|Home » Industry Watch » The Technological
Göran Rudling Declares War on Entire Universe™
Of windmills and bipolar disorders.
STOCKHOLM (Rixstep) — State feminist Göran Rudling has now formally declared war on the entire Universe™. People who held out hope now admit it appears their altruistic sentiments were in vain.
Göran Rudling is on the warpath against Julian Assange, Rixstep, Mark Stephens, Brita Sundberg-Weitman, Flashback, and Björn Hurtig all at once - with new windmills expected to turn up on the radar any day.
The denizens at Flashback have long suspected there's something 'not quite right upstairs' with this sixty year old git but now the debate's over, the freak's out of the bag - Rudling's now being referred to directly as 'bipolar'.
The Night Before
'Twas the night before the High Court bail hearing, and all through the house not a creature was stirring save for several people at Finers Stephens Innocent and WikiLeaks headquarters burning the midnight oil, trying to make sure they had it all right in time. When into the inbox there came such a clatter, a message arrived - what was the matter?
You made a good translation of my article 'Fallet Assange: Uppgifter raderas om och om igen' that helped it to spread across the net. I am working on an update of that article that contains some more revelations still unknown. When I am done I would like to send the articles to you so you can get it translated fast.
Please contact me at my e-mail address and we can maybe exchange some details.
[Actually it was the copy at Radsoft that curiously got most of the hits but who's counting?]
This led to a telephone conversation. Or rather a monologue. Listening to the recording would leave one perplexed. Staff at Rixstep were lectured on what was wrong with Julian Assange and Mark Stephens.
It was impossible to get a word in edgewise. And it was impossible to fathom why this person wished contact. Shouldn't he instead talk to Mark Stephens if he was convinced Stephens was incompetent and going about things totally in the wrong way? Shouldn't he be able to tell Mark and Jennifer that Julian Assange was a total cad, that there were no political overtones to the case, that Julian Assange needed only to apologise to Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén and the case would disappear? Shouldn't he be allowed to explain to Mark (and Julian) that Julian did a Bad Thing™ by not explaining to Anna Ardin before he went off to Enköping that he and Sofia might have sex?
But should he then be allowed to explain to Julian that the proper thing would have been to march straight into the police station on the morning of Saturday 21 August and - damn the torpedoes or the thought of legal representation - simply blurt out:
'I am Assange. Please interrogate me.'
No, probably not that either.
But the social sophisticate Rudling did succeed in raising Mark on the horn that very night and according to reports held him up for several hours, explaining everything he was doing wrong.
All the while FSI and WikiLeaks and others were trying to get the case together for the High Court bail hearing to hopefully keep Julian out of Wandsworth over the holidays.
Time is of the essence here. JA's solicitors are preparing their case for Tuesday. They need what they can get before then to prevent his extradition. It would be good to at least give them access to what you have - preferably this evening.
Of note is the fact Rudling had an early copy of the police files but wasn't letting go of it for all the money in the world. He seemed to much prefer making a big deal out of it and keeping everyone (and everything) in suspense - including the truth.
Then of course because of the huge traffic the Rixstep translation generated internationally, the cosmopolitan Rudling was invited to the UK. To take the stand not against Julian Assange but on his behalf. A tricky proposition as Rudling several times confided he was between indifferent and hostile towards WikiLeaks and had developed a high profile contempt for the person of Julian Assange himself.
But evidence Anna Ardin had redacted her web presence to remove exculpatory evidence seemed important enough. And word came back that Rudling had even 'softened' in his opinion of Julian Assange after having met him. So maybe things would work better now? So maybe Rudling would hastily develop rudimentary social skills and learn how to listen and not just talk?
No worries - Rudling got sent back to Sweden and started 'blogging' again.
Always at War
Rudling never let it go. Never chilled out. Not even after the hour long
conversation monologue. Seriously - how can anyone talk down a horn a full hour without even acknowledging the people at the other end? And he was going to call Julian Assange 'totally socially incompetent'? The mind boggles. And even more so when one realises he'll never get it.
The mail traffic resumed and was incessant. And always the same thing: Mark Stephens was a klutz and Julian Assange was a cad who didn't understand women. Why? Why bother people other than those directly involved with this ridiculous nonsense?
Just a few things. If Julian is extradited to Sweden from England he will have a better shield from the US. If the US would want him to be extradited when he is in Sweden it has to be decided first by a Swedish court and THEN buy [sic] the court in England that okayed the extradition in the first place. Do you follow. He will have the protection to the UK and the Swedish courts.
The reason Julian ended up in this mess is because he treats women in a completely stupid way. Note [sic] raping them. Just showing them no respect.
Anna Ardin arranged for a seminar, let him stay at her flat, arranged the crayfish party, volunteered to be his pressecretary [sic] and let him fuck her. What did he do? He showed that he didn't care shit. He humiliated her in front of her friends and political colleagues. She just couldn't cope with that and the circus started. But still what Julian did is not criminal.
As long as Julian's lawyers think this has something to do with WikiLeaks and are convinced that the US is out to get him and that Sweden will extradite him the case will never end.
If Julian would realise that he is getting this shit is [sic] because he treats females (maybe males too) like shit. I am not saying he deserves to be falsely accused. But I can understand how Anna reasoned.
So Julian must face the facts. And the best way is to attack the false allegations and say that he is sorry if he made anybody feel bad. Just crisis management.
That's quite a fat nut for someone who professes to know little and care less about WikiLeaks.
I had a long conversation with Mark last nite. I think I know there [sic] general position and how they reason. I think it would be good if they could follow a different strategy. They should charge Anna with false accusations. Without going into detail why that strategy would be more useful it could result in either they could prove that the police is prejudiced (a reason for extradite Julian) or the [sic] could actually catch Anna.
What is important is that we have to critizise [sic] Julian for lack of social competence. His treatment of the two women is so fucking stupid so he should be punished. But it is not a crime. This case is similar to Bill Clinton case. It is just total lack of competence dealing with women, but it is not a crime.
If Julian would understand that he has made a number of bad decisions in social behaviour and would take responsibility for it, anybody would understand that what he did is not criminal. And if he would do that, it would be much easier to accuse Anna of false allegations.
The idea is for Julian to accept wrongdoing in something which is not criminal and step up actions in pursuing something that is criminal, false allegations. Then the table is completely overturned. [sic]
But to do this, Julian has to stop playing the game that the US want to kill him. They do not want that. They are trying to prevent more leaks. That's it.
Please ask all the questions and I will try to explaing [sic] the general idea and the real benefits of this course.
Not to say there isn't some truth there (albeit very little). But why spend days ranting to people outside the offices of Finers Stephens Innocent? There are screws all over the floor in the Rudling cubicle and it's pretty obvious who they belong to.
The time had finally come to put a stop to the Rudling™. The mailbox had to be cleared for real work. Ahem.
> The problem is Julian's lack of understanding how human beings, females, react.
No that is not the problem. It has never been the problem and it will never be the problem. How dare you pretentiously, arrogantly say to someone who visits your country for the first time, is planning on staying just a week, and gets messed up in this crazy culture that it's his fault?
Julian had a child - and raised it well - before the age of either AA or SW. He fought for that child with his life and his mother for years. Julian is fine.
It's Sweden today that's sick beyond belief. And you're so much in the middle of it you don't even see it. You don't even know about ROKS and they're the most influential of all these fringe groups. Könskriget, if perhaps you saw it on telly in 2005. Or check it out at YouTube.
I'm not interested in debating crazy Sweden with you. I don't really care anymore about that sick country. I'm only interested in helping remove that silly distraction from his life so he can get on with things that are really important.
Sweden bears a big shame and it might take tens of years to repair the damage - and that's only if the man-eaters and the society as a whole are prepared to come to their senses and admit what they did was wrong. But I'm not holding my breath.
I used to love Sweden and have a lot of respect for Sweden. But not anymore. The whole place is bat shit insane and you really and truly deserve each other.
And that's all I'm going to say on that. I'm not interested in discussing something so stupid ever again.
And with that the 'annoyance' seemed gone. Miles and miles of it. Filed under 'rancid nutbars'. Gone gone gone.
But Rudling hit the warpath on his return to Sweden. All that AFK contact with normal people must have really shattered his nerves. And he says that his father taught him an important lesson early in life.
'If you say something and everybody agrees with you, you are definately [sic] in the wrong. If you say something and everybody disagress with you, you could be right.'
Rudling set out to be more right than ever. But first a look at what he published before Belmarsh - after FSI got Julian out on bail. Things start out with the person claiming to welcome adversity saying he can no longer handle it.
2010-12-17: Women-Hating Men! Stop Reading My Blog!
Starting Now, All Comments Will Be Reviewed
The reason I've decided to moderate the comments is because of the inability of several people to contribute to the debate with viewpoints and questions but instead contributing with insulting epithets [sic] In particular one person. Who writes with the name 'Clear Text'. I've warned Clear Text on several occasions and asked him to try to do his own research instead of posting invectives and poorly researched theories.
So it's because of several people who are mostly one person. And the person's capital crime is not researching according to Rudling's standards. No wonder he hates the forum you'll meet further below.
2010-12-17: Julian Assange Defends Himself in BBC Interview
It's obvious Julian has thought from day one this is about a 'smear campaign'. And thanks to Julian's completely erroneous judgement about what the case is about, Julian hurts himself in a way no one else could ever do.
It's obvious Julian thinks everybody's out to get him. That it's about a big conspiracy. It seems impossible for him to think he did anything wrong. And he doesn't seem interested in responding to accusations in a police interrogation.
Julian doesn't seem to understand he's under arrest. He's not been charged. The police only want to question him so they can decide if he's to be charged. So it's completely unreasonable to demand he see any of the charges beforehand. The police want to interrogate him and ask him some questions to see and hear how he reacts to the accusations. It's very strange Julian's solicitors don't understand this.
I'm going to publish more about Julian's strange defence and how he with the help of WikiLeaks tries to evade justice. There are a lot of strange things about the allegations against Julian. His own behaviour and defence are also enormously strange. But I'll sort it out.
Abuse of the words 'obvious' and 'strange' should carry a prohibitive fine and a half year's community service.
2010-12-18: Why Is Julian Assange Lying?
All I've been hearing since 21 August is Julian Assange claiming the allegations are a smear campaign. And that the Pentagon, the CIA, the prosecutor's office, and the police are involved. Then there are a number of other unnamed international organisations who profit from this remarkable affair. I've never heard him say it's a private matter and that it has nothing to do with WikiLeaks. Nor have I heard him say he's sorry for the way he hurt the victims. It's always about the truth-teller Julian Assange's suffering. And all the evil forces of the planet are against him.
Pot? Meet world. Perhaps nowhere else is it so apparent Rudling's only looking into his own soul - what's left to it. This is a 'person' who set out to prove Julian Assange was guilty so his disregarded theories about sex and sex laws can stand. For it can't be possible to harass innocent people, right? This 'person' is sick. (Also note how he cleverly labels the girls 'victims'.)
2011-01-25: Do You Have to Lie to Be Believed?
It's also obvious Julian Assange is totally socially incompetent, if we're to believe even a bit of the police documents.
Can't get much better than that. An unbipolarised commenter puts him in his place.
Don't forget that what you read in the police documents is the attempt by two vengeful women to smear Julian and not objective fact. And there's nothing there that holds in court anyway, just as we suspected all along.
And so forth. There's more than enough at the Rudling site for a PhD in abnormal psychology.
It's time to see what the productive blogger Rudling's done after his visit to Belmarsh when he reportedly 'warmed up' to Julian Assange (and everyone else). He'd already gone after Assange and Stephens in dozens of articles. Has he warmed up? And now that he's back home in the duck pond, sheltered from the world around, are there new windmills to charge?
Enemy #3: Rixstep
Rixstep's the site that can offer good and fast translations of Rudling's important work - according to Rudling. Rixstep's the site that did the whirlwind translations of the police protocols the moment they arrived - over 30,000 words in five 20-hour days, which is at least three times the average for translation work. (Why didn't Rudling release his own copy weeks earlier?)
Typos do occur - they've been occurring with a frightening frequency all along at the website of the egregious Rudling. And duly reported. By Rixstep. But with a subtly different unpolarised approach.
Broken link in new article for image '20101004_anna_kom2.png'.
A word missing here.
'Frågan är om de poliser som gör jobbet vettig utrustning och får tillräckligt stöd av ledningen?'
Thanks. I'll correct it
One 'r' too many.
'Anna Ardin valde att blir pressekreterare'
Too many 'en's. ;)
'kräver att man ska tillsätta en en granskningskommission'
And so forth. Use a bit of social skills. Hold back one's urge to destroy the Entire Universe™. That's how corrections are supposed to work. That's how all human interactions are supposed to work. Now check the bipolar approach.
I was asked by an English journalist about the leaked 'Häktningspromemoria'. I gave him a link and also a link to where the 'HPM' is translated.
For some reason I wanted to check just one of the important witnesses story, Petra Ornstein. Petra var sedan samma kväll hemma hos Anna på kräftskiva och då hade allt varit som vanligt och Petra hade träffat Julien för första gången. Petra uppfattade inte det som att Anna och Julien hade något ihop vid kräftskivan.Petra pratade inte så mycket med Julien.
Your translation reads:
'A was at the crayfish party and everything was normal and A met Julian for the first time. A sensed that Anna and Julian had something going at the party. A didn't speak very much with Julian.'
Your translation is absolutely false. It paints a completely different picture.
I want you to know that I have only checked three paragraphs in one interview. And I spotted one severe error. I will look thru the other pages when I have the time.
What will you do about this?
That's quite the mouthful for someone who says Julian Assange is 'totally socially incompetent'. Only one possible reply.
> What will you do about this?
Gee. Don't know now. Would have done something immediately. But inasmuch as you're such an ASSHOLE...
Just don't know.
The typo - six bytes - was corrected immediately. Of course.
But being called an ASSHOLE only further provoked the environmentally toxic Rudling who then accused this site of being uncritical of Julian's purported flaws (because he was called an ASSHOLE). But of course the ASSHOLE showed a great social awareness and perspicacity in not publishing his own message. Smart move. That could have exposed him.
Enemy #4: Björn Hurtig
It's good this is being dealt with properly. Assange's solicitor has for a long time attempted to delude us into thinking Julian Assange has always been available for questioning. As I pointed out 25 January, this isn't true. Now it's been established in a court of law and now the Swedish bar association are demanding to know why Björn Hurtig made such claims.
So one of Sweden's most renowned jurists fucked up again. Thank goodness Rudling's there to sort it out.
Enemy #5: Brita Sundberg-Weitman
Don't go believing like Brita Sundberg-Weitman that Marianne Ny hunts innocent men to bust them for crimes they haven't committed. Believe more in sloppy investigations that make it difficult for prosecutors to distinguish between real perpetrators and imagined perpetrators.
A cruel, unfair, and arrogant attack on one of Sweden's most beloved and celebrated jurists that shows how the famous Rudling 'logic' really works. She slapped him for it.
It's always easier to criticise someone for something they didn't say than to criticise something someone really said. I have not said MN 'hunts innocent men to bust them for crimes they haven't committed'. That is surely not her goal, rather the collateral damage: her ambition and narrow-minded view make it possible for innocent people to get caught up in the sweep and lose their freedom - at least during the preliminary investigation.
Enemy #6: Flashback!
Flashback is a international phenomenon. In a country with only 8,000,000 inhabitants fluent in the Swedish language, the Flashback forum has garnered over 500,000 members. Do the math.
Do the math again: the internationally famous thread on the Assange case - used by Old Media (together with Google Translate) for their clumsy reports - has over 2,500,000 topic views and 25,000 posts.
Almost every major break in the Assange case started at Flashback. Sofia Wilén was discovered there - going on only two tidbits from the Daily Mail: the family name initial 'W' and the name of the town. They accomplished this through hard work - really hard work.
That's Flashback. They have insiders from government, the media, the police - everywhere. Brita Sundberg-Weitman posts there. It's a good club with a great atmosphere. But Göran Rudling doesn't like Flashback. For several reasons.
- Hanging out at Flashback requires social skills.
- People at Flashback have to allow each other's opinions.
- Göran Rudling would have to respect what others have to say.
- People at Flashback aren't really keen on Göran Rudling anyway.
And so forth. Consequently Göran Rudling must hate Flashback back.
'Flashback harms more than it helps. That's my opinion.'
'We have different opinions here. Almost all speculation on Flashback is completely insane.'
'It'd be a good thing if people could stop fishing in uncorroborated information. We should stick to corroborated facts. Those who want to go fishing in uncorroborated information and make up theories can try Flashback.'
'That WikiLeaks claim Flashback is a reliable source is in my opinion disheartening. This makes WikiLeaks less credible in my eyes. There are other sources WikiLeaks refer to that I also do not find credible. The reason is simple. There are those who believe Julian Assange is innocent and will do anything they can to find proof this is the case. And those who believe in a conspiracy work the same way. Try to find, or make up, facts which indicate a conspiracy.'
'I started my investigation trying to find proof Julian was guilty - but I couldn't find anything. What I instead found was a lot of information indicating Anna Ardin's story was constructed after the fact and that [web] deletions were conducted systematically to try to prove her story was true.'
'I wanted to check all possible sources for my testimony [at Belmarsh]. I'd looked at Flashback a few times before and already decided Flashback wasn't a reliable source. But I decided to read through all the 22,000 posts anyway. I found nothing of interest other than the two things I named earlier. To me it looks like when correct and interesting information turns up, it's discussed in a few comments but then discarded and the conspiracies come back with renewed energy.'
'For those of you who have difficulty coming up with your own conspiracy theories, I have some advice. Flashback has a thread. When I last checked, it had 21,811 comments. 1,818 pages with conspiracy theories. And what's really cruel is that Marianne Ny is a part of the most of them.'
And yet Flashback are this year nominated for one of Sweden's most prestigious awards in investigative journalism.
Swedish Radio: Flashback Dig Worthy of Golden Spade Award
Because Flashback were first with the exposé, we nominated their thread on Bjästa for the Golden Spade. But what's interesting isn't whether the jury have the courage to follow the rules but what journalists have to learn from Flashback.
We don't want to defend or excuse the debate climate at Flashback and one doesn't need to either to be able to see the positive and creative there. Attacks on Flashback are also ironic considering how many journalists take their materials from the forum without attribution.
It's time to see the bad for what it is, the good for what it is, learn from it all, and award the Golden Spade to Flashback.
Rudling versus the Entire Universe™: a tragic love affair sadly crushed.
I'm so sick of it all. Will it never end? At any rate I want to say the other girl's just as much to blame.
- Anna Ardin
Apparently Swedish laws are unique. If you have a penis you're half a rapist before you even get through customs.
- Scott Adams
If I am able to reveal what I know, everyone will realise this is all a charade. If I could tell the British courts, I suspect it would make extradition a moot point.
- Björn Hurtig
I can tell you that the Swedish prosecution still hasn't provided copies of those SMS texts that have been referred to. Those texts are some of the most powerful exculpatory evidence. In Australia prosecutors have a very grave duty to disclose such evidence to courts when seeking the grave exercise of a court's power against an individual. Yet in Sweden in this case, in the first hearings to obtain an arrest warrant, those texts were not submitted to the Swedish court, which is highly improper.
- James Catlin
The prosecutor could achieve this broadening of the law during Assange's trial so he can be convicted of a crime that didn't exist at the time he allegedly committed it. She would need to. There is no precedent for this. The Swedes are making it up as they go along.
- James Catlin
Julian Assange will surely learn that considering what WikiLeaks has published, he's got a few enemies in the Pentagon, the CIA, and the White House. Sweden began an investigation into rape which was later dismissed. Assange was even denied residence in Sweden. One can only speculate to what extent the security agencies of the US were involved. And considering the obvious interest of the US to silence WikiLeaks, is it likely Assange will have an accident of the 'Boston brakes' kind in the coming years? Or will he be snared with compromising information of the 'honey trap' kind?
- 'Drozd' at Flashback 23 October 2010
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.
- The Assange Police Protocol: Translator's Note