Free Dominique Strauss-Kahn!

[wiseacre]

You may be aware that Domique Strauss-Kahn, head of the International Monetary Fund, and a man considered as a strong contender for the presidency of France has been arrested on trumped-up rape charges in New York

Comments

[kuh]

Whew. I thought your entry sounded off until I read the cut.

[wiseacre]

I would hope so. As perhaps my longest-serving friend and future wife, I'd expect you to know me.

This just came to me as soon as I heard about the story. I'm repulsed, but not surprised to find people actually making these types of comments for real.

Apples and oranges, not apples and apples

[ed_rex]

There is a major difference between the positions of Strauss-Kahn and Assange that I think you're neglecting in your rush to attack the alleged hypocrisy of those who've leapt to Assange's defence while hanging the banker out to dry.

Quite simply, Strauss-Kahn is a powerful member of the establishment and Assange is a not-nearly-so-powerful rabble-rouser with some very serious and very powerful enemies.

Leaving aside the specifics the accusations against both men, it merits at least a raised eyebrow that at least one of Assange's accusers seems to have had some kind of connection with the CIA.

Do I think Assange is guilty or innocent? I don't know one way or the other. I do know that the U.S. Government and the Pentagon (hell, just about every government in the world!) had and has it in for Assange, while I have no reason to believe that any government (with the possible exception of the French, but that's kind of stretching my dislike of Sarkozy) had or has it in for Strauss-Kahn

Re: Apples and oranges, not apples and apples

[wiseacre]

I don't disagree with you, for the most part. I say it has to be played out in court. I just was disgusted but how quickly so many people on the left, the one's who are usually busy railing against patriarchy and spelling "women" with a "y" were jumping to defend him because they support something he's connected to.

I confess also to some personal antipathy to Assange and his WikiLeaks because I personally know someone who has been libelled by them. If he had the financial resources and could bring the case to course, he would certainly win. I could go on, but maybe that's another post.

Re: Apples and oranges, not apples and apples

[ed_rex]

... jumping to defend him because they support something he's connected to.

Fair enough. I haven't seen much of those defences, but I had a very similar reaction to all those actors and actresses who were willing - nay, who were enthusiastic in their rush to grant absolute to the child rapist Roman Polanski because he has made some (admitedly brilliant) movies.

Re: Apples and oranges, not apples and apples

[wiseacre]

After I posted my reply to you, I saw someone who had vigourously and wholly defended Assange post a disparaging post about DSK that made it clear she believed he was guilty.

I believe you meant to refer to Roman Polanski as a "child raper" or "raper of children." His crime was committed when he was an adult, after all. :) Funny old thing, the language. We both know what you mean, though, so I guess it works, after a fashion.