7 ms·

An interesting learning was, how to most effectively frame a person if you want them to lose public support. They first did the "rapist" framing. Making up a c

by 101404 7y ago

An interesting learning was, how to most effectively frame a person if you want them to lose public support. They first did the "rapist" framing. Making up a case that never existed and repeating it in the media all the time. Surprisingly, that didn't work as effectivity as expected. So they switched the framing from "rapist" to "right wing". That seems to have achieved the intended outcome with many previous supporters.

mcv 7y ago
These are not things that "they" did, though. They're things that "he" did.
- shadowprofile77 7y ago
  Well, no. Assange did not accuse himself of rape and then push out a media narrative about it over successive months. "They" (in this case, Swedish and other legal authorities and various news agencies did). And though the question of his level of guilt in those cases remains somewhat ambiguous as far as I know, the now dropped rape cases have the whiff of political smear to them. Regardless of Assange's merits or failures as an activist or human being, the current conditions he's being subjected to absolutely do indicate a man being made an example of for politically motivated reasons and in violation of basic legal guarantees. That is something that's far more dangerous than anything he himself is likely to be convicted of.
  - mcv 7y ago
    The way the rape case was initially dropped and then picked up again certainly seemed weird, and there may have been political pressure behind it. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, though. The stories of the women involved seemed very credible, and unlikely to have been made up, considering they were supporters of him. But I totally agree that this treatment in this extradition case sounds terrible, and the judge seems strongly biased against him. Does not sound like a fair trial. In any case, Assange is a controversial figure. He's done things I wholeheartedly support, and things I strongly oppose. I support his early fight against censorship and the release of the collateral murder video. I disagree with releasing all the material concerning sensitive operations unchecked and unedited. I am concerned by the rape stories, strongly oppose his self-centered grandstanding, and my working theory is that he went mad, possibly with power, due to the massive size of the Manning leaks. I supported the rape investigation, but oppose his extradition to the US, because I doubt he's ever going to get a fair trial there. And now it looks like even the extradition trial from the UK is not going to be fair. He's a complex figure with good and bad sides. His are a bit more extreme than most. I find it hard to form a simple opinion about him, because nothing about this is simple. But it seems obvious to me that both blind support and total condemnation are wrong positions to take in this. I agree he's being made an example of for political reasons, and that's very wrong, but that doesn't automatically mean he's entirely innocent either.
    - johnrackles 7y ago
      > The stories of the women involved seemed very credible, and unlikely to have been made up, considering they were supporters of him. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, disagrees: https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian-assange-b252ffdcb768 https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian... Specifically, this section: "Surely, I thought, Assange must be a rapist! But what I found is that he has never been charged with a sexual offence. True, soon after the United States had encouraged allies to find reasons to prosecute Assange, Swedish prosecution informed the tabloid press that he was suspected of having raped two women. Strangely, however, the women themselves never claimed to have been raped, nor did they intend to report a criminal offence. Go figure. Moreover, the forensic examination of a condom submitted as evidence, supposedly worn and torn during intercourse with Assange, revealed no DNA whatsoever — neither his, nor hers, nor anybody else’s. Go figure again. One woman even texted that she only wanted Assange to take an HIV test, but that the police were “keen on getting their hands on him”. Go figure, once more."
      - squarefoot 7y ago
        The important part is that the woman would have had consensual sex, then walked away with the condom to use it as evidence for something that didn't happen. This makes it sound like it was planned from the beginning.
      - FireBeyond 7y ago
        "Go figure" seems such an odd phrasing for someone writing an objective investigation on such a serious matter. I think there's a cake and eat it too. That the rape campaign was an organized smear campaign. That the combined resources of Sweden and the US (and possibly the UK) too's best ability at a smear campaign at someone was "may not have used a condom when he implied he would during a sexual encounter". That's a pretty sad indictment of those intelligence communities (regardless of the merits either way).
    - BigJ1211 7y ago
      The rape case is rather odd to say the least, as posted above by a user you might want to read this article: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea... Basically it comes down to the story not adding up, drummed up charges, testimony that was changed by the police. After the headline was made on August 20th (accusing him of rape) the person that 'accused' him (she hadn't (yet)) was questioned on the 21st and only after that did she accuse him of 'rape' (not actually rape, but stealthing). According to her he had intentionally broken the condom during sex. However the broken condom that was submitted into evidence had no DNA of her, nor of Assange. Neither woman accused him of anything before headlines were being made apparently.
- resters 7y ago
  You believe that Assange is both a rapist and a right wing zealot? There is no evidence to support either claim.
  - mcv 7y ago
    As pointed out elsewhere, the rape allegations are credible. And while I'm not calling him a right-wing zealot, and considered him left-libertarian for his dedication to free information and opposition to censorship, he did at some point seem to work with Trump and Russia in order to falsely discredit Clinton and get Trump elected. So again, there is evidence to support it.
    - fit2rule 7y ago
      How credible is a rape case when the police themselves admitted to altering the reports of the accusers to fit the narrative given to them?
      - tyingq 7y ago
        That is pretty curious. “police officer IK, who had formally questioned SW on 20 August 2010, modified and replaced the content of SW’s original statement in the police database, upon instruction of her superior officer MG and without consulting SW.” https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=24838 https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublic... (The report itself)
        mcv 7y ago
        Is that not tampering with evidence? If true, I'd expect some serious investigation into this.
        tyingq 7y ago
        Yes. The "ohchr.org" is the "Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights". I would imagine that's enough weight to warrant a local inquiry.
- 101404 7y ago
  Propaganda works. You probably once supported his fight for free speech, until they made up the "Trump supporter" story. With that, they actually managed to catch many people who previously supported him. Of course, he was "left" and they told all his friends that he "now supports the enemy". Was a really clever framing move.
  - mullingitover 7y ago
    "Made up"? https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...
  - FireBeyond 7y ago
    Made up how, exactly? > On Oct. 3, WikiLeaks, writing a day before it was set to announce the release of hacked Democratic emails, wrote to Trump Jr.: "Hiya. It'd be great if you guys could comment on /push this story." * https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec... * https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/14/563996442/donald-trump-jr-had-direct-contact-with-wikileaks-during-campaign https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/14/563996442... * https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-campaign-planned-wikileaks-dump-tried-acquire-clinton-emails-mueller-n996081 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-campaign... Which aspects of these stories were "made up"?
    - FireBeyond 7y ago
      Further: In a subsequent message to Trump Jr., WikiLeaks proposes what it acknowledges is "an unusual idea": "Leak us one or more of your father's tax returns," the message suggests, "Most of the harm has already been done by the nyt [New York Times] and pre-empted by your father (tax writedowns)." "If we publish them it will dramatically improve the perception of our impartiality," the message continues. "That means that the vast amount of stuff that we are publishing about Clinton will have much higher impact, because it won't be perceived as coming from a 'pro-Trump' 'pro-Russian' source, which the Clinton campaign is constantly slandering us with."
untog 7y ago
The rape accusations were credible, he just refused to answer to them. That doesn’t mean they were invalid in the first place, it just means they’ll never be proven in a court of law.
- exikyut 7y ago
  Nope, he did offer to answer to them, repeatedly: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea... This article details more than I could ever have wanted to know about the entire situation. It is an excellent 10,000 ft view.
- 101404 7y ago
  No, the police in Sweden invented them. The UN special investigator documented the whole thing pretty thoroughly. But apparently some people still stick with the lie. Propaganda is pretty effective.
  - linuxftw 7y ago
    It was incredibly effective. His support dropped to almost nothing overnight because nobody wanted to be seen supporting a rapist.
odiroot 7y ago
It's like straight out of Bolshevik handbook. If you can catch a person stealing, it's open-shut case. Easy peasy. If not, try to discredit them (appealing to the morals of the people) -- maybe they cheat on their spouse, or use prostitutes? If that still doesn't work just try slapping an "enemy of the people" / fascist / reactionary label and see if it sticks.
- deorder 7y ago
  They also tried to frame him as working for the Russians before and when that did not work as a pedophile: https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-to-Frame-Assange-as-a-Pedophile-and.html https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-t...
andrepd 7y ago
>So they switched the framing from "rapist" to "right wing". I don't know who is "they" but the shift in perception didn't need any prompting from anyone. It was Assange that started acting as Russia's stooge.
- einpoklum 7y ago
  He "stated acting as Russia's stooge" when the Clinton people decided Russia was to blame for their 2016 elections campaign failing. Then suddenly everybody and their uncle became a Russian asset, Russian stooge, Putin puppet and so on. Yes yes, we've heard it all before. Over 3 years of this stuff, with no evidence of any stoogery.
anonsivalley652 7y ago
I would use more specific facts rather than pronouns. "They" were the Swedish prosecutor clearly acting on orders from their government either a) in furtherance of appeasing the US or b) someone who didn't like or was working for one of Assange's enemies, a con-artist, concocted a story with enough detail to convince an authority that crime potentially occurred. It is transparent that Assange doesn't belong to either American political party but attempted to parlay the emails* into a hail-mary get-out-of-jail-(but-not-for-)free card by trying to appease Trump. On that, he gambled and lost, and now some idiots on the internet assume idiotic statements like "he's a Ruskie spy," "he loves Trump," or "he's Putin's best friend." \* The emails were NOT from a Russian operative. Assange stresses this if anyone cares to listen. Furthermore, if someone watched Jimmy Dore, they'd know this is a continuation of anti-Russian conspiracy theories.

by 101404 7y ago

mcv 7y ago

These are not things that "they" did, though. They're things that "he" did.

shadowprofile77 7y ago
Well, no. Assange did not accuse himself of rape and then push out a media narrative about it over successive months. "They" (in this case, Swedish and other legal authorities and various news agencies did). And though the question of his level of guilt in those cases remains somewhat ambiguous as far as I know, the now dropped rape cases have the whiff of political smear to them. Regardless of Assange's merits or failures as an activist or human being, the current conditions he's being subjected to absolutely do indicate a man being made an example of for politically motivated reasons and in violation of basic legal guarantees. That is something that's far more dangerous than anything he himself is likely to be convicted of.
- mcv 7y ago
  The way the rape case was initially dropped and then picked up again certainly seemed weird, and there may have been political pressure behind it. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, though. The stories of the women involved seemed very credible, and unlikely to have been made up, considering they were supporters of him. But I totally agree that this treatment in this extradition case sounds terrible, and the judge seems strongly biased against him. Does not sound like a fair trial. In any case, Assange is a controversial figure. He's done things I wholeheartedly support, and things I strongly oppose. I support his early fight against censorship and the release of the collateral murder video. I disagree with releasing all the material concerning sensitive operations unchecked and unedited. I am concerned by the rape stories, strongly oppose his self-centered grandstanding, and my working theory is that he went mad, possibly with power, due to the massive size of the Manning leaks. I supported the rape investigation, but oppose his extradition to the US, because I doubt he's ever going to get a fair trial there. And now it looks like even the extradition trial from the UK is not going to be fair. He's a complex figure with good and bad sides. His are a bit more extreme than most. I find it hard to form a simple opinion about him, because nothing about this is simple. But it seems obvious to me that both blind support and total condemnation are wrong positions to take in this. I agree he's being made an example of for political reasons, and that's very wrong, but that doesn't automatically mean he's entirely innocent either.
  - johnrackles 7y ago
    > The stories of the women involved seemed very credible, and unlikely to have been made up, considering they were supporters of him. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, disagrees: https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian-assange-b252ffdcb768 https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian... Specifically, this section: "Surely, I thought, Assange must be a rapist! But what I found is that he has never been charged with a sexual offence. True, soon after the United States had encouraged allies to find reasons to prosecute Assange, Swedish prosecution informed the tabloid press that he was suspected of having raped two women. Strangely, however, the women themselves never claimed to have been raped, nor did they intend to report a criminal offence. Go figure. Moreover, the forensic examination of a condom submitted as evidence, supposedly worn and torn during intercourse with Assange, revealed no DNA whatsoever — neither his, nor hers, nor anybody else’s. Go figure again. One woman even texted that she only wanted Assange to take an HIV test, but that the police were “keen on getting their hands on him”. Go figure, once more."
    - squarefoot 7y ago
      The important part is that the woman would have had consensual sex, then walked away with the condom to use it as evidence for something that didn't happen. This makes it sound like it was planned from the beginning.
    - FireBeyond 7y ago
      "Go figure" seems such an odd phrasing for someone writing an objective investigation on such a serious matter. I think there's a cake and eat it too. That the rape campaign was an organized smear campaign. That the combined resources of Sweden and the US (and possibly the UK) too's best ability at a smear campaign at someone was "may not have used a condom when he implied he would during a sexual encounter". That's a pretty sad indictment of those intelligence communities (regardless of the merits either way).
  - BigJ1211 7y ago
    The rape case is rather odd to say the least, as posted above by a user you might want to read this article: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea... Basically it comes down to the story not adding up, drummed up charges, testimony that was changed by the police. After the headline was made on August 20th (accusing him of rape) the person that 'accused' him (she hadn't (yet)) was questioned on the 21st and only after that did she accuse him of 'rape' (not actually rape, but stealthing). According to her he had intentionally broken the condom during sex. However the broken condom that was submitted into evidence had no DNA of her, nor of Assange. Neither woman accused him of anything before headlines were being made apparently.
resters 7y ago
You believe that Assange is both a rapist and a right wing zealot? There is no evidence to support either claim.
- mcv 7y ago
  As pointed out elsewhere, the rape allegations are credible. And while I'm not calling him a right-wing zealot, and considered him left-libertarian for his dedication to free information and opposition to censorship, he did at some point seem to work with Trump and Russia in order to falsely discredit Clinton and get Trump elected. So again, there is evidence to support it.
  - fit2rule 7y ago
    How credible is a rape case when the police themselves admitted to altering the reports of the accusers to fit the narrative given to them?
    - tyingq 7y ago
      That is pretty curious. “police officer IK, who had formally questioned SW on 20 August 2010, modified and replaced the content of SW’s original statement in the police database, upon instruction of her superior officer MG and without consulting SW.” https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=24838 https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublic... (The report itself)
      - mcv 7y ago
        Is that not tampering with evidence? If true, I'd expect some serious investigation into this.
        tyingq 7y ago
        Yes. The "ohchr.org" is the "Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights". I would imagine that's enough weight to warrant a local inquiry.
101404 7y ago
Propaganda works. You probably once supported his fight for free speech, until they made up the "Trump supporter" story. With that, they actually managed to catch many people who previously supported him. Of course, he was "left" and they told all his friends that he "now supports the enemy". Was a really clever framing move.
- mullingitover 7y ago
  "Made up"? https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...
- FireBeyond 7y ago
  Made up how, exactly? > On Oct. 3, WikiLeaks, writing a day before it was set to announce the release of hacked Democratic emails, wrote to Trump Jr.: "Hiya. It'd be great if you guys could comment on /push this story." * https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec... * https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/14/563996442/donald-trump-jr-had-direct-contact-with-wikileaks-during-campaign https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/14/563996442... * https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-campaign-planned-wikileaks-dump-tried-acquire-clinton-emails-mueller-n996081 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-campaign... Which aspects of these stories were "made up"?
  - FireBeyond 7y ago
    Further: In a subsequent message to Trump Jr., WikiLeaks proposes what it acknowledges is "an unusual idea": "Leak us one or more of your father's tax returns," the message suggests, "Most of the harm has already been done by the nyt [New York Times] and pre-empted by your father (tax writedowns)." "If we publish them it will dramatically improve the perception of our impartiality," the message continues. "That means that the vast amount of stuff that we are publishing about Clinton will have much higher impact, because it won't be perceived as coming from a 'pro-Trump' 'pro-Russian' source, which the Clinton campaign is constantly slandering us with."

untog 7y ago

The rape accusations were credible, he just refused to answer to them. That doesn’t mean they were invalid in the first place, it just means they’ll never be proven in a court of law.

exikyut 7y ago
Nope, he did offer to answer to them, repeatedly: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea... This article details more than I could ever have wanted to know about the entire situation. It is an excellent 10,000 ft view.
101404 7y ago
No, the police in Sweden invented them. The UN special investigator documented the whole thing pretty thoroughly. But apparently some people still stick with the lie. Propaganda is pretty effective.
- linuxftw 7y ago
  It was incredibly effective. His support dropped to almost nothing overnight because nobody wanted to be seen supporting a rapist.

odiroot 7y ago

It's like straight out of Bolshevik handbook. If you can catch a person stealing, it's open-shut case. Easy peasy. If not, try to discredit them (appealing to the morals of the people) -- maybe they cheat on their spouse, or use prostitutes? If that still doesn't work just try slapping an "enemy of the people" / fascist / reactionary label and see if it sticks.

deorder 7y ago
They also tried to frame him as working for the Russians before and when that did not work as a pedophile: https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-to-Frame-Assange-as-a-Pedophile-and.html https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-t...

andrepd 7y ago

>So they switched the framing from "rapist" to "right wing". I don't know who is "they" but the shift in perception didn't need any prompting from anyone. It was Assange that started acting as Russia's stooge.

einpoklum 7y ago
He "stated acting as Russia's stooge" when the Clinton people decided Russia was to blame for their 2016 elections campaign failing. Then suddenly everybody and their uncle became a Russian asset, Russian stooge, Putin puppet and so on. Yes yes, we've heard it all before. Over 3 years of this stuff, with no evidence of any stoogery.

anonsivalley652 7y ago

I would use more specific facts rather than pronouns. "They" were the Swedish prosecutor clearly acting on orders from their government either a) in furtherance of appeasing the US or b) someone who didn't like or was working for one of Assange's enemies, a con-artist, concocted a story with enough detail to convince an authority that crime potentially occurred. It is transparent that Assange doesn't belong to either American political party but attempted to parlay the emails* into a hail-mary get-out-of-jail-(but-not-for-)free card by trying to appease Trump. On that, he gambled and lost, and now some idiots on the internet assume idiotic statements like "he's a Ruskie spy," "he loves Trump," or "he's Putin's best friend." \* The emails were NOT from a Russian operative. Assange stresses this if anyone cares to listen. Furthermore, if someone watched Jimmy Dore, they'd know this is a continuation of anti-Russian conspiracy theories.