Fox News Calls for Terrorist Killing of Julian Assange

Shooting the messenger

So Fox News, the place where most Americans get what passes for information, has now aligned itself with terrorists.

In this clip, two fools are calling for special forces to kill Julian Assange because, among other things, “he’s a traitor”.   It seems to have escaped their attention that Assange is Australian.

Wikileaks has been working in partnership with several world-respected newspapers to verify the accuracy of the leaks, including The Guardian, the New York Times and der Spiegel. Since Fox News believes Assange should be killed, they should be consistent and demand the execution of the newspaper editors as well.  Shouldn’t they? As one of the talking heads pointed out, every night in Afghanistan special forces are taking out “enemies of America”. It doesn’t seem to cross the mind of these boneheads that there’s a very good reason why the Taliban in Afghanistan are enemies of America. You fucking invaded them, idiot. Do you expect them to love America? And did you forget that you created the fucking Taliban in the first place when you wanted to piss off the Russians?

And why stop there?  Why not kill every bond trader who damages US financial interests?  Every athlete who might beat them in the Olympics.  Why not kill everyone who disagrees with Sarah Palin? Execute all atheists.

Why not?  That’s the direction they’re heading.


Meanwhile, the rape case becomes more and more absurd. Naomi Wolfe wrote an excellent piece on it for the Huffington Post.  The article, entitled , Julian Assange Captured by World’s Dating Police, is scathing of Wolf’s feminist sisters: I am also pleased that the alleged victims are using feminist-inspired rhetoric and law to assuage what appears to be personal injured feelings.

That seems to sum it up.  Feminism is all very well until you have sex with a famous guy and then find out you weren’t the only one.  After that, it’s back to tears and name-calling.  As Wolf puts it, thank you again, Interpol. I know you will now prioritize the global manhunt for 1.3 million guys I have heard similar complaints about personally in the US alone.

Not to mention those one or two women who haven’t been entirely open about their dalliances.

I don’t believe in the conspiracy that some people claim is behind the arrest of Assange. I don’t think it was some kind of set-up, but I do think that the US and Britain seized on the opportunity when these women decided to get revenge on Assange for two-timing them.  As somebody said, if it happened in China, the same Fox News idiots would be calling him a dissident.

It’s absurd, and futile at the same time.  It just shows that Calvinism is never too far below the surface in Sweden, but even if the tolerant, civilised Swedish sex police manage to put Assange away for years, it will make no difference.  Wikileaks will still be there in one form or another.  As long as people are willing to leak information, somebody will publish it.

Now.  I wonder who the editors of the Guardian, the New York Times and Der Spiegel have been shagging?

26 thoughts on “Fox News Calls for Terrorist Killing of Julian Assange

  1. America,the good ole U.S of A.The land of freedom,freedom of speech.Until you say something that offends one of their many secret services.Go America.Go fuck yourself.

  2. Fucking dumb red neck yanks in that clip. All of them.
    Excuse my language, but that type of ignorance and disregard for a person’s life pisses me off.

    Reminds me of a quote those good ole boys could do with reading..
    “We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.” Edward R. Murrow.

    “Wikileaks will still be there in one form or another. As long as people are willing to leak information, somebody will publish it.” You’re absolutely right there Bock. It’s inevitable.

  3. Here’s an excellent article from Keith Olbermann at MSNBC that seems fitting and related..
    “Dissent and disagreement with government is the life’s blood of human freedom…
    The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.”

  4. The Americans deserve whatever stones are thrown at them although not sure we are that well placed to do the throwing – we have plenty of innocents lying in graves who were put there by our own rednecks and lauded by many for doing so.

  5. This is typical Fox “news” bullshit. They appeal to the lowest common denominater and use those idiots to seat the likes of GW Bush into power. Sarah fuckhead Palin has be contracted by them to be a political analyst, it would be funny if it wasn’t scary.

  6. Uh… neither of the women are CIA. That’s actually just some random crap that’s being thrown around to get the tinfoil hat brigade excited. One of them had some articles in a publication that got support from the CIA. That’s about as far as the link goes.

    The fact that one of them is a feminist really shouldn’t make a difference to this case. Are we going to get into a discussion of motive based on someone’s political beliefs? Quite frankly, if this were about a staunch conservative making the accusation, I doubt anyone would notice or indeed care; it’s just a very persistent myth that feminist = OMG HATES MEN WANTS THEM TO SUFFER! I tire of that, really I do, mostly because I am a feminist and I don’t hate men.

    Newsflash: just as the actions and beliefs of one man can’t be assumed to be true for all men, the actions and beliefs of one feminist cannot be assumed to be true of all feminists.

    Let’s take all that and put it to one side. Forget that Assange is a high profile figure. Forget that one of the women is apparently a feminist. What actual facts do we have?

    The answer to that is… not much. I’ve been digging through different reports and I can’t seem to nail anything down as being definitive. We know that Assange had sex with both women inside a pretty short space of time, but outside of that? We don’t know enough to call it one way or another.

    The ‘sex by surprise’ thing needs to be clarified, at least. They’re not just pulling it out of their collective asses – this isn’t a case of consentual sex without a condom being called rape after the fact. (That’s playing into the myth of women regretting consensual sex and deciding to call it rape afterwards – to the best of my knowledge, it never really happens in reality, if only because the actual conviction rate of rape is pitiful and the woman is usually victimised for it. Anyway that’s not important here.) From what I can gather from various different sources, the accustion is that during sex – at some point? It’s not clear when or with which woman – the condom broke, the woman asked Assange to stop, and he didn’t.

    The accusation of rape is entirely down to this: persisting in a sexual act, after the partner in said act has asked the other partner to cease the activity, is essentially forcing someone to participate in a sexual act against their will and is therefore sexual assault.

    You can debate whether a broken condom is really a good reason to call off consensual sex, but the point is that, if this is true, it pretty much is rape – because that’s what you call having sex with someone against their will, even if they initially consented to it. I would hope that in a similar situation, most men would in fact stop what they were doing and make sure their partner was okay, if nothing else.

    Anyway, this is all academic right now. I’m not inclined to believe either side; it’s a he-said-she-said thing right now, and we have nothing solid to base a conclusion on. It’s possible Julian Assange is a rapist. It’s possible two vindictive, jealous women are trying to screw him over because he slept with them both. For all I know, it’s possible this is a plot cooked up by the CIA to nail him over Wikileaks.

    For what it’s worth, I support what Assange is doing, and the whole call for his murder is despicable. I’ve changed my homepage on my site because I believe that. I hope he isn’t a rapist, but I’m not so naive to think that he can’t possibly be one because he’s doing stuff I happen to agree with.

  7. Interesting analysis, and one I agree with. Even if Assange turned out to be the world’s worst criminal, it would have nothing to do with his activities on Wikileaks.

    The accusations against him don’t seem to be proveable one way or the other, and there seems to be evidence of one woman removing Twitter posts post facto. Let’s see what comes of that.

  8. I reckon and have done for a time that this is just more fodder for the likes of us to talk about.
    I have said this before and I’ll say it again – This is a huge slight of hand. The US govenment (Lieberman especially) has put forwad a Bill proposed in the Senate, the entire global Internet is to be claimed as a “national asset” of the United States. If Congress passes the bill, the US President would be given the power to “kill” the Internet in the event of a “national cyber-emergency.” Supporters of the legislation say this is necessary to prevent a “cyber 9/11” – yet another myth from the fearmongers who brought us tales of “Iraqi WMD” and “Iranian nukes.”

    This wiki-terror crap is the excuse they need. We can all talk about the issue as we see it and as it is shown to us, but we really need to start opening our eyes a little wider. I have said before, he would be dead a long time ago if it wasnt for his “leaks” regarding Bin Laden and Iran. Israel will not allow his killing until they have used this to their end.

    The upside to wiki and what it says it stands for is that it encourages other people to leak real information to us. But this will be short lived as the internet will be heavily scensored in the near future.

    It wouldnt surprise me that sites such as this one will have trouble existing in the near future.

    Just seen on Sky News there about 2 bombs in Sweden. Always ask yourself, WHO BENIFITS?
    Cue bono……..

  9. Claire,

    I agree with you on your second last paragraph especially where you say you aren’t agreeing with either camp and it is a he said / she said thing right now. What is known is that a public prosecutor in Sweden already decided there was no case to answer, but that another prosecutor in a different city restarted the case. We’ll see what happens.

    Unfortunately I disagree with you on your assertion that there is a “myth of women regretting consensual sex and deciding to call it rape afterwards – to the best of my knowledge, it never really happens in reality”

    False claims do occur and can have severe repercussions for all involved. There are some high profile examples of women doing exactly that because they regretted having consensual sex such as the Hofstra case where a student at Hofstra college in New York got seperated from her boyfriend at a club, met a guy and brought him and hid 5 friends back to her place where they all had consensual sex. When her boyfriend called over looking for her, she claimed she was raped leading to the imprisonment of 4 men. The case only fell when she was confronted with a video of her having consensual sex which was taken on a cell phone. That noted anti feminist publication jezebel discusses it further here

    Or there is the case of the wife who had an affair and felt guilty about it and then said she was raped leading to the arrets of two innocent me.

    There are a number of other documented reasons for some women to make false rape claims ranging from a woman trying to win back erexlover by claiming she was gang raped

    To another woman claiming abondenment issues as a reason for her falsely accusing an ex of rape

    Or the student who wanted more time to finish her University assignment so accused a cleaner of raping her in order to get an extension on her assignment. .

    Ignoring false rape claims because it doesn’t fit into a specific viewpoint does an argument no good. It hurts all involved those unfortunate enough to be falsely accused, their families etc. They are not collateral damage to be ignored. Never mind the damage they do to genuine victims of rape by making it harder to tell if their cases are indeed true. So there might be the appalling vista of rapists walking free as a result of this. Something I’m sure noone agrees with.

    But getting back to Assange etc Naomi Wolfe has her say about the use of feminist inspired rhetoric and laws to assuage what appears to be personal injured feelings here:

  10. Claire,
    I posted the above link to show that in Sweden there is a more heated and informed discussion than ever possible in Ireland. About this case at least.

    I’m too tired to argue your feminist case right now, I’m actually too busy to fight my corner as an emancipated woman who is (and always has been) independent, has to earn her own crust and knows how to stand her ground. And who knows how to fight off every man (and woman) who stands in my way of confidence .
    I’ve been in the feminist movement in my youth, long before it reached catholic Ireland. And I’ve learned a lot.
    One of the things were that a lot of my feminist companions were just middle-class girls with a fashionable agenda. The true emancipation, in my opinion, is to fight the male dominated establishment. And that’s not only patriarchism but deeply rooted ancient structures as well. That’s a struggle which will never end, even not with “softie” men who “understand” women.

    Feminism the way you explain it is by now (!) and especially in Ireland a middle-class thing: Women who don’t know what it’s like to stand their ground, who from the comfort of their homes and probably with financial support of a husband and/or family or a cushy job can claim to know what it’s like to be a woman in a hostile male world.

    Now, I’m with you with the basic thing about rape, as I outlined in another post on this blog: If a woman says NO she means NO.
    And I’m all for harshly punishing a rapist. Not that Ireland is a beacon of justice in this regard…
    So keep on fighting.

    But the feminist culture has, as every movement, it’s negatives, that is in this case to condemn every sexual encounter as rape if it doesn’t work out as expected. And, according to the Swedish law or the interpretation of a prosecutor, every offence against a woman’s sexuality is called by law a rape, if you are clever.

    I actually don’t think anymore that Assange raped that woman (or these women). All evidence points to immature and rather puberal revenge.

    Feminism is different. Feminism is about equality and hence responsiblity . Which means you are as much responsible for your sexual encounters as the man in question. If you complain you put yourself back into the “poor me” position. And that’s very contraproductive and just shows that you didn’t understand anything about true emancipation.
    Don’t you think?

  11. I see WikiLeaks have leaked the astounding info that Gerry and Marty knew of the Northern Bank raid before it happened, well so what? if they did or didn’t, 6 year old story re hashed no doubt by FF to stave off Sinner advances in the polls, I’d rather know who knew about the 85 odd billion give or take a few more billion here and there that that shower of ner do wells in FF stole of the Irish Taxpayer to pay off gamblers and speculators.

    Apparently dukes now says Anglo needs another 35 billion WTF? Why isn’t this ridiculous entity wound up and thrown down a well where it belongs. More Cuba Libres needed.

    I’m no SF supporter but expect more distraction type stories in the coming weeks and months.

  12. @Mark

    Perhaps I was being a bit facetious when I said it doesn’t really happen – I stand corrected on that, and I apologise.

    I checked the current FBI statistics for the US, and apparently the incidence of false rape accusations are no higher than for any other crime. My main concern is that there is a myth that victims are routinely lying, and cases of false accusations may be hyped and overly reported in order to feed into this.


    Not sure exactly what you want to argue about. I’m a moderate feminist, to be precise. Problem?

    In my experience, being a feminist is incredibly unpopular these days. Everyone – and I really mean everyone, even my parents who’ve known me all my life – hears that I’m a feminist and instantly assumes that I’m a feminazi who hates men and likes burning bras. Other women in my age group vary between being indifferent or openly hostile, or they are hesitant to call themselves feminists at all even if they share my opinions.

    This isn’t to say that your experience is any less real or valid – it’s just a different experience, which isn’t surprising seeing as we are different people.

    Needless to say, I don’t really agree that feminist culture is to condemn every sexual encounter as rape if it doesn’t work out as expected, or that Sweden’s laws say that every offence against a woman’s sexuality is called a rape, or that complaining about a sexual encounter somehow means you are weak and don’t understand true emancipation. I suppose the point is that there are many differing views, and there is a continuing and very healthy debate among feminists on a whole range of issues.

    I still maintain, however, that we don’t have all the facts on this case. Your link is interesting – I have read it before – but it’s still unconfirmed and the source is apparently a Swedish tabloid. Let’s not jump to conclusions just yet.

    I believe the case is still a sideshow, a distraction from the greater story which is the enormous amount of information that Wikileaks has put at our disposal. We have never before had such an insight into recent international diplomacy efforts between countries, and I find it astonishing that they are so… human, I suppose. It’s like – dare I say it – an episode of any soap opera on a huge scale.

  13. I once made a comment on the website of an academic feminist, in which I gave the examples of Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher as women who were capable of directing violence. The reply was that these people were honorary men.

  14. “You fucking invaded them, idiot. Do you expect them to love America?”

    The worse thing is, they probably did. As Liberators don’t you know…

  15. @Bock

    I’m not totally surprised by that response, to be honest, although I’d love to know the context. It probably stems from the concept of gender essentialism, i.e. that men and women are fundamentally different in the way that they think.

    I personally think that it’s backward and ill-informed, but it still has some traction among feminists.

    Anyway, on the subject at hand – this article is an interesting read if anyone hasn’t seen it yet.

    Naomi Wolf again, but with rather less sarcasm and much more disdain for the actions of the UK and Swedish authorities.

  16. Wonderfully written article by Naomi Wolf there Claire, thank you for that.

    Julian Assange has been ” Granted Bail” today.

  17. Looks like i was wrong here, there is an appeal against Assange`s bail. he has to wait a further 48 hours while this appeal is heard. WOW democracy and the rule of law at work !

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.