Following our earlier coverage on Julian Assange's withdrawn Swedish rape charges, an update. You get this story two ways, depending on where you look. "Straight" coverage, like the Wall Street Journal online, plays it, well, straight (my emphasis throughout):
Swedish Chief Prosecutor Eva Finne will investigate the charges brought against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange this week, she said Monday.But apparently Assange is accusing the Pentagon of waging info-war against him, something the WSJ doesn't tell you. Yahoo News:
The prosecution authority Friday said Assange was suspected of alleged rape and molestation, but dropped the rape investigations the following day. . . .
The rape charges were dropped Saturday because new information regarding the case became available, Finne told Dow Jones Newswires without providing further details.
She defended the decision Friday to bring forth the initial charge of allegated rape, saying it was taken in accordance with normal legal procedures.
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said in an interview published on Sunday that he believes the Pentagon could be behind a rape accusation against him that was later dropped by Swedish prosecutors. . . .The UK Daily Mail online, quoting the same interview:
The Aftonbladet newspaper quoted Assange, 39, as saying he did not know who was "hiding behind" the claims, which came amid a stand-off with Washington over the website's publication of secret Afghan war documents.
He said he did not know how they had come about, but gave a clear indication of who he thought was behind them, adding: 'We have been warned that the Pentagon plans to use dirty tricks to destroy us. And I have been warned of sex traps.If I'm doing the Rockford Files thing, I start with that "on-call prosecutor" and whoever he/she talked to. (Notice that of the three, only the Daily Mail mentions him/her.)
Within hours of the warrant being issued, chief prosecutor Eva Finne said she was revoking it, and a spokesman yesterday blamed an 'on-call prosecutor' for the decision.
This one really interests me, so I'm watching how it plays out. It's a classic case of asymmetrical warfare on the anywhere-battlefield, but this time against one of "us" — fair-skinned blond Westerners with political objections — instead of one of "them" (you know, incorrectly-religioned brown people with anti-colonial objections).
The asymmetrical war was bound to come home; this is its first arrival. In that sense, this is a tip-of-the-spear story.
And as usual, it's as much about us (i.e., how we handle the Pentagon dealing with "us" the way it deals with "them") as it is about any of the players. Stay tuned; I sure will.
Our original "stain on the pavement" coverage is here (and h/t mirth for the lead).
GP
