« | »

33 Year Old Assange Stalked 19 Year Old

From that other famous whistle blowing site, Gawker:

The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

By Adrian Chen
December 16, 2010

Julian Assange, the founder of the world’s most notorious secret-sharing operation, has some embarrassing documents in his own past. We’ve obtained a series of emails detailing his stalkery courtship of a teenager in his pre-Wikileaks days.

Elizabeth (not her real name) met Assange one night in April 2004, about two years before Assange started his now-infamous whistle-blowing website Wikileaks. She was 19 at the time; Assange was 33 and a student at the University of Melbourne studying physics and mathematics. Elizabeth spotted Assange at a bar near Melbourne and approached the older man with the long white hair because he seemed different than other guys she’d met.

"I started talking to him and he just seemed kind of quiet and nerdy," she told us in a phone interview. "I didn’t think he was sexy or anything. Just strangely alluring for a 19-year-old girl." Assange flirted with her, showing off by explaining complex equations and joking about her mathematical ignorance.

They chatted until the bar closed, and Assange walked Elizabeth back to the small town where she lived with her parents. Walking down a small country road, Assange kissed Elizabeth. She wasn’t particularly thrilled by this development, but it didn’t put her off too much either. "It was like, fine, whatever," Elizabeth said. "He wasn’t creepy about it, and he didn’t try anything weird."

Before parting ways, Assange gave her a card with his name, email address, and an image of a lighthouse—possibly an early symbol of his quest for radical transparency. Elizabeth gave Assange her email address in return, and he took the train back to Melbourne.

Soon after, Elizabeth received this email inviting her on a date.

Elizabeth doesn’t remember how she responded and no longer has her reply, but it was probably dismissive because "I wasn’t into him," she said.

She certainly didn’t give him her phone number, which explains why she was shocked when Assange called the house where she lived with her parents the following day. The call went about as poorly as you might expect after Assange wouldn’t tell Elizabeth how he got her number.

"I was really cold because he somehow found out information about me and I didn’t know how and it scared me," she said.

But Assange wasn’t discouraged. After the botched call, he emailed to chastise her for not being more polite on the phone:

The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

She replied coolly. Assange countered with a wistful remembrance of their night together after the bar.

A couple days later, Assange tried calling Elizabeth again. This time, Elizabeth pretended to be someone else because she was becoming increasingly creeped out by Assange’s persistence. But judging from Assange’s next email, he mistakenly interpreted this as a coy flirtation.

After a few more emails got him nowhere, Assange decided to change tack. Instead of calling Elizabeth, he would try to get Elizabeth to call him. But he chose probably the worst possible way to give her his phone number. Somehow, Elizabeth says, Assange figured out the make and license plate number of her car. Then he incorporated it into a riddle which, when solved, would reveal his phone number:

The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

But he’s not a weirdo. No way.

More weirded out than ever, Elizabeth emailed back that she couldn’t call him because the riddle didn’t give her his number. So Assange decided to go back to calling her, and later that day sent an email asking the best time to call.

At this point, Elizabeth told him flat-out to stop calling her house. Assange then tried to give Elizabeth yet another way to contact him—through his (now-defunct) personal website, iq.org…

Finally, Assange gave up. But not before making up for his humiliation with a stream of overwrought put-downs in an email:

The Creepy, Lovesick Emails of Julian Assange

Assange’s relationships with women haven’t improved much in the six years since his creepy attempt at wooing Elizabeth. His online dating profile [sic] and blogging reveal an insufferable self-styled Don Juan, and he currently stands accused of raping and sexual molesting two Swedish women. (He was released on bail from a British prison earlier today.)

For the record, Elizabeth says she never felt threatened by Assange’s behavior; she viewed it as misguided attempts at courtship by a socially awkward nerd.

"I don’t think he’s a bad person," she said. "He’s just a funny bugger."

It sure sounds like textbook stalking to us. For the record, ‘Elizabeth’ might have just won herself a round trip ticket to Sweden. She certainly would make a good character witness — for the prosecution.

But the biggest surprise here is to learn that Gawker is another minion of the United States military cabal, just like Amazon, Paypal and the rest. Who knew?

(There are still more of these ‘creepy emails’ from Mr. Assange at Gawker.)

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, December 17th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

24 Responses to “33 Year Old Assange Stalked 19 Year Old”

  1. canary says:

    His belief that she really liked him, is a sign of a stalker, and the type that would rape and say she wanted it. Now he’s out on bail with access to the internet. Now he has another chance to follow through with his threat to take poison. Reminds me of Obama’s ramblings in his writings.

  2. Mithrandir says:

    Where is all that RULING CLASS OUTRAGE pre-November 2nd?

    Now that the election is over, and the ruling class got embarrassed by Assange, as being childish, amateurish, and wholly unqualified….he is the enemy now?

    The guy was just trying to get some —so what? Who hasn’t been embarrassed by their attempts at wooing women? How many of you would like a video or written account of your strikeouts online?

    NOBODY is going to suffer for all these leaks other than our “humble servants” —boo-hoo!

    • DEZ says:

      Assange was more than happy to dump military secrets, peoples personal E-mails, etc,, and his apologists keep saying how we have a right know everything about everyone, and anything.
      But once, one of your hero’s is embarrassed, you want their privacy protected?

    • Mithrandir says:

      Oh for god’s sake! In the last 100 years, who has been more responsible for the majority of DEATHS in this world?
      A: Governments.
      B: Citizens leaking government information?
      ~~~Let’s add up the body bags~~~

      The gov’t is a PUBLIC entity in which they have no reasonable expectation of privacy, as we are paying their salaries. THE PEOPLE have a right to know what their “humble servants” are doing.

      A private citizen’s emails, and his strikeouts wooing women, are private, and…..the Constitution protects THE PEOPLE, their private thoughts, ideas, property, and emails. The Constitution wasn’t created to protect the government….if you remember.

      All these government lapdogs weeping b/c Hillary Clinton and their other masters got embarrassed….pathetic!

    • artboyusa says:

      I’m with you, Mithrandir, on this one; this creeped our weirdo’s real “crime” was to embarass the ruling class. Tough for them. Notice the ferocious energy and dispatch with which he was hunted down; our rulers really went to “the ends of the earth”, or at least to Sweden, this time to nail Assange, which is more than they’ve managed in almost ten years where Bin Laden is concerned. But hey, all Osama did was kill Americans. Assange made our masters look silly. An embarassment, which, since they haven’t worked out yet that you don’t put things in emails that you don’t want the world to see, they fully deserve.

      Btw, yesterday’s UK Guardian ran leaked testimony from the women Assange allegedly assaulted. One said “Not only was it the worst screw ever, it was violent”. Oh man; “the worst screw ever”. What guy wouldn’t rather be known as a traitor or a cyber terrorist or anything, rather than “the worst screw ever”?

    • tranquil.night says:

      Your idealistic anti-government argument basically equates US Military and Diplomatic efforts to the duplicitous evil of other government regimes. lt’s the Julian Assange justification for criminal anti-Americanism, and we resent it very much in addition to finding it factually incorrect.

      In this high-minded game of anti-government gtcha you’re totally incapable of seeing that it’s our State and Military complex that keeps this world run by idiots from plunging into war. That’s even with idiots running our government. The real question to us is whether our idiots are helping the other idiots debase and subvert the framework and power of American dominance. I don’t need a New START to know that’s not even a question anymore, it’s simply this bunch’s standard MO.

      So if you want to talk conspiracy let’s discuss how the Ruling Class weren’t all afuss over the damage from these cables in the months before Julian said he was going to release what they knew he had and “embarrassed” them (I remain to see anyone publicly embarrassed or held accountable for any of this, other than Pvt. Manning, whom we’ll never actually know how he ended up with access to that cache). Funny the international outcry just wasn’t there as he was jeopardizing the lives of people who depended on us to protect their identity, when he published the Pentagon cables.

      Embarrass them.. who’s embarrassed by any of this? The State Department cables did nothing but validate Conservative analysis of world politics, and the worthlessness of Obama Foreign Policy. But do any of them seem the slightest bit unnerved? They have more to be afraid of from the American people, and for good reason.

    • Mithrandir says:

      What bothers me is that there isn’t a clear answer on just exactly which information leaked is directly harming our troops? The fact that they are directionless in the most dangerous part of the world is beyond ridiculous…we are supposed to pretend that a few leaked cables will put them at anymore risk than they already are.

      2. Where is national security threatened by these leaks?

      3. The most important thing, is that a very liberal Assange, embarrassed his American liberal buddies, which probably stings them the most. “Hey, embarrass America–fine, but don’t put ME in the crosshairs!” –says our ruling class liberals.

      When people want to cover up for big gov’t they usually throw up kids as a shield, or feelings, or “It’s Christmas time, let’s pass this horrible bill”, or “Our troops are in danger!!!!!” –please….be realistic about all this, the ruling class got embarrassed, and that is 99% of the issue, not the petty 1% they are using as a crutch.

  3. JohnMG says:

    Why don’t we give this disgusting piece of skin all the material and physical means available to “off” himself, and then encourage him to do so. You could probably lop off a huge chunk of our government deficit by selling tickets to the event, or host a lottery to see who gets closest to the day and hour that he rids the world of himself.

    What a piece of human garbage!

    • canary says:

      yeah. great headlines. Cyber Monster’s Final Leak Videoed his Final Hours.

      And the U.S. Government DHS or Technology won’t be able to stop him, or remove it from the internet.

    • Mithrandir says:

      Soooo, when Assange forces transparency upon our noble masters in the government, you would prefer to scrap the Constitution, and have this guy killed? –because he embarrassed the ruling class?

      Scratching my head as to why this guy is so offensive to the common person. How is this guy hurting you exactly?

    • JohnMG says:

      Read Ann Coulter, Mith. Not only is he an international criminal, he is not entitled to our constitutional protections any more than are the despicable turds being held at Gitmo. If you want protection under the umbrella of our founding document, become an American and subject yourself to our laws. If not…..take your chances.

      Assange would sell you out in a heartbeat. In fact he has. And I didn’t say I’d “off” him, I said I’d give him the means to do it to himself.

      As for secrecy? Do you want to do away with it all? Do you want to give away the latest in defense R & D? We shouldn’t spy? We shouldn’t protect our own intelligence gathering? WTF?!

      So, yeah. His document dump proves the ineptitude of the current gaggle of fools. It embarrassed them. We all know what buffoons they are. But would you compromise the safety of our troops on the ground to give this feckless, twisted, perverted publicity hound his fifteen minutes of fame? I wouldn’t piss up his ass if his guts were on fire.

      Perhaps you Libertarians need to back up and regroup. Even George Washington had sense enough to keep secrets from those who would do us harm….even if only through their own naivete. Sheesh!!

      The amazing thing about your post is that, if one were to take the letters in transparency, rearrange them, add a few letters, and drop a few more, it would spell STUPIDITY.

    • Mithrandir says:

      (*95% of the Earth’s population isn’t covered under our Constitution, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have rights at all, and we can do with them what we will. –That would be a criminal dictatorship, don’t you think? [remember rights are INALIENABLE, not granted by humans])

      The Hillary Clinton line, “Assange is endangering our troops!” The same shield used to stop our own people from burning the “holy” Koran, despite the fact that they are citizens, and the people overseas who will be angry–are NOT. –Never thought I would see conservatives sticking up for the exposed foibles of the liberal establishment….what a bunch of sell-outs!

      The only one endangering our troops is our own damn inept gov’t! They shouldn’t BE in the desert Vietnam also known as Afghanistan, going on patrols to be moving targets for the Viet Cong Al Qaida/Taliban. Assange did nothing. But Huzzah!, there is a new bomb-proof underwear available for our troops (that’s really thinking through bad foreign policy right?)

      This is how our gov’t protects our valuable R&D, spying, and intelligence-gathering you care so much about? To be accessible via USB flash drive? Sometimes it takes an episode like this to fix a criminally negligent policy. Perhaps, in the end, they will take better care of our precious data.

    • tranquil.night says:

      1. Constitutional rights are seperate from individual rights. Creator-endowed Liberty was demonstrated in Assboy’s decision to subvert World Diplomacy and the US Military without one care to the unintended consequences. Whereas it is within the Constitutional authority of the Federal Government to apply means even beyond legal in pursuit of such criminals, traditionally called spies. The rule of law doesn’t factor in good intentions, it judges results. Assange is a spy for Anarchy; a cyberterrorist if such can yet be defined. Look at what his fanatic believers did in retaliation to the corporate distancing from wikileaks.

      2. The caches of information released so far, which apparently are somewhere between “harmless” and “total embarrassment of the Ruling Class” were obtained (and likely solicited) from a source who behaved in gross offense to our rule of law and UCMJ, regardless of government bureaucratic incompetence (which would suggest compliance, right?) Therefore, legally speaking, we are not talking about a legitimate media outlet and its right to publish but a criminal enterprise.

      You hyper-Libertarians are as convicted to your radical anti-government dreams as the hyper-Libs are to their Nanny-Statist fantasies. I’m going to start calling you the Far Right.

    • Its an interesting thing to watch the leaks as one might watch a train wreck in progress.

      A couple of observations about rights and the constitution.

      Rights are indeed God given. The constitution recognizes those rights, and theoretically the government is held to extreme standards when dealing with its citizens. …ITS CITIZENS. There is no flag behind those folks in Gitmo. If they had a country to defend their inalienable rights then we would be plodding through the diplomacy channels. They have no nation states claiming them and their actions.

      Our government is liable for protection of our rights as top cheese, as citizens of the US of A, period. And no one else who violates our space as either invader or purveyor of harm to our citizens here or abroad is deserving of that protection..

      Back to Assange.. Dirtbag. Probably SOME trumped up charges. However, like a train wreck, anyone who caught it on camera is hitting the rewind, even if they don’t like him.

    • Mithrandir says:

      Fine, descent points to be sure, but consider this:

      Going after people, capturing them, sending them off to torture camps, waterboarding them (supposedly not torture) holding them indefinitely in Gitmo, trying them under our laws when they are not citizens, trumping up charges against non-citizens, bullying other countries and businesses to harass those we don’t like, not having Congress declare war, allowing the CIA to engage in war without accountability etc.

      Is this the America you want? REALLY? Is the fog starting to lift off of your eyes as to why people would slam planes into towers? (understand the anger, I didn’t say agree with the outcome)
      How about the guy who crashed his plane into the W.H. when Clinton was President? Or the guy who did the same to the IRS building recently? Or the other countless attacks from our own citizens?

      Perhaps now you will realize that most, if not all, government activity is mischief-making either home or abroad. A government that is open and honest, has no fear from blow-back from those abroad or at home—when both have the same grievances.

      Good discussion, but the source for many, if not the majority of our conflicts and problems are not Assanges of the world, it is the bloated tax-monster called government, and George Washington and the other wise men clearly warned us of the consequences.

      Anyway, take care, stick to your guns if you think you ought to…

  4. proreason says:

    He’s normal for a progressive.

    None of them care a whit about what their victims think.

  5. tranquil.night says:

    First hand lesson for all young women out there. Adults who go out of their way to look and act very different do so for very particular reasons which are never benign, and typically always rooted in deep insecurity and other significant psychological problems. It’s not rude to be judgmental, just use that God-given woman’s intuition.

    We’ve all read enough news (ahem, Natalee Holloway) and watched enough CSI to know very easily how story’s like this can end. Tracking down her phone number and car plates? How’s that not set off huge red flags? Well it doesn’t always if you’re 19 and naive.

    Everything, everything, is about control with sociopaths. He probably thought his act was like a suave James Bond, full of the danger and intrigue that supposedly attracts women. A painful dose of reality in the form of such rejection can be that which sends their fragile mind’s off the cliff.

  6. GetBackJack says:

    Sure is convenient, this popping into view right about now. I don’t believe in ‘coincidences’. I wonder if anything would have come of these ‘reported’ emails and such if Assange hadn’t kicked the Usual Suspects squarely in the coconuts?

    Just saying.

    Remember, Cardinal Richelieu said he could hang any man if the Cardinal had but six sentences from the suspect.

    • tranquil.night says:

      Wait, you mean there’s potentially bias in the media? You mean maybe there might be deeper, more sinister motives behind such a coordinated release of embarassing information? Hmmm.

    • Mithrandir says:

      A chilling message to all those conservative, liberal, and everyone not mentioned: you embarrass your ruling masters, and there is no limit to the amount of damage they will bring down upon you:

      ~PRIVATE banks won’t do business with you.
      ~Countries suddenly put you on INTERPOL watch lists.
      ~Surprise rape allegations will be used to ruin your credit.
      ~Formerly hidden and personal emails pop up out of no where.
      ~Congress passes special laws just to go after you, making them retroactive of course.
      ~Inundate you with huge legal fees bankrupting you for life.
      ~Dragging you to and from jail, court, prison again and again (also known as harassment) . Granting you release, then revoking it, then granting it again….maybe. (a la Roman Polanski)
      ~Chain you with GPS tracking devices.

      The government should be TRANSPARENT (remember that word during the campaign?) and should NEVER have this kind of power over a private citizen. A gov’t so concerned over its own secrecy is a tyrant.

      911’s goal was to attack, sit back and watch us devour ourselves as a paranoid, hyper-sensitive police-state, making our lives more miserable than Al Qaida could have ever done by themselves: Mission Accomplished

  7. NoNeoCommies says:

    Too bad this “document dump” will not get the coverage it deserves.

  8. Steve says:

    All the people who insist that Mr. Assange’s sexual charges were trumped up to help the CIA are more paranoid that some of the top people WikiLeaks:

    The co-ordinator of the WikiLeaks group in Stockholm, who is a close colleague of Assange and who also knows both women, told the Guardian: “This is a normal police investigation. Let the police find out what actually happened. Of course, the enemies of WikiLeaks may try to use this, but it begins with the two women and Julian. It is not the CIA sending a woman in a short skirt.”

    10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange | Media | The Guardian

    • Mithrandir says:

      Who would believe a liar? It’s a game of who is more trustworthy: Government (CIA) , or anti-government people (Wikileaks) .

      It is an anti-American liberal, who stung his “useful idiot” liberals in America, but then clearly feminist liberal women stung Assange with rape allegation because they also want power over people, and men.

      Ordinarily, we would all sit back and chuckle a bit, but those conservatives who primarily defend Hillary Clinton because she got embarrassed, rather than rock-solid evidence our country and troops were put in harms way is the crux of my complaints.

      Anyway, thanks for the good debate guys. If you’re right, put it in a way where at least most can agree with you.

      Take care. . .

  9. artboyusa says:

    Just want to say how much I’ve enjoyed this thread. It’s good mental exercise when not everyone agrees with each other and a debate like this gets going. Thanks, all!

    As far as the main argument goes, for me the bottom line is that either the government belongs to us or we belong to the government. If you prefer the second condition, then you don’t have to do anything and our masters will carry on with an anti terrorist policy that only terrorizes ourselves, a foreign policy that consists of attacking other countries for their own good, and a domestic policy that wants to turn our country into the northernmost province of Mexico. If you think the government belongs to us, then you have to fight for it, every step of the way, and not cut the ruling class an inch of slack. I’m no fan of Julian “worst screw ever” Assange and he’s no friend of America but I’m not buying this “troops in danger” stuff either and I don’t see anything in this “classified information” that we don’t guess or know already. If our rulers think its so secret, they should have done a better job keeping it that way. Since they didn’t, hey, tough noogies, Hillary.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »