The Swedish version of the Freedom of Information Act, Offentlighets och sekretesslagen, is a law for openness and transparency. It guarantees ordinary people the right to see government documents so people can be well informed and check what is going on.
In the Assange case all the documents released from the police are lawfully released under the “Offentlighets och sekretesslagen”. There are no leaks from the police. The only confirmed leak is the Detention Memorandum (Häktningspromemoria) that was leaked by Julian Assange’s lawyers. Even though the first page states “Please notice that the documents are legally privileged information for Mr Julian Assange and nobody else” it did not stop the English legal team from leaking the documents to the public.
Since some people are convinced that there is foul play involved in the Assange case numerous requests under the Offentlighets och sekretesslagen have been made. The latest released documents are the contacts between the prosecutor Marianne Ny and Julian Assange’s lawyer Björn Hurtig. The documents does not indicate any foul play. On the contrary, it indicates that Julian Assange is not telling the truth. Continue reading
Amnesty International is an important organization that fights for Human Rights.
Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards.
On 27 September Amnesty made a statement regarding the Julian Assange case.
The Swedish authorities should issue assurances to the UK and to Julian Assange that if he leaves Ecuador’s London embassy and agrees to go to Sweden to face sexual assault claims, he will not be extradited to the USA in connection with Wikileaks, Amnesty International said.
When I read the statement I was extremely surprised. How can Amnesty International ask for assurances when they should know that it is against the Swedish constitution to do so? Amnesty International has made a big fat mistake.
Today the Swedish Section of Amnesty openly declares that the International section is in the wrong. Guarantees cannot be offered and the Swedish Section has a different view of the case:
Statement on Julian Assange and the Swedish investigation
Swedish section of Amnesty International does not endorse the way the organization has set itself on the issue of guarantees. Swedish section does not believe that it is neither appropriate nor possible to demand that the Swedish government to provide assurances that Assange to be extradited to the United States. Amnesty International’s primary focus is the Swedish investigation and that Julian Assange, by being on location in Sweden, can help to allegations of crimes can be investigated further. Should the United States in such latter position would ask Julian Assange extradited for crimes linked to WikiLeaks, Amnesty International will turn against extradition because of the danger that he was in the U.S. would be exposed to serious violations of their human rights.
For more information contact Madelaine Seidlitz at email madelaine.seidlitz @ amnesty.se or telephone 0707440877th
Amnesty International is ill-informed as so many other people and organizations in this case. I find it amusing that the Swedish Section openly disagrees with the International Section. When is the International Section going to say, “Sorry, we messed up”?
Naomi Wolf is a world-renowned public intellectual and influential feminist. She has written extensively about the Assange case. Articles that are filled with misrepresented facts, innuendo, outrageous conspiracy theories, half-truths and the like. In a post, “Checking Naomi Wolf’s 8 big problems in the Assange case and coming up empty”, I’ve tried to verify her claims but have not been able to do so. Of her so called 8 big problems I found 9 very serious factual errors. I’ve come to the conclusion that Naomi Wolf is, at best, ill-informed.
Now Naomi Wolf is upping the ante. She is now fabricating evidence to support her claims. In her latest post from 31 August this year, “Sweden’s Other Rape Suspects”, she wants us to believe that Swedish authorities do not take rape seriously.
“So, for most raped Swedish women, the shelters are full, the hotlines inactive, and the police selectively look the other way – that is, unless they are busy chasing down a globally famous suspect.”
In order for Naomi Wolf to do so she misrepresents facts and fabricates a story that Julian Assange committed the alleged rape in the city of Uppsala. Why Naomi Wolf places the alleged rape in Uppsala and not in another of Sweden’s more than one hundred cities is easy to understand. Continue reading
The Age of Information,
Has turned out to be the Age of Ignorance.
Mark Crispin Miller
Professor Mark Crispin Miller has been kind to post my rebuttal of Naomi Wolf’s claims on his blog, News from Underground. RESPECT.
Recently I noticed an article posted on Mark Crispin Miller’s blog, “News from Underground.” The article, written by Naomi Wolf, is called “Something Rotten in the State of Sweden: 8 Big Problems with the ‘Case’ Against Assange.” I have followed the Assange case from the beginning. I’ve made discoveries of deleted tweets, poor police work and other irregularities. Because of my findings I was asked to be a witness for the defense in the extradition hearings on the 7th and 8th of February 2011. There are problems in the Assange case, but none of Naomi Wolf’s claims are actually real problems. In fact, Naomi Wolf’s so-called problems are misconceptions and fictitious conspiracy theories. Continue reading
The problem is all inside your head she said to me
The answer is easy if you take it logically
I’d like to help you in your struggle to be free
are the first lines of Paul Simon’s great song “50 ways to leave your lover”.
Great people sometimes make great mistakes. But over the time the mistakes are forgotten. How about this quote from Harry Morris Warner, one of the founders of Warner Brothers, from 1927:
“Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?”
Harry Morris didn’t get the idea of sound in movies then. But in a little while he and his brothers used sound in films and became very successful.
Gareth Peirce is a great lawyer. And a human rights activist. On May 29 2012 she sent a mail to the Australian government to ask for extra support for Julian Assange. In the mail Gareth Peirce asks the Australian government to interfere in the judicial process. There are 16 demands. All of them ridiculous. Continue reading
For a long time I thought I had a crystal ball in my hand. That I could tell the future. And everything because of Julian Assange. Every time I was asked what I thought would happen in the case I anwered like this:
Since Julian has left Sweden in an attempt to avoid interrogation he will be arrested in absentia. And then an European Arrest Warrant will be issued. He will fight the extradition in court and he will lose. He will appeal and he will lose again. He will take it to the Supreme Court and lose. Then he will appeal to the European Court of Human Rights and they will not take the case. And he will be sent to Sweden where he will be interviewed. After that the case will be dropped since there is nothing as far as I know that indicates he has committed any criminal offence.
This prophesy seemed ok until the decision in the Supreme Court on May 30, 2012. Julian lost but got a second chance to appeal the decision. Something that is very rare. The reason given was that the decision was partly based on the Vienna convention and the lawyers had not been given opportunity to give their opinion about the text. But Julian’s lawyers missed the opportunity. The Supreme Court in an unanimous decision on June 14 rejected the last appeal as without merit. But the court was friendly towards Julian. They gave him 14 days to appeal the case to the European Court of Human Rights since they believed, as I did, that Julian would appeal. That would be in line with his past behavior that seems like a person suffering from “justice obsession syndrome” (rättshaverist in Swedish, rechtshaberei in German). But is was not going to happen. Continue reading
This article is a re-written version of my original article. Since it is the first time that I have re-written an article, let me mention the reasons for it. The original article contained many very nasty comments aimed at ridiculing Professor Marcello Ferrada de Noli. These comments are now removed. My opinion is that the professor’s articles on honor killings and honor related violence are grossly misleading. By presenting a false picture of honor related violence and honor killings professor Marcello Ferrada de Noli completely ignores all the young women who are victims of honor violence in Sweden and by doing so he actively supports the perpetrators of honor-related violence. Professor Marcello Ferrada de Noli states that his blog is about “Human Rights for All” His writings says something completely different.
Just because the professor is misleading his readers does not mean I have the right to insult him. It was mean and damn stupid of me. And something that I am very sorry for.
Göran Rudling, April 27 2012
In three posts on his blog Professor Marcello Ferrada the Noli gives voice to remarkable opinions on honor violence. Among other things, the professor states that the Swedish state-feminists along with Swedish media are exaggerating the prevalence of honor-related violence in Sweden in order to demonize “Muslims” to make it possible to send Swedish military forces to Afghanistan. Another one of the professor’s numerous conspiracy theories. But for the professor, the statement is important. He fully believes that Swedish state-feminists are conspiring with the Swedish political establishment to get Assange extradited to Sweden so that he can be extradited to the United States. And the reason for it is that Julian Assange has published secrets about the war in Afghanistan. A publication that has made the political establishment Julian Assange haters.
I can’t believe the professor is for real. His conspiracy theories are so many and so silly. But honor-related violence in Sweden is a serious issue. Not least for the approximately 70 000 young people between 16 and 25 (about 5% of all youths between 16-25) that know that their family wants to decide who they are going to marry. Out of these, 8 500 are worried that they will not be free to make a decision of who to marry. On top of that we have all the young immigrant girls who don’t look forward to the summer break because they fear that they will be forced to marry some relative when they go on vacation to the parents home country.
In this article I will demonstrate that professor Marcello Ferrada de Nolis studies of honor violence is nothing but unsupported arguments that he has created in order for them to fit into the preconceived conspiracy theories. Portions of this text was written as a comment on the professor’s articles. Comments that were not approved. Continue reading
Because something is happening here,
But you don’t know what it is,
Do you, Mister Jones?
The first time Bob Dylan performed with an electric band was at the Newport Folk Festival on 25 July 1965. “Ballad of a Thin Man” was written shortly afterwards. The song was recorded on 2 August and the album “Highway 61 Revisited” was released on 25 August 1965.
It is said that the song is about a journalist, Jeffrey Owen Jones, who interviewed Dylan in connection with his first electric concert. Mr. Jones, who was an intern at Times Magazine, wrote after the interview an article about the harmonicas increasing popularity in American folk music. Mr. Jones missed the whole controversy about Dylan going electric.
In 1990 Dylan was asked if it could be a single journalist who gave him inspiration for the song, he replied: “There were a lot of Mister Joneses at that time. Obviously there must have been a tremendous amount of them for me to write that particular song . It was like, ‘Oh man, here’s the thousandth Mister Jones.”
I’ve always loved the song. Over the years it has given me an enormous amount of energy when I encountered “Mister Jones” in reality. In the Assange case, there are lots of “Mister Joneses”. Who talks and writes a lot. Who understand that something is happening but just don’t know what it is. The aim of this article is to point out some of the thin men. But because there are so many, there will be several parts.
For a start, let’s have a look at the thinnest ones. The ones with “male panic syndrome”. One version of anti-feminism that has become much more common and loud since 11 September 2001. Rick “©®™” Downes, Israel Shamir, Marcello Ferrada the Noli and the Flashback Community. To make it easier for you to understand how thin they are, I will use their own words.
The Assange case starts when Julian does not answer his phone when a female he had sex with calls him. The female, Sofia Wilén, then calls Anna Ardin, another recent sex partner of Julian’s, which eventually leads to a police report. And the whole story gets started. When Julian’s lawyer tries to get hold of him, he continues not to answer his phone, which over time leads to a European Arrest Warrant, EAW, and finally the case ends up in England’s Supreme Court.
Of course, none of the people involved will ever admit that the case may be all about over-use of Caller ID. They’d rather talk about corrupt authorities, political interference, conspiracies, onward extradition to the U.S., CIA, Pentagon, State Feminism, lay jurors, Jewish media conspiracies, dark forces, openness and transparency versus secrecy, evil prosecutors, honey-traps, Karl Rove, Mutual Legal Assistance, proportionality, secret talks between Swedish and US authorities, etc.
Much of what has been written in the Assange case is based on fallacies, misconceptions and fictional information. In this article I will show that a source that Julian Assange, WikiLeaks, Justice for Assange and WikiLeaks Central regard as credible, Rixstep, invents facts and writes bizarre articles based on these made up facts. Continue reading
For those of you who are familiar with the Julian Assange case, portions of this long post is repetition. I’ve felt that is crucial that a complete time-line of events is posted so that you can get an idea of what has really happened. Much of what has been written about the Assange case is fictional information. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between fictional and real information. In future posts I will take a closer look at some of the people that are inventing and misrepresenting facts. But first lets look at the issue, Julian’s availability for interrogation.
A “truth” among those who support Julian Assange is that he has been available to the police for questioning. And he has not “fled Sweden” to escape questioning. In the extradition hearing on 7-8 February 2010 Julian’s English lawyers attempted to convince the court that Julian had been available for questioning for five weeks and that the police and the prosecutors had not showed interest in interviewing him. Something that Sweden’s representative, Clare Montgomery, showed was totally incorrect. The purpose of this article is to give you all the facts so you can make up your own mind whether Julian Assange was available for questioning or if he tried to escape. Continue reading