back to article Assange denies 'sexual assault' allegations

Swedish prosecutors made public accusations of rape and molestation against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and then quickly dropped them over the weekend. An arrest warrant was issued, in absentia, on Friday night, then withdrawn on Saturday. Two women aged 20 and 30 made the claims about two separate incidents to Swedish …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Rogerborg

    I'm sure he's getting wood over this

    By which I mean the cross that he's chosen to nail himself to. Come on, don't persecute the martyr - you'll just engorge his already tumescent ego.

    1. It wasnt me

      @Rogerborg

      I dont have an opinion either way on Wikileaks, but in the name of Karma I sincerely hope that someone publishes entirely baseless allegations of a simlar nature against you all over the worlds media. You inconsiderate bell end.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Successful distraction

      I agree that since Assange let himself become part of the story, he has woven his own rope. Having said that - I cannot believe how much traction stories about him have gained.

      Surely the bigger story here remains the fact that wikileaks has got some extremely sensitive information that has been kept from the public eye by interested parties:

      1. Should this information remain secret? Who does that serve best? What is the risk of revealing it? Is that risk worth it?

      2. Does wikileaks serve a vital purpose, bigger than (according to some of you lot) massaging someone's ego? In other words, is it actually important that a by-product of wikileaks' existence and purpose creates an annoying celebrity? Or is wikileaks just a big fake vanity project? Really??

    3. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

      Yes, but the irony is delicious..

      I must admit the irony, which may have been intentional.

      After all, how did a prosecution notice become public. Ah, ahem, well, I think it's called a leak.

      Following Assange's modus operandi, the information was checked for veracity (check: it's true) and if Assange could still keep himself safe when published (check: it was about him, after all) and presto, we are live in 3..2..1.

      In this case too there was little check for the further consequences of publication, *precisely* following Assange's own MO. I rather like principles of confidentiality maintained, because the knock-on effect of uncontrolled publication can be severe - boosting a deficient ego being one of the most minor side effects - so pardon me if I'm not exactly overflowing with sympathy for Mr Assange here.

      Petard, hoist, etcetera..

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    c

    They can't assassinate him because it would be too public, would make him a martyr and wouldn't damage WikiLeaks. So they attempt to destroy his character and thereby damage his creation. I'm only surprised the didn't accuse him of child porn.

    Conspiracies really aren't what they used to be. This is WAY too obvious.

    ROSWELL ROSWELL!!

  3. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

    Just the beginning

    Next thing his old mobile phone be "found" on ebay, full of images of child sex abuse.

    See the machine in action (predictable and inept).

  4. yoinkster
    Unhappy

    dfg

    I have no great love of wikileaks or Assange but the way this guy is being persued is rediculous. The timing of these allegations is so blatant even a two year old could see through them.

    I hope he goes on the front foot and whoops some ass over all this.

  5. Chris Hatfield
    FAIL

    I hope the luddite bozos at the Hexagon realise...

    ..that Wikileaks can survive even if Julian Assange is taken out, in some way.

    Bulletproof hosting is called bullet-proof for a reason.

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      Yeah, it's bullet-proof . . .

      but have you seen the latest bunker-busters that them thar Air Force jockeys can unleash on "strategic" targets ?

      1. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

        Not a chance

        US military kit only gets accurate when it involves Chinese embassies :-).

    2. Trevor_Pott Gold badge
      Alien

      You want a conspiracy?

      How about this:

      WIkileaks as a front for intelligence agencies. They can leak information they require/desire, all the while building up this image of a complete twatdangle over the years to slowly but surely discredit the image and concept of whilteblowers. From the hero/martyr fighting the man to the egoist out to make a name for himself, the public conciousness’ perception of a whistleblower is changing thanks to wikileaks and Ass.

      Now, it’s not at all likely that this conspiracy theory is true…but it beats the hell out of Roswell…

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Alien

        re: You want a conspiracy?

        Wikileaks is clearly being used as a channel to distribute propaganda and the military data release seemed like a way to announce unofficially that the war in Afghanistan wasn't going according to the offical propagandised version of events being promoted in the mainstream media.

        Being inherently dodgy and having lots of stuff to hide these spooky types love hiding their operations behind facades such as pseudo religious cults and using untraceable anonymous "spam" email and the like to spread their messages.

        Your summary of shifting the story in the hope of discrediting whistleblowers also makes perfect sense when you consider a lot of PR and advertising works on the basis of association - project the idea that whistleblower Assange is a dodgy egocentric creep and people will associate whistleblowers with dodgy egocentric creeps.

        This story isn't about Julien Assange or Wikileaks - it is about the futile inhumane butchery and industrial slaughter that the US and UK armed forces have unleashed on behalf of their paymasters in the middle east and afghanistan.

    3. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      BUlletproof hosting

      Bulletproof hosting is only as bulletproof as the people behind the hosting. This is all hosted somewhere. Find al the various places it is hosted and you can get anything taken down. If you honestly believe for a fraction of a second that US.Gov doesn’t have it’s ways you are delusional.

      What do I mean by have its ways? I mean you find the person who runs the datacenter and you put a gun to the head of someone they care about. Very quickly the server you don’t like goes away. I don’t care how many places the damned thing is hosted, you can rinse and repeat for each datacenter owner until the task is completed.

      If US.gov truly and honestly didn’t want Wikileaks hosted, it wouldn’t be. The same is true for any of the large world powers. What this means is that while WIkilieaks is mildly irritating and potentially embarrassing, it isn’t an actually threat to the folks in power quite yet. A threat perhaps to some grunts on the ground or denizens of Afghanistan, but since when has any politician given a rat’s about them?

      There is no such thing as bulletproof hosting. All that Wikileaks’ continued existence demonstrates is that they aren’t yet enough of a nuisance to expend the effort required to make them go away.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Except

      it isn't bulletproof.

      Wikileaks security is lousy. It's more of a honeypot than a safehouse.

  6. Tom 7 Silver badge

    US shoots itself in the foot

    even diehard right wingers seem to think this is the US trying to set the guy up.

    Laughable in its incompetence too!

  7. Arctic fox

    Predictable

    It was scarcely a question of _if_ such tactics would be used but _when_ they would be used.

  8. Roger Varley

    It's a good job

    that 30 odd years in IT hasn't turned me into a cynical old git, otherwise I'd be thinking "Sting"!

  9. The Indomitable Gall

    I hope...

    I hope Assange offers due congratulations to the prosecutors for leaking the information. After all, he's the poster boy for full disclosure.

    I don't believe the dirty tricks claims myself.

    It's entirely possible that it was a genuine claim that was genuinely kicked out*, but that whoever leaked it just saw the opportunity for a bit of delicious irony.

    * Thinking of another story (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/18/police_online_images_warning/), it's completely plausible that the victim had been raped by someone with a resemblance to Assange, and Assange's current press profile means she saw his face enough that she slowly convinced herself it was him.

  10. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      What's Sting

      got to do with it?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Troll

        Sting?

        Well clearly the 'Police' were in on the whole thing...

        1. Lionel Baden
          Coffee/keyboard

          O NO

          This means another keyboard damn you two !!!

          1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

            Re: O NO

            If I had a keyboard for every time you lot say you need a new keyboard, I could put them in a pile which I could climb to freedom.

            1. OffBeatMammal
              Coffee/keyboard

              Re: If I had a

              dand it Sarah, now you owe me a new keyboard :)

            2. MinionZero
              Coffee/keyboard

              Missing marginally miffed Moderatrix...

              Answers to the name of Sarah Bee, last seen vanishing under an avalanche of keyboards after a failed escape attempt.

            3. Trevor_Pott Gold badge
              Coffee/keyboard

              @Sarah

              But could you pile them one on top of the other to reach the height of the ISS? If you could, would the Beeb change it's system of measurement?

            4. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

              Get those flexible ones..

              .. and you could bounce your way out as they're made of rubber (obligatory "hmmm, rubber" remark omitted for brevity).

              Problem is that they are coffee proof, sorry.

              /me hands ladder and escape kit..

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Quite to the contrary, my dear Watson

      I think they might view it as largely a success. It all depends on what they're after and whether they're in it for the long haul. The latter is almost certainly true; secretive bureaucrazies tend to harbour and nurture their pet hates. And fertile grounds they are. Think Starr practically jerking himself off over the idea of nailing Clinton, or the dirty little nameless fed that coming after Roman Polanski ad nauseam.

      It's a distraction. Two of them. One to make a big impact, one to linger and fester and sap his strength. The former only lived for a week-end, and I'm reasonably sure someone's behind it and that a bit surer that if so they wouldn't've minded it living a bit longer but regardless, it didn't need to stray around. It's done the job. The other is still there, and notice how you have to read to the second or third paragraph to notice that. It's not in the headlines. Most people will gloss over it, but it's there and it'll pop up again.

      It's so obvious nobody is believing it could really be that orchestrated, so it gets away with it. Think _True Colours_ or _Wag the Dog_. And remember: American Politics doesn't come with a Hollywood Ending.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      WTF?

      Downvote?

      Come on!? How can my comment possibly be downvoted when it was so useful as a set-up for the clearly great pun that followed it? Hmm? Who was it, eh? Admit it! I don't claim any major skill in my minor pun, but what's to downvote about it?

      I mean, really, I expect it when I say anything (positive or negative) about Apple, or if I suggest I still like Firefox despite it being uncool, or when I promote eugenicist ideals as a good way forward for humanity, but when I make a slightly bad pun? This would never have happened in Nazi Germany.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Yes, well,

        I should have seen those downvotes coming.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    correction

    The younger woman's age has not been revealed, it is just reported as between 20-30.

    The likely elder female, the 30year old, has according to her CV previously written chronicles in the newspaper who was first to publish this (tabloid called "Expressen" www.expressen.se)

  12. Tigra 07 Silver badge
    Jobs Horns

    FBI - Foreign Bullsh*t Instigator

    This stinks of American involvement

  13. smudge Silver badge
    Black Helicopters

    Hands up...

    ...anyone who DIDN'T immediately think "fit-up" when you first heard about the allegations.

  14. Andrew the Invertebrate
    Black Helicopters

    Warning sharp U-turn

    Given the speed of the Sweedish 180 on the charges, either the prosecutors were found out to be total idiots or Assange's "Insurance" file holds more than just some Afghan military reports.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Flame

    A New Episode Of Virginia Dirty Tricks Company

    I have seen the beginning stage of this myself, but didn't take that trap because the male control officer could be identified as a merkin from 100 meters distance.

    And I figured that this kind of relationship won't be very good on the long run. Now I know what their real plans are....

  16. breakfast

    Weird though...

    If this was something to do with spooks ( and it certainly doesn't seem like a legit claim at this point, so someone with an agenda seems to be involved ) why on earth would they do it so obviously and so badly? This is playground stuff.

    Either this is a deliberately clumsy distraction or conspiracy theorists everywhere really need to re-evaluate their beliefs about the abilities of the international intelligence community.

    1. Arctic fox
      FAIL

      The International what community?

      "Either this is a deliberately clumsy distraction or conspiracy theorists everywhere really need to re-evaluate their beliefs about the abilities of the international intelligence community."

      The phrase intelligence community is an oxymoron. Hardly amazing really given that they do seem to employ an awful lot of morons. There are any number of examples of the less than "George Smiley" level of these tossers' performance of their "duties". That they might be involved in a less than amazingly skillful attempt to smear somebody is scarcely surprising.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Umm, side effect..

        .. of voting in politicians based on their press presence instead of their capabilities.

        Intelligence is a service like any other, and can thus likewise be manned by competent people whose decisions are overridden by complete morons who are better at licking political rear ends. In other words, not unlike any business. If you need an example of how disastrous that can be, just look at what caused the Wall Street crisis (which was accelerated by the ability of those responsible to escape any kind of impact on their own life).

        There is intelligence in Intelligence, it would be nice if they let those people actually do their job again. But that would take intelligent leadership - which depends on who you vote for..

        This was a public service announcement. Send no money. No politicians were harmed during the construction of this message, for which we apologise. Author may sue, contents may settle. Only created with recycled keystrokes.

    2. Trevor_Pott Gold badge
      Big Brother

      @breakfast

      AH, but if Ass. arranged the claims (ostensibly in order to pain the spooks in a bad like for attempting something "so obvious") then it becomes a far more subtle work.

      Come now, your tinfoil hat needs polish, sir...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      That would be the CIA, actually.

      AFAIK, FBI is US internal, federal, CIA is the uncontrolled lot that goes about sponsoring people who then become terrorists or otherwise a pain in the neck for the US.

      You could say they invest in their own future - without the problems they create themselves there would be no longer be a need for them, but that would naturally be the cynical way of looking at it..

    4. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      *raises hand*

      When I read the allegations, the first thought through my mind was "I'll be the little nomad is using his fame and lifestyle choice to get into all sorts of trouble. Since he never seems to stay in the same place twice, it would seem like he has arranged the perfect lifestyle to accomplish it...."

      It wasn’t until I read about it on the Register and had to deal with the rather sycophantic wikileaks crowd here in the comments that I thought for a second he didn’t do it. He’s not the pure and virginal messiah come to save us all. He’s an egotistical little twatdangle who has risen to fame quite quickly of late. I am not saying that makes him a rapist, but I am certainly cynical enough to look at the whole thing and go “meh, he wouldn’t be the first” and then move on to reading about DRAM or something.

      1. Tigra 07 Silver badge
        FAIL

        Failure for the false correction

        He's most wanted by the FBI, not by the CIA

        So my original assertion that the FBI is involved was correct.

        Whether, they went on to involve the CIA is another matter and still doesn't change the fact that the FBI were involved in the first place like i stated

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Megaphone

      My hand's up

      Assange's love of publicity made me think he put the allegation there himself. The spooks are much more sophisticated.

      Remember he has been out of the papers for a week, poor lad.

    6. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      FAIL

      RE: Hands up...

      Is it so hard to believe that Mr Assange might have a case of the Dikileaks? After all, it looks as if one of the women in the complaint has been identified as a left-of-centre Swediah journalist and not some right-wing, CIA-wannabe kook.

  17. JaitcH
    Unhappy

    American 'intelligence' operatives have the finesse of a pregnant elephant

    The minute I heard of this I thought 'set up'.

    For those with good memories, you will recall in 2003, the U.S. ex-Marine and U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter, who by then was one of the most persuasive opponents of the attack on Iraq, repeatedly and forcefully protesting that there was no evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction, was the subject of a media smear campaign, accusing him of having engaged in criminal sex acts with teenagers.

    The accusations faded to black when proof was sought.

    One media rabble rouser wrote: "But it seems to me this Scott Ritter kiddie-sex bust might explain Ritter's sudden and inexplicable 180 on Iraq. Maybe they set him up in a sting? That sort of thing was standard op for the KGB. Just a thought."

    Of course, Bush lies prevailed, and Ritters truth was proven. The CIA didn't even fake WMD - how dumb could they get?

    Even the Pentagon has admitted Assange is smart and smart people make sure they don't damage their mission, unlike the U.S. government spooks.

    1. fishman

      No change

      A new president claiming "Change". So much for that. It's not surprising considering Obama's support for the Patriot act.

      1. JaitcH
        Unhappy

        The Patriot Act is a pussy ...

        considering Obama has now signed a presidential order permitting security agencies to kill American citizens - without trials.

        Not even Bush and Cheney thought of that one.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Perhaps you should watch a Film

          'Missing' starring Jack Lemon is an excellent film and after watching it, decide for yourself whether certain permits have never been given before.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Sometimes the Brits aren't that much better..

      .. but at least they get help from the press.

      You may recall a chap called David Kelly..

  18. Ally J
    Black Helicopters

    But who benefits from this?

    Much as I love the idea of some very daft CIA spook orgainising a rubbish story and then realising no-one will believe it, I can't imagine anyone being *that* stupid. All this story has done is make Assange more of a martyr and add to his reputation as a fearless champion of the truth despite the efforts of 'the Man' to silence him.

    My (very cynical) money is on this being a black propaganda exercise by the pro-Assange camp.

    1. Roger Varley
      Happy

      But who benefits from this

      Hmm .. there's a novel approach to the conspiracy theory. I can just hear Assange: "I'm in deep shit, the US govt is out to get me,, the CIA, FBI and god knows who else is after me. What can I do to improve things .. <thinks> I know, I'll get myself accused of two counts of rape. That should do it"

      D'ya know, it does my heart good to realize that there's always going to be someone more cynical than me.

  19. Arthur McGiven
    FAIL

    Dept of smears

    All "intelligence" organisations have special departments for this kind of thing. It's just surprising that the press should fall for this so gleefully, or is it?

    1. Adam Salisbury

      Real or not

      The press don't need pesky facts to report on aynthing these days, 'some bloke down the pub told me' seems to be enough these days, well that or Wikipdeia!

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    Self-inflicted?

    I may be overthinking things, but if Assange knew a smear was coming, is it not possible that he could have arranged for this to happen so that if/when a serious (and probably better-planned) allegation is made people are already thinking 'smear campaign'.

    Such a fast U-turn and the fact that it was actually made public suggests something is going on does it not?

    1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

      Re: Self-inflicted?

      Ah, wheels within wheels on top of other wheels that aren't really wheels.

      1. Captain Jack
        Joke

        Hope they don't get confused

        That's all good until they get confused as to who's slandering who and we end with the story "FBI rapes Assange"

      2. Luther Blissett

        @SarahB - "wheels that aren't really wheels"

        Indeed not. See and marvel - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophan

        And they aren't the biggest cheeses in the joint by any means.

      3. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

        My mind wheels..

        .. sorry, reels..

  21. Just Thinking

    It obvious

    Assange arranged these allegations himself.

    Accused of a serious offence, accusation withdrawn within hours due to poor evidence, everybody assumes its a fit up.

    So when the spooks do come up with a smear, invented or otherwise, we will all just think it is another fit up.

    1. Gav
      Boffin

      obvious indeed

      That's what they want you to think.

      Unless Assange arranged it, so that you'd think that the FBI had arranged it, so that it would look like Assange arranged it to look like the FBI had arranged it..

      Or maybe that's what *he* wants you to think....

      Aren't conspiracy theories great? They telescope down a recursive hole that dwindles into ever increasing realms of ludicrous detail.... but it's all still possible!

  22. Keith 21
    Big Brother

    And so it begins.

    The oh-so-predictable efforts by "intelligence" to try to discredit Assange have already started, it would seem.

    Only this time, they have let the office juniors have a go, and they've made such a mess of it that the results are so painfully obviously a set-up.

    Alas, I fear, this is only the beginning rather than the end of the attempts to frame him.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  23. OffBeatMammal
    Stop

    Nice TP preference

    young Mr de Worde would be proud

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Big Brother

    The really shocking thing in this

    They are active in propagating similar colouring in a campaign aimed at manufacturing popular consent to justify an invasion of Iran, presumably to securitise control of the Oil wealth. Notice how Iran is constantly headline news? How the stories about Iran always focus on some negative aspect or attempt to convey the impression that it represents a threat?

    Remember how they also a similar campaign about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction?

    As Chomsky has highlighted corporate news media appear more and the subservient propaganda arm of the wealthy, powerful and corrupt. How many other repressive militaristic regimes with poor human rights records receieve the kind of present attention directed at projecting the threat narrative into public conciousness? Has journalistic integrity, fact checking and independant research been entirely replaced by vertbatum copy and paste of the news wire?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Or...

      There is plenty of evidence to go to war against Iran (or at least help in going to war with them) - kidnapping of other states' citizens/subjects, detaining of members from other states' military who were in international waters. The continued development (and attempted concealment) of enrichment plants. There is also the matter of the training and materials for the roadside bombs in Iraq coming from Iran. The continued aggressive stance towards Israel, who like or not have a right to their own lands (although not that of others') Then there's the human rights issues, the extra judicial beatings, detainment without trial, corrupt elections, etc.etc. If our governments wanted to go to war with Iran they've got all the reason they need, it's just that they really don't want to go to war with Iran, clearly lots of blind eyes are being turned while the issue is being forced by those in power in Iran.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        FAIL

        The aggressor

        The strong aggressor projects himself as the weak victim. The aggressor projects the victim as the aggressor.

      2. Lottie

        re: Or

        "Then there's the human rights issues, the extra judicial beatings, detainment without trial, corrupt elections, etc.etc."

        I know, we should be the only countries to do this!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Shock. Horror.

      " Has journalistic integrity, fact checking and independant research been entirely replaced by vertbatum copy and paste of the news wire?"

      No, it's been entirely replaced by verbatim copy and paste of Wikileaks.

      Same difference.

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Australia's Intelligence Agencies

    "Assange told Al Jazeera TV he had no direct evidence of spook involvement but had been warned 11 August by Australian intelligence services to expect such a slander campaign."

    Being Australian, I doubt that our intelligence services would have had the competence to discover a possible slander campaign. Nor am I convinced that they would have informed Assange if such a campaign existed.

  26. perlcat
    Grenade

    man, you guys are nuts.

    What a load of conspiracist tripe. It's not even quality. Go back & re-read the Illuminatus Trilogy, learn how the real conspiracy thing is done. You don't even get the tinfoil lined snoopy helmet award for this.

    I highly doubt that Assange has the 'nads to do rape -- from the looks of him, he'd have to leave mummy's basement and a whole mess of cheetos first. I also highly doubt that a government that has gotten permission to kill terrorists without trial would waste time with something like this, when they could just snuff him, or better.

    I hate to break it to ol' Julian, but he didn't just make enemies in the USA -- his playing loose cannon with other nations' facts gives him a nice long enemies list. Many of those don't bother getting laws passed to say that it is OK to kill foreigners engaged in terroristic acts. Many might pull the trigger if they even think he will leak something sensitive.

    I don't see him so much as a hero as I do a dumbshit who got himself well and truly in over his head believing his own sanctimonious bull shit about how the truth belongs to everybody. So far as his demise being justifiable -- the several hundred people who will die as a direct result of his naive belief that this information belongs out in the public weigh pretty heavily in the balance against him.

    I'd say that the US is exercising commendable restraint, but more cynically, I'd say that it is more Obama's nutless approach to national security than anything else. (Terrorist? We banned the word, so we've solved the problem by renaming it! Aren't we special! Now people only get killed by man-caused disasters! PARTY IN SPAIN!!! W00T!!)

    Before this episode, Assange was viewed as a harmless, naive crackpot. Now, he's become a dangerous naive crackpot. If he isn't running seriously scared, he should be, and his worst enemy is his mouth -- I don't think he has any idea how to STFU (the whole point behind wikileaks, eh?). I do not think that other nations' intelligence services play as nice as CIA/NSA, and their solutions to such problems are usually of the 9mm category. It would probably please them immensely to have him wake up dead and the US blamed for it. Not a good idea to hand them motive and iron-clad alibi, but again, can't STFU. The more he goes off on the US, the sooner that day comes.

    As far as conspiracies go, it'd take about 5 minutes to cock up some data embarrassing to one of those countries, spread the word that he has it and is ready to post it, and wait for the popping noise. A couple weeks pass of nobody knowing exactly who did it, and problem solved.

    RIP dumbshit. I'd say I was sorry, but you got a lot of people better than you killed.

    1. duncan campbell
      Thumb Down

      More stupid threats from the cracker-jack crowd here.

      Fact is the security wonks at the CIA *started* a blood feud

      back when they were using dirty trix on the Soviets in 'Ghan.

      The kind that makes the Hatfields and McCoys look like a pissin'

      match in a kindergarten.

      Things like bombs wrapped in kiddie toys with Russian lettering

      seem to be part of the issue...

      The message should have been clear when that Pashtu Hashashin

      parked his ass across from the CIA headquarters and whacked

      some of the "brains" involved. But nooo. We had to go to war

      to protect these assholes.

      Fubar

      1. perlcat
        Black Helicopters

        isn't a threat.

        Just the long-assed way to make the observation that nobody in their right mind (barring Loki) loves a loose cannon, and you'd be surprised at who will find a way to get along just long enough to deal with it. Nobody but an idiot wants a messy extradition, hearing some geek bleating about how he's being repressed all over the press. The only reason for that is to make an object lesson out of someone, and I don't think this is like embarrassing the pentagon by hacking their server or setting up a gambling website and having some ignorant nancy get his panties in a wad over it. I think that certain people are well and truly pissed.

        As to the blood feuds -- I have no doubt. There's payback, there's fuckback, and a whole lot more going on. I can't say so much as who started them -- I think you'd need to go back a lot further to really figure out who started what. We have absolutely no idea what exactly is really going on out there right now, and me, I'd prefer to stay as far out of it as possible. But Assange willingly inserted himself into it, even if he wasn't fully aware of the consequences. As you mentioned, dirty tricks in the pro league tend to leave grease spots on or largish holes in the pavement. At the very minimum, he has become a pawn in a much larger game.

        As to the assholes being protected, in all fairness, you should include a lot of people in that crowd. The genesis of this situation goes back a long ways, and there's plenty of blame to go around. US ineptness in Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan ranging from well before the 1980's was inexcusable, but we weren't the only country backing the wrong guy or setting up deals with the wrong country. In a lot of ways, the only people that could keep peace there were the Turks, and they used appalling brutality as the weapon of choice.

        Seems like it was some other country that 'liberated' the region from the Turks when the Ottoman empire fell apart (or was it pushed?). Can't blame them for doing that, for their self-preservation, for their good intentions, or their needing oil. Also can't blame anyone for saying 'no' if they didn't want to go there and fight those battles. Just damned glad to have good people along as reliable people are hard to find. I just wish that my country could treat them better. *That* embarrasses me.

    2. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

      One little problem..

      .. you've got one guy whom you *know* to be an idiot. Popping this one could create the risk of a smarter one taking his place, and you can only pop so many people before it becomes somewhat embarrassing to local authorities.

      Besides, about the last thing anyone would like to see happening is Assange becoming some sort of martyr. I suspect the reason he hasn't met with an accident yet is that he probably isn't quite as "public" as alleged, and there is more information held back for release after "accidents". I can see that as about the only reason he is still polluting the press. You already know Assange's definition of "public" is "everyone who pays me to get first publishing rights", so the idea of him being selective isn't as alien as it may appear at first glance.

      I agree with some other commentards, it was probably a smear campaign but until they properly entrap him to be found teaming up with Roman Catholic priests helping themselves to small choir boys I don't think much is going to stick (pardon the unintentional pun)..

    3. Roger Varley

      @Perlcat

      "So far as his demise being justifiable -- the several hundred people who will die as a direct result of his naive belief that this information belongs out in the public weigh pretty heavily in the balance against him."

      Cite!

      This has come up in other discussions regarding the leaks. Everyone is going around claiming people will/have died as a result of the identities contained in the leaked data. The number varies (several hundred being one of the larger figures I've heard), but, given that the data is publicly available, I have yet to see anyone actually produce any evidence to backup the claims - you know, hard facts rather than waffle & spin.

      So, I'm sorry, unless you can back up your claim, I'm calling BS on this one.

      1. perlcat
        Black Helicopters

        not everything is as neat as you'd like.

        I love all this insistence on evidence masquerading as thoughtful discourse, implying everything else is by definition 'waffle and spin'.. You force a dichotomy on an argument that isn't there.

        Sorry -- I do not know the names of the people as released. Further, if I did, I would not be irresponsible and do so to satisfy a juvenile urge to prove myself and impress someone that either a) knows that doing so endangers people and so an ethical person would not, or b) wouldn't care even if I were to prove them. What next after their names to satisfy you? addresses, next of kin? What if you decided that their getting murdered on satellite TV while the murderer screamed that this is what happens to informers wasn't enough 'evidence', since he wasn't convicted in a court of law in a country recognized by you? Am I supposed to supply more names? You're asking me to compound the moron Assange's murder by foolhardiness with murder by incitement. Do your local police know about your pushing me to commit murder by incitement?

        Surely you are aware that information has value. In a desert, if you know where to find water, you live. In al-qaeda, if you know where an informant is, make him dead, then nobody else wants to inform on you, you live (long enough to whack a few more unbelievers or people that just happen to be in the way).

        What a reasonable person would know, and in this any prosecuting attorney would refer to the standard of reasonableness and prudence -- is that sensitive information, especially informant information, can be used if known to identify the informant via triangulation. It is the same knowledge that tells you that if you lay down in the middle of a busy street at rush hour, you may get ran over and you may die, so don't do it.

        The particular people in this case have motive to kill, have done so in the past, and make it perfectly clear that that's their intention if they find said informants. These are not nice people. Therefore, if the information is released, the reasonable and prudent test pretty much says that people will die because of it.

        You want numbers? Good luck with that. I estimate at several hundred judging by the volume of information, and the fact that life is apparently cheap in that neck of the woods -- al-qaeda et al has not had a problem with collateral damage in the past, and blowing away an entire family just enhances their desired deterrent value. The number could be higher, could be lower. If it was "just" 199 and I could prove it, admit it -- you'd still say I was spreading "waffle and spin".

        You want me to hold your hand and tell you what you want to hear? Not coming from me.

        I know that I will not convince you or anybody else that truly wants to believe the fairy tale that information just wants to run free. But if anybody else sees this and sees any logic in it, I've done my part.

        I got a cool idea. Since you're so damned smart about what happens with actionable intelligence in a war zone, go to Iraq. I'll pass a rumor to wikileaks that you gave information to the US about al-qaida. Wait a week, see what happens. I call cowardice on you if you don't. It's only a week, it'd be a blast of a holiday!

  27. duncan campbell
    Grenade

    Welcome to the Cannibal Society, Julian

    He should expect his taxes to be audited as well as never getting laid again.

    The newspapers will talk to him about details of his private life and he will

    hear voices telling him all sorts of weird shit. And when the ground pork

    tastes like monkey seasoned with ambergris, he'll need to practice a

    shit-eater's grin and tell 'em "it's all just meat".

    Fubar

    1. perlcat
      Paris Hilton

      well, I don't know so much about the never getting laid part

      there are plenty of self-destructive types out there of either persuasion. Just last month some shrink got herself killed by choosing to date the man she met at the anger management clinic she was running. Evidently he had anger issues. Who knew?

      But it would be an interesting trick to feed him a little acid until he starts talking in amanfrommars-ese -- if nobody believes him anymore, then he's about as safe as he can hope to be.

  28. Keith Wingate
    Joke

    Redundant, really

    "A former Swedish prosecutor, Sven-Erik Alhem, demanded answers to why the arrest warrant was made public - the opposite of usual policy because suspects would be alerted and more likely to flee."

    Surely it would have been on Wikileaks within hours anyway....

    1. JimC Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Another keyboard bites the dust:-)

      big grin:-)

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    Reading these posts...

    ... it becomes very clear what is really going on.

    People are idiots.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Anonymous Coward
      FAIL

      Thank you Professor

      Quite a thesis you have there.

      1. duncan campbell
        FAIL

        Thesis, smesis

        It's called "work experience".

        Fubar

  30. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    RE: Self-inflicted?

    Thought this also - as long as Wikileaks remains in the current headlines, cha-ching, donations keep pouring in.

    Ofcourse its also quite feasable that some intelligence service that has been monitoring Assange and his associates, arranged for these two women to 'find out about each other' , perhaps spicing up emotions with choice audio or (oh god no, please) video clips as proof.

    Paris, because i'll watch all her spiced-up video footage any time. But hope and pray to the baby jesus that my senses are never 'molested' by Assanges spiced-up video footage...

  31. Anonymous Coward
    Megaphone

    Land of the Free*

    *note - your freedoms may be subject to limitations. freedoms are dependent on patriotism, support for the commander in chief, armed forces and allegiance to the flag. freedom must not include vocal or material support for "the enemy". freedom means you will do exactly as we say. non-cooperation will result in our taking your freedoms by force. all your freedoms belong to us. you are either with us or against us. why do you hate our freedom?

  32. Marco Mieshio
    Alert

    What Next?

    This is not conspiracy surrounding Assange's arrest attempt, this is fact and the question begs as to who is going to stand with him during the many attempts to undermine him in the future. Most people will not stand with him unless it affects them personally as we are all fickle like that. However given the financial crisis that has been thrust upon us by the elites I think the army will be 300 million strong. Notice the number here for those who know!

  33. NightFox

    On the Other Hand...

    Right now, Assange can do just about anything he wants... even if he was shown on live TV snorting coke with Osama bin Laden surrounded by Thai ladyboys whilst desecrating the grave of Mother Teresa of Calcutta it would be put down to the CIA.

  34. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019