KDC or Glenn Greenwald raped anybody?
Has Assange been convicted of rape?
Has a charge even been brought?
Has Assange been convicted of rape?
Has a charge even been brought?
He cannot be charged until they question him. Since he is avoiding Sweden and Swedish authorities, they cannot charge him.
Not that that makes him any more or less guilty of the accusations, but still.
What you can accuse Assange rightly of at this point in time is being a douchebag and phenomenally stupid. But fame has done similar things to lots of other people and he doesn't have the monopoly on either in this particular case.
The Swedes had him on their soil, declared that there was no case, told him he was free to go, then changed their minds and then a whole circus ensued. In the UK he was at some point in custody.
There is enough fodder for a whole slew of in-depth investigations but so far there is no movement on that and the standing invitation of the Equadorians to interview Assange 'on site' has been steadfastly refused, which is curious indeed.
Other notable points in this case are that Sweden doesn't normally make such a hoopla over much more serious cases (including rape cases) and the too convenient timing.
Lots of food for thought on this one.
Please study the case in detail before you make such charged statements.
The timing there is very subtle and open to several interpretations depending on how you want to fill in the blanks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_A...
So I won't blame you, it's an extremely complex case that does not lend itself to the issuing of 5 word sound bites.
It's complex because all parties appear to have behaved in weird and sometimes in-explicable ways and all parties seem to have made morally questionable moves (including the prosecutor).
You mention 'less rape' as if to you rape has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Normally such language is used for convicted criminals.
It's perfectly ok with me if you don't like Assange, I'm of the opinion if he did just the bits that he has admitted to and that seem to be indisputable that he's a complete douchebag but the behaviour of the women, the authorities and the process up to and including Assanges holing up in the Equadorian Embassy in London make me stop very much short of calling him a rapist. I may change that position in the future, but I'll wait for the trial (assuming there ever is one).
There is a ton of stuff there that's questionable at a minimum not the least of which is the series of actions by the Swedish prosecutor.
So no, he hasn't been convicted and/or charged and as such calling him a rapist is getting ahead of the timeline.
What he does in the meantime doesn't change that one bit.
Of course, I still think that the whole charade around having him extradited to Sweden for questioning is just a tiny little bit too convenient for the powers-that-be to think it's only about the rape.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/women-a...
That is one piece that speaks strongly to me, mostly because of the position the women that wrote it take.
Since when do those under suspicion get to dictate to the authorities how they conduct their investigation?
"definitely rape" is so far off base, it's ridiculous. You're either gravely misinformed, or shilling.
I agree that Swedish definition of rape is a bit bonkers (e.g. I don't think that "sex without a condom" is rape, at most it's "fraud" or "lying"), but I think that sex with a sleeping person is always rape (unless you've been explicitly given consent that it's OK beforehand).