For some human rights?

February 12th, 2013 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

Andrew Stone at the NZ Herald:

A leading human rights lawyer yesterday hit out at a decision banning a West Papua independence activist from speaking at Parliament.

, a member of ’s defence team, is in New Zealand briefly with Benny Wenda, a leader of the self-determination campaign for West Papua, which is under Indonesian control.

Is the right not to be raped not a human right? Is it a human right to flee justice rather than fight charges in court?

Not sure how you can be called a leading human rights lawyer, when you argue against alleged victims of rape being given a chance to have their case heard in court.

Note I am not saying Assange is guilty of rape. I am saying that he is not above the law, and should fight his case in court. It’s paranoid nonsense to suggest two hard core left-wing anti-US activist Swedish women are part of a plot to get him to the United States.

Tags: , ,

20 Responses to “For some human rights?”

  1. gazzmaniac (2,269 comments) says:

    Is the right to not be harrassed by a foreign power (or indeed your own government) also not a human right?

    Nobody has ever been extradited for a rape charge, particularly one that has little hard evidence to support it. We all know it’s for more than that.

    Just like Kimble Dotcom, I highly doubt that Julian Assange will ever see due process.

    As for West Papua, all that needs to happen is for an Australian company to find minerals or oil within their borders and their independence will be backed by Australia, just like what happened when oil was discovered in the Timor Sea.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. cha (3,537 comments) says:

    Assange being a toe rag is surely the best reason to ignore the oppression and violence in West Papua.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. PaulL (5,775 comments) says:

    I think DPF’s point is that this guy is hardly a human rights lawyer, nothing to do with West Papua.

    My view on Assange is that it’s crazy lefties and anarchists arguing amongst themselves, and using the courts to do it. Assange is definitely a toe rag, and he appears to have a history of allowing women to think they’re special to him in order to sleep with them, only to drop them like a hot potato and move on. In short, he’s a player.

    That looks to be what he did in Sweden, the problem is that he chose to do it in lefty circles where that sort of thing is generally frowned upon. They’ve looked at what he did and it would seem it might be illegal.

    I don’t really have an opinion on whether it was legal or not, or whether what he did meets a commonly accepted definition of rape given that it is clear that there was at least some amount of consent. It seems to hang on the question of how long that consent was valid for, and whether it was conditional on him not being a toe rag (i.e. whether it was based somewhat on his lies). What I do believe is that his behaviour was at least immoral, and the action that they’ve taken is probably fair justice for him being a toe rag – and probably has put a stop to at least some of his philandering ways. Which might be what they were after.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. kowtow (6,701 comments) says:

    I presume it was National who didn’t want to upset the Indonesians by letting this topic be aired in our House of Representatives.

    Mind you Labour would have been no different.

    The Indonesians (Javanese) are a bunch of post colonial,imperialists. But because they’re brown it’s OK.

    Imperial colonialism is only evil when it’s white.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. gazzmaniac (2,269 comments) says:

    Jennifer is a pretty funny name for a guy, PaulL.

    I also don’t think that “players” or “man whores” should go to jail for having sex with girls who put out. That sort of opinion just reeks of jealousy.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. asterisk.4 (13 comments) says:

    Trying to spin attention away from the deplorable situation in West Papua is despicable.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Free_Choice

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. ross69 (3,637 comments) says:

    It’s paranoid nonsense to suggest two hard core left-wing anti-US activist Swedish women are part of a plot to get him to the United States.

    Has the US stopped torturing Bradley Manning yet?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. CHFR (195 comments) says:

    Ross, when did they start??

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. alwyn (359 comments) says:

    @gazzmaniac at 2.50pm

    You must be very old if you think “guy” is reserved for men.
    I would have thought that guy being used for both males and females was pretty well standard for anyone under the age of forty and would be understood by anyone under seventy.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. unaha-closp (1,033 comments) says:

    Because human rights are universal, they don”t just apply to people you happen to like.

    “Not sure how you can be called a leading human rights lawyer, when you argue against alleged victims of rape being given a chance to have their case heard in court.”

    She argues in a court of law to prevent her client being subject to oppressive, unjustifiable, detention and extradation to a foriegn nation. That is almost a definition of a human rights lawyer. As long as the court where the case is being held is just (and I think the British court system is pretty good) this is what they do.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. kowtow (6,701 comments) says:

    Manning ,the traitor should be facing a firing squad.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. gazzmaniac (2,269 comments) says:

    alwyn – you must be deluded if you think that any female would be happy to be called a guy. What you say is probably true in the broadest plural sense of the word, such as “you guys” referring to a mixed group of people. It certainly doesn’t apply to a singular female, but may apply to a group of females, again in the loosest sense of the word.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. ross69 (3,637 comments) says:

    Ross, when did they start??

    Sometime in 2010 is most likely.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-healey/us-torture-must-be-taken-_b_850783.html

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. cha (3,537 comments) says:

    Manning ,the traitor should be facing a firing squad

    In your wee world perhaps but Jonathan Polllard who stole real military secrets for a US ally managed to avoid the noose.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,786 comments) says:

    two hard core left-wing anti-US activist Swedish women are part of a plot to get him to the United States.

    Why not?

    Russel Norman is in the pay of the USA Government. They own him.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. PaulL (5,775 comments) says:

    Nah, my mistake, didn’t read closely enough. Jennifer is a pretty funny name for a guy, yes.

    I’m not suggesting that players should be prosecuted for having sex with girls who “put out”, although I’d never have put it quite like that. I am saying that players should be quite aware of the rules of the road in the nations in which they visit. If they do things that are illegal in that country, they should face the music.

    I’ve not followed it closely, so my understanding of the situation is a bit shallow, but my impression is that it comes down to one of two things:
    1. He had sex with one of the ladies the night before, in the morning he had sex with her whilst she was still partially or fully asleep. She hadn’t given consent to that. As a guy I worry about that as being illegal, certainly with my long term partner I reckon there’s implied consent that I can start something in the middle of the night (although I’m clearly risking getting clocked for waking her up). But apparently that’s the law over there

    2. He told one of the ladies some mistruths, I think particularly relating to him not shagging other ladies in parallel, and she asserts her consent was based on this information. So given that he lied, her consent was not valid. This one I reckon might be reasonable, I’d have to think about it some more.

    Bottom line – you go a) shagging crazy lefties, or b) shagging people in countries where you don’t know the law, you’re exposing yourself to these kinds of things. And since he’s a bit of a player I reckon he probably deserves some of what’s coming to him.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    It’s paranoid nonsense to suggest two hard core left-wing anti-US activist Swedish women are part of a plot to get him to the United States.

    I’ve actually seen people try to claim that they need Sweden to extradite him so the US can then get to him, because the UK has no extradition treaty with the US.

    That is of course, ridiculous and a basic google search confirms that the US does in fact have such a treaty. So there is nothing stopping them from extraditing him from the UK.

    Of course, Assange is now under a nice self-imposed arrest, looking more and more crazy to the public (and a number of his supporters) by the day. And the US doesn’t even have to pay for it!

    I’m of the opinion that they should give him a medal, it would certainly be the best way to destroy his credibility with the anti-us crowd. Outside of the fact that he’s already inadvertently exploded a few anti-us conspiracy theories anyway. Who knew that it was the Saudis who wanted Iran sorted out?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Yoza (1,348 comments) says:

    David Farrar:“. It’s paranoid nonsense to suggest two hard core left-wing anti-US activist Swedish women are part of a plot to get him to the United States.”

    The US establishment and its flunkies are out to get Assange, if Assange is not paranoid he has real problems. Glen Greenwald : sums it up nicely when quoting Seamus Milne

    But as Milne put it last night with great understatement: “such posturing looks increasingly specious.” As he rhetorically asked:

    “Can anyone seriously believe the dispute would have gone global, or that the British government would have made its asinine threat to suspend the Ecuadorean embassy’s diplomatic status and enter it by force, or that scores of police would have surrounded the building, swarming up and down the fire escape and guarding every window, if it was all about one man wanted for questioning over sex crime allegations in Stockholm?”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    Okay, so by Mr Farrar’s logic, it was quite right for the fellow charged with blasphemy in Saudi Arabia to be extradited back from Malaysia to face the death penalty because “he is not above the law, and should fight his case in court”!

    I’m no fan of Mr Assange, and would delight in him getting his comeuppance, but just because a country makes a law doesn’t mean that law is just or acceptable. The Swedish definition of rape is ridiculously draconian – misrepresenting yourself to get laid may not be moral but it is certainly not rape. Why should any man – Assange included – have to answer to that nonsense?

    More pertinent to this post, what does all that have to do with West Papua? She’s a lawyer – it’s her job to represent others. And I would say if she is defending a man from extradition because he told a girl he was shagging some fibs, then she is doing her job correctly as a human rights lawyer, because in the civilised world, lying to get laid is a moral and civil matter, not a criminal one.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. JulianPilbrow () says:

    This debate is hilarious. They don’t talk about the leaked documents/videos.
    We want to see him in Sweden really, but not in America; rapists and their stuff are unwanted in America.
    Julian Assange is in his place; an office doing a lag with no love for him or his wikileaks site.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.