Assange Rape Allegations and the Left’s Abandonment of Women’s Rights
But despite the elaborate posturing of Wolf and her fellow leftists, neither the details of what went on in those women’s bedrooms, nor the wider issues of rape laws and anonymity, are of the least interest to them. It’s all simply a smokescreen to obscure their real motive, which is to prevent Assange’s extradition from the UK to Sweden, or undermine the case against him until it collapses. And if Assange should be convicted, destroying the characters of his victims will at least allow them to maintain that he’s the victim of a conspiracy, and that his guilt should not detract from the nobility of the Wikileaks project.
Their positions have nothing to do with the facts of the case, and everything to do with the political ideology of the accused. The intent behind the current round of revelations from Wikileaks is essentially anti-American and anti-Western (even if many of the disclosures don’t actually serve that end) — and for the left, the anti-American, anti-Western project comes before all else. Women, like blacks, gays, and other “interest groups,” are only useful insofar as they can be exploited to advance the greater cause. The feminist movement, for example, has proved invaluable for undermining the traditional family and expanding the availability of abortion; blacks, for enabling liberals to expand the welfare state and thus the reach of government in the U.S., and for perpetuating self-destructive notions of white guilt.
But when a group is no longer helpful to the left, it is cast aside, and Assange’s accusers are being sacrificed to safeguard his image as an unimpeachable seeker of truth and justice. Any interest group can be similarly discarded at any time. The left is big on animal rights too, but if Michael Vick were a prominent figure on the left, Wolf would by now have written several articles explaining why the occasional fight can help to keep your dog active and alert, and comparing the prosecution of Vick with the fate of Martin Luther King, Jr..
Campaigners for women’s rights shouldn’t be surprised by this turn of events. Leftists have in recent years made clear how little importance they attach to the freedom of women around the world by resisting moves by Western governments and moderate Muslims to outlaw the burka. Not surprisingly, Naomi Wolf has been busy in this respect too. Again, the logic is simple: those who enforce the wearing of the burka are Muslim extremists, and Muslim extremists are at war with the United States; therefore Wolf, and the rest of the hard left, are compelled to support them.
And anyway, liberals and leftists have never had a problem excusing the mistreatment of women by their leading men, whether it’s Teddy Kennedy leaving his date to die in a submerged car, Bill Clinton exploiting a young intern and lying about it under oath, Nelson Mandela beating his wife, or Roman Polanski drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl. The status of a leftist icon is the ultimate Get Out of Jail Free card, both in terms of reputation and, sometimes, literally.
It’s important to note that many decent liberals have spoken out against those who are making light of the allegations against Assange and attacking his accusers, while expressing full or qualified support for the activities of Wikileaks. But far too many on the left take the view of Whoopi Goldberg, discussing the Polanski case on The View:
I know it wasn’t “rape” rape. I think it was something else, but I don’t believe it was “rape” rape.
What she was trying to say was: there’s rape, and there’s rape by liberal-left icons. There’s a big difference, don’t you know.
The feminists abandoned women’s rights a long time ago when they aligned themselves with the Islamists. They turned a blind to the plight of Muslim women and ignored and defended the indefensible.
http://www.hudson-ny.org/540/the-dutch-stockholm-syndrome
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139738
I agree that the wailing has subsided a bit since the details of the claim have come to light. The anti-accuser sentiment before the police report came out was much higher than it is now. Folks do now tend to want to see how this progresses.
But it is a very strange case. I’m fairly sure it would never see the inside of a courtroom in australia. If you think it would (or should) be prosecuted in the US, then by all means say so. I’m sure the sisterhood would be glad to have the support of PJM on hearsay prosecutions of philanderers.
IF guilty, assange is guilty of being a jerk. I already thought he was a jerk – I don’t need a prosecutor to tell me that. But as it stands, he’s accused of somehow magically causing a condom to break (because, hey, that NEVER happens accidentally, right? At least 85% percent of the time, anyway), of pressing his, ahem, affections upon a girl who, miracle of miracles, is already in bed with him and not getting an HIV test when (allegedly) asked. Now, on principle I think he should have agreed to that last one. But it shouldn’t have come to a prosecutor to sort it out.
And all of it comes down to he-said-she-said. I repeat – anyone who thinks that’s a sound basis for a criminal rape prosecution, then hold up your hand. Hello? Anyone?
I reckon assange is a jerk. I don’t have a problem with what he’s doing wiki-wize, but I don’t like him personally one little bit. If I were a girl, I’d want nothing to do with the guy. Apparently I’m a bit smarter than two lasses from sweden. But do they have a criminal case? IMHO, based on the evidence revealed so far, no.
Meanwhile, I don’t see why sweden doesn’t just sign an agreement with britain and australia that gives the guy legal immunity against extradition to the US – with, say, $20 million pounds in an escrow account to seal the deal. Let’s get on with this and cut the BS. I want sweden to get on with the business of either redeeming or embarrassing itself without that added complication.
Matthew, you must be living in Idaho or something. Of course in most states in this country (as in most countries) these accusations would be laughed out of court. But this is Sweden, Jake – rules are different here, and no one in Sweden thingks these charges to be ridiculous.
“and no one in Sweden thingks these charges to be ridiculous”
Really? I haven’t seen any polling at all on what swedes think about the case. Do you have some links?
Oh, and this thread is about the left’s abandonment of women’s rights. It’s about THEIR response to the charges, not what sweden’s laws might happen to be.
The reason is simply that feminists still remember the old witch weighing trials.
Feminist’s don’t care. They care about justice for women and not the greater good. If this was not true they’d be marching in the streets insisting that veterans hospitals full of men with smashed minds and bodies be co-ed.
In the long run, the only group who has ever made an institution that truly ended up taking into account the greater good, even at their own expense, has been the racist, imperialist, colonialist, oppressive European descended men who everyone loves to hate.
If you wait for blacks, gays, women and Latinos to take a long view for the greater good of all, you’ll end up with a permanent grimmace on your face unless you’re stupid enough to believe that G.L.A.D., NOW, the NAACP or the National Council of La Raza really care about anything but their own myopic agenda that pretty much encompasses a philosophy that is the exact opposite of the US Constitution while hypocritically manipulating that document for their own ends.
I can’t think of organizations that are less American in outlook than these. They even equal Hizbollah in their thinking that they are always right to insist on their own rights while ignoring those of others regardless of the damage to the future of this nation.
I’m trying to imagine America founded by a group of blacks, gays, feminists and Latinos and what I get is an image that is clear only in the scope of its failure. Such groups unrealistically only exist within the framework of the institutions they profess to be against and they are killing the goose that laid the golden egg all the while falsely arguing that they are each the goose.
Really? Where did you get THAT silly idea?
If feminists cared about JUSTICE, they would celebrate women who choose to be full time mothers, instead of denigrating them. They would celebrate women’s right to be fully informed of the medical facts and risks of abortion, instead of fighting it tooth and nail. They would demand that abortion clinics meet basic medical standards of cleanliness, instead of fighting vigorously to ensure that they are the most unregulated medical facilities in America. They would take to the streets in outrage over the many rapes and forced abortions that occur in America’s abortion mills. They would be marching on Washington to demand full disclosure of medical complications of abortions in this country, instead of trying to crucify everyone to tries to bring it out in the open. They would be on every talk show screaming about the fact that more women are being harmed by abortion today than there ever were before Roe vs. Wade.
Feminists are not the least bit interested in JUSTICE.
The rape allegations against this turd really miss the point. The man should be brought back to this country in chains for the simple reason that he’s guilty of espoinage. That is the overriding crime for which he should be put in jail for. Assange is the Al Capone of the digital age. If they can’t get him on espionage, they’ll try to get him on a lesser charge (as they did Capone for tax evasion). This man has committed one of the biggest acts of espionage in the past 20 years and our horrific Attorney General is still trying to decide what to charge him with, let alone how to bring him back to this country to face charges. It really is pathetic.
Espionage? Really? That would take some pretty sophisticated arguing to sustain. I don’t see how he’s any more guilty that the guardian, the SMH, the new York times. He’s a receiver of stolen information, no doubt about that. But he din’t steal it.
How do you know that for sure, Matthew? How do you know he wasn’t working in cunjunction with Manning, or that he had even engineered the entire plot? We have yet to hear ANYTHING about Assange’s part in the theft of this information. Also, in the old days of the Cold War, if somebody STOLE information through espoinage in this country and then handed it off to another person in another country, the end user of that information was just as guilty as the person who stole it. So if somebody stole information here in the United States and then gave it to a third party, like the Soviets, are you saying the Soviets were not guilty of espionage? That argument sure didn’t hold any water during the Cold War, nor should it hold any water now.
How do you know that for sure, Matthew? How do you know he wasn’t working in cunjunction with Manning, or that he had even engineered the entire plot?
A couple of things:
(1) You’re the one saying it’s guilty – it’s not enough to say “well, prove he isn’t”.
(2) Assange doesn’t personally need to “engineer” anything. He’s got a web site set up for people to anonymously upload stuff. For him to communicate directly with people to solicit material would be a suicidal risk. How would he even contact manning? Just wander around in iraq with a laptop, looking for people who might look a bit like spies? How would that work?
We have yet to hear ANYTHING about Assange’s part in the theft of this information.
Well, yes. We have. According to wikileaks, they don’t know who uploaded the material. They claim that they can’t even confirm that it was manning because they just don’t know. That’s the point. To have a leak site that isn’t set up to protect the identity of the leakers would be pretty stupid. Assange had nothing to do with it because he didn’t have to.
Also, in the old days of the Cold War, if somebody STOLE information through espoinage in this country and then handed it off to another person in another country, the end user of that information was just as guilty as the person who stole it.
But that’s just silly. Assange isn’t a US citizen, he’s never set foot on US territory. How on earth can he qualify as a spy against the US?
So if somebody stole information here in the United States and then gave it to a third party, like the Soviets, are you saying the Soviets were not guilty of espionage? That argument sure didn’t hold any water during the Cold War, nor should it hold any water now.
Ugh. They might be ethically guilty of espionage – just like every other country that ever existed. But legally? No. Has the US ever arrested and tried any KGB spymasters who operated out of the kremlin? Should russia be gunning for CIA chiefs?
Obviously assange (et al) is guilty of publishing secrets. But I don’t see how that makes him any different to a lot of journalists.
“They might be ethically guilty of espionage – just like every other country that ever existed. But legally? No. Has the US ever arrested and tried any KGB spymasters who operated out of the kremlin? Should russia be gunning for CIA chiefs?”
You’re kidding, right? So the KGB was only “ethically” guilty of espionage, not in reality. Hard to argue with strange logic like that. So all those KGB spies during the cold war were only guilty of “ethical” violations, not crimes of espionage, right? And for the record, the US HAS arrested A LOT of KGB agents, which were either killed or exchanged for our own agents during the Cold War. Just read any of the books about the Cold War to see that. And as for Russia gunning for CIA chiefs, to think they haven’t tried is to be naive at best. Read “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” by Tim Weiner if you want to get more information about that.
“But that’s just silly. Assange isn’t a US citizen, he’s never set foot on US territory. How on earth can he qualify as a spy against the US?”
How on earth can a foreigner qualify as a spy against the United States? Again, you’re kidding right? So all spies against this country are native-born Americans, right? Were you even ALIVE during the Cold War? So I guess all of those Soviet spies working out of the Soviet embassy were all born in Kansas, right? And by your definition, all those KGB spy masters were NOT guity of espionage against the US because they were not born here or even set foot here. That is just odd thinking. And how do you know Assange was never here? Has every aspect of this guy’s life been published? But even if he wasn’t physically here, in this digital age you can set up shop anywhere in the world and still get information to inflict damage on any country. Ever hear of “hacking” government files?
“According to wikileaks, they don’t know who uploaded the material.”
Oh, so now we’re to believe whatever Wikileaks says, right? Heavens, they would never, ever, lie to us, correct? Do you honestly believe everything you read on the Internet? Wow, you really trust this guy, don’t you. Again, how do you know if this guy didn’t have anything to do with the uploading of this information? And should there also be no price for enabling people to print sensitive or classified documents that harm a nation? If you think he should not pay a price for that, then I guess anybody can be an accessory to a crime and not be found guilty of that.
“(1) You’re the one saying it’s guilty – it’s not enough to say “well, prove he isn’t.”
No, sorry chum, I don’t have to prove anything. Assange is the guy in possession of and publishing a lot of stolen documents. He is the guy who has to prove that he didn’t break any laws, especially if his actions caused the deaths of people or agents both in Afghanistan and Iraq. The very fact that he is in possession of stolen secret documents makes him a criminal. Publishing them makes the crime even worse.
There is Sarah Palin Derangement Syndrome. And there is the Assange Derangement Syndrome.
Both express themselves as deliberate obtuseness and constructs that claim to prove _something_ but that just show up the poster as another person too obsessed to discuss anything in a constructive manner.
Why, it even gets otherwise perfectly sane conservatives into a position where they rabidly want to hold up ‘laws’ that are catch-all oppressive tools of the left that poison the coherence of an entire society and turn most folks into instant sex offenders.
Mr. Assange is not our friend, but let’s not make common cause with our enemies and sell out own believes in order to support their sick sabotage of society just because this once it happens to be a handy wrench with which to catch a monkey.
Well, honestly, i think the “rape charges” brought against him were not rape at all. I think Assange is vile and repugnant but i think that Sweden’s calling sex without a condom rape is proof enough against statism and socialism. Men in Sweden have helot status.
First, I agree with your assessment of Mr Assange, but – and this is a big BUT – your opinion of the laws of the country of Sweden have nothing to do with it. As a sovereign country they can make any laws they see fit. I’m sure that should they object to our 2nd Amendment rights (which they probably do) you would – rightly – tell them to mind-their-own-business-thank-you-very-much.
Rape will never mean to you what it meant and meas to me.
Assange’s situation is interesting because his liberal icon status is based on the first two major Wikileaks document dumps. The most recent one, in December, included info that was far more embarrassing to the Obama Administration, climate change hysterics, Michael Moore and other various liberals. That did not sit well with many, and if you’ll notice, it was after that when the Justice Department suddenly took and interest in dealing with Assange, and a number of feminists suddenly decided that maybe the Swedish women should at least get a hearing.
Julian’s anti-American stance in general still makes him a darling to most leftists in the world community, but any more releases like the ones in December, and like a species whose population has been nursed back to health, Assange may lose his protected status.
However, it’s equally possible that Assange is guilty of serious sexual crimes,
Guess you are not a believer in the presumption of innocence.
and at the very least there’s a case to be answered.
There is also the possibility of charges being filed out of malice abetted by politically ambitious (and politically correct) prosecutors.
I don’t know everything about this case but I haven’t seen or heard anything to indicate the sex was anything but consensual, which means there was no rape.
And yes, the names of those who make allegations of rape should be public. False allegations are anything but rare. A woman who makes a false allegation should face the same penalty as a rapist since the crime is equally as vile.
And in many cases, such as this one, it would be better for the legal authorities to tell everybody to go home and stop bothering them.
And yes, I don’t particularly like Assange.
Which is all completely beside the point of the article. Swedish law is what it is, and will do what it will do. The point of the article is why are the feminists siding with Assange (and please don’t try to argue that they’re against false and frivolous rape charges).
Actually, the point McNally seems to be making is that it is somehow shameful to point out the Assange really hasn’t done anything worthy of criminal prosecution regarding the sex claims.
At least in any sane society.
If Naomi Wolf actually takes the right side for a change, I won’t attack her for it.
While I agree with you that false rape accusations are anything but rare, and just as vile as the real thing (both to real rape victims as well as the men they falsely accuse), publishing the names sould only be done after a trial is over and the accuser found to have made false accusations. e.g. the Duke accuser *should* have had her picture and name published, and she should have been charged. (such women should be ostrasized from the civilized world and their heinous behavior published and punished – they harm women as well as men).
Real rape victims do not deserve to have their names published far and wide and be humiliated all over again.
I wondered why rape charges were being brought up against Assange. He most certainly has the mannerisms of a gay man. I can’t be the only person to be aware of this truism.
On what planet have you been living during your sentient lifetime?
That you say the Left is abandonning its position on “womens” rights. Take a good look at their behaviours and agenda, particularly those of their “leaders” in the USA e.g. ALL the Kennedys, William AND Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Gloria Steinem, and the others who for a very long time, once they got their hands on the gavel, turned to more interesting subjects. Look for instance at their “strong” positions and protest at the behaviours of some African, some Arab, some Asian governors. HOW BRAVE these leftists /”feminists” are/ were when pushing against governments that provided them RIGHTS protected in Law and custom, than in societies in which the governors have, or have taken, absolute powers of life and death over their people. Governors whose response to leftists/ feminists protests, were there any in evidence, was/ is to gun them down, murder,send to re-education camps with psychoactive drug and other aids to “educate” to consensus, to imprison to gulags any protesters.
How diplomatic these brave one might even say heroic leftists/feminists become in those instances. When they do not simply ignore altogether the assaults and abrogations of “human rights” in those nations.
“Human Rights” so assiduously pursued for redress ie reparations when addressing ,the nations of which these so brave head leftists can find nothing of redeeming value / virtue. EXCEPT the moral, legal and institutional power and influence these Leftists/feminists covet and have been for the past half century with their sheepdog allies in Congress and Court UNLAWFULLY abrogating again and again and again. AT THE SAME TIME living in and availing themselves of these Rights and Protections. Rights and protections not, NEVER YET, available to the people of those other nations. Independent nations Leftists/feminists hold up as “victims” of western nations.
What you describe here in your article is simply SOP of these leftists/ feminists / one- worlders / internationalists / “Democrats” / “liberals” / progressives / “best and brightest” / “feel your pain compassionates”. Their dreams of “power over the lives of others” as lust for release in any ways possible.
The real mystery is WHY, the evidence available for all to witness, that so many who were not as these Leftists, not to put too fine a point on it, deranged creatures, were seduced to gave them honours, and powers to interfere and restrict the lives of so many others. For their always and from the outset known by these Leftists / feminists to be chimera.
I have said this before Assange labels himself as a leftist because that’s where “you get money for nothing and the chicks are free.” (This case falls under the latter.) So far the wikileaks do they have put the incompetence of the Obama administration on display (why do you think that after the initial story happened the actual cables have been relegated to the back pages?) while generally exonerating Israel and the Bush administration.
Assange has become another fake but accurate narrative for the left.
Assange wisely chooses only white women to assault. Wouldn’t the left attack him if, say, the “victim” were a black freelance stripper, a’ la the Duke University Lacrosse Team case, or do his leftist ‘fides preclude any judgement indicating misogynist leanings, like Ted Kennedy’s proclivity for “waitress sandwiches”?
Precisely Snake! The left cares nothing for the facts of any situation. They only care if it’s useful to serve their narrative. So if a leftie does it, down the memory hole. Not “rape, rape”. If as, in the Duke case, it can be made to appear that whitey did it, bingo!!!
Naomi Wolf ? She’s the chick (sorry, “feminist consultant”) that dressed the Goracle (known today as “the crazed sex poodle”) in olive drab during his presidential run.
In speeches, she rambles on and on, completely disjointed, if you’ve ever been unfortunate enough to hear her.
Perhaps the Swedish women’s charges were trumped up to nail Assange, but the interesting thing (according to the charges as they were written up) was that both Swedish feministas were, essentially, Assange Groupies and hopped in the sack with him in minutes, if not hours. In other words, barely elevated above Rock Star groupies.
Reportedly, Assange, (aka “the cad”) got one of them (at least) to pay his various and sundry expenses in Sweden.
Relative to “abandonment of women’s rights” look at the whole feminista refusal to vociferously rag on Muslims for their treatment of women.
That’s because, in the feminista playbook (they follow it lockstep), so called multiculturalism and obeisance to cultural differences trump actual facts of behavior.
And look at the feminista failure to rag on Bill Clinton, post Monica revelations. That’s because Bill was their (liberal) guy who favored child care centers for working moms and so forth.
Women who faithfully subscribe to some kind of feminista litany are, by and large, agenda driven, and, frequently, shallow hypocrites.
Chappaquiddick.
Selling out of women to “the cause” is nothing new.
The left-feminists lost all moral authority with their shameful silence over the treatment of women suffering under sharia law.
Evidence is growing that Assange was set up on the sexual charges (the point Moore, Wolf and Pilger were trying to make to begin with) especially given the CIA connections (not of the women themselves but of the LAW FIRM representing the women – see OpEdNews article at http://tinyurl.com/4fo977u)
In addition the Swedish press is reporting that Karl Rove was involved. I’m sure people remember Karl Rove and all his dirty tricks against Bush’s opponents. I also strongly recommend people read the article translated from the Swedish in OpEdNews at http://www.opednews.com/articles/Rove-Suspected-In-Swedish-by-Andrew-Kreig-101219-292.html
The whole Wikileaks/feminist controversy is starting to smell like classic Cointelpro tactics to me. The use of identity politics to divide the progressive movement dates back to the 1960s civil rights movement. I write about my sad personal experiences with all this in my recent memoir THE MOST REVOLUTIONARY ACT: MEMOIR OF AN AMERICAN REFUGEE (www.stuartbramhall.com). I currently live in exile in New Zealand.
Karl Rove??? That’s the nuttiest thing I’ve seen since Gasland.
What about waiting for the facts and let the court decide?
But wait. You are also the one to start an on-line petition to indict Sarah Palin for incitement to violence.
Damn the facts, trial by media.
What about starting a on-line petition to indict the Democratic Party for incitement to violence?
(From the DLC website)
http://www.ndol.org/upload_graphics/BP_0405_heartland1.gif
Or doesn’t that fit your warped sense of justice?
“I currently live in exile in New Zealand.”
Sounds terrible.
If you don’t like it in New Zealand you are free to leave.
To be honest, please leave!
We have enough conspiracy nuts and neo marxists, such as Matt McCarten and John Minto and their groupies, to keep us amused.
Judging from the details given to the guardian, I think both women felt they couldn’t say “no” to this “star” personality. Once they compared notes, they realised he was just an ordinary guy and no “star” at all. Then they realised they had not “really” wanted sex with him. It’s a tricky case because he’s quite correct to say that they were willing at the time but they are also quite correct to feel that they were abused in some way. Perhaps because I’m a woman, I feel the women’s case is stronger. If a woman says “yes” to protected sex but “no” to unprotected sex, then in my view it is indeed rape if a man engages in unprotected sex. The case of the second woman is clearer here as he initiated sex while she was asleep. The case of the first rests on what exactly he did to that condom. All in all, I have absolutely no problem with the idea that Assange has a case to answer.
Didn’t the self serving moron,,,Whoopi Goldberg say about a director who raped a 13 year old child…”Well…it wasn’t rape rape”?
What do you expect from a fornicating lover of rapists?
If Assange was actually charged with something, there might be some basis to consider issues related to extradition. However, given he is wanted for ‘questioning’, let the interrogators come to him, at a place that obviates his worry about abduction, a fear, given the players involved, that is perfectly rational.
Like purchased Harem slaves who have lost the Sultan’s eye, all of the left’s siphoned off special interest groups are discardable. It’s sad that they A: don’t know it yet and B: really don’t care as long as they can stay in the harem rent free.
Puppetry works best like that!
With all due respect, Mike, I don’t think you’re getting the whole picture. You might have cited Sady Doyle and the #MooreandMe campaign. There’s little interest in facts on that side of the debate, and all ideology. Frankly, I’m surprised Pajamas endorsed an essay that fobs off legitimate questions over the allegations as blind support for Assange. I hate Assange, but to see the gender feminists go on attack is to see the workings of a totalitarian movement. At least address that if you’re looking for a balanced account of events.
The New Reality of Rape–and Porn
Every grade schooler knows, or should know, that under the Western world’s systems of justice, everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
It matters not whether the court of public opinion has already condemned an accused as, for example, in the instance of Jared Loughner who was seen by dozens to have unleashed a mad, homicidal barrage of gunfire in Tucson 10 days ago. He is still an alleged assailant until and unless he is convicted.
So, too, is Julian Assange, the infamous and admitted WikiLeak leaker of hundreds of thousands of classified American government documents, still an alleged terrorist and will be “alleged” to have committed crimes until he has his day in court and is convicted.
Assange has also been accused of other crimes, vicious crimes of raping and sexually assaulting two women in Sweden.
Regardless of the merits of the case against him, and the details are in dispute, the reactions and lack of reactions of America’s Left, and especially of liberal women, to the charges have been very telling and indicative of their brazen hypocrisy. To many such women, if the accused is a fellow liberal, particularly an America-hater like Assange, any sexual offenses can readily be forgiven as peccadillos, if that.
Assange was arrested in Britain and is currently free on bail. His attorney and the liberal Brit press have taken to referring to the victims by the quaint and derogatory British term, “moneytrappers,” what we would “golddiggers,” and his supporters are dismissing the allegations as nothing more than that and as a politically-motivated conspiracy by grasping females to smear Assange. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3439)
The left displaying their “completly hyprocrtical” stance on “women’s rights” (except when it’s inconvient) is absolutely nothing new. I’m sure the names Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton ring a bell. They were all for women’s rights, as long as those women offered them sexual favors. Of course, NOW isn’t any better – e.g. they stood behind Kennedy and Clinton. They also attack conservative women.