To Believe Julian Assange, You Must Believe Israel Shamir, Vicious Anti-Semite and Liar.

[msanthrope]

There are many threads on Julian Assange, and the charges listed in the European Arrest Warrant issued by Sweden. A copy of the charges is given below. At the core of all of these threads, though, is the inescapable conclusion that you either believe the women who have alleged the acts outlined below, or you believe Wikileaks, and their employee's explanation of the supposed CIA plot against Assange.

Who is this employee who was chosen by Assange to present his honeypot defense? Israel Shamir. And who is Israel Shamir? He is the Wikileaks news aggregator for Russia. He used that position to cement his close ties with Putin, by claiming that Pussy Riot was a Western Plot. And he set up a state-sponsored Wikileaks site for the repressive Lukashenko Presidency in Belarus, outing opposition organizations. Al Jazeera details how dissident information was given, and lives threatened.

When he called himself Jeran Jormas he claimed that all the Jews in the WTC got texts on 9/11 telling them to stay home. He's got six different identities and a son who works for Wikileaks Sweden who is just as batshit crazy as he is. Oh---did I mention his views on the Holocaust are so insane that Norman Finkelstein didn't want to be associated with him? Neither do prominent Palestinians.

So the man who called Sweden "the Saudi Arabia of feminism" hired the guy who thought the 2006 Tehran Conference on the Holocaust was so peachy he had to become a speaker. He shared a stage with Horst Mahler.

And you know what tells me? There's a reason Nick Davies cut off Assange as a source and proved, conclusively, that Assange and Shamir lied about the nature of the allegations. And Davies didn't stop there---he eviscerated the lies of Assange and Shamir: "Julian Assange was forced to admit, in interviews with the London Times and with the BBC, that there is no evidence of a honeytrap. That matters very much. The news media don't want to report that -- there's a much better story in the dirty tricks. Some of the most active tweeters and the bloggers have not picked up on it -- they are much too happy with their conspiracy theories. The celebrity disciples like Bianca Jagger don't mention it. They simply move on to insist that there must be another conspiracy at work in the legal process. But the honeytrap story is dead: our story killed it. Whether or not Assange is guilty of a crime is a separate matter: the facts are not yet finally established, the law is not yet finally interpreted. At some point in this coming year, a court will decide that."

So who you gonna believe? The anti-Semite Holocaust denier? The guy he works for who fled prosecution? Or will you believe the women who swore out complaints, and have waited patiently for justice.

I know whose side I'm on. Because even "liberal" men can be sex offenders.

The charges from the EAW....

1.
On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.
2.
On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.
3.
On 18th August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.
4.
On 17th August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state.
It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

[mcar]

1. An excellent, and sad, account misanthrope

Thank you.

[msanthrope]

7. You are welcome. It really is a very simple issue--either you believe that there's a worldwide

conspiracy to convict Julian Assange of acts he did not commit, as he has claimed, or you believe that the acts alleged in the warrant happened.

[eggplant]

104. Isn't it possible to believe both? n/t

[msanthrope]

106. I don't think so. nt

[azureblue]

122. or

we can believe, and I think your posts here prove it, that you are here to smear him to draw attention away from what he exposed. "Attack the messenger, when you have something to hide" How quaint and amusingly pathetic.... But let's give you a little test: Why does the Swedish prosecutor insist that Assange come to Sweden for "questioning", when the charges are misdemeanors, not felonies? Even though CCTV interviews for misdemeanors has been accepted for years in Europe, why does the Swedish Prosecutor refuse to do that - even one conducted from the embassy itself? You are purposely omitting the fact that the charge of "rape" as defined by Swedish law in the charges brought against him, is not the same thing as rape as defined in the US. Further, why did the Swedish Prosecutor take the original prosecutor off the case when the first prosecutor could not find enough evidence to substantiate charges? And that was based upon, in both cases, of the women involved going as far as cooking breakfast for him the next morning and letting him stay, and not reporting a thing for at least 30 days? Now if you had included that fact in your smear, that would have blown your whole case out of the water. But that's what smear merchants do - tell just enough truth to make their case and hope no one catches them half lying.

Face it, folks, here we have a smear merchant who flings buzz words and innuendo, in hopes we have forgotten they flimsiness of the original charges against Assange, and the odd behavior of the Swedish prosecutor. All this proves is that Assange has hit a nerve with his released information.

[msanthrope]

128. Rape is not a felony in Sweden? Can you cite that? nt

[Cha]

157. Nah, msanthrope is reporting on what is happening with Julian Assange right now.. if you choose to

let it distract you that's your problem.

Many people can multitask.. keep two thoughts in their head at the same time.

Msanthope is not the "smear merchant" here.

[pnwmom]

179. Rape is a felony in Sweden, and that's what the women accused him or raping them. Forcible sex

with an unconscious person is rape.

[pnwmom]

178. Thank you for all your work putting this together. Those women deserve their day in court. n/t

[msanthrope]

198. I think the term "concierge justice" was used to describe the treatment some here

seem to expect Assange to receive. Not a word for the victims, though.....although if you look down thread you'll see some posts about the victims that I find nauseating.

[Luminous Animal]

100. So sad, too. That people slurp up 1960s era propaganda. Thank Hank I had parents that taught me to

reject the propagandists because, otherwise, I would have believed that civil rights activists were communists and deviant fornicators.

[avaistheone1]

250. True>>> Exclusive New Docs Throw Doubt on Julian Assange Rape Charges in Stockholm

This is an excellent read. Highly recommended.

http://observer.com/2016/02/exclusive-new-docs-throw-doubt-on-julian-assange-rape-charges-in-stockholm/

[Spazito]

2. Wow, very thorough post...

A lot to digest, thanks for posting this.

[GoneFishin]

3. What a desperate jumbled stinking pile of non sequiturs, drivel logic, and false dichotomies.

[msanthrope]

5. I felt that way reading Israel Shamir's honeypot defense.....

He claimed that the four charges Assange faces are thusly---

In other words, the farcical rape charges have once again been leveled against the Pentagon’s Public Enemy Number One. Julian Assange now stands accused of: (1) not calling a young woman the day after he had enjoyed a night with her, (2) asking her to pay for his bus ticket, (3) having unsafe sex, and (4) participating in two brief affairs in the course of one week. These four minor charges, worthy of Leopold Bloom’s mock trial in the Nightown chapter in Ulysses, have been shaken and fermented until they were able to cook up a half-baked rape case! Step down Iran; Sweden takes the cake! While Iran is notorious for unyielding conservative sentences against adulterers, Sweden shows us what the liberal side of the coin looks like as she invents criminal charges for failing to telephone and for careless use of preservatives in consensual acts of affection. Worse, they are purposely conflating consensual sex with rape for political purposes. In this, Sweden makes a mockery of the very real crime of violent rape.

Does this description comport with the actual acts described?

[Matterate]

4. He is a disgusting individual who has pulled the wool over the eyes of a lot of

supposedly intelligent folks.

I guess if you "fight the power," you can get away with anything, including rape, by claiming it was all a setup for stepping on the toes of the rich & powerful.

And your fan club will believe it with their big hearts and tiny brains.

[msanthrope]

6. Don't read any Polanski rape apologia threads on here. They are vomit inducing. nt

[freshwest]

33. +1

[zappaman]

8. Israel Shamir is a piece of shit.

But we have DUers who think linking to him is fine, so

[msanthrope]

9. I'm of the opinion that repeated linkage to certain types of sources indicates that you share those

sentiments. Not that the occasional mistake cannot be forgiven--especially when it is rectified. But it's a disturbing pattern with some posters.

[tammywammy]

10. As the TOS says...

In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism

It's not surprising that anti-Semites show up in links to support conspiracy theories. What I don't understand is the continued linking to them after it's been pointed out. I can only assume the repugnant views are shared by the poster.

[zappaman]

76. At this point, I would have to agree.

[geek tragedy]

116. When Holocaust denial sites have been linked to

at DU, 95% of the time it's conspiracy loons doing it.

And yes, there are hundreds of examples of that happening in the past before Skinner cracked down hard on that crowd.

[zappaman]

121. It still goes on.

Posters are more subtle now.
Not going to hate sites, but linking to articles by anti-Semites.

[geek tragedy]

125. Yeah. It used to be so bad though.

Willis Carto, David Irving, etc.

[zappaman]

126. We had a member who was banned for supporting Ron Paul.

He was a big conspiracy theorist and once he got banned, he started posting holocaust denial to his website.
I think if there are any anti-Semites on DU, they are too smart to be overt about it.

[geek tragedy]

135. Another one just got zapped.

Talking about how Putin is thwarting the Rothschilds.

[zappaman]

137. Israel Shamir also accused the CIA of putting the women up to it....

Without a shred of evidence.
Which is where some of our more gullible DUers may have gotten the idea.
He's a piece of shit.

[SidDithers]

212. Last week, the poster decided Christopher Bollyn was a credible source...

I think, by now, that it's become a pretty clearly demonstrable pattern by that poster.

And I've come to agree with your conclusion - that the repugnant views are shared by that poster.

Sid

[Octafish]

11. Wrong. All the strawmen in the world don't diminish what Assange revealed.

The documents WikiLeaks has released show the US Government extends its services to warmongers and banksters.

How often have we been told in world-weary tones that Wikileaks has revealed nothing new - especially by those who want to appear to be in the know? Here is an aide-mémoire of a few of the highest profile revelations.

by Ryan Gallagher
17 February 2011
OpenDemocracy.net

Since 2006, whistleblower website WikiLeaks ? has published a mass of information we would otherwise not have known. The leaks have exposed dubious procedures at Guantanamo Bay ? and detailed meticulously the Iraq War's unprecedented civilian death-toll ? . They have highlighted the dumping of toxic waste in Africa ? as well as revealed America's clandestine military actions in Yemen and Pakistan ? .

The sheer scope and significance of the revelations is shocking. Among them are great abuses of power, corruption, lies and war crimes. Yet there are still some who insist WikiLeaks has "told us nothing new". This collection, sourced from a range of publications across the web, illustrates nothing could be further from the truth. Here, if there is still a grain of doubt in your mind, is just some of what WikiLeaks has told us:

SNIP...

•The Obama administration worked with Republicans to protect Bush administration officials facing a criminal investigation into torture (see Mother Jones ? )

SNIP...

•More than 66,000 civilians suffered “violent deaths” in Iraq between 2004 and the end of 2009 (see the Telegraph ? )

CONTINUED with LINKS...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ryan-gallagher/what-has-wikileaks-ever-taught-us-read-on

That has nothing to do with Israel Shamir.

[hack89]

14. He can be both a free speech hero and a rapist

Both life and people are complex.

[Octafish]

40. That's why I don't bother to attack the messenger, but try to understand the message.

Makes my life interesting. It also allows me to make informed decisions, important for a citizen in a democracy. Best of all, understanding and sharing the truth keeps intact my integrity.

Regarding WikiLeaks:

5 WikiLeaks Revelations Exposing the Rapidly Growing Corporatism Dominating American Diplomacy Abroad

One of WikiLeaks' greatest achievements has been to expose the exorbitant amount of influence that multinational corporations have over Washington's diplomacy.

By Rania Khalek / AlterNet June 21, 2011

One of the most significant scourges paralyzing our democracy is the merger of corporate power with elected and appointed government officials at the highest levels of office. Influence has a steep price-tag in American politics where politicians are bought and paid for with ever increasing campaign contributions from big business, essentially drowning out any and all voices advocating on behalf of the public interest.

Millions of dollars in campaign funding flooding Washington's halls of power combined with tens of thousands of high-paid corporate lobbyists and a never-ending revolving door that allows corporate executives to shuffle between the public and private sectors has blurred the line between government agencies and private corporations.

This corporate dominance over government affairs helps to explain why we are plagued by a health-care system that lines the pockets of industry executives to the detriment of the sick; a war industry that causes insurmountable death and destruction to enrich weapons-makers and defense contractors; and a financial sector that violates the working class and poor to dole out billions of dollars in bonuses to Wall Street CEO's.

The implications of this rapidly growing corporatism reach far beyond our borders and into the realm of American diplomacy, as in one case where efforts by US diplomats forced the minimum wage for beleaguered Haitian workers to remain below sweatshop levels.

In this context of corporate government corruption, one of WikiLeaks' greatest achievements has been to expose the exorbitant amount of influence that multinational corporations have over Washington's diplomacy. Many of the WikiLeaks US embassy cables reveal the naked intervention by our ambassadorial staff in the business of foreign countries on behalf of US corporations. From mining companies in Peru to pharmaceutical companies in Ecuador, one WikiLeaks embassy cable after the next illuminates a pattern of US diplomats shilling for corporate interests abroad in the most underhanded and sleazy ways imaginable.


While the merger of corporate and government power isn't exactly breaking news, it is one of the most critical yet under-reported issues of our time. And WikiLeaks has given us an inside look at the inner-workings of this corporate-government collusion, often operating at the highest levels of power. It is crystal clear that it's standard operating procedure for US government officials to moonlight as corporate stooges. Thanks to WikiLeaks, here are five instances that display the lengths to which Washington is willing to go to protect and promote US corporations around the world.

1. US officials work as salespeople for Boeing. The merger of state and corporate power is striking in a slew of cables detailing US State Department officials acting as marketing agents on behalf of one lucky corporation. Earlier this year the New York Times revealed details about how US diplomats have actively promoted the sale of commercial jets built by the US company Boeing.

CONTINUED...

http://www.alternet.org/story/151370/5_wikileaks_revelations_exposing_the_rapidly_growing_corporatism_dominating_american_diplomacy_abroad

It's a good read, helpful for those interested in seeing what's in WikiLeaks without having to actually get on Uncle Sam's shit list of unpatriotic, no-good, busybodies now classified as enemies of the state, Liberals, in a word.

[hack89]

48. I have no problems with Wikileaks. Assange is not Wikileaks. Nt

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

68. No he can't. Welcome to All-Good, All-Nader DUlandia

[tblue]

197. Let me quote another DUer:

20score:

"I don’t give a damn if Jesus, MLK and Gandhi are cloned and made President, Vice President and Secretary of State, respectively.

If they are overseeing massive, illegal spying programs and Charlie Manson is somehow able to blow the whistle on those programs, I will still be against the spying."

(I'd add: And I'd still appreciate the leak.)

[hack89]

200. So celebrate him for the leaks and punish him for the rape

it is not complicated.

[msanthrope]

16. Being a proven liar does diminish the probability you should be believed. Being an anti-Semite does,

too. When you are both, your credibility is pretty much shot.

So when you claim that your employer isn't a rapist, because the CIA arranged a honeypot trap, you not only should not be believed, you should be shunned.

And certainly not cited, right Octa?

[Octafish]

44. What does that have to do with what WikiLeaks revealed?

In addition to exposing war crimes, WikiLeaks demonstrated US Government officials use their office to advance the interests of warmongers and banksters. That's the important thing.

What's not as important: Drawing all manner of hate on Assange through accusations which may or may not be true. How can you of all people, an attorney practicing law somewhere in the United States, make him out a rapist when he hasn't even had his day in court? That's not a liberal position.

[msanthrope]

55. I didn't discuss that in the OP Octa. I discussed the charges against him. And I'm not in a court

of law Octa----so I get to opine on Assange's guilt, freely.

And you know why he hasn't had his day in court? Because he's a coward, and he fled.

[Octafish]

130. That's why I posted it: WikiLeaks documented goverment criminality.

What matters more for US democracy is to see those who lied America into wars for profit face justice.

[msanthrope]

134. Who are you to decide that the women who accuse Assange should not see justice? nt

[zappaman]

139. Apparently, since other people have gotten away with different crimes...

Assange should not be questioned about his.
Makes sense, right?

[msanthrope]

145. Absolutely.....I've had clients who point that out. Of course, as a criminal defense

attorney, my clients have a vested interest in other justice being done first.

[Octafish]

141. Who are you to put words in my mouth?

Shows me the facts aren't on your side, so you change the subject.

[zappaman]

142. So, you agree those women should see justice?

[msanthrope]

146. You made a judgment about what "matters more." Who are you to judge that? nt

[Scootaloo]

153. "Matters more for US democracy." It's like A Tribe Called Qwest, you say the whole thing

[Scootaloo]

152. Might want to differentiate then

Between Assange's claims of "honeypot" entrapment, and Assange - by extension Wikileaks - writ whole.

I've read other posts from you on the subject and I'm sorry I don't think the conflation was accidental on your part.

[Spider Jerusalem]

18. You know who else was a rapist? JFK. (Look up Mimi Alford.)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. The affair was consensual and lasted eighteen months

"if I was 19...I would do it again—it's hard to say I wouldn't..."


Mimi Alford

[Octafish]

29. That would change my opinion, were it true.

One thing I do know, foreign policy sure changed after the assassination of President Kennedy back to what it was under the Dulles Brothers from 1953-1960. It's been "money trumps peace" pretty much ever since, with an intervening Democratic administration here and there. I wrote about it on DU:

As a Democrat, a DUer and as a citizen of the United States, I was proud to attend the Passing the Torch: An International Symposium on the 50th Anniversary of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy at Duquesne University. One of the many important things discussed there was what author, historian and teacher, James DiEugenio reported on the important change in foreign policy JFK represented from his predecessor and his successors, immediate and otherwise.



DiEugenio said President John F. Kennedy did not undergo a change of heart from Cold War hawk to liberal dove Democrat only after the hair-raising nuclear crises he experienced in office. "John F. Kennedy was never a Cold Warrior," DiEugenio said. Throughout his 16-year career in the House and Senate, President Kennedy sided with the People, Justice and Democracy -- across the United States and around the world. This is a world view radically different from Eisenhower, and his foreign policy makers, principally the Dulles Brothers and their allies, including young Dick Nixon.

The JFK Administration may have represented a break in the action, H20 Man's Father explained to him and I agree. It was a special interlude, indeed. In only 1,037 days, we launched the nation toward the moon, creating a new type of economy; maintained the peace when several times the heads of the military and the secret organs of the national security state counseled all-out war; and started the nation on a path where all men are equal under the law, no matter race, color, or creed, and justice extended to economics and health, as under FDR and the New Deal.

DiEugenio’s research shows President Kennedy was working to defend the interests of democracy over those of colonialism, not only in Europe, as evinced in divided Berlin, but in Africa, Asia, South America and around the world. During less than three years in office, Kennedy turned official U.S. support from that of Eisenhower and the Dulles Brothers for supporting US commercial and colonial interests over democracy, such as in Guatemala and Iran, to respect for the nations and their democratically elected leaders, like Lumumba and Sukarno. In matters of war and peace, JFK always sided with peace, making overtures to North Vietnam. The Dulles Brothers and Nixon sided with France and the colonial powers, even drawing up plans to nuke the North Vietnamese Army at Dien Bien Phu, Operation VULTURE.

The record shows JFK's Foreign Policy of democracy over colonialism was immediately reversed by Lyndon B. Johnson, who reversed course in Vietnam and supported the pro-colonialist forces in Congo, Vietnam, Brazil, Dominican Republic and elsewhere around the world. Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and most who followed continued the Business-As-Usual, advancing the interests of Big Money, Big Oil and Big Wars for Profit.

One of the things I am most proud of is how Democratic Underground covered many of these salient points on its boards, from DU1 through the present day. At the Duquesne conference, I was listening and nodding, knowing that many times we had discussed this on DU. In looking back to one particularly important post through GOOGLE, I found we sourced this information back to DiEugenio. That's what the Internet can do: Spread Truth.

Why it matters.

Democracy depends on Truth. The Republic depends on Justice. That is, the reality that ours is a nation under law.

Once a criminal is, or criminals are, allowed to go free, Justice has been denied. We find ourselves operating under a falsehood, we are living a Big Lie.

We as a Nation have been on the criminal path since November 22, 1963.

DUers know you don’t need to read a history book or watch a tee vee special to know: It shows. Since 1964 and the Gulf of Tonkin, it’s been a series of wars without end for profit. And in the process, the rich became super-rich -- the richest and most powerful people in history.

Thanks for reading. Keep spreading the Truth, DU! The next 50 years can be different from "Money trumps peace." The coming age can be decades of peace and prosperity for ALL: They can be Democratic. That includes using what WikiLeaks revealed to prosecute the warmongers and banksters.

[840high]

88. Thank you.

[pnwmom]

180. And the documents he revealed don't excuse sexual assault.

Last edited Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:53 AM - Edit history (1)

He shouldn't get a free pass on rape simply because some people are happy about the documents he published on the internet.

[zappaman]

187. Apparently, that's the way it works.

If you have ever said anything bad about the US, Bush and Cheney in particular, you should be allowed to rape with impunity.

[whathehell]

252. Girls and women don't really matter, anyway..

[hifiguy]

232. Bravo.

The relentless campaign by some on DU against Assange, and by extension Wikileaks, has always smelled like a ratfuck to me.

[hack89]

12. But Assange is so dreamy! How could he possibly lie? Nt

[hobbit709]

13. with this crap you have him tried, convicted, sentenced and evidently want him drawn and quartered

Last edited Thu Mar 19, 2015, 09:50 PM - Edit history (1)

[LittleBlue]

15. OP is a word salad of logical fallacies

Title is itself a textbook association fallacy.

[msanthrope]

17. Well, either you believe Assange's honeypot defense, or you don't. Do you, or don't you? nt

[LittleBlue]

19. I formed my opinions independent of anyone's claims in this case

I've never heard of Israel Shamir before

[msanthrope]

22. Even Assange's own defense? Wikileaks put forth this defense....and it's proven false. That

doesn't influence your views on credibility?

[LittleBlue]

34. I found the claims difficult to believe due to the timing of the allegations

before anyone issued a statement on the matter. The Swedish prosecutor's actions have made no sense whatsoever, assuming she has a strong case against Assange.

These issues have made me doubt the credibility of the claims. But I'm willing to reevaluate my opinions if we ever get to see the evidence. However, I've never heard of Israel Shamir before, and I've never been particularly interested in anyone's unsubstantiated claims, including Assange's.

[msanthrope]

38. I wouldn't assume she has a strong case against Assange. In fact, I would say he stands an

excellent chance on skating on a he said/she said equivocation. I think if the CIA were involved, it would be a slam dunk.

[LittleBlue]

56. Probably. My confusion comes from the fact that the prosecutor says she could have

interviewed him at any time. We knew after Assange's first year in the embassy that he wasn't coming out. So why wait until now? This concession could have been made years ago. Which would have potentially saved the British gov £15m.

When I see a bizarre coincidence, such as a man like Assange, who has (to my knowledge) never been accused of a violent crime before, suddenly be accused of being a serial rapist after embarrassing several governments, it makes me question what is the truth.

Rather than say "I definitely believe Assange", I'd rather just see the case. Her reluctance to pursue the case makes me believe it's extremely weak. Something does not add up.

[LittleBlue]

140. This brought up an additional question that I thought you could answer for me

As an attorney yourself.

If he stands an excellent chance at walking, why would he wait out 4 years in an embassy to avoid a trial? If the case is weak, and he's lying about the possibility of extradition, then how do you explain him being so apparently fearful of extradition?

It seems like another inconsistency

[msanthrope]

143. I think Assange is basically a coward. I've had guilty clients fuck up completely minor sentencing

and plea deals, because they wanted to avoid prison at all costs. I think he's very fearful of going to prison as a rapist in Sweden, and I think he's narcissistic enough to have thought this actually would have blown over.

And I don't think he's fearful of extradition---I think he is a very canny manipulator who realizes that the gravy train of donations and book deals keeps running if the US is a convenient boogeyman.

[Fred Sanders]

31. Indeed. Sentence first, trial later. And the ad hominem argument to discredit Assange's proven revelations is classic.

[geek tragedy]

20. Israel Shamir is a Neo-Nazi piece of shit, and Assange's choice to associate with Neo-Nazi trash

tells you everything you need to know about him.

I haven't seen people citing Shamir as a source recently. But, of course, the anti-semitic shitrag counterpunch still does.

[zappaman]

79. Oh, some do and don't care when called on it.

A simple search will show you.

[Luminous Animal]

93. Really a Neo-Nazi who wrote for Haaretz? Oooooh kay. And ya know, I do not agree with

Shamir but he never worked for Wikileaks, never paid by Wikileaks and he was never a Wikileaks activist. That "famous" picture of Assange posing with him was a result of Shamir interviewing Assange.

[wildbilln864]

102. please don't interject facts into the discussion.

[geek tragedy]

113. Are you denying that Shamir is a vile bigot? nt

[wildbilln864]

115. nope! n/t

[geek tragedy]

118. Great! Peace nt

[geek tragedy]

105. Shamir claims he wrote for Haaretz.

Given his status as a chronic liar and Holocaust denier, maybe not a credible claim.

He is as much of a repulsive Jew-hating bigot as many sentenced at Nuremberg. A quick google check will verify this.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Israel_Shamir

According to Shamir, the Jews are to blame for pretty much everything. He claims that the reason the mainstream press often takes sides with Israel is because the "rich Jews buy media so it will cover up their (and their brethren's) misdeeds. The Jews in the media are giving protection to the rich Jews. ... In the US, even in Western Europe, no view can be proposed to the general public unless approved (after being vetted and corrected) by a Jewish group."[4] He believes that there exists a vast Jewish conspiracy pushing for global hegemony, writing that, "Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is. Palestine is just the place for world state headquarters; necessary, for otherwise the people of Europe wouldn't be magnetised like a rabbit in the headlights of a car."[5] A Russian-language book by Shamir, published in 2010, hawked The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.
Shamir has written in defense of the Holocaust-denying pseudo-historian David Irving, saying that he was persecuted for his "denial of Jewish superiority", adding that, "Not only is Western Christian civilisation dead, but even its successor, secular European civilisation, has met its demise only a few days after its proud and last celebration by the Danish scribes. It was short-lived: about two hundred years from beginning to the end, the Europeans may once have had the illusion that they can live without an ideological supremacy. Now this illusion is over; and the Jews came in the stead of the old and tired See of St Peter to rule over the minds and souls of Europeans."[6]
Shamir was also booked as a speaker at the International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust, the infamous Tehran gathering of anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers convened by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government in 2006. He shared the stage with Horst Mahler, a Neo-Nazi lawyer from Germany.[7] Shamir later spoke glowingly of the conference, saying that, "Nobody – and I do mean nobody, including British, French, American, German, Russian leaders – really cares about the victims of a war long past, Jewish or otherwise; they pay tribute to the Holocaust as nations pay tribute to their vanquisher." He also wrote that the official narrative of the Holocaust serves as "a justification of [rich and powerful] minority rights over [oppressed] majority needs."[8] In a 2011 interview the Jewish Tablet magazine, Shamir repeatedly refused to acknowledge the atrocities committed at Auschwitz.[9] Elsewhere, he has described Auschwitz as "an internment facility, attended by the Red Cross."

Regular contributor to Counterpunch. Which says all that needs to be said about Counterpunch.

[msanthrope]

131. Can you cite anything he actually wrote for Haaretz? Rationalwiki cannot substantiate many of his

claims.....

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Israel_Shamir#cite_note-novakeo-0

[Zorra]

23. Who sends ya'll this stuff to post on DU? Or do ya'll make it up yourselves?

It's really fucking embarrassing.

You're being kind of successful though; traditional Democrats are spending less and less time at DU because of this type of right wing nonsense.

Congratulations to all of you.

[msanthrope]

26. Counterpunch is left-wing, Zorra....and had no problem publishing the honeypot defense.

I don't know how I "made up" the Guardian articles.

[Zorra]

57. Collage (noun) a combination or collection of various things.

What drives this desperate need among the DU right to continually attack Julian?

There's lots of alleged rapists out there running around.

Of course, they didn't expose and embarrass the MIC repeatedly, like Julian did, so there is that, of course.

[msanthrope]

71. Well...how many are bail-jumping fugitives living in an Embassy and having press conferences?

He lives in the spotlight and you wonder why people focus on him????

[Cha]

147. "The DU right.."? Lame attempt to smear, Z. Assange gets facts reported on him and you call it

a "smear".. well, there ya go.

[R B Garr]

161. Exactly. Apparently if you don't buy the conspiracy theories, you

are labeled as "right". Or a war monger, another version of "right."

It's really hard to buy the CT that Assange has been the victim of a gaggle of petty women on a global scale -- who are acting on behalf of Bank of America. And, yes, that is what was purported by one of the Assange lovers in a very recent thread -- Bank of America. I guess some believe it's the CIA. And they call these CT meanderings "facts".

[Cha]

162. Yes, Precisely.. they're really quick with their personal insults.. that's all they have while

sputtering to protect poor little misunderstood Julian.

[Zorra]

235. There is, very clearly, a DU right. It's not a smear, it's a stone cold fact. nt

[Cha]

242. No, it's not a fact that those who disagree with you about assange are on the right. And, it's an a

lame attempt at a "smear" .. it says more about you than anyone who disagrees with you.

[Luminous Animal]

97. Her blather reminds me of all the propaganda that I heard against civil rights activists in the 60s.

Pathetic. By Shamir's own admission, he's never worked for Wikileaks and has never been a Wikileaks activist.

[msanthrope]

114. So Shamir, the liar, is to be believed over Wikileaks own spokesman, Kristinn Hrafnsson, who

once upon a time simply didn't deny who Shamir was? You believe Shamir, but not Reason or the Guardian????

In Russia, the magazine Russian Reporter says that it has “privileged access” to the material through Shamir, who told a Moscow newspaper that he was “accredited” to work on behalf of WikiLeaks in Russia. But Shamir has a rather large credibility problem, so Swedish Radio put the question directly to WikiLeaks spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson.


Swedish Radio: Israel Shamir…Are you aware of him? Do you know him?

Kristinn Hrafnsson, Wikileaks spokesman: Yes. Yes, he is associated with us.

SR: So what is his role?

Hrafnsson: Well, I mean, we have a lot of journalists that are working with us all around the world. And they have different roles in working on this project. I won’t go into specifics into what each and everybody’s role is.

SR: Are you aware of how controversial Israel Shamir is in an international context?

Hrafnsson: There are a lot of controversial people around the world that are associated with us. I don’t really see the point of the question.

SR: Are you aware of the allegations that he is an anti-Semite?

Hrafnsson: I have heard those allegations…yes, yes. [Pause] What is the question really there?

SR: The question is, do you that that would [sic] be a problem?

Hrafnsson: No, I’m not going to comment on that.

Strip away the caginess and the obfuscation—remember, no one is allowed secrets but WikiLeaks—and Hrafnsson, who took over spokesman duties when Assange was jailed last week, confirms that WikiLeaks chose Shamir to work with their Russian media partners. After its investigation, the Swedish Radio program Medierna concluded flatly that "Israel Shamir represents WikiLeaks in Russia."
http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/14/the-assange-employees/

The Guardian got it wrong, too?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-israel-shamir-russia-scandinavia

[Cha]

155. She accuses you of "blather".. while "blathering".. lol they all have their thumbs in their

ears while protecting Julian assange who is accused of rape and sexual molestation. They don't care what he did.

[msanthrope]

165. Oh, LA and I go way back---she always gives me a chuckle.....

One time, LA accused me of plagarizing myself, and threatened to tell the Internets about it.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3051961

So when I explained to her how the Internet worked, and finished laughing,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3053576

I think I incurred her permanent wrath......

[Cha]

177. Just Wow! So ready to "gotcha!" when it was she who got busted. smh

She's also the one who was excoriating those who used GG to refer to Glenn Greenwald, as "homophobic", when she had done the very same thing.

Why, wasn't that you who actually broke the case wide open!?

[msanthrope]

203. The intrepid MADem......and that thread was one for the ages.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024992409

[Cha]

208. Yes it was.. oh, that's right.. many months ago! mahalo

So disingenuous to accuse others of homophobia just 'cause we were using his initials especially when she had done the very same thing. But, even if she hadn't used them it was still disingenuous.

MADem

[freshwest]

190. That was a sad exchange there. No connection was made.

Last edited Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:57 AM - Edit history (1)

[Zorra]

238. Reason.com? Seriously? "reason.com - free minds, and free markets"

[ND-Dem]

173. +1,000,000

[msanthrope]

205. I miss HiPointDem on threads like this, don't you? I remember the time HiPointDem

ably defended Assange by claiming that the Guardian was conspiring with the Gates Foundation to discredit him.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1190871

[SidDithers]

217. And then HiPointDem was banned as an homophobe...

Homophobes don't belong at DU.

Sid

[zappaman]

226. but...

[Zorra]

240. HiPointDem....from the "DU Volunteer Pest Control" archives

Note: The first troll named in one subject lines of this email exchange is still here, so I had to delete their name and put "Trolls Name Here" to post this DU Mail Exchange

Mar 2013

(Members Name hidden)

Please read my exchange with HIpoint in that thread

Mail Message

What an asshole, trying to bait me into losing my cool. Fuck her and I will not ignore her because I want to see what the hell she is up to.

Reply to this DU Mail

Mar 2013

(Members Name Hidden)

Re: Re: ---Trolls name here------- and HiPointDem Are Both Trolls/Moles

Mail Message

Glad to know I am not alone! They need to be shown the door.


> Thanks, (Members Name Hidden), more than a few of us suspect this.
>
>
> Z
>
> > Both have been banned before and have come back to stir up shit. HiPoint hasn't been here a year and has over 13000+ posts. Who the fuck does that?

Reply to this DU Mail

[msanthrope]

241. Yeah......it's pretty obvious. I try to helpfully point when I can. nt

[snooper2]

236. -70 *(980*5609.8 - 6) +208 / 490,000

[ND-Dem]

244. +2 x 1,000,000

[pnwmom]

183. Since when is it right-wing to support women being taken seriously when they make claims of rape

and sexual assault?

[Vattel]

24. This is so obviously a false dichotomy that I will use it when I teach critical thinking.

"either believe the women who have alleged the acts outlined below, or you believe Wikileaks, and their employee's explanation of the supposed CIA plot against Assange."

No, a third possibility is that the charges are false though not the product of a CIA plot.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. Isn't there a fourth possibility?

That the charges may be true.

[arcane1]

36. That's the first possibility: believe the women who have alleged the acts

[morningfog]

30. Or even, that the charges may be true (or mostly true), but

the lengths that parties are going through to prosecute the case are disproportionate to the charges and how others are treated.

[msanthrope]

42. Well, when you say lengths to prosecute, let me ask you something.....

can you name another accused rapist who is hanging out in an embassy?

One could argue that the refusal of the LA district attorney to drop charges against ROman Polanski is going to great lengths. Should that be dropped?

[morningfog]

59. It's more than simply not dropping the charges.

And you would agree, I am sure, that the allegations against Assange are less serious than those against Polanski.

I have no reason to disbelieve Assange's accusers. That doesn't mean I trust the UK. Nor does it mean that I must believe that the US has had no role in applying pressure.

[msanthrope]

63. I don't like parsing between rape victims...I think the charges against

Assange are serious, too.

I respect what you say about the UK and the US. I wouldn't trust them, either, but it was Assange's choice to travel to the UK, and take advantage of the legal process there.

[msanthrope]

35. Is that what you think? The charges are false but not part of a CIA plot? Why do you not believe

the claims of Wikileaks?

[Vattel]

41. No, that's not what I think.

I don't know whether the charges are true. I doubt that there was any CIA plot.

[msanthrope]

46. What do you think of a defendant who flees the jurisdiction, and then has an employee put out such a

ridiculous public defense that maligns the victims?

What does that tell you about the credibility of the defendant?

[Vattel]

52. What do you think about the credibility of a poster

who poses a false dichotomy and then instead of admitting the mistake changes the subject?

[msanthrope]

58. I didn't present a false dichotomy, Vattel.....I presented an uncomfortable moral question

that touched on sexism and anti-Semitism. And I'm not really surprised at the answers.

[Art_from_Ark]

195. No, you presented a false dichotomy

Last edited Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:49 AM - Edit history (1)

"A is bad. A supports B. Ergo, everything that B does is bad. To believe B, you must also believe A, and by default, you must also be bad."

It is your MO-- shoot the messenger, deflect from the message, stick up for the surveillance state. The one poster called you a "tool" which was obviously in the sense of Vattel's explanation, yet you deflected, "OMG, he called me a male organ!!!" when you know goddam well that wasn't the case.

[freshwest]

28. Thank you for this evening's reading material. And a new perspective.

[Hissyspit]

89. Why?

See post #15.

[Cha]

189. Check out this piece I just found when I google Shamir and Assange.. two peas in pod..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6389629

[ismnotwasm]

32. Thank you for putting this together

I appreciate it

[Hissyspit]

91. Old stuff tossed together in guilt-by-association fallacy.

See post #15.

[99Forever]

37. Bullshit.

True to form.

Wadda tool.

[msanthrope]

39. Are you calling me a tool? A slang term for a male member? nt

[Vattel]

49. No, he is not saying that you are a tool in the sense of being a male member.

He is saying that you are a tool in the sense of being someone who, without even realizing it, is used by the powers that be to further their interests.

[msanthrope]

66. Do you speak for that poster, or are you assuming that's he meant? nt

[Art_from_Ark]

83. It is quite obvious what the first poster meant

Vattel's explanation was spot on-- "tool" didn't have anything to do with male organs

[msanthrope]

85. Do you speak for that poster? nt

[Art_from_Ark]

86. It was obvious what he meant

and you know it. You are just being obtuse, like a good lawyer.

[msanthrope]

87. I'm asking you if you speak for that poster. How do you know what is in their mind? nt

[zappaman]

123. It's not what I thought he meant, so I guess it's not so obvious.

[99Forever]

99. Yes he does.

With my permission.

[grasswire]

227. of course you are right. nt

[99Forever]

101. Yes he does.

Also with permission.

[randome]

50. Google image 'tool'. Some fascinating stuff.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[99Forever]

98. Has nothing to do with genitals.

What sort of person would think that?

[msanthrope]

103. Okay, then who do think I am be used by? The CIA? nt

[99Forever]

109. Oh please.

[Cha]

164. They have nothing.. so they resort to attacking with personal insults. Quite pathetic actually

[Bobbie Jo]

213. The evil gubmint, of course.

[msanthrope]

218. The NSA does have a good dental plan, I'll give them that. nt

[ND-Dem]

176. the perpetually outraged

[zappaman]

182. Yeah, why would anyone be outraged by rape?

Just because you don't think rape is something to be outraged about, doesn't mean others feel the same.

[ND-Dem]

184. right, that's what i said and that's certainly logical my you've outdone yourself

[zappaman]

185. No, I understood you.

Don't you think the women deserve their day in court?

[zappaman]

191. So, still wondering...

Do you think those women deserve their day in court?

[Cha]

192. Not sure they do if they adhere to julian and shamir's philosophy..

"That Shamir ever gained access outraged many at WikiLeaks. Now Assange's dictator-admiring friend has surpassed himself"

Israel Shamir and Julian Assange's cult of machismo

Leaking, we are told, is a man's business. Israel Shamir, a strong supporter of Julian Assange, has penned an extraordinary piece in defence of the WikiLeaks founder as he awaits extradition to Sweden. The decision to extradite Assange for questioning in relation to alleged sexual offences against two women is, Shamir writes, "a defeat for all the men, and a defeat for mankind".

Assange's situation is not merely the consequence of one man's sexual liaisons, but part of a wider ploy to feminise men in order to make humanity more compliant to political elites. "Strong men are prone to rebellion, ready for sacrifice and primed for action," Shamir writes.

"It is no coincidence that the enemies of Empire are all masculine males, be they Gaddafi, Castro, Chávez, Lukashenko, Putin – or Julian Assange. It appears the men have been targeted for elimination; the working ants need no sex."

Strong men fight abuses of power, it seems, while women are, presumably, expected to support them from the kitchen – or in the bedroom.

If Shamir could be dismissed as merely a crank, his article might even be funny. But his influence over WikiLeaks and beyond is difficult to overestimate, and this relationship make his views more significant – and disturbing.

MOre..
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/08/israel-shamir-julian-assange-cult-machismo

So Shamir.. thinks poor Julian is getting a raw deal.. like Gaddafi, Castro, Chávez, Lukashenko, Putin –

End quote from James Ball..

"Assange and Shamir may think their proclivity to judge people's worth by their testosterone level makes them alpha males, but others are far more likely to judge it makes them look like boys. It's time to grow up."

[Cha]

163. "Bullshit" "Wadda tool".. that needs to boomerang right backatcha.

[randome]

45. Don't smear Shamir, assauge Assange.

This is getting bookmarked.

And before too many more chime in telling us we're simply "tools of the establishment" or whatever, why not accept the simplest explanation: we simply don't believe Assange. Surely his character is multi-faceted enough (remember, he said informants deserved to be killed) that it allows for many different interpretations.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[Scuba]

47. Assange's character is not important to me. The crimes he exposed are. Any comment on the crimes?

[hack89]

51. What about the crime of rape he is accused of?

Something we should simply ignore?

[randome]

53. The Scott Ritter defense?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[OnyxCollie]

62. Can't we just look forward?

Or does that only apply to war crimes?

[hack89]

72. It should not apply to any crime. Nt

[OnyxCollie]

78. It SHOULD not apply to any crime,

but apparently "we tortured some folks" and yet no one is facing any prosecution, save for the guy whose organization put the spotlight on the those who committed war crimes and other nefarious actions.

It raises a red flag to me, but YMMV.

[Scuba]

202. That's something for Swedish authorities to pursue, if they have sufficient evidence. However ...

... Assange's alleged shortcomings are often, as is the case in this thread, used as a diversion to distract from the war crimes he exposed.

I find it very sad that DU members write posts (and replies) focused on Assange's character flaws in an obvious attempt to distract and mitigate those much more serious war crimes.

If you want to write posts attacking rapists, there are millions of candidates. Why focus on Assange if not to detract from the crimes he exposed?

[msanthrope]

206. So, do what I do...look objectively at what he releases, and then, demand

he not be shown concierge justice.

FYI....one of the reasons Shamir has tarnished Wiki leaks is because of his involvement in falsifying cables released to the Russian media. The story is available with some simple googling. That should be troubling.

[Scuba]

207. Still no comment on the war crimes exposed by Assange. Very telling.

[msanthrope]

209. Which war crime? nt

[Scuba]

215. Take you pick.

[randome]

221. You could be a little more specific.

Perhaps you refer to the 'collateral murder' video? The one where troops asked for and were given permission to fire on individuals violating a curfew in a war zone?

Invading Iraq was a tragedy of immense proportions. But those troops in that specific video are not guilty of war crimes.

Or were you referring to something else?

All of which, of course, is irrelevant to Assange's current 'problem'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[msanthrope]

223. Yes.....the edited video that took out the guy with the RPG? nt

[randome]

224. Forgot about that. Right. That one.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[hack89]

210. Two separate issues

I can condemn both the war crimes and Assange's alleged crimes.

We talk about Assange because of his actions - his arrogant notion that the good he has done places him above the law.

We talk about Assange because he is the only accused rapist whose alleged crimes are routinely minimized and his victims, in our endless discussions on rape culture, are the only rape victims whose stories and motivations are routinely vilified.

I reject your notion that justice for his victims would somehow come at the expense of justice for the victims of the war crimes he exposed.

[Scuba]

214. Nice try, but that's a fail. I made no reference to any alleged victims being short-shrifted.

I don't know of anyone who carries the "notion that the good he has done places him above the law." There are many here, however, who seem to think that his character flaws somehow excuse all the vile actions he exposed.

[hack89]

222. If you say so.

I think you are reaching - I can't recall anyone supporting war crimes. Perhaps you have some specific examples? From the sounds of it there must be many to choose from.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. We have at least four separate issues going on. I will try to disentangle them.

1) We can all agree that Mr.Shamir is a nasty piece of work. Not only is he an anti-semite, he's a homophobe to boot; referring to same sex couples as man and wife.
2) Just because Shamir is a bad guy and is defending Assange doesn't mean Assange is a bad guy or guilty of the charges he is accused of.
3) Assange may be guilty...Assange may be innocent...And the accusations can be independent of any political motivation.
4) Asange's findings are independent of his character or lack thereof.

[geek tragedy]

64. the bigger scandal is that Assange gave Shamir access to the cables

concerning Russia and Belarus, including cables about dissidents, which Shamir then turned over to the Lushenko regime.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. Counterpunch is supposedly a left wing site

Why did they let Shamir slime gay people, ergo;

Nowadays very few Swedish male-female couples marry in the church, or get married at all; most Swedish gay couples, however, are proud to become “man and wife” in the church.



http://www.counterpunch.org/2010/09/14/assange-beseiged/

[msanthrope]

107. Shamir's homophobia is unsurprising, isn't it? nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

117. Well, he is a small f fundamentalist Christian so there's that./NT

[geek tragedy]

111. Counterpunch is a vile cesspool of bigotry

It's not progressive, more Der Sturmer than The Nation.

[zappaman]

230. That's a good point.

[LittleBlue]

75. +1

And I think this is bound to happen when we're still so starved of facts after 3 years.

[leveymg]

60. The accusers and the accused are both deeply corrupt.

In keeping with the Cold War that excused anything but no one. They're back. Screw them.

[hack89]

61. How is the Swedish legal system corrupt?

America would be blessed to have a system like theirs.

[leveymg]

69. Sweden is also corrupt, but has excellent PR going back

to World War Two. There is no such thing as Non-aligned, just able to turn around on the fence to find the most comfortable position. Sweden isn't any better than the world that surrounds it.

[Hissyspit]

77. Nope.

If you've been following this case closely, you would be aware of the many corruptions.

[msanthrope]

65. I am going to assume by "accusers" you do not mean the women involved? nt

[leveymg]

70. They are being used, having given their consent to that.

[msanthrope]

73. I find that to be an incredibly offensive characterization of victims of sexual assault.

Do you know them personally, that you could call them used?

[msanthrope]

81. So what happened to them....the forcible acts described in EAW, is not "real rape?" nt

[zappaman]

82. Wow.

It's eye opening to see how casually some can dismiss rape.
Nauseating, actually.

[msanthrope]

84. It's simply stunning. It truly is. nt

[leveymg]

92. it is those with eyes wide open to the greater crimes of state which

astonish most.

[leveymg]

90. The greatest act of violence in this case didn't happen in bed.

It's the misuse of the legal system to score points for men in grey suits. Look at them if you want to see real perversity. But you want to cheapen this to a mere sex crime, a distraction from the greater moral outrage.

Thanks for the spectacle of distraction.

[msanthrope]

96. A "mere sex crime" "real rape?" I find it interesting that you don't actually address the acts

alleged in the warrant. Why not? Rape is a "mere sex crime" to you?

[NYC Liberal]

108. Unbelievable. I must say, this thread has certainly been very enlightening.

Sadly, I’m no longer shocked by some of the things that are said around here – particularly when it comes to women.

Some really disgusting comments in this thread.

[geek tragedy]

112. Todd Akinism. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

94. just barely

On Thu Mar 19, 2015, 09:35 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

They are being used, having given their consent to that.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6388991

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is an extremely offensive and sexist idea to put out there...that adult women who have sworn out complaints of rape are being "used." It's sexist, and would never be said of a man who was assaulted. It's a disgusting trope that adult women are incapable of making decisions, and are not to be believed. Please hide it, and show that sexism is not tolerated on DU.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Mar 19, 2015, 09:49 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Assange is innocent. The women's stories have changed, and they are at the very least being used to prosecute, and ultimately extradite Assange. Bullshit alert. You could have just as easily made this point in the thread, but went for a hide instead. Weak sauce.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: what the absolute fuck. Hide this POS
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Additional fact:The women bragged about having sex with Assange.

[Cha]

154. THis one got a HIDE.. thankfully..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6389047

[zappaman]

156. Great hide

[Cha]

159. Long overdue.

zappa

[Tuesday Afternoon]

158. glad someone alerted on that one. It was every bit as offensive. Thanks, Cha

[Cha]

160. You're welcome, Tuesday..

Just depends on what kind of jury you have..

[freshwest]

95. GT's post made me google. From AlJazeera:

Julian Assange, Ecuador, and the Belarus connection
A rights group is demanding WikiLeaks reply to claims it gave intelligence on dissidents to the Belarusian regime.

By Bill Weinberg - 08 Sep 2012

...In unrest following the evidently stolen elections of December 2010, strongman Lukashenko (ruling since 1994) had over 600 protesters and dissidents rounded up. Some were tortured, and the campaign to win their release brought courageous "silent protesters" repeatedly to the streets. The affair won Belarus the opprobrium of the UN Human Rights Commissioner, EU, US State Department and global rights groups, but (happily for Lukashenko) few international headlines.

Last year, the free-press advocacy group Index on Censorship cited evidence that WikiLeaks' "accredited" representative in Belarus, Israel Shamir, may have provided the Lukashenko regime with intelligence from US diplomatic cables to help determine who to round up. Lukashenko boasted in the state-controlled media of receiving WikiLeaks intelligence that revealed who was "working behind the scenes" in the December protests. Shamir was meanwhile boasting claims on CounterPunch website that WikiLeaks cables provided "proof positive" the protests were "orchestrated" by the State Department. (The "proof positive" consisted of some indications of a US AID contractor's involvement in money smuggling.)

Did Shamir turn over WikiLeaks cables to Lukashenko that "named names" of activists identified or cultivated by the State Department? Index on Censorship queried WikiLeaks on the issue, submitting a list of questions about what material WikiLeaks or Shamir may have provided the Lukasheno regime, and Shamir's official status in the WikiLeaks organisation. One WikiLeaks representative responded tersely: "We have no further reports on this 'rumour/issue'." Another told Index: "Obviously it is not approved."

Adding to the controversy, Israel Shamir is a notorious and obsessive Anti-Semite. The charge of anti-Semitism is of course often used unfairly against critics of Israel - but even Palestine solidarity activists have issued denouncements of Shamir, warning that association with him could hurt the movement. Shamir's website avidly promotes Holocaust revisionists, and runs such non-ironic headlines as "Down With Human Rights" and "In Defense of Prejudice" - this in response to protests of Shamir's references to war-mongering "Jewish media-lords". Lukashenko, perhaps not coincidentally, has also used ugly Jew-baiting rhetoric against the opposition movement... 

But with Lukashenko's boasts (and Shamir's clear enthusiasm for Lukashenko) the Belarus case may go beyond mere WikiLeaks "blowback" to active collaboration with repression. The lack of concern with this question by WikiLeaks' advocates on the left raises questions about a single-standard commitment to human rights...

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/20129410312450511.html

There is a lot of back and forth there in the article. It's worth the read. What has struck me is the value of ideology over the value of the lives of people. These are Ron and Rand Paul supporters, that is, Libertarians, and we have learned their opinion on most of us here. Including women and minorities. Even if want to forgive, for our safety, we can't forget our lives mean nothing to their version of how the world should be, which does not allow us a voice.

Another piece:

Julian Assange and Europe's Last Dictator

The former WikiLeaks chief will moderate a public discussion about Belarus, despite damaging the cause

by Kapil Komireddi - March 2012

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2012/03/belarus-assange-lukashenko

You can see two belief systems, one of which is called the Cult of Julian Assange, playing there. In the meantime, some rather inconsequential people have decided to stay out of political life for fear of the survelliance state in place there. Where some have been tortured. This is the real thing going on there.

[msanthrope]

127. Are you actually telling us that Shamir is not an anti-Semite?

Because that's what your third source is saying.......(Shamir is orthodox Christian, fyi.)

and my suggestion to you is that you read what Katha Pollitt had to say about him, and delete.....

http://www.thenation.com/article/157288/case-julian-assange#

[Hissyspit]

129. No. Did you read what I wrote?

[msanthrope]

133. Yes--you seem to be claiming that Shamir is being "smeared." How does one smear a

anti-Semite Holocaust denier?????

Please, tell us.

[Hissyspit]

136. I self-deleted it. You are obviously going to be dishonest about this.

Clearly I was referring to the smear campaign against Assange, and was using the letter to the editor as an example of how one can link to opinion pieces on the Internet to create a fallacious picture in an OP.

[msanthrope]

144. How does one smear Assange on this point? Israel Shamir--and his son, work for Wikileaks.

That's beyond dispute....heck---I even link to Wikileaks own spokesperson.

Israel Shamir's political views are well known.

That Assange chose to associate with that disgusting individual is not a smear---it's a damn fact!

[Hissyspit]

166. As I said, dishonest.

I just said clearly I wasn't talking about smearing Shamir.

And then you repeat it.

[msanthrope]

169. How does one smear Assange on this point? Was he unable to work the Google?

Was he unaware of Israel Shamir's political leanings?

Was Shamir not working for Wikileaks in Russia? Somebody better tell the Wikileaks spokesperson I quoted.....

Look--when you hold adults accountable for the miserable choices they make, that's not a smear---that's called "consequences." Assange bears the responsibility of assigning this guy to write his defense.

[Hissyspit]

172. Was he unaware?

I don't know. Apparently you know all.

This does not follow. It's deliberate fallacy:

"To Believe Julian Assange, You Must Believe Israel Shamir, Vicious Anti-Semite and Liar. [View all]

There are many threads on Julian Assange, and the charges listed in the European Arrest Warrant issued by Sweden. A copy of the charges is given below. At the core of all of these threads, though, is the inescapable conclusion that you either believe the women who have alleged the acts outlined below, or you believe Wikileaks, and their employee's explanation of the supposed CIA plot against Assange. "

[msanthrope]

174. You would think Assange would google a prospective employee, right? I mean, this is the guy

selected to work with Russian media. You'd think Julian might have perused his website, right?

[Cha]

188. Maybe he did and liked what he saw.. I just google him and got this..

"That Shamir ever gained access outraged many at WikiLeaks. Now Assange's dictator-admiring friend has surpassed himself"

Israel Shamir and Julian Assange's cult of machismo

Leaking, we are told, is a man's business. Israel Shamir, a strong supporter of Julian Assange, has penned an extraordinary piece in defence of the WikiLeaks founder as he awaits extradition to Sweden. The decision to extradite Assange for questioning in relation to alleged sexual offences against two women is, Shamir writes, "a defeat for all the men, and a defeat for mankind".

Assange's situation is not merely the consequence of one man's sexual liaisons, but part of a wider ploy to feminise men in order to make humanity more compliant to political elites. "Strong men are prone to rebellion, ready for sacrifice and primed for action," Shamir writes.

"It is no coincidence that the enemies of Empire are all masculine males, be they Gaddafi, Castro, Chávez, Lukashenko, Putin – or Julian Assange. It appears the men have been targeted for elimination; the working ants need no sex."

Strong men fight abuses of power, it seems, while women are, presumably, expected to support them from the kitchen – or in the bedroom.

If Shamir could be dismissed as merely a crank, his article might even be funny. But his influence over WikiLeaks and beyond is difficult to overestimate, and this relationship make his views more significant – and disturbing.

MOre..
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/08/israel-shamir-julian-assange-cult-machismo

So Shamir.. thinks poor Julian is getting a raw deal.. like Gaddafi, Castro, Chávez, Lukashenko, Putin –

End quote from James Ball..

"Assange and Shamir may think their proclivity to judge people's worth by their testosterone level makes them alpha males, but others are far more likely to judge it makes them look like boys. It's time to grow up."

[freshwest]

193. MRA talk from a 'liberal' hero?

Reminds me of royalty who raped peasant women for sport. Just lay down and let the very important person have his way with you.

I don't find the prejudging of these women 'liberal' at all. There's only empathy for these one-percenters. Perhaps we are not dealing with liberals, progressives or Democrats, but a Libertarian mindset.

My mind is focused on the rights of women & minorities. Not the 1%. These guys are defended like sports teams, and to hell with women:

Ashley Judd recalls her own traumatic history of rape and incest in a powerful essay addressing sexual violence after Twitter troll attack

The star said while she would much prefer to be talking about March Madness basketball - of which she is a passionate fan.

'I love March Madness so much that even now, what I really want to talk about is how Sunday's [game] strategy did not, in fact, work.'

She now finds herself having to talk about how she as a woman, like many women, is objectified and attacked.

'What happened to me is the devastating social norm experienced by millions of girls and women on the Internet. Online harassers use the slightest excuse (or no excuse at all) to dismember our personhood.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3003367/Ashley-Judd-recalls-personal-history-rape-incest-powerful-essay-addressing-offline-gender-violence-Twitter-abuse-college-basketball-game.html#ixzz3UuCP5jqf

She dared to critcize a sports team and they came after her with all four claws bared. The powerful have their supporters. She is speaking out for those who don't have celebrity status such as she has.

The Libertarians are all over the media, they've been there for years in some of the highest positions of power. And that is my main problem with GAS. They are for themselves, the rest of us don't matter in their calculus. That makes me very suspicious of what they do.

I don't care how they dress it up, I'm not buying it. Period.

[Cha]

194. "Julian Assange Backs Ron and Rand Paul".. yeah, I'd say assange is something.. backing racist

repubs doesn't bring him any cred. No, it's not "liberal"..

snip//

WASHINGTON — Julian Assange is a “big admirer” of both Ron and Rand Paul, the Wikileaks founder said during a recent interview–while calling some of the younger Paul’s views “sometimes simplistic.”

The Wikileaks founder praised America’s top libertarians — former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2008 and 2012, and his son, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., viewed as a possible Republican White House contender in 2016 and perhaps the Congress’s most vocal and widely recognized libertarian — during a video Q & A, questioned by the editor of conservative campus-news and watchdog group Campus Reform.

“I am a big admirer of Ron Paul and Rand Paul, for their very principled positions in the U.S. Congress on a number of issues,” Assange said, asked about the Pauls by Campus Reform Editor-in-Chief Josian Ryan



I'd read that about Ashley Judd.. she's a strong women and can stand up to those ugly verbal attacks from stupid macho abusers.


http://collegebasketball.ap.org/article/shocker-selection-sunday-dickie-v-plants-one-judd

[Cha]

196. Forget Your Team: Your Online Violence Toward Girls and Women Is What Can Kiss My Ass.. more

on Ashley.. she would have been such a good candidate against mitch.

snip//

The "Pass the Mic" series showcases unique voices, perspectives and ideas. This op-ed was written by Ashley Judd, an actress and advocate for women's rights.

During a conference championship game on Sunday, I posted a comment to Twitter that some found unsportsmanlike. I didn't much care for three players bleeding on the court, and I tweeted that the opponent was "playing dirty & can kiss my team's free throw making a—." The volume of hatred that exploded at me in response was staggering.

I routinely cope with tweets that sexualize, objectify, insult, degrade and even physically threaten me. I have already — recently, in fact — looked into what is legally actionable in light of such abuse, and have supplied Twitter with scores of reports about the horrifying content on its platform. But this particular tsunami of gender-based violence and misogyny flooding my Twitter feed was overwhelming.

Tweets rolled in, calling me a cunt, a whore or a bitch, or telling me to suck a two-inch dick. Some even threatened rape, or "anal anal anal."

MOre..
http://mic.com/articles/113226/forget-your-team-your-online-violence-toward-girls-and-women-is-what-can-kiss-my-ass

[msanthrope]

199. And that's what so many here are trying to avoid...the "smear" of Assange is nothing

more than him being held accountable. He knew what Shamir was about.

[Cha]

201. "Assange and Shamir have been friends for years".. and Shamir is going for the testoserone defense.

Report the facts on Assange and you're accused of a smear job.. yeah, too bad the truth is so ugly.

It's beyond bizarre. mahalo for your OP, msanthrope

[msanthrope]

204. Assange is a con man.....cryptome has always been better, more

daring, and frankly, more transparent and accessible. And rape is not a progressive value.....the defense of concierge justice on this site is troubling.

[MannyGoldstein]

119. Problem is, neither side is trustworthy.

But your ability to 'just know' who's guilty is quite impressive.

[msanthrope]

120. I haven't found a single reason to impugn the credibility of the victims. If you have, please share

it.

[Hissyspit]

124. This is that same old smear campaign material dredged up for some reason.

If you actually follow the links in the OP there is not actually a lot to back it up.

[MannyGoldstein]

138. I figured

That's a long-standing trend with this poster.

I'm not particularly impressed with Assange, but given the US War on Whistleblowers and our government's incessant lying and lawlessness, I don't trust that Sweden's not trying to grab Assange for extradition, torture, and many years in prison.

[msanthrope]

149. Extradition where, Manny? To the US? Then why didn't we extradite him from the UK when he was

around on bail for two years on a country estate. Heck...why didn't we rendition him?

To extradite him from Sweden, we'd need to get Sweden and the UK to agree......so we just decided to make extradition more difficult? It doesn't make any sense.

However, legal experts have pointed out several obstacles any extradition and subsequent prosecution in the US would have to overcome.

Correspondents say that Sweden could apply a more stringent test than that used when an extradition is sought from the United Kingdom.

Also, even though the extradition would be according to Swedish law, the UK's approval would be needed.


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-19426382

[Rex]

151. Why didn't the CIA just grab his ass when he was drugged with the two women?

If they did plan this, they obviously fucked up because Assange is not in their custody. Why try and ruin his rep? It already is set in stone with the people that hate him and the people that support him.

I don't think the CIA was involved in this one.

[MannyGoldstein]

167. Given that Ed Snowden was allowed to grab virtually everything from the NSA

because he was the MS Sharepoint admin, and then move to Moscow... I'm not sure that scenarios involving competence on the part of the US cryptogovernment are a great bet. Malevolence, perhaps but not competence.

[msanthrope]

175. Assange was on bail for two years, living in the English countryside. Are you saying the

"cryptogovernment" couldn't pull together a black bag operation to rendition him in two years?????

If that's true, then aren't Snowden and Greenwald liars when they encourage us to fear the obviously incompetent "cryptogovernment?" I mean, so what if they've got your metadata.....they obviously are too stupid to do anything of importance with it!

[MannyGoldstein]

216. More sophomoric debating tactics from you

And is that one of those dreaded Socratic questions that you detest so badly? Or is there an arbitrary exception to your arbitrary rule?

[msanthrope]

220. Manny, I adore the new catchword...."cryptogovernment!" I'm gonna use it

everywhere.

But seriously, Manny...Assange was bumping about the English countryside for nearly two years....do you think we just forgot to get around to him, or did the cryptogovernment oversee the slowest black bag operational rollout, ever?

[zappaman]

231. I hope someone at the CIA got fired for this!

They go to all that trouble to set him up and then let him get away?

[msanthrope]

233. It's the slowest black bag operation, ever. Heads should roll! Abu Nasir

was captured in less time!

[msanthrope]

150. How does one smear a Holocaust-denying anti-Semite? I'm still waiting for you to

explain how one smears Israel Shamir.

As for Assange, explain why he should not be called to account for his voluntary associations with such a person?

[Hissyspit]

168. You post this fully knowing I already said I wasn't talking about smearing Shamir.

Assange made a number of bad associate decisions, including Domsceit-Berg. It doesn't change the fact that your OP headline is a fallacy.

[msanthrope]

171. "Bad associate decisions" is what we are calling hiring and keeping Israel Shamir and his son?

Was Assange unable to work the Google?

Look, it is not a "smear" to correctly point out that Assange chose to associate with a well-known POS. That he chose Shamir to write his public defense is also telling. Assange will just have to be accountable for his behavior.

[pnwmom]

181. Do you think the women who have accused him of rape deserve their day in court? n/t

[zappaman]

186. The one question guaranteed to get...

Crickets.

[MannyGoldstein]

211. Of course.

I can also see how Assange has a reasonable fear of unreasonable things happening to him.

Difficult situation.

[whatchamacallit]

170. What

a persuasive presentation steaming pile!

[Lancero]

219. According to Assange's supporters, it was not a 'legitimate rape'

A bit sad at how many Democrats tend to revert to Republican logic when it comes to this guy. According to them it's not a 'legitimate rape', it's just a 'gubmint hoax' because they want this guy gone.

[zappaman]

225. Thank you!

This has been a VERY revealing thread!

[msanthrope]

228. I'm waiting for someone to tell me it wasn't "rape-rape." nt

[zappaman]

229. Well, their silence on the question...

"do these women deserve justice in the courts?" speaks volumes.

[msanthrope]

234. That may be my next OP......nt

[tammywammy]

237. The response I've seen from the Assange supporters is pretty much:

"They didn't even want to press charges!!!!1!!!1!11!"

[msanthrope]

243. They should comfort themselves knowing that I've had criminal DV clients

who said the same thing about their wives and girlfriends.

[bravenak]

239. Great thread.

I think accused rapists should at least be arrested and processed and questioned near the location of the crime. Everytimg he said about this issue was suspect to me from day one.

[RobertEarl]

245. bushco is on the loose

And some of you are going after Assange? WTF?!?!?!?!

[stevenleser]

246. Assange shouldn't have credibility anyway. After he was essentially forced to reveal he lied about

The Helicopter incident. These two politifact links, which themselves have links backing them up, tell the story.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/14/julian-assange/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-tells-colbert-per/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/12/robert-gates/gates-said-leaked-military-video-shooting-iraq-doe/

[Cha]

247. Mahalo for the links, steven

[msanthrope]

248. Well....who is paying Assange to push that false narrative?

When Assange pushed that edited video, easily discrediting himself .....and also discrediting whistleblowing.....cui bono?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/07/cryptome_on_wikileaks/

There's a reason John Young got rid of Assange.

[randome]

255. Colbert (one of my few genuine heroes of this age) had Assange's number early on.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[SunSeeker]

249. K & R for exposure.