Top 10 songs of the month: Who's Making Money

John Cole

You absolutely did say the essence of that, when the rape accusations against Assange came out last summer. Without missing a beat. And reiterated it thereafter. And if you don’t believe it, I’m sure your archives are more accessible to you than they are to me.

I have no idea why they are more accessible to me than you, but if you put “rape assange” in the search box you will see I dismissed the charges WHEN the Swiss dropped them, stating it is deeply troubling when charges of rape are tossed around, because rape is a serious thing.

The only other thing I said about it was the following:

You know what? Maybe he is a pervert and a rapist. But you don’t exactly have to be Alex Jones or Paul Watson or drinking grain and rain water to think this is a little sketchy. Especially the way it just sort of appeared after the military document dump, and now after the latest dump, the arrest warrant is issued. It is just getting too convenient (Ritter) that every time someone throws a fly in the ointment, this kind of thing happens. Maybe there is something in the personality type and it is all just a big coincidence. Or maybe not.

And I stand by that. You don’t exactly have to be a conspiracy theorist to note that every time someone speaks up, this sort of thing happens. And even then, I noted the possibility of his being a rapist and that maybe there is something in the personality type that makes people who are defiant (like Assange or Ritter) that also coincides with their being sexual deviants.

As to this bullshit:

I eagerly await a link to where you—similar to your hero Glennzilla—ever said anything along the lines of “Regardless of anyone’s opinions of Assange and Wikileaks, an accusation of rape is a serious matter to be resolved pursuant to the applicable law—and no one should EVER attack the accuser, or question her motives, any more than they should assume the guilt of the accused.”

Lo and behold, I linked to two pieces that SAID JUST FUCKING THAT. Here is the Amanda Marcotte piece I linked:

We can be grown-ups here. We can entertain the idea that Wikileaks is performing a valuable service while acknowledging the strong possibility that Julian Assange is himself an asshole who treats women like they’re objects he can exert his massive power issues on. We can criticize Interpol for treating these alleged sex crimes more seriously than they ever treat sex crimes and maintain sympathy for women who reportedly were quite afraid they had been exposed to unintended pregnancy or worse. Maybe we can even do one better than that, and accept that more than a few men who consider themselves liberals or even leftists—-or may even claim to be feminists—-still act like women’s concerns should be dismissed and our rights can be transgressed with ease. I’m not accusing Assange of anything, but I seriously think it’s silly to think the accusations couldn’t be credible.

And here is Feministe:

I’m not particularly interested in debating What Assange Did or Whether Assange Is A Rapist, and I’d appreciate it if we could steer clear of that in the comments section. Rather, I’m interested in pushing back on the primary media narrative about this case, which is that women lie and exaggerate about rape, and will call even the littlest thing — a broken condom! — rape if they’re permitted to under a too-liberal feminist legal system. In fact, there are lots of good reasons to support consent-based sexual assault laws, and to recognize that consent goes far beyond “yes you can put that in here now.” It’s a shame that the shoddy, sensationalist reporting on this case have muddied those waters.

You have now trotted out every single form of weak bullshit imaginable, and the facts and the archives have shot you down each and every time. You even got to throw in a weak shot at Greenwald.

Do you want to stop now, or keep digging?

The Foo Fighters just launched a contest to find directors for their album. Usually these contests involve sending in your fan-made video, having the band judge it, and then getting a camera or a Red Lobster gift certificate as your prize. But for this contest — called “This Video Sucks” — the band is asking fans to submit their reels of previous work. I think this means the winners will get a small budget and work with the band on the concept and shooting. There’s no mention of pay beyond exposure (the videos will premiere on Fuse), but I’m sure that’s all Michel Gondry got when he directed their video for “Everlong.” Says Dave Grohl: “I had this idea that instead of going and spending a ton of money on one video made by a director who’s done it a trillion times, why not split up the cash and give it to the fans and let the fans make 11 different videos for the band? So that, instead of just making one video as the album comes out, we have 11 different videos for the 11 songs on the record.”

The band shot some funny contest promos, which you can watch below:

free rental agreement forms

Top 10 songs of the month

Friday 7 January 2011

Who's Making Money

Stocks Slide After Double-Whammy Of Bad <b>News</b>: Here's What You Need <b>...</b>

YouTube - DESKTOP <b>NEWS</b>!!

This week's travel <b>news</b> - Travel - Macleans.ca

No comments:

Post a Comment