Hi,
I just read your post about Assange as devil or saint. I can say regarding your first question about whether or not he is guilty of sexual assault, I had the same thought as you about making assumptions. It turns out the facts (as agreed upon by both Assange's critics and supporters) is that there were two women in question, one relatively soon after the other, and that it was not sexual assault in either case as considered in the mainstream sense (it was consensual), but that it was in violation of Swedish law, that is, that the man wear a condom. As I understand it, that legally constitutes rape in Sweden, though it's not what most of the world thinks of when they hear the word. And considering it was consensual, although I'm the last person to comment on Swedish law, I would suspect the women would be guilty of consenting to what would amount to "illegal sex." Though that battle I would expect to come down to which side has a more charismatic representative in court.
However, there's also the claim, most notably from the US, that Assange's work itself jeopardizes lives and that he ought to be tried under the Espionage Act of 1917:
http://www.newsy.com/videos/can-julian-assange-be-tried-under-the-espionage-act
Feel free to use the video on your blog if you feel it adds another element to the debate of Assange's role as saint or devil... or combination of the two.
Have a great day,
Daniel Maxson
Community at Newsy
http://www.newsy.com/
Assange
pp
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment