The rush to smear Assange's rape accuser.

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The rush to smear Assange's rape accuser.

Postby vanlose kid » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:29 pm

by sgt_doom
on Tue, 12/14/2010 - 14:41
#805674

THE PEOPLE’S BRIEF ON JULIAN ASSANGE AND THE SWEDISH SECURITY STATE



Now, everyone is claiming Assange broke the law, yet it was only a short time ago those rather flimsy charges were brought against him, so allow us to review each and every actual law which was broken in Sweden, Switzerland and Europe leading up to this day.

First, in direct violation of Sweden's secrecy laws, prosecutor Maria Kjellstrand confirmed details of the case to rightwing tabloids when they called her. (Maria Kjellstrand's husband works in the office of the Justice Minister, Beatrice Ask, by the way.)

Next, we see that Chief Prosecutor Eva Finnes, who was brought in to oversee the other prosecutors, threw out the case on a number of grounds: the two women had gotten together to compare notes (corruption of "evidence") and get their stories lined up, prior to going to the police to seek "advice" -- ostensibly such advice-seeking was supposed to grant them immunity from the possibility of being charged with falsely reporting a crime -- yet on close examination of Swedish legal codes they can still be charged with this; also, the two women were witnessed as being friendly with Assange after their supposed "molestations."

(At this point one might be forgiven for assuming this was some type of social mix-up, which various governments quickly took advantage of -- excepting, the first and older accuser, Anna Ardin, was the volunteer who made the various arrangements for Assange's visit to Sweden, which he left for after coming under surveillance in Iceland where, given the low-lying urban architecture, it is very difficult to carry out even a moderately successful surveillance and her prior connections to rightwing anti-Castro groups as well as having worked for one of the Bonnier family's publications -- the Bonnier family being owner of record of the first rightwing tabloid to break the "leaked" story. [Some Swedes claim that this tabloid, Expressen, isn't rightwing; simply anti-leftwing.]

Typically in these situations, where someone from a shoestring-budgeted volunteer operation relies upon another foreign volunteer -- that is the typical SOP or modus operandi of the intel subversion operation (check with any environmental or activist group and you'll find they've experienced this situation in one form or another).)

Then, after much pressure from the Justice Minister, Beatrice Ask, the case is reopened.

Once again, person or persons unknown from the Swedish Prosecution Authority leak details of Assange's file and case to the tabloids -- in violation of Swedish secrecy laws which are supposed to protect the accused prior to trial.

Next, we find Assange and his attorneys repeatedly approaching the Swedish Prosecution Authority to notify them of their availability to be questioned, yet each and every attempt is rebuffed over a forty-one day period! Finally, Assange asks for and is granted permission to leave Sweden --- a most unusual action, given the supposed weighty circumstances of his "crime" --- of course we find out later that the reason for that lengthy wait and allowance to leave Sweden is because no magistrate wishes to take this farce of a flimsy case.

Once in the United Kingdom, again Assange and his attorneys contact the Swedish Prosecution Authority about setting up a video call -- something which the Swedish Prosecution Authority HAS done in the past -- but are again rebuffed.

At this point, one of the accusers, Anna Ardin (the other being Sofia Wilen) leaves or flees to Israel or Gaza, ostensibly to do some charitable work, but curious given the nature of her status as a witness and one of the accusers. (If they seem so suddenly obsessed with returning Assange to face his accusers, it might make some sense, legally speaking, to have his accusers actually at hand!!!)

While the warrant is being sought from Interpol, the Swedish Ministry of Justice rushes into being a law titled: "Sex by surprise" with which they hope to prosecute Assange.

Now while all this is taking place, it is interesting to note that an accused murderer in Stockholm is allowed out on bail, and some suspicious circumstances will shortly take place surrounding a suicide bomber.

But prior to discussing that it should be pointed out that the law firm representing the accused is a high-priced one staffed by two partners, one Claes Borgstrom and his sidekick, the former Minister of Justice (only recently having resigned from that position), Thomas Bodstrom. Also of interest, a former advisor and co-cabinet member of Bodstrom's is Par Nuder, recently appointed a director at Madeleine Albright's Albright Stonebridge Group, which was formed from the merger of the Stonebridge Group (whence came an Obama appointee and campaign manager, Roger Altman, formerly of Evercore Partners and Peter G. Peterson's private equity leveraged buyout giant, the Blackstone Group) and Rahm Emanuel's assistant chief of staff, Mona Sutphen.

It should also be noted that the Stonebridge Group had a strategic partnership with the neocon lobbyist firm, the Civitas Group (made up of those delightful people in their Brooks Brothers suits who invaded and disrupted that famous vote recount down in Florida in the 2000 presidential election!).

Interesting background on Bodstrom, a member of Claes Borgstrom’s law firm representing the two accusers of Wikileaks' Assange, and Bodstrom’s buddy Par Nuder.

From a blog article concerning another AP article rather reminiscent of America's warrantless wiretapping events:


Thursday, June 19, 2008ASSOCIATED PRESS STORY GETS FRA ACT ALL WRONG
The FRA Act is getting some attention in an Associated Press story. Since the AP will define how this piece of legislation is presented in the American media it is important to correct the mistakes and omissions in the story.

STOCKHOLM, Sweden - Sweden's Parliament narrowly approved a contentious law Wednesday that gives authorities sweeping powers to eavesdrop on all e-mail and telephone traffic that crosses the Nordic nation's borders. The right-leaning government's slim majority helped secure 143-138 approval, despite strong opposition from left-leaning parties led by Social Democrats.

What the story leaves out is that the law was originally conceived by the socialist prime minister Goran Persson back in 1995 after he had given an infamous speech, saying that "we shall all speak well of our country" and "I will personally stigmatize anyone who criticizes our country abroad". A pretty stark statement coming from a Western European prime minister. It is, unfortunately, indicative of what kind of politician Mr. Persson was. And he held on to his belief that it was somehow within his jurisdiction - his right, in fact - as a prime minister to spy on his citizens. So in 2004 his closest henchman, Par Nuder, and minister of justice, Thomas Bodstrom, finally wrote a law that allowed the government to use computer technology for unlimited surveillance of the population. (By that time computer technology had advanced to a level where they felt comfortable implementing a system of this type.) The center-right government has taken the idea and run with it, not realizing that they are carrying the water for the socialists who now will win the 2010 election based on their no to this law - a law that they will then keep in place and use against the very politicians who made it the law of the land.

http://expatswedereport.blogspot.com/20 ... w-all.html


Now if all that isn't strange enough, we have PayPal, in direct violation of national, international and cash transfer laws (not to mention something called the WTO Financial Services Agreement, I believe), freezing, or effectively stealing, Wikileaks money, although absolutely NO court orders, nor any legal documentation, had bee issued to do such.

The PayPal CEO will later claim it was due to pressure from the US State Department --- something supposed to be illegal in the USA, according to the last time I checked. Now some might say that Wikileaks had violated PayPal's policy, but when that took place no charge had yet been made against Assange, nor has one so far gone through any legal system convicting Assange of anything, nor does PayPay have any history of doing anything remotely similar against any and all money launderers, criminal activities, etc., utilizing their services.

Around the same timeframe, a Swiss bank also freezes, or effectively steals, the Wikileaks' account -- claiming that the street address given their PostFinance bank (within the Swiss post office, and normally used by travellers, immigrants, etc.) was a phoney address, but it was indeed Assange's residential address he was then staying at -- a normally accepted procedure -- and an obvious subterfuge by the Swiss bankster. This is in direct violation of Swiss banking laws, and Euro Union laws, which is why an Icelandic company is in the process of suing them, if the latest news stories I've read are correct.

So we have PayPal, and the Swiss bank, freezing over 100,000 Euros of Wikileaks operating monies.

Of course, there are others who also make life as difficult as possible, even though no charges have been actually leveled, nor any conviction obtained, of course: Tableau Software, of Seattle, WA, USA, who pulls their software license, making the efficient storing of the cables' content more difficult and time-consuming; Amazon (also headquartered in Seattle, WA) pulls their servers from Wikileaks' use, and several other private firms follow suit.

While the aforesaid is occurring, the several Wikileaks' sites are being hammered with denial-of-service attacks by criminals who appear to be tracked back to the US government, curiously enough -- again in violation of existing national and international law, as no charges, nor legal documentation has been filed in this matter.

So, we have a lengthy string of lawbreaking, crimes and criminal activities all directed illegally and unlawfully at Julian Assange and the international Wikileaks' operation, yet when online protesters around the world strike back, THEY are labelled criminal.

Curiously, as almost similar as the surveillance law passed involving Bodstrom and Nuder, is a suicide bomber attack, horrendous yet conveniently knocking much public discussion of Wikileaks off the news; but there are some interesting circumstances surrounding it:


http://www.thelocal.se/30794/20101212/


Military staffer knew about attacks: report

"A Swedish Armed Forces (Försvarsmakten) employee warned an acquaintance to stay clear of an area in central Stockholm on Saturday where, several hours later, two explosions went off in what is being called a terrorist attack."

.......

(To review the connections: prosecutor Maria Kjellstrand’s husband works for Justice Minister, Beatrice Ask, who replaced Thomas Bodstrom in that position, and Bodstrom went to work with Claes Borgstrom at his law firm which quickly volunteered to represent accusers Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen against Assange, and Borgstrom is a friend of the prosecutor-in-charge, Marianne Ny, and Par Nuder is a close confident of Thomas Bodstrom.)

Strange, it is almost like living in an alternate universe where Sweden almost mirrors America?????

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest- ... ent-805674


*


boom!

*
"Teach them to think. Work against the government." – Wittgenstein.
User avatar
vanlose kid
 
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The rush to smear Assange's rape accuser.

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:58 pm

seemslikeadream posted this and said: move, combine, if ya want

This is probably the thread...

10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange
Unseen police documents provide the first complete account of the allegations against the WikiLeaks founder

Nick Davies
guardian.co.uk, Friday 17 December 2010 21.30 GMT

Documents seen by the Guardian reveal for the first time the full details of the allegations of rape and sexual assault that have led to extradition hearings against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.

The case against Assange, which has been the subject of intense speculation and dispute in mainstream media and on the internet, is laid out in police material held in Stockholm to which the Guardian received unauthorised access.

Assange, who was released on bail on Thursday, denies the Swedish allegations and has not formally been charged with any offence. The two Swedish women behind the charges have been accused by his supporters of making malicious complaints or being "honeytraps" in a wider conspiracy to discredit him.

Assange's UK lawyer, Mark Stephens, attributed the allegations to "dark forces", saying: "The honeytrap has been sprung ... After what we've seen so far you can reasonably conclude this is part of a greater plan." The journalist John Pilger dismissed the case as a "political stunt" and in an interview with ABC news, Assange said Swedish prosecutors were withholding evidence which suggested he had been "set up."

However, unredacted statements held by prosecutors in Stockholm, along with interviews with some of the central characters, shed fresh light on the hotly disputed sequence of events that has become the centre of a global storm.

Stephens has repeatedly complained that Assange has not been allowed to see the full allegations against him, but it is understood his Swedish defence team have copies of all the documents seen by the Guardian.

The allegations centre on a 10-day period after Assange flew into Stockholm on Wednesday 11 August. One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.

Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.

According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.

When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.

On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A. A second woman, Miss W, had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. Both women joined Assange, the co-ordinator of the Swedish WikiLeaks group, whom we will call "Harold", and a few others for lunch.

Assange left the lunch with Miss W. She told the police she and Assange had visited the place where she worked and had then gone to a cinema where they had moved to the back row. He had kissed her and put his hands inside her clothing, she said.

That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."

Assange's supporters have pointed out that, despite her complaints against him, Miss A held a party for him on that evening and continued to allow him to stay in her flat.

On Sunday 15 August, Monica told police, Miss A told her that she thought Assange had torn the condom on purpose. According to Monica, Miss A said Assange was still staying in her flat but they were not having sex because he had "exceeded the limits of what she felt she could accept" and she did not feel safe.

The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom".

Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."

The police record of the interview with Assange in Stockhom deals only with the complaint made by Miss A. However, Assange and his lawyers have repeatedly stressed that he denies any kind of wrongdoing in relation to Miss W.

In submissions to the Swedish courts, they have argued that Miss W took the initiative in contacting Assange, that on her own account she willingly engaged in sexual activity in a cinema and voluntarily took him to her flat where, she agrees, they had consensual sex. They say that she never indicated to Assange that she did not want to have sex with him. They also say that in a text message to a friend, she never suggested she had been raped and claimed only to have been "half asleep".

Police spoke to Miss W's former boyfriend, who told them that in two and a half years they had never had sex without a condom because it was "unthinkable" for her. Miss W told police she went to a chemist to buy a morning-after pill and also went to hospital to be tested for STDs. Police statements record her contacting Assange to ask him to get a test and his refusing on the grounds that he did not have the time.

On Wednesday 18 August, according to police records, Miss A told Harold and a friend that Assange would not leave her flat and was sleeping in her bed, although she was not having sex with him and he spent most of the night sitting with his computer. Harold told police he had asked Assange why he was refusing to leave the flat and that Assange had said he was very surprised, because Miss A had not asked him to leave. Miss A says she spent Wednesday night on a mattress and then moved to a friend's flat so she did not have to be near him. She told police that Assange had continued to make sexual advances to her every day after they slept together and on Wednesday 18 August had approached her, naked from the waist down, and rubbed himself against her.

The following day, Harold told police, Miss A called him and for the first time gave him a full account of her complaints about Assange. Harold told police he regarded her as "very, very credible" and he confronted Assange, who said he was completely shocked by the claims and denied all of them. By Friday 20 August, Miss W had texted Miss A looking for help in finding Assange. The two women met and compared stories.

Harold has independently told the Guardian Miss A made a series of calls to him asking him to persuade Assange to take an STD test to reassure Miss W, and that Assange refused. Miss A then warned if Assange did not take a test, Miss W would go to the police. Assange had rejected this as blackmail, Harold told police.

Assange told police that Miss A spoke to him directly and complained to him that he had torn their condom, something that he regarded as false.

Late that Friday afternoon, Harold told police, Assange agreed to take a test, but the clinics had closed for the weekend. Miss A phoned Harold to say that she and Miss W had been to the police, who had told them that they couldn't simply tell Assange to take a test, that their statements must be passed to the prosecutor. That night, the story leaked to the Swedish newspaper Expressen.

By Saturday morning, 21 August, journalists were asking Assange for a reaction. At 9.15am, he tweeted: "We were warned to expect 'dirty tricks'. Now we have the first one." The following day, he tweeted: "Reminder: US intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks as far back as 2008."

The Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet asked if he had had sex with his two accusers. He replied: "Their identities have been made anonymous so even I have no idea who they are."

He added: "We have been warned that the Pentagon, for example, is thinking of deploying dirty tricks to ruin us."

Assange's Swedish lawyers have since suggested that Miss W's text messages – which the Guardian has not seen – show that she was thinking of contacting Expressen and that one of her friends told her she should get money for her story. However, police statements by the friend offer a more innocent explanation: they say these text messages were exchanged several days after the women had made their complaint. They followed an inquiry from a foreign newspaper and were meant jokingly, the friend stated to police.

The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.

The co-ordinator of the WikiLeaks group in Stockholm, who is a close colleague of Assange and who also knows both women, told the Guardian: "This is a normal police investigation. Let the police find out what actually happened. Of course, the enemies of WikiLeaks may try to use this, but it begins with the two women and Julian. It is not the CIA sending a woman in a short skirt."

Assange's lawyers were asked to respond on his behalf to the allegations in the documents seen by the Guardian on Wednesday evening. Tonight they said they were still unable obtain a response from Assange.

Assange's solicitor, Mark Stephens, said: "The allegations of the complainants are not credible and were dismissed by the senior Stockholm prosecutor as not worthy of further investigation." He said Miss A had sent two Twitter messages that appeared to undermine her account in the police statement.

Assange's defence team had so far been provided by prosecutors with only incomplete evidence, he said. "There are many more text and SMS messages from and to the complainants which have been shown by the assistant prosecutor to the Swedish defence lawyer, Bjorn Hurtig, which suggest motivations of malice and money in going to the police and to Espressen and raise the issue of political motivation behind the presentation of these complaints. He [Hurtig] has been precluded from making notes or copying them.

"We understand that both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange. They do not complain of any physical injury. The first complainant did not make a complaint for six days (in which she hosted the respondent in her flat [actually her bed] and spoke in the warmest terms about him to her friends) until she discovered he had spent the night with the other complainant.

"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.

"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The rush to smear Assange's rape accuser.

Postby JackRiddler » Sat Dec 18, 2010 1:40 am

I think Naomi Wolf has put it best. There's nothing believable in the prosecutorial abuse of Assange (and ultimately of the two women) as an opportunity to test out a new doctrine of protection for women that has not been applied in any other comparable case. The charges could be exactly as the prosecutors paint them, but there would never be Interpol and nine days detention in solitary without bail and taking it straight to the press already on the first day of the charge, etc. etc., for anyone who was not pre-defined as an enemy of the state for reasons entirely unrelated to the charges.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)
Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 165 guests