December 9, 2010

"That's rape in Sweden!"

In Taki's Magazine, Jim Goad explains what Julian Assange of WikiLeaks is in the hoosegow for. 

Apparently, hell hath no fury like a feminist scorned.

By Steve Sailer on 12/09/2010

77 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am not the first to say this, but I think this is pretty obviously being pushed forward by the general irritation that the various state employees have towards him.

12/10/10, 1:12 AM
Anonymous said...

He and Sweden deserve each other.

12/10/10, 6:35 AM
Anonymous said...

So the accusations are dubious and probably politically motived.

Try making that point in a mixed-sex environment.

12/10/10, 7:04 AM
Dahinda said...

Steve, I have to say that just about everything that you have ever written equals rape in Sweden!

12/10/10, 7:26 AM
Anonymous said...

A livelier account:

http://roissy.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/the-assange-rape-a-case-of-spurned-groupies/

12/10/10, 7:52 AM
Kylie said...

What do you expect from a country that produced an international best-seller originally (and with no apparent irony) titled Men Who Hate Women?

So private actions are publically revealed to the entire world spitefully and vindictively by a person claiming to act in the name of truth, justice and anything but the American way....now where I have heard this one lately?

Thanks, Juley. I never would have made the connection between diplomatic cables and sexual intercourse were it not for you. Yet another instructive example of how what goes around, comes around. Maybe you'll be able to ride this one out. Maybe some good will come out of it. Maybe you'll be able to head off further harmful revelations about your private affairs. Maybe your standing as a member of the international community of whistle-blowers won't be permanently damaged. Maybe I'll get tired of cheap puns drenched in Schadenfreude.

Maybe.

For the record, I don't mind what he did with Wikileaks half as much as I mind his motives. Pretty much anything that embarrasses the current and last US administrations is fine with me. But he apparently didn't consider or didn't care about the fall-out. And that's unacceptable. A payback should always be confined to the offending party and should always be proportionate to the offense.

12/10/10, 8:58 AM
josh said...

Roissy had a great piece on this,too. Swedish girls have had,from time immemorial,a rep for being sexy and beautiful.In reality they seem to be some nasty sons of bitches. A rethinking may be in order,just as Russian girls' rep for being ugly and masculine--when Brezhnevs wife,at a Commie summit,is mistaken for Fidel Castro,you can see how that could hurt their image---was obliterated by Glasnost. They,the Swedes, are a creep,nasty,mean people,esp the women,with their rotten stinking feminism. As Asange is a tool of Israel,I cant summon much sympathy for him,but I hope he is able to beat this.(Just as I similarly had a twinge of sympathy for Tiger,given his she-devil bitch harridan of a wife.)

12/10/10, 9:07 AM
Tino said...

A couple of points about Swedish rape/feminism:

1. It’s not as simple as Sweden having harsh rape laws. We have bad rape laws. Until recently, rapists would often walk because certain real rape was not defined as rape (such as getting the girl unconscious and having your way).

What they did was to make the laws broader. But reducing type 1 error increases type 2 errors, so now you have all these false accusations.

Furthermore, the punishment for rape is still very mild. 1-2 years is normal.

2. Feminism is strong is Scandinavia, more than American readers can imagine. It may be the biggest difference between U.S and Sweden, more than economic or foreign policy. The word “psychosis” describes it well.

However, after a large ideological battle in the mid 2000s, and perhaps due to internal dynamics, the feminism bubble was bursts. Young Swedish women are no longer brainwashed to same extent by post-modern Marxist feminist theory in media and academia.

But these two girls are leftist activists, and appear to still live inside the feminist bubble, and are therefore for all intents and proposes mentally insane.

12/10/10, 9:26 AM
michael farris said...

"this is pretty obviously being pushed forward by the general irritation that the various state employees have towards him"

Gee, ya think?

12/10/10, 9:41 AM
Anonymous said...

I am not sure if Sweden has any type of due process rights but I would be willing to be that there are plenty of good defence lawyers that would be willing to waive their fees to get the opportunity to cross examine Anna Ardin under oath. Furthermore, if Assnage has a jury of his peers, he will get 12 men, albeit emasculated swedish men, to sit and judge. Demand a jury trial.

12/10/10, 9:53 AM
fbj said...

Chateau writes basically the same thing, only more sprinkled with delightful insults towards feminists

http://roissy.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/the-assange-rape-a-case-of-spurned-groupies/

I live in laughingstock Sweden and a small comfort right now is that we're not part of the Eurozone :)

12/10/10, 10:20 AM
Anonymous said...

OT

Foreign Cinema.

http://www.tnr.com/book/review/european-invasion-foreign-film

12/10/10, 10:48 AM
Anonymous said...

If Sweden has any kind of due process, I doubt this case will ever go the distance to the trial. The women know damn well that they'll be ripped to shreds under any kind of cross-examination because they were both more than friendly with him in public afterward. They'll withdraw their claims before things ever get that far. What's more, I don't think they care at all: their goal was simply to create legal trouble for him, and they've succeeded gloriously at that. With legal wrangling about extradition, he could be in jail for a year or more.
It's pure sweet, state-assisted revenge from spurned lovers.

12/10/10, 10:52 AM
agnostic said...

It's high time for Scandinavia to re-paganize. A lot of other places converted and were no different or even the better for it. But look at how overboard they've gone on civility and kindness.

12/10/10, 10:57 AM
Anonymous said...

I was surprised that this dork had groupies. Maybe I shouldn't have been. I wasn't surprised that his groupies were so flakey though.

This is why you don't want to associated with feminists.

12/10/10, 11:09 AM
MQ said...

But he apparently didn't consider or didn't care about the fall-out. And that's unacceptable

Amazing how people are taken in by propaganda here. Three points:

1) No fallout in terms of physical harm to anyone due to these leaks has ever been demonstrated.

2) Wikileaks routinely contacts the U.S. government in advance of a leak to ask them to help in redacting any information that could cause harm. The government has always turned them down, they don't want to add to the legitimacy of the organization and they want to keep the claim that this causes some undefined, non-specified risk to our troops.

3) Wikileaks themselves (without the help the government refuses) redacts any individual identifiers which could cause harm prior to a release.

Interference with wikileaks is an attack on press freedom *within the U.S.*, as it sets an "official secrets act" type precedent for punishing third parties who are not spying simply for talking about things the government deems a secret. So this is not an academic issue.

12/10/10, 11:09 AM
Simon in London said...

Swedish Leftism does seem like a national psychosis. Compare Sweden to relatively-normal Norway, Denmark and Finland, and the contrast is striking. Sweden as a nation feels insane. I visited on vacation back in 2004 and we were happy to leave early for Norway. Norway is boring (except the scenery) and hideously expensive, but the absence of mental malaise was worth it.

Many Swedish women are physically beautiful though. Just don't have sex with them!

12/10/10, 11:33 AM
Anonymous said...

See, the meeker the men, the more women will be disgusted with them. And the more they're disgusted with men, the more likely they'll be to accuse them of anything that could stick, including, ironically, of being too violent.

Leave it to a roissy cultist to write like a villian in a Stieg Larsson novel.

12/10/10, 11:50 AM
rob said...

The CIA or whoever really effed up on this one. We're supposed to believe that a computer nerd actually talked to 2 chicks?

12/10/10, 12:07 PM
corvinus said...

It appears that few things make a woman angrier than if she likes a man, he has sex with her, and then takes off with nary a thought. A variation on that is if she finds out through the female gossip chain that he loves a different woman. Yet another thing that ticks them off is if she likes him, knows he likes her back, yet he denies it and flirts with other women.

Generally speaking, a man can stay out of trouble if he never comes on sexually to a woman whom he isn't "in love" with. This is counterintuitive, for men tend to think the opposite, that they have to watch out for the women who aren't attracted to them. But this turns out not to be a problem. if she wasn't receptive to him, she'd shut him down before anything got started. It's the other way round that's more legally dangerous!

12/10/10, 1:47 PM
Whiskey said...

Yes, Roissy is the go to guy for the take on it.

What is telling is that the case is so bogus, and yet ... the Swedish State, which would be expected to dump this into the toilet (a waste of time) is pursuing it.

That to me says that the pols expect a higher domestic benefit from pandering to women, "rape" defined as any sex which women regret afterwards, than pandering to anti-American, anti-Western stuff that Assange trades in.

Yes, that "Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" author (Swedish title "Men Who Hate Women") paints Sweden as the hotbed of abuse and rape. But not oh not the Muslim rape-war against natives, oh no. Which has spawned an "anti-rape belt" created by two Swedish women. Nope. It is the feminist HATE HATE HATE for Beta Males.

Sweden is ground zero for feminism and equality and beta male-ism. The Kindergartens require boys to dress as girls one day each week. Peeing standing up is forbidden. The feminists even tried to forbid marriage, changing it to a ten year "contract" renewable only once. With gay marriage a plenty and ultra-liberal sex laws for female representation on corporate boards and electoral bodies.

As a result, Swedish women HATE HATE HATE their beta male counterparts with a passion. And desire as Sandra Tsing Loh points out, Muslim men who dominate them (and form the bulk/85% of real rape cases).

12/10/10, 2:27 PM
Anonymous said...

Sweden is the country where a feminist party which had garnered 5% of the vote had a "man tax" in their political platform. That tacitly means that 5% of the Swedish adult population (10 % of the women) felt that men should simply pay more due to the fact that they have a cock! Perhaps they need to have a "women's tax" where the women cook and clean for the country while the men work outside the home to raise money for the tax (that is a joke).

12/10/10, 3:25 PM
Anonymous said...

I do not buy the theory that these charges have materialized because of American omnipotence.

Indeed, I think the Swedish government would have a laughing fit if the CIA (or any other American power) asked them to do such a thing.

The real story, I think, is that the world has gotten to a point where it really is more dangerous to anger a woman in a "progressive" country than leak U.S. military secrets.

12/10/10, 3:37 PM
Tino said...

”Compare Sweden to relatively-normal Norway, Denmark and Finland”

Simon: I disagree. The Scandinavian insanity scale goes Norway-Sweden-Denmark-Finland.

Norway is more feminist than Sweden in most regards. They have a law that publicly traded companies have to have 40% women.

• Big Business organizations are controlled by the state in Norway and supports the madness, while in Sweden they resist policies like this.

• The Norwegians have made a political farce out of the Nobel Peace Prize, while in Sweden it is given out more or less fair.

• Norway just elected a left-wing government which includes communists. In Sweden currently the socialist parties together poll less than a third of the vote.

Wiskey:

The Swedish State is not a monolith. We have strict laws against politicians getting involved in bureaucratic decision making.

It may sound naïve or even absurd to you, but if you ask most Swedes (including insiders) they will tell you that the rape case is a coincidence. If it is ever found out that the foreign minister is behind this, it will be the greatest political scandal in decades. Would they take this risk to marginally protect American interests?

The stuff you write about kindergartens is not true. There are a handful of experimental kindergartens that do all sort of crazy things, and get a lot of attention from the media, but the regular kindergartens that have 99.9% of the kids do none of the things you mentioned. Swedes are fairly socially conservative in private and when it comes to their kids.

One last point: Perhaps because the ideology is so crazy and foreign to human nature, Swedish women decouple feministic theory and private behavior. These two girls are representative of educated leftists, but not on ordinary women:

• According to time use studies the aggregate gender division of labor is the same as the United States, roughly 60-40 for work and 40-60 for home production.

• Over 80% of parental leave is taken by mothers.

• Swedish mothers but not fathers typically work half-time.

12/10/10, 3:40 PM
Atot said...

Mr. Wikileaks is Mr. Dickileaks.

12/10/10, 3:47 PM
Kylie said...

"No fallout[quoting my use of that term] in terms of physical harm to anyone due to these leaks has ever been demonstrated."

I didn't specify physical harm. Don't alter my statements to make them more vulnerable to your arguments. And don't bother going all high-minded spouting tripe about an "attack on press freedom". I really couldn't care less whether or no those cables were leaked. I know I don't have the whole story and doubt I ever will so I can't make an informed judgment. That said, nothing I have read about Assange or heard him say makes me think he had any motive other than embarrassing nations and individuals he dislikes. And I find that spiteful and petty, not noble and just. He strikes me as a bright but developmentally delayed and terribly unattractive adolescent and I'm delighted to know his own tactics were used against him.

12/10/10, 5:23 PM
MSG said...

The first thing I thought of after learning how ridiculous charges are was Br'er Rabbit and the briar patch. Can we rule out the possibility that this is a collusion and a charade intended to buy time before his eventual extradition to the United States?

12/10/10, 5:58 PM
sj071 said...

Further Buddhisation of Swedish society is the only way forward towards the peacefull resolution and prevention of violence.

12/10/10, 6:09 PM
So Badly Played said...

It was a strange coincidence to hear NPR today bleet about how the Chinese imprisoned Nobel Peace winner Liu Xiaobo on trumped up charges. This, at a time when Sweden, Australia, America, Interpol, Western corporations (Visa, MC, PayPay, Amazon) and Western media are colluding to do the exact same thing to Assange with false smears of sex crimes.

Of course not a peep from NPR on the more important news happening now in our own Western world, just Richard Gere-like moral preening.

Our Western media first informed me that Assange was a pedophile. Now, he's still falsely reported as a rapist. Some Western leaders are hoping to blame a hit on Putin. It's depressing when Russian media is more reliable and has the moral high ground to call the West hypocrites.

The Chinese and Russians must love this spectacle of the West immolating ourselves in every way possible.

12/10/10, 6:31 PM
Anonymous said...

Apparently, hell hath no fury like a feminist scorned.

Are you guys following this breaking story tonight about Obama abdicating the presidential podium to Slick Willy with some off-the-cuff remark about not keeping Michelle waiting at the White House Christmas party?

I know that most of the folks on the starboard side of the blog-o-sphere are gleeful about this turn of events [i.e. the bloom coming off the rose of the Obama myth], but boy-oh-boy-oh-boy, it is pretty dadgum terrifying to see an IQ-115 quota hire in action* here as commander-in-chief.


*Er, missing from action altogether.

Yikes.

PS: Some of the folks at Free Republic are speculating [487, 442, 279] that he was really called away from the podium by the nicotine addiction.

12/10/10, 6:46 PM
Anonymous said...

Everything is rape in Sweden except when a Muslim man molests a child: that's what is known as a cultural misunderstanding.

12/10/10, 7:03 PM
Chief Seattle said...

All the Vikings with balls are in England and Ireland.

12/10/10, 7:05 PM
Anonymous said...

"The stuff you write about kindergartens is not true."

Whiskey has said stuff that is not true!! I repeat, Whiskey has said stuff that is not true!! Is everyone paying attention?

12/10/10, 7:19 PM
none of the above said...

Kylie:

I recall hearing a comment from some famous investigative reporter, to the effect that you pretty much have to be a monumental asshole to do the job well. (He said it better than that.) I suspect this is basically the case with Assange--in order to be willing to run a site whose purpose is to leak secrets of the powerful, you probably can't be the kind of person who spends his time wondering if some of those secrets might have a good purpose you can't see.

12/10/10, 7:29 PM
none of the above said...

What, according to the respectable mainstream voices in America, is the real sin of someone like Steve in his posts and articles? What characterizes the difference between Steve and how those respectable voices deal with topics such as race and IQ and school performance, race and crime, the impact of immigration on low-wage native labor, etc.? As far as I can see, their main complaint isn't that Steve's not telling the truth (though sometimes they think he's wrong), it's that he's not responsible. Responsible journalism means deciding what topics ought not to be discussed, what facts ought not to be put in front of the people, what viewpoints are too dangerous or destabilizing to be voiced.

This is also the main complaint against Assange. He's disclosing true things, and since the first mass disclosure, apparently being careful not to leak the names of Afghan and Iraqi collaborators and such. But they're things that the respectable, powerful people in the US really think ought not to be discussed in public.

I mean, why upset the American people with stories of taxpayer dollars used to provide important Afghans with some boys for the evening? Why would we really need to know that we've been carrying out attacks in Yemen? Or all those embarrassing revelations about just how corrupt our tame Afghan government is, or how Karzai is on Iran's payroll, too? I mean, really, it's just not responsible to put that sort of thing out in public, where little people can read it.

By contrast, responsible newspapers like the NYT are careful to mostly publish leaked stories that the administration wanted leaked. They can be relied on to responsibly avoid raising socially uncomfortable questions, whether those involve racial issues or issues of empire.

12/10/10, 7:47 PM
Kylie said...

"I recall hearing a comment from some famous investigative reporter, to the effect that you pretty much have to be a monumental asshole to do the job well...I suspect this is basically the case with Assange..."

Yes, that's the impression I got from Carl Bernstein during Watergate.

Nora Ephron helpfully confirmed it for me with her hilarious roman à clef, Heartburn.

But I suspect the chosen profession of both men is incidental to their being monumental assholes.

12/10/10, 8:12 PM
Whiskey said...

You cannot demand total transparency from the West (but not say, Iran or Russia or China) and not get it demanded from YOU.

As far as Kindergarten goes, saying "not all Swedish Kindergartens are like that" only says that not all of the society is not totally insane. Would that be tolerated in say, Idaho? Nope. But Sweden it is. Would say, the US or Canada have a minor but important political party advocating end to marriage? Nope.

No one has questioned the accuracy of the statements, merely "oh its not REALLY that bad because well JUST BECAUSE!" That this stuff even exists and that Assange is charged with basically making the women regret the sex by not treating them better is indicative of how lunatic Sweden really is. And just where the US and every other WEstern nation is headed.

12/10/10, 8:22 PM
Truth said...

Sportette, you don't believe in freedom of speech? You wouldn't help children depending on what bumper sticker is on the back of the car?

You been coming off like kind of a commie the last few days.

12/10/10, 8:35 PM
Anonymous said...

Totally OT, but even my least political friends have expressed astonishment over what happened today in the White House press room:

I feel like the Yankee fans must have; I want to chant, "Whose your daaaaaaddddddy."

12/10/10, 10:01 PM
Reg Cæsar said...

The feminists even tried to forbid marriage, changing it to a ten year "contract" renewable only once. --Whisky

Feminists? Sounds like Protestantism to me.

12/10/10, 11:14 PM
Kylie said...

"Sportette, you don't believe in freedom of speech?"

Where did you come up with that?

"You wouldn't help children depending on what bumper sticker is on the back of the car?"

You got that one right anyway. And please, no personal anecdotes about how you helped some stranded redneck get his pickup out of the ditch and didn't even make a snarky comment about his gunrack and the Lynyrd Skynyrd 8 track on his dashboard.

I'm sure you're a better man than I am. And if you're not, you should be.

"You been coming off like kind of a commie the last few days."

Well, color me red.

12/10/10, 11:58 PM
Truth said...

"Would that be tolerated in say, Idaho? Nope."

Unfortunately, Sport, I don't think you would either.

12/11/10, 12:04 AM
Felix said...

Why the fuss?

As Tino said, "the punishment for rape (in Sweden) is still very mild. 1-2 years is normal".

And the prisons are presumably like a nice, second class hotel.

12/11/10, 3:57 AM
Udolpho.com said...

jesus the comments on sailer have really gone downhill

12/11/10, 7:44 AM
Nobie said...

And please, no personal anecdotes about how you helped some stranded redneck get his pickup out of the ditch and didn't even make a snarky comment about his gunrack and the Lynyrd Skynyrd 8 track on his dashboard.

An iSteve reader and a redneck on a lonely country road. Sounds like Deliverance.

12/11/10, 9:54 AM
Tino said...

Wiskey:

There are 9336 Kindergartens in Sweden. I have heard to 3 of them which do the sort of thing you describe. I can guarantee you that the 3 craziest experimental schools in the United States also do weird things, and are perfectly tolerated, as they should be.

At any case you are misleading the readers by giving the impression that this is a general phenomenon. Try to analyze quantitatively, not through anecdotal examples.

12/11/10, 10:37 AM
Anonymous said...

I just googled "rape porn". I got seven and a quarter million hits. This seems to be about an average number of hits in pornography. I tried "milf midget porn" and got almost twelve million but "farm animal porn' had less than a million. Tastes vary.

So those who say that all men are rapists are wrong. More men are intrigued by sex between older women and "little people" than are interested in rape. As far as I know milf-midget sex is completely legal in all fifty states. I have no idea what, if anything, this means.

I do know that rape appears in other primates. Orangutans have two size modes among males. The large males (about twice the size of a female) are preferred. The female apes strongly avoid mating with the smaller males. The small males rape the females. If they didn't presumably the small males would die out.

So rape is in a sense "natural". At least it's continuance in the wild and human society has a Darwinian explanation. Of course murder is also "natural" in this sense.

The natural way to control rape would seem to be to execute rapists. Unfortunately these Swedes have made it difficult to distinguish between the the man who breaks into a home, steals a child, rapes, and murders her and the guy whose date has "buyers remorse" after a little late evening spontaneous recreation. This expanded definition tends to make it more difficult tho deal with the real rapists effectively.

Albertosaurus

12/11/10, 11:11 AM
Baloo said...

Can somebody give a link for the Swedish kindergarten crossdressing thing?

12/11/10, 11:12 AM
Kylie said...

"Truth said, 'Would that be tolerated in say, Idaho? Nope.'

Unfortunately, Sport, I don't think you would either."

Have you been playing golf in Whitopia again?

12/11/10, 11:13 AM
Hoo said...

Why is it that comments by idiots like Whiskey always get through, but Steve plays Gestapo with everyone else?

Man, I hope Whiskey is donating big money to Steve, or else Steve just has a soft spot for deranged Jews like Whiskey.

12/11/10, 1:50 PM
Anonymous said...

Who would have expected a column on Swedish law to have touched off such a festival of vituperation?
Mr. Sailer, you may wish to screen comments a bit more carefully.

I am not Lugash.

12/11/10, 2:07 PM
robert61 said...

What a lot of codswallop about Sweden! The place seems to be functioning as a symbol for most of you. It's not a symbol, though; it's a fairly pleasant western European country, beset like the US by various fashionable stupidities but on the whole a decent place to live. Tino has already refuted several of the idiocies. I would add, in response to Baloo, that there's no crosslink about the kindergarten cross-dressing because it's not true. Neither did the Feminist Party ever get 5% of the vote; that would have put them in parliament. Instead they flared brightly for their Warholian 15 minutes then faded (albeit bleating shrilling all the while) into the background.

12/11/10, 2:23 PM
vor said...

good god. Chill out already, OK? It sounds here like a bunch of Chinese talking about how the Americans who adopt Chinese children just want to harvest their organs.
These are a few extreme examples of laws which may (or may not) be actually implemented, in daily life, constantly. That's what you'd say if they made a big deal about a genuine rape/murder case, right? Stop taking the extraordinary and making it the ordinary. That's the MSM's job. We're supposed to be reasoned and critical thinkers. Talk to a lot of Scandis and not just a few of the walking wounded.

12/11/10, 4:32 PM
corvinus said...

All the Vikings with balls are in England and Ireland.

If this was Facebook, I'd "like" this comment. Add Iceland, who recently told the bankers to get stuffed and had a shootout with the Brits over cod a few decades back.

12/11/10, 4:52 PM
TH said...

Sweden just experienced its first suicide bombing. Luckily, the jihadist managed blow up only himself.

12/11/10, 5:02 PM
Anonymous said...

Why is it that comments by idiots like Whiskey always get through, but Steve plays Gestapo with everyone else?

Ah, the eternal mysteries of life...

12/11/10, 5:18 PM
Tino said...

Speaking of Sweden and insanity:

An Audi registered to one "Taimour Abdulwahab" blow up in central Stockholm, killing the terrorist (who may or may not be Taimour) and injuring two.

Ten minutes prior to this Swedish media received a video letter in Arabic and Swedish, calling “mujahidin” to arms against Swedes and criticizing the “pig” Lars Vilks (Mohamed cartoonist).

(picture of spolosion)
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article8265933.ab

The terrorist act was 10 hours ago. As of writing, none of the major Swedish newspapers are pointing out the Islamists connection. They just quench the thirst of their readers by writing that someone (who knows or cares who or why?) blew up a large bomb in central Stockholm during charismas shopping.

What will happen next is quite predictable. The Swedish media and political leaders will go on Diversity Deff-Com 5, intensifying the propaganda level for the coming few days. The public must not be allowed to make the inference that this event would not have happened without Muslim immigration.

Or start asking themselves: exactly how was importing these guys supposed to benefit Sweden again?

At least some fresh material for Wiskey.

12/11/10, 5:26 PM
Tino said...

More info:

He had 6 bombs, only 1 went off.
Interestingly, while not writing anything in the headlines, in the text between the lines the media hint at the Muslim connection by citing of the letter mentioning Vilks and Afghanistan.

It seems some of the poor journalists are trying to do their job under the constraint of the PC autocracy.

Naturally after such an event, the Swedish Prime Minister is as of writing silent.

12/11/10, 5:34 PM
Kylie said...

"exactly how was importing these guys supposed to benefit Sweden again?"

I understand that Malmo is much more vibrant than it used to be.

12/11/10, 8:05 PM
Anonymous said...

OT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5ZuifUBrwo&feature=related

Is 'steve' in the opening of this video an allusion to Sailer?

12/11/10, 8:22 PM
Anonymous said...

Kylie said

>nothing I have read about Assange or heard him say makes me think he had any motive other than embarrassing nations and individuals he dislikes.<

He's publishing the truth.

You say that makes him a "mean, spiteful" person and you're glad "his own tactics are being used against him." You mean he was falsely accusing people of rape?

Never trust people who screech when the truth is told.

Let this world system be utterly exposed and rent in two for the crooked nightmare it is.

12/11/10, 10:09 PM
Bruce Banner said...

Why is it that comments by idiots like Whiskey always get through, but Steve plays Gestapo with everyone else?
Because Whiskey is so fun to read? Let's face it, he's become a permanent fixture here. I've been reading his stuff for years, ever since his "Evil Neocon" days. Always wrong, always entertaining.

12/12/10, 1:17 AM
Anonymous said...

Man, I hope Whiskey is donating big money to Steve, or else Steve just has a soft spot for deranged Jews like Whiskey.

Why are the two mutually exclusive?

Does not a large part of our structural political dilemma in this country emanate from powerful politicians [typically DEM] having a soft spot for the big money they receive from deranged Jews?

Why would you expect Steve [or, say, Peter Brimelow, or Rich Lowry] to be any different?

12/12/10, 2:34 AM
Mike said...

You'd think they'd have used hotter chicks if it actually was a "honey trap", though I suppose the conspiracy theorists would say he would have been more suspicious of a frame. Still, I find it hard to believe that the CIA would have to resort to trying to recruit these two to frame him, when it would leave less potential loose ends, to simply make him, and his Wikileaks associates and/or website disappear. As it is, they would have to have foreseen that setting him up for rape would not stop his associates from continuing forward with publishing leaks, so they would have know it would accomplish little of their objective of plugging the "Wikileak". And recruiting a die-hard feminist to be used as a sexual plaything for the benefit of a "Patricial" organization bent on "global hegemony" (as the feminist nuts would probably label the CIA), would be pretty difficult. Probably, it is something that arose from female jealousy (as mentioned in the original story), and the various powerhouses who are ticked off at Julian are pushing it as a way to get revenge on him.

12/12/10, 6:06 AM
Kylie said...

David said, "Kylie said

>nothing I have read about Assange or heard him say makes me think he had any motive other than embarrassing nations and individuals he dislikes.<

He's publishing the truth.

So? I wasn't referring to what he did, I was referring to why he did it. You can tell the difference between motive and method, can't you?

"You say that makes him a 'mean, spiteful' person and you're glad 'his own tactics are being used against him.'"

No. I didn't say that. What I said was "nothing I have read about Assange or heard him say makes me think he had any motive other than embarrassing nations and individuals he dislikes...And I find that spiteful and petty, not noble and just."

I have no idea what he's like, I only have my impression. But yes, I enjoy seeing his tactics used against him. At least you got that one right.

"You mean he was falsely accusing people of rape?

Again, no. What I meant--and said--was "So private actions are publically revealed to the entire world spitefully and vindictively by a person claiming to act in the name of truth, justice and anything but the American way....now where I have heard this one lately?"

That's what he did and what those two women did--publicly reveal private actions for what seem to me like vindictive personal reasons.

And how do you know those rape accusations are false? Were you there? Or you are just exercising the same omniscience you used when you knew I meant the opposite of what I said?

The women don't claim he used force or violence or coercion, only that they withdrew their consent during sex but sex continued and condoms weren't used throughout. Apparently, under Swedish law, that's rape. It's a classic case of "he said/she said" and only three people will ever know what really happened, four if we count omniscient you.

Never trust people who screech when the truth is told."

Far from "screeching" about those flipping cables, what I actually said was "For the record, I don't mind what he did with Wikileaks half as much as I mind his motives. Pretty much anything that embarrasses the current and last US administrations is fine with me. But he apparently didn't consider or didn't care about the fall-out. And that's unacceptable." But you didn't quote that because it didn't fit in with your agenda.

The people who are not to be trusted are those who twist a person's words to mean something different and then condemn the person for the edited version of those words. You cherrypicked my comments and edited them in a way to reflect the exact opposite of what I said and meant, just so you could condemn what you claim I said, not what I actually said.

I've answered you once. I won't reply to you again.

12/12/10, 9:27 AM
Kylie said...

David said, "Kylie said

>nothing I have read about Assange or heard him say makes me think he had any motive other than embarrassing nations and individuals he dislikes.<

He's publishing the truth.

So? I wasn't referring to what he did, I was referring to why he did it. You can tell the difference between motive and method, can't you?

"You say that makes him a 'mean, spiteful' person and you're glad 'his own tactics are being used against him.'"

No. I didn't say that. What I said was "nothing I have read about Assange or heard him say makes me think he had any motive other than embarrassing nations and individuals he dislikes...And I find that spiteful and petty, not noble and just."

I have no idea what he's like, I only have my impression. But yes, I enjoy seeing his tactics used against him. At least you got that one right.

"You mean he was falsely accusing people of rape?

Again, no. What I meant--and said--was "So private actions are publically revealed to the entire world spitefully and vindictively by a person claiming to act in the name of truth, justice and anything but the American way....now where I have heard this one lately?"

That's what he did and what those two women did--publicly reveal private actions for what seem to me like vindictive personal reasons.

And how do you know those rape accusations are false? Were you there? Or you are just exercising the same omniscience you used when you knew I meant the opposite of what I said?

The women don't claim he used force or violence or coercion, only that they withdrew their consent during sex but sex continued and condoms weren't used throughout. Apparently, under Swedish law, that's rape. It's a classic case of "he said/she said" and only three people will ever know what really happened, four if we count omniscient you.

Never trust people who screech when the truth is told."

Far from "screeching" about those flipping cables, what I actually said was "For the record, I don't mind what he did with Wikileaks half as much as I mind his motives. Pretty much anything that embarrasses the current and last US administrations is fine with me. But he apparently didn't consider or didn't care about the fall-out. And that's unacceptable." But you didn't quote that because it didn't fit in with your agenda.

The people who are not to be trusted are those who twist a person's words to mean something different and then condemn the person for the edited version of those words. You cherrypicked my comments and edited them in a way to reflect the exact opposite of what I said and meant, just so you could condemn what you claim I said, not what I actually said.

I've answered you once. I won't reply to you again.

12/12/10, 9:27 AM
Tino said...

“He's publishing the truth.”

First, stealing and publishing American military intelligence is technically the “truth”. It’s still espionage.

In particular, notice the dog that didn’t bark. There were no serious scandals revealed in Wikileaks. No conspiracy, no murders, no plans to steal Iraqi oil, no slaughter of civilians.

The biggest Wikilead “scandal” was a doctored video of the American helicopter “murdering“ innocent Iraqis, that were in fact armed insurgents attacking coalition soldiers.

That is obviously not “the truth”, and reveals his anti-American intentions, rather than an honest person trying to get the “truth” about goverment scandals out.

12/12/10, 12:12 PM
ATBOTL said...

"As Asange is a tool of Israel..."

Care to elaborate on that?

12/12/10, 4:05 PM
TGGP said...

Swedish women like Muslim men? I'd be surprised. Most research shows that while men are non-discriminating ("anything in a skirt" being one summation) women penalize outgroup men. Asian women are something of an exception in that they don't give bonus points to their own (though they do penalize black/hispanic men relative to whites).

12/12/10, 4:38 PM
none of the above said...

Tino:

You mean the video where they released both the full video and an edited one with commentary? The "insurgents" were a Reuters cameraman, the people he was traveling with, a passer by who saw a bunch of wounded people and tried to help, and his kids. As far as I ever heard or read, even the army didn't claim the victims were insurgents, just that there were insurgents in the area and that the guys in the helicopter probably thought the Reuters guy's camera was a weapon.

Note the interesting bit here. Wikileaks released the whole video, not just the edited summary. Contrast with what we normally get from 'responsible' media, or our own government, or what we got from Israel after they raided that Turkish ship--heavily edited footage with no access to the raw footage.

The "enemy" from whom these secrets must be kept mostly isn't Al Qaida or the Taliban, and certainly not other governments, who probably had penetrated the system long before. It's the American people who are the real threat, and secondarily, the citizens of allied countries.

12/12/10, 7:05 PM
none of the above said...

As an aside, Wikileaks claims to accept, verify, and publish leaks, not to be breaking into computers and stealing information. If the us government can make a case for that, they'll get Assange extradited from Sweden. But if he's just publishing leaks, he's doing exactly what all kinds of newspapers and magazines and tv news shows do all the time.

The usual argument in the msm is that Wikileaks is irresponsible, meaning they leak things that shouldn't be leaked. As best I can tell, this was true in one of the earlier leaks, where they didn't scrub out all the names of US collaborators. My understanding is that they've been more careful since. But in terms of freedom of speech, I'm not sure it matters. And when the us mainstream media so accuse them, I think back to their participation in the PR blitz that got us into the war in Iraq, with a stunning lack of critical thinking or questions, heavy reliance on anonymous sources (aka leaks), and tuning out of anyone contradicting the message. And I think I might prefer a little less responsibility.

12/12/10, 7:20 PM
jody said...

"Latin American students do poorly academically because they are brain-damaged from malnutrition and don't have access to any kind of proper school."

we have controlled for that. 2 groups, 1 in mexico, 1 in the US, similar results.

there are 30 million mestizos from mexico in the US who get PRIME american education at taxpayer expense. in fact, they are educated better than euro americans. they have many extra and additional educational programs, costing billions of dollars, aimed directly at helping them and improving them. group specific programs which euro americans do not participate in. mestizos are the majority of the public school population in california, a state which spends a preposterous amount of money educating them.

yet mestizos are still garbage at academics. science, medicine, engineering, they contribute almost nothing in any of those fields. this is not much different than the performance of mexico itself. almost nothing important comes from mexico, is developed in mexico, is discovered in mexico, is invented in mexico, or is first manufactured in mexico, a nation with over 100 million people.

i hardly think this makes them bad or worthless or not worth helping. they aren't bad. they're people, doing their thing. but they aren't too good at school. every time this is measured, the results come out about the same. it's not due to language. some are native spanish speakers, others are native english speakers, most of them blow at school.

12/12/10, 7:30 PM
jody said...

whoops! posted that in the wrong thread. steve, please post that in the PISA language thread.

12/12/10, 7:31 PM
Marc B said...

"This is why you don't want to associated with feminists."

There are many reasons not to, like for maintaining sanity, but access to no-strings-attached sex is not one of them. Feminists find men sexually viable compared to the sycophant males fighting alongside them in their "struggle". Hardcore feminists give into their lust for brutish, vulgar males on a regular basis.

Assange was likely set-up by operatives working in conjunction with Interpol.

12/13/10, 10:49 AM
K(yle) said...

You mean the video where they released both the full video and an edited one with commentary? The "insurgents" were a Reuters cameraman, the people he was traveling with, a passer by who saw a bunch of wounded people and tried to help, and his kids. As far as I ever heard or read, even the army didn't claim the victims were insurgents, just that there were insurgents in the area and that the guys in the helicopter probably thought the Reuters guy's camera was a weapon.


I believe you have your information wrong. A seperate channel supplied the full video after WikiLeaks edited version came out.

The Reuters crew were hanging out with Mahdi. There are plenty of stills of men with AKs and an RPG as well.

The least damning claim you could make is that Wikileaks got duped, but that doesn't seem very likely. All evidence points to them editting the video themselves.
Regardless, if you are a reporter going into the warzone you know the risks. That Apache crew didn't radio up their chain of command to find out if they should explode some reporters and then get the ok. There were obviously involved in a battle where innocent bystanders interjected themselves into the conflict and were killed as a result.

That isn't what Wikileaks provided. They deliberately tried manipulating the truth. They aren't an organization to total transparency, but instead to crafting a narrative.

12/13/10, 4:27 PM
Mr. Anon said...

"K(yle) said...

The Reuters crew were hanging out with Mahdi. There are plenty of stills of men with AKs and an RPG as well."

What stills? Care to post a link to them? Or do they not really exist?

"Regardless, if you are a reporter going into the warzone you know the risks."

Yeah, the effrontery of those damned iraqis, walking around an iraqi city in broad daylight and callously stepping in front of those 30 mm cannon shells. Those people got some nerve.

12/14/10, 7:16 AM
none of the above said...

K(yle):

This new york times article describes the video leak.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/world/07wikileaks.html

Wikileaks put out both videos at the same time, but also put the edited version with commentary out from a specific URL, I think collateralmurder.com.

The wikipedia article on this is pretty good:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12%2C_2007_Baghdad_airstrike?wasRedirected=true

One thing I learned from the wikipedia article is that there is a gap in the footage between the first two attacks and a third attack where a building full of people got blown up. I have no idea what's missing, and that might excuse the third attack.

The stunning thing in the video, to me, was shooting at a person trying to help the wounded. There can't really be a justification for that, as far as I can tell.

More generally, the responsible media don't show this sort of thing on their own. But this is what war looks like. War in a city involves lots innocent people dying, in visually gory ways. Yet somehow, most of what we see from the news are rather sanitized pictures. It's worth asking why.

12/14/10, 6:09 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)