OK, let’s get graphic for men like Moonbeamracer, Assange, Todd Akin, Paul Ryan, et. al. who believe rape
is only “legitimate” if it is “forcible." I challenge them to explain to me any situation in which a man is violated anally by a penis, without his consent, and it is not rape.

The reason these Neanderthals believe as they do is because rape is a crime committed overwhelmingly against women. I’d like them to answer this challenge and put themselves in a woman’s shoes to see
if they finally “get it.”

Pardon, I meant there are no degrees of the word no.

See, there is an up side (pun intended) to getting old, if Mr. Happy won't respond then you are only guilty of forcible spooning.

Use your hand, it knows what you like and almost never says no. If your hand says no, buy an apple pie.

Ryan Assange, Akin, Galloway, Moonie' and who knows how many others will never 'get it" This twisted mentality is so prevalent, occurs in such diverse demographics that I am beginning to think it is caused by essentially faulty 'wiring'; it cannot merely be the result of social influences.

Misogyny has always existed as history proves. We are seeing the enormity of the problem due to all the technical advances in communication. Horrifying as the comments of the Galloways may be, it is necessary for them to be exposed. One must always know the enemy.

Toni I was thinking the same thing, if rape was a crime primarily comitted against men would these men be so quick to make it sound like it doesnt matter? So quick to judge what does and does not qualify as abuse? I dont think they would. As a victim of attempted sexual assault I find these men disguisting, and a disgrace to all people - male and female. Rape is Rape, No means No, the sayings have been around forever because they are true and no matter how you try to downgrade the offense it's still a disguisting and evil act that no one deserves. These men need to stop siding with the criminals and start thinking about the victims; if that victim was you, your wife or child how would you feel?

And Moonbeamracer, I think you are off the mark. While there have been cases of women falsely claiming rape, they are far from the majority. The number of victims (male and female) who report "legitimate" rape and those who do not report rapes are far greater than those who falsely report.

I will consider the source of the name callers .. and ask restraint .. using the term "Neanderthals" or accusing someone of being "full of crap" does not lend itself to a meaningful debate ... only exposes your ignorance on the subject.

From your comments it is obvious that the innocence of any individual charged with a crime (man or woman) they didn't commit is equally as aborant as the crime of rape, is beyond your comprehension or understanding. I cannot even imagine that the insertion of a penis or any object into anyone's body orifices, could ever be anything but by force ... without their consent ... or are you implying that smiling and saying "OK" is not what you really mean and that later you have a legitimate claim of "RAPE?"

If you want to shove that up my anus ... your going know distinctly how I feel about it and should you continue experience a lot of pain in the process ... with hospitalization a serious possibility!

Below presents I believe a unbiased perspective of the problem ... whether you chose to recognize it or not ... as a proponent of women rights its fast becoming recognizable that a vast number of woman are so prejudice in this area that they can't see the Forrest for the trees ...

http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/

Well if he is innocent he better go to Sweden quickly to clear his name.Right now he is accused of serious sex crimes. The women who have accused them have gotten as far as they have because they are not going to be bullied into forgetting these things.And the Swedish government either.As for you accusing the 2 women of being paid ,you better go to Sweden and prove that.If you can´t you will be put in prison for false accusations and defamation of character. Get thee to Sweden also.You can stand with Solange anf have your day in court.If you open your mouth you better be able to defend your position.!!

Julian Assange is being accused of rape because that is the only way the people scared of his website's disclosures could get him out of business. He is innocent and his accusor is being paid to make these claims.

Prove it.

Just an FYI since you are clearly deeply into the whole conspiracy thing, there are websites out there that do the same thing as Wikileaks, and have been doing it for many, many years. Yet they are still up and still doing their thing. Main one that comes to mind is Cryptome.org. Sorry, but gotten really stale claiming what you just did. Like I said, prove ANY part of your claim, or please just stfu.

I believe I am with the mainstream that no means no and that rape is rape. But we should be careful not to conflate what is going on with Assange with the useless debate we are having here. Assange is in a very precarious position in that he has been labeled a terrorist in an extremely politically charged environment. He fears being extradited to the US, which seems likely should he travel to Sweden to "answer questions." In a claim of rape, I do believe we should give the victim the benefit of the doubt. But, this is not a normal case, and I think it is fair to evaluate the veracity of the claimants given the high-profile nature of this case, and the powerful outside forces that are involved.

If I'd been editor of this "news" site, I would have handled this story differently. It suggests that Assange is guilty of rape because men tend to minimize the act. I've read the police report and statements provided by the two women involved and what happened between them was consensual sex, not rape.

Apparently, in Sweden, a man can be accused of rape if there is sex without using a condom. I wonder how many men would be convicted felons of sex crimes after having broken this law. By consequence, this law could also be violated by having oral sex. This means that President Bill Clinton would have been arrested and imprisoned after having sex with Monica Lewinsky.

Sweden questioned Assange once and allowed him to travel when he asked if it would be okay. Now they want to question him again...but won't do it unless the questioning takes place in Sweden for some reason. Apparently being "unquestioned" about sex without a condom warrants use of an Interpol Red Notice and threatening war with Ecuador.

If the US wanted Assange wouldn't we just get an extradition order from Great Britain rather than waiting for him to get to Sweden first? The US has an extradition agreement with Great Britain, why would the US need Sweden?

Assange is not afraid of the US, he is afraid of the charges against him in Sweden because he has something to fear. He's an arrogant little putz that has realized his paper shield does not grant him special powers. "I'll answer your questions but only if you come to me". Who the hell does he think he is?

argues,

Britain won't do it. They would be complete suckers and it would play horribly bad on the world stage, and in their own country, that the UK is purely a US stooge. Sweden on the other hand is notorious for this very type of behavior so people (other nations) wouldn't bat an eyelash at it.

Assange will take on Todd Akin's informed opinion, it was a "legitimate rape."

Rape is rape is rape. Period. If the two women accusing assange is telling the truth (or even just one of them) he is guilty of rape under Swedish law. Maybe Assange and his supporters disagree with the law, but the law is the law is the law. Period.

I love how everyone jumped on Moon. Especially Chris, someone who's grasp on reality seems to be slipping everyday. The sources that you gave give numbers from 2% to 90%, so just claiming that it must be 2% is quite stupid. Rape is very hard to prove, which is why it comes down to he said she said, and people will probably side with the woman more since they are looked at as victims in our society whether or not they are truthful. That is why false rape is a very serious thing for guys. Off just a girl's word, someone's life can be destroyed. Even if she is eventually proved wrong. Moon also pointed out how crazy some of the rape laws have become. Sweden will charge you with rape if you are a man, and use your higher position to solicit sex, even if it was not forced or threat like in any way. False accusations and this horrendously broad term is exactly why so many people wont believe the woman, or why many victims dont come forward. It harms both parties, so please fem nazi's just shut up.

Swedish law in this case defines "rape". Said and done.

Obama/Assange 2012

Rape is rape. Assange is not accused of rape.

There was indeed, once, a rape charge against him:

From http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/07/us-wikileaks-assange-charges-idUSTRE6B669H20101207?pageNumber=3

After initially issuing a warrant for Assange's arrest on rape and molestation charges in mid-August, a Swedish prosecutor dropped the rape charge the next day.

And in addition:

a lawyer representing the Swedish government laid out for a British judge four specific charges of sexual misconduct, three related to Miss A and one related to Miss W. The word “rape” was not part of the charges but “unlawful coercion” and Assange’s alleged reluctance to use condoms was.

If you read the article, you will see that the main concern the women had was that they wanted to get health checks because he had had unprotected sex with them.

Well, if Assange had been charged with rape, I would care. But since he is only wanted for questioning and has never been charged and it is pretty unusual to have extradition in a case of 'wanted for questioning,' this is 99% chance of a set up.

Rape is Rape and no means no. Period. It doesn't matter if you've been lovers for years or if it's a total stranger with a knife at your throat. If someone has sex with you against your will then it's rape. end of story.

That being said I am also in favor of tough penalties for women who make a false allegation as long as it's proven that she was outright lying about it. I've heard enough stories of women who had consensual sex only to regret it later and cry rape. Making a poor choice after one too many cocktails only to have an "OMG what did I do!" moment when you roll over and see the cheeseball you went home with doesn't mean you can call it rape. Otherwise every guy who has sex with a fat chick after a night of drinking should be able to claim the same thing. Also I've seen where the woman was fine and happy about having sex with a guy until it became apparent weeks later that he was only into a one night stand and just not that into her. When it first happened she was almost giddy telling me about this guy she met the night before, a week later when he still hadn't called she was feeling used... after two weeks she pulled the whole he got me drunk and took advantage of me thing....

And I think that's what confuses otherwise well meaning men. Not the douchebags who talk about "legitimate rape" or "sexual etiquette" etc. for political purposes. I'm talking about the average guy who hears these comments and then says something about degrees etc. of rape or perentages of false reports.

Ladies, if we want the right to be able to screw like men and not be called sluts then we also have to take responsibility for our own actions and own it if we make a bad choice in partner on occasion. Rape is never something that we should use to get back at someone who never called, or a boyfriend who broke our heart, or as a way to get what we want in a divorce, etc. We have to be hard of the small minority of women who do this, to discourage them from crying wolf. Women have to be extremely tough on women who do abuse it, no excuses.

Again, false reports are rare, but it only takes one proven false report to shed doubt on every accuser who only has her word against her rapists. Everytime someone hears a story like Brian Banks' it reinforces that idea that maybe the woman is lying about it. One case has underminded years of progress for victims rights.

Well if he is innocent he better go to Sweden quickly to clear his name.

Why can't he be questioned in Britian? Or Ecuador? Why does he need to go Sweden?

If he is innocent, why does he need to go anywhere?

But since he is only wanted for questioning and has never been charged and it is pretty unusual to have extradition in a case of 'wanted for questioning,' this is 99% chance of a set up.

Technically, he has been charged with rape. The charge was withdrawn the next day, however.

Which, in of itself, is pretty suspicious.

Thats how they work - the "shadowy ones". Assange called them out, and posted info that the smoke n mirrors boys did NOT want us to learn about.

to quote a poster here:

KeenInsight

"If I'd been editor of this "news" site, I would have handled this story differently. It suggests that Assange is guilty of rape because men tend to minimize the act. I've read the police report and statements provided by the two women involved and what happened between them was consensual sex, not rape."

Apparently, in Sweden, a man can be accused of rape if there is sex without using a condom. I wonder how many men would be convicted felons of sex crimes after having broken this law."

*

See - this is how the "Intelligence Community" works hand in hand with "Goverments" to protect thier best interests. I know "conspiracy theory!!!!!" LOL

NO - it's not, this stuff is easily noticed by those who can actually comprehend what they read, and it's NOT a retty read either. Agenda 21, over 600 FEMA prison camps already built, and other....non-conspiracy stuff, the Vatican and Republicans on ONE side trying to control women, and ignore the poor (you'd think after 2k years Christ's Teaching's would have worked...).

As for the RAPE charge? Yeah - in THIS article - it's smoke and mirror's - easy to see - just get all the female readers pissed off and let them vent on here and they Totally deflect that it's really all about international political chess.

Ladies... Rape is Rape - Dont ever let these assh0les win.

I pray (in my own heathen druidic way), that ALL the victims of rape be healed and protected for Ever More, and that the rapists are punished... totally, wether by court of Justice, or Karma.

*I would have said court of law - but Obviously, there is a difference now between Law, and Justice...

Aloha, Blessed BE as Blessed Is

Woot Diligence

at the risk of being put into this sort of village witch hunt type scenario. moonbeam, i do feel your point, the facts are there through the experience of MANY men that rape has simply become a fashionable easy button for a woman to use society and it's pity toward women as a glass barrier to make wild accusations without accountability. on the other side you also make a good point in there being so much shame about reporting the true crime when it is committed!

i know people will flame me as soon as i post this but i hardly re-check these any way, i feel that forums are no longer a place for intellectual conversation and sharing of views, but a place to banter, persecute, and spay popular views and opinions on the wall like scat in a monkey cage. i have looked at your post with my mind kept open and clear of emotion, and i see both of your views and i share them too.

women want equality, then they must have it the same way men have it in the eyes of society. when a man can defend himself physically from a female attacker without the stigma of striking a woman, when a woman can't claim rape for an unwanted result of CONSENTING intercourse, and when the physical fitness requirements are the same for boys and girls then i will be a happy man.

as for the forcible thing, if she sais no it means no! and to the issue of the sudden second round of fun, she should take charge and say no; THAT would make it rape! when she Say's "NO" that means NOT CONSENTING, or if she makes effort to stop you. that man in the article has a valid point in stating a difference between manners and an act of violence. someone like moon has to take the stand for the right thing and tell everyone to hold their horses and thing with their head not their heart.

apologies for being so long winded folks, and thank you for reading this through, as a side point i believe with this whole abortion being OK thing so long as it was conceived by rape once that is in effect I'd be shocked if suddenly "rape" claims didn't skyrocket.

One can clearly see who the men are on this thread. Even when a woman can't say the word "no" it is still rape if it is unwelcome. Like when a woman is unconscious (from being drugged or even from being really drunk) or mentally incapacitated for one reason or another. This is the same reason it is wrong to have sex with any animal of another species. If it can't tell you "no" it's still wrong. But especially after the word "no" or any action to that point the act should stop and the second party should disengage whether married, long-time lovers, or what have you. Unless, of course you both like that sort of thing and have an understanding. ;-)

I agree, other types of rape that are not violent rape are hard to prove if not impossible but should the victims of these horrible acts still not be allowed to receive justice for the wrong-doing commited against them. If it's ever happened to you, your view might be different than that of those who have never been in such a situation.

Especially Chris, someone who's grasp on reality seems to be slipping everyday. The sources that you gave give numbers from 2% to 90%, so just claiming that it must be 2% is quite stupid.

I gave sources for all the numbers claimed, however you'd have to be an idiot to believe that 90% of rape claims are false. I provided 4 sources all of which tend to agree the number is in the single digit percentages.

It doesn't matter what we consider rape to be here in the US. It doesn't matter what the UK considers the criteria to be. All that DOES matter is what Sweden considers rape to be. And since it's Sweden's laws he's accused of breaking, Sweden gets to be the one he is extradited to. I don't really care who believes those women. It's not the point. We are all nations of laws, and this guy is doing his best to evade a lawful international extradition order.

Not to mention the Ecuadorian Foreign Minister explicitly states he was given asylum because they feel he's going be sent to the US and Gitmo. Total bullshlt and I pity those people who still think that will happen.

Chris, there it goes slipping again.

All 4 sources said there was no way to prove it, and all admitted it was a guess at best. Not to mention, they are only the percentage that can be proved.

Never did I say I think its 90%. There goes your grasp on reality again. Please go back under your rock.

The problem Assange faces is that he looks like a dilettante when it comes to wanting the "rule of law" enforced.

Assange was extradited for questioning about pending charges based in Swedish law. If having unprotected sex without the permission of your partner is considered a violation of the law in Sweden, then by all means the actions taken by authorities were correct! This has always been spun as a set up when in reality it is just delusions of grandeur on the part of Julian Assange. If the US, or any other nation wanted him removed from the picture, he would be dead already. Convenient accidents happen all the time. The fact he is still breathing and being allowed to make a paranoid ass of himself is proof enough that he is irrelevant to anyone who would care.

NO MAN is above the law. Mr. Assange needs to answer to Swedish authorities and after that, if he is still free, he can resume dodging U.S. and other authorities.

What really struck me is the sheer stupidity of this "bad manners" defense. Was this clown upset that the term "legitimate rape" was already taken by U.S. d*p$h*t Todd Akin or did he possibly consult candidate Akin to come up with such a moronic viewpoint??

It never ceases to amaze me how clueless people are about the Assange case. Do you know exactly what he's been accused of? Not wearing a condom during sex. That's it. Yes, that can be considered rape in Sweden. However, he hasn't been charged at all by the Swedish government. In fact, he was willing to talk to Swedish authorities about the situation in the embassy, but they declined.

Only ignorant people don't know what this is about, and that's the fact that is Assange goes back to Sweden, his ass will be extradited to the U.S. as soon as our government snaps the finger. They want to make lessons of people who decide to whistleblow and show just what the cronies in Washington are really about.

If people did two minutes of research, they'd start to figure out that they have no valid reasons to be hating this guy, but alas, I forgot that this is the Newsvine.

He's always said he'll go there if the Swedes will guarantee not to extradite him to the US. They won't. He's also offered to submit to Swedish interrogation on UK soil.

They just never bother to read ranman... The last 3 Assange topics they're all just broken records. They always go back to the issue through Sweden, even if you post in capital letters that it's not about that. I've said a dozen times if he posted info from N. Korea, Iran, China, or Russia it would be us granting him Asylum. Ridiculous how hypocritical our government can be.

It never ceases to amaze me how clueless people are about the Assange case. Do you know exactly what he's been accused of? Not wearing a condom during sex. That's it. Yes, that can be considered rape in Sweden. However, he hasn't been charged at all by the Swedish government.

Ranman....You conveniently forgot to note that Assange has not been formally charged because in Swedish criminal cases nobody is charged until very late in an investigation, unlike in the U.S. and Britain where charges are filed early on. Assange high-tailed it out of Sweden before the investigation reached the point of a formal charge—which is why they want him back. Also, you left out the fact that one of Assange's two accusers claims Assange forcibly held her down while having sex with her; the other claims she woke to find him having sex with her without a condom.

Why do they want him back before charging him? They had the opportunity to interview him in the UK, and all the other evidence is in Sweden.

Also, if this were just about the rape case, why would the Swedish authorities not simply guarantee that he won't be extradited to the US? I suspect it's because they intend doing just that, and so does Assange!

Why do they want him back before charging him? They had the opportunity to interview him in the UK, and all the other evidence is in Sweden.

Because, Linda, it is their law. Not our law. Not your agenda. Their law.

It's my duty to Oceania to hate this man. Why? Because I've been told so. His image was plastered all over the telescreens at the last Hate Week rally.

Ok I'm not defending this guy or convicting him but people, it's time you stop thinking that if you just turn yourself in, you'll be cleared. Nothing could be further from the truth. Modern day witch hunts happen all of the time and they are often successful. People are convicted of crimes they did not commit more often than you think. It is naive to think that the Court systems of any nation are so fail proof that, if you are wrongly accused, the Courts will get all of the facts and set matters straight. The one thing Assange has going for him is he can likely afford to hire decent lawyers but there are many ordinary people who essentially are found guilty when they ought not to have been or plead guilty because they have no hope. I really don't blame this man for being skeptical of the motives of the Swedish authorities.

Please, where was all the "outrage" when Whoopi said Roman Polanski's rape of a young lady was not really rape? If you are doing to tar and feather one pinhead you need to tar them all.

What amazes me is that Britain puts so much effort into an alleged rape case when there are much more serious criminal cases to go after, like the numerous Iraq war crimes allegations against both British and American citizens. But of course the NWO lackeys in British government are simply doing their master's bidding, punishing Assange for daring to reveal their dirty secrets. Justice my rear end...

"If he didn't rape anyone, he won't get convicted in the Swedish courts, so why doesn't he just go clear his name?"

I admire your blind trust in a justice system run by feminists to give fair hearing to A MAN accused of rape.

@valdviewpoint didn't you notice he has a big picture of Kennedy behind him. If you are going to bring politics into this at least have a brain. I'd say Ted Kennedy is someone he looked up to.

Tonij,

Assange high-tailed it out of Sweden before the investigation reached the point of a formal charge—which is why they want him back.

If the prosecutor in Sweeden, the special prosecutor, not the original one who refused to even start an inquiry, was interested in justice and the truth, they would have already interviewed him and got all questions answered.

Then if she still felt it was warranted she could have filed charges and had a proper extradition order arranged for him. He would have much less standing in that situation and a lot less support. However, the refusal of the prosecutor to do this, shows the end of your statement to be the paramount concern for Sweden. They want him BACK in their country. Not to charge him or put him on trial for rape, but more for the secondary and unstated threat of extradition to the US.

The Swedish prosecutor and government can make this all go away and properly handle this. Or they can continue to attempt to hide their true motives and pussy foot around the real reason they want him back within their borders. So far, for two years, they have chosen the latter.

"It never ceases to amaze me how clueless people are about the Assange case. Do you know exactly what he's been accused of? Not wearing a condom during sex. That's it."

Ranman, I am just wondering if you think Assange should be charged with something different, like endangering the life of the women? He could be carrying any number of incurable STDs. If one of these women get HPV from him and later dies of cervical cancer should he then get charged with murder?

I only ask because your comment "that's it" makes it sound like you are very cavalier about what Assange may have done here.

Ranman....You conveniently forgot to note that Assange has not been formally charged because in Swedish criminal cases nobody is charged until very late in an investigation, unlike in the U.S. and Britain where charges are filed early on.

Incorrect. Assange was charged with rape.

From http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/07/us-wikileaks-assange-charges-idUSTRE6B669H20101207?pageNumber=3 :-

After initially issuing a warrant for Assange's arrest on rape and molestation charges in mid-August, a Swedish prosecutor dropped the rape charge the next day

So your idea that "in Swedish criminal cases nobody is charged until very late in an investigation" is obviously something you just made up because it sounds good.

He was charged and the charges were dropped.

He is no "political prisoner". The Swedish courts saw fit to charge him, and they are notoriously liberal. He's not in the same league as Daniel Ellsberg. Assange is just a narcissistic scumbag trying to hide behind the politics of WikiLeaks.

He hasn't been charged with any crime. They want him extradited to Sweden for questioning. Look it up if you don't believe me.

See post 2.4 above....

ValidViewpoint ... Your assertion ..."The Swedish courts saw fit to charge him, and they are notoriously liberal." is untrue ... Assange has not been charged by Sweden for any crime, regardless of how many time you continue to make the false statement.

Which begs the question .....

why didn't the prosecutor question Assange while in the UK for hearings? She could have resolved this whole issue by questioning him while she was in London & gone back to Sweden and filed appropriate charges, and changed the dynamics of this whole case.

Anyone, having read all the legitimate data available about this case, giving it a fair reading, would recognize the improbability of the guilt of this man .. as the first Swede prosecutor did ... only a fool would go back to Sweden under these circumstances were they innocent of the crime ...

Repeat all you want, but that doesn't make it accurate. Here's exactly what was said by the Swedish Director of Prosecution, Marianne Ny: "There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. Considering information available at present, my judgement is that the classification of the crime is rape."

"Rape is simultaneously the most over-reported and under-reported crime on the books." ---Alan Dershowitz (paraphrased)

Here's exactly what was said by the Swedish Director of Prosecution, Marianne Ny: "There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. Considering information available at present, my judgement is that the classification of the crime is rape."

Then why was the rape charge withdrawn?

From http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/07/us-wikileaks-assange-charges-idUSTRE6B669H20101207?pageNumber=3 :-

After initially issuing a warrant for Assange's arrest on rape and molestation charges in mid-August, a Swedish prosecutor dropped the rape charge the next day

Rape is when you have sex without consent. Waking up and finding someone having their way with you is not consent.

"By staying you're giving the indication that you're still in the game.."

If that's what you believe, I know a lot of men that would prefer your likes stay as far away as possible from their daughters.

What rubbish! Waking up to sex with the person you spent a pleasurable night with is generally a good way to wake up... And consent is not such a cut-and-dried concept as people make out. What about reluctant consent? What if you want someone to like you, so you give consent? What if you like to play hard to get? What if you give consent because you're scared? There are clear-cut cases when sex is non-consensual, and clear-cut cases when it is, but there is also a big grey area in between.

Again, my point is not that what Assange did that morning is necessarily acceptable - it's that it might well have been acceptable, depending on precisely what happened, the moods and apparent moods of both parties that morning and the night before, etc.

Okay, if you have sex using a condom to prevent pregnancy and exposure to disease, and then go to sleep, you are NOT CONSENTING to unprotected sex while you are sleeping! What if he had gotten her pregnant or had given her a STD? Would you have blamed her for not using protection? He is a rapist if he had sex with her without her consent, period.

I hope to God you do not have children Jake. Women are not all you can eat buffets you can just get your fill from anytime its convient for you just because they're there.

And I don't understand how it is that men always seem to be the ones making such decisions on WOMEN'S issues. Men do not get raped nearly as often as women do, expecially if passed out from intoxication or whatever... Nor do men have to bare the sometimes consiquential child that comes with rape or incest. See how you feel when its your daughter knocked up by some guy that took advantage of her passed out at a party or somthing. Or would you say she deserved it ?

You can turn the subject right around dreamer and say why do women make decisions on men's issues. More men are falsely accused. Such a dumb statement. Women dont have to worry about false accusations like men.

Oh, and in the US, more men are raped than women now due to prison rape. Thats not made up. We are the first civilation in history where more men are raped than women.

So Mr. Burns your claiming women in office are passing bills on what men can and cannot do with thier bodies and so forth?? I am not saying there arn't false accusations from women at times - unfortunalty there are at times- and that hurts our credibility. However, for thousands of years women have been the "servant" to men and that old school generation is still lingering I highly doubt that in all this time in history men have been raped more than women. I agree with your prison statement, but I don't believe for a minute that it happens more to men than women.

Your arrogance to link Assange with being worse than Saddam shows your ignorance in caring about the issue at hand.

I was on the fence about this topic until reading the above post. If even half what this guy is saying is correct this blows every other argument completely out of the water. I know once you personally assign a label to somoen its very hard to reconcile this and change your mind but I would ask that those of you who already decided that assage is a rapist, please consider that you are wrong.

Solange has to go to Sweden to answer these charges.He should want to clear his name .If he doesn´t it will be a type of admission of guilt.England has a obligation to deliver him to Sweden.Ecuador has nothing to do with this.He is accused of serious but common crimes.He is not a political prisoner.Get thee to Sweden now,Solange.! Ot you can rot in the Ecuadorian embassy!

Bart,

He's not worried about Sweden and the inquiry into his acts while there. He's worried, and rightly so, about extradition to the US the moment he hits Swedish custody.

So while he may want to clear his name, he wasn't born yesterday. He knows the real reason they want him back so bad, and he isn't falling for it.

he's afraid of being extridited to another country for other crimes that he KNOWS he'll be convicted for

In this day and age, I'm afraid that's not exactly what would happen to him. More like limbo through our various military prisons and more crap thrown at him thanks to the Patriot Act. This country's sense of "justice" these days is a god damn joke.

Will to Power <><><> If they consented to sex, but conditioned thier consent on his use of a condom and he did not use a condom, it IS rape. Guess what!! It is rape even if YOU say it is not. I don't know whether or not this specific point is spelled out in the US (Federal and/or State) law(s). However, it is spelled out in Swedish law. When are you and et al going to get it through your noggins that the law is the law is the law. As per the possibility that he will be tried by the US: that is just conjecture, at this time. Since he is not a US citizen, he cannot be tried for treason. As for anything else, because of the Elsberg precedent, I'm inclined to believe he will ultimately get off entirely or suffer little. Could I be wrong? Of course! What I don't really understand is how he could possible be guilty of having sex, with or without consent, since he is clearly demonstrating that he doesn't have any---uh--marbles, anyway.

Hi Tommy,

What I've read over the years suggests that Mr. Assange's problems might stem from an over blown ego. The two women that have filed charges against him, were originally supporters of Mr. A. and his "mission". They put him up in their homes and it appears that he totally took advantage of their trust and generosity. The rest may well be, "she said, he said", but forceful unprotected sex while holding someone down may be "a sex game" where you come from, but I think that this is clearly rape. What if the women had become pregnant, or contracted a decease? No must always mean no; if not, inviting some over for a coffee could be construed as an invitation to commit a violent sex act.

For supporters of the Wikileaks project, it may be inconvenient that this guy's ego has gotten him into a tiff with yet another country's legal system, but perhaps, if you believe that you are above the law, and that you know better than everyone else then well, stuff like this happens. Note, even heroes have warts, be careful who you invite into your home, especially it they appear to have narcissistic tendencies.

Mr. A's alleged crimes also seems to have been consistent with his relationship with his staff at Wikileaks. It was never about the "mission" as much as it was about Mr. Assange's Ego. Several of is core staff said as much and quite before any of the scandals broke.

So, a word to the wise. Is you are a fugitive; don't speed, don't break and enter, don't pick fights in the street, and don't have un-consentual sex with the people who are trying to help you.
Conspiracy? It appears that Mr A. made this mess himself. To suggest that these women somehow set him up (They lured this guy into their homes, and then pretend that they were asleep while in irresistibly erotic poses so that pore Mr. Assange could not help but assault them, and they hid the condomes) is ludicrous.

Just sayin'

it arguably constituted an assault on his sexual partner

How is an assault involving sex not a sexual assault? I don't understand your semantics here.

Because there is a useful distinction between rape and sexual assault. As there is between murder and manslaughter, or between negligent driving and reckless driving.

Galloway's point was that "rape" is the wrong term. There are many forms of sexual assault - technically, if my date kisses me without asking me first, it's a sexual assault. It's kinda tempting to attach the term "rapist" to an obnoxious guy who gives me an univited sloppy kiss, and it might indeed deter him, but on the other hand, the term "rapist" is completely undermined.

Galloway wasn't saying what Assange did was ok - he was saying it shouldn't be called rape.

Don't let's confuse what Todd Aiken said with what George Galloway said! Aiken was saying abortion shouldn't be allowed even in cases of rape, because a woman can't fall pregnant from being raped (!). Galloway was saying that we should be careful what kinds of behaviour we call "rape", as too broad a definition is bad for women and bad for men!

Linda et al <><><> There is no broad definition of rape. Rape is having sex with someone without that person's consent. That includes violent forciful rape and sex with a little girl who may love her rapist, but cannot legally give her consent. In the Assange case, he had previously had consentual sex with each of the women, but, in each case, this consent was hinged on his use of a condom, which he did not do. Swedish law states that this is rape. Maybe you disagree but you personnally do not make Swedish law.

I was commenting on what Galloway said. That "rape" was an inappropriate word to use to describe what happened. He has a point, regardless of what term some prosecutor in Sweden wants to use, and even if what Assange did is considered rape under Swedish law. He was saying it's unwise and inconsistent to call it rape.

The question of whether the charge is real or bogus, or whether Assange should be extradited or not, is a separate issue. If it weren't for the fact that all governments are scared of Wikileaks, the correct course of action would be obvious - you're right, it was an alleged crime on Swedish soil, and Assange should go and argue his innocence in Swedish court. The Wikileaks angle makes things quite a bit more complicated.

you are wrong about the extradition from uk to us. that was refused as uk dont extradite if the death penalty is likely to be the punishement