« | »

Assange: DoD May Be Behind Rape Claim

From the Agence France-Presse:

Wikileaks man says Pentagon may be behind rape claims

August 21, 2010

STOCKHOLM (AFP) – Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said in an interview published on Sunday that he believes the Pentagon could be behind a rape accusation against him that was later dropped by Swedish prosecutors.

The country’s prosecution service meanwhile justified the chaotic situation when authorities first issued an arrest warrant for the Australian whistleblower late on Friday night but then withdrew it the following day.

The Aftonbladet newspaper quoted Assange, 39, as saying he did not know who was "hiding behind" the claims, which came amid a stand-off with Washington over the website’s publication of secret Afghan war documents.

Assange said he was shocked by the allegations against him and that he had never had sexual relations with anybody in a way that was not consensual, the tabloid said.

But he said that he had been warned previously that groups such as the Pentagon "could use dirty tricks" to destroy Wikileaks — adding that he had been particularly warned against being entrapped by sexual scandals.

Assange told Aftonbladet that despite the lifting of the warrant, his enemies would still use the claims to damage Wikileaks, which is set to publish thousands more secret papers about the war in Afghanistan in coming weeks.

He refused to give more details about the two women whose claims sparked the furore, saying that it would impinge on their privacy.

And we can’t have that.

Prosecutors said Saturday that Assange was now "not suspected of rape" and was no longer wanted for questioning on the charge, but added that an investigation into a separate molestation charge remained open…

The Swedish prosecutor’s office issued a statement on Sunday defending its actions.

It said that chief prosecutor Eva Finne, who was responsible for withdrawing the arrest warrant, had "more information available to decide on Saturday than the duty prosecutor on Friday evening."

Such as what?

"A decision regarding restrictive measures, such as this, must always be reevaluated in a preliminary inquiry," the statement added.

The spokeswoman for the prosecutor’s office, Karin Rosander, told AFP late Saturday that the procedure followed was normal and would have been launched automatically by the duty prosecutor in serious cases such as rape.

In an interview in the Expressen newspaper, which broke the story, duty prosecutor Maria Haljebo Kjellstrand said that she "did not regret her decision".

The two women who originally made the claims did not make an official complaint and it was the police who took the decision to inform the prosecutors office, she said.

"I received a report from the police which seemed to me to be sufficient to arrest him. On Friday evening I got a call from the police describing what the women said. The information I received was convincing enough for me to take my decision," Hljebo Kjellstrand was quoted as saying

It sure sounds like all the politics came after the arrest warrant was issued.

By the way, we thought women never lied about rape. Where is NOW?

The website says it had repeatedly asked the Pentagon for help analysing the remaining documents, and Assange has said he wants to avoid publishing the "names of innocent parties that are under reasonable threat".

The Pentagon denies that WikiLeaks has approached them.

Probably it’s another one of their dirty tricks.

And speaking of dirty tricks, the Politico reported this story with this headline: ‘Sweden clears Assange of rape.’  Which, of course, is not true.

Meanwhile, last week, this is how the same Politico reported that the Department Of Justice was dropping its six year long investigation of Tom Delay: ‘Justice Dept. cuts losses with DeLay.’

What media bias?

This article was posted by Steve on Sunday, August 22nd, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

7 Responses to “Assange: DoD May Be Behind Rape Claim”

  1. Rusty Shackleford says:

    The phrase “grasping at straws” comes to mind.

  2. GetBackJack says:

    Wall … meet that which is flung.

  3. Papa Louie says:

    “The two women who originally made the claims did not make an official complaint and it was the police who took the decision to inform the prosecutors office, she said.”

    So, going to the police to report a rape is not the same as making an “official complaint”. What then would make it “official”, going to the press?

    The police filed a report about a rape that caused the prosecutor to file an arrest warrant. The prosecutor then talks to the same police and decides to withdraw the warrant. What changed? What information was missing from the report? Why didn’t prosecutors talk to the women directly? Perhaps the women are reluctant to press charges because the case is now international news and they just don’t want to be raped again by the press. Is that sufficient reason to let a rapist off the hook?

  4. tranquil.night says:

    “I hope nobody working for the CIA is incompetent enough to believe that would work. Even hard evidence of rape would not ‘discredit’ a hero of the international Left … One of the chief blessings the Left bestows upon its faithful is the sanctification of awful men.” DoctorZero

    Sadly, Obama’s CIA might just be that incompetent. Obama’s DoD might just be engaging in this behavior to give Assange more sympathy/press, as the first round of Wikileaks failed to produce any of the desired political results. Julian enjoys his ‘international subversive’ rebel-with-morals image; now that they’ve knocked the charges down, the media will pull the weight on assuring the revised truth. No such thing as bad choices or bad publicity when you’re working for the bigger good.

    • proreason says:

      You’re right about Doc Zero.

      From left field, he may be the best out there. At the least, he’s up there with Anne, Steyn and Sowell.

      And he doesn’t seem bound by any of the can’t touch that rules either.

    • tranquil.night says:

      “doesn’t seem bound by any of the can’t touch that rules either”

      Yep, he’s a proud wingnut – unafraid to recognize this as a battle of values and connect whatever issue on which he writes with the correctness of our values. As a wordsmith, he’s got a powerful command of allegory and tone like Reagan, which is much more a powerful communicational resonator with me and a lot of readers than some ignoramus with specialized journalistic credentials throwing in their dull 2 cents or reprinting formulaic talking points disguised as news.

      A solid addition to the Field Commanders of the Conservative Underground. As the clash between us invariably consumes more of the public and more of the country, people will come to find that we have all arrived at our breaking points through very independent means and circumstances which when taken together have come to tell the real story of what has happened to this country since we were insurrected by foreign agents.

      While on the other side of the battle-lines, the truth exposes their lies daily. The inner workings of their very thoughts and actions are explained to a greater degree of understanding by commoners than their brainiest eggheads can offer in a social engineering thesis. The rats are bailing, the robots and apparatchiks are having fatal system errors. The maniacs that lead them will soon stand alone.

      And at that point, let God hear the men and women of this nation who still believe in its dream and fought to the very fiber of their spirit to protect it – and let Him stay these lunatics vengeance from plunging us into the cauldrons of Hell.

    • tranquil.night says:

      There’s another angle to this that struck me now that the possibility of the DoD pursuing legal charges is headlining Drudge. I hope to God they’re not playing it but fear they are because I keep asking why the news cycle keeps wanting to go in this direction.

      WikiLeaks is an international organization. Assange is a foreign national. They can perhaps request extradition to face charges on behalf of our laws, but that’s a laugh.

      This would be the first case to lay out the moral impeative for an international legal foundation for regulated speech, vis-a-vis Net Neutrality.

      Since he is so repulsive, especially since it’s been implanted that he’s already a criminal personal deviant, it’s the perfect trap to get the pro-war Right media to sucker themselves right into their own demise.

      International subversive indeed. A criminal for the cause. I notice you’ve dropped the platinum hair of the young cult idealist for the more classic clean-cut suaveness of the traditional high-society professional Leftist operative, Julian.

      I have the imagination of a kook conspiracy theorist, I know, but I’m well past the point where I want to stay my tongue anymore. The professional left are experts at turning a profit from criminality. Anything has been proven to be possible.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »