260

Julian Assange's sexual assault accuser is "happy" he's free (www.bbc.com)

submitted 4 months ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/world@lemmy.world

75 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Swedish human rights activist Anna Ardin is glad Julian Assange is free.

But the claims she has made about him suggest she would have every reason not to wish him well.

Ardin is fiercely proud of Assange's work for WikiLeaks, and insists that it should never have landed him behind bars.

“We have the right to know about the wars that are fought in our name,” she says.

Speaking to Ardin over Zoom in Stockholm, it quickly becomes clear that she has no problem keeping what she sees as the two Assanges apart in her head - the visionary activist and the man who she says does not treat women well.

She is at pains to describe him neither as a hero nor a monster, but a complicated man.

(page 2) 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] x4740N@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

I've heard accusations that assange is politically biased and refused to publish leaks about rupukelicans on wikileaks so I'm not sure what to think of him

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] autotldr 1 points 4 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

They set off a chain of events which saw him trying to avoid extradition to Sweden by seeking asylum in a London embassy for seven years.In 2019 the Swedish authorities ended their investigation.

If this was the case, he probably would have committed an offence under Swedish law.Later, Ardin writes that she heard from another woman - named in legal papers as SW - who had attended the seminar.

In a 2016 statement to Swedish prosecutors, Assange maintained that his sexual relationship with SW was entirely consensual, and that in texts seen by his lawyers, she told a friend that she had been “half asleep”.Both women filed police reports - Ardin's case was categorised as alleged sexual misconduct, and SW's as alleged rape.The press got hold of the reports, setting off an extraordinary series of events.

Now we have the first one.”Another post followed the next day: “Reminder: US intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks as far back as 2008.”Assange’s UK lawyer Mark Stephens claimed that a “honeytrap” had been sprung and that “dark forces” were at work.A social media furore erupted which Ardin describes as “hell” – she tells me the amount of harassment and death threats forced her to leave Sweden at one point.“I couldn’t work.

Greece’s former Finance Minister, Yanis Varoufakis, a long-time supporter of Assange, last week described her claims as “mud” and “innuendo”.No evidence has ever been found to link Ardin with US intelligence.

Months after the incidents, an international arrest warrant was issued for Assange, who was in London at that point.In December 2010, he admitted to the BBC that it was “not probable” he was part of a classic honey-trap operation - but he still denied any wrongdoing.Assange was convinced that if he went to Sweden he would then be extradited to the US - where he feared the death penalty awaited.

The original article contains 1,510 words, the summary contains 308 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It's amazing how every liberal that sees massive American war crimes under Bush and Obama being exposed can only go "but what about Republicans? Else it doesn't count!

Bush is literally a Republican.

load more comments

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024

260 points (91.4% liked)

World News

39019 readers

2328 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.