Sexual Allegations and Government Fit-Ups

by craig on May 18, 2011 8:45 pm in Uncategorized

After I protested internally and in writing about UK complicity in torture, I found myself suddenly faced with eighteen allegations against me by my employer, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, including an allegation that I had criminally expedited visas for women in return for sexual favours, or to put the same allegation more bluntly, blackmailed visa applicants into sex.

My world collapsed. Like Strauss-Kahn, I ended up on suicide watch. I don’t know if DSK is innocent; he could indeed be a monster; but should he be innocent, I know the absolute hell he is going through.

After an official British government investigation, I was presented with the file of a single visa applicant, for a young lady named Albina Safarova. From her passport photo, she was very beautiful. On the back of her application, the visa officer had written “HMA [Her Majesty's Ambassador] authorises issue.”

But if I had authorised issue, my signature should have been there; it wasn’t. What was there, was a letter from the lady’s visa sponsor, a man named Dermot Hassett. In his letter of support for the application, he stated that the circumstances of the application were known to the British Ambassador, Mr Craig Murray. On top of which, there was a letter from the visa issuing officer, Lorraine Clarke, who stated that she had issued the visa after being informed by two named British diplomats that Mr Hassett was a friend of mine.

So far, so damning. But I had never even heard of Mr Dermot Hassett or of Ms Albina Safarova. I had never met him. I had never met her. I was mystified. I eventually passed the papers on to a seasoned investigative journalist, Bob Graham. He tracked down Dermot Hassett, who told him that the British Embassy had advised him to add the phrase about my knowing the circumstances of the application to his letter of support. They said that would guarantee the visa would be issued.

I have no reason to believe that Dermot Hassett and Albina Safarova were anything other than unwitting dupes. But this application was directly and officially shown to me as evidence of my sexual inolvement in visa applications. I have no doubt at all that it was fabricated evidence to damage my reputation and lessen the impact of any potential public revelations I may make about UK complicity in torture or extraordinary rendition.

I was cleared on all charges, but that did not matter because the British government had damaged my reputation forever by promoting the allegations to the media. Those who deny the very possibility that modern western governments connive in quite deliberate conspiracies of injustice, have no idea what they are talking about. If you threaten them in any political way, they can certainly fabricate evidence against you.

I know; they did it to me.

Tweet this post

124 Comments

  1. Paul Johnston

    18 May, 2011 - 9:30 pm

    Sometimes they fabricate, yes I agree, but sometimes they don’t have to!
    I all walks of life you see a situation where you think surely they wouldn’t have done that, but often it seems to me that people in posts of power do really stupid things because they think they are untouchable. The present expenses issues in the Houses of Commons and Lords show that. Or the judge who falsifies the speeding ticket. Hubris is the term I think!
    Off topic I was speaking to Dr Elizabeth Teague last night, possibly you remember her, really nice lady7.

  2. “Those who deny the very possibility that modern western governments connive in quite deliberate conspiracies of injustice, have no idea what they are talking about.”

    But that does not exempt someone who accuses the British Government of having a “State racial hate machine…” from providing rational grounds for their assertion.

    Anyway, who believes that modern western governments do not connive in quite deliberate conspiracies of injustice? Most Americans believe 9/11 was in some way or another, an inside job — unlike you. LOL.

  3. Craig, You say: “(I am in Accra) where callers are more or less unanimous that as the woman is from Guinea, in Francophone Africa, the Sarkozy connection is to blame. ”

    I didn’t realise the woman was a francophone. Did you see that the first to release the news was a French UMP activist who claimed he heard from ‘a friend’ in the hotel? The timing of his information – and the source – would be very interesting.

    As you say, “That fact is certainly a boon for conspiracy theorists.” And the Daily Mail agrees (Oh Good! I hear you say)

    “Such theories were bolstered by the fact that the first person to break the news of Strauss-Kahn’s arrest was an activist in Mr Sarkozy’s UMP party – who apparently knew about the scandal before it happened.

    Jonathan Pinet, a politics student, tweeted the news just before the New York Police Department made it public, although he said that he simply had a ‘friend’ working at the Sofitel where the attack was said to have happened.

    The first person to re-tweet Mr Pinet was Arnaud Dassier, a spin doctor who had previously publicised details of multi-millionaire Strauss-Kahn’s luxurious lifestyle in a bid to dent his left wing credentials.”

    More here:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1387625/IMF-chief-Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-feared-political-enemy-pay-woman-allege-rape.html#ixzz1MjlJiyKE

    Regards,

    Pete

  4. Paul Johnston

    18 May, 2011 - 9:44 pm

    When comparing it with your case Craig I suppose at least he will have his day in court, unlike yourself.

  5. Yes, although I haven’t totally abandoned hope that there will one day be legal action against those who tried to frame me.

  6. I agree that DSK should have the benefit of the presumption of innocence. I even think that previous allegations of sexual harassment against DSK, which have been known for years, don’t mean he’s guilty of this – it would be logical to frame him in this way.

    However the maid is also entitled to a presumption of innocence. It concerns me that the majority of the French public assume that she is guilty. And I know from experience that it’s very difficult – and often very unwise – to allege any improper activity against people who are wealthy and powerful. While the U.S. – and Sarkozy and above all Marine Le Pen – may benefit from these allegations and the arrest of DSK, that doesn’t mean they set him up or that they did.

    Both are likely to suffer considerably whatever the facts. Both may find their future lives damaged. The best outcome would be the establishment of the truth – but I’m not convinced that’s at all likely.

  7. If it’s his word against hers, how can any progress be made towards proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt?

    Not that I should have to ask, in view of the deluge today of people (mostly women) demanding that the “conviction rate” (of those accused of rape) should rise sharply. They seem to have no trouble whatever in assuming that every allegation is true, and hence that every acquittal (or failure to convict) is a miscarriage of justice.

    It does rather make one wonder what is the point in having courts of law at all. Especially since the judgment of a court is conditional on prosecutors deciding to bring a case.

  8. Bill Jackson Jr

    18 May, 2011 - 11:13 pm

    I guess I’m still scratching my head about the usefulness of “framing” a Bilderberg turd like DSK at all. He threatened no power centers and was in fact part and parcel of power itself. It looks at first glance as though he stepped on his willy at a most unfortunate time and his proclivities may have caught up with. Time will tell. What I have noted both here as elsewhere, however, is a curious lack of concern for his accuser.

  9. I think the salient point made in the news story
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMMkxyYQdjU
    is that if such an incident had happened, it could easily have been hushed up.

  10. The article at
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24784
    gives more detail of Strauss-Kahn’s change of direction at the IMF

  11. @ Craig,

    You have been on the frontline and have felt the heat of state power directed against you.

    However, let’s all be sober.

    What is the IMF and the Washington agenda?

    How does one rise to be head of the IMF if not by sharing the ideological stance of the IMF and by being supportive of the Washington agenda?

    Is it possible to have variations and degrees of opinion within the same sphere of support for the IMF/Washington agenda? – sure it is?

    Against that background, is this in and of itself some sort of clever “false flag” operation?

    Did the system know about the proclivities of the IMF chief? – sure it did.

    Is the present French presidential race the kind that makes it expedient to out an insider who is not as “right” as one might like to have him at this time of bombing Libya and pressing ahead with NATO operations etc? Well – Khan is not, and never has been, any real threat to anything, but if you set in place assumed parameters of division and cast one guy as the bad sex fiend and the other candidate gets to breathe new life – maybe the politics of it all plays out in the end – just “right”.

    Storm in a chief’s underwear if you ask me.

    Over to you Craig.

  12. May I respectfully point out something? I hope it’s not a bother.
    It would seem that there is a big difference between what you experienced and what DSK is now subject to. It would seem that what you experienced could very well be the result of the schemings of one person. On the other hand, if this situation with DSK were a product of a scheme to set him up, it would necessarily involve a great number of parties. At a minimum, the New York County District Attorney and many of his employees, along with the NYPD, would have to agree to be pawns in the designs of some higher authority. They would have to agree to break the law and subject themselves to conviction and incarceration if it were ever effectively leaked by one of their cohorts that they were taking part in the scheme.
    Ambassador Murray, might I most humbly ask how this higher authority could have convinced local police and prosecutors to risk the livelihoods of themselves and their children?

  13. Further – I understand the motivational factors that led to the analogy that you drew with Khan – but, truth be told Craig, I respect you as a different sort of individual and I see you as truly an honourable man. No need to sit in and set sail in the same boat as the IMF chief – albeit the boat is being directed to the same rocks for both men’s destruction. Beyond the intial trajectory – I do not see your plight ( as it was then) as really the same as Khan’s. I, at least due to my respect for you, distance you from him – you are a totally different sort of man.

    Let’s see if subsequent events and noble history vindicate my views.

  14. Craig Murray – A window on extraordinary Integrity – a lesson to us all as we peek into the mind of this great man:
    -
    “They turned up at my door with broken teeth and burns from torture. Some would spend the night in my home. On one occasion the grandson of a dissident I had met was murdered within hours of my speaking to his grandfather. They left his body on the doorstep. His hands and knees had been smashed with a hammer. It was a warning not to speak to me,” Craig 2004
    -
    http://craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2004/10/daily_telegraph/
    -
    “Anyone who even internally questions what’s happening is going to seriously damage their employment prospects ” Craig 2007
    -
    http://craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/04/leaking_secrets/
    -
    On the IMF:
    -
    The integrity of the IMF (although we all doubt it sometimes) should not be sacrificed. Its purpose must be to promote development, not a tool of regional politics. Craig 2006
    -
    UK COMPLICITY IN TORTURE:
    -
    CONFIDENTIAL
    FM TASHKENT
    TO IMMEDIATE FCO
    TELNO 63
    OF 220939 JULY 04
    INFO IMMEDIATE DFID, ISLAMIC POSTS, MOD, OSCE POSTS UKDEL EBRD
    LONDON, UKMIS GENEVA, UKMIS MEW YORK
    SUBJECT: RECEIPT OF INTELLIGENCE OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE
    SUMMARY
    -
    1. We receive intelligence obtained under torture from the Uzbek intelligence services, via
    the US. We should stop. It is bad information anyway. Tortured dupes are forced to sign up to confessions showing what the Uzbek government wants the US and UK to believe, that they and we are fighting the same war against terror.
    -
    2. I gather a recent London interdepartmental meeting considered the question and decided to continue to receive the material. This is morally, legally and practically wrong. It exposes as
    hypocritical our post Abu Ghraib pronouncements and fatally undermines our moral standing. It obviates my efforts to get the Uzbek government to stop torture they are fully aware our intelligence community laps up the results.
    -
    3. We should cease all co-operation with the Uzbek Security Services they are beyond the pale. We indeed need to establish an SIS presence here, but not as in a friendly state.
    -
    DETAIL
    -
    4. In the period December 2002 to March 2003 I raised several times the issue of intelligence material from the Uzbek security services which was obtained under torture and passed to us
    via the CIA. I queried the legality, efficacy and morality of the practice.
    -
    5. I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to use intelligence acquired by torture. He said
    the only legal limitation on its use was that it could not be used in legal proceedings, under Article 15 of the UN Convention on Torture.
    -
    6. On behalf of the intelligence services, Matthew Kydd said that they found some of the material very useful indeed with a direct bearing on the war on terror. Linda Duffield said
    that she had been asked to assure me that my qualms of conscience were respected and understood.
    -
    7. Sir Michael Jay’s circular of 26 May stated that there was a reporting obligation on us to report torture by allies (and I have been instructed to refer to Uzbekistan as such in the
    context of the war on terror). You, Sir, have made a number of striking, and I believe heartfelt, condemnations of torture in the last few weeks. I had in the light of this decided to
    return to this question and to highlight an apparent contradiction in our policy. I had intimated as much to the Head of Eastern Department. 8. I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that without informing me of the meeting, or since informing me of the result of the meeting, a meeting was convened in the FCO at the level of Heads of Department and above, precisely to consider the question of the receipt of
    Uzbek intelligence material obtained under torture. As the office knew, I was in London at the time and perfectly able to attend the meeting. I still have only gleaned that it happened.
    -
    9. I understand that the meeting decided to continue to obtain the Uzbek torture material. I understand that the principal argument deployed was that the intelligence material disguises
    the precise source, ie it does not ordinarily reveal the name of the individual who is tortured.
    Indeed this is true – the material is marked with a euphemism such as “From detainee debriefing.” The argument runs that if the individual is not named, we cannot prove that he was tortured.
    -
    10. I will not attempt to hide my utter contempt for such casuistry, nor my shame that I work
    in and organisation where colleagues would resort to it to justify torture. I have dealt with hundreds of individual cases of political or religious prisoners in Uzbekistan, and I have met with very few where torture, as defined in the UN convention, was not employed. When my then DHM raised the question with the CIA head of station 15 months ago, he readily
    acknowledged torture was deployed in obtaining intelligence. I do not think there is any doubt as to the fact.
    -
    11. The torture record of the Uzbek security services could hardly be more widely known. Plainly there are, at the very least, reasonable grounds for believing the material is obtained
    under torture. There is helpful guidance at Article 3 of the UN Convention;
    “The competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the state concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.” While this article forbids extradition or deportation to Uzbekistan, it is the right test for the present question also.
    -
    12. On the usefulness of the material obtained, this is irrelevant. Article 2 of the Convention, to which we are a party, could not be plainer:
    “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”
    -
    13. Nonetheless, I repeat that this material is useless – we are selling our souls for dross. It is in fact positively harmful. It is designed to give the message the Uzbeks want the West to
    hear. It exaggerates the role, size, organisation and activity of the IMU and its links with Al Qaida. The aim is to convince the West that the Uzbeks are a vital cog against a common foe,
    that they should keep the assistance, especially military assistance, coming, and that they should mute the international criticism on human rights and economic reform.
    -
    14. I was taken aback when Matthew Kydd said this stuff was valuable. Sixteen months ago it was difficult to argue with SIS in the area of intelligence assessment. But post Butler we
    know, not only that they can get it wrong on even the most vital and high profile issues, but
    that they have a particular yen for highly coloured material which exaggerates the threat. That is precisely what the Uzbeks give them. Furthermore MI6 have no operative within a
    thousand miles of me and certainly no expertise that can come close to my own in making this assessment.
    =
    15. At the Khuderbegainov trial I met an old man from Andizhan. Two of his children had been tortured in front of him until he signed a confession on the family’s links with Bin Laden. Tears were streaming down his face. I have no doubt they had as much connection with Bin Laden as I do. This is the standard of the Uzbek intelligence services.
    -
    16. I have been considering Michael Wood’s legal view, which he kindly gave in writing. I cannot understand why Michael concentrated only on Article 15 of the Convention. This
    certainly bans the use of material obtained under torture as evidence in proceedings, but it does not state that this is the sole exclusion of the use of such material.
    -
    17. The relevant article seems to me Article 4, which talks of complicity in torture. Knowingly to receive its results appears to be at least arguable as complicity. It does not appear that being in a different country to the actual torture would preclude complicity. I talked this over in a hypothetical sense with my old friend Prof Francois Hampson, I believe an acknowledged World authority on the Convention, who said that the complicity argument and the spirit of the Convention would be likely to be winning points. I should be grateful to
    hear Michael’s views on this.
    -
    18. It seems to me that there are degrees of complicity and guilt, but being at one or two removes does not make us blameless. There are other factors. Plainly it was a breach of
    Article 3 of the Convention for the coalition to deport detainees back here from Baghram, but it has been done. That seems plainly complicit.
    -
    19. This is a difficult and dangerous part of the World. Dire and increasing poverty and harsh repression are undoubtedly turning young people here towards radical Islam. The Uzbek
    government are thus creating this threat, and perceived US support for Karimov strengthens anti-Western feeling. SIS ought to establish a presence here, but not as partners of the Uzbek
    Security Services, whose sheer brutality puts them beyond the pale.
    MURRAY

  15. “if this situation with DSK were a product of a scheme to set him up, it would necessarily involve a great number of parties. At a minimum, the New York County District Attorney and many of his employees …. and subject themselves to conviction and incarceration if it were ever effectively leaked” –Yugo/Larry
    .
    I thought the whole point of the possible set-up was that it would have been done by Sarko’s people. In which case the Americans would have known nothing, and be going about their duties normally.
    .
    I came across some info on Twitter tonight, but I haven’t kept the sources, so anyone who wants to follow-up will need to Google. I read that she’s not a single mother, but rather a widow. Also, the New York Post is saying that she is living in an apartment that is reserved for HIV/AIDS sufferers, although they don’t go so far as to day she has HIV/AIDS. They do say that her previous apartment was also one set aside for such sufferers. I found a link for that:
    http://www.dailyindia.com/show/440418.php
    .
    Also, another bail application has been made asking that he be released into home detention (I assume at his daughter’s home) with an electronic tag.
    .
    DSK has apparently also undergone the taking of (police) photos of him naked, to make sure any scratches or other markings are noted. The man did have a reputation for predatory sexual encounters, and women who worked with him plus female journalists had been advised (and knew) not to be alone in a room with him.
    .
    From his past behaviour, he sounds like a bit of an animal where women were concerned. However, I recognise that if one wanted to set him up, since he already had that reputation, that would be the area to set him up in. (And Sarko is a little shit.)
    .
    Since DSK is admitting sex, but saying it was consensual, this will be down to a very simple ‘his word against hers’ and DNA tests will make little difference. There was however talk that she was bleeding when she ran downstairs.

  16. PS, Since he’s admitting sex, and claiming it was consensual, it doesn’t look like the timing mix-up (“one and a half hours wrong in a period of three hours” on the previous thread) makes any difference now.

  17. “…Lorraine Clarke, who stated that she had issued the visa after being informed by two named British diplomats that Mr Hassett was a friend of mine.”

    “…the British Embassy had advised him to add the phrase about my knowing the circumstances of the application to his letter of support. They said that would guarantee the visa would be issued.”

    1. Who were the two diplomats who lied?

    2. Who placed that call to Dermot Hasset?

    If you can’t answer these questions maybe you can look into getting your site hosted in Iceland or follow guidofawkes’ business set up…then you can spill all the beans without the legal hassle…for the time being.

  18. Dreoilin

    Where has he admitted “sex”, as you term it, and why doesn’t it matter that the prosecution changed their story and timing when they found out he had an alibi for their original timing and story?

    It’s interesting too that you’re so swayed by untested accounts of what you term his “past behaviour” which make him “sound like a bit of an animal where women were concerned”. Are you for real?

    It’s seems to me that you’re easily swayed by media and have little in the way of an understanding of what due process is all about, nor indeed how the world really works.

    It’s because of people like you that the banksters of this world can do as they please.

    The fascism of Feminism and the greed of banksterism go hand in hand. That’s a given. It was always a given. Unfortunately for feminists, they’re little more than useful idiots.

    There’s a lesson there but I doubt you’ll understand.

    I expect it’s that glass ceiling in your brain. You know, the one you always blame on men.

  19. YugoStiglitz

    19 May, 2011 - 7:15 am

    Jon, are you going to censors Herbie’s comments directed at dreoilin? Let’s be consistent.

  20. What’s that grinding sound?
    .
    Oh, it’s Herbie’s axe.

  21. Why should I be censored?

    Dreoilin is an adult woman and must stand by her statements and be questioned upon them.

    Are there special easier rules for female arguments or something?

    To my mind she’s talking rubbish and I pointed that out.

    I’ve always said that Feminism is a fascism, even in the earliest days from a centre left perspective.

    Why should I be censored when that fact is now becoming more obvious than ever, day in day out.

    But thanks anyway for your intervention. It shows at least the truth that neo cons like yourself and feminism are fellow travellors.

    Which is kind of what I was saying and it’s like kinda obvious anyway etc.

    Just because the nice people at the BBC aren’t yet saying it don’t mean it ain’t true. That’s a good rule of thumb.

  22. YugoStiglitz

    19 May, 2011 - 7:49 am

    I’m actually not in favor of striking your comments, but the standard that Jon seems to have set with me should be applied to you. You made an odd, irrelevant personal attack on Dreoilin.

  23. Angrysoba

    Nice to see that you too are keen to benefit from argument-lite feminist distractions.

    It used to be called hiding behind women’s skirts.

    I’m sure you’ve invented a more pleasing description of yourselves these days.

    Either way, Feminism and Neo Conism are fellow travellors.

  24. I haven’t said anything that I cannot defend in argument.
    I seek no favour.
    I stand by my words. I speak my truth. I can do no other.

  25. Herbie Goes Bananas!
    .
    Nice to see that you too are keen to benefit from argument-lite feminist distractions.

    It used to be called hiding behind women’s skirts.


    .
    I embrace my Feminine OverLadies!
    .
    What’s that you say, John? I can’t hear you over that *screeeeeech* *screeeeech* I think that axe is sharp enough old boy.
    .
    I’m sure you’ve invented a more pleasing description of yourselves these days.

    Either way, Feminism and Neo Conism are fellow travellors.

    .
    I fail to see what you’re so upset about? Is it because you know – you know – that this despicable woman is lying like the lying woman that she is? Or is it tautologous to call her a lying woman?
    .
    And yes, please do call me a neo-con. I quite like that. And a Zionist FemiNazi while you’re at it. What’s that you say Herbie?
    .
    “I’m not a misogynist!” *screeeeech* “Women are just liars, that’s all!” *screeeeech*

  26. It’s seems to me that you’re easily swayed by media and have little in the way of an understanding of what due process is all about, nor indeed how the world really works.
    .
    I think I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen someone say this type of thing. It’s the empty boast of a screwball on most occasions.
    .
    I haven’t said anything that I cannot defend in argument.
    I seek no favour.
    I stand by my words. I speak my truth. I can do no other.

    .
    Unsolicited bragging of someone’s own integrity is also a sign of someone not to be trusted. I always find myself asking, “Why do they need to tell me they are telling the truth? Don’t we usually think that is the least we can expect from someone? And why do they feel they need to preface their comments with assurances that they know the way the world works? Maybe they’re just very insecure…”

  27. Not sure why I called you John there Herbie.

  28. Oliver,

    I never shy from telling the truth from fear of libel action – I have probably received more lawyer’s letters than Paul over the years, but nobody has ever dared take me to court.
    I published the names in my book, Dirty Diplomacy. The reason I do not repeat them now is that at least one of them had a serious psychiatric breakdown as a result of whht he did, and was himself acting under extreme duress, which caused him to resign from the FCO shortly thereafter.

  29. Herbie needs to calm down. He sounds like another JimmyGiro only less intelligent.
    .
    I believe I wrote: “I came across some info on Twitter tonight, but I haven’t kept the sources, so anyone who wants to follow-up will need to Google.” I would hope Herbie can use Google?
    .
    As far as I’m concerned DSK is innocent until proven guilty. Although, as in many other cases, it looks like it may fall to the woman to prove – somehow – that she didn’t agree to have any sexual dealings with him. Whether the reports that she’s a “shy, religious, Muslim” will carry any weight in that, I know not. Quoting from the link I have given further down: “Obviously, the credibility of the complainant is a factor in cases of this nature,” Kelly said. “One of the things they’re trained to look for, and what was reported to me early on, was that the complainant was credible.”
    .
    As for me being “easily swayed by media”, I’m not quoting media when I refer to his reputation. I have it from someone who worked with him in the assemblée nationale that the standing advice for women was not to get into an elevator alone with him. (I said “room” but on checking I find that it’s “elevator”.) There are indeed lots of media reports out there that seem to back this up.
    .
    As for him admitting to having had sex with this woman, I got that WRONG. (I told you I was reading Twitter.) However, this is where the implication came from: “One of Strauss-Kahn’s attorneys, Benjamin Brafman, said at his client’s arraignment this week that the forensic evidence ‘will not be consistent with a forcible encounter’. That led to speculation the defense would argue it was consensual sex.”
    http://www.iol.co.za/news/world/imf-chief-to-apply-for-bail-1.1070956 [Sapa-AP]
    .
    Have I covered everything? I’m not giving evidence in court, you know, Herbie, I’m commenting on a blog.
    .
    Craig/Jon, I probably should have posted all this on the previous thread. Apologies. It was late at night when I posted my first comment.
    .
    Angry, you made me laugh and splutter my coffee.

  30. “but the standard that Jon seems to have set with me should be applied to you. You made an odd, irrelevant personal attack on Dreoilin.” –Yugo/Larry

    How revealing.

  31. Dick the Prick

    19 May, 2011 - 11:35 am

    Yup, you were screwed and there’s a pathetic irony that the FCO could have gained from your interventions had they had any wit, decency, strategic understanding or ability.

    The FCO is running rings round the Tories now with both Cameron and Haigh being overwhelmed by bullshit geo-politics.

    Good luck Craig in your endeavours to get the wankers.

  32. I am afraid that what I experienced could not possibly have been done by one man. It is a long story, and you have to read the book, I am afraid, But I am sorry to say it was a government conspiracy – but not one that stretched outside the FCO, No 10, and MI6 – I was in fact desperate to bring in the police, but was blocked off.

    There is absolutely no reason a conspiracy would have to involve the police. A possible scenario (NB I am not saying this happened. He may have raped her. I am saying it is possible). Woman set up to seduce possible next french President with known history of sex addiction. May involve s and m or other mark leaving practices. Gets bodily fluid, exaggerates dishevellment and rushes into path of security camera screaming. NYPD of course obliged to act.

    Turns out DSK was at lunch at time given. Woman says “I was traumatised, I was in shock, I couldn’t count time, English not my first language”. NYPD and prosecutors of course have to test the case.

    Yhe problem is with 9/11 obsessives like you, is that you move from saying that because one claimed conspiracy was not a conspiracy, no conspiracy has ever existed. And that any conspiracy to exist would need a massive cast, because a 9/11 conspiracy would. Think.

  33. “Good luck Craig in your endeavours to get the wankers.”
    .
    I echo that. I’d dearly love to see Craig take the FCO to court. But, given the stress he initially endured, and the stress he has no doubt endured over the last eight years, I’m reluctant to push the court idea. No doubt Craig will let us know what he’s planning in due course.

  34. Paul Johnston

    19 May, 2011 - 12:15 pm

    I’m sure you know that you have lots of supporters here Craig but I too would recommend like Dreolin moving on. Don’t let the bastards take even more of your life, it’s a finite resource. As mentioned they could always sacrifice someone who probably was made to do stuff under duress, you know that’s how these things often pan out.

  35. The problem with rape cases is that it’s incredibly difficult for an accused individual to prove his innocence once the alligations have been spread all around the court of public opinion, and this happens long before the case even goes to trial, the damage has already been done, and DSK has lost his job.

    Clearly rape, or accusations of sexual abuse or misconduct, are an incredibly powerful weapon in the hands of unscrupulous people who desire to smear a public figure or damage his reputation beyond repair.

    The US police and prosecutors are normally extremely slow in pursuing rape charges because they are notoriously difficult to prove in a court of law without evidence and witnesses, or physical signs that an attack, or rape has taken place. So the speed with which the US authorities acted in relation to DSK is very surprising indeed. The chambermaid, must have been an extraordinarilly believeble and good witness to convince the police to act so promtly.

  36. Strauss-Kahn has been setup, stuffed and screwed. As Craig admits, lubricity allegations stick like shit to a clean blanket. Conspiracy theorists suggest Strauss-Kahn was stitched-up as a right-wing plot by Sarkozy’s UMP party. To me that manipulation by a well placed carnal banana skin is far too simplistic and even diversionary.
    -
    Strauss-Kahn was fully aware the IMF has been ineffective in addressing the recent imbalances and current instability in the global economy. He wanted reform beginning with an immediate expansion of the current system of special drawing rights or money that can be issued by the IMF fund. Strauss-Kahn grew to detest a system dominated by holdings of US dollars which he said created a global recessionary bias after the recent financial crisis because it places the burden of adjusting to payments imbalances on nations which run a deficit. In fact he wanted a new global currency that would stop the rot of ersatz capitalism, fundamentally corrupt, inequitable and doomed to failure. Why should a countries citizens support markets and too-big-to-fail financial firms.
    -
    An example is of course Ireland where its citizens now realise the cost of bailing out bondholders (whether in Germany, the US, the UK or even Ireland) is being borne by them. It is a massive, unjustified and unjustifiable redistribution of resources.
    -
    Currently the IMF is lending money to ensure Irish taxpayers bail out Irish bank bondholders, but with little concern for economic growth and welfare. The international lending terms imposed on the Government and its citizens are onerous in large part due to the Government’s continuing policy of bailing out the Irish banks. Raising interest rates to Ireland to tame European inflation is senseless. The budgetary “correction”, arising from higher taxes and *lower services* to pay for interest on the debt, is increasing.
    -
    Be assured Ireland’s predicament is a warning, a red light to us UK citizens that the noose is tightening and we, the British people will be strangled, left dangling above our impoverished children.

  37. Hmmmmm.

    Dreoilin finally admits to errors in her post, and to knowing someone in the French national assembly who was afraid of lifts and elevators.

    On foot of which the NYPD do the fastest arrest in their whole incompetent history and the world’s media sing Psalm 94 in harmony.

    Hey ho.

    Angrysoba merely provides further evidence that he’s simply a troll.

    Now back to the issues.

    The point about all this stuff is that DSK is being fitted up for annoying the banksters just as Gadaffi is being fitted up for emmmmm… annoying the banksters…Berlusconi gets out of gaol free and all the other dictators keep on dictating…

    It’s difficult to make it any simpler than that.

    So once again for those who arrived late. It’s not about Feminism. It’s not about liberal interventionism. It’s just using fools as tools, same as ever.

  38. “sexual dealings”

    Ah!

    Dat sorta ting.

  39. I am really surprised how many people are tying themselves in knots trying to believe that Strauss-Kahn is a victim of some plot. If Sarko wanted to railroad him he’d do it in France where he has control, are we supposed to believe the alleged victim was planted in the hotel 3 years ago with this situation in mind?

    Experience of the real world tells us there are predators who push the limits again and again, each time finding that vested interests will cover their tracks. This time the predator went to far. His lawyers are aiming for claiming consent because the DNA has him bang to rights.

    Handwriting on the back of an application form and DNA samples backing the story of a traumatized and injured person have nothing in common.

  40. ‘In any investigation, my Bunter, it is most damnably dangerous to have a theory.’
    ‘I have heard you say so, my lord.’
    ‘Confound you – you know it as well as I do. What is wrong with the doctor’s theories, Bunter?’
    ‘You wish me to reply, my lord, that he only sees the facts which fit into the theory.’
    ‘Thought-reader!’ exclaimed Lord Peter bitterly.
    Dorothy L Sayers, The footsteps that ran.

  41. “I am really surprised how many people are tying themselves in knots trying to believe that Strauss-Kahn is a victim of some plot. If Sarko wanted to railroad him he’d do it in France where he has control, are we supposed to believe the alleged victim was planted in the hotel 3 years ago with this situation in mind?”

    It’s already been pointed out that the midget is not the instigator. That’s been pointed out in this blog, others and in French political commentary. Sarko couldn’t do in France what the Americans did cos DSK was too much liked.

    But anyway. It’s DSK’s IMF position that the banksters are aiming at, not his presidential ambitions though they do get the two birds for the one stone.

    The whole point about that hotel being a regular stay for DSK is that all they had to do was find a vulnerable employee who could easily be turned. Threats to immigration status, bribes etc. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

    That’s the strong case.

    The weaker case is that knowing of DSK’s animal heterosexuality all they had to do was put a female within sight of him and let nature take its course.

    Either way. His perp walk happened because he weren’t doin what the banksters wanted. No Feminism nor liberal intervention required.

    Next!!

  42. Dominique Strauss-Kahn has most certainly been set up because, disgraceful though it is, very influential elites such as him just don’t get prosecuted for the type of offences he is alleged to have committed. Usually, if the authorities are involved at all, it is to cover it up and ensure that nothing gets into the media or gets reported by the media. In North America thay call such cover-ups – “bimbo control”. I know with certainty that MI5/MI6 are expert in covering things up for high establishment figures, and I would expect that US Intelligence in New York is just as proficient.
    **
    Am I suggesting that Mr. Strauss-Khan is innocent? Not necessarily. As Craig says, I don’t know whether Strauss-Kahn is a monster or totally innocent. All I am suggesting is that he was not arrested because of the alleged offences, but because somebody even more powerful than him wanted him ruined.
    **
    Is it just a false “honey trap” SMEAR as happened in Craig’s case, or is there more to it? Possibly there is more to it; particularly if there is a past history of sexual abuses, where intelligence agencies may actually have helped with the cover-up. Intelligence agencies like flawed people of influence who commit these types of crimes on a regular basis because they can be blackmailed and controlled – and thrown to the wolves if necessary at any time the agencies decide to shift from cover-up mode into lets nail him mode. I don’t know the answer. I do know that high establishment figures don’t get nailed for this sort of crime (serious though the allegations are) and they most certainly don’t get hauled off an aircraft, and thrown in jail without bail. What is it really about? The question to ask is – who benefits????

  43. Herbie, I agree that it’s an easy mistake to see conspiracies where there is just plain human weakness and bad behaviour. But coincidences tend to catch one by the sleeve. Take a look at this article, for instance:

    Bankers Cheer as IMF Head Faces Sexual Assault Charges
    http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney05162011.html

    It just seems odd. Why would someone so rich and powerful throw it all away by forcing himself crudely on a hotel chambermaid? He must have known exactly what the stakes were, and the situation was hardly a novel one for him. The only way I can make it work would be if he were deliberately tempting fate – seeking an adrenaline rush by doing something suicidally self-destructive. (Like Hugh Grant, on that famous occasion).

    And look at the timing. Just as DSK becomes really, really unpopular in high places for seeking to change the whole direction of IMF policy – WHAM! It reminds me uncomfortably of the way the Swedish authorities stirred in their sleep and decided to reinstate the charges against Julian Assange that they had assured him, months before, were dead – TWO DAYS after the great and the good in the USA vowed to take him down.

  44. Hi Tom,

    Just for clarity. I was quoting MrJohn in the first 4 lines of my last post in order to disagree with them.

    I agree with what you’re saying.

    For me the central issue is that the banksters got an outcome they desired and there’s clearly an element of active orchestration on their part required to achieve that.

    Whether DSK actively contributed to his demise in attacking this woman or she has been threatened into lying about what happened is neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things notwithstanding any distress to the woman involved if the claims are true.

    Even if the claims aren’t true she will still have been abused by powerful people for their own political and economic ends and will be immensely distressed for that alone, and perhaps to an even scarier degree, as we saw in the case of the younger of the Swedish women in the Assange case.

    In short, women are naive to think that this is some sort of victory against horrible nasty men.

    It ain’t.

    The banksters are quite happy that feminists distract everyone from the main issue, and as usual they play their part wonderfully. That’s why Feminism has been encouraged. It’s useful. It can be used or ignored as needs demand.

    They’re merely being used in a power struggle between powerful interests. DSK as head of the IMF would have been better for the world economically than will now be the case, despite any personal libido issues.

    Feminists and liberal interventionists, even when they think they’re fighting a moral cause are simply being used as tools in an altogether more important game.

  45. I’ve not seen enough of the story to be *certain* that DSK has been set up – I’d be interested as to why Herbie and Roderick seem convinced. Thanks Tom though for the interesting link – certainly the circumstances are sufficient to warrant some suspicion. That the IMF might be led down a progressive economic path – what a thought!

    ‘erbie – didn’t follow what you were saying, but no-one gets deleted here for writing nonsense. But please be nice to people – @dreoilin regularly offers interesting and thoughtful input here. I’m sure you realise genuine feminism and neo-conservatism have very little in common, and are regularly opposed to each other.

    One has to be careful with hobby horses, in my view – it’s fine to choose to be opposed to feminism, but it isn’t a given that all high profile sexual assaults are brought about by malicious or lying women.

  46. @Herbie – our posts crossed :)
    .
    > In short, women are naive to think that this is some sort of
    > victory against horrible nasty men.
    .
    Errr, I don’t think there are many women who do think that. Believe it or not, most women – like most people, strangely – would rather have justice done. So, if there is a case to answer, he should be brought before a court, but if he is innocent of the charge, then one hopes the legal system will exonerate him. I am suspicious in the Assange case of foul play, but we cannot ignore the charges in case they turn out to be correct. Good people do bad things, I suppose – even though I am firmly in favour of the presumption of innocence.
    .
    We’ll just have to disagree on the idea that someone is ‘encouraging’ feminism so that they can be ‘used’ to support the economic status quo. I think the balance of political and worker power in the world is sharply skewed in favour of men, which makes genuine feminism* a worthwhile cause to support.
    .
    * I say “genuine” since I think the view you have of feminism of a grumpy bunch of men-haters does exist, but I don’t regard that as feminist. However, an all-gender movement which is opposed to patriarchy and discrimination, but is in favour of men (!) sounds pretty reasonable to me. I don’t see how that supports the status quo – such groups should be in favour of all forms of domination, including economic ones.

  47. Dick the Prick

    19 May, 2011 - 8:07 pm

    I think she charged him $500 and he kicked her back door in an she wanted more and has ran off crying rape. Dunno – could be wrong. That would be my hunch. Not guilty m’lud.

    He ran out of he shower with a boner and shagged her up the ass? Oh do fuck off.

  48. Hi Jon,

    I hear what you’re saying about Dreoilin, but I hope I don’t have to be too nice to the Larries and Angrysoba too.

    My view is that irrespective of whether or not DSK actually attacked this woman, his arrest, humiliation and resignation required active intervention by the banksters.

    They got what they wanted. He may have actively assisted in his demise, but that in itself is not enough for him to now be in the position he’s in. Were he still a good boy pro-bankster he’d have been quickly shuffled off out of the country and the woman paid off to keep quiet.

    The feminist arguments merely distract from what this is really about.

    I’m all for the sovereignty of the individual etc, but there are much greater issues which affect us all and which ultimately transcend any individual damage to this woman, whether by DSK or the pressure of bankster agents upon her to make it up.

    We saw precisely the same issues at play in the case of Assange.

    At best, feminism is not helping us to understand and change the world. It merely distracts us from what’s going on. If it were truly progressive and not merely something that powerful interests could use as they see fit, it would be marginal to mainstream discourse which it quite clearly is not, despite recurring protestations to the contrary.

    Feminism Inc has been incorporated.

  49. Dick the Prick

    19 May, 2011 - 8:11 pm

    There is a racist element in maybe DSK refused to pay her?

  50. “Dreoilin finally admits to errors in her post”
    –Herbie
    .
    There was no “finally” involved. I was only back the once, after your delightful challenge.
    .
    “and to knowing someone in the French national assembly who was afraid of lifts and elevators.”
    .
    I’m sure everyone is rolling on the floor laughing. “Wit” and omniscience? What a combination!
    .
    “The weaker case is that knowing of DSK’s animal heterosexuality all they had to do was put a female within sight of him and let nature take its course.”
    .
    What the hell does that mean? That he’s a rapist at heart and it’s all just “nature’s way”??
    .
    Another thing, do you classify any woman who comments on alleged rape as a feminist? How would you know how I feel about feminism?
    .
    “Dat sorta ting.”
    .
    Is that your version of an Irish accent? Are you a racist Herbie? Along with your other ‘talents’?
    .
    “The feminist arguments merely distract from what this is really about.”
    .
    Which ‘feminist’ arguments? Where?
    .
    ———————————-
    .
    “Why would someone so rich and powerful throw it all away by forcing himself crudely on a hotel chambermaid?” –Tom
    .
    Mrjohn said it up above. Maybe this time he went too far, having engaged in somewhat similar behaviour before. Similar but not as bad. And what if this woman ran downstairs dishevelled, obviously traumatised, possibly bleeding, and blurted her story in a staff area, possibly with several witnesses? The hotel management would be obliged to call the NYPD, and they in turn couldn’t afford to ignore her, surely? How many people would have had to be silenced? Maybe the fact that DSK was trying to take the IMF in another direction is sheer coincidence … At the moment, we have no way of knowing.
    .
    If she WAS a victim of rape, and if she testifies, that poor woman will have several traumatic months ahead of her. Possibly years. And Herbie’s description of her and other brave women as “tools” adds insult to injury.
    .
    I DO think Assange was set up. In this case, I am 50/50. We have the woman’s statement of what happened. On the other side, regarding a set-up, we have nothing but speculation.

  51. By the way, that Libyan woman who said she was gang raped by Gaddafi’s thugs seems to be widely believed in this part of the world – at least by Channel 4 who interviewed her about two nights ago. I haven’t seen any allegations that she was a plant by NATO-backed “rebels”.

  52. Excerpt:

    “In the wake of DSK’s arrest, other women are coming forward. The young writer Tristane Banon — who didn’t press charges in 2002 when, she claims, DSK tried to rape her — is pursuing charges now. (Her mother, Anne Mansouret, a Socialist candidate, now says she’s sorry that she discouraged her daughter from going to the police.) Piroska Nagy, with whom DSK had an affair at the IMF, is back in the news, reminding the world that when the IMF board declared there was “no evidence of coercion or abuse of his power,” it ignored her own statement that she had been pressured and coerced into sleeping with him. Suddenly, it’s common knowledge that women journalists and IMF staffers took care not to be alone with him.”
    .
    Full article:
    http://www.thenation.com/article/160792/dsk-deja-vu
    .
    So much for smart remarks about people who are “afraid of lifts and elevators”.

  53. Here is an intelligent assessment of the Khan affair -without any “conspiracy” element:-

    http://rt.com/news/imf-undesirable-strauss-kahn-us/

  54. Mr Courtney, this is for you:

    http://www.myspace.com/tom_heneghan_intel/blog

  55. @Herbie, thanks. My personal view is you should be nice to AngrySoba too; I disagree with him on a lot of things, especially Israel/Palestine, but an opposing perspective genuinely held is interesting and useful.

    I think we need to be careful in letting DSK off for (alleged) bad behaviour. If he did force himself on the maid, he should be charged, regardless of whether his policy change at the IMF was progressive. Ditto in the Wikileaks case – I personally think Assange has been set up, but he still ought to to answer the charges set against him, and he should be charged if there is reasonable evidence. It doesn’t (and shouldn’t) matter that we think they are “good men”.

    This underscores my view of a dilemma that progressive causes have generally. Government transparency or socialist economic policy etc, should be obtained fairly and democratically, whereas corporatism and elite financial control will usually be obtained through media control, legal gagging, imperial action and cloak-and-dagger games. Therefore, for what progressives are asking, we are at a significant disadvantage.

  56. A Former Assistant Secretary of the U.S Treasury under Reagan and former editor of The Wall St Journal, Paul Craig Roberts, tells how it all works and why he never gets into lifts or elevators alone….

    “The Establishment Eliminates A Threat”

    http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Establishment-Eliminat-by-paul-craig-roberts-110520-790.html

  57. Breaking News No 94

    Poor old dead Father Ted revealed as anti Irish racist!!

    There was shock in Dublin today as it was revealed that Dermot Morgan’s well known catch phrase “dat sorta ting” was officially declared racist against the eternally pure and god-fearing Irish people.

    “Sure we knew he wasn’t even proper Irish in the first place” said a spokeswoman for The Purity Party, “feckin Welsh bugger”!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT9xuXQjxMM

  58. Don’t answer me directly, Herbie, I might bite. Or wrongfully accuse you of rape.

  59. I learned today that a friend has just been arrested and charged with harassment. His crime? He was getting friendly with a cleaner at work, and asked her back to his flat (she didn’t go), and offered to help her out financially because she claimed to be in difficulty. This has been construed as an offer to pay her for sex. He wasn’t lewd towards her, didn’t lay a finger on her, impede her progress, or even insult her. He was being inappropriately nice. (As English isn’t her first language, there may also have been communication problems.)

    Now, as it happens, he did exactly the same for me last year (I’m male) when I went through a bad patch, and – guess what? – he never molested me! I even slept on his couch for a few weeks; he got a key cut for me, and paid me for cleaning for his flat. It’s true he does occasionally make smutty quips, but I’m happy to match him on that level.)

    You might think this junk accusation would be thrown out with the trash. But in addition to being arrested, he has been called in by his boss and forced to resign from his part-time professional job. His career may be irreparably damaged. He’s doing well to stay sane.

    Hurrah for feminists! – stamping out the scourge of single men offering to help women in difficulty, in case it’s misinterpreted as a unwanted come-on. Pah!

  60. Hi Jon

    I don’t think we would ever have heard of DSK’s sexual life unless the banksters wanted it so.

    Sure, we would have heard whispers, gossip etc but not the detailed info that is now emerging through mass media, indeed acting en masse.

    There’s nothing progressive about a situation where the banksters use seemingly progressive causes when it suits them and ignore them when it does not.

    That’s the dilemma.

    Ultimately then these seemingly progressive causes are incorporated into just another tool for regressive power.

    All these problems were pointed out when the left moved to embrace identity politcs, and nothing much has changed on that score.

    We’d be better to move back to an understanding of the dynamics of economy etc rather than in the intervening time delude ourselves that power cares that any individual is raped.

    It’s pointless to prop up a justice system that is corrupt by accepting occasional crumbs of justice as and when it suits them.

    Ultimately one must make a temporary compromise if one is to achieve anything of value.

    That understanding seems to have died sometime in the early 1980s.

  61. Hi Dreoilin

    The “racist” thing was much to shrill and ridiculous to respond in any other way than by lampoon.

  62. Very sorry to hear it. It seems astonishing to me that asking someone out is harassment, provided you accept a refusal with good grace.

  63. That’s it Herbie. When you can’t answer a woman’s questionS, call her “shrill and ridiculous”.
    .
    Relax, I have you thoroughly pegged now.

  64. Hi Dreoilin

    I haven’t seen any questions, merely jibes and slurs upon my character.

    I’m not interested in a personal slagging match, I concern myself solely with great matters of state but if you wish to make further fool of yourself then please carry on.

    I’m perfectly relaxed, thank you.

  65. Jon, I may said something like this in the past on these boards, but can we ‘bottle’ you and distribute you free on street corners? I am not suggesting that you are a genie. But a little of your humanity and equanimity would go a long way. On DSK, I agree with your approach. Let’s see what happens.

    After all, Jeffrey Archer and Jonathan Aitken got banged away for perjury and DSK (nominally a ‘socialist’ when that word has become meaningless in these contexts, a little like ‘Ghibelline’ in Mediaeval times) is hardly a Leftie really is he? It’s not as though he was suggesting rigorously re-regulating the banking system or giving the wealth of JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs to the people of Chad. Britain now is backing a Frenchwoman for the post, so not an ‘Anglo-Saxon’ plot either. I mean, Head of the neoliberal IMF, plundering the pockets of ordinary people to pay trillions to the banksters? So maybe there’s no plot, eh? If he’s innocent (of the charges), then let him go free; if guilty, then off to prison where he can write his memoirs and the appear on talk-shows forever and ever amen.

  66. Herbie wrote:
    .
    > I don’t think we would ever have heard of DSK’s sexual life unless the
    > banksters wanted it so. Sure, we would have heard whispers, gossip etc but
    > not the detailed info that is now emerging through mass media, indeed acting
    > en masse.
    .
    I think you missed my point. Sure, if he were an austerity-measures capitalist, he might be viewed by the establishment as worthy of “helping out” if he commits a crime. In those circumstances, yes, a man might commit a crime and then have it covered up afterwards. But that would be a disgraceful state of affairs, and we should condemn it.
    .
    Ergo, if a progressive were to attempt to turn around the IMF, and then commit a crime, we should not cry foul if that person is arrested and charged. I agree with you therefore that there is a double standard, but I sense slightly that you think DSK should be let off because he opposes neo-capitalism? It might help me understand your position if you would agree that, if DSK is guilty, he should be charged? I think we should all agree on that.
    .
    > He may have actively assisted in his demise, but that in itself is not
    > enough for him to now be in the position he’s in.
    .
    I think that position is indefensible. Isn’t that the same as saying “Good men in power may rape women”?
    .
    I don’t sense as you do that feminism has been co-opted by the establishment, and agree with Dreoilin that this is not a feminist issue. I think you might be allowing your distaste for feminism to cloud your judgement.
    .
    But you’re right in a way about the left’s embracing of identity politics during the 1970s. It’s not that the left was wrong to look at class, gender and race, but that all this came at the expense of ignoring the economic system that was starting to turn towards neo-capitalism. I am sure author Naomi Klein – a woman and a feminist – would agree with you on this.

  67. Feminism is as feminism does. You have to look at how things function in the world not how you wish them to be. It’s in that sense that feminism has been incorporated as a tool of fascism. We can see too that feminism has been incorporated fully into consumerism of course.

    When I use the term fascism, I use it advisedly. I’m referring very specifically to the increasing use of naked violence at home and abroad, the destruction of civil liberties and due process etc and the many other crimes against our political life.

    It used to be the case that we spoke of a vulgar marxism, which of course was the predominant form. It might be wise then to think of a vulgar feminism. Then again we could perhaps talk of a western feminism, much in the way we used to talk of a western marxism.

    There’s a rather amusing exemplar of this in the radical differences between a very cosy western feminism and the real lives of women in the developing world. There was a very revealing prog recently in which a group of feminists were supposed to be discussing the lives of women in the developing world. It ended up that the American feminists had to keep talking over the woman from the developing world because what she was saying was inimical to their very being and that of the corporates who employ them. That’s what it’s all about.

    We might also ask how is it that with so many women working in media none of this good feminism of which you speak ever seems to manifest itself. Media is now more uncritical of power than it ever has been. It was much more critical in the past when fewer women worked in it. Again, you have to look at what’s happening in the world.

    There’s no point people writing books that are little read and even less understood and then claiming that that’s the real feminism, when in the world things are very different.

    Again on the protection of establishment rapists you have to look at what actually happens. These people are protected so long as they do what banksters want in much the same way as nasty dictators are protected.

    Of course rapists should be punished but there’s little merit in a system that only punishes those who’ve offended the banksters whilst the others are let continue as they please. It’s in that sense that “men in power may rape women”.

    At best feminism is a project gone awry but I’m afraid it’s all seems very much worse that than that. It’s almost as if feminism colluded in denying us the critical tools to deal with what the banksters are up to, leaving us with little more than an empty sloganising as demonstrated in the posts of Dreoilin and Angrysoba.

    You really do need to ask yourself some searching questions about what’s going on. You might begin by asking just what sort of feminist is Hillary Clinton, and indeed is there any point in being whatever she is. She don’t seem that different to the banksters so far as I can see.

  68. Herbie says:
    .
    “It’s almost as if feminism colluded in denying us the critical tools to deal with what the banksters are up to, leaving us with little more than an empty sloganising as demonstrated in the posts of Dreoilin and Angrysoba.”
    .
    Herbie complains about Dreoilin and I sloganising [sic] and of being insulted by slurs and jibes and – no doubt – slings and arrows of outrageous fortune which is ironic given much of what Herbie has said earlier:
    .
    “banksters”
    .
    “Feminism is as feminism does.”
    .
    “I’m not interested in a personal slagging match”
    .
    “A Former Assistant Secretary of the U.S Treasury under Reagan” (This is always trotted out as an appeal to authority before a senile old gurning git called Paul Craig Roberts announces his latest Apocalypse scenario. Most of us probably laughed at those Christians talking about the Rapture but PCR has about one Rapture a month.)
    .
    “My view is that irrespective of whether or not DSK actually attacked this woman, his arrest, humiliation and resignation required active intervention by the banksters.”
    .
    Yes, but you still haven’t given an argument for this. This is despite you saying:
    .
    “I haven’t said anything that I cannot defend in argument.”
    .
    Those who care at all are still waiting for some evidence you can “defend yourself in argument”. So far all I’ve noted is bluster and repetition and I’m sure I’m not the only one who has noticed.
    .
    Just to make myself clear, this is bluster:
    .
    “I concern myself solely with great matters of state”
    .
    Methinks the lady doth protest too much.
    .
    “I seek no favour.
    I stand by my words. I speak my truth. I can do no other.”
    .
    What do you want? A cookie?
    .
    And what is “your truth” and how does it compare with “the truth”?
    .
    And this is repetition:
    .
    “banksters”
    “banksters”
    “banksters”
    “banksters”
    “banksters”
    “banksters”
    “banksters”
    .
    Now, Jon asked you a useful question earlier and I think it would be a shame for you to duck it. Here it comes again:
    .
    “It might help me understand your position if you would agree that, if DSK is guilty, he should be charged?”

  69. “My view is that irrespective of whether or not DSK actually attacked this woman, his arrest, humiliation and resignation required active intervention by the banksters.”
    .
    Anyway, I really think that is the way Herbie sees it. It doesn’t really matter to him whether or not DSK raped the housekeeper because he is not concerned with her at all (remember, Herbie is concerned SOLELY with “great matters of state”) he is only concerned that the “banksters” may benefit from this. Remember, DSK’s guilt is irrelevant. That’s Herbie’s stated position.

  70. @Herbie, I’d very much like to understand your position, but like Angrysoba I only see a collection of slogans. What does “feminism is as feminism does” actually mean? I still don’t see this as a feminist issue.
    .
    > It [the media] was much more critical in the past when fewer women worked in it.
    .
    Correlation doesn’t prove causation. I’d say corporate/legal power, media company mergers and a mixing of the journalist/politician class have been largely responsible for the de-clawing of the media. I agree with Chomsky & Herman’s approach (the Propaganda Model).
    .
    > Of course rapists should be punished but there’s little merit in a system that
    > only punishes those who’ve offended the banksters whilst the others are let
    > continue as they please.
    .
    But, you would still want DSK to be charged in accordance with the law, if there is a case to answer? I think it helps to state that unequivocally.
    .
    > You might begin by asking just what sort of feminist is Hillary Clinton.
    .
    I think this is one of the basic errors people make when they misunderstand feminism. It is certainly a feminist goal to get an equal gender representation in positions of power, but one is not a feminist merely by being a woman. Most women are not feminists, and plenty of women have anti-feminist ideals.

  71. @Suhayl – apologies, I missed your earlier post. Thank you for the kind words, though I would say that spending time here has incrementally moulded my approach with some very thoughtful and reasoned voices, of which yours is one.
    .
    Anyway, I have long wondered whether reason and experience – not things I lay much claim to – could be bottled as a liquid by each generation, so that the next generation could drink and do things better. Maybe one day :-)

  72. Hi Jon

    As I’ve explained before, what “feminism is as feminism does” means is that you have to look at how feminism functions in the world.

    There’s no point in pointing to texts gathering dust in the academy and saying that’s what feminism is.

    So, in the case of Hillary Clinton for example, and indeed many other prominent females who claim to be feminists it seems that there’s not much that distinguishes them from bankster colleagues.

    In terms of media feminists, and there seem to be more claims there than anywhere else, has media improved? Of course not. It’s got worse.

    So, this feminist goal of getting an equal gender representation in positions of power doesn’t seem to benefit anyone other those lucky few chosen. What’s the point of that from the perspective of feminism, especially if as you claim “most women are not feminists, and plenty of women have anti-feminist ideals”.

    Why put the enemy in positions of power? Seems a curious strategy to me and indeed one so obviously doomed to failure.

    This is of course the problem with identity politics, and why it has been so easily incorporated into the system.

    I mean, even Anrysoba seems to have embraced feminism, so little threat is it to his view of what ought to be.

    It’s a pity too that you didn’t address the issue of those corporate tenured American feminists who seek to silence sisters from the developing world who want to talk about economics and colonialism etc.

    Anyway.

    The guilt or innocence of DSK will be determined by a jury or plea bargain or even suicide perhaps.

    However, I’m still of the view that his current predicament owes more to his annoying the banksters than it does to any attempt at unlawful sex with a chambermaid.

    The banksters don’t much care about immigrant chambermaids nor any other kind of chambermaid. That much must be obvious to you.

    No one said it was easy. But if your underpinning theory is poor and easily incorporated by power then you just make it more difficult than it needs to be.

    The right have always understood that “it’s the economy, stupid”. I imagine they were delighted when the left forgot that, and proceeded to divide amongst themselves in intractable questions of identity.

    “Blair Babes”. “Cameron Cuties”. Harriet Harman. Incorporated, you see.

  73. Hi Angry,

    You say and I quotate:

    “Now, Jon asked you a useful question earlier and I think it would be a shame for you to duck it. Here it comes again:
    .
    “It might help me understand your position if you would agree that, if DSK is guilty, he should be charged?””

    Hmmmm.

    You seem to be rather confused about how it works. Not that I’m surprised of course, but I think you’ll find that the charge thing normally comes before the guilty thing. I know media has a different process and perhaps that’s what you prefer.

    I think that if there’s a complaint it should be investigated, and if evidence found he be charged and then presented to a jury for determination.

    It’s subsequent to that the “guilty” or indeed “not guilty” bit comes into play.

    However, I don’t think any of this would have happened had he not annoyed the banskters.

    Hope that helps.

  74. Hi Suhayl,

    The difference in the cases of Archer and Aitken is that they themselves initiated legal action.

    They were Oscared by their own hand. They entered a legal dispute of their own volition.

    You might argue that DSK may have put himself at risk of legal action, but it’s not at all the same thing as entering into legal contest voluntarily.

    DSK was changing the way the IMF operated and the banksters weren’t happy with that.

    If Christine Lagarde or whoever takes over the IMF continues his policies without opposition then you may well have a case. If she reverts to the more traditional IMF way of doing things, then you do not.

  75. “DSK was changing the way the IMF operated and the banksters weren’t happy with that.”
    .
    Not everyone agrees with you.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/may/19/imf-dominique-strauss-kahn
    .
    “But as can be seen from what is happening in the peripheral Eurozone countries, the IMF is still playing its traditional role of applying the medieval economic medicine of “bleeding the patient”. To be fair to both Strauss-Kahn and the fund, neither the managing director nor anyone else at the IMF is ultimately in sole charge of policy, especially with respect to countries that are important to the people who really run the institution. The IMF is run by its governors and executive directors, of whom the overwhelmingly dominant authorities are the US treasury department, which includes heavy representation from Goldman Sachs, and, secondarily, the European powers.”

  76. “I think that if there’s a complaint it should be investigated, and if evidence found he be charged and then presented to a jury for determination.”
    .
    Could you say what you mean by ‘evidence’ please?

  77. “It doesn’t really matter to him whether or not DSK raped the housekeeper because he is not concerned with her at all (remember, Herbie is concerned SOLELY with “great matters of state”)”–Angry
    .
    Yes. I think it’s a case of ‘talking to the hand, because the ear’s not listening’.

  78. Hi Dreoilin

    You really ought to read the whole thing. Bits like this, for example:

    “Strauss-Kahn was aware that the fiscal tightening ordered by the European authorities and the IMF was preventing Greece from getting out of recession; but while he pushed for “softer” conditions, he was powerless to change the lending conditions from punishment to actual help. That’s ultimately because the European authorities (European Commission and European Central Bank), not the IMF, are calling the shots – although Strauss-Kahn encountered plenty of resistance within the fund itself, too.”

    or this:

    “and the odds are good that the next managing director – of whatever nationality – will be to the right of Strauss-Kahn. Real change at the IMF is in the hands of the governments of most of the world – but only if they dare to organise it.”

    I can’t quite see where this chap disagrees with me.

    Would you care to point it out please.

  79. Reply to my previous and current questions, Herbie. And maybe you’d quote where I was supposedly “sloganising” while you’re at it. Actual quotes, please.
    .
    As for the article, naturally I’d read it. Don’t be silly please. The whole message of the article is that there was, and will be, little or no difference. With or without DSK.

  80. It’s probably worth considering at this time the observations of a post-feminist who dares to navigate these dangerous waters.

    Over to you Naomi:

    “Harriet Lessel, executive director of the New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault, agrees that this case has seen “a very quick and targeted response,” and points out that rape is “a grossly underreported crime” in New York. Worse, she says, many victims under other circumstances believe that the criminal justice system is unresponsive to their needs and more oriented toward ensuring that the innocent are not convicted.

    While Lessel is quick to add that New York has “some great police officers and prosecutors who really care,” she says that the police do not normally issue public statements supportive of victims’ credibility, let alone early on, as they did with Strauss-Kahn’s accuser. Nor has she ever heard of someone being photographed naked as part of the evidence.

    So what is happening here?”

    http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/05/23/a-tale-of-two-rape-charges/

    Indeedy do. Just what is happening here.

  81. As I said, ‘talking to the hand, because the ear’s not listening’ …

  82. Hi Dreoilin

    You claim:

    “As for the article, naturally I’d read it. Don’t be silly please. The whole message of the article is that there was, and will be, little or no difference. With or without DSK.”

    The article quite clearly states that DSK was trying to change things.

    Here’s the key points you’re looking for:

    “he was widely praised as having changed the IMF, increased its influence and moved it away from the policies that – according to the fund’s critics – had caused so many problems for developing countries in the past.”

    “To be fair, some changes at the fund during the tenure of Strauss-Kahn were significant. For the first time ever, during the world recession of 2009, the IMF made available some $283bn-worth of reserves for all member countries, with no policy conditions attached. The fund also made some limited credit available without conditions”

    “To be fair to both Strauss-Kahn and the fund, neither the managing director nor anyone else at the IMF is ultimately in sole charge of policy, especially with respect to countries that are important to the people who really run the institution.”

    “The biggest changes were in the research department, where there was tolerance for more open debate. For example, there were IMF papers that endorsed the use of capital controls by developing countries under some circumstances, and questioning whether central banks were unnecessarily slowing growth with inflation targets that may be too low.”

    “while he pushed for “softer” conditions”

    “the odds are good that the next managing director – of whatever nationality – will be to the right of Strauss-Kahn.”

    So you see, even your supposed naysayer indicates that DSK was engaging in policies that the banksters didn’t like. And of course there are many others who will make stronger arguments in his support of the changes he wrought at the IMF.

  83. “So you see, even your supposed naysayer indicates that DSK was engaging in policies that the banksters didn’t like.”
    .
    I recommend to people that they read the article for themselves, since you are selectively quoting.
    .
    For example, the correct quote is, “he was widely praised as having changed the IMF, increased its influence and moved it away from the policies that – according to the fund’s critics – had caused so many problems for developing countries in the past. How much of this is true?” — the question at the end that you chose to delete.
    .
    And it’s hard to see how he was “engaging in policies” of his own when the piece clearly says, “But as can be seen from what is happening in the peripheral Eurozone countries, the IMF is still playing its traditional role of applying the medieval economic medicine of “bleeding the patient”.”
    .
    I’ve had quite enough of your twisting and turning and slippery methods, since apart from ‘editing’ the Guardian article, you positively refuse to answer straight questions, but keep waffling and trundling away like a roughshod horse instead. Unfortunately, you can’t win debating points that way.

  84. @Herbie,
    .
    Thanks for your reply to my question, but I don’t feel it’s been answered fully. Of course, I didn’t intend to imply that a guilty verdict could precede a police charge. What I was asking was, if it transpires DSK carried out the crime in question, whether you thought he should be charged. This is one of those yes-or-no questions, but we’ve not had a yes or no from you.
    .
    The point you are making is fair enough – I agree that he might get protection from the law if he were one of the boys. I am willing to entertain the possibility that the charge is being expedited in order to to get rid of him. But that’s not my question.

  85. Herbie,
    .
    On the issue of feminism:
    .
    > So, in the case of Hillary Clinton for example, and indeed many other
    > prominent females who claim to be feminists
    .
    I maintain that Clinton is not a feminist – she certainly doesn’t act like one, in my view. Her modus operandi – which has become a great deal more right wing and militarist over the last few years – is to mimic the masculine aggression of the American political establishment. Thatcher and Palin are much the same in my view (even though it doesn’t seem fair on Thatcher to put her in the same category as Palin, who is a product of an extraordinarily violent environment).
    .
    To your knowledge, has Clinton spoken about being ‘a feminist’? I’d be surprised if she has.
    .
    > So, this feminist goal of getting an equal gender representation in
    > positions of power doesn’t seem to benefit anyone other those lucky few chosen.
    .
    Well, there are two problems with that analysis: (1) this goal hasn’t yet been very successful thus far, and (2) I imagine feminists would rather feminists got into power, rather that women with masculine (or anti-feminist) views.
    .
    > “Blair Babes”. “Cameron Cuties”.
    .
    These are sexist taglines that judge female politicians by their physical attractiveness. That is the diametric opposite of feminism, and certainly not an illustration of the establishment co-opting the movement. You’re just grasping at straws on this one!
    .
    > Harriet Harman
    .
    I don’t know much about Harman, except that she professes to be a feminist, and was part of the New Labour coterie. But from theyworkforyou.com: “Voted very strongly for the Iraq war” and “Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war”. For a war that killed hundreds of thousands of women, I am not sure she could call herself a feminist. But then if you find yourself in Blair’s Labour cabinet, I don’t think you can call yourself progressive either!
    .
    > Why put the enemy in positions of power?
    .
    Presumably you mean right-wingers. This implies that a women who finds herself in a position of power has been put there by a feminist. Clearly that’s a nonsense: if a powerful women such as Clinton gets into power and subsequently reflects masculine political ideology, it is unlikely she was “put there” by a feminist at all. Indeed, I think you credit feminism with too much power – if they could choose a US Secretary of State, the world would be a much better place ;-)
    .
    Conclusion: I’m certainly interested in unusual analyses, but on feminism I think you’ve taken the wrong tack. There is not much in this story that ought to discredit feminism as a movement, while there is plenty to commend the movement. Whether the forward strides that women have made recently (say, increased equality in the workplace) are down to feminism or to other forces is debatable, but of course backwards steps have been made too (increased corporate pressure on women to conform to a narrow beauty ideal). So feminism could either be said to have had mixed success, or little success at all, depending on what you think it was responsible for.

  86. [Mod/jon: deleted as disruptive.]

  87. (Thanks for the Naomi Wolf article, by the way. A good and interesting read, though it doesn’t change my views on what I’ve written already :) ).

  88. (@YugoStiglitz – snarky and unhelpful comments from the sidelines will get you deleted every time. Engage in the debate or get out.)

  89. Hi Dreoilin

    I quite simply don’t agree with you, nor could any reasonable person.

    I’ve outlined his progressive achievements above, even in an article that you claim, rather dishonestly in my opinion, that “The whole message of the article is that there was, and will be, little or no difference. With or without DSK.”

    The article quite clearly lists the major progressive changes that DSK has made, as I’ve outlined above.

    Reader’s can judge for themselves, of course:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/may/19/imf-dominique-strauss-kahn

  90. Hi Jon

    You ask:

    “What I was asking was, if it transpires DSK carried out the crime in question, whether you thought he should be charged. This is one of those yes-or-no questions, but we’ve not had a yes or no from you.”

    I’ve addressed this question a number of times now, most recently in my reply to Mr Angry of America.

    I’ve even addressed what I assumed what was the spirit of your question in saying that rapists should be punished.

    There is no simple yes/no answer to your literal question above because your premise is incorrect.

    You’re asking a question about his guilt prior even to his being charged. It’s a bizarre proposition.

    We don’t know if DSK has committed a crime until a jury has looked at the evidence.

    Don’t you understand that he’s being tried in media and that this is the MO of undemocratic regimes?

  91. YugoStiglitz

    24 May, 2011 - 1:34 am

    So snarky = deleted? Wow! It remains amazing (but perhaps a bit predictable) what does suffice as an approved comment on this site.

  92. YugoStiglitz

    24 May, 2011 - 1:36 am

    And I’m quite serious – do any of you plan on contacting DSK’s defense team to make sure they know your theory on why the maid is making these allegations?

  93. “You’re asking a question about his guilt prior even to his being charged. It’s a bizarre proposition”
    .
    Thu May 19, 2:46 pm ET
    .
    Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the International Monetary Fund, has been indicted on seven counts of sexual assault by a New York grand jury. The decision means he’ll stand trial or plead out for allegedly trying to rape a maid on Saturday in his room at the Sofitel Hotel in Midtown. Strauss-Kahn faces up to 25 years in prison if he’s convicted of all the counts against him.
    .
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/atlantic/20110519/wl_atlantic/strausskahnindictednewyorkgrandjury37936_1
    .
    Sadly it appears that Herbie doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

  94. YugoStiglitz

    24 May, 2011 - 7:00 am

    So now there’s the issue of the DNA evidence. Ambassador Murray, humbly and respectably, what technology do you think exists that puts DSK’s DNA on the employee’s clothing? Is the NYC crime lab now part of the “fit-up” against DSK? What could the individual employees possibly get out of taking part in that crime?

  95. What a silly point. Monica Lewinsky had Bill Clinton’s sperm on her dress, but it wasn’t rape. I presume it is sperm – though I imagine that if you clean somebody’s room you will undoubtedly get microscopic traces of other kinds of DNA on your clothes.

  96. Herbie, I am not asking you to try him. I’m simply asking whether the usual rules should apply to him. You did say that rapists should be punished, but given that you said “all they had to do was put a female within sight of him and let nature take its course”, I felt you might be excusing rape, so long as it is done by good people. I do feel you’ve avoided the question, as I think does Dreoilin, but I’ll stop pressing now.
    .
    I agree that there is a trial-by-media in these cases though, which is disheartening indeed. That said, he can at least afford good lawyers, and the case will be in the public eye, so I remain hopeful that his trial will remain fair. I am not certain that his case has been expedited because of his policy ideas, but as I said before, it is a possibility. We will have to wait and see.

  97. If someone says that rapists should be punished then that should be clear enough to any reasonable person.

    The problem is that your specific question was poorly phrased.

    Your question made an assumption of guilt prior to charge. And it doesn’t work that way.

    Dreoilin is wrong because, as she’s demonstrated above, she doesn’t understand the difference either. The issue is not, as she assumes “has DSK been charged”?

    It is very specifically should he be charged if we think him guilty? And that’s not how it works. People are charged when it is thought there is as case to answer, not because we think them guilty. It may seem a subtle distinction to you but it’s a very important distinction which goes to the heart of due process.

  98. Hi Jon

    Here’s an article extolling the virtues of Hillary’s feminism:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jan/16/hillary-clinton-feminist-foreign-policy

    You haven’t addressed the issue of how quotas for women advance the cause of feminism as you describe it.

    These sexist taglines, as you describe them, are one of the ways in which feminism is incorporated. It’s not just something you can ignore.

    On Harriet Harman, she’s s self-described feminist with a whole lot of female supporters in the party, but again she just looks like another neo con. You can’t easily dismiss this either.

    So in your terms feminism is a failed project. It hasn’t achieved what you want. But it’s worse than that. Feminism has been incorporated as a servant of corporate power, as we can see with the powerful feminists above and indeed we can see in mass media when issues such as the DSK or Assange affair come to light.

    It’s clear that identity politics just doesn’t deliver the goods.

    What unites people is not their gender nor their ethnicity nor their nation, but their common humanity and desire to make some sort of life for themselves.

    Feminism and all the other “isms” have succeeded only in dividing people, which of course suits the banksters just fine.

  99. Herbie,
    Both DSK and the chambermaid know the truth. They know whether it was attempted rape or not. I believe Jon’s question is a simple one. If you could see into the chambermaid’s mind, or DSK’s mind, and IF you did that, and IF you knew that an attempted rape HAD been committed by DSK in this case, should he have been charged?
    .
    Or do you perhaps think that given his status and his work, he should have been shielded and protected by those in power?
    .
    You wrote further up the page, “I’m all for the sovereignty of the individual etc, but there are much greater issues which affect us all and which ultimately transcend any individual damage to this woman”
    .
    This is why the question needs a straight answer.

  100. You also wrote, Herbie, “He may have actively assisted in his demise, but that in itself is not enough for him to now be in the position he’s in.”
    .
    Why not?

  101. Dreoilin writes:
    .

    “You also wrote, Herbie, “He may have actively assisted in his demise, but that in itself is not enough for him to now be in the position he’s in.”
    .
    Why not?”
    .

    For all the reasons that Naomi Wolf gave in her article and all the reasons I’ve given as to how the banksters protect their mates.

  102. Herbie,
    Both DSK and the chambermaid know the truth. They know whether it was attempted rape or not. I believe Jon’s question is a simple one. If you could see into the chambermaid’s mind, or DSK’s mind, and IF you did that, and IF you knew that an attempted rape HAD been committed by DSK in this case, should he have been charged?
    .
    Or do you perhaps think that given his status and his work, he should have been shielded and protected by those in power?
    .
    You wrote further up the page, “I’m all for the sovereignty of the individual etc, but there are much greater issues which affect us all and which ultimately transcend any individual damage to this woman”
    .
    This is why the question needs a straight answer.

    ——————

    and you’re still avoiding the question.

  103. Dreolin
    .
    Jon’s question was not a simple one. Much of what has been going on here concerns the unusual process, as Naomi Wolf points out.
    .
    If someone simply asks the generic question, “should rapists be punished” then the answer is simple. It’s yes.
    .
    That is not what was asked though.
    .
    Because rape is an emotive issue much of the discussion focusses in on the victim and we lose sight of the unusual process in this case. And that suits those who wish to hide that unusual process.
    .
    But as again Naomi Wolf points out, this case is nothing like a normal rape procedural at all. Far from it!.
    .
    The banksters win in the distraction and the NY authorities get to pretend that they take rape seriously, when the Rape Crisis centre claims that ordinarily they do not.

  104. My question is a simple one, Herbie, and you’re avoiding it like the plague.
    .
    If you had been a fly on the wall, and IF you knew that an attempted rape HAD been committed by DSK in this case, should he have been charged?
    .
    Or do you perhaps think that given his status and his work, he should have been shielded and protected by those in power?
    .
    ————————
    .
    I note that you’re refusing to answer. Bye Herbie

  105. Dreoilin
    .
    If someone repeatedly says to you that “rapists should be punished” then a reasonable person will understand what’s being said. It’s quite clear.
    .
    It’s your pretence not to understand that’s the problem here, and that has happened a number of times in your interventions.
    .
    Your talk about reading people’s minds indicates just how abstracted from any discussion of this issue you are. You’re simply trying to distract from the unusual nature of the process involving DSK.
    .
    And that’s of course my point about how so called feminists serve the interests of banksters and neo cons, unwittingly or not. Your inability to address the issues in the way that an intelligent observer like Naomi Wolf does is because you seem only to think in black and white, and sadly the world is not like that at all.

  106. @Herbie – I might have phrased it better, but it ought to be clear from my posts that I know the difference between ‘case to answer’ and ‘guilty’. But I maintain, as does Dreoilin, that several times you appeared to excuse rape by a good man if bad men would have got away with it. But, to your credit, you’ve given a simple “yes” to “should rapists be punished” – I’ll have to settle for that.
    .
    I don’t have time to do justice to your valid questions about feminism in general, but hopefully I will this week. But:
    .
    > as we can see with the powerful feminists above
    .
    This might be the cause of our differences here: I just don’t think they are feminists, as I’ve said repeatedly before. Even if someone calls themselves a feminist, it is not necessarily true. Cherie Booth insisted to a journalist that she and her husband were socialists – and yet their kind of “socialism” has nothing to do with the vision of Tony Benn and others.
    .
    I sense you’re keen to lob out feminism at any opportunity, because you don’t like it, and so you’ll happily accept Harman/Clinton’s view that they are feminists in order to discredit the movement. I just don’t think that’s fair on women who are *genuinely* opposed to discrimination, and who are fighting for a better deal for women.
    .
    More on this when I get a moment… :)

  107. Hilarious obscurantism.
    Seeya Herbie!

  108. What do Ken Clarke, Naomi Wolf, Laurie Penny’s mum and Herbie have in common?
    .
    Well, Ken Clarke had an argument with some very stupid sloganising people about rape law.
    .
    Laurie Penny’s lawyer mum had an hour long argument with sloganiste Lit grad Laurie Penny about rape law.
    .
    And see here poor old Naomi Wolf despairing at ever getting into this discussion:
    .
    http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/20/naomi_wolf_vs_jaclyn_friedman_a

  109. Herbie, if DSK did it (i.e rape) should he go to jail?
    .
    If yes, and he did do it, doesn’t that mean that all your tantrums about “banksters” and feminism turn out to be irrelevant?
    .
    (This doesn’t mean that the two things aren’t subjects in their own right but different subjects whereas rape is the real subject here and you’ve spent all your time trying to change it.)

  110. Angry

    “Herbie, if DSK did it (i.e rape) should he go to jail?”
    .
    My view is that anyone who is convicted of rape should be punished according to what is deemed appropriate to those judging the case. Neither I, nor you and certainly not Dreoilin are in any position to determine this specific case. That’s obvious to all but the most stupid of people.
    .
    “If yes, and he did do it, doesn’t that mean that all your tantrums about “banksters” and feminism turn out to be irrelevant?”
    .
    Of course not. It’s the strange process in this case that makes it stand out. Rape is common. This process is highly unusual. That’s Naomi Wolf’s argument, and it’s mine too. What feminism does, and it’s probably better to call it a naive sloganising feminism, is distract from the unusual process in this case.
    .
    “(This doesn’t mean that the two things aren’t subjects in their own right but different subjects whereas rape is the real subject here and you’ve spent all your time trying to change it.)”
    .
    If rape is so common, and it is, why is this case so special and worthy of screeds of column inches across the planet?
    .
    It’s not as if DSK is a well known celeb. He’s not. Certainly not in the US, and indeed not in most of Europe either.
    .
    What makes this case so highly reportable?
    .
    You don’t appear to have explained why that is so. And yet it’s the very unusual nature of the process in this case that raise so many questions about it.
    .
    The only comparable recent case is that of Assange and we know what that was about. We know too that DSK was doing things at the IMF that the banksters didn’t like.

  111. Curiouser and curiouser
    .
    Despite many press accounts over the past number of days reporting that DSK’s DNA has been found on the maid’s clothing, it now appears that the NYPD are denying being the source of this information.
    .
    There is in fact no named source in any of the press reports, nor even any named authority.
    .
    It appears that these news reports can all be traced to one French outlet, Atlantico.fr who themselves have no named source, and they ain’t saying where they got the info from other than unnamed French sources.

    http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/05/24/strauss_kahn_dna_dsk_sample_matches_semen_found_on_hotel_maid_s_.html

    This is Atlantico’s site

    http://www.atlantico.fr/

  112. Looks as though someone is making things up.
    .
    Now, why would that be?

    New York police have denied reports of finding DNA traces from Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former IMF chief, on a maid’s clothes.

    “Investigators had so far given “no result and no information” about the DNA test results, they said on Tuesday, following news reports earlier that the DNA tests had given a positive result.

    A spokesman from the New York Police Department denied that the results from the genetic testing had been released.

    On Monday a spokeswoman from the prosecutor’s office would not comment on the report saying there would be “nothing until the trial.”"

    http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/05/2011524433952134.html
    .
    But despite this, the casual and even interested observer will have been deluded into thinking they’ve got DSK bang to rights.
    .
    And that’s of course how these smears work.

  113. I was just thinking about what Naomi Wolf said about the photographing of DSK naked being unusual. Initially I thought it was just for humiliation along with the frequent strip searching the NYPD boasted about.
    .
    Then I thought that if their case is that DSK presented himself naked to the maid then she could reasonably be expected to describe what he looks like naked. Any special identifying features etc.
    .
    What better way to do this than show her photographs of him naked.

  114. YugoStiglitz

    24 May, 2011 - 7:16 pm

    How does Naomi Wolf know anything about law enforcement in NYC?

    Atlantico.fr might have been the first to break the DNA story, but it was independently confirmed by other media outlets. Read your own link.

  115. Hi Larry

    There’s no independent confirmation of the DNA story, yet it’s still all over media.
    .
    Everyone is relying on unnamed sources.
    .
    The only real possible source (NYPD) is saying that they haven’t released such information to anyone.
    .
    So, a classic smear.
    .
    I also read some drivel about his “pals” contacting her family in Africa, again totally unnamed sources.
    .
    That’s the very interesting thing about this whole case. Just how much smearing is going on, and why. No one outside of France and the financial world, had ever heard of this bloke before the whole thing broke. Not normal at all.
    .
    When the banksters are out to get someone the media dogs are let off the leash. Simple as that, though they may just have pushed their luck too far on this one.

  116. “Neither I, nor you and certainly not Dreoilin are in any position to determine this specific case.”
    .
    Yet, you have been opining long and hard on this specific case since day one. I am not sure how you get a dispensation even while denying to everyone including yourself and saying Dreoilin is especially unqualified to comment. Why would that be?
    .
    Ah! Is it because of this?
    .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w

  117. :)

  118. Lagarde would bring a French vision of the importance of social spending, plus her desire for a “multipolar” world in which China and other developing nations played a greater role.
    .
    “Lagarde would be very much in the continuity of what Strauss-Kahn did,” said Gilles Moec, senior European economist with Deutsche Bank.
    .
    “What’s interesting is that she would bring those French values, which are probably what’s needed, but also an understanding of the Anglo-Saxon approach.”
    .
    Lagarde appears to have enough support in Europe, the United States and China to handily defeat any potential challengers to head the IMF.
    .
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/25/us-imf-lagarde-idUSTRE74O2E220110525
    .
    Interesting.

  119. Angry

    Opining on the inconsistencies of a legal case is not quite the same thing as determining guilt or innocence.

    I know and appreciate that, as indeed most worldly adults do.

    Neither you nor Dreoilin seem to understand the basics of due process.

  120. Dreoilin
    .
    This is much more interesting and indeed a far more objective analysis of the situation:
    .
    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xirhp3_dumas-says-strauss-kahn-was-best-man-to-get-bailouts_news
    .
    Gilles Moec whom you quote above is a Deutsche banker whose employer’s interests lie in ensuring that DSK’s approach will now cease.
    .
    He has been quoted extensively across media which itself is even more interesting than your post.
    .
    Lagarde quite simply doesn’t have the economic nous to challenge the interests of the banksters. That was DSK’s skill, an unusual skill as head of the IMF because previously his post had been held by economic amateurs. That suited the banksters and it looks very much like they’ll get their way with a return to a puppet head.

  121. Chilling, Craig. But you have survived stronger. Strength to your keyboard.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn : France's would-be president , accused of sex attack - Page 19 - TeakDoor.com - The Thailand Forum
  2. Take Your Pick – Why I Hate Freeway Insurance

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted by Expathos