PoliceLeaks
By Israel Shamir
The British magistrate
court has decided to surrender Julian Assange to the Nordic Amazons who were
hunting for his head – pending appeal. Thus the long Saga of the Broken
Condom, or whatever name by which it will become known to posterity, took a
definite turn for the worse. The judge decided to honor the European Arrest
Warrant issued by man-eating Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny. Julian has
appealed to the High Court, ensuring that the saga will go on as a side divertissement
to the main story, Cablegate.
We shall not delve again
into what happened between Julian and the two women; this has already been covered in previous installments. Today we turn to the dramatic events
that occurred immediately afterwards. We live in an age of leaks, and this
story is no exception. The Swedish police papers pertaining to Assange
case have surfaced on the web – and there are some shocking revelations. One
revelation concerns the investigative editor of The Guardian, David
Leigh and his accomplice Nick Davies. They were given the leaked police papers
well before they were made public, and Davies constructed a story that revealed his special
“unauthorised access”. Now the original documents (in Swedish) have been
published on the site flashback.org, and the English version is now available
on Rixstep.com with this touching foreword from the translator:
“The truth will out, the
truth wins out. Let no journalist ever again speculate into what the protocols
say. Six months of digging and the people at Flashback have the actual
documents. The sleaze printed by rags such as the Daily Mail, Sweden's Aftonbladet
and Expressen, and perhaps above all the toxic Nick Davies of The
Guardian, can stand no more. Yet more: these documents are an indictment of
the 'news organisations' who've printed deliberate inaccuracies all along or
even worse: refused to print anything at all. Nick Davies' account of the
protocols was maliciously skewed; both Aftonbladet and Expressen
had copies early on and printed nothing. Bloggers had copies but arrogantly
kept the information to their Smeagol selves.”
Once again we can compare
the raw data with the official story, and once again we can confirm that Leigh
and his partners are brazen, busy little cooks. They cooked the Embassy Cables,
as we reported in Counterpunch,
and now we can see exactly how they cooked the Assange police papers too. Leigh
and his supporters have loudly proclaimed that his deletions and redactions
were due to British libel laws. In this story, he proves how empty was his
rhetoric. Every damaging accusation against Assange was given a place of
prominence; the true and disturbing picture has remained buried until now.
Our story begins on Friday,
August 20, 2010, when the two women of our story, Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen
met in Stockholm, compared their experiences and discussed how to commemorate
their weekend with Julian. Manipulative and ambitious, Anna Ardin had decided
to get some sweet revenge on our breezy, festive Julian, who had drifted like a
butterfly away from her bed and over to the bed of the younger Sofia.
Anna’s plan was to stay out of the limelight – she convinced Sofia to make out
the complaint. But she did arrange for it: Anna took Sofia to see the police.
But Anna did not take Sofia
directly to the nearest police station. No, Anna had already arranged an
appointment with her good friend, policewoman Irmeli Krans. Anna Ardin and
Irmeli Krans were once political running mates for a city hall election –
Irmeli came in at 38th place and Anna won 12th. Irmeli is a well-known gender
activist, a member of the LGBT movement and the Gay Police Union. Krans’s blog is full of pictures taken at gay parades from Riga, Tallinn, and
Stockholm. It might appear as if this stern criminal investigator treats her
police work as a hobby while her real work is attending gay parades all over
Europe, but she dropped everything for the Assange case.
Anna delivered Sofia to the
police station only after the main force had gone home at 4 pm, leaving Anna’s
friend Irmeli to handle the distraught Sofia. At 4:21pm, Irmeli began writing
what would later be described as “the interrogation of Sofia Wilen”. Anna Ardin
was always present in the room: she brought Sofia in and introduced her to the
policewoman, but her presence was never mentioned in the protocols. This is a
gross violation of law: fellow witnesses are never present during police questioning!
Furthermore, every person present at the inquiry must be listed, yet Anna
unaccountably remains invisible. She gave no evidence at all.
In the end, all this
careful police-room theatre was spoiled with a too-hasty denouement. The
interrogation was not even over before a different policewoman, as if on cue,
called the prosecutor and obtained an order to arrest Julian in absentia.
It almost seems as if a thoughtful hand had prearranged it all. The prosecutor
issued the arrest warrant without having read the complaint and before Anna had
made a statement or even a complaint. The climax of our drama took place at 6
pm on Friday, and yet the very next morning (Saturday, August 21st),
the sleazy right-wing tabloid Expressen, a Swedish clone of the New
York Post, had already published all of the police allegations, featuring a
photo of Assange on the front page and the headline ‘DOUBLE RAPIST’.
That was a Pentagon threat
coming true. The US military demanded from Assange to destroy all the files, or
else. “If doing the right thing is not good enough for them (WikiLeaks), then
we will figure out what other alternatives we have to compel them to do the
right thing," the Pentagon spokesman said. The sex case was a device to
compel Julian, and Sofia’s feelings were of no importance.
The leaked police papers
reveal that Sofia was heart-broken when she learned of the charges; she never
expected Assange to be charged with rape. As we learn in testimony from her
American boyfriend, Sofia was raised to have a hysterical fear of unprotected
sex. After a lifetime of horror stories, she feared the fatal consequences of
unprotected sex; she was terrified at the thought of viruses crawling over her
body, and the only thing she wanted from the police was to force Julian to take
an STD test immediately. Julian was willing but the labs were closed for
weekend.
Even Irmeli Krans, our
man-hating interrogator, could not help but think there was no crime committed.
Apparently Irmeli had made plans to comfort Sofia, and voiced her intentions to
her superiors; she was promptly taken off the case and her boss Mats Gehlin
took over. The first thing he did was order her to fix the record of the Sofia
interview. Irmeli knew this was wrong, and she wrote him a message saying “With
the risk of appearing difficult I do not want to have an unsigned document with
my name circulating in DurTvå-space. Particularly not now when the case has
developed as it has.“ But he kept pushing her, and eventually she submitted to
his authority. The computer system (DurTvå) however, would not allow her to
falsify the records – instead, the system re-dated the protocols to August 26,
a sure sign of tampering. So now the original protocol does not even exist. Yet
even after doctoring the records, the interrogation of Sofia Wilen is a most
peculiar one: she did not sign it and there is no voice recording, so we can
only guess what went on in there. Discrepancies in Swedish police records
might not be news, but that night of August 20th - the night the
prosecutor authorized Julian’s arrest - was a very busy night for a pandering
political party and its pet journalists.
That evening there had been
a lavish crayfish party at Harpsund Slott, the Prime Minister’s summer
residence, a Swedish Chequers. Harpsund is a fabulous place, and every
important guest of the Swedish government has visited it: from Nikita
Khrushchev to Angela Merkel. Besides the Prime Minister and the Foreign
Minister, there were present several politicians and political journalists,
among them Niklas Svensson, a political journalist for Expressen.
Svensson was fired from Expressen in 2006 for hacking into an opposition
party computer and stealing an important document, the party strategic paper
for elections. Later he was reinstalled and rewarded for his strong political
sympathies for the ruling right-wing (and very pro-American) coalition.
That night Svensson
received a message on his cell phone describing the double complaint against
Julian, although we know that at the time there was still only one reluctant
statement. We don’t know whether or not he shared the good news with the
ministers and Ambassadors at the party, but I don’t see how he could have
contained himself. The elections were scheduled in three weeks’ time, and the
government was eager to placate the Americans, upset at Julian’s new Swedish
base of operations. Svensson called the police and the prosecutor, and they
confirmed the news as an official press release from the police department.
The next morning,
policewoman Sara Wennerblom telephoned Anna Ardin and told her that she would
have to give evidence. They did the interview by telephone that same day. In
this phone interview Anna said that she freely consented to have sex with
Assange, but that she wouldn't have let it happen if she'd known he didn't have
a condom. So much for the rape charge! A few hours later, the warrant was
voided when another prosecutor, Eva Finne, looked at the reports and concluded
that no crime was committed. Case closed.
But the closed case was
soon to be reopened. Pro-American right-wing forces in Sweden wanted to do as
much damage to Julian as possible. They were worried that Sweden might become
Wikileaks headquarters, and they knew that allegations of sexual misconduct
would (and did) prevent Julian from obtaining permanent residency. The
right-wing Swedes were supported and guided by Karl Rove, the
American political adviser and longtime Bush supporter who has been advising
Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt for the past two years. Reinfeldt
would like to be considered “the Ronald Reagan of Sweden”; he has tried for
years to dismantle Swedish socialism and bring them into NATO. The
American lawyer Roger Shuler has argued convincingly that Rove’s
fingerprints are all over the Assange case.
In order to reopen the
case, a law firm run by two political heavyweights was brought in, Tweedledum
and Tweedledee, sorry, Bodstrom and Borgstrom. Tweedledum Thomas Bodstrom was
once a Justice minister whose claim to fame is that he delivered two hapless
Swedish-resident Arabs to a CIA rendition plane so that they could be tortured
in one of Mubarak’s jails. Tweedledee Claes Borgstrom was once a minister for
equality, no, not social equality, God forbid, but “gender equality”. Feminism
is always a good career move for a Swedish man, at the very least as a way to
atone for his offensive gender. Borgstrom is a super-feminist, forever calling
for a more expansive definition of rape. He famously stated that no woman could
know for sure whether or not she was raped; only the lawyers can tell for sure.
Swedish bloggers noticed that he
“defended the European Data Retention Directive on the grounds that it
helps 'catch more rapists'.”
Borgstrom spoke to his old
comrade Marianne Ny, and together they prepared new laws that stretched the
definition of rape so far that “if a woman doesn't have multiple orgasms during
hetero sex, the man can be charged with rape”, in the witty words of a sister
feminist. Ny is heading a ”development center” specializing in sexual offences,
and is attempting to take feminism to the next level (a la Valerie
Solanas). Retired judge Brita Sundberg-Wietman writes this about Marianne Ny: She
is known to have said that when a woman alleges she has been a victim of
assault by a man, it is a good idea to have the man detained, because it is not
until he is arrested that the woman has time to think of her life in peace and
realize how she has been treated. According to Ny the detention has a good
effect as protection for the woman ”even in cases where the perpetrator is
prosecuted but not found guilty”.
Marianne Ny is a prosecutor
in far-away Gothenburg, but Swedish laws allow her to take on any case as long
as there is some new development. And lo and behold, under Borgstrom’s guidance
new evidence suddenly appeared: ten days after Julian’s arrest and release,
Anna Ardin carried a soiled condom into a police station. The condom was
checked, and the examination came up blank: the condom showed no sign of being
used at all. But Marianne Ny did not need a positive result, all she needed was
a “new development”; and so she re-opened the case.
Afterwards, she did
nothing. From time to time she called a witness to be interrogated, but Julian
was not called up again. It was only much later, when he was in the UK, that
Marianne Ny decided to demand his extradition. This was a smart move. If she
had called him in for questioning while he was in Sweden, the case would have
immediately collapsed. Since he will now be brought into Sweden against his
will, Ny and Borgstrom will be able to lock Assange up for months until the
trial, as Swedish law does not permit bail. Once in custody, Julian can be
shipped to the US, or directly to Guantanamo without even returning to Sweden;
as a detained foreigner he can be deported at the pleasure of the Swedish government.
Our hero has found himself
in quite a mess. And meanwhile, in order to create more confusion and undermine
Julian’s unflagging popularity, the Guardian team has cooked up a new
charge: this time it is anti-Semitism. It is much easier to shout “Anti-Semite!”
than to defend The Guardian against these very real accusations:
falsification of cables, plagiarism, manipulation, deliberate smearing of
Julian Assange… The best answer to their newest baseless accusation is given in
this fabulous Julian Assange kicks little kittens video.
Anna
Ardin: Follow Up
If Anna Ardin hoped to
enjoy her revenge, it misfired badly. She ran in the local elections just after
the story broke; she received 6 (six) votes altogether, while the next lowest
contender pulled 1500 votes. In a classic case of cooking your own goose, Anna
Ardin became the biggest turn-away name in the country. Her only chance at
rehabilitation lies in the fact that she may be sought out by Black
PR agencies for her negative public relations capabilities.
We wrote in Counterpunch
that the young lady had some CIA connections, and that she was deported from
Cuba for that very reason. Some feminists pointed out that a lady should not be
called names after suffering at the hands of the brute Assange. However, we
have now a confirmation from a sterling source: the BBC.
Their man in Cuba, Fernando
Ravsberg reported: “Anna Ardin, the Swede who is accusing Julian Assange of
rape, appears to have worked for some Cuban dissident faction. Dissident
sources confirmed that Ardin supported the opposition in Cuba for years. “
“Manuel Cuesta, a leader of
the Arco Progresista admitted that this political connection lasted from
2004 to 2006. The activities of the Swede in Cuba had little to do with those
of a normal tourist. The opposition leader assured that she “advised us
on how to form a political party, we exchanged bibliographies and her group
gave us a minimal amount of economic assistance.”
“It seems everything was
running along fine until she tried to “make us pay the cost” for her
services. According to the opponent, “she tried to influence us too
forcefully on how we should lead Arco Progresista. Our reluctance
generated certain uneasiness on her part.”
Manuel Cuesta described her
as a very beautiful woman, “Self-centered, having a strong personality,
committed, intelligent and very Eurocentric. Her principal virtue is her
determination and her worst defect is her Eurocentric arrogance.”
Cuesta told Ravsberg that
in 2006 Anna established some tie with Carlos Alberto Montaner, who is seen by
some as a CIA contact. Montaner vigorously denied knowing Anna.
Ravsberg concluded: “Arco
Progresista has few certainties but many suspicions. Manuel told us
that all of this “enters into an intriguing realm of political jockeying, and
it amazes me a little. We’re thinking back so we can piece things
together, because it’s evident that there’s something strange in all this.”
Edited by Paul Bennett
Sourced: http://www.israelshamir.net/English/PoliceLeaks.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment
Only comments that benefit this cause are approved.
My time is precious I practice Mr Obama's freedom of speech.
Thanks for your support and time to visit us.