Rigged documentary on Julian Assange in the Swedish National Television. Part 3: “Men are animals”
By Prof. Marcello Ferrada-Noli
“To rig means 1. arrange the outcome of by means of deceit 2. manipulate in a fraudulent manner”
Part I Introduction: A. Who is really the one causing the discredit of the Swedish state and the Swedish legal-system? B. Background hypotheses, C. Aims, D. Ethical issues.
Going through the documentary’s political agenda. The Dirty tricks: a) “Assange is the cause”: Manipulating Jan Gillou’s statement, b) What international research has ever concluded that the Swedish system of justice is “the best and fairest in the world”?, c) “Assange is a skilful manipulator”. Translating equivocally to make the passage fit with the documentary thesis: Manipulating Daniel Domscheit-Berg’s statement, d) The blunt lie about Julian Assange leaving Sweden right after the accusations, e) Deceitful omissions: The case of Naomi Wolf. APPENDIX A.Part II “Men that hate women”: a) That women in Sweden are discriminated and even scorned by men in the “data branch”: But only male immigrants are shown, b) A psycho-social rationale for the populist chauvinist card.
Part III “Men are animals”: a) A few words on the genesis of Swedish state-feminism.b) The gender war. c) That women in Sweden are scorned in the Internet for being women. The hidden agenda of the Pirate Party d) That the Swedish women – “such as AA & SW” – that “have been victim of rape” are harassed and discredited by men in the Internet. “Victim” Claes Borgström.
Part IV a) That Swedish women responded spontaneously with a grass root movement, a “mass-movement” prata om det (talk about). Part V Tales of Swedish unfairness: a) Where is Björn Hurtig? b) Where is Jennifer Robinson? c) Where is the truth? Conclusion: The Swedish Television documentary that got the world’s opinion to question Sweden cultural-health status.
a) A few words on the genesis of Swedish state-feminism in the context of the Assange documentary accusations on men’s hate against women
The statement “men are animals” was publicly issued in the Swedish state-owned television by the President of the main Swedish feminist organization “Roks”. Read a background on this notable Swedish gender-perspective posture here.
The scandalous case of “Sweden” against Julian Assange has put Sweden in the center of international focus, which have also invited to an analysis of typical Swedish institutions – cultural, societal or political – such as the phenomenon of Swedish state feminism.
This is a huge subject, a shocking subject for many in the world. It is not about feminism as an ideology or a political movement. It’s about both a school of thought and a fundamentalist political agenda with clearly fascist components that managed, during the time Margareta Winbergwas a minister in the government of Göran Person, to infiltrate the government and acquire strategic positions there, principally in the cultural and educational systems.
This wasn’t a “secret” or “clandestine” operation. This operation was totally in the open around the year 2008 and seen in the propositions of Winberg on behalf of the feminist/supremacist organisation ROKS (in turn inspired by Eva Lundgren).
Margareta Winberg declared herself in the documentary “The gender war“(see below), with these words, that “Roks’ analyses and the Swedish government analyses are in complete agreement” and that her propositions at the Persson’s government were plainly accepted even if she would consider that members of such government did not know or did not understand what she did, what she meant with those propositions, what they were really about!
To put it as simply as possible, the blame for this dramatic blow to the brand Sweden internationally is the sole responsibility of the Swedes themselves – and not for anything Julian Assange may or may not have done. Julian Assange isn’t the cause of this process – he is a victim of it.
So the effort of this ‘feminist’ documentary – if not of the entire ‘public service’ apparatus – is to mobilise public opinion to believe that Sweden, as a state and as a system – and not only the aspects related to fanatical feminism or political corruption – are today the focus of international criticism. And why? Because the Swedish public,
in the absence of sound explanations or any explanations at all by politicians and the mainstream media, have started to wonder themselves what that international scorn is all about.
Those in power in Sweden to not want people to have opinions on these issues. They’re afraid of public scrutiny. They want silent ‘consensus’ instead.
For they’ve rediscovered the techniques used by dozens upon dozens of power elites: chauvinism, patriotism, nationalism – all to obscure their own treasonous agendas. For what they’re doing isn’t in the best interests of Sweden.
Sweden’s interests do not include abandoning the country’s neutrality. Nor the abandonment of equal rights regardless of gender. Nor the ethical deterioration of journalism. Nor the misuse of public institutions and public funds by fanatic and fascist ideologies with no scientific grounds for their preposterous ‘supremacy’ agendas.
As always, the infamous Swedish ‘smugness’ misses the point and power of worldwide opinion outside the borders. They don’t look to export symbols such as IKEA, ABBA, SAAB, or exotic meatballs, or midsummer nights. For these are times of profound change throughout the world, with waves of revolutions, with bloody campaigns to make human rights prevail and fascist rule succumb. The world praises respect for the truth and despises its abuse. Sweden apparently swapped sides in every respectable enterprise.
Everyone in the world around will understand – and this must be the real reason the documentary isn’t made available outside the country – that the documentary makers are taking a free ride on the train of a populism on the rise in Sweden. Everybody in the world around already knows Sweden has a notably higher level of negative sentiment towards immigrants and refugees, this as seen in the rise to power of the
Sweden Democrats, where a significant part of their platform is channelled into the issue of criminality in the immigrant classes and with a concomitant lack of respect for women.
And this is why Sweden’s populism seems to fit so snugly with the documentary:
i) a foreign man, ii) Julian Assange, iii) founder of WikiLeaks, iv) has managed to get the whole world v) against the Swedish state and vi) against the Swedish judicial system.
Remember the mantra repeated over and over again throughout.
“Who would have thought this man could manipulate world opinion to question Sweden and the Swedish legal system?”
[“Vem hade annat att den här mannen skulle få en världsopinion att ifrågasätta Sverige och den svenska rättsstaten?”]
When among other the state-feminism ideology had not been yet officially imposed through a coup promoted by fundamentalist-feminist cohorts organized around the fascist-feminist organization “Roks” and implemented particularly by the social democratic politician and minister Margareta Winberg. (she declared in the documentary “The gender war” that “Roks analyses and the Swedish government analyses are in complete agreement” and that her propositions at the Persson’s government were plainly accepted even if she would consider that members of such government did not know or did not understand what she did, what she meant with those propositions, what they were really about!).
When Sweden had not yet been sold to the multinational corporative-world. When it was still the period of a “Swedish model” to be praised by many in the world. For it was not only and alternative ideological-economic and social model, it was also an effectively functioning model. It was the time when the foreign visitor saw reliable trains and busses under Swedish management run according to schedule, when the health care at the hospitals provided health care without fatal delays, when the newspapers printed the truth, when Sweden championed solidarity to democratic freedom-fighters of the Third world, when solidarity among people was inn and egoist-individualism was despised. In sum, when Sweden followed their own national public interests and not those of the new entrepreneurs and foreign powers to which the country was successively sold.
Sweden was an truly idol in many countries of the world until politicians as Göran Persson and company began to sell the prestigious Swedish neutrality at the same time that in domestic affairs replaced the world-known social solidarity for egoist-individualism and only profit-oriented enterprises. They open the door to superficial and alienated entertainment public service, they let prevail in the administration of justice and higher education fascist-feminists that NOTHING have to do with true Swedish feminist traditions and figures of whom we all were proud of. They allowed and promoted trials with verdicts consistently in favour of women in spite of total lack of evidence, and they favoured the praxis of politically appointing the members of Swedish courts;
Someissues referred in the international criticism of the Swedish system of justice and the Assange case. The vast majority of these issues was not mentioned by the documentary although it was its primarily declared concern!
Sweden has a judiciary system in which judges participating in the courts are appointed by the political parties (there is not Jury-system in Sweden, neither exists in Sweden the institution of bail).
Sweden allows secret, “close-doors” trials. Particularly with regard to sexual-offences trials in which case secret trials is the most common form to be used in the Swedish system of justice.
The appealing system in Sweden has been notably reduced after a law of 2008 (the so called EMR reform) devised to curve down the number of cases resulting on appealing at higher courts.
In the Swedish case against Assange the police investigators conducted interrogations without video-recording, sound-tape recording or other form of transcription. This is an aggravating anomaly and which infringed clear standard proceedings as instructed by the Police Authority with regard to cases involved suspicions of rape.
The interrogation of one of the nominal accusers was performed by a police officer friend of the other nominal accuser.
The interrogation of Julian Assange could have very well have conducted in Sweden but the prosecutor chosen to issue an Interpol warrant what it made possible the fabrication of an extradition case.
The law-firm defending the accusers is co-owned by a politician member of the very same political group within the Swedish Social democratic party, Mr. Thomas Bodström (former Minister of Justice) and in which the accuser AA was at the time of the accusation the political secretary.
The actual lawyer appointed by the firm (the other co-owner of the law firm) is Mr. Claes Bogström, which, together with the prosecutor of the case Ms. Marianne Ny, and together with the former Minister of Justice and chairman of the Justice Committee of the Swedish Parliament Mr. Thomas Bodström participated in the study of the new legislation which radicalized the proceedings and penalties for sexual-offences in Sweden.
Mr. Thomas Bodström was the main politician – apart of the former Prime Minister Göran Persson – signalled around the agreements with CIA on the rendition of political refugees in Sweden to be transported to torture elsewhere. For that he was called upon the Swedish Constitutional Committee. The Swedish political parties however, as well as the mainstream media, did never really condemn such behaviour.
That secret and treacherous political behaviour from the part of top officials in the main Swedish political parties – acting shameless in favour of foreign powers while sacrificing the interest of their own Nation – was later disclosed to public by the WikiLeaks revelations on Sweden. The “Swedish neutrality” – by which so many profitable weaponry-businesses could have been done on Sweden’s behalf during decades in the Third World – in fact it did not exist, it was a blunt lie. And all that with the accomplice silence of the Swedish mainstream media which have hijacked the noble profession of journalism and have deprived it of its fundamental ethics.
Other articles in Professors blogg on the Swedish case against Assange