, it makes sense that we have some threads where people may express their thoughts and opinions and other threads where the posting should be more limited to anecdotal reporting and analysis.
This becomes difficult for members to navigate, especially if they are new.
We have stated on several threads before that we expect someone to read the entire thread before posting. This came up more than once on the Creating a New World
Thread (http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=13795.0), which had grown to an impressive length.
So, because it gets pointed out from time to time that members should read an entire thread before posting, I am confused by what appears to be a change. I am left wondering a few things:
- some threads are considered different than others and therefore the reading before posting expectations are different and hopefully there is some criteria used to discern one type from another
- the times that people were told to read the entire thread were mistakes and it actually isn't an issue whether or not someone is up to speed on what has already been covered
- that you were speaking for yourself and not the forum when you posted your thoughts about my comments on this issue.
As an admin with considerably more experience on this forum, I take your words to heart and consider them carefully. I also expect that when you are discussing anything to do with the forum, that you are speaking for the forum, hence my asking if there was something new and what criteria was being used, so I could avoid making mistakes in the future.
When I looked back upon why I bothered to respond to Justin's post in the first place, I was thinking that someone else might say something and perhaps I could, in advance, offer a good explanation of why one is expected to read an entire thread. This was a mistake as obviously nobody seemed to think it was an issue aside from me, which makes me wonder what was going on wrong in my head and why did I feel such a principle needed to be explained.
I also have to figure out why I felt I should step in not just let things take their natural path without my intervention. Since I am not a moderator and obviously have lapses in judgment, I will refrain from offering such guidance and leave such things to the moderators.
This speaks more to my current issues with trying to save other people from experiencing potential negative outcomes than anything Justin said or did.
What's worse, my actions seem to have had a completely different outcome than I had hoped and I gratefully take the opportunity to further reflect on what was behind my actions.
I would, however, appreciate some clarification vis a vis the expectations on reading threads in their entirety, especially once they hit a certain length. It can be difficult for a newbie to understand these things if someone with a little more experience like myself doesn't understand.
I hope this helps explain things better.
Gonzo
I apologize that I have not been able to find the time to write a decent response to your comments until now.
Yes, I actually think people read all of a thread, except possible for extremely long ones, and I think they should. Otherwise they won't know what has been discussed and possibly introduce concepts that have already been discussed thereby creating noise and increasing the amount of energy others need to expend to read the thread. This was the principle I was trying to convey.
Although this forum is supposed to be dedicated to research, I understand it is also an information and experience sharing network for certain aspects of the Work, including dealing with emotional, psychological, spiritual and physical areas.
Therefore, it makes sense that we have some threads where people may express their thoughts and opinions and other threads where the posting should be more limited to anecdotal reporting and analysis.
This becomes difficult for members to navigate, especially if they are new.
We have stated on several threads before that we expect someone to read the entire thread before posting. This came up more than once on the Creating a New World
Thread (http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=13795.0), which had grown to an impressive length.
So, because it gets pointed out from time to time that members should read an entire thread before posting, I am confused by what appears to be a change. I am left wondering a few things:
- some threads are considered different than others and therefore the reading before posting expectations are different and hopefully there is some criteria used to discern one type from another
- the times that people were told to read the entire thread were mistakes and it actually isn't an issue whether or not someone is up to speed on what has already been covered
- that you were speaking for yourself and not the forum when you posted your thoughts about my comments on this issue.
As an admin with considerably more experience on this forum, I take your words to heart and consider them carefully. I also expect that when you are discussing anything to do with the forum, that you are speaking for the forum, hence my asking if there was something new and what criteria was being used, so I could avoid making mistakes in the future.
When I looked back upon why I bothered to respond to Justin's post in the first place, I was thinking that someone else might say something and perhaps I could, in advance, offer a good explanation of why one is expected to read an entire thread. This was a mistake as obviously nobody seemed to think it was an issue aside from me, which makes me wonder what was going on wrong in my head and why did I feel such a principle needed to be explained.
I also have to figure out why I felt I should step in not just let things take their natural path without my intervention. Since I am not a moderator and obviously have lapses in judgment, I will refrain from offering such guidance and leave such things to the moderators.
This speaks more to my current issues with trying to save other people from experiencing potential negative outcomes than anything Justin said or did.
What's worse, my actions seem to have had a completely different outcome than I had hoped and I gratefully take the opportunity to further reflect on what was behind my actions.
I would, however, appreciate some clarification vis a vis the expectations on reading threads in their entirety, especially once they hit a certain length. It can be difficult for a newbie to understand these things if someone with a little more experience like myself doesn't understand.
I hope this helps explain things better.
Gonzo
anart
A Disturbance in the Force
Hi Gonzo,Gonzo said:
I think the clarification you are looking for was supplied in Perceval's earlier post:
Perceval said:
In other words, yes there is an expectation of forum members that they read a thread before posting in the thread - that's basically common courtesy. It's also understood that not everyone is going to do that. In this specific case, Justin was honest enough to mention that he'd not read the thread - that is common courtesy on his part and didn't really warrant a reprimand. I suppose it comes down to the idea that each situation is unique and should be seen clearly for what it is.
Now, I'm not saying this to 'reprimand' you - I'm just explaining my perception of what occurred and explaining the idea that while, in an ideal world, everyone who posts on every thread in this forum would have read the thread in its entirety and be up to speed and on the same page with everyone else, we don't live in an ideal world. So, as Perceval mentioned, 'it's not an issue' - not really. Yet, you have taken it quite seriously and to heart which indicates that something else might be going on here. There is a bit of a flavor of, "I made a mistake, but it's not my fault because you weren't clear, so clarify, and by the way, I just won't post in the future when I think something needs input, since I'm not a moderator" - that flavor resembles a Primitive Defense Mechanism reaction - you are defending yourself from a perceived emotional threat that does not actually exist in reality.
What happened in this thread isn't a big deal, yet you are demanding clarification because you feel not only that you have been accused of doing something wrong, but that it only happened because 'the rules' aren't clear - so in a way, you have been 'wronged'. It's an interesting thing that happens in our minds when emotions start to run our thinking. We flavor things and twist them to protect our self-image - we see motivations that are not really present and we demand clarity in situations that are, by their nature, evolving and organically varied, thus not always 'clear'.
It's interesting as well because Perceval had already clarified, yet you sat with this for a while, built it up in your mind and still asked for a clarification. It reads as if you don't think it's okay for you to make a mistake or misread a situation, and since it's not okay for you to do that, you must get concrete clarification in order to protect yourself from it ever happening again, or at least protect yourself from it being 'your fault'. The reality is that it IS okay for you to have misread a situation - it's not a big issue. There is a lot of information, as I'm sure you know, in the narcissism reading about this type of inner dynamic - the inner terror at being 'wrong' - the defense of the self-image - all of that emotional energy that flows in the wrong direction for the wrong reason, all because we are terrified of being seen as not perfect or not right or not on the ball all the time since we learned very early on that we are only loved for what we do, not who we are.
Anyway, even if the details above are a bit off, that is the flavor of what you've written, so it might be worth looking at this whole situation from a different perspective and see what you can see. If you looked at it all from the view point that you didn't 'make a mistake' and there is really no issue here - it's not a big deal at all - what would you see in your response?
10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange
Unseen police documents provide the first complete account of the allegations against the WikiLeaks founder
* Nick Davies
* guardian.co.uk, Friday 17 December 2010 21.30 GMT
Julian Assange at Ellingham Hall where he is staying Julian Assange at Ellingham Hall. Photograph: Paul Hackett/Reuters
Documents seen by the Guardian reveal for the first time the full details of the allegations of rape and sexual assault that have led to extradition hearings against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.
The case against Assange, which has been the subject of intense speculation and dispute in mainstream media and on the internet, is laid out in police material held in Stockholm to which the Guardian received unauthorised access.
Assange, who was released on bail on Thursday, denies the Swedish allegations and has not formally been charged with any offence. The two Swedish women behind the charges have been accused by his supporters of making malicious complaints or being "honeytraps" in a wider conspiracy to discredit him.
Assange's UK lawyer, Mark Stephens, attributed the allegations to "dark forces", saying: "The honeytrap has been sprung ... After what we've seen so far you can reasonably conclude this is part of a greater plan." The journalist John Pilger dismissed the case as a "political stunt" and in an interview with ABC news, Assange said Swedish prosecutors were withholding evidence which suggested he had been "set up."
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.
Stephens has repeatedly complained that Assange has not been allowed to see the full allegations against him, but it is understood his Swedish defence team have copies of all the documents seen by the Guardian. He maintains that other potentially exculpatory evidence has not been made available to his team and may not have been seen by the Guardian.
The allegations centre on a 10-day period after Assange flew into Stockholm on Wednesday 11 August. One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.
Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.
According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.
When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.
On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A. A second woman, Miss W, had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. Both women joined Assange, the co-ordinator of the Swedish WikiLeaks group, whom we will call "Harold", and a few others for lunch.
Assange left the lunch with Miss W. She told the police she and Assange had visited the place where she worked and had then gone to a cinema where they had moved to the back row. He had kissed her and put his hands inside her clothing, she said.
That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."
Assange's supporters point out that, despite her complaints against him, Miss A held a party for him on that evening and continued to allow him to stay in her flat.
On Sunday 15 August, Monica told police, Miss A told her that she thought Assange had torn the condom on purpose. According to Monica, Miss A said Assange was still staying in her flat but they were not having sex because he had "exceeded the limits of what she felt she could accept" and she did not feel safe.
The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom".
Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."
The police record of the interview with Assange in Stockhom deals only with the complaint made by Miss A. However, Assange and his lawyers have repeatedly stressed that he denies any kind of wrongdoing in relation to Miss W.
In submissions to the Swedish courts, they have argued that Miss W took the initiative in contacting Assange, that on her own account she willingly engaged in sexual activity in a cinema and voluntarily took him to her flat where, she agrees, they had consensual sex. They say that she never indicated to Assange that she did not want to have sex with him. They also say that in a text message to a friend, she never suggested she had been raped and claimed only to have been "half asleep".
Police spoke to Miss W's ex-boyfriend, who told them that in two and a half years they had never had sex without a condom because it was "unthinkable" for her. Miss W told police she went to a chemist to buy a morning-after pill and also went to hospital to be tested for STDs. Police statements record her contacting Assange to ask him to get a test and his refusing on the grounds that he did not have the time.
On Wednesday 18 August, according to police records, Miss A told Harold and a friend that Assange would not leave her flat and was sleeping in her bed, although she was not having sex with him and he spent most of the night sitting with his computer. Harold told police he had asked Assange why he was refusing to leave the flat and that Assange had said he was very surprised, because Miss A had not asked him to leave. Miss A says she spent Wednesday night on a mattress and then moved to a friend's flat so she did not have to be near him. She told police that Assange had continued to make sexual advances to her every day after they slept together and on Wednesday 18 August had approached her, naked from the waist down, and rubbed himself against her.
The following day, Harold told police, Miss A called him and for the first time gave him a full account of her complaints about Assange. Harold told police he regarded her as "very, very credible" and he confronted Assange, who said he was completely shocked by the claims and denied all of them. By Friday 20 August, Miss W had texted Miss A looking for help in finding Assange. The two women met and compared stories.
Harold has independently told the Guardian Miss A made a series of calls to him asking him to persuade Assange to take an STD test to reassure Miss W, and that Assange refused. Miss A then warned if Assange did not take a test, Miss W would go to the police. Assange had rejected this as blackmail, Harold told police.
Assange told police that Miss A spoke to him directly and complained to him that he had torn their condom, something that he regarded as false.
Late that Friday afternoon, Harold told police, Assange agreed to take a test, but the clinics had closed for the weekend. Miss A phoned Harold to say that she and Miss W had been to the police, who had told them that they couldn't simply tell Assange to take a test, that their statements must be passed to the prosecutor. That night, the story leaked to the Swedish newspaper Expressen.
By Saturday morning, 21 August, journalists were asking Assange for a reaction. At 9.15am, he tweeted: "We were warned to expect 'dirty tricks'. Now we have the first one." The following day, he tweeted: "Reminder: US intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks as far back as 2008."
The Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet asked if he had had sex with his two accusers. He said: "Their identities have been made anonymous so even I have no idea who they are. We have been warned that the Pentagon, for example, is thinking of deploying dirty tricks to ruin us."
Assange's Swedish lawyers have since suggested that Miss W's text messages – which the Guardian has not seen – show that she was thinking of contacting Expressen and that one of her friends told her she should get money for her story. However, police statements by the friend offer a more innocent explanation: they say these text messages were exchanged several days after the women had made their complaint. They followed an inquiry from a foreign newspaper and were meant jokingly, the friend stated to police.
The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.
The co-ordinator of the WikiLeaks group in Stockholm, who is a close colleague of Assange and who also knows both women, told the Guardian: "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."
Assange's lawyers were asked to respond on his behalf to the allegations in the documents seen by the Guardian on Wednesday evening. Tonight they said they were still unable obtain a response from Assange.
Assange's solicitor, Mark Stephens, said: "The allegations of the complainants are not credible and were dismissed by the senior Stockholm prosecutor as not worthy of further investigation." He said Miss A had sent two Twitter messages that appeared to undermine her account in the police statement.
Assange's defence team had so far been provided by prosecutors with only incomplete evidence, he said. "There are many more text and SMS messages from and to the complainants which have been shown by the assistant prosecutor to the Swedish defence lawyer, Bjorn Hurtig, which suggest motivations of malice and money in going to the police and to Espressen and raise the issue of political motivation behind the presentation of these complaints. He [Hurtig] has been precluded from making notes or copying them.
"We understand that both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange. They do not complain of any physical injury. The first complainant did not make a complaint for six days (in which she hosted the respondent in her flat [actually her bed] and spoke in the warmest terms about him to her friends) until she discovered he had spent the night with the other complainant.
"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.
"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."
Unseen police documents provide the first complete account of the allegations against the WikiLeaks founder
* Nick Davies
* guardian.co.uk, Friday 17 December 2010 21.30 GMT
Julian Assange at Ellingham Hall where he is staying Julian Assange at Ellingham Hall. Photograph: Paul Hackett/Reuters
Documents seen by the Guardian reveal for the first time the full details of the allegations of rape and sexual assault that have led to extradition hearings against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.
The case against Assange, which has been the subject of intense speculation and dispute in mainstream media and on the internet, is laid out in police material held in Stockholm to which the Guardian received unauthorised access.
Assange, who was released on bail on Thursday, denies the Swedish allegations and has not formally been charged with any offence. The two Swedish women behind the charges have been accused by his supporters of making malicious complaints or being "honeytraps" in a wider conspiracy to discredit him.
Assange's UK lawyer, Mark Stephens, attributed the allegations to "dark forces", saying: "The honeytrap has been sprung ... After what we've seen so far you can reasonably conclude this is part of a greater plan." The journalist John Pilger dismissed the case as a "political stunt" and in an interview with ABC news, Assange said Swedish prosecutors were withholding evidence which suggested he had been "set up."
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.
Stephens has repeatedly complained that Assange has not been allowed to see the full allegations against him, but it is understood his Swedish defence team have copies of all the documents seen by the Guardian. He maintains that other potentially exculpatory evidence has not been made available to his team and may not have been seen by the Guardian.
The allegations centre on a 10-day period after Assange flew into Stockholm on Wednesday 11 August. One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.
Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.
According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.
When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.
On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A. A second woman, Miss W, had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. Both women joined Assange, the co-ordinator of the Swedish WikiLeaks group, whom we will call "Harold", and a few others for lunch.
Assange left the lunch with Miss W. She told the police she and Assange had visited the place where she worked and had then gone to a cinema where they had moved to the back row. He had kissed her and put his hands inside her clothing, she said.
That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."
Assange's supporters point out that, despite her complaints against him, Miss A held a party for him on that evening and continued to allow him to stay in her flat.
On Sunday 15 August, Monica told police, Miss A told her that she thought Assange had torn the condom on purpose. According to Monica, Miss A said Assange was still staying in her flat but they were not having sex because he had "exceeded the limits of what she felt she could accept" and she did not feel safe.
The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom".
Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."
The police record of the interview with Assange in Stockhom deals only with the complaint made by Miss A. However, Assange and his lawyers have repeatedly stressed that he denies any kind of wrongdoing in relation to Miss W.
In submissions to the Swedish courts, they have argued that Miss W took the initiative in contacting Assange, that on her own account she willingly engaged in sexual activity in a cinema and voluntarily took him to her flat where, she agrees, they had consensual sex. They say that she never indicated to Assange that she did not want to have sex with him. They also say that in a text message to a friend, she never suggested she had been raped and claimed only to have been "half asleep".
Police spoke to Miss W's ex-boyfriend, who told them that in two and a half years they had never had sex without a condom because it was "unthinkable" for her. Miss W told police she went to a chemist to buy a morning-after pill and also went to hospital to be tested for STDs. Police statements record her contacting Assange to ask him to get a test and his refusing on the grounds that he did not have the time.
On Wednesday 18 August, according to police records, Miss A told Harold and a friend that Assange would not leave her flat and was sleeping in her bed, although she was not having sex with him and he spent most of the night sitting with his computer. Harold told police he had asked Assange why he was refusing to leave the flat and that Assange had said he was very surprised, because Miss A had not asked him to leave. Miss A says she spent Wednesday night on a mattress and then moved to a friend's flat so she did not have to be near him. She told police that Assange had continued to make sexual advances to her every day after they slept together and on Wednesday 18 August had approached her, naked from the waist down, and rubbed himself against her.
The following day, Harold told police, Miss A called him and for the first time gave him a full account of her complaints about Assange. Harold told police he regarded her as "very, very credible" and he confronted Assange, who said he was completely shocked by the claims and denied all of them. By Friday 20 August, Miss W had texted Miss A looking for help in finding Assange. The two women met and compared stories.
Harold has independently told the Guardian Miss A made a series of calls to him asking him to persuade Assange to take an STD test to reassure Miss W, and that Assange refused. Miss A then warned if Assange did not take a test, Miss W would go to the police. Assange had rejected this as blackmail, Harold told police.
Assange told police that Miss A spoke to him directly and complained to him that he had torn their condom, something that he regarded as false.
Late that Friday afternoon, Harold told police, Assange agreed to take a test, but the clinics had closed for the weekend. Miss A phoned Harold to say that she and Miss W had been to the police, who had told them that they couldn't simply tell Assange to take a test, that their statements must be passed to the prosecutor. That night, the story leaked to the Swedish newspaper Expressen.
By Saturday morning, 21 August, journalists were asking Assange for a reaction. At 9.15am, he tweeted: "We were warned to expect 'dirty tricks'. Now we have the first one." The following day, he tweeted: "Reminder: US intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks as far back as 2008."
The Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet asked if he had had sex with his two accusers. He said: "Their identities have been made anonymous so even I have no idea who they are. We have been warned that the Pentagon, for example, is thinking of deploying dirty tricks to ruin us."
Assange's Swedish lawyers have since suggested that Miss W's text messages – which the Guardian has not seen – show that she was thinking of contacting Expressen and that one of her friends told her she should get money for her story. However, police statements by the friend offer a more innocent explanation: they say these text messages were exchanged several days after the women had made their complaint. They followed an inquiry from a foreign newspaper and were meant jokingly, the friend stated to police.
The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.
The co-ordinator of the WikiLeaks group in Stockholm, who is a close colleague of Assange and who also knows both women, told the Guardian: "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."
Assange's lawyers were asked to respond on his behalf to the allegations in the documents seen by the Guardian on Wednesday evening. Tonight they said they were still unable obtain a response from Assange.
Assange's solicitor, Mark Stephens, said: "The allegations of the complainants are not credible and were dismissed by the senior Stockholm prosecutor as not worthy of further investigation." He said Miss A had sent two Twitter messages that appeared to undermine her account in the police statement.
Assange's defence team had so far been provided by prosecutors with only incomplete evidence, he said. "There are many more text and SMS messages from and to the complainants which have been shown by the assistant prosecutor to the Swedish defence lawyer, Bjorn Hurtig, which suggest motivations of malice and money in going to the police and to Espressen and raise the issue of political motivation behind the presentation of these complaints. He [Hurtig] has been precluded from making notes or copying them.
"We understand that both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange. They do not complain of any physical injury. The first complainant did not make a complaint for six days (in which she hosted the respondent in her flat [actually her bed] and spoke in the warmest terms about him to her friends) until she discovered he had spent the night with the other complainant.
"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.
"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."
Assange is psychologically unhinged and has played right into the hands of the media
The wildly promiscuous lifestyle of WikiLeaks boss Julian Assange
By David Rose
19th December 2010
* Accusers went to police after he refused AIDS test
* Days before, he stole THIRD girl from boyfriend's bed
* Ex-colleague accuses him of acting like a dictator
* Top Guardian journalist now refuses to deal with him
The two women who say they were sexually assaulted by the WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange would never have complained to police if he had agreed to take an HIV test, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
WikiLeaks’s Swedish co-ordinator, who worked closely with Mr Assange for months, said in an exclusive interview that he repeatedly begged his boss to have the test, both to head off the possible police investigation and for Mr Assange’s own peace of mind, given his promiscuous sex life.
‘The two women told me, that if he goes to the clinic for an HIV test, then we won’t go to the police,’ said Mr Assange’s colleague, who wishes to remain anonymous because he is a witness in the case brought by Swedish prosecutors, which led to Mr Assange spending nine days in Wandsworth Prison pending extradition.
‘I became the middleman in these negotiations,’ he added.
‘I felt that if Julian had agreed to have the HIV test, they would have dropped it. I told him, “Just do it, and anyway, it’s good for you, because you’re sleeping around”. A lot of women were extremely attracted to Julian, and after a few minutes, they offered themselves to him. From my perspective, they were like groupies with Mick Jagger, and he takes these opportunities.’
* He preaches openness but demands privacy. He reveals 'secrets' but 99% are prurient gossip. He's accused of rape but won't face his accusers. Why do the Left worship the WikiLeaks 'God'?
The WikiLeaks co-ordinator said he felt certain that the two women – who both allege that Mr Assange forced them to have intercourse during the same week in August without using a condom, against their express wishes – had nothing to do with any supposed American intelligence plot to discredit him, as he has frequently claimed.
‘The CIA is not behind this at all,’ he said. ‘Of course it is a golden opportunity for them. But from the beginning, it was personal.’
He said Mr Assange refused to take the test until it was too late, when all the Swedish clinics had closed for the weekend: ‘Julian said, “I don’t like it when people are blackmailing me, and they are blackmailing me by threatening to go to the police”.’
Mr Assange also told him that he had spoken to one of the alleged victims, known as ‘Ms W’, assuring him that ‘she is fine, she won’t go to the police’. The WikiLeaks co-ordinator knew from his own conversations with Ms W that she was not fine at all, but terrified she had been infected.
Mr Assange’s British lawyer, Mark Stephens, said his client had taken a test for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases at a later date, which showed he was not infected.
‘If it is true that all the women really wanted was for him to be tested, and that this would have stopped the case, then it is very disappointing that it has got so far,’ he said.
Today, The Mail on Sunday publishes unredacted details of the sexual-assault allegations against Mr Assange. They may well dismay his high-profile feminist supporters, such as the American writer Naomi Wolf, who has claimed he is a victim of the ‘international dating police’, and Jemima Khan, who offered to provide one of the sureties that led to his release last week on £240,000 bail.
Our investigation also reveals that:
* In the same week that Mr Assange had sex with Ms A and Ms W, he ended the relationship between a well-known American reporter and his girlfriend by blatantly attempting to seduce her during a dinner at a Stockholm restaurant. Having left the restaurant hand in hand with Mr Assange, the woman did not spend the night at the hotel where she had been sharing a bed with the American.
* Mr Assange has lied about aspects of his work. At a public meeting in London, he falsely claimed that the ‘Climategate’ emails from the University of East Anglia were first published by WikiLeaks. In fact, the emails were published by specialist climate websites in America and Canada – yet Mr Assange spent several minutes lamenting how he had found publishing them morally difficult because they boosted the arguments of global-warming sceptics.
* A senior journalist who worked closely with Mr Assange at the Guardian, and helped broker the deal that saw the paper become one of a handful of media organisations around the world with privileged, early access to successive WikiLeaks documents, has refused to continue dealing with him. It is understood that staff at other organisations, including Der Spiegel in Germany and Al Jazeera television, have also grown unhappy with his methods. One reporter said: ‘He can be extremely dictatorial. I’ve seen this first-hand.’
* Mr Assange has been accused of dishonesty by key colleagues, including Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a German computer specialist who was his closest collaborator for three years until he left WikiLeaks in September.
Mr Domscheit-Berg plans to publish a book about WikiLeaks early next year.
An advance copy of the publicity blurb states: ‘Not only he, but also other close colleagues could no longer put up with Assange’s high-handedness, dishonesty and grave mistakes, and got out.’
Ms W is accusing Julian Assange of rape
Ms A is also accusing Julian Assange of rape
Allegations: Ms W left, and Ms A are accusing Mr Assange of forcing them to have sex without using condoms
Quoting Mr Domscheit-Berg, it adds: ‘The fact that a project this powerful is under the sole control of someone with Julian Assange’s personality structure is a tangible danger to informants and collaborators.
‘Our trust was abused, we were threatened, misled and intentionally kept in the dark. It is not for nothing that many who have quit refer to him as a “dictator” . . .
‘Justified, even internal, criticism – whether about his relations with women or the lack of transparency in his actions – is either dismissed with the statement, “I’m busy, there are two wars I have to end” or attributed to the secret services’ smear campaigns.’
Amid the claims by Mr Assange that the sexual allegations against him are an American plot, it has been forgotten that when Mr Assange went to Sweden last summer, he said he believed he would be better protected from arrest for leaking America’s secrets there than in Britain, and that Sweden would be the ideal place to base the WikiLeaks computer servers.
However, once he arrived, he seemed determined to exploit the ‘rock star’ status that followed the publication of WikiLeaks’ first huge trove of US documents, the so-called ‘Iraq war logs’.
On Wednesday, August 11, the day Mr Assange flew in from London, he was invited to dinner at Stockholm’s Beirut restaurant with the Wiki¬Leaks Swedish co-ordinator,
the co-ordinator’s girlfriend and an American journalist who was travelling through Scandinavia with an English woman.
From the beginning, the American journalist told The Mail on Sunday, Mr Assange was unusually rude, and when he offered him a copy of his recent, well-reviewed book, he said: ‘Don’t bother. I’d only throw it away.’ After that, he says Mr Assange ignored him, focusing intently on his girlfriend instead.
‘He was acting as if she were a single girl on her own, though it must have been obvious to him that we were together.’
Later, when the woman said she was going outside to smoke, Mr Assange left the table to join her.
The American journalist, who spoke out on condition of anonymity, said: ‘When they hadn’t come back after 45 minutes I went to see what was happening.
‘They were standing very close together a little way down the street, and Julian was whispering in her ear.’
Even then, they did not come in. The group finally left when the restaurant closed for the night. The journalist turned round and saw that Mr Assange and his girlfriend were walking hand in hand, and when he asked him what was happening, ‘he dropped into a classic fighter’s pose, with his fists up’.
The writer spent the night alone.
‘Assange seemed to take pleasure in humiliating me,’ he said.
‘He tried to take this woman away from me and then spent the night with two other women later in the week. It’s extraordinary.’
On Friday, August 13, two days after the evening at the Beirut restaurant, Mr Assange had sex with Ms A, in whose flat he was staying. It has been widely reported that she says the condom he used tore.
But her full police statement suggests that the encounter began with coercion. After they returned from dinner, he began by stroking her leg, but moving more quickly than she felt ready for, made it clear he wanted full-blown sex, removing her clothes and ripping her necklace.
According to her statement, he pinned her to the bed and held her arms, while forcing open her legs. In response to her pleas, he put on a condom. But after some time, the statement alleges, she felt him ‘do something’ with his hands. It was only after he ejaculated that she realised that the condom had been torn – she claims, deliberately, by Mr Assange.
Mr Assange and his supporters have drawn attention to the fact that she did not go to the police for almost a week, that she continued to see him and allowed him to use her flat.
But among the documents in the police dossier is a statement from a friend of Ms A’s who alleges that on the Saturday, August 14, Ms A told her they had had ‘the worst sex ever,’ and that it had been ‘violent’. The following day, says her statement, Ms A told her that she thought Mr Assange tore the condom on purpose.
The Swedish prosecutor’s case suggests that Mr Assange has a peculiar fetish for having unprotected sex.
The second complainant, Ms W, had consensual intercourse with him using a condom on the night of August 17. But the following morning, she alleges, she woke to find him on top of her, having unprotected sex – something she had never done before.
The Swedish WikiLeaks co-ordinator told The Mail on Sunday that Ms A called on Thursday, August 19, to tell him that she had had sex with Mr Assange and that he had ripped the condom.
‘She said she was telling me this because Ms W had phoned her and informed her that she also had slept with Julian – and that he hadn’t used a condom. That was when she asked me to talk to Julian and ask him to take an HIV test.’
A tense series of phone calls between the co-ordinator, the women and Mr Assange ensued, lasting for much of the following day.
Even then, the co-ordinator said, the women initially intended only to ‘tell their story’, not to make a criminal complaint. But once the police realised that both women were alleging they had been forced against their will to have sex without condoms, the matter was out of their hands: ‘It became a police case, whether or not the women wanted to turn him in.’
Mr Assange’s lawyer, Mr Stephens, said he still considered it possible that Mr Assange had been set up by a CIA ‘honeytrap’.
‘Either by happenstance or design,’ he said the sex case was merely a ‘holding charge’ pending the unsealing of what would inevitably be far more serious charges by America.
He also claimed the Swedish authorities’ attitude to the case was ‘highly unusual’, saying that an offer for them to interview Mr Assange in Britain was still open. Neither women’s allegations were credible, he said.
The wildly promiscuous lifestyle of WikiLeaks boss Julian Assange
By David Rose
19th December 2010
* Accusers went to police after he refused AIDS test
* Days before, he stole THIRD girl from boyfriend's bed
* Ex-colleague accuses him of acting like a dictator
* Top Guardian journalist now refuses to deal with him
The two women who say they were sexually assaulted by the WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange would never have complained to police if he had agreed to take an HIV test, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
WikiLeaks’s Swedish co-ordinator, who worked closely with Mr Assange for months, said in an exclusive interview that he repeatedly begged his boss to have the test, both to head off the possible police investigation and for Mr Assange’s own peace of mind, given his promiscuous sex life.
‘The two women told me, that if he goes to the clinic for an HIV test, then we won’t go to the police,’ said Mr Assange’s colleague, who wishes to remain anonymous because he is a witness in the case brought by Swedish prosecutors, which led to Mr Assange spending nine days in Wandsworth Prison pending extradition.
‘I became the middleman in these negotiations,’ he added.
‘I felt that if Julian had agreed to have the HIV test, they would have dropped it. I told him, “Just do it, and anyway, it’s good for you, because you’re sleeping around”. A lot of women were extremely attracted to Julian, and after a few minutes, they offered themselves to him. From my perspective, they were like groupies with Mick Jagger, and he takes these opportunities.’
* He preaches openness but demands privacy. He reveals 'secrets' but 99% are prurient gossip. He's accused of rape but won't face his accusers. Why do the Left worship the WikiLeaks 'God'?
The WikiLeaks co-ordinator said he felt certain that the two women – who both allege that Mr Assange forced them to have intercourse during the same week in August without using a condom, against their express wishes – had nothing to do with any supposed American intelligence plot to discredit him, as he has frequently claimed.
‘The CIA is not behind this at all,’ he said. ‘Of course it is a golden opportunity for them. But from the beginning, it was personal.’
He said Mr Assange refused to take the test until it was too late, when all the Swedish clinics had closed for the weekend: ‘Julian said, “I don’t like it when people are blackmailing me, and they are blackmailing me by threatening to go to the police”.’
Mr Assange also told him that he had spoken to one of the alleged victims, known as ‘Ms W’, assuring him that ‘she is fine, she won’t go to the police’. The WikiLeaks co-ordinator knew from his own conversations with Ms W that she was not fine at all, but terrified she had been infected.
Mr Assange’s British lawyer, Mark Stephens, said his client had taken a test for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases at a later date, which showed he was not infected.
‘If it is true that all the women really wanted was for him to be tested, and that this would have stopped the case, then it is very disappointing that it has got so far,’ he said.
Today, The Mail on Sunday publishes unredacted details of the sexual-assault allegations against Mr Assange. They may well dismay his high-profile feminist supporters, such as the American writer Naomi Wolf, who has claimed he is a victim of the ‘international dating police’, and Jemima Khan, who offered to provide one of the sureties that led to his release last week on £240,000 bail.
Our investigation also reveals that:
* In the same week that Mr Assange had sex with Ms A and Ms W, he ended the relationship between a well-known American reporter and his girlfriend by blatantly attempting to seduce her during a dinner at a Stockholm restaurant. Having left the restaurant hand in hand with Mr Assange, the woman did not spend the night at the hotel where she had been sharing a bed with the American.
* Mr Assange has lied about aspects of his work. At a public meeting in London, he falsely claimed that the ‘Climategate’ emails from the University of East Anglia were first published by WikiLeaks. In fact, the emails were published by specialist climate websites in America and Canada – yet Mr Assange spent several minutes lamenting how he had found publishing them morally difficult because they boosted the arguments of global-warming sceptics.
* A senior journalist who worked closely with Mr Assange at the Guardian, and helped broker the deal that saw the paper become one of a handful of media organisations around the world with privileged, early access to successive WikiLeaks documents, has refused to continue dealing with him. It is understood that staff at other organisations, including Der Spiegel in Germany and Al Jazeera television, have also grown unhappy with his methods. One reporter said: ‘He can be extremely dictatorial. I’ve seen this first-hand.’
* Mr Assange has been accused of dishonesty by key colleagues, including Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a German computer specialist who was his closest collaborator for three years until he left WikiLeaks in September.
Mr Domscheit-Berg plans to publish a book about WikiLeaks early next year.
An advance copy of the publicity blurb states: ‘Not only he, but also other close colleagues could no longer put up with Assange’s high-handedness, dishonesty and grave mistakes, and got out.’
Ms W is accusing Julian Assange of rape
Ms A is also accusing Julian Assange of rape
Allegations: Ms W left, and Ms A are accusing Mr Assange of forcing them to have sex without using condoms
Quoting Mr Domscheit-Berg, it adds: ‘The fact that a project this powerful is under the sole control of someone with Julian Assange’s personality structure is a tangible danger to informants and collaborators.
‘Our trust was abused, we were threatened, misled and intentionally kept in the dark. It is not for nothing that many who have quit refer to him as a “dictator” . . .
‘Justified, even internal, criticism – whether about his relations with women or the lack of transparency in his actions – is either dismissed with the statement, “I’m busy, there are two wars I have to end” or attributed to the secret services’ smear campaigns.’
Amid the claims by Mr Assange that the sexual allegations against him are an American plot, it has been forgotten that when Mr Assange went to Sweden last summer, he said he believed he would be better protected from arrest for leaking America’s secrets there than in Britain, and that Sweden would be the ideal place to base the WikiLeaks computer servers.
However, once he arrived, he seemed determined to exploit the ‘rock star’ status that followed the publication of WikiLeaks’ first huge trove of US documents, the so-called ‘Iraq war logs’.
On Wednesday, August 11, the day Mr Assange flew in from London, he was invited to dinner at Stockholm’s Beirut restaurant with the Wiki¬Leaks Swedish co-ordinator,
the co-ordinator’s girlfriend and an American journalist who was travelling through Scandinavia with an English woman.
From the beginning, the American journalist told The Mail on Sunday, Mr Assange was unusually rude, and when he offered him a copy of his recent, well-reviewed book, he said: ‘Don’t bother. I’d only throw it away.’ After that, he says Mr Assange ignored him, focusing intently on his girlfriend instead.
‘He was acting as if she were a single girl on her own, though it must have been obvious to him that we were together.’
Later, when the woman said she was going outside to smoke, Mr Assange left the table to join her.
The American journalist, who spoke out on condition of anonymity, said: ‘When they hadn’t come back after 45 minutes I went to see what was happening.
‘They were standing very close together a little way down the street, and Julian was whispering in her ear.’
Even then, they did not come in. The group finally left when the restaurant closed for the night. The journalist turned round and saw that Mr Assange and his girlfriend were walking hand in hand, and when he asked him what was happening, ‘he dropped into a classic fighter’s pose, with his fists up’.
The writer spent the night alone.
‘Assange seemed to take pleasure in humiliating me,’ he said.
‘He tried to take this woman away from me and then spent the night with two other women later in the week. It’s extraordinary.’
On Friday, August 13, two days after the evening at the Beirut restaurant, Mr Assange had sex with Ms A, in whose flat he was staying. It has been widely reported that she says the condom he used tore.
But her full police statement suggests that the encounter began with coercion. After they returned from dinner, he began by stroking her leg, but moving more quickly than she felt ready for, made it clear he wanted full-blown sex, removing her clothes and ripping her necklace.
According to her statement, he pinned her to the bed and held her arms, while forcing open her legs. In response to her pleas, he put on a condom. But after some time, the statement alleges, she felt him ‘do something’ with his hands. It was only after he ejaculated that she realised that the condom had been torn – she claims, deliberately, by Mr Assange.
Mr Assange and his supporters have drawn attention to the fact that she did not go to the police for almost a week, that she continued to see him and allowed him to use her flat.
But among the documents in the police dossier is a statement from a friend of Ms A’s who alleges that on the Saturday, August 14, Ms A told her they had had ‘the worst sex ever,’ and that it had been ‘violent’. The following day, says her statement, Ms A told her that she thought Mr Assange tore the condom on purpose.
The Swedish prosecutor’s case suggests that Mr Assange has a peculiar fetish for having unprotected sex.
The second complainant, Ms W, had consensual intercourse with him using a condom on the night of August 17. But the following morning, she alleges, she woke to find him on top of her, having unprotected sex – something she had never done before.
The Swedish WikiLeaks co-ordinator told The Mail on Sunday that Ms A called on Thursday, August 19, to tell him that she had had sex with Mr Assange and that he had ripped the condom.
‘She said she was telling me this because Ms W had phoned her and informed her that she also had slept with Julian – and that he hadn’t used a condom. That was when she asked me to talk to Julian and ask him to take an HIV test.’
A tense series of phone calls between the co-ordinator, the women and Mr Assange ensued, lasting for much of the following day.
Even then, the co-ordinator said, the women initially intended only to ‘tell their story’, not to make a criminal complaint. But once the police realised that both women were alleging they had been forced against their will to have sex without condoms, the matter was out of their hands: ‘It became a police case, whether or not the women wanted to turn him in.’
Mr Assange’s lawyer, Mr Stephens, said he still considered it possible that Mr Assange had been set up by a CIA ‘honeytrap’.
‘Either by happenstance or design,’ he said the sex case was merely a ‘holding charge’ pending the unsealing of what would inevitably be far more serious charges by America.
He also claimed the Swedish authorities’ attitude to the case was ‘highly unusual’, saying that an offer for them to interview Mr Assange in Britain was still open. Neither women’s allegations were credible, he said.
So Assange handed over full rights to the leaks to the NY Times. This was never wikileaks, but "NY Times Leaks", which is basically Israeli/US Govt.-leaks.
http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/qatar/136564-wikileaks-to-release-israel-documents-in-six-months.html
http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/qatar/136564-wikileaks-to-release-israel-documents-in-six-months.html
Odysseus
Jedi
Seraphina said:
Yep, talking about a big drama buildup here. It looks very much like a dramatic setup peaking into the "internet's 9/11" with evil cyber-terrorists and -threats all over the internet needed to be taken care of with some bill ready to be presented and approved as the remedy. "The war on cyberterror" is about to arrive, everybody grab some pop corn and enjoy the show. (I know, it's not funny...)
Iron
Dagobah Resident
It seems that the censorship on the internet is about to begin.
China-like perhaps? Or in a different flavor?
On another note, Sott and Cassiopaea.org are likely targets. How we will network if the internet begins to be under tightier surveillance?
I havent read the entire thread, so I appologize if those questions were already answered.
China-like perhaps? Or in a different flavor?
On another note, Sott and Cassiopaea.org are likely targets. How we will network if the internet begins to be under tightier surveillance?
I havent read the entire thread, so I appologize if those questions were already answered.