|Home » Industry Watch (» The Technological » Hall of Monkeys » Heroes Banquet)
Sweden is Fantastic!
Flashback's resident troll scores an epic own goal.
STOCKHOLM/NEW YORK (Rixstep) — The date for an interview with Julian Assange approaches, unless Marianne Ny and her buds can find new creative ways to stop it. Consequently, Flashback's resident troll, long suspected to be from the country's power elite, has opened the coffin again and kicked into high gear.
The following exchange took place 2 January 2016 between the troll and forum regular 'kurrekotte' wherein the latter fires several broadsides against 'Fantastic Sweden'.
Global awareness of Sweden's deplorable judicial morass has grown in the past few years, especially following a redress at the United Nations in Geneva in 2015. This is apparently lost on the troll (and the Swedish ruling class who've not taken anything on board since the UN confrontation).
But Flashback followed the news.
Sweden is Fantastic!
Polls in Sweden show that as of today, trust in the current government is at an all-time low. Many people are aware of the mess of the case of Assange in Sweden, as they were of the Quick scandal, the 'Ulf' scandal, the da Costa scandal, the Billy Butt scandal, and so forth. But Sweden's subservient media continue to do their best to not bring such unwelcome reminders to their attention.
Such was the case, for example, when Stefania Maurizi broke with her FOIA documents on 19 October last year, which proved that the British Crown Prosecution Service had been working behind the scenes to prevent Julian Assange from being interviewed (or even being allowed to submit a statement) whilst in the UK. Paul Close of the CPS feared that Sweden's case would fall apart.
And this whilst Marianne Ny, Carl Bildt, Fredrik Reinfeldt, and others continued to lie to the media and the world.
The incompetence and corruption of Sweden's ruling class are not limited to the case of Assange in Sweden, but this case is as good a place as any to start.
Everything can be resolved. The way it works today, each state itself tests the arguments for granting asylum, which in turn lets in abuse of the system for political reasons, which is suspect in the case of Julian Assange and Ecuador. Because the system of asylum is meant to protect and not to judge, one could have a system where, for example, 25% of members have to approve of the asylum application, and that would then be considered legitimate grounds for a nation to grant asylum. I don't think Assange would have won 25% of the vote. All he'd get would be Ecuador and a few banana republics.
You're pretty much alone in that belief. You seem to lean towards counting how many countries today seem to be willing to grant asylum to Assange. In other words, it doesn't sound like you've imagined an objective and impartial court, but a political one, subordinated to governments and diplomatic relations. The only purpose with a court like that would be to give the mere appearance of objectivity and impartiality. Coming from you, what a shocker.
Sweden isn't perfect but on the whole we're amongst the best in the world according to independent reviewers of democracy and corruption. As regards the extreme detention times, we continually reevaluate detention decisions, and those who are targeted by those decisions are not exactly our most exemplary citizens. There are good reasons for those extreme detentions. Of course it's terrible if this should happen to someone who's completely innocent, but the cases that I've heard about don't indicate anything like this. So even if the detention times are injurious for the detainees, they still have, in 100% of the cases, in my opinion, acted so as to cause this injury themselves. The alternative would have been prison if one had achieved a guilty verdict, or more likely an acquittal, which would put the criminals back on the streets to commit new serious crimes (having already committed serious crimes but released on lack of evidence).
Sweden is fantastic! We've only done wrong when 'wrong' was our best alternative!
Yet we don't seem to have ever harmed someone who was innocent - our mistakes have had only beneficial effects for the alleged victims!
Your line of reason is fucking bat shit, irresponsible, and hostile to rule of law. You deserve your own slogan.
'This troll is of the opinion that due process helps the victim even when the guilty party is prosecuted but not convicted!'
When it comes to Assange, he alone is in that situation.
Can it really be so fucking hard for you to not judge beforehand?
Start instead with the presumption that he is innocent, and see how well your reasoning stands up.
Because he has committed no crime, he deserves to be hung out in the media as a suspected rapist by a prosecutor who leaks the information in breach of office. But this wasn't bad for him, and had absolutely nothing to do with him - it was only a benign mistake.
He chose himself to trust prosecutor Marianne Ny when she lied to him and told him he was free to travel abroad. If one's so dumb as to trust a Swedish prosecutor, and one dares travel abroad, solely because one is innocent, one has only oneself to blame!
For the benefit of the 'victims', Swedish authorities lied about the lack of opportunity to interview Assange outside Sweden. And they continued to lie about this, on a daily basis, when he reported to the police each day, and all this for the benefit of the 'victims'.
That Julian Assange would have suffered because of this: that's pure nonsense! If an innocent person seeks the help of the British courts, one has only oneself to blame! That's just as dumb as trusting in a Swedish prosecutor!
Assange can leave the embassy whenever he wants.
And how many steps would he take before he was deprived of liberty? With your logic, North Koreans are free to cross the border to South Korea whenever they want! Sure they'd be shot straight away, but that doesn't mean they're not free to cross the border!
This is ironically rather reminiscent of Assange's original 'freedom' in Sweden.
He's abused the system of asylum for his own bizarre purposes, and his abuse of the system has caused him additional harm as well.
And you still can't cite how he would in such case have 'abused' this system of asylum? This is just more of your bullshit?
If the same thing had happened in our normal civilian society, we'd have been able to diagnose the situation and apply methods of coercion to treat this self-harm behaviour. As the system of asylum is not well constructed and can lend itself for extreme cases such as this, it might be appropriate to modify our legislation.
When someone refuses to understand that Sweden is fantastic and goes to the extreme of seeking asylum in order to avoid being tortured in the US, yes one should be put onto a Funny Farm.
Another idiotic thing he did was try to get a guarantee from Sweden that he wouldn't be turned over to the US on their temporary surrender agreement. How fucking dumb is that?
And because Sweden is fantastic, we don't have to make guarantees! One must of course, naturally, and most likely (in my opinion) reserve the right to still make mistakes for the benefit of the 'victims'. Only a total nutter would fail to see that.
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