Source: guardian.co.uk ; Author: Tom Kington

Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi says young women should follow the money when looking for a partner, noting that women seem to like him and "I'm loaded."

Berlusconi, who was embroiled in a sex scandal last year and is known for his gaffes, also raised eyebrows with a joke about Hitler's followers urging him to return to power.

The billionaire businessman appeared at a convention Sunday of the youth wing of his People of Freedom party. When questioned by one of his Cabinet ministers -- a woman -- he joked about marriages of convenience, saying women were lining up for him because "I'm a nice guy" and "I'm loaded."

He also recalled a much-criticized TV interview he once gave, when "I said to a girl to look for a wealthy boyfriend. This suggestion is not unrealistic."

He also claimed women favor older men, thinking that "he's old. He dies and I inherit."

The 73-year-old Berlusconi was engulfed in a sex scandal last year centering on his purported dalliances with young women, including an escort. Berlusconi's wife Veronica Lario said last year she was seeking a divorce. They are now separated.

The media baron has said he is "no saint" but denied ever paying for sex.

In Italy, a divorce can only be sought after three years of separation. Media reports this summer suggested that Berlusconi's wife has rejected his early proposals for a financial settlement.

Berlusconi often gets criticized for his earthy sense of humor, and this time an opposition political demanded he apologize to Italy's Jewish community for his Hitler joke.

Before telling it, he said "I already know I am going to be criticized."

Berlusconi, who claims prosecutors have led corruption investigations against him because they are left-wing, also appeared to be poking fun at himself when commenting on the loss of his AC Milan soccer team on Saturday. He contended the referee robbed the team of three goals and that Milan often gets "leftist referees."

Source: mail.com ; Author: VICTOR L. SIMPSON

The US is marking nine years since 9/11 amid controversy over plans for an Islamic centre near Ground Zero and a threat to burn the Koran.

The biggest event is in New York, where relatives are reading out the names of those who died when planes hit the twin towers of the World Trade Center.

President Barack Obama has urged respect for other religious faiths.

US Vice President Joe Biden and New York mayor Michael Bloomberg paid their respects.

Meanwhile, the pastor behind the threat to burn Korans in Florida has said the event has been cancelled permanently.

"We will definitely not burn the Koran, no," the Reverend Terry Jones told NBC's Today show.

"Not today, not ever," he said when pressed about whether his planned demonstration might happen at a later date.

Speaking at a memorial event at the Pentagon - which was also hit by an airliner on 11 September 2001 - President Obama paid tribute to those who died in the attacks, saying America's greatest weapon was to stay true to itself.

America would never be at war with Islam, Mr Obama declared.

"We will not sacrifice the liberties we cherish or hunker down behind walls of suspicion and mistrust," he said.

Rallies

US Vice-President Joe Biden and his wife were among the dignitaries who attended the commemoration in New York, where the names of all the victims are being read out.

For the first time, relatives reading out the names have been joined by people working to build the Ground Zero memorial.

"No other public tragedy has cut our city so deeply, no other place is as filled with our compassion, our love and our solidarity," said New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

"It is with the strength of these emotions, as well as the concrete, glass and steel that is brought in day by day that we will build on the footprints of the past, the foundation of the future."

Bells tolled across the city to mark the moment at 0846 (1346 GMT) when the first hijacked plane struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center nine years ago.

This year's anniversary is likely to be the most contentious and fraught yet, says the BBC's Laura Trevelyan.

Once the city's official commemorations are over, rallies will be held both for and against the proposed Islamic community centre and mosque near Ground Zero.

Both sides want to use the emotion of the day to highlight their causes, our correspondent says.

Four airliners were hijacked during the attacks in 2001, which claimed the lives of 2,975 people, as well as the 19 hijackers.

Planes were crashed into each of the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon near Washington, while the fourth crashed into a field in Pennsylvania after passengers fought back against hijackers.

President Obama's wife Michelle, the First Lady, will be present at the event in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, along with former First Lady Laura Bush.

Sensitivity issue

Some relatives of the 9/11 victims oppose the Muslim centre in New York because they say it disrespectful to have a reminder of Islam by the place where so many died.

However, other families support the project as an expression of America's commitment to freedom of religion.

Stephanie Parker, daughter of 9/11 victim Philip L Parker, attended a vigil in support of the Islamic centre near the site on Friday.

She said she had come to the vigil, which gathered about 2,000 people, because she was troubled by what she saw as people wrongly equating all of Islam with the hijackers.

"I think the anniversary is being overshadowed," she told the Associated Press news agency.

Sally Regenhard, who lost her firefighter son Christian Regenhard on 9/11, planned to attend both the ceremony in New York and the anti-mosque protest.

"The purpose is to speak out and express our feelings that this mosque, the location of it, is a grievous offence to the sensitivity of 9/11 families," she said.

The anti-mosque rally is expected to hear taped messages from Bush-era diplomat John Bolton and conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart.

Dutch anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders, who advocates banning the Koran, plans to address the rally in person, as do a handful of Republican congressional candidates.

Pressure on pastor

Saturday saw new protests in mainly Muslim countries over the Koran-burning proposal, with rallies reported in Somalia and Afghanistan.

Pastor Terry Jones had said he hoped to meet a leading imam to discuss the proposal for the Islamic centre, to be located a short distance from Ground Zero, the WTC site.

He said he had suspended the book-burning only because he had received a guarantee, from an imam in Florida, that the centre would be moved.

Police escorted Mr Jones after his arrival in New York's Laguardia airport.

But the planners of the Islamic centre have said they did not speak to the Florida imam, and would not be moving their project.

Mr Abdul Rauf said on Friday that he was "prepared to consider meeting with anyone who is seriously committed to pursuing peace" but added that he had no current plans to meet Mr Jones.

Mr Jones is the pastor of the tiny and previously little-known Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, and author of a book entitled Islam is of the Devil.

He had planned to stage an International Burn a Koran Day on Saturday, saying the book was "evil".

But pressure was put on the pastor to cancel the burning. The FBI visited Mr Jones to urge him to reconsider his plans and he was telephoned by US Defence Secretary Robert Gates.

In his remarks on Friday, Mr Obama denied that his administration's intervention in the affair had elevated it to greater prominence.

He appealed to Americans to respect the "inalienable" right of religious freedom and said he hoped the preacher would abandon his plan to burn the Koran, as it could add to the dangers facing US soldiers serving abroad.

"This is a way of endangering our troops, our sons and daughters... you don't play games with that," he told reporters.

Source: British Broadcasting Corporation

Lady Greenfield, former head of the Royal Institution and current professor of synaptic pharmacology at Lincoln College, Oxford, criticised the "smugness" of scientists who claim to “have all the answers”.

She made the comments in a BBC Radio 4 Today programme discussion about Professor Hawking’s views.

Last week he angered many religious believers by saying science “can explain the universe without the need for a creator”.

In his latest book, The Grand Design, he said: “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.”

He also atttacked philosophers for failing to keep up with modern developments in physics and biology so that “their discussions seem increasingly outdated and irrelevant”.

Lady Greenfield said: “Science can often suffer from a certain smugness and complacency. Michael Faraday, one of the greatest scientists, had a wonderful quote, he said: ‘There’s nothing quite as frightening as someone who knows they are right’
“What we need to preserve in science is a curiosity and an open-mindedness rather than a complacency and a sort of arrogance where we attack people who come at the big truths and the big questions albeit using different strategies.”

Asked whether she was uncomfortable about scientists making comments about God, she said: “Yes I am. Of course they can make whatever comments they like but when they assume, rather in a Taliban-like way, that they have all the answers then I do feel uncomfortable. I think that doesn’t necessarily do science a service.”

She was also critical of Prof Hawking's comments about philosophy, saying: “Scientists have a duty, if they want to have people who aren’t scientists to appreciate that value of what they are doing, if they want to place it into a wider social and moral context, the duty is on the scientist to explain in words ordinary human being can understand. What is dangerous…is to make sweeping assertions about a whole category of academia.”

She later claimed her Taliban remarks were "not intended to be personal", saying she "admired Stephen Hawking greatly" and "had no wish to compare him in particular to the Taliban".

However, she added that his statement that God was not needed was "surprising".

She said: "All science is provisional and therefore to claim to have the definitive answer to anything is a hardline view. It would be very great shame if young people think that to be a scientist you must be an atheist. There are plenty of scientists, such as genome researcher Francis Collins, who also have Christian faith."

Her remarks are likely to be interpreted as a criticism of Professor Richard Dawkins, the prominent atheist and bestselling author of The God Delusion who helped to pay for buses emblazoned with adverts declaring "there's probably no God".

Lady Greenfield, a distinguished neuroscientist who was appointed director of the Royal Institution in 1998, has launched legal proceedings against it claiming she was the victim of sexual discrimination and unfairly dismissed in January.

Rebel members at the organisation failed in their bid to oust its ruling body and reinstate her as the head of the organisation.

Professor Dawkins opposed the moves to reinstate Lady Greenfield, saying: Somebody who is threatening to sue the institution is not someone I would want to be the director.”

Source: Telegraph.co.uk; Author: Alastair Jamieson

Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, explains why he decided to publish thousands of secret US military files on the war in Afghanistan.

But who is Julian Assange?

Wikileaks Director & Founder.

Co-invented "Rubberhose deniable encryption" in 1997 intended to be "as a tool for human rights workers who needed to protect sensitive data in the field".

Attended 37 schools and 6 universities in Australia during his early life.

Researcher of the book Underground: Tales of Hacking, Madness and Obsession on the Electronic Frontier.

Lived in Melbourne as a programmer and a developer of freeware.

Described himself as "president of an NGO and Australia's most infamous former computer hacker" in 2006.

Unpaid volunteer as of January 2010; being able to self-finance his work because of money he made earlier with internet-related activities.

Winner of the 2009 Amnesty International Media Award (New Media), awarded for exposing extra-judicial assassinations; the 2008 Economist Index on censorship Award; and various other media awards.

Source: youtube.com

(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.

1. Debate on sex
2. Debate on justice system
3. 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

Source: aktivarum.wordpress.com

Author, journalist and public intellectual Christopher Hitchens announced Wednesday (30 of June 2010) that he will undergo treatment for cancer of the esophagus, thereby cutting short his current book tour.

Hitchens made the announcement via a statement posted on Vanity Fair’s website, a publication for which he regularly contributes.

“I have been advised by my physician that I must undergo a course of chemotherapy on my esophagus. This advice seems persuasive to me. I regret having had to cancel so many engagements at such short notice,” Hitchens said.

The English-born Hitchens, 61, was in the middle of a book tour to promote his newly released memoir “Hitch 22.”

Hitchens, a noted enfant terrible in the literary world, is a well-known public figure who appears regularly on TV and has had his work published in a myriad of magazines including The New Statesman, The Atlantic, Vanity Fair, Slate & The Nation. He also published several books including his recent atheist tome "God is Not Great."

He is well-known for his prolific consumption of alcohol and cigarettes. It was reported that the chain-smoking Hitchens gave up smoking cigarettes in 2008, though a profile piece in the Washington Post earlier this month showed that he was still indulging in the habit. In 2003 he famously quipped that his daily intake of alcohol was enough "to kill or stun the average mule."

Hitchens, once a darling of the left, famously underwent an ideological shift in recent years, especially after 9/11, that saw him support the Iraq war and lose the support of many of his former admirers.

Hitchens became an American citizen in 2007. He currently lives in Washington, D.C., with his wife Carol.

Source: foxnews.com

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been questioned by Swedish police over allegations of molestation, his lawyer said today.

Leif Silbersky said police questioned Assange in Stockholm for about an hour last night and formally told him of the allegations against him.

Silbersky said his client denied the accusations and hoped the prosecutor would drop the case.

Police started investigating Assange this month after two Swedish women accused him of rape and molestation, but the prosecutor later closed the rape investigation.

Molestation is not a sex crime under Swedish law, but covers offences such as reckless conduct or inappropriate physical contact. It can result in fines or up to a year in prison.

Assange has suggested that the accusations are linked to Wikileaks's release of secret US military documents on the war in Afghanistan, which were published in collaboration with the Guardian and two other newspapers.

He wrote on Twitter: "The charges are without basis and their issue at this moment is deeply disturbing." He said the website had been "warned to expect 'dirty tricks'. Now we have the first one."

US authorities criticised the leak, saying it could put the lives of Nato troops and Afghan informants at risk.

Assange has said that Wikileaks intends to release a further 15,000 documents – a pledge condemned by the Pentagon, which has demanded the deletion of the files from the website.

Source: guardian.co.uk - Associated Press in Stockholm.

Seven hundred Roma have been detained in France as police dismantle their campsites—part of President Nicolas Sarkozy's crackdown on illegal immigration. On Thursday, some 100 were flown to Romania for repatriation with 300 Euros per adult and 100 Euros per child to ease the transition. The Roma, also known as Gypsies (though this is a pejorative term), are associated with a peripatetic lifestyle. Why do the Roma wander?

Persecution, initially. The Roma originated in India but left the subcontinent in the 11th century, perhaps following Muslim invasions. From there, they crossed into the Byzantine Empire, and then up to southeastern Europe by about 1300. Generally speaking, xenophobia made it difficult for them to stop in any one place for very long, let alone establish permanent settlements. (Since it's thought that the Roma adhered to strict purity codes, they may also have been reluctant to mix with outsiders, making assimilation unwanted on both sides.) When the Roma arrived in Western Europe in the 15th century, local populations worried they were part of an Ottoman invasion (because of their dark skin color) and the German Reichstag of Freiberg declared them outlaws. Barred from purchasing land or joining guilds, the Roma had no choice but to move about.

Wandering became a way of life, and the Roma fit into the European economy by selling merchandise in rural areas distant from shops. Angus Fraser writes in The Gypsies that "they appeared as purveyors of gossip and news, sellers of cheap wares (often made by themselves) repairers of household goods, seasonal laborers (e.g. for haymaking, pea and fruit picking, hopping); or they could function as itinerant entertainers." With improved communication networks, the Roma continued to do seasonal work that required movement, replacing traditional caravans with trailers and campers. Some Roma now value the freedom of an itinerant lifestyle and consider it part of their culture.

Contrary to stereotype, however, wandering is no longer the default for the Roma. The communist regimes in Bulgaria and other eastern European countries forced the Roma to settle down, pushing them into segregated ghettos. Most Roma today are actually sedentary rather than peripatetic. There are no hard numbers Europe-wide, but it's thought that the vast majority live in apartments and houses. Many of the Roma who do move from country to country are merely participating in the economically motivated and widespread migration out of Eastern Europe.

Source: Slate.com