Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday January 08 2017, @07:01AM   Printer-friendly
from the reporter-not-under-USA's-thumb dept.

The Indicter reports

Author and investigative reporter Celia Farber has prepared for publication in The Indicter, an updated analysis of the Swedish Assange case. The in-depth analysis concludes that the police reports confirm Julian Assange's testimony, as given to the prosecutor in her questioning conducted at the Ecuadorian embassy in London. It has also been established that the crucial allegations against Mr Julian Assange, as have appeared in the Swedish and international media, in fact were constructed by the police and were not what the complainants really said or wished to achieve.

It has been discovered that it was the police, or the prosecutor's office, which unlawfully and/or unethically leaked the "allegations" to the evening paper "Expressen", which is clearly known for its declared NATO sympathies. Regrettably, but also predictably, this was an opportunity for Western mainstream media to create a scandal around the founder of WikiLeaks. Likewise, it was an occasion used by the MSM to insidiously attack the organization that had partly exposed the corruption of the governments they represent, and partly surpassed them in journalistic efficacy and objectivity.

But it was more than purely vendetta-time; it was a well-articulated campaign which started that day in August 2010 when--according to the Snowden documents--the US government asked the countries participating in the military occupation of Afghanistan under US command to prosecute Julian Assange. Sweden obeyed; others cooperated.

Nevertheless, the Afghan Logs and the Iraq Logs exposed by WikiLeaks remained published. The WikiLeaks founder did not surrender. The Assange case, already politically in its origins, turned into a spiral of increasing geopolitical dimensions.

[Continues...]

Our position has always been that the above-described political aspect has always been present in the 'Assange case' and we could hardly be--in principle--interested in furthering a discussion on details pertaining the intimacy of Mr Assange or of other people around the constructed 'legal case'.

However, we regard this analysis of Ms Celia Farber--A Swedish-born and America-based journalist familiar with the intricacies of the Swedish culture and language--as important material, which we hope will help to end the overblown discussion on the 'suspicions' or 'allegations' against Mr Assange. These allegations have constituted the essence of the artificial debate that the Swedish prosecutors periodically orchestrate, through press releases or erratic press conferences of the type "we have nothing new to communicate".

We have also published--in the same spirit of clarification--the statement of Mr Julian Assange given to the Swedish prosecutor during the interview in London. In the context of this new analysis by Celia Farber, we also recommend the reading of "The answer given by Julian Assange to the Swedish prosecutor in the London questioning of 14-15 November 2016".

From that page:

6. On 23 August 2010, the Chief Prosecutor of Stockholm, Eva Finné stated she "made the assessment that the evidence did not disclose any offence of rape".

7. On 25 August, the Chief Prosecutor found that "The conduct alleged disclosed no crime at all and that file (K246314-10) would be closed".

8. A week later, I learned to my surprise that a different prosecutor by the name of "Marianne Ny" had reopened the preliminary investigation without any consultation or opportunity for me to be heard--after I had already been cleared and the case had been closed.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by wisnoskij on Sunday January 08 2017, @01:59PM

    by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Sunday January 08 2017, @01:59PM (#451017)

    The Russians must of hacked these records and replaced his victims with sleeper agents.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Troll=1, Funny=1, Touché=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Touché' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 08 2017, @02:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 08 2017, @02:08PM (#451020)

    It's the start of the Russian pod person invasion!

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Sunday January 08 2017, @03:48PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 08 2017, @03:48PM (#451049) Homepage Journal

      OMG! I didn't realize the pod people were RUSSIAN!! Now I'm scared!

      --
      Our first six presidents were educated men. Then, along came a Democrat.
      • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 08 2017, @04:11PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 08 2017, @04:11PM (#451060)

        They're not, they're CIA.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 08 2017, @08:22PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 08 2017, @08:22PM (#451158)

    When shortened, "must have" becomes "must've".
    "Must of" is not a thing.

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

    • (Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Sunday January 08 2017, @11:10PM

      by Magic Oddball (3847) on Sunday January 08 2017, @11:10PM (#451231) Journal

      When shortened, "must have" becomes "must've".

      I've always assumed that people were improperly writing "of" in place of the full word "have" in sentences, not effectively misspelling "must've." Then again, I could be totally wrong; I've never quite understood how people could mangle frequently–used words/phrases after seeing them written correctly on a regular basis.