Feminists slam the "rape apologism" of Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann

Submitted by johndias on Fri, 2010-12-17 23:14

Article here. Looks like the online radical feminists are on the warpath (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) to a couple of well-known political lefties, Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann, for their defense of Wikileaks' Julian Assange (Assange has been bogusly accused of sex crimes by two female groupies in Sweden, one of whom is a known radical feminist). I'm actually with Moore and Olbermann on this one insofar as they have defended the reputation of Assange. But another part of me is snickering in glee at the microscope that the feminists are putting on their usually apologist male supporters on the political left. These two male lefties, dogmatic ideologues themselves, sowed an alliance with even more dogmatic feminist ideologues, and are now reaping what they sowed. And in typical deference by such males to their feminist masters, Olbermann has compliantly shut down his Twitter account.

As a men's rights activist and an opponent of feminist ideologues, I am feeling so validated right now.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

... his being a target of "feminist jurisprudence", which gets extra sharp teeth when crossed with a governmental reason to go after him.

My take on Assange's Wikileaks behavior is this: all governments have secrets and secret communications that are, and rightly so, privileged. If for example one comes across a diplomatic pouch lying in the street, it's against the law to open it. It should be returned to the authorities. Overall, that is as it should be.

But coming across unprotected media that holds state secrets of any nation, one's own or another's, places one in different positions depending on the details. If the two nations are at odds or rivals, then indeed, one ought to consider turning the information over to one's own government as an act of good citizenship. In some countries this may be required by law. But what about if the other country or countries are allies or at the least, non-rivals? Assange is a citizen of Australia and the information he came across was held as secret by a country that has for its exclusive relationship history been a friend and ally of the US. To the best of my knowledge, American and Australian soldiers have never once stood across from one another on a battlefield, but only side by side. It seems to me that while he may be seeking to expose embarrassing facts about the US and other countries as they try to navigate the difficult times we live in vis-a-vis the war on terror and the many complexities of modern diplomacy, what with the new age of rising and not-so-rising global and regional powers, I wonder just how much he or others working with him have considered ALL the effects of what they are doing.

The Internet is owned and operated by various governments all over the world. People often falsely think it is an owner-less, "free" service, like water and air. Well, it isn't. The large computer systems needed to power the day-to-day, incomprehensibly large movement of data across the world and route it correctly are owned largely by government institutions all over the world. It is efforts like Assange's that cause these owners to reconsider their generosity and make them ask themselves if having this huge, almost "free" system of mass-communication that in most parts of the world goes largely uncensored, with China being a huge and notable exception, is such a good idea.

Long story short: I believe the abuse of Assange by the European legal system is a disgusting act of crassness and undermines the credibility of Interpol as well as makes for a very bad advertisement for Swedish tourism, much less their legal system's standards. However if I had been Assange and had access to the kind of documents he somehow got ahold of, I would have thought long and hard about going on a mass-publication spree. The repercussions of such acts should be taken into very careful account and I am not sure to what degree he considered this part of things.

In any case, he has no business being in jail based on the ridiculous pretext under which he has been arrested. (If he has committed some other crime having nothing to do with that, then that is a different matter-- but one that has yet even to be approached.) Shame on anyone or any government that continues further or starts to lend itself to this charade.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Fri, 2010-12-17 23:50

Micheal Moore the mangina can you believe it?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by crypter27 on Sat, 2010-12-18 01:54

the privilege of stamping 'top secret, or secret or whatever', on info. and documents has long been, like everything in government, abused beyond reason. we can see that. crimes forgiven by fiat. what a scam.

julian did offer the arrogant gov. zealots a chance to work with him on editing out bad stuff, and they turned a cold shoulder.

then they screamed, cried foul, and got nasty. pressuring a mangyna femstate's privileged class, that julian had crossed, to file false rape claims (right in their wheelhouse).

add to that the fact that his actions are not illegal in the u.s.

sounds like the reactions validate the actions.

i've been saying this for decades, whatever feminists touch turns to crap. you side with them, like mikey and ubberman always do, and a crap sandwich will be on the menu sooner than later. enjoy the feast boyz. dessert has got to be better, right?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by daveinga on Sat, 2010-12-18 02:38