(16.48 Saturday) Chief Prosecutor Eva Finné reverses Kjellstrands decision completely and causes the biggest media frenzy we have seen in ages. Since they have not yet talked to Assange the dismissal of the warrant must be made based on the same information the warrant was made upon. Important to remember here is that the later lesser charges gets fuel in media cause of the first rape-charge. Had the initial charge been “sexual molestation” media would not have been in “frenzy”. Rape is special and unique cause rape is interpreted by feminists as structural male power abuse. Basically the strong guy beating the weak guy, as a student at law school said: Rape is a shame-crime.
Aftonbladet have comments from Assange who says he have no idea who the women are, no idea what the accusation is about and have never had sex without it being consensual. When asked the stupid question if he had sex with anyone at all while in Sweden. Assange rightly told the reporter that is a private matter.
When we commented on this, we went with the theory that this was a cultural clash between theory-sex-life of radical feminist fantasy and real world sex-life. The real problem here was people in media assuming guilty until innocent. The principle in court is innocent until guilty.
Leif Silbersky in DN comments that it is unusual higher-prosecutors overturned lower-prosecutors decisions but it happens and it is to their honor they can confess a mistake since the accusation itself can cause a lot of damage.
The Assange-case by now could be seen as example on how radical feminism makes people act crazy anytime the word “rape” is even mentioned. People also overestimate the value of gossip not realizing it is for entertainment purpose, not facts. There is also irony in the subject of Assanges seminar being “The truth is the first victim of war” clearly same is true about media war.
Rumors online tell names of the two women who made the accusations. They are claimed to be Anna.A (social democrats, SKS) and Amelia.A (the pirate party). Both are active in politics and thus objects of public interest. Early on it is revealed Anna.A is a well known radical feminist which partly validates our theory what the case really is about: The Sexual politics of radical feminism.
Anna.A was already known to us as she had earlier tried to ban juvenile lyrics in student-songs at Uppsala University. The claim she was behind the accusation was strengthened by the fact that she just closed her blogs while Google-cache revealed the radical feminist content. One post said “Rape is a part of men power” “It is time to end the male ideal” which proves she in fact is heavy into the radical feminist viewpoint where the dominant opinion is rape is not about sex but about power.
Now our suspicions were confirmed. It was neither a serial rapist nor a conspiracy by the CIA. It was two young women with warped view of men, unrealistic idea of sex-life and last but not least, a feminist prosecutor on-call with unrealistic picture of what rape means according to the law.
By this moment RO President J.Binninge makes JO notification of the on-call prosecutor Kjellstrand for issuing warrant with not enough information. Also former chief lawyer Sven-Erik Alhem also criticize the Prosecutors office in DN: He has two strong points
a) Probable cause is the stronger degree of suspicion, that it was lifted a few hours later without anything new in the case is very confusing.
b) Also, an arrest in the absence is usually not made public. It would give the suspect a chance to escape.
Göran Lysen, Professor of International Law, in DN: ”It smells bad feminism here. Rape cases should be investigated objectively and impersonally as regards the matter as regard to all other crimes.”
A well known Law Blog writes: Assange-story is a scandal. All newspapers went out with the name. All may now crawl to the cross. The story is perhaps the clearest illustration of the hollowness of integrity protection in the media society.
A opposing blog writes:”I have met a sufficient number of victims of rape to say that it is not something a woman simply register or even talk about.”
We commented: Women are not clones, but individuals. Some women are more likely than others to easily report and talk about sex. Some women would never report an obvious rape. Other women could easily notify police of a completely fictional rape and continue to argue that even when they knew they were filmed during voluntary sex. Here is actual absolute proof.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1301755/Mother-alleyway-sex-soldier-cried-rape-hide-shame.html
For this reason it can´t be argued that ”Somebody knows how difficult it is for a woman to notify police ….” No they do not know because they have no experience of the entire female population. They have to learn that there are a number of women (fortunately a minority) that is completely contrary to what people are used to on this issue. The important point here is that claiming one woman makes a false/unfounded accusation doesn’t mean claiming this is something common for women. It is one/a few person/persons doing wrong, not women as a group doing wrong. That the motif for doing it is female doesn’t mean most females with that motif would notify the police. Whether she is that kind of woman is simply bad luck, nothing else!
Amelia.A, on twitter replies on the rumors: No I did not have sex with /that/ man.
An obvious Clinton joke, people in general and the blog Aktivarum specifically no longer think she is involved cause with such a strong personality she would probably have punched the guy and ended the intercourse, not notified the police.
However the rumors about Anna.A is stronger and stronger. It s soon obvious she is most likely the older woman who earlier commented on “hard to take a no” in Aftonbladet. She is correct age, lives at correct place (Södermalm) and the profile of strong feminist opinions fits. She is soon outed on the blog “Gotiska klubben” who actually gives their post an English title to cause international attention. Title is “Anna Ardin, most hated woman in the world?” Because her name is in the title, everyone visiting linked articles or the toplist at wordpress now knows the name.
Aktivarum writes on this: We are not yet certain she is the correct person but here are the reasons Gotiska klubben think she is. (age, place, profile, proximity to assange, closed blogs etc)
The Prosecutors office was engulfed in a media storm. The now famous Video with Rosander on Al-Jazeera is made. The Al-Jazeera reporter asks how the mistake was made. Rosander told them it could not be called mistake because it was normal procedure. Of couse world media did not agree. Even if something is normal (common) that doesn’t mean it is correct or ok.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLy2UOaA0CU
-Surely, the first step is to try and contact the person who is being accused?
I cant give you any details concerning the investigation
-Wouldnt it be logical to try and talk to him?
Uhh… I cant comment on that, unfortunately
-You feel a little embarrased by all of this?
No not at all, thats not in question
-Uhh… Why not?
Because this is normal procedure
-Well, it´s quite normal to accuse somebody of rape and then… two hours later say, no, thats not the case?
Yeah it is quite common that new information gets into a case and that you have to revise uhh… the decisions.
This video makes it obvious Rosander have no idea what she is dealing with. She says lots of weird things, give an overall unprofessional impression and just the body language of the reporter tells a lot of how he feels. Generally Swedish people are embarrassed over this Prosecutors information.
Also by this moment just one of the accusations remain, and that is a lesser crime comparable to stealing a car – and against the other woman, the rape charge is not nothing. Had that been the initial accusation this would not have made media waves all over the world. It is now clear there was a huge error made in the police/justice system.
Aktivarum does a new update: Two English-speaking blogs are also beginning to translate all the information coming from Sweden.
http://nicholasmead.com/2010/08/21/how-to-smear-a-hero/
http://ibnkafkasobiterdicta.wordpress.com/2010/08/22/the-legal-twists-and-turns-of-the-rape-charges-against-julian-assange/
Now the prosecutor s office start with the stonewall tactics. When asked about this they reply they can t comment the investigation in progress. What progress? There is not even a definition of crime. We assume they are being instructed by a PR-person on how to avoid more bad media.
This means they neither confirm a serious accusation, nor drop the case completely (Cause the second the case is dropped people start asking questions) so to avoid questions they keep the absolute lowest rated crime possible, molestation (not sexual) which could be stuff like raunchy phone calls.
Because no information arrives we review what we know. Cultural Marxism means dividing the people of the world in groups with more power and groups with less power. The groups with less power are seemed as special needs groups. Radical feminism means seeing female sexuality as the group with less power and male sexuality as the group with more power, then you use the government to take power from the strong and give to the weak. Basically saying women decide what is ok in sex, men don’t. Anna.A is a confirmed radical feminist. The younger woman is unknown cause she is not active in politics.
Anna.A is also has worked with women s issues at Uppsala University, specially with sexual harassment cases. She is working with encouraging women to report just about anything they don’t like from guys. The more we read about her the more extreme her opinions on the issue seem. On UU a text regarding sexual harassment goes: “With sexual harassment we mean any unwelcome behavior based on gender or/and sexual nature”. Basically she is outlawing for guys to hit on girls at all without the girls more or less wearing a sign telling it s ok. As told earlier, radical feminist ideas about love and sex are in real conflict with how things happen in the real world when guys and girls hook up. They want things in line with a simple theory of what things “should” be like.
At the moment of our next post at Aktivarum, the name of Anna.A (Anna Ardin, press contact for Assange) has been confirmed. She is clearly the older of the two women and the one the molestation charge refers to. Nobody knows however what this molestation is supposed to be about. Wild rumors and speculation is the result because of the prosecution office not explaining their actions. Soon The Guardian with sources in Sweden claims it has to do with having sex without protection.
”Both women reported that they had been involved in consensual sexual relationships with Assange, but each reported a separate non-consensual incident of a similar character in which Assange allegedly had sex with them without using a condom.” The Guardian.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/24/assange-wikileaks-swedish-prosecutors-charges
Clearly if this is true, it should not even be a police matter. There is no rule saying people absolutely have to have sex the way the partner wants it. That’s a matter of individual choice.
Now some words about the rhetorical tactic Guild by association. This means making people look guilty by referring to something that looks similar. The leftwing blog “Sverige är inte världens navel” claims ”I dont know anything about the accusations against Assange. I know that celebrities such as him has raped women before” Another Swedish female feminist blog Isobels Verkstad : “I was not surprised of the accusations against Assange, I don’t know him, but celebrities like him have raped women at earlier instances”
As we can see, structuring language like this is not a coincidence. It’s a technique based on human psychology. Associating A with B makes people assume they would be linked. In fact that’s just a illusion as the claim A is no evidence for claim B. Clearly the more radical feminist blogs assume Assange is guilty, the liberal blogs assume he is innocent (or guilty of just molestation which could be any party trick gone wrong and is not a serious crime)
In our next blogpost we ask if the Swedish justice system is fair towards men in sex crime at all? We again referred to how Littorin, a member of the government made the conclusion he did not have a chance against the accusations in the media and resigned.
Now Former Chief Prosecutor Sven Erik Alhem asks in “Juridiken Idag” if there was a breach of the secrecy regarding the preliminary investigation. When Expressen asked and had all details, the prosecutor s office confirmed and this could according to Alhem be illegal.
Our analysis and discussion on the matter show how the presumption of innocence practically doesn’t exist because media do not want to be seems as accusing the women of lying. Thus they must assume the women do not lie and that means Assange is assumed guilty until proven innocent. The women are assumed innocent until proven guilty of the accusation so in all practicality, the accusation itself is seen as a crime. This is per definition wrong. Accusing without foundation is stupid, and steal the resources police need for real violent forced-sex rapes, but its not a crime.
Basically what the case now really is about is media scrutiny. And media is aimed both on the accused and the accusers. The younger woman s name however is not mentioned cause she is not (as the older Anna Ardin) active in politics.
Because of the details in the Guardian, now speculation goes wild on the nature of the sex itself. We discuss how media shows Assange like a Rock Star and thus groupie-sex would be a natural consequence, since we know this is more or less guaranteed among some women. Even when the man with media light on is a violent criminal, some women are very attracted.
We also discussed how he first had sex with Ardin, and then with a younger woman. It is logical to point out the accusation was not even made until the women talked to eachother. Thus Anna Ardin found out Assange had sex with a younger woman 3 days after her.
”The alleged molestation of Ms A was said to have occurred on the morning of Saturday 14 August. The alleged rape of Ms W was said to have occurred on the morning of Tuesday 17 August.” The Guardian
It is very common women become really angry over their partner having a new younger woman. That is simply a matter about female psyche. A few words based on Evolutionary psychology. Young women are stars with lots of male attention, however that doesn’t last. Younger women eventually replace the older ones for male attention. In fact “midlife crisis” describes a man in the age where you have most money and power and thus more access to supermodels in their 20s than the man had when he was in the 20s.
The point here is simple: When an older woman not accuse the guy until hearing he had sex with a younger woman, we know she was not as angry until she heard he replaced her. The older woman waits 6 days to go to police, the younger woman waits 3 days to go to police. When talking to each other they immediately go to police after “talking” however they did not see it as rape, they say they wanted to know if they could force mr Assange to test himself.
The POLICESTATION makes it a matter of rape. Also I personally suspect the police station are responsible for leaking the information to the Expressen reporter on the same evening. However researching that matter is not allowed for source protection (ironically, the same laws that made Assange choose Sweden in the first place) It doesn’t matter though, very few persons COULD tell Expressen details of the warrant for arrest.
The point here is that molestation while being illegal is not even a serious offense, the real important thing at this moment was what Al-Jazeeras reporter called the “DEFAMATION IMPLICATIONS” it has on everyone there was rape charges in the press. That is a way more serious matter than accusation of molestation. At this point Aktivarum published a post commenting how now we have three different debates in association to the Assange-case.
- Debate on sex
- Debate on justice system
- Debate on press
On the sexdebate some women we speak to claim Assange did not act like a “gentleman” and they also claimed to have heard he did not show proper respect to women in general, and young women specifically. This is claimed on Flashback by women who know Anna.A and the younger woman.
OUR RESPONSE: This was just ridiculous. Had the women not liked the way Assange behaved why would they want to have sex with him? Many women claim women don’t like player-types. This is evidently a wrong. If women did not like players, the players could not even be players in the first place. You have to be liked by women to have sex with women. Casanova himself declared this 100s of years ago.
We say this is image-management. Some girls don’t want it to be known to others what they really like and choose to go for. This is a problem but helping them lie about it don t solve the problem. This should be solved by creating an environment where women feel safe to tell others what they go for in the real world. Neil Strauss book “The Game” gives a detailed picture of the problem. The only real solution is public education and discussion.
On the press debates and justice-system debates however there is a competition about aiming guilt. Some blame the press for publishing. Some blame the prosecutor office for even issuing arrest before having all the proper information needed.
”The alleged molestation of Ms A was said to have occurred on the morning of Saturday 14 August. The alleged rape of Ms W was said to have occurred on the morning of Tuesday 17 August.”
Our final post in this matter is done Thursday 1600. An internet forum is copying an article from Resume telling the details of the entire case. How Expressens reporter jumped into a car and drove very fast 135 km to the Expressen building in Stockholm.
Some people who know Anna Ardin and the younger woman tell details at the internet Forum Flashback. Their claims makes even the older feminist women take Assanges side. One woman say that he promised to call and did not do so. She also pays some things for him and according to a young woman that made her feel used when his phone was off.
“Welcome to Sweden, Mr Assange. You should know that paying for sex is illegal here, and if you don’t pay, you’ll be accused of rape and molestation.”
This humorous comment was made when somebody talked about how the younger woman after paying some things for Mr Assange felt used. Some younger women clearly don’t get this “equality” feminist thing goes both ways. An older feminist got furious and said something like: “I have been an active feminist over 30 years and such claim even makes me wanna twist your ear”.
Basically the older women seem to be true liberal feminists. For them feminism means equal rights. However some of the younger women seemed to be radical feminists. For them feminism means the opinion women have lesser power on collective basis than men and thus the right for special treatment in everything. Its basically entitlement-feminism.
Thus it s proven the liberal feminists takes Mr Assanges side when the argument is he let her pay. The argument is that if a woman had sex and let the guy pay, nobody would say he would feel abused and have reasons to ask police if he had been violated when she did not return calls.
The older feminists not only often are on Assanges side. They get furious when they hear younger women claming to be feminists while having the opinion women should be treated specially for being women. That is against everything feminism normally stands for. Thus it s important to remember normal (liberal) feminism and radical feminism are not in agreement at all.
Claes Borgström himself (who are now at the womens side) appears to be radical feminist. So his opinions on rape are as likely to be ideological opinions as based in the actual law text. Remember Borgström himself is the absolute example of what he attacks, He is a white heterosexual rich male. That his ideology is about attacking heterosexual white males clearly don’t include himself.
There is also another aspect. Blog of Erik Laakso (another white man) says: Now you are in Sweden assange, here we treat women with respect. However earlier (and probably unknown to Mr Assange) in Sweden we had a debate about a muslim refusing to shake hands with a woman for cultural/religious reasons. And in that debate many regarded forcing the Swedish way on the foreigner was in fact racist thing to do.
AFTONBLADET SUNDAY: They write the rape-charge was about a condom being ripped. I just read this and the first thought from me is: If a guy ripping a condom commits rape, then a woman lying about being on the pill is also committing rape. The interpretation is crazy, clearly political. When the law was written there is no chance they intended this use.
Observe the police station in question has special focus on prostitution. Thus people there are more likely to be into the radical feminist theory on the matter of sex for men being about power. The police meets a lot of bad men, misandry could easily appear in such an environment.
http://www.polisen.se/Skane/Om-polisen/lan/St/op/Polisen-i-Stockholms-lan/Sambandet/Sambandet/Artiklar-2009/Torskstopp-pa-Malmskillnadsgatan/
Finally: Important to remember is that the driving force behind these accusations of rape was the police at Klara närpolisstation in central Stockholm, not the two women involved. Borgström asked in Aftonbladet replies: They are not law-trained.
Basically the radical feminist agenda is declaring women raped when they don’t even see themselves as raped. This is nothing new. I include this link for information how ideologically motivated feminists did the same thing in USA, declaring girls raped of their boyfriends against their will. It’s a career move for the feminists cause politicians seldom can see through the bogus claims. Also it’s a chivalry thing. Men are groomed to protect women from harm.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/feb/24/opinion/op-mac_donald24/4
The Key to this case is to remember three things:
1) The media coverage caused by a leak in police or at the prosecution office itself caused more harm than any sentence on molestation could do. Staffan Dopping commented this and told that regardless of guilt or innocence in court, media already had its toll on the person behind the media coverage
2) While police called the prosecutor 1700, the younger woman (who was the only one regarded as rape-victim) was questioned until 1840, according to the radio program “Medierna” the female police questioning the younger woman did not have contact with the prosecutor office
3) The decision from prosecutor Eva Finné to drop the rape-charge completely was based on transcripts from the questioning of the younger woman. Rosanders claim in Al-Jazeera that Finné hade more information would then completely rest on what the female police was told by the younger woman 1700-1840. That means 1.40 hours was all between an international media frenzy and a unknown rape-charge in the statistics being dismissed cause of lack of ground for claiming rape.
With Regards, Erik founder of the blog Aktivarum
The text ends here.
A final comment: The most effective weapon political correctness has is economic oppression. Basically putting pressure on companies and institutions not hiring people that say things going against the politically correct consensus. Democratic debate however requires several opinions.
When journalists themselves cant write the truth cause media owners threaten they will lose their jobs if they do that is a large problem for anyone who wants real analyses.
Also, without being allowed to do mistakes, people cant really do exceptionally good things. If a soccer player will be kicked of the team for missing one penalty shot. The best way to remain on the team would be not taking any penalty shots.
There are two ways dealing with this situation.
1) Living a double life not using your real name online when reporting on these issues. Then however you cant meet people in real life and discuss the issues.
2) Donations giving you the freedom to be yourself and provide alternatives to the politically correct consensus – or ”master narrative” as it was called by Wikileaks.
If you appreciate our work with the Assange case (or Aktivarum in general) and think alternative opinions as well as this kind of policially incorrect analyses are valuable. Any donation or other suggestions of help would be greatly appreciated and help us get the time needed for better analyses.
This is a longshot but we figured why not? We help people for free anyway we can, I am sure more people are like us. For some people in the world, a small sum is what for us would be a huge difference. Being able for example to buy a laptop in reserve if this computer breaks would be greatly helpful.
Otherwise any work-suggestions would also be ok. Just no ”get rich quick-schemes” we are not looking to get rich. We are looking for ways getting more time for Aktivarum, paying off a smaller debt and better working tools.
For the international visitors.
Name: Aktivarum
Bank: Nordea
IBAN-number: SE4130000000038395113900
Message: Anything telling who to say thanks
If you are uncertain regarding what these money would be used for or have any other questions regarding my knowledge of the Assange case from the swedish perspective I will be happy to answer any questions by mail aktivarum@gmail.com
Well, this has been two crazy weeks. Concerning the Assange-gate the world seemed to ask the question: What the heck happened?
We earlier tried to give Sweden the answer. This is our attempt to answer the huge majority of the world who neither speak swedish or have an updated view on the internal politics in Sweden.
/Erik
(p)Link
Commenti
Storico
Stampa
Feed RSS 0.91
Feed Atom 0.3
