A) That's not even remotely true.  It's a crime to break a condom and not tell a woman you broke it,(as in, you broke it yourself intentionally) but it's not rape... and as a crime it doesn't carry a penalty high enough to warrant extradition.  It's penalty is a minor fine.

B) She was a feminist speaker, who went to a feminist orginization who got money from the CIA that wants to promote equal rights in Cuba.  There isn't anything remotley suspious about that.   Unless you think people should swear off civil rights causes based on funding.   Considering one of the big things feminism fights against hardest is false beliefs about rape... I can't imagine a feminist going out of their way to perpetuate one of the biggest myths about rape that false accusals are common.

Whatever you read, you either misread or they didn't have a firm grip about what they were writing about and just took the conspiracy line straight from the guy's lawyer.

A) You're absolutely right: This is not rape. It's not rape by your definition, it's not rape by my definition or anyone elses. It's not rape by your or my country's law definition, but thing is: it can fall under the weird and vague definition of "rape" in swedish law (which as I already pointed out led to Sweden having the highest percentage of rape accusations in the whole world).

Assange by the way did not break any condome. As far as I know he simply refused to use one, and instead of simply saying "Well no sex then" the woman finally agreed not to use a condome. The next morning, she even brought him to the train station and bought him a ticket. When she didn't hear from him for two days, she called a female friend, and during the conversation it turned out that Assange had slept with both of them. They must have both gotten really pissed, because they decided to take revenge by going to the police to check if there isn't any crime they could charge him with.

So yes, maybe it was just a coincidence that the woman Assange stayed at in Sweden had just previously visited an organization close to the CIA. It's a bit strange (if a government only wants to fund a human rights group for ethical reasons, why let an intelligence agency handle the money transfer? It's obvious that people will get suspicious) but it could really have been just a coincidence. But that doesn't change the fact that the whole Assange rape charges are ridiculous and rather strange: Some guy being internationally searched by Europol for not wanting to use a condome. And I wouldn't be surprised if he gets deported to the USA as soon as he reaches Sweden.

A) No it can't... you misread it.  Look up swedish law.  It is wider then most Europeon laws... but only in that "Date rape" is considered regular rape. 

B) I actually do think if you have sex with a woman and she agrees to on the condition you wear a condom... and then you remove the condom intentionally or intentionally break it, it is rape.

You have made a consented sex act unconsented by intentionally going against the agreement you had going in.

C) That wasn't the account... you misread or the person who published it made a LOT of assumptions.   Your going off something his lawyer said (his lawyer) while adding in a bunch of made up stuff.

D) I'm sure the CIA funded the group because pressing for women's rights in Cuba makes things in Cuba more uncomfotable for castro.  What does it matter though?   In the end it's improving the life of women in Cuba which is all that should matter for a femnist.  Al Queda could fund a gay rights group in the US, and anyone who believes in gay rights should feel perfectly fine working with them.  Civil rights trumps liking the person who paid for the thing.

E) Ever think the story sounds strange because you've only heard his lawyers side of the story because Swedish lawyers aren't aloud to comment on the case outside of confirming or denying what the press asks them?

F) Blame the victim is the common rape defense for both innocent and guilty men.  This shit happens in EVERY rape case.  That it's happened here is completely typical.  The only thing that is surprising is their hasn't been a "spontanious" coming out of a bunch of men they slept with saying "Yeah she's a real slut" yet.  Ninte times out of ten it works even for guilty people.  Which is why rape is about the dumbest thing to form a conspiracy theory charge around.

I'm grateful for Wikileaks. It's too easy to sweep concepts under the rug and not think about them. Having them exposed for the world to see if a good idea. Two things happen.

1 "enemies" know about it.
2 YOU know about it. Once both sides know about a "weakness" then it invalidates it as a weakness. It is better to know about your own weaknesses then to forget and let it get exploited by the "enemy"

An exposed world is a world more interested in protection than aggression. IMHO anyways.

Wikileaks needs to go eat shit and die. I'm sick and tired of them. Do they really think releasing stuff like this helps anyone? Of course the US has stuff like this but making it public is just retarded and pointless. 

On another note, its amazing how much freedom there is in America but people still complain about everything. In China half of the internet is blocked by the government but in the US stuff like this gets out all the time and anyone can access it. 

I can imagine how that went down.

Russian Pilot 1: We are approcahing Canadian Air-space.
Russian Pilot 2: Hold it! We have received information that Canada has scrambled all its Bi-planes!
Russian Pilot 1: What! They have Bi-planes! Lets turn back while we still can!
Russian Pilot2: Roger That.

Canadian Pilot: Well that was easy, eh?

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/equip/cf18/index-eng.asp

There's Canada's "bi-plane" for you, dumbass.  

I'm pretty sure this is the Canadian Air Force's main fighting plane.



I must admit though, there good painters.

Okay its actually the CF-188 hornet but whatever...

So you agree with me then?