Anna/Irmeli/Sofia

No new information, no real changes.

Get It Try It

STOCKHOLM (Rixstep) — A number of older Flashback posts have come to light in recent days. They can have been overlooked because of work on other projects took precedence.

This thread starts with a clarification by the venerable 'Duqu' and then quickly hits into the most salient. All posts are rendered for the purposes of context.

'Publicistklubben'

'Publicistklubben' is the name of Sweden's journalism club but also the name of a typically anonymous Flashback member who joined the forum in November 2010. No association between the one and the other should be imputed.

It was 'Publicistklubben' who first posted a link to the notorious police documents, which were subsequently translated by this site and used as a work of reference by the British courts. Those documents broke the case wide open.

'Publicistklubben' has since posted to Flashback from time to time, and his information seems to indicate connections inside police headquarters. Some members of Flashback didn't want to take him seriously, but 'Publicistklubben' was always, even when found in error, very explicit about his sources, and when what he's heard or read is mostly hearsay.

We start with Duqu's post the other day and proceed in the order they were cited at Flashback.

1. Duqu (1)

MHK, Maria Hällebo Kjellstrand, is the prosecutor who in 2006 prosecuted Niklas Svensson for data intrusion of the Swedish Worker's Party. It was the security police SÄPO who sounded the alarm about the intrusion. At the time of Assange's arrest in 2010, she was the wife of Per Kjellstrand, a member of staff with Minister for Justice Beatrice Ask. So now Niklas Svensson could plot revenge.

There've been recent revisions in the official story of that data intrusion:

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dataintrångsaffären_2006

That same year, 2006, only a few eeeks after the data intrusion scandal, Anna Ardin is deported from Cuba. There is clear evidence that she was a money courier, and not just an exchange student.

https://annaardin.wordpress.com/2006/08/08/utvisad-icke-onskad-uppgiven/

In May 2010, a short time after Assange's first visit to Stockholm that year, Ardin was the coordinator for Ship to Gaza which ended fatally for some Turks. The Swedes on that voyage were detained at Ben Gurion Prison, and not even our foreign department knew when they'd be released. This is when Niklas Svensson flies down to Tel Aviv, in order to get on a new plane back to Frankfurt with the released Swedes, this with only two hours notice.

Already here we can see direct connections between Svensson and Ardin.

The story starts to be reminiscent of today's circus in a mega-format where the US accused Russia and WikiLeaks of being behind the DNC leaks. But this is only a big sideshow. Today, no one is talking about what Snowden revealed right before the election, namely that it was child's play to hack the election machines.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2138902/cyber-experts-show-how-easy-it-is-to-hack...

Coincidental with this poor theatre which is being pimped hysterically by Swedish media, our intelligence organisation MSB is, in secret, training state employees in dealing with war scenarios.

http://www.svd.se/hundratals-civila-utbildas-for-krig-i-hemlighet/om/det-skarpta-sakerhetslaget

So one has a bit of distance to the mess with JA, with what's happened since 2006, and one can then compare global events where, inter alia, Sweden contributed to the war in Libya on the orders of the US, where we even sent in PSYOPS units to Malta - and even a ten-year-old can see the connections and the vested interests.

Why do the Swedish media, completely without critical insight, continue to belch up the latest follies by the CIA and the FBI? Simple. Because they're up to their eyeballs in the shit themselves and they can't get out. So instead they try to insinuate that any Swede who is critical of their narrative is either a Putin troll or an idiot. Our own forum troll is a perfect example.

But now, 6,000 yankees have arrived in Germany, along with their tanks and armoured vehicles, in addition to five shiploads of additional war machines coming in from Norway, and right now, Sweden wants to negotiate on the sale of Patriot missiles. There are already plans underway to build silos on Gotland, but our politicians don't want us to know. Today's Patriot missiles can carry nuclear warheads. So what we see now are pure war preparations, and not some strengthening of our supposed defence systems.

kurrekotte

[After this, discussion turned again to August 2010 and the Friday afternoon at the downtown Stockholm police station.]:

You don't have to be an accomplished actor to fool the police. The paperwork was done by Irmeli Krans, a friend to Ardin, seen in the picture here with Bodström, who ran the law firm with Borgström who was the plaintiff counsel of both girls back then.

trenterx (1)

It's true that Irmeli Krans handled the paperwork, and that Krans was biased. But when Krans started the paperwork, at approximately 16:20, it had already been decided to accuse Assange of rape. Krans had no say in that decision.

The real spider in the web that day was Linda Wassgren. She's the one who initially greeted the women (14:00) and first questioned them together, thereafter one by one. After a few telephone calls, she reported that 'everyone was earnestly in agreement that this was rape', according to her own memo. But 'everyone' did not include Irmeli Krans, who still hadn't been consulted.

Linda contacted the prosecutor on duty (Maria Häljebo Kjellstrand) right before 17:00. They decided together that Assange was to be arrested and apprehended. Irmeli Krans was kept out of this discussion, as she herself lamented. Immediately after Linda's chat with MHK, Assange is formally arrested, and police cars are sent into town to find him.

Is it worthwhile to highlight all the details of what happened that day? Absolutely. Linda is quite simply an important but well-hidden player behind the search and arrest on 20 August. There is no written account for the interrogations she conducted. A journalist like Niklas Svensson, who wrote about the bias of Irmeli Krans, has steered clear of investigating Linda's behaviour and contacts. Things are being blacked out around her.

I believe that Linda's telephone calls, that afternoon of 20 August, before Irmeli's interrogation of Sofia had even begun, were what sealed Assange's fate. It was the people who were part of that telephone traffic who decided Assange should be charged with the rape and molestation of two Swedish women. Irmeli's only a sideshow, perfect for distracting from those who really made the fateful decisions that day.

trenterx (2)

[Trenterx adds the following in a comment on his own post above.]

'Publicistklubben' helped shine a light on that side show.

Johan Hallberg was chief of station. He's another well-hidden player. Evidently he really put Irmeli in her place when she objected to the rape charges.

Publicistklubben

It is here we get into the meat of the discussion. Note that all of the above was posted in the past 24 hours, but the following from Publicistklubben is five years old, posted at 21:01 on Friday 17 June 2011.

This is the post.

When Ardin was told that her story of Assange's assault would be processed as a crime against the state and that Assange would be charged with rape, she was shocked, and said 'I'm not cooperating anymore, I want to withdraw all I've said'. She was told that it was not up to her but to the police and prosecutor.

So at that point, Ardin wanted to hop off, according to my sources. Just like Wilén when she stopped Irmeli's interrogation, got up and left.

What got Ardin to change her mind and stick to her first story? The attacks at Flashback. [Note: the attacks didn't happen in the main Assange thread in such case. Ed.] Ardin felt that her honour was at stake. If she hopped off, she'd be branded as a skank and a liar. So she didn't want to give in. That, at any rate, is her version.

One of my sources at the police found it strange that Ardin wouldn't understand the consequences of her visit to the police. With her background as police liaison at the University of Uppsala and her knowledge of sex crime legislation, she should have known Assange would be arrested for rape. [Note: it's been the opinion of this site that this is precisely what she did, tip-toeing around the real issues until the police took charge. Ed.] According to another of my sources at the police, it would have been enough if Ardin had told them she didn't want to cooperate as a plaintiff, they would have closed the case. [Note: this is not technically accurate, but Publicistklubben is merely reporting what the sources said, and of course not all investigators will necessarily treat matters the same way. Ed.] But as we know, Ardin didn't do that. If Wilén has given the same reason for sticking to her testimony, I don't know.

The buzz about Irmeli Krans upset a lot of people at police headquarters. When interrogated herself, Irmeli said that she recognised Ardin's name when it popped in as part of Wilén's testimony, but that she'd not met with or even seen Ardin in the police station that day.

Another remarkable thing is that Irmeli initially dissed Wilén's story.

'That's not rape, that won't wash', Irmeli told a colleague. When she repeated that to her station chief, she was reprimanded.

That Irmeli would later take sides with the 'talk about it' campaign against Assange is explained at police headquarters by Irmeli being a politician first and a policeman only afterwards.

'How would it have looked if a well-known LBTQ politician took sides with Flashback? Her political career would have ended', said a female source within the police department.

Then onto the tiresome question about Irmeli's first interrogation with Wilén and the new version of that testimony that she was ordered by Mats Gehlin to put into the computer system. Is there a mysterious first version that we'll never see, a version that's been removed from the system, as the email exchange between Irmeli and Gehlin indicates?

The answer is 'no'. Both versions are in the system so they can be compared. [Note: only the second version, believed to have been 'spiced up' by Borgström, was submitted by Marianne Ny to the court on 18 November. Ed.] Changes have been made, but they're of a stylistic and linguistic nature, according to a 'colleague of a colleague'.

Rick Falkvinge and Anna Troberg of the Pirate Party were interrogated by the police. [Note: their testimony was not part of the court submission either. Ed.] Neither interrogation added anything to what's known about Ardin's behaviour at her crayfish party after Assange's alleged assault - in other words, she acted completely normally and not as a person who was the victim of a traumatic attack. But this doesn't have to mean anything.

Both members of the Pirate Party offered accommodations to Assange. He said 'no' to both offers.

'I would have said 'no' too, there was something bonkers about them both', says a source at police headquarters.

What happened was that Ardin tells them that Assange will continue to stay with her, this after an inquiry by Johannes Wahlström. This we know from the detention memo.

The additional interrogations of Ardin and Wilén yielded nothing. Both women are sticking to their stories. No new information, no real changes.