Australian TV Documentary:Sex, Lies and Julian Assange

[Ichingcarpenter]

This doc has been deleted in some countries but is from the ABC.

The excellent Australian documentary on the persecution of Julian Assange tells us much about the main accuser, Anna Ardin, but not enough.

• Anna Ardin worked on behalf of a number of Miami-based, U.S. government-paid intelligence agencies and was an associate of the anti-Cuban terrorist, Carlos Aberto Montaner. Source: Cuban news agencies, Granma and Prensa Latina.

• While in Cuba, Ardin worked with the Ladies in White, a feminist anti-Castro group that is partially funded by the US Government and counts among its supporters Luis Posada Carriles, a CIA agent convicted of terrorist attacks that killed hundreds of people. Source: Indymedia.

• After leaving Cuba, Ardin worked on websites financed by USAID and controlled by the CIA. One of these websites was ‘Miscelánea de Cuba’, run by the Cuban, Alexis Gainza. Source: Australia-Cuba Friendship Society.

• Through Gainza, Ms. Ardin became involved with several Swedish agencies, including Dagens Nyheter and SVT, and then entered the Swedish Social Democrat party. Gainza is connected with the German Internationale Gesellschaft für Menschenrechte (International Human Rights Society), a group linked to German and U.S. intelligence and includes former Nazis (such as Ludwig Martin) and ex-military figures (Dieter von Glahn) in its ranks. The current president of the IGFM, Martin Lessenthin, works closely with the Venezuelan opposition party Primero Justicia, led by anti-Chavez terrorist Alejandro Peña Esclusa. Primero Justicia, in turn, is the main partner of the International Republican Institute, an extreme right-wing group funded by the US Government’s National Endowment for Democracy. Both USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy are funded by the CIA. Sources: various.


Naomi Wolf offers eight further indicators of skullduggery in the Assange case (and many thanks to a reader named wxyz for the link):

Based on my 23 years of reporting on global rape law, and my five years of supporting women at rape crisis centers and battered women’s shelters, I can say with certainty that this case is not being treated as a normal rape or sexual assault case. New details from the Swedish police make this quite clear. Their transcript of the complaints against Assange is strikingly unlike the dozens of such transcripts that I have read throughout the years as an advocate for victims of sex crimes.

Specifically, there are eight ways in which this transcript is unusual:

1) Police never pursue complaints in which there is no indication of lack of consent.

Ask Sweden to produce ANY other police report in which any action was taken in a situation in which there is no stated lack of consent or threat of force. Police simply won’t act on a complaint if there is no indication of a lack of consent, or of consent in the face of violence. The Assange transcripts, in contrast to any typical sex crime report, are a set of transcripts in which neither of the women has indicated a lack of consent. (There is one point at which Miss W asserts she was asleep – in which case it would indeed have been illegal to have sex with her – but her deleted tweets show that she was not asleep, and subsequent discussion indicates consent.)

The Assange transcript is therefore anomalous, as it does not suggest in any way that either woman was unconsenting, or felt threatened. On this basis alone, therefore, the Assange transcript is completely aberrant.

2) Police do not let two women report an accusation about one man together.

The transcripts seem to indicate that the police processed the two accusers’ complaints together.

This is completely unheard-of in sex crime procedures; and the burden should be on Clare Mongomery, QC, or Marianne Ny, to produce a single other example of this being permitted.

[Cleita]

1. K&R

I watched this yesterday.

[tama]

2. What is odd about the transcripts

is that Julian is not questioned over Sofia's accusations at all, only about Anna's claim that he broke a condom on purpose, which is quite fantastic, and which he denied. Only explanation that comes to mind is that he couldn't be interviewed about what Sofia said because there was no signed statement from Sofia. So far I have seen no confirmation that Sofia has given a signed statement to police. Lot's of other strange stuff there too.

[HiPointDem]

3. according to the police questioner, the news that assange had been arrested came in during the

questioning and she left the police station without having the statement read back to her or signed.

the police questioner was asked to alter the statement 6 days later but the computer system foiled the attempt (all records were retained).