Julian Assange Gets The Bog Standard Smear Technique 1895

The Russians call it Kompromat – the use by the state of sexual accusations to destroy a public figure. When I was attacked in this way by the government I worked for, Uzbek dissidents smiled at me, shook their heads and said “Kompromat“. They were used to it from the Soviet and Uzbek governments. They found it rather amusing to find that Western governments did it too.

Well, Julian Assange has been getting the bog standard Kompromat. I had imagined he would get something rather more spectacular, like being framed for murder and found hanging with an orange in his mouth. He deserves a better class of kompromat. If I am a whistleblower, then Julian is a veritable mighty pipe organ. Yet we just have the normal sex stuff, and very weak.

Bizarrely the offence for which Julian is wanted for questioning in Sweden was dropped from rape to sexual harassment, and then from sexual harassment to just harassment. The precise law in Swedish, as translated for me and other Sam Adams alumni by our colleague Major Frank Grevil, reads:

“He who lays hands on or by means of shooting from a firearm, throwing of stones, noise or in any other way harasses another person will be sentenced for harassment to fines or imprisonment for up to one year.”

So from rape to non-sexual something. Actually I rather like that law – if we had it here, I could have had Jack Straw locked up for a year.

Julian tells us that the first woman accuser and prime mover had worked in the Swedish Embassy in Washington DC and had been expelled from Cuba for anti-Cuban government activity, as well as the rather different persona of being a feminist lesbian who owns lesbian night clubs.

Scott Ritter and I are well known whistleblowers subsequently accused of sexual offences. A less well known whistleblower is James Cameron, another FCO employee. Almost simultaneous with my case, a number of the sexual allegations the FCO made against Cameron were identical even in wording to those the FCO initially threw at me.

Another fascinating point about kompromat is that being cleared of the allegations – as happens in virtually every case – doesn’t help, as the blackening of reputation has taken effect. In my own case I was formerly cleared of all allegations of both misconduct and gross misconduct, except for the Kafkaesque charge of having told defence witnesses of the existence of the allegations. The allegations were officially a state secret, even though it was the government who leaked them to the tabloids.

Yet, even to this day, the FCO has refused to acknowledge in public that I was in fact cleared of all charges. This is even true of the new government. A letter I wrote for my MP to pass to William Hague, complaining that the FCO was obscuring the fact that I was cleared on all charges, received a reply from a junior Conservative minister stating that the allegations were serious and had needed to be properly investigated – but still failing to acknowledge the result of the process. Nor has there been any official revelation of who originated these “serious allegations”.

Governments operate in the blackest of ways, especially when it comes to big war money and big oil money. I can see what they are doing to Julian Assange, I know what they did to me and others (another recent example – Brigadier Janis Karpinski was framed for shoplifting). In a very real sense, it makes little difference if they murdered David Kelly or terrified him into doing it himself. Telling the truth is hazardous in today’s Western political system.

1,895 thoughts on “Julian Assange Gets The Bog Standard Smear Technique

1 2 3 4 5 64
  • Suhayl Saadi

    Re. George W. Bush (though I am somewhat reluctant to side-track over old ground), my understanding is that the 2000 Presidential Election recount was stopped by one of his pals in Florida, whatshername, and that in fact if the count had been allowed to continue, it would have become clear that he had lost and ought never have been sworn-in as President.

    I know that Al Gore (yes, we need to remember about the sanctions on, and bombings of, Iraq during the Clinton-Gore years) ‘ought’ to have won handsomely and didn’t, and so ‘threw away’ the election (so to speak), but nonetheless, that corrupt, fraudulent election allowed the war dogs to have their day – their several years, in fact. It’s easy to launch war and a culture of systemic abuse and torture, black sites, etc.; it’s extremely difficult to stop/ reverse it. I’m thinking particularly of Iraq, of course, but more generally as well, because it is a global operation which continues apace. And so, millions have died. Whatshername-in-Florida has an awful lot to answer for. I’m sure she sleeps peacefully. Such amoral people do.

  • Jaded.

    Well, I wouldn’t be surprised if Larry and soba, operating through different IP addresses of course, were one and the same. They will rarely have 2 or more shills assigned to the same patch unless there are copious comments to deal with.

    Kieron, please don’t be in any doubt whether these ‘debunkers’ would be here without an economic incentive. It’s full time work for them. I would wholeheartedly agree that they must have sick minds to boot.

  • somebody

    No I don’t think so. Angrysoba is more literate than LfStL and Angry uses the term of endearment – Moonbat. LfStL calls us ‘silly gooses’

  • Larry from St. Louis

    As usual Suhayl, you have it completely wrong. And you’ve had plenty of time to clarify the issue. If the recount had transpired in the counties in which the Democrats wanted it to transpire, then Al Gore would probably have squeaked by (and not won “handsomely”). But if the recount had occurred for ALL of the votes in Florida with the same standard being applied (that is, an impression of the voting card) being enough, then Bush would have squeaked by. If it makes it more palatable for you, just imagine all the Republican voters in Florida who were not able to figure out how to properly punch a hole into their ballot. The Gore campaign’s lead attorney, David Boies, later on concluded that if a full recount had occurred, Bush would have won.

    But the U.S. Supreme Court cut short any recount (as ordered by the Florida Supreme Court), probably because a full recount would have lasted past the end of Bill Clinton’s second term, which seemed scary to them.

    Nonetheless, I think they should have allowed the full recount to occur, and everyone should have recognized Clinton as the de facto interim President.

    In any event, we’re still dealing with idiots like you who know nothing of the facts and think Al Gore actually won “handsomely” in Florida.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Larry, though I am reluctant to respond to you at all now, I shall in this instance.

    I never said that Gore won “handsomely”; re-read the post, Larry. As usual, you didn’t read it properly. Quite plainly, what I inferred was that he ‘ought’ to have won handsomely (but ran a poor campaign) which resulted in a very close outcome.

    Thank you for your infomation. There were very many controversial aspects of that election, including the problems with (mainly black) voters being turned away, etc. It is by no means as clear-cut as you posit. My view is that extensive electoral corruption at various levels aided Bush’s ‘election’ in 2000.

    Do you agree with the killings and torture, the black sites and the debasement of the reputation of the USA internationally by the flouting of international laws and conventions and the deliberate waging of aggressive war? I think you do.

    You have claimed, in previous posts, to disparage the rightwing in the USA, yet you do everything you can to express your support for their policies.

    Remember your use of the word, “ragheads”, for which you were criticised by angrysoba? You issued to retraction or disclaimer, no apology for the use of that word.

    I thought that you had been banned from this blog, buddy. So why do you keep popping-up on it?

  • Anonymous

    “If I am a whistleblower, then Julian is a veritable mighty pipe organ.”

    I don’t follow. Murray spoke publicly, as a matter of conscience, of his personal experience as a diplomat, contrary to the rules or expectations under which he worked. That I would acknowledge as whistleblowing. But Assange is merely a website operator, about who’s motivation we know nothing.

    In my view, that he has been charged with “molestation” sexual or otherwise has nothing to do with his credibility.

    There seem to be as many ready to believe that the charges prove his integrity as believe the reverse.

    What is of real interest is whether Assange has actually read and evaluated the thousands of documents he has released, and if so whether his evaluation is worth a damn. He’s said to be a “hacker”. What kind of background is that for a person claiming the ability to inform the public on the basis of tens of thousands of classified documents?

    To the present, the effect of Assange’s release of the Afghanistan documents appears to have been to strengthen the argument for pursuing the war in Pakistan. So why are we supposed to believe that Assange is a good guy — unless you’re for extension of the war to nuclear-armed Pakistan, in which case Assange seems to be doing a great job.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Lord Denning was a very able and interesting English Judge. He made maverick moves in his judgments. One thing however struck me, was that when it came to issue of the interest of the state or the formula of “national security” he was very much a willing sheep on the Bench.

    Julian is saying things that reveal the dirty underbelly of the state beast, and the state in the “national interest” wants to award him a Kompromat – but so far have only come up limp dick.

    It goes with the turf Craig. When one sets out to do that which is right and in the interest of humanity, as distinct from professed “national interest” the power of the state will be used to discredit or pressure. If all else fails, then death – so sorry Diana.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    REPLY TO ” Assange’s release of the Afghanistan documents appears to have been to strengthen the argument for pursuing the war in Pakistan. So why are we supposed to believe that Assange is a good guy — unless you’re for extension of the war to nuclear-armed Pakistan, in which case Assange seems to be doing a great job.”

    ANSWER:If the disclosed documents are accurate and would not otherwise be within public domain, it is better to have an informed – rather than an uninformed public. Let the journalists interpret, the public know and the pepople use the information as best they can to keep their governments aligned to truth.

  • Qark

    “If the disclosed documents are accurate and would not otherwise be within public domain, it is better to have an informed – rather than an uninformed public.”

    But you make the error of assuming that the public will be informed by the documents. Why should we believe that?

    First, selective release of real classified documents can give a totally false picture of reality.

    Second, obviously the corporate media are not going to give the public a fair evaluation of millions of words of classified documents, for two reasons. One is that the corporate media have their own agenda and will process the released information to project whatever message they favor. The other is that the corporate media rely on journalists who are mostly ignoramuses (I mean, would you be proud to be a journalist working for, say, Poop Murdoch, or the New York Times — LOL), among whom are many assets controlled by the security services.

  • Kieron Golding - Student

    Courtenay Barnett,

    Thank-you for your post which tells us that you find Lord Denning was at times influenced by others on matters of State.

    Can you expand on your last sentence that mentions death as a last resort?

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Since we’re on the subject of risk, what do people think about this poor chap found dead “in a sports bag in his bath” in London this week? Morbid speculation, perhaps.

    I note that the security services are already pouring cold water on any suggestion of an assassination, as opposed to a (relatively, at least wrt aetiology) more mundane ‘criminal’ murder. That’s interesting, because how could they know that at this stage? This in itself suggests that there might be more to it.

    One wonders too exactly what he was, or had been, working on. It’s an awful tragedy for his family and of course for the young man himself. A very dark world.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Right, KingofWelshNoir, I know what you mean.

    He too may have been Welsh (“had a Welsh accent” in one of the ‘papers).

    And then there’s the Russian connection. The ‘phone cards. The nothing for two weeks. If you didn’t turn-up at work for two weeks (and were not on holiday), someone surely would go bang on your door, no? Contact family, no? Report you as a missing person, no? This was not some down-and-out. This was en employee, reportedly, of GCHQ/ SIS. If a Police Officer – an ordinary PC – say, didn’t turn-up at work for two weeks, does one imagine for one moment that his/ her police colleagues would not become just a little worried?

    The top-class flat in a top-notch area. Do all SIS employees get that sort of accomodation? I think not.

    There is quite a lot which seems very suspicious here (understatement). A decision was made to inform the media. So, what is going on?

    KingofWelshNoir, you’re a thriller writer. ‘Found in a bag’, cause of death unknown says Home Office pathologist. Russian Mafia hit…? Is that what is being gently suggested by the repeated ‘Rodina’ references? Virgin Islands.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Wait for the onset of lurid tales of his private life – as was suggested earlier in relation to (albeit ante-mortem) kompromat, a sure sign, if it begins, of a deliberate campaign of disinformation, though the reason would remain elusive.

  • KingofWelshNoir

    Hi Suhayl

    I have no idea what it’s all about but I agree it does sound like something from a thriller. And, like you, when I saw his address I immediately wondered about his salary. In fact I was tempted to apply for a job – but they told me, ‘No chance, our files say you are a troofer and you post on Craig Murray’s blog, go away you subversive.’


  • Suhayl Saadi

    Wow, somebody, the two businessmen to whom you have alluded look, ahm, robust, shall we say, like archetypal screen antagonists. Except these guys are for real. Scary.

    I see also that there have been allegations with respect to dealings with Milosevic when he was boss of Serbia. Interesting that the SS are reported to have blocked Neville-Jones’s appointment to the most senior security position, though she still got the domestic sec. ministry of course. A morass, of course – what else would one expect?

    Interesting, too, that many of the Russian (and Ukrainian) ‘oligarchs’ seem to have Israeli passports. I’ve heard that Israel has become quite a node for organised crime – and much more.

  • Abe Rene

    Suhayl: I thought Kompromat was a washing machine. It uses Moony washing powder, so one brain wash later you have a fellow with head shaved and dressed in a white robe with a symbol of the Exalted Leader on it saying ‘I believe that Sin Bin Moony is supernatural, and I want to give him all my money.’

    As for the GCHQ employee found murdered in his flat, that is wonderful for conspiracists. Just imagine how many yarns you could spin with that one. Here’s my guess: he gambled, was up to his skull in debt, and couldn’t pay up. The gang to whom he owed a large sum decided to make an example of him.

  • Abe Rene

    PS. The theory of gambling is only a guess. He might have been a paragon of virtue, murdered by dastardly terrorists or enemy agents.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    It is indeed a washing-machine, Abe!

    Thbe thing is, one doesn’t actually haver to make anything up – this death is so bizarre, it almost outdoes fiction (as KingofWelshNoir implied – and he should know!). Actually, in my experience, taling not just about thrillers, etc. but about fiction in general, you’ll write something and think, oh I’ve gone too far, and then you’ll read about some real happening and relaise that the ‘real’ world in which we live is further-out, more extreme, the bad things worse, than any fiction or drama could portray.

    Whether or not he was a paragon of virtue, I doubt very much that this was seomthing as simple as gambling debts.

  • Courtenay Barnett


    TO QARK:- “If the disclosed documents are accurate and would not otherwise be within public domain, it is better to have an informed – rather than an uninformed public.”

    But you make the error of assuming that the public will be informed by the documents. Why should we believe that?

    REPLY: I stick to my point. Indeed, as you suggest, there can be more subtle manipulative information elements that are being utilised. So, is it better to have more information that one can grapple with – or less?

    TO GOLDING: Having one house burning down threat, and two death threats by drowing – what more can I say? I am still alive until the powers that be take my life.

  • You

    come on people

    there are more of us then there are of them

    we can do it!

    one world united in peace!

  • Erin Rebel

    It’s scary how much of the US population is brainwashed, basically. If one bothers to step “outside” of the US, it coukd get scary. Some never leave; some do, and return with a much greater perspective.

    In a nutshell, can’t the US government fathom up somthing a bit more clever than “rape”, if the incrimination is meant for Julian. Please, come up with something more original, if even for the fun of being governmentally creative. Just a though…some of us know better than to listen to the drivel…

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Courtenay, why are “the powers that be” threatening you? And who are “the powers that be”? Are we talking the state, or organised crime, or what? Now that you’ve intrigued us, please could you expand. Thanks.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Somebody, do you think that the SS’s blocking of Neville-Jones from the top job might have as much to do with turf wars b/w the two sec. and intel. services (SS and SIS) as with the alleged Russian angle itself? After all, if they’d been that concerned, why give her a job in government at all?

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Somebody, one wonders who runs ‘Spyblog’, the fascinating link which you provided? As far as I can see, there’s no info. on their extremely detailed, professional (to run the operation, it would require full-time staff, in my view, and the whole presentation looks intensely corporate) and very elegantly designed website, no ‘contact us’ button, no details of funding sources. It asks one to register in order to make comments, as do many sites. How does one know whether or not this is simply another vehicle for gathering information on dissent(ers)?

    Perhaps I’m being inordinately suspicious. It’s just a thought.

1 2 3 4 5 64

Comments are closed.