Why I am Convinced that Anna Ardin is a Liar

by craig on September 11, 2012 1:05 pm in Uncategorized

I am slightly updating and reposting this from 2012 because the mainstream media have ensured very few people know the detail of the “case” against Julian Assange in Sweden. The UN Working Group ruled that Assange ought never to have been arrested in the UK in the first place because there is no case, and no genuine investigation. Read this and you will know why.

The other thing not widely understood is there is NO JURY in a rape trial in Sweden and it is a SECRET TRIAL. All of the evidence, all of the witnesses, are heard in secret. No public, no jury, no media. The only public part is the charging and the verdict. There is a judge and two advisers directly appointed by political parties. So you never would get to understand how plainly the case is a stitch-up. Unless you read this.

There are so many inconsistencies in Anna Ardin’s accusation of sexual assault against Julian Assange. But the key question which leaps out at me – and which strangely I have not seen asked anywhere else – is this:

Why did Anna Ardin not warn Sofia Wilen?

On 16 August, Julian Assange had sex with Sofia Wilen. Sofia had become known in the Swedish group around Assange for the shocking pink cashmere sweater she had worn in the front row of Assange’s press conference. Anna Ardin knew Assange was planning to have sex with Sofia Wilen. On 17 August, Ardin texted a friend who was looking for Assange:

“He’s not here. He’s planned to have sex with the cashmere girl every evening, but not made it. Maybe he finally found time yesterday?”

Yet Ardin later testified that just three days earlier, on 13 August, she had been sexually assaulted by Assange; an assault so serious she was willing to try (with great success) to ruin Julian Assange’s entire life. She was also to state that this assault involved enforced unprotected sex and she was concerned about HIV.

If Ardin really believed that on 13 August Assange had forced unprotected sex on her and this could have transmitted HIV, why did she make no attempt to warn Sofia Wilen that Wilen was in danger of her life? And why was Ardin discussing with Assange his desire for sex with Wilen, and texting about it to friends, with no evident disapproval or discouragement?

Ardin had Wilen’s contact details and indeed had organised her registration for the press conference. She could have warned her. But she didn’t.

Let us fit that into a very brief survey of the whole Ardin/Assange relationship. .

11 August: Assange arrives in Stockholm for a press conference organised by a branch of the Social Democratic Party.
Anna Ardin has offered her one bed flat for him to stay in as she will be away.

13 August: Ardin comes back early. She has dinner with Assange and they have consensual sex, on the first day of meeting. Ardin subsequently alleges this turned into assault by surreptitious mutilation of the condom.

14 August: Anna volunteers to act as Julian’s press secretary. She sits next to him on the dais at his press conference. Assange meets Sofia Wilen there.

Anna tweets at 14.00:

‘Julian wants to go to a crayfish party, anyone have a couple of available seats tonight or tomorrow? #fb’

This attempt to find a crayfish party fails, so Ardin organises one herself for him, in a garden outside her flat. Anna and Julian seem good together. One guest hears Anna rib Assange that she thought “you had dumped me” when he got up from bed early that morning. Another offers to Anna that Julian can leave her flat and come stay with them. She replies:
“He can stay with me.”

15 August Still at the crayfish party with Julian, Anna tweets:

‘Sitting outdoors at 02:00 and hardly freezing with the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing! #fb’

Julian and Anna, according to both their police testimonies, sleep again in the same single bed, and continue to do so for the next few days. Assange tells police they continue to have sex; Anna tells police they do not. That evening, Anna and Julian go together to, and leave together from, a dinner with the leadership of the Pirate Party. They again sleep in the same bed.

16 August: Julian goes to have sex with Sofia Wilen: Ardin does not warn her of potential sexual assault.
Another friend offers Anna to take over housing Julian. Anna again refuses.

20 August: After Sofia Wilen contacts her to say she is worried about STD’s including HIV after unprotected sex with Julian, Anna takes her to see Anna’s friend, fellow Social Democrat member, former colleague on the same ballot in a council election, and campaigning feminist police officer, Irmeli Krans. Ardin tells Wilen the police can compel Assange to take an HIV test. Ardin sits in throughout Wilen’s unrecorded – in breach of procedure – police interview. Krans prepares a statement accusing Assange of rape. Wilen refuses to sign it.

21 August Having heard Wilen’s interview and Krans’ statement from it, Ardin makes her own police statement alleging Assange has surreptiously had unprotected sex with her eight days previously.

Some days later: Ardin produces a broken condom to the police as evidence; but a forensic examination finds no traces of Assange’s – or anyone else’s – DNA on it, and indeed it is apparently unused.

No witness has come forward to say that Ardin complained of sexual assault by Assange before Wilen’s Ardin-arranged interview with Krans – and Wilen came forward not to complain of an assault, but enquire about STDs. Wilen refused to sign the statement alleging rape, which was drawn up by Ardin’s friend Krans in Ardin’s presence.

It is therefore plain that one of two things happened:


Ardin was sexually assaulted with unprotected sex, but failed to warn Wilen when she knew Assange was going to see her in hope of sex.

Ardin also continued to host Assange, help him, appear in public and private with him, act as his press secretary, and sleep in the same bed with him, refusing repeated offers to accommodate him elsewhere, all after he assaulted her.


Ardin wanted sex with Assange – from whatever motive.. She “unexpectedly” returned home early after offering him the use of her one bed flat while she was away. By her own admission, she had consensual sex with him, within hours of meeting him.

She discussed with Assange his desire for sex with Wilen, and appears at least not to have been discouraging. Hearing of Wilen’s concern about HIV after unprotected sex, she took Wilen to her campaigning feminist friend, policewoman Irmeli Krans, in order to twist Wilen’s story into a sexual assault – very easy given Sweden’s astonishing “second-wave feminism” rape laws. Wilen refused to sign.

At the police station on 20 August, Wilen texted a friend at 14.25 “did not want to put any charges against JA but the police wanted to get a grip on him.”

At 17.26 she texted that she was “shocked when they arrested JA because I only wanted him to take a test”.

The next evening at 22.22 she texted “it was the police who fabricated the charges”.

Ardin then made up her own story of sexual assault. As so many friends knew she was having sex with Assange, she could not claim non-consensual sex. So she manufactured her story to fit in with Wilen’s concerns by alleging the affair of the torn condom. But the torn condom she produced has no trace of Assange on it. It is impossible to wear a condom and not leave a DNA trace.


I have no difficulty in saying that I firmly believe Ardin to be a liar. For her story to be true involves acceptance of behaviour which is, in the literal sense, incredible.

Ardin’s story is of course incredibly weak, but that does not matter. Firstly, you were never supposed to see all this detail. Rape trials in Sweden are held entirely in secret. There is no jury, and the government appointed judge is flanked by assessors appointed directly by political parties. If Assange goes to Sweden, he will disappear into jail, the trial will be secret, and the next thing you will hear is that he is guilty and a rapist.

Secondly, of course, it does not matter the evidence is so weak, as just to cry rape is to tarnish a man’s reputation forever. Anna Ardin has already succeeded in ruining much of the work and life of Assange. The details of the story being pathetic is unimportant.

By crying rape, politically correct opinion falls in behind the line that it is wrong even to look at the evidence. If you are not allowed to know who the accuser is, how can you find out that she worked with CIA-funded anti-Castro groups in Havana and Miami?

Finally, to those useful idiots who claim that the way to test these matters is in court, I would say of course, you are right, we should trust the state always, fit-ups never happen, and we should absolutely condemn the disgraceful behaviour of those who campaigned for the Birmingham Six.

Tweet this post


1 8 9 10 11 12 20

  1. Salander (2:44 pm),

    from Arbed’s 4:13 pm extract, I see Guy Sim has lots of tenuous inferences, “suspects”, “unlikely”, “was busy…”, (is it established somewhere when exactly she gave the Aftonbladet interview, and that it was not say CB on her behalf?) and readings of dates on documents, so personally based on that I do not read it as an established fact, and it is Guy Sims who is doing the speculating :-)

  2. Hi Snap,

    Please don’t be confused by the fact that I am reproducing only small excerpts from a 150-page book. Guy Sim establishes the exact times of Anna Ardin’s interview with Aftonbladet on 21 August 2010 beyond any doubt in another chapter. Likewise, he gives lots of evidence across the book to substantiate other matters which might, at first glance, appear to be speculative.

    Would you like to give me an email address so I can send you my pdf copy of the book? Or let me know if you decide to ask Jon the Mod whether he’d be prepared to give me a ‘moderator’s email’ so he can then forward it to you (he’ll have both our email addresses, of course)?

  3. Arbed (5:19 pm),

    My take, looking at the Swedish version in the undermattan docs, is that MG sent CB one file PM.pdf in the email of Aug 26 9:41, which is the day before he sent his letter to demand the case be re-examined.

  4. Dear Snap,

    Ah, does the undermattan version also say “attached files” rather than “attached file”? Guy Sim does definitely think there were two pdfs – but could he be mistaken in this? I’m pasting in below his conclusions on the changes made to Wilen’s statement that Irmeli Krans input to Durtva on 26 August. This chunk is from page 96 of his book, so please bear in mind there’s much much more on individual changes made to the document (eg, around Wilen’s very first contact with Ardin, how she came to hear about Assange’s seminar, etc) in the preceding pages.

    Conclusions on the changes made to the interrogation with Sofia Wilén
    Eva Finné, an experienced Chief Prosecutor, received the 20/8 2010 version and dismissed all the suspicions against Assange. This suggests that the serious accusations, from the heading “The assault” and some text under it, were not present in the 20/8 version which she read, but were subsequently inserted into the 26/8 version. The interrogation part covers five pages in its original Swedish version. The 26/8 changes to the first three pages are minor and cosmetic, giving the impression of a clean-up operation. The reader who perseveres in comparing the two versions, a slow task, does not encounter substantial changes until page four, if he gets that far. They are on parts that were blanked out in the 20/8 version and thus very difficult to detect. In summary, three pages of minor, cosmetic alterations followed by substantial well-hidden changes on page four. For example, in her submission to the Svea Court of Appeal dated 24 November 2010, in connection with her request for the arrest of Julian Assange, Marianne Ny states:

    “Rape 17 August 2010 (Item 5):
    “The complainant Sofia Wilén slept when Julian Assange forced himself into her and only when his penis was in her vagina did she awake.” This is clearly based on the text that was inserted on 26/8 under the heading “The assault.” Under Swedish law a witness is not required to sign a statement, but has it read back to them. The statement was not read back to Sofia Wilén so she never approved it. The police DurTvå Word program had a built-in automatic date and time system that prevented the manipulated 26/8 version being given the date and time of the original 20/8 interrogation. Irmeli Krans did not expect this complication, so wrote a disclaimer claiming that it was not her idea to manipulate the text. Had the DurTvå Word system not had this function, the fact that the text had been doctored would have been much more difficult to detect. The insertion of male slang [Sim details this in preceding pages] in the text suggests that at least some of the manipulation of the text was directed by a man. The ungrammatical phrase in English suggests that his English was not very good. The fact that it is claimed that both women used the highly unusual term “the glans” in fingering Julian Assange for unprotected sex suggests a common denominator. So did the author of the “necessary changes” in Sofia Wilén’s interrogation also advise Anna Ardin what to tell the police in her interrogation? The wording of Police Inspector Irmeli Krans’ disclaimer in the 26/8 version indicates that the “necessary changes” were typed in using a reference document, not pasted from a data file. The changes are too substantial to have been written on a paper copy of the 20/8 version, therefore there should be (or should have been) a document of the “necessary changes” As this document was used for an official purpose it is (or was) an official document and any member of the public in Sweden should have the right to request a copy of it. Some spelling mistakes in the 20/8 version were corrected in the 26/8 version, some were not. All this suggests that the author of the necessary changes” was not very computer savvy, and thus likely to be of middle age or older (assuming that most younger professional people nowadays are computer-literate). If so, the clues so far indicate a man who uses slang, whose command of the English language is not very good, who is an expert at manipulating evidence, who is not computer literate and who is middle aged or older.

    In her application to the Svea Court of Appeal, dated 24 November 2010, Marianne Ny states: “During the preliminary investigation that has been conducted, Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén were interrogated several times.” For each woman there is only one interrogation document in the published sets, so there is unlikely to be more than one such document. When they went to the Klara sub-police station on 20 August they were interviewed by Inspector Linda Wassgren: “I then of course chose to talk with each of the women separately and asked them to tell me the details of what they had experienced.” She did not record what they said. So that makes two interrogations. But the word “several” means more than two (in Swedish as well as in English, “flertal”). Was Sofia Wilén interviewed by this (conjectured) man of middle age or older, and if so did he compose the “necessary changes” document, including his own embellishments? On 25 August 2010, Eva Finné finally closed the case against Julian Assange. The following day, 26 August, Police Inspector Mats Gehlin contacted lawyer Claes Borgström by e-mail at 9.17am. After receiving a confirmation reply from Claes Borgström, Mats Gehlin sent Claes Borgström an e-mail with PDF files attached. Were the PDF files the censored and uncensored versions of the 20/8 interrogation of Sofia Wilén? Irmeli Krans began making the “necessary changes” to Sofia Wilén’s interrogation at 2.43pm that day, approximately five hours after the PDF documents had been sent to Claes Borgström. The previous day, 25 August, after it became known that Eva Finné had discontinued the case, Police Inspector Irmeli Krans had written in her Facebook, “Scandal in every newspaper and news bulletin. But our dear, eminent and exceedingly competent [Social Democrat lawyer] Claes Borgström will hopefully bring a little order!”

    All the “necessary changes” that incriminate Julian Assange are in the 19 percent of text that was blanked out in the censored 20/8. If some of them had been in the 81 percent of legible text, the manipulation would have been apparent to anyone comparing the censored 20/8 with 26/8. Only the censored 20/8 was available to the public. The success of this strategy is apparent in the fact that it has remained a well-kept secret for two years. The fact that the incriminating “necessary changes” are in the blanked out 21 percent cannot be accidental, they are too targeted. So the author of the “necessary changes” must have worked from two documents, the uncensored 20/8 and the censored 20/8. Apart from prosecutor Eva Finné, it seems that no-one outside the police had the
    uncensored 20/8. So the author most probably received the uncensored 20/8, and presumably also the censored 26/8, from the police. The most probable way for the police to send these two documents to the author would be as PDFs attached to an e-mail.

    On 1 September 2010, Chief Prosecutor Marianne Ny resurrected the case and justified this on the basis of the transcripts, including the 26/8 (doctored) version of the interrogation of Sofia Wilén. Marianne Ny’s decision is set out in a document signed by her and headed (in Swedish) “Decision on Review of Case” (AM 2010/5245). “In my examination of the case I conclude that there is reason to assume that crimes under the heading of public prosecution have been committed. Against the background of that set out in the documents of the case at present a relevant act shall be considered to be rape.” “Documents of the case at present” on 1 September clearly meant the 26/8 version. Was Marianne Ny aware of the fact the 20/8 version and the 26/8 version were not identical? Julian Assange’s lawyer, Björn Hurtig, was clearly unaware of it, because in his appeal document to the Svea Court of Appeal dated 19 November 2010 opposing the arrest order of Julian Assange) he quotes the subheading “The assault” and the paragraph under it, including “he had pulled on the condom only over the glans,” “she came to, feeling him pushing into her” and “You better don’t have HIV.” Marianne Ny was slow in providing the Sofia Wilén interrogation (26/8 version) to Assange’s lawyers.

  5. Hello Arbed,

    Is it worth my time to explain this? I will need some help with a couple of lines of Swedish, and need to write clearly with reference to the material, as I have no wish to get drawn into tiresome arguments with the trolls. I was only referring to the apparent interpretation of the MG emails; these other allegations you put above are too much to read for now, but seem to show he has a theory and is then clutching at straws to support it.

    – Has Guy Sim established exactly which program was used to print the MG emails?

    In the meantime, if you want some datapoints, take a look at whatever email programs you can view and see how they present the header line (none/singlular/plural) for different sample emails with zero, one, two or more (.pdf) attachments and make a note together with the program name and version.

    I have always hoped that someone would by now have produced an English translation of these FOI documents, as Rixstep did for the earlier ones. I’m getting the picture now that Guy Sim’s book is largely based on these recent documents at undermattan etc.
    – Has he any other new sources he has obtained himself?
    – Does he give his qualifications or affiliations? (even in reading Swedish)

    I believe it leads to a better understanding to work from the sources than to fill one’s head with appealing embellished stories or “facts” that are mere speculations, and to then have to work hard to clear it out.

    To be positive, I hope it prompts people to better document and first translate the new FOI documents.

  6. Hello Duqu (9 Nov, 10:48 am),

    were you responding to me when you wrote this?:

    “Ewa Finné: statement on Saturday, the prosecutor office rushed docs via curir to Finne´s summerhouse outside Stockholm, she read it and then faxed back here decition that it was no rape and the arrestwarrant was removed.How d
    Papercopies at undermattan.com, se assangedocuments.”

    Perhaps you had seen my question:

    “If Eva Finne was on vacation (was she?), then how did she come to be called in to sort it out?”

    I’m more or less aware of the courier and faxing on the Saturday. I was asking about the official procedural steps that lead to her being involved in the case at all.
    – Did she intervene on her own authority? Or, did someone else call her back from holiday?

    As I have since written:

    “May one also presume, in the normal case in Sweden, such an arrest decision by a duty prosecutor is not temporary but would have remained in force without any further review?”

    – What is your take on this?

    (To all:) If that is normally so, then if indeed there was a grand plan, then when analysing, people need to remember this unanticipated U-turn.

  7. Hi Snap,

    Sorry, but unless you’ve actually read Guy Sim’s book yourself, your criticism of it seems a bit unfair to me. It almost could come across as carping about things, or dismissing something out of hand, before even having the full picture. I’d like to think I’m not a stupid person, and also that I’m pretty well informed about the Swedish case overall. I have read the whole book and take it seriously. Much of what’s in the book I personally already knew from my own researching over the course of two years. Sim clearly has researched very well and his sources are diverse. He uses a lot of stuff uncovered by Flashback (which, of course, is closely associated with undermattan) and, though I don’t know for sure, I had assumed “Guy Sim” was a pseudonym for someone working directly FROM Sweden…

    I hope this doesn’t come out sounding too harsh but I really think your research will suffer, lag behind, if you don’t acquaint yourself with all the NEW evidence revealed for the first time in Sim’s book. Even Flashback are finding some bits and pieces new to them in it. John Goss pointed out that you could order Sim’s book using cash in a local bookstore, if that’s the most suitable route for you.

  8. Arbed,

    you are indeed being too harsh and again quite condescending (you don’t sound sorry), given I helpfully contributed my take in brief form (11 Nov, 6:21 pm), based on my technical expertise, having looked at several documents. I then spent over an hour drafting my response to your disputing reply (over 1000 words quoted), and asked you sincerely some questions which would help me to have a better basis for me to then spend more time to compose a definitive reply so as to avoid arguments which I foresaw would come if I made another off-hand reply. Instead my scarce hours are further spent on your incautious response.

    The reason I asked you to look for yourself at the behavior of email programs to see how they “present” i.e. display (in singular or plural), in a small scientific experiment of sorts, was to encourage you to think about the basis for the inferences being made and provide me with some data points to help answer you.

    I had hoped I could by now make a very brief response and at most be asked politely to elaborate, and then to have others reciprocate making a comparable effort to answer my questions.

    Kindly white-out for now whatever sentences may appear unfair and take me in good faith and try to respond constructively rather than argumentatively in answering my direct questions, and with more respect for me and my time, which is better spent on the little known “new” information I have in mind to contribute.

  9. Hi Snap,

    Oh dear, we really don’t see eye to eye, do we? You are asking me to do this:

    “The reason I asked you to look for yourself at the behavior of email programs to see how they “present” i.e. display (in singular or plural), in a small scientific experiment of sorts, was to encourage you to think about the basis for the inferences being made and provide me with some data points to help answer you.”

    but surely this is YOUR approach to research, not mine. I have already told you I do not have a scientific background. I am not making any inferences about email programs; I am simply reporting that Guy Sim believes there were two emails sent by Mats Gehlin to Claus Borgstrom.

    Because I have reported that fact here, Flashback have picked it up and are, as we speak, busy researching this particular issue. I keep an eye on Flashback and will pick up the result of their endeavours (and I’ll report back here). This is more my style of collaborative research. It seems silly for me to attempt to ape a style of research for which I am not trained. I promise you the results would be amateur in the extreme if I did. So it seems to me to be a much better idea if I don’t go off on tangents trying to do stuff which is beyond me and I have no talent for. I am much better off sticking to what I know and following an approach which suits my skills and background: close reading and detailed textual analysis.

  10. Dear Arbed,

    that is also rather unwarranted that your two links placed in the most current thread on the site go directly to your over-reactionary and over-generalising criticism of me posted above. Kindly ask Jon to edit them to a more appropriate form ASAP.

    To be frank, my research suffers greatly from the effort it takes to deal with your snowballing exchanges, which start when I tactfully hint (from my knowledge and expertise and what I assumed you should have known) you may need to look deeper or qualify you assertions, as you have acknowledged and indeed at times taken on board. I continue to extend to you much patience and forgiveness, as you ask, so kindly show a little more appreciation.

    (9 Nov, 12:53 pm)

  11. Oh, apologies – I simply cut and paste the url for page 5 from my browser bar but I had refreshed the page before I did it. I thought that would simply link to “bottom of the page 5”, not to a specific comment as I wasn’t within or linked to a specific comment at the time.

    I did say I wasn’t ‘tech’ or scientifically literate, didn’t I? :) Can you tell me please how to get the correct “bottom of page” (or top of page, doesn’t matter which) link, and I’ll give it to the moderator to substitute into my post.

  12. Hi Snap,

    “…which start when I tactfully hint (from my knowledge and expertise and what I assumed you should have known) you may need to look deeper or qualify you assertions”

    but why tactfully hint? If you have knowledge about the case or expertise that others don’t have, why not just share that knowledge? Get it out there, tell others what you know which they don’t – that way everyone benefits, surely?

  13. PS.

    “… my time, which is better spent on the little known “new” information I have in mind to contribute”

    This is what I meant by above post. If you have info, please share, spit it out. The more new info that comes out in unravelling this Swedish case, the better.

  14. Arbed,

    the number tags (#123456) refer to particular posts.
    no numbers or # (…/comment-page-5/) gets the top of the topic post.
    ask Jon if there is a special tag for the bottom.
    #comments gets the top of the comments on the page like this (try it):

  15. Arbed (3:41 pm),

    I think if you made even a small effort to look at your own inbox, you may well find that even your own email program uses the plural “Attachments:” even if there is one, and lists the different files if there is more than one. That alone counters the inferences Guy Sim is using to say the email contained two pdf files, unless he has forensics on the actual program used to print the emails of MG in the FOI documents to prove that.

    Most books give a brief description of the Author near the front or on the cover. There are various Guy Sim persons on the web, so it would help to identify which one if any he is.

    Provided that the FOI documents at undermattan are genuine, and given no other evidence not mentioned above by Guy Sims, I stand by my take, that MG sent CB one file PM.pdf in the email of Aug 26 9:41, which is the day before CB sent his letter to demand the case be re-examined. In adittion, the PM.pdf most likely refers to the terminolgy used for a Memo in Durtva, which is “PM”, whereas the witness statements etc. have different title words in Swedish. In addition, the documents show that MG sent the PM to CB in consultation with Eva Finne on Aug 26. As I indicated, I will need help with a few sentences of Swedish to state that more precisely, but I think it says Eva Finne phoned MG and asked him to send the PM to CB, which he did.

    Let me know when flashback themselves figure this out, or find some solid contradictory evidence to what is in these documents, or someone wishes to help with precise Swedish translation, or engage in constructive discussion.

  16. Hmmm…
    Is his correct name Sims as in “Guy J Sims”? Most of the items here use “Sim”, so can we get this straight and fix the typos please.

  17. Hello Arbed,

    I tactfully hint, because that is what learned friends do to avoid hostile argument and to allow for the posibility of not being absolutely certain due to the existence of otherwise unknown facts or evidence.

    For example, you made indirect references to the existence of what I elsewhere called “new hard facts which are rather secret to most” when you stated the need to amend a formal letter to Perklev to add “a sentence or two about the rape certificates”, and also “It could be altered very easily to include reference to the hospital rape certificate that one Flashbacker wants it to cover.”. I then hinted (note the key words “specific” and “beyond speculation”):

    – Has something specific emerged on “the hospital rape certificate” beyond speculation?

    To which you condescendingly responded:

    There is a big scandal about fake rape certificates being issued by that particular hospital. Rixstep has done an article on this issue. Should be easy enough to find if you check Rixstep’s “Assange” archive.

    I am well aware of the general scandal and what is at rixstep and radsoft and also the more specific speculation at DaddysSverige’s blog, as indeed I told you earlier in this post:

    When you make such references to documents, I cannot prove their non-existence, so the onus is on you to provide a specific reference etc. when reasonably questioned, as I did.

    Similarly, see what I asked about “all online traces professionally scrubbed”…

    There are other things I have hinted at, too.

  18. Snap 4.49pm

    Yes, I am aware of every single fact you give in this post. Flashback too have already figured out all this. What is new – which Guy Sim supplies – is the detailed textual analysis behind his assertion that there must be two documents from which whoever did the alterations of Wilen’s statement must have worked, as set out in my 11 Nov 7.22pm post:

    “All the “necessary changes” that incriminate Julian Assange are in the 19 percent of text that was blanked out in the censored 20/8. If some of them had been in the 81 percent of legible text, the manipulation would have been apparent to anyone comparing the censored 20/8 with 26/8. Only the censored 20/8 was available to the public. The success of this strategy is apparent in the fact that it has remained a well-kept secret for two years. The fact that the incriminating “necessary changes” are in the blanked out 21 percent cannot be accidental, they are too targeted.”

    I find that persuasive. But then, I’ve read the whole book, so I have seen exactly how he demonstrates line by line the percentage of text altered, one document superimposed (using textual formatting) on top of the other, and what those alterations were. I’m persuaded by his argument, having reviewed it thoroughly for myself. What more can I say?

    May I make a suggestion please, Snap? I think there’s maybe a problem with your approach of tactful hinting and I think I can illustrate what I mean by that with the material you reproduce above. You say: “I then hinted (note the key words “specific” and “beyond speculation”): Has something specific emerged on “the hospital rape certificate” beyond speculation?”

    Now I’m not a mind-reader so, without the later explanation that the original question was in fact a hint, or the pointers contained in the brackets, the original question is waaaayyyyy too subtle for me. I just read it as ‘Oh look, another commenter on the blog is asking a straightforward question’, which I answer by pointing them to a website source I know has written in depth on that particular issue. Not meant to be condescending at all. Meant to be helpful. But, unfortunately, read as condescending. I’m upset that this happens so I think I should desist from trying to be helpful to other posters on this site – I’m obviously not good at it.

    “When you make such references to documents, I cannot prove their non-existence, so the onus is on you to provide a specific reference etc.”

    This bit I don’t understand at all. My original post about the letter to Anders Perklev, as far as I can recall, was not addressed to you but was a message to Flashback. I did not know the specifics of whatever additions Flashback wished to make about the hospital rape certificates, I had just read (on Flashback) that they were thinking of writing an open letter to Anders Perklev and felt it should also talk about the certificates. All I was doing was suggesting there was an easily alterable existing letter. Suggesting that to Flashback. What questions was I asking you about it? I don’t remember any so I don’t understand why this has upset you somehow.

    Are you saying that the secret information you have that you want to share is about the rape certificate? Is that it? I’ve read the Daddy’s Sweden link again. The only new information on it – new to me, that is – is what he says about it being legally possible to compel a reluctant complainant. Is what you’re hinting at – the work you are doing on the “new hard facts which are rather secret to most” – anything to do with that? Doubtless you will not be thankful for it, but my two-penneth-worth about Sophie Wilen being compelled against her will with regard to a rape certificate is that I think it would’ve come out that she had been compelled in some way in the statements of her witness friends, as she spoke to the majority of those subsequent to her hospital visits, and there’s nothing to indicate it in those. I’ve done a very long review of Sophie Wilen’s “witnesses” statements at 11 Nov 3.14pm – I don’t know if any of that is helpful to you.

    Look Snap, I’m clearly NOT the right person for you to be asking any questions. I seem not to understand them in the first place, and I only upset you with my responses. Please do not ask me any further questions.

  19. Hi all. I caught sight of some of the exchanges here, and seeing some conflict decided to take a further peek. I’m not following the Assange legal case in detail, but all credit to everyone here for getting involved in the nitty-gritty.

    Snap, you earlier asked me for advice on how to convey tone when making statements. Since you seem to be having some problem with that, I’ll offer some brief thoughts. I’m not speaking as a moderator here – just as an observer in a coffee-shop, listening to your public conversation!

    From what I can tell, Arbed is a genuine and thoughtful interlocutor, with an readable, discursive style, a readiness to apologise, and an excellent ability to make amends for the inaccuracies of human communication.

    On the other hand, I am sad to see you have been: volunteering other people for various kinds of work, patronising, over-sensitive, over-cautious and occasionally plain rude. Your excellent standard of English leads me to think that you are not just accidentally reaching for the wrong word, but I appreciate that there are other possible reasons why you genuinely find other people’s responses frustrating. Unfortunately, I think you have taken an initial incorrect view of Arbed, and this has spiralled, despite her repeated diplomacy and attempts at conciliation.

    Shall I furnish some examples?

    I am aware of more than you assume, which is mildly annoying, or hinting from considerable expertise for you to think clearly about what impressions you have made based on catchy stories.

    Here you’ve taken offence where none was intended, blamed your conversational partner for your feelings of annoyance, and implied that whilst you have “considerable expertise” (arrogance), your exchange partner may need instruction in “thinking clearly” (patronising).

    I’d really like and encourage others such as yourself to do likewise in writing what you know and further to demand the Press to perform their proper function in society.

    Volunteering other people for work. Why not do it yourself?

    Arbed, actually I was asking you to have the grace to place your response to one of my questions I asked in the other thread in place there as a conversation

    Accusing ones conversational partner of gracelessness won’t help the conversation along – it is, again I am sorry to say it, rude and unnecessary. What does such a statement of exasperation achieve, other than offence?

    Instead my scarce hours are further spent on your incautious response.

    Another one, no further comment necessary!

    that is also rather unwarranted that your two links placed in the most current thread on the site go directly to your over-reactionary and over-generalising criticism of me posted above.

    More rudeness and substantial over-sensitivity.

    To be frank, my research suffers greatly from the effort it takes to deal with your snowballing exchanges, which start when I tactfully hint

    Same again.

    Snap, your interest in this case is commendable, as is your demand for detail. But something is getting in the way, and obviously since I don’t know you I can’t say what it is. For what it’s worth, I think you should take up your own excellent ideas – such as making an internet-based timeline of events, or a summary of evidence from here and Flashback etc. If you can take a moment to analyse your style of interlocution too, I think that would be time well spent.

  20. Arbed (4:00 pm),

    In line with your undertaking I (rather unnecessarily) explained to you the links at 4:45 pm, and there are signs of a moderator at work, so I am disappointed to see those links remain there unchanged at present in the most recent topic. Please see this gets corrected soon.


  21. Hello Jon,

    Could you please replace the two links back to this page that I’ve included in this post:


    with this (twice):


    Thanks very much and for your kindness above.

  22. Hi Arbed, no problem, and that’s done.

  23. Hello Jon the moderator, Clark?,

    I could do with some non-judgemental, non-side taking, respectful open minded, inquiring mediation here with this very awkward situation here that has been now created by the unsolicited intervention of Jon the “non-moderator”, making very unhelpful remarks that are a very unfair denigration of me and my intentions in a way I am most unhappy to have left here on this board, and unhappy to have to take further hours of time I do not have to spare to clear up even as far as to make this statement, while I was trying to find time to make any sense from Arbed’s last post which misunderstands me again.

    How can we sort this out, as I am already the one here who feels under attack after merely having posted my considered opinion on a couple of very limited points, stating them clearly as my take or how I personally read it, contributing my analysis and information, and stating I did not wish to be drawn into arguments and trying to draw a line under it with a further clearly specified opinion, on one very specific point.

    Your dual role does not leave me the freedom to reply to you on an equal footing, so because of that I will make no comments on any of your statements, and would kindly request that Jon the moderator removes Jon the non-moderator’s post for the time being, and request you both leave me alone so I can get some rest from this most exhausting exchange.

    Ideally if Clark was willing to engaage in a helpful manner that would be very much appreciated, but I am sadly aware of his resignation as a moderator. Otherwise who do you propose is in a position to mediate this most unjustified situation I am being cornered into.

  24. Snap wrote: “If Eva Finne was on vacation (was she?), then how did she come to be called in to sort it out?”
    I’m more or less aware of the courier and faxing on the Saturday. I was asking about the official procedural steps that lead to her being involved in the case at all.
    – Did she intervene on her own authority? Or, did someone else call her back from holiday?”

    Anders Perklev, Riksåklagare (chief prosecutor), intervened. He contacted Mats Åhlund (överåklagare, ”head prosecutor”) who took the decision.

    This is the story according to Expressen on Sept 3 2010 (my translation):

    “Överåklagare Mats Åhlund was contacted by his boss, Anders Perklev. The Chief Prosecutor had concluded that the case should be lifted off the duty prosecutor, since she suffered from heavy work load. I decided that Eva Finne should take over the case, Mats Åhlund said.” http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/darfor-drojer-julian-assange-utredningen/

    Comment: Eva Finne must have been contacted on Saturday morning. The unanswered question is why Perklev took his initiative. Did he discuss this with the government or not?
    Most of the Swedish government were gathered at a crayfish party (another one!)on Friday evening. The arrest in abstentio of Julian Assange must have been known there early Friday evening. It must have been a talking point. And, I assume, there must have been a discussion in the inner cabinet. The likelihood is that they were surprised and wanted to know what the hell was going on. Even if we assume that there was a secrete service operation involved (a speculation) it need not have been known even by the PM, especially if it was organised by a foreign secret service.

  25. addition to previous comment: Anders Perklev contacted Mats Åhlund on Saturday morning, according to the same source as above. Thus Eva Finne was appointed on the Saturday and made a very quick and efficient job in the Wilen case, based on the original version of the interview with Sofia Wilen.

  26. Am glad this thread is still open. Loved the email exchange between nutcase Mary Eng and capeless superhero Goran. “Bent penis” – that’s my pickup line!

    @Jon – you got it right. Some people read things into exchanges that don’t exist. Arbed has been straight up and down on this subject.

    But I have a question. Did Goran get to nail Mary?

  27. @ Salander 13 Nov 12.23pm

    Have there been any more names added to those we know were at the crayfish party at Harpsund on that Friday evening (20 August 2010) when the arrest warrant was issued? I had heard that Carl Bildt was a confirmed guest and also the husband of the on-duty prosecutor (the chap who worked in Beatrice Ask’s office, forget his name now).

    Any more now known? All details you have gratefully received. :)

  28. I am glad this page is still going. I’ve just finished reading Guy Sims’ book on ‘Julian Assange in Sweden’ and confess it is worth every penny, There is so much information, a lot of it new, and it very well demonstrates how Sweden has turned positive discrimination (in favour of feminists) into a fine art. One of the things that stuck out was the recent changes (2005) in Swedish rape law classification. I almost burst out laughing, but perhaps that is my insensitivity as a man, when I read that placing a finger inside a woman, without asking her, or without her asking him to do so (unasked is a bit ambiguous) first, amounts to rape.

    “For example, a man inserting his finger into a woman’s vagina, unasked; this now qualified as rape with potentially a long prison sentence.”

    It is not for me to question the peculiarities of law in a land in which I do not live but I do think this rather peculiar. What made me smile later was what Anna Ardin allegedly said in her police statement: “When asked Anna replied Assange must have known that it was for a condom . .” she was reaching. Despite the free discussion of sex that is apparent in Sweden Julian has got to be able to read Anna Ardin’s mind when she wants something. But if in the course of foreplay it reaches a stage where (hypothetically) Julian has a desire to insert a finger into her vagina he has to ask: “Excuse me, Anna, is it all right now for me to insert a finger into your vagina to comply with the 2005 changes in Swedish rape laws?” Or Anna, who cannot even tell him she is reaching for a condom, “Excuse me Julian the time has come for you to be able to insert a finger into my vagina”. Or am I misinterpreting? I notice these changes to the law were introduced on April 1 (April Fool’s Day here in England).

    I have read a lot of books. Perhaps my own experience was originally based on the romance of novels. Anyway to my mind there seems to be a certain point, a mutual understanding if you like, between a man and a woman as to when their relationship has reached a certain stage. Otherwise the woman tells the man she does not want to go further. I have never come across any mention of this particular “excuse me” courtesy anywhere. Is this one of the reasons why Sweden’s ‘rape laws’ have become the laughing-stock of the world? Does a man have to ask his wife every time they make love if certain practices are permissible that they have been engaging in all their lives prior to 2005? My God! What have they done to human relationships?

  29. Snap, please do not feel cornered. We are all adults here and opinionated–everybody makes their own judgment. Arbed is playing with a straight bat and, I believe you are too. Your style may at times be a little irksome but that is no big deal. In the spirit that 1+1=11 I think you could both still collaborate for the larger good, with a little more give and take, but it does take TIME and patience. Please be clear, i am not trying to be patronising and am saying what i am at the risk of butting in. Think of the price Assange is paying in pursuit of greater freedom and right action, and i don’t take my personal freedom for granted. Celebrate it and lighten up. Every relationship/dialogue is an opportunity to create harmony. I won’t live in conflict. If its not soluble, even with compassion, one walks away from it.

    We all have different styles. There is something of a construct that people have that is considered ‘normal’, but the Universe presents immense variety. I live my life on 3 basic principles as Einstein elucidated: Truth, Goodness and Beauty. Please understand i am not sermonizing; merely, sharing.

  30. Arbed wrote:
    Have there been any more names added to those we know were at the crayfish party at Harpsund on that Friday evening (20 August 2010) when the arrest warrant was issued? I had heard that Carl Bildt was a confirmed guest and also the husband of the on-duty prosecutor (the chap who worked in Beatrice Ask’s office, forget his name now).

    The party is a highlight of the year, before work starts properly in the autumn. Most of the government would have been there. Fredrik Reinfeldt (PM), Carl Bildt (foreign minister), Beatrice Ask (“justice minister”), Sven Tolgfors (defense minister)were all there, as far as I understand it. And all the party leaders in the “Alliance government, Jan Björklund (liberal), Maud Olofsson (center party), Göran Hägglund (christian democrat). Most of the second in command in each ministry would have been there also. I have not heard that Per Kjellstrand, married to the on-duty prosecutor Maria, was there.

    Two journalists, Niklas Svensson and his photographer received the tip about Assange’s arrest while at Harpsund. There has been some speculation that the tip might have come from someone at the party, perhaps even Carl Bildt. Bildt has always denied any american pressure on Sweden in this issue, perhaps because he does not need to be pressed at all.

  31. Thanks Salander,

    That’s quite a list you’ve got there! Hmm, very true what you say about Carl Bildt. Though, personally, I’ve always felt the tip-off was in the other direction, ie that Svensson and co received the tip from the source “close to the investigation”/one of the women (most likely Ardin) and they passed it to the political players they were mixing with at the time they received it.

    You wouldn’t happen to know what time of day these annual shindigs at Harpsund start, would you? Maria Kjellstrand issued the warrant for Assange’s arrest at precisely 5pm on Friday 20 August 2010. We know Linda Wassgren phoned Mats Gehlin in the Family Violence Unit, the station officer Johan Hallberg and a couple more (as yet unknown) people. Do we know anything about who Kjellstrand spoke to before (or shortly after) issuing the warrant? Might she have phoned her husband at all that afternoon? Regarding hubby Per being at the Harpsund party, I thought Flashback had found that out last year sometime and established that he was in fact there.

    Ever since I first heard where Svensson was when he got the initial tip-off about the women’s visit to police I’ve always felt that there’s more to the Harpsund angle. Like there’s still a missing link in the puzzle chain and Harpsund somehow might just be it… I suppose it’s been firmly established that Karl Rove wasn’t even in Sweden that night, let alone swanking it up with his Bestest Pal Reinfeldt? :( Pity

  32. The Harpsund event started before lunch on Friday. Seminar about the economic situation in the afternoon. Discussions about Pakistan. Press conference with plenty of journalists in the late afternoon. Swimming, sauna and leisure after that. Drinks and mingle at 19.30. Sit down dinner after 20.00 with crayfish, snaps and singing. Good mood in anticipation of an election victory in four weeks. In that atmosphere the news about Assange’s arrest must have been received by some of the key ministers before the mingle started.

    Here is a feature article, including some pictures, by a well-known player, Niklas Svensson, in a well-known newspaper ,Expressen, published on August 21 at 15.23. Around an hour before Eva Finne closed the rape case.

  33. To Arbed. As far as I know Karl Rove was not in Sweden when the case exploded, or the week before. But he was there earlier in the summer. This picture is from Almedalen, Gotland, the place for the most important political civil society gathering in Sweden every year. First or second week in July. Rove had a closed dinner with political friends there.

    On the picture is Bill McCormac, Republican American living in Sweden, working on Prime PR, Karl Rove and Fredrik Andersson, member of the moderate party (Carl Bildt’s party) and head of Prime PR:s office in New York. If any of you know anything about Prime’s american and british links it would be of interest.


  34. Hi Salander,

    There’s someone who comments regularly on Craig’s blog who’s very good at digging into company records. I’ll ask them if they can find anything out for you. Brb.

  35. Arbed, re: your link on the Correa post.

    All I’ve been able to find up to now is the UK twitter account for PrimePR. I guess you might already have that.


    Will try some more.

  36. re Bill McCormac

    Not sure this is the same family. But it was a Republican success of an older sister of a Will McCormack (note difference in spelling) however don’t rule it out as being the same person.


  37. The older sister’s name is Bridget McCormack.


    They seem to be a very influential family. Of course it may not be the same person.

  38. Sorry, Salander I missed your earlier request for the same information.

    Here is an image of writer/actor Will McCormack, younger brother of Supreme Court Judge, Bridget. Is it the same person as in your photo? I’m not very good at lookalikes.


  39. @ John Goss 2.03pm

    Hi John,

    No, that’s not the right guy – wrong eye colour – or family (the McCormac spelling is correct). I’m not even sure that primesw.co.uk is part of the same Prime group we’re after. Here’s is McCormac’s biog page from Prime’s Swedish website (use Google translate):


  40. Thanks Arbed. Will drop that lead.

  41. And here Fredrik Andersson’s biog from Prime’s Swedish website:


  42. John, I don’t know exactly which sources Mary uses to dig up the stuff she does but if you do know perhaps you could start with those sources? I’m aware Flashback does already have quite a bit on this Prime two-some; what I think they’re after is more on any connections via companies they are associated with, or have previously been associated with, in the UK or US.

    Mary very kindly said “will do, but not today” as she’s heading off to the demo about the Gaza raids today, so if you’re not busy perhaps you can do it, or some of it, for her?

  43. Arbed, Salander, apologies if you’ve already seen, or posted this.


  44. Arbed, now I’m clearer as to what you want, the best site I know is:


    I’ve searched this site using Bill McCormac, Billy McCormac, and William McCormac to no avail. There is probably a US equivalent and I’ll try to find out what that is. I think to be a director in the UK you have to have an address here.

  45. Nothing. Only Sweden. There is a US address that appears to pick up McCormac’s email address {billy.mccormac@gmail.com} but you have to pay.


    My concern is it might direct one back to the Swedish sites. Perhaps Mary can come up with something. Komodo is also good at getting this kind of information. If McCormac works for the CIA they have most likely scrubbed anything connected with his former life. He seems to have stock exchange knowledge. The easy way to pay him is for the CIA to use its insider knowledge and transfer a few shares from time to time. As you can see from the Correa blog post drug money is being used to try and depose the president of Equador.

  46. Arbed, I’ve found a number of Swedish videos of McCormac talking (in Swedish) with a panel of five including a Wikileaks’ representative, but I guess you know about this and you can no doubt understand it, which I can’t.

    As to his US roots I suspect he is a descendent of a Harvard educated family man who settled in California and was a scientist and NASA space expert called William Murray Mccormac (1920-1999). There is a family resemblance, perhaps a grandson.


  47. Oh dear. Looks like Goran Rudling’s “Samtycke Leaks” may be going viral.


    as a result of this:



    Meanwhile, anyone want to sign the petition against the misguided and ill-informed campaign to ban Julian Assange’s appearance at the Cambridge Union?


    It’s appalling that these people are referring to him as a “confessed rapist” when he has vehemently denied these allegations over and over again.

  48. Susy Langsdale, CUSU Women’s Officer should hang her head in shame for this ridiculous campaign to silence an uncharged man:


    Looks like it’s worked too:


    Suzy Langsdale has already been given much in the way of facts about the Swedish investigation in feedback from Cambridge students – just in case her campaign was based on genuine ignorance about them. It seems she hasn’t bothered to educate herself and has simply decided that nowadays if anyone has a sexual allegation made against them they no longer have the right to be heard or the right to defend themselves. Presumption of innocence? Pah! Who needs that?

    Extremely well-researched and informative book, available for download for less than $3. Best conpendium of facts about the Swedish investigation to date:

    Guy Sim, Julian Assange in Sweden – what really happened:

  49. For Arbed and anyone interested. It appears that your Billy McCormac is the son of Billy Murray McCormac mentioned above. So his father must have been middle-aged when he fathered Billy (unless Willy is in his sixties). He has made two donations of $1000 to the Democratic National Committee Services Corporation in 2009 and this year. I can find no details of him having any directorships in the US or UK. His father worked on Nuclear weapons’ experiments in Europe and elsewhere. His name is Billy Murray McCormac II and there is very little about him anywhere under Billy McCormac or any other name. But it appears he is not short of money.


  50. Dear Arbed and Mr. John Goss

    I have been extremely busy with work and travels and not been able to keep in touch with developments on this issue as i would have liked to. However I will be penning an article very soon for a very reputable international newspaper from a developing country on developments in the Assange case and would appreciate your input.

    email me at:gondwanaland69@yahoo.com

    Thank you.

  51. It is interesting that McCormac has made donations to the Democratic National Committee Services but describes himself as a Republican.


    I am struggling to find out what University (or military academy) he went to. Anybody know?

  52. Can anybody open this please and post its contents. It says something about Billy McCormac and the CIA not having the capability for something.


  53. Hi John,

    It won’t open for me either. Perhaps you should repaste your request in the latest thread and request Clark’s (or another one of the ‘techie’ chaps on the blog) help with it. He’s back commenting again.

  54. Hello Arbed and John. I’ve cached something that could be your target here:


  55. It looks as if the original article was on site of the Timbro Swedish think-tank. There is a Wikipedia article about Timbro, and they have an English entry-point to their web site:



  56. Clark thank you. This was the piece I was after.


    I located it by cutting some of the text from below the link.

  57. Hi Everyone,

    The Flashback folk have unearthed potentially explosive news. English speakers will need to use Google translate on the links below, and likewise with the links within the Flashback posts.

    Brief summary is that a 7 September 2010 raid in Sweden on a network of “elite” file-sharers – misleadingly described as co-ordinated by the Belgian authorities and as “nothing to do with Wikileaks” in the Swedish MSM at the time – was in fact a smokescreen for a CIA op to link two particular IP addresses: one was Bradley Manning’s aunt’s house, the other was to Wikileaks’ server at Swedish host at the time of Cablegate, PRQ.

    Here are the best Flashback posts giving the details:



    And here’s the “smokescreen” story as it appeared on Sveriges Radio’s site on 7 September 2010:


    PRQ, of course, is the company founded by Gottfrid Svartholm – @Anakata – also co-founder of The Pirate Bay and friend of Julian Assange, who is currently 11 weeks into detention in solitary confinement for various reasons:

    – serving the one-year prison sentence he was given in absentia for his role in the Pirate Bay

    – “suspicions” (ie not yet charges) allegedly relating to a hack of Logica, contractor to the Swedish tax authorities and Defence systems. These were slapped on him following the extremely dodgy (and possibly illegal) manoeuvres by the Swedish authorities to get him deported back to Sweden from Cambodia

    – new “suspicions” (ie not yet charges) of “aggravated fraud” which the Swedish prosecutor refuses to go into any detail about. Very vague.

    I can’t help feeling that the third item here is really the crux of everything, and that Svartholm’s detention in Stockholm is part of the bigger picture of getting Assange extradited to the US via Sweden to face the espionage indictment that’s currently under seal with the Grand Jury in Virginia. I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if Svartholm’s name is on one of the other sealed indictments discovered by accident by Birgitta Jonsdottir’s US lawyers, ie Svartholm is one of the “seven civilians” it’s been confirmed the Grand Jury is investigating. In this scenario, perhaps Svartholm’s pre-charge detention is simply a holding mechanism pending the successful extradition of Assange from the UK to Sweden, then they both get shipped off together to the US.

    I wonder if one of our Flashback visitors could do an English translation of the Flashback posts and links above, to help get this important info out into the English-speaking blogosphere?

  58. Has anyone pointed this out to Rixstep? Do they have an article on this yet?

  59. Hi Clark,

    Rixstep’s tweeted about it. No idea if he plans an article on it. Hope so.

  60. Not much help. I am sure, but here’s a tapeworm halfway up Karl Rove:


    Looks like the same McCormac to me.

  61. Anonymous supporters of Julian Assange have apparently been hacking into hospital records in Sweden, though they seem not to have targeted the ones which could reveal new information in the case:


    I’m trying to post the following comment to this article, without any luck so far. Wretched commenting feature is snaffled at the moment, or I’m being moderated/censored (though The Local claims comments are unmoderated):

    @ Emerentia

    No, I don’t understand what these Anonymous idiots thought they were doing. These hospitals have nothing to do with the Assange case. If it had been the Dandervd hospital or the Södersjukhuset hospital they hacked I could understand it, as there are genuine questions about the circumstances of Sophie Wilen’s visits to those. This extract from Guy Sim’s new book “Julian Assange in Sweden – what really happened” is talking about the alterations made to her witness statement before it was input to the police computer as the ‘official’ version six days after she made it:

    “[It is impossible to detect whether these two paragraphs were changed, they were blocked out in the 20/8 version. The second paragraph especially is quite extraordinary. It means that after taking Assange to the train station and kissing him goodbye and asking him to phone her, she then went to the Södersjukhuset Hospital which has a ‘Reception for Raped Women,’ the brainchild of the former Social Democrat government, including the then Equality Ombudsman, Claes Borgström and his partner, the then Justice Minister, Thomas Bodström. This hospital is a long way from her home, she would need first to take a commuter train to Stockholm and then travel across Stockholm, as it is on the far side of that city. A journey of between one and two hours. On the other hand, it is very close to Anna Ardin’s apartment – just 900 metres (1,000 yards or 3,000 feet) – walking distance. The Danderyd hospital is also a long way from Sofia Wilén’s home, it is also in Stockholm. There was a perfectly good hospital three kilometres (two miles) from Sofia Wilén’s home, the Enköping Lasarett, it has a gynecology department but it does not have a ’Reception for Raped Women.’ A later prosecutor, Marianne Ny, was able to present the fact that Sofia Wilén had been to the ‘Reception for Raped Women’ at the Södersjukhuset Hospital as implying that she had been raped. Sofia subsequently told her friend Marie Thorn that she didn’t want to go there in the first place but was “steamrollered” into going there “by … others around her.”

    There is also the question of why Wilen would choose to cut a piece out of a used condom (Yuck!) and take that with her to get it tested for HIV at the hospital instead of simply putting the whole condom into a plastic bag. That would make much more sense as it is more likely to allow a decent-sized semen sample for them to analyse. Also, the question of why she didn’t, in fact, give this piece of condom to the hospital but gave it to Anna Ardin instead. Page 38 of Guy Sim’s book:

    “The piece of condom from Sofia Wilén is given the designation 2010-0201-BG20840-1, the only text not blanked out is “Produced.” The condom from Anna Ardin has the same designation except that the final digit is -2 instead of -1. The only text not blanked out is “… after enquiry by the police.” The piece of condom from Sofia Wilén was in fact produced by Anna Ardin, which means that Sofia Wilén must have given it to her. As detailed below, it is evident that Sofia Wilén must have been carrying this piece of condom around in case it helped establish whether Assange had HIV, because that was Sofia Wilén’s sole preoccupation; therefore she evidently had no intention of giving it to the police. The requisition assignment was ‘executed’ by Sara Wennerblom at 18.12 (6.12pm) on 21 August for both condoms.”

    Then there is also the question of whether the fact that the forensic evidence from Sophie Wilen is a piece of used condom, instead of a whole used condom, has anything to do with these strange notes by policeman Mats Gehlin on the forensic report from SKL (page 21 of Sim’s book):

    “No DNA was found on the condom from Complainant No. 2’s [Anna Ardin’s] residence. “On vaginal tops from Complainant No. 1 [Sofia Wilén] were found DNA from Complainant No. 1 [Sofia Wilén] and DNA from a man. On the piece of condom that had been found in Complainant No. 1’s apartment was found DNA from Complainant No. 1 and DNA from the same man as was found on the vaginal tops. “Complainant No. 1 [Sofia Wilén] had not noticed if any condom had been broken as it was dark in the room and when the suspect put the condom on it sounded as if he was pulling on a balloon. The piece of condom was found under the bed, under that part of the bed that the suspect lay on when he put the condom on.”

    If you want to find out more Sim’s book is the best-researched and most complete account of the Assange case so far. You can download it for less than $3 here:

  62. TLDR version of above comment:

    So, Sophie Wilen has apparently also experienced a ‘damaged condom’ incident – how curiously similar to the story Anna Ardin’s allegations detail… or so it seems she has at some point told the police (Gehlin’s notes on forensic report) – and she has taken this piece of condom found under her bed to a hospital to see if they will test it for Assange’s possible HIV status. But she then decided not to hand it in to the hospital but instead give it to Anna Ardin, who in turn gives it to the police after she [Ardin] has made her own telephone statement a day after helping Wilen to make hers at the police station. But Wilen’s statement (well, the extensively altered ‘official’ version input to the police computer six days later) makes no mention at all of Wilen’s ‘damaged condom’ experience. Hmmm…

  63. Please folks, write and say “cracking” to refer to breaking computer security; hackers are programmers, and we shouldn’t assist the propaganda campaign. It is true that a good hacker can also crack, but “locksmith” shouldn’t come to mean “safe cracker”.


  64. Hi Clark,

    Um, sorry about the mislabelling – I do appreciate the difference in the two terms, though I doubt readers of The Local would have.

    But hurrah!, my comment at 12.25pm above DID get into the comment section of The Local… for a couple of hours…

    and then, Boo!:

    13:02 November 23, 2012 by Arbed
    Comment removed by The Local for breach of our terms.

    It did no such thing, of course [http://www.thelocal.se/terms.php?terms=Discuss]. The information I’m trying to share is being censored in Sweden.

  65. Hmmm. . . indeed.

    Something is puzzling me. It is Billy McCormac’s life before leaving the US. I cannot find a date of birth, school record, medical record. There is no reference to his age in anything written about him (Swedish or English) as far as I’m able to ascertain. Either he has something to hide – or some other interested party has something to hide.

    For the tweet expert of Sweden to have no past is curious. There could be a perfectly rational explanation. But the fact that his father was a nuclear physicist exploding nuclear weapons in the air is worrying. Perhaps that is the cause of his reticence with personal history . . . shame! Don’t think so though.

    I can’t think of a way of emailing him to get this information. Any ideas anyone?

  66. OK, managed to establish that Billy’s age now is 43, so his father was about 50 when he was born. Let’s see how that helps!

  67. Hello.

    I see Mr Rudling did not answer Duqu’s questions. How could he after being put to shame by Fia’s post.

    I posted the Timbro question on Flashback.

    This is what I think is the “hidden agenda” of the case
    The name derives from the Sweden-related content of the vast collection of leaked US diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks – a notable characteristic of many of the relevant cables being reducible to the general form: “The US Wants… – Sweden Wants…”.
    The pdf is a timeline.
    Sadly the person making this has not kept gathering data.

    Best Ragards from Sweden

  68. Wtfuk, yes, Fia’s post was very revealing. I like to think my outing of him posting as Anonymouse on the “CIA Plot Against Correa Funded by Drug Money” post made a small contribution too. Especially since Flashbackers discovered him doing the same thing on their site.

    Thanks for that post on Karl Rove. Using links on that I discovered the following which relates to his assumed bi-sexuality, which if true, makes Sweden an ideal country in which to practice his other sexual interests. Are Flashback users aware of this? He allegedly had a bisexual affair just before his second marriage in June this year.


  69. Here is another link tot he same story, with comments.


    According to some of the comments there is suspicion that this is not true.

  70. I couple of us doesnt believe anonymouse is Göran but fits more to one of plaintiffs.
    But who knows. We sometimes have discusions via PM which is not public.

    Also if Mr Rove is bisexuall would be off-topic at this Flashback-thread and render varning from moderators, might be possible sneak that info in but it seems not relevant for the case.

    Best Regards from Sweden

  71. Hi John,

    Well done on your digging into Billy McCormac. I concur with Wtfuk about Anonymouse though; I think he/she is a personal friend of Anna Ardin.

  72. Wtfuk, Arbed, of course I could be wrong about Anonymouse. However, his/her comments I believe stopped the same time as Göran Rudling stopped commenting.

    I have put together a file on Billy McCormac junior (it contains mainly links to websites). Given more time I might be able to put together some kind of profile. There is little on his life before he arrived in Sweden. His father was a Freemason and it generally follows that sons of masons (Lewises) become masons themselves.

  73. Snap, sorry to have kept you waiting so long, especially as I still don’t really know what to suggest. Have you ever tried looking through someone else’s conversation, all fragmented and sometimes not quite in sequence, with comments to other contributors interspersed? It can be very confusing. Sorry, there is so much material here with which I am unfamiliar…

    I see that you haven’t submitted any comments for a while. I don’t think that Jon’s criticisms meant that you had to stop contributing; I doubt that Jon is about to start deleting or editing your comments. I suggest that you try to ignore whatever you were upset about and just carry on. I can’t really help with hurt feelings or short patience, recently having thoroughly fucked up on similar matters myself.

    What is your objective? Are you just trying to understand the Assange case for yourself, or are you trying to contribute to the public analysis of events?

    No one else is obliged to research in accordance with your instructions. However, if their analysis seems logically deficient to you, you have every right to point out the errors as you see them. If you think that Arbed places too much trust in Sim’s book, it is up to you to read the book and raise your objections.

    My belief is that all contributors should just debate the evidence, rather than speculating about the roles or intentions of other contributors. As soon as such “second order” interpretation is invoked, things get very messy very quickly.

  74. If it is any help, my screen-name by my avatar links to a page with some contact details for me. If anyone wishes to exchange documents, attachments etc., both parties should e-mail me. Please use the second address because it’s shorter and easier to reply from.

    I can also post documents on my web space.

    Sorry Snap, I know this isn’t much, but I hope it helps.

  75. Jon or Clark, I think Arbed’s post of 22 Nov, 2012 – 1:17 pm belongs as much on the thread below as on this thread since it relates to Gottfrid Svartholm the Pirate Bay founder. But this excellent and important post by Craig Murray, which unfortunately engendered less than 100 comments, is now closed.


    Wtfuk, the point I was making about Karl Rove had nothing to do with his bisexuality. That’s his concern. What was wrong with it was him embarking on a homosexual relationship with Ali Akbar the same month that he got married for a second time.

    “In June 2012, Karl Rove married Karen Johnson, a 45-year-old GOP lobbyist, in Austin, Texas. The couple dated for several years before getting married. The newlyweds flew to Naples on Steve Wynn’s private jet.”

    He then made sweeping condemnations on Simpson, Bauer, and Siegelman on “On the Record” because he thought (wrongly) that they intended to “out” him. So you see why this is important?

  76. Looks like Karen Johnson is Karl Rove’s third wife.


    It is not how many times he marries that is the problem with Karl Rove (politically an ambassador for marriage) but it is becoming apparent to me, as it must have been to many Americans for some time, that he is the fixer behind George W. Bush’s sham election ‘success’. That was the ‘success’ that took us into war on a false premise.

  77. Breaking News: Expressen is reporting that the Swedish Anonymous Twitter account has been closed and Anonymous is calling for a tweet-storm against the Twitter’s CEO.


  78. Hi John,

    Yes, it seems Espressen are trying to link the suspension of AoS’s twitter account to the story detailed in my 23 Nov 12.25 post. Both whether Anonymous were in fact responsible for the original ‘hack’ of hospital records and now Espressen’s attempts to pin the blame for it on AoS seem a bit suspect to me.

    Did you see this latest news about judges at the Swedish SVEA Appeal Court writing up a ‘guilty’ judgment and distributing it to the court’s lay judges before the court hearing even took place?


    There’s a direct connection here to the Assange case. The Svea Court President Fredrik Wersäll quoted here is the guy who upheld Marianne Ny’s Swedish arrest warrant for Assange on 24 November 2010, which enabled her to write out the EAW.

    Interesting that it’s this SVEA court judgment that the UK Supreme Court relied on as the independent and impartial judicial oversight required in an EAW issuing state when they heard Assange’s appeal over whether Marianne Ny should be considered a proper ‘judicial authority’ for the purposes of issuing EAWs.

  79. Hi Arbed

    Thanks. I will have a look at the SVEA appeal when I get back from walking the dogs. The story is probably similar to this.

    A book is due to be released next week by Andrew Kreig. It is called Presidential Puppetry (short title) and has a quite a lot about Karl Rove’s dirty tricks. You can download a pre-election version for less than £5.00. I’ve been reading this and it is stunning. A former Democratic secretary of state and attorney general, Don Siegelman, is in prison due to Rove’s dirty tricks but they go much deeper than that. As with your story the judge was specially chosen. It stinks. At least one of you in Sweden should buy a copy because that’s what’s coming your way.


  80. Arbed, I’ve just read the article and left a comment. How long it will be there I don’t know. It relates to the judge who presided in the Assange extradition appeal case,

    “Justice Nicholas Phillips, who retired at the end of September to take up a post in Qatar for something I suspect more than £300,000 a year. But this was not before he had presided over Julian Assange’s extradition appeal, for trumped-up charges of rape. Assange lost but the decision was not made in the Supreme Court so much as in Whitehall, the gentlemen’s clubs and the upper echelons of government. Anybody who thinks otherwise is a blatant fool.”

    Kreig’s book, ‘Presidential Puppetry’, linked in my previous comment, shows that the United States is probably even worse.

  81. Jemand, your first link at 5.56 am is like the Anna Ardin case without US involvement. Your second at 7.55 am shows the Barbados police tortured an innocent man to get a confession and are not looking for anyone else. It makes me ask is a policeman the rapist?

  82. I’ve blogged about the Swedish Ecuadorian Embassy’s letter to the Swedish government offering for the prosecution service to interview Julian Assange in their embassy in London. I have reproduced Rixstep’s copy of this very respectful letter.

  83. Been working on what I consider to be my best video in the Assange series. Kindly spread it. Thanks.


  84. If the above link jams please try this. Kindly spread through Sweden. Hope Billy M doesn’t want to get me extradited for spilling the beans on his dad.


  85. JG, since there are no sources to your movie, I place it in the Assange link thread instead (same sub-forum) of big-assangethread.
    Text with sources would be appriciated.
    good work:)

    Best Regards from Sweden

  86. Great vid, John! I’m not sure exactly what wtfuk means by “text with sources” but, if you do, it would be great to get this vid bumped into the main Flasback Assange thread.

    I’ll do my best to spread it too.

  87. Thanks Arbed.

    Well the Monet story I made up. But there has to be some way Marianny Ny and Claes Borgstrom have been persuaded to take on a case that they know is flawed.

    This Wtfuk is what I have:

    This relates to the Siegelman imprisonment.


    This obituary relates to Billy McCormac senior.

    It says: “Mr. McCormac is survived by his wife, Diana McCormac; children, Norene Kallas, Candace Cowper, Lisbeth Kilkenney, Billy McCormac II and Dennis McCormac; siblings, John McCormac and Donald McCormac; five grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren.”

    This shows that Billy McCormac in Sweden is also called Billy Murray McCormac. Somebody seems to have removed this – now who would do that?


    Anyway among Swedish donors to has made two donations of $1000 to the Democratic National Committee Services Corporation in 2009 and this year as mentioned in a post above.


    This above gives his age as 43 when his father was 92, but his father died in 1999 aged 79 so it must give current ages.

    The link below gives details of Billy Murray McCormac senior’s experiments in the upper atmosphere.


  88. It should have read “Anyway among Swedish donors to the Democratic National Committee Services Corporation he made two donations of $1000 in 2009 and another $1000 this year.”

  89. Or better “Anyway among Swedish donors to the Democratic National Committee Services Corporation he made two donations, one of $1000 in 2009 and another $1000 this year.”

  90. JG.
    Thanks for sources. Posted on Flashback big assangethread.

    Best Regards from Sweden

  91. Duqu here again.

    Does anyone here know anything of a Guy J. Sims that is selling his e-book in this case ?
    I can only find a 69 year old guy in Texas that never has written a book before.
    The data taken in this book is from Flashback and NNN (Al Burke).
    Whatever the “service” Guy J. Sims wanted to give the english speaking community, there are already free translates on sites like NNN.se etc, so its clearly that someone just wanted to gain money on Assange´s dilemma.

  92. Wtfuk, thanks.

    Duqu, I don’t think Guy Sims is trying to make a lot of money. He would have charged much more if he was. I get the impression he is Swedish (or English). Translation is expensive and time consuming. I was thankful for his book. He does explain that this information was already available in Swedish. I have found it a useful handbook for checking facts but to my mind its biggest service is to those who have no idea about what happened in Sweden. Nobody in the manstream media is allowed to mention the names of Irmeli Krans, Anna Ardin or Sophia Wilen. I just wish more people were coughing up three dollars to pay for it, and more importantly, to read it. Another thing is we don’t know whether he is donating the proceeds, say to Wikileaks. I assume Guy Sims is a nom-de-plume but have no idea of the identity of the author. If I did I would point out a few minor typos to improve it.

  93. Well, both NNN.se and Rixstep.com are in English, and Rixstep was on since day one, while NNN showed up around 1 1/2 year later. Of course I understand your situation as non swedish speaking people, maybe both NNN and Rixstep had a poor public relations to reach out, but as most of the people today use google, the stuff that Guy writes about is already mentioned in the other 2 existing english sites, and also this Guy popped up in september this year, just 2 months ago, that whats make it odd. I just saw that this thread will be closed on dec 10, so whats are your plans then to communicate ?

  94. @Duqu re: thread closing date

    As long as there are new posts in this thread the closing date will keep rolling forwards

  95. If anyone doubts there is a really high-level political push to get Assange extradited to the US via Sweden, well take a look at this:

    Written by BBC journalist Martin Bentham (and God knows the BBC isn’t very happy with Assange after the embarrassment he’s caused them this week) and appearing in London’s Evening Standard and headlined “Top EU official tells Julian Assange: ‘Just go to Sweden and answer the charges'”:


    Swedish politician Cecilia Malmstrom claims to know very little about the Swedish sex crimes allegations – she simply can’t see why the US would extradite for sex crime allegations: “I don’t believe for a minute that’s why he would go to the US,”

    Is she really trying to play that stupid? Nobody, but nobody, has ever thought that the US would attempt to extradite Assange for sex crimes.

    But she’s not that dumb at all. This is both clever and nasty.

    Here’s a Congressional C-Span video showing Cecilia Malmstrom sitting at the same table as US Attorney-General Eric Holder as he confirms they’ve had “informal talks about Wikileaks” and their supposed threat to “US National Security” at a 9 December 2010 US/EU conference about cyber-security and cyber-crime:



    On 9 December 2010 US Attorney-General Eric Holder and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano met with their European counterparts Viviane Reding, Principal Vice-President of the European Union, EU Council Interior Minister Annemie Turtleboom and Justice Minister Steefan de Clerck, and Cecilia Malmstrom, a Swedish politician currently serving as European Commissioner for Home Affairs to discuss US-EU cyber-security and cyber-crime partnerships. Eric Holder stated:

    “We had, I think, informal conversations about the WikiLeaks matter and the concerns that it has raised in the minds of all of us. The hope here in the United States is that the investigation that we are conducting will allow us to hold the people responsible accountable” and “I think that the release of this information has put at risk American National Security, and whatever is to come… will be consistent with the concerns that I have expressed.”

    In fact, Cecilia Malmstrom and Eric Holder co-authored an article only yesterday. How chummy…


    I doubt such close and friendly relations between an EU Interior Minister and the US Attorney-General only yesterday are entirely unrelated to the former’s insistence in today’s Evening Standard that Assange MUST go to Swedish to face the (non-existant) charges…

  96. Following on from my previous post, and to further dispel any lingering doubt about Ms Malmstrom’s motives, the date of the conference at which her own “informal conversations” about Wikileaks with the US Attorney-General are confirmed – 9 December 2010 – is only one day after the Independent newspaper confirmed on 8 December 2010:

    “Informal discussions have already taken place between US and Swedish officials over the possibility of the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange being delivered into American custody, according to diplomatic sources”


    Given her own involvement in similar US/EU talks only one day later and her position in Swedish politics, if Cecilia Malmstrom is now claiming to have no knowledge of high-level diplomatic discussions about “delivering Assange into US custody” – and that’s precisely what she is doing in the above Evening Standard piece – then she’s lying through her teeth.

    Is there anything we can do to call her out on this? Open letter perhaps? Or anyone able to publicise Malmstrom’s duplicity in Swedish media or blogs?

  97. Arbed. took liberty to post your info on Flashback.

    Best regards from Sweden

  98. Wtfuk,

    I was hoping you would. Best regards to you too, from this benighted isle.

1 8 9 10 11 12 20

Leave a Reply

Basic formatting: <strong>Bold</strong>   <em>Italics</em>  <blockquote>Indented/quoted</blockquote>  <a href="http://example.com/link">Link text</a>

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted In The Cloud