THE DUCKPOND (Radsoft/Rixstep) — Ace investigative forum Flashback continue their discussion of this evening's events on Swedish state television.
Swedish SVT hyped the 'Agenda' show broadcast 21:15 this evening as including a 'new interview' with Julian Assange. But the anaemic segment - called 'WikiLeaks' Collapse' - used only 10 of the 45 allotted minutes in what used to be excellent investigative reporting, and they used those mere ten minutes for a cherry-picked extract from Andrew Fowler's excellent documentary from three weeks ago.
The only difference between the original and the köttbulle version is the original is complete but doesn't have Swedish subtitles. That seems to make a difference for the people who are at least second best at English in Europe.
The discussion at Flashback continued immediately after the lacklustre Swedish state television 'presentation'. The topics are interweaved - a bit of the documentary and a bit from the earlier discussion about 'condoms' and Anna Ardin's (and Marianne Ny's) risk of going to prison.
It's worth naming the now acquitted doctor from the Astrid Lindgren children's hospital. Three years of torment, and we know now she's a woman. She was picked up brutally from her place of work and sat behind bars as completely innocent, and the single blood test they took was no good.
Add to that the security policeman who was finally acquitted after having been convicted on a medical report signed by Lotti Helström.
And suddenly we have to ask ourselves if JA is unique, special, and a political target. The female doctor and the security policeman don't fit in the template for political conspiracies.
My guess is CB was contacted by AA and SW already Friday or perhaps Saturday morning after their visit to the Klara police. CB has been demonstrably indefinite about the time when he first was contacted by them.
SW doesn't say a thing about broken condoms during her interrogation [with Irmeli Krans] on Friday. But first after that weekend [when they established contact with CB] and in connection with the submission of SW's condom, and this is in conjunction with remarkable new information about 'balloon sounds'.
Up until the interrogations that Friday I don't think there was any planned setup or other mysterious hidden motives behind the events. Things are run mostly by Ardin being out of joint, cruel, and for the moment full of hatred after being dumped by a white heterosexual man.
What then happens through Ny and the others can very well be driven by the need to refuse JA a residence permit as [trenterx] wrote.
And as far as J666's questions about SW's medical report: shouldn't the report be part of the detention memo if it indicated JA had committed a crime in Enköping? EF's decision also points to the report being rather pale: she threw out the SW part of the case. EF should have had access to the report when she made that decision.
I'll guess the chat was something like this from Gehlin/Borgström: 'Anna, you said you had something similar happen to you. That's what's made this case so interesting. A slight hint that someone broke an agreement to use a condom is one thing - it's not something we can build a case on. But you're saying the same thing happened to you. And you're both saying that you have the proof at home in the form of ripped up condoms. So go home and search everywhere for them!'
My take is AA's the type of feminist who will trample over cadavers to get what she thinks is right. And because she's made up her mind SW's been raped by JA, she's going to nail JA no matter it harms SW. SW is not part of AA's 'enlightened' circle, so AA doesn't have to be considerate of her. JA is a threat to all women and must therefore be punished. That's my own theory (which can be totally wrong).
Otherwise the evening's report on JA in Agenda was disappointing. The only information about the legal case was that they're still waiting for a decision.
Agenda broadcast a segment on JA because one is still waiting for a decision but the case itself and the accusations weren't mentioned at all.
The segment, purchased from Australian television, was old hat about JA personally and was followed by a discussion in the studio about the future of WikiLeaks. It would have been so nice if anyone from the media could have reported on the case instead.
If they're afraid of their feminist friends then they can always find another angle such as the legitimacy and the rule of law surrounding the EAW (and thereby not formally a discussion of the accused). They could discuss Sweden's inability to interrogate people who are abroad or take up some of the other strange things found in this case.
Yes it's surely bizarre! In the very best of cases the segment was an advert for next week's show when the decision may be announced, and Agenda can offer a thorough analysis of all the remarkable twists and turns, for example why Ny refuses to use Mutual Legal Assistance to interrogate Assange.
SVT have been hitting the books and probably know where it's all leading. They might even have inside information. Their segment was a typical intro to a more thorough report.
I don't think JA will be extradited to Sweden and then it'll be OK to paint him the hero again in the Swedish media.
It was too dangerous having him here for our relationship with foreign powers but the media actually like WikiLeaks.
If he's not extradited to Sweden, the media interest will move from AA, SW, CB, MN, the FUP, and the sex story that people in the social democrats (AA, CB, et al) concocted. Instead we'll get media focus on the extradition decision and on JA. A decision to not extradite is a crushing criticism of the Swedish judicial system. And the Swedish government will have to take the blame.
WikiLeaks will be praised to the sky now that JA will never again put his foot in the country. NIMBY. That's to say a classic diversionary tactic to protect the social democrats and their lackeys.
That's politics. And everyone knows where SVT have their roots.