Sunday, August 29, 2010

THE WIKILEAKS CONTROVERSY: WHAT’S THE TRUTH?…;) | Project World Awareness

WOW!!!…Gee haven’t we kinda had it with the sexual inudations to discredit someone throughout the history of time…Give us a break…at least be a little more imaginative…How dumb do you really think we are???It’s become predictable…

~jude

While the White House and Pentagon worry over the coming disclosure of another 15,000 classified documents on Afghanistan by WikiLeaks, the organization’s leader Julian Assange finds himself swirling in accusations of sexual impropriety.

Defend WikiLeaks – End the Secret Wars

The Peace and Justice Resource Center has a special obligation to report this story fairly and accurately because thousands of people have signed the petition:

Defend WikiLeaks – End the Secret Wars

What is the truth behind the allegations? What effect will they have on WikiLeaks? Is this a “dirty tricks” effort by intelligence agencies to discredit, disrupt and destroy the whistleblower threat?

The situation changes daily. For this analysis, the Bulletin has relied on Swedish sources on the ground, and translations from the papers Expressen, Dagens Nyheter, and Svenska Dagbladet.

  • Expressen, which was first out with the information, phoned the prosecutor the evening of Friday, August 20, already knowing all the information about the alleged rape, who was involved, and places; as of Saturday, August 28, the source of the newspaper’s information was not known;
  • “No one has explained yet why a newspaper had access to the investigative materials in the same minute as the prosecutor had it,” a Swedish source tells the Bulletin.
  • The on-call prosecutor, Maria Haljebo-Kjellstrand, who received the media inquiry, says she only acknowledged that the investigation was about Assange. She says she revealed no other information and asked the evening paper not to print the news, according to DN.
  • The rape allegation went around the world in the media and internet;
  • On Saturday, August 21, Chief Prosecutor Eva Finné dropped the rape charge and, shortly after, terminated any suspicion of sexual assault [sexuelle ofredande]; she authorized an interview/investigation into the charge of molestation;
  • The lawyer for the two women, Claes Borgstrom, will appeal the prosecutor’s decision
  • Assange’s lawyer, Leif Silbersky, complained that, “my client has been stigmatized world-wide as a rapist, one of the worst of crimes [and] has been damaged enormously”;
  • Both affected women deny giving the story to the media;
  • Assange denied committing any crime, and said all his sexual relations always have been “fully consensual”;
  • One of the women involved denied there has been any conspiracy by the police or CIA, but says Assange has a “distorted [warped]” view of women and “simply can’t take a no for an answer.” She added, “It is quite wrong that we should be afraid of Assange and therefore refuse to notify the authorities. He is not violent and I do not feel threatened by him.”

Here are some translated definitions in Swedish law:

  • Sexual abuse, also referred to as molestation, is the forcing of undesired sexual behavior by one person upon another. When that force is immediate, of short duration and infrequent [isolated], it is called sexual assault.
  • Sexual assault, depending on the local jurisdiction, may include rape, forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration, forced sexual intercourse, inappropriate touching, forced kissing, child sexual abuse, or torture in a sexual manner.
  • Sexual harassment, covers a wide range of offensive behavior, commonly-understood as behavior intended to disturb or upset, plus persistent and unwanted sexual advances

In summary, the press initially reported that Assange was charged with rape. That charge, and that of sexual assault, were dismissed the following day, leaving a police investigation of molestation.

Whatever the truth in this case, readers also should understand that law enforcement agencies repeatedly have used dirty tricks involving sex in efforts to defame political opponents. A brief list of examples would include:

  • “[Daniel] Ellsberg, according to Henry [Kissinger], had weird sexual habits [and] used drugs,” according to White House chief of staff H.R. Haldeman. Richard Nixon ordered the burglary by White House “plumbers”, including CIA agents, of confidential medical files from the office of Ellsberg’s psychoanalyst, Dr. Robert Fielding, on Sept. 3, 1971. The purpose was to discredit Ellsberg as an anti-war spokesman according to White House aide Egil Krogh in a 1974 pleading in federal court. One of the objectives was for the CIA “to perform a covert psychological assessment/evaluation on Ellsberg.” They wanted information on his wife and children, according to historian Taylor Branch. [In Ellsberg, Secrets, 2002, p. 445]
  • It is well-known that the FBI attempted to “neutralize” Dr. Martin Luther King with illegal wiretaps which revealed extra-marital affairs. Tapes were sent to his wife at home and, in 1964, when King was receiving the Nobel Prize, the FBI sent him a surreptitious warning letter which concluded, “King, there is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is … You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation.”
  • In 1970, the FBI planted rumors with a Hollywood columnist alleging that the actress Jean Seberg was pregnant by a Black Panther. As an agent wrote on April 27,1970: “The possible publication of Seberg’s plight could cause her embarrassment and serve to cheapen her image with the general public.” Seberg miscarried, and eventually took her life August 30, 1979.

Research for this article was contributed by Eva Ehrstedt. Additional editing by Wesley Saver of the Peace and Justice Resource Center.

Related articles by Zemanta
via projectworldawareness.com

Posted via email from ElyssaD's Posterous

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)