Assange Extradition; Exposing the Political Smear of the Swedish Sex Allegations against Assange; MiniMisInfo talks with Christine Assange

Julian Assanges’ mother Christine has been campaigning tirelessly to clear her son’s name, inform our politicians of the facts, and counter the smear campaigns launched by the Mainstream Media. I had a chance to speak with her, and find out that there is much more to this story than we are being told.

I first heard about WikiLeaks through the evening news, as most people in Australia and around the world would have. The explosive caches of documents released by Wikileaks have solidified their position as a true journalism outlet. Through the Collateral Murder video, the CableGate documents, and their most recent expose` the Global Intelligence Files, they have shown that in these times of increasing secrecy and censorship in the guise of protecting us from terrorism, it is still possible to hold governments accountable for their actions. Since her sons’ arrest in the U.K , and following court proceedings Christine Assange has been on the frontlines of the information war hoping for justice and freedom for her son, who to this date has not been charged for any crimes in any country of the world,( unless you include the secret indictments brought against him by the U.S, which we only know about through WikiLeaks releases ) and who faces indefinite detention in Sweden regardless of what charges, if any, are ever brought against him. We asked Christine questions which reflect the image the MSM has portrayed of her son, and she came armed with all the facts, which absolutely destroy the lies being told by some media outlets around the world.

Emmanuel: The first question we have is; Is Julian Assange a Rapist?

Christine Assange: Well, I don’t believe Julian’s capable of rape, and the women themselves have stated that the sex that they had was consensual and non-violent. You need to remember that in Sweden the definition of rape can include categories under consensual and non-violent sex. The tweets between the women and their friends indicate that they had no problem individually regarding their sexual contact with Julian. In fact, Woman S.W, when she was being interviewed by the policewoman Irmeli Krans was so upset that the police were going to allege that Julian was wanted for rape that she couldn’t finish her interview and didn’t sign her statement.

C.A: The texts between woman SW and her friends indicated that she was half-asleep, not fully asleep. Her unsigned statement on the EU arrest warrant was altered afterwards to read asleep. Woman AA stated to the tabloid AftonBladete ( on the 21st August 2010 ):

” It is completely false that we are afraid of Assange and therefore didn’t want to file a complaint, he is not violent and I do not feel threatened by him “.

CA: The rape allegation was made by the police, not the women.

E.G: Neither woman has alleged rape at any time in this case?

C.A: That’s right. It was made by the police and leaked to the tabloid newspapers. Within 24 hours the Chief Prosecutor of Stockholm Eva Finne dismissed the rape charge ( direct quote from Eva Finne: ” I consider there are no grounds for suspecting he has committed rape” ), saying that there was no evidence for it. That decision was appealed by a politician-lawyer called Claes Borgstrum. Retired Senior Swedish Lawyer and retired Judge Brita Sundberg-Weitman, witness at an Assange U.K Hearing in a written witness statement to the court wrote:

“It is important to note here, that an appeal was made on behalf of the complainants by Mr. Claes Borgstrum, a well-know politician, lawyer, ultra-radical feminist and activist… He is also a politician whose platform is associated with radical feminist activism, and has developed a legal practise around acting for complainants in rape cases”

(Full copy of Brita Sundberg-Weitmans’ expert testimony can be found here ).

C.A: Woman A.A is friends with Irmeli Krans; the policewoman who questioned Woman S.W. Woman A.A, Irmeli Krans, Claes Borgstrom and Thomas Bodstrum all belonged to the same political party the Social Democrats, and all stood together at the same time for elections with one of the platforms being widening the definition of rape within consensual sex. These elections took place a month after the sexual allegations were made against Julian. Claes Borgtrom appealed the dismissal of the rape allegation to Prosecutor Marianne Ny. Woman A.A submitted a condom which she said Julian tore deliberately during sex. But on investigation by a forensic unit there was found to be no DNA from either woman AA or Julian. Julian was not informed of the appeal, and therefore had no chance to make submissions. Brita Sondberg-Weitman, a Swedish lawyer and retired Judge, stated at one of Julian’s hearings in the U.K:

” In recent years, elements of the Social Democratic party, including one of the complainants, who is a well-known and aspiring Social Democrat and politician, and her lawyer Mr. Borgstrum, and some public officials like Ms. Ny have taken the lead in amending Swedish law so as to try and make it more favourable to women… it is a fact that people like Marianne Ny and Claes Borgstrum have worked in co-operation on different issues in efforts to produce our new, more stringent sexual offence laws”.

E.G: Why do you think there is so much media coverage of the sex allegations? It’s almost and obsession point it seems, rather than the work he does they seem to focus on the sexual allegations, why do you think that is?

C.A: Well initially it’s because the first prosecutor Maria Haljebo Kjellstrand unlawfully told the Swedish tabloid Expressen that Julian was wanted for rape. Expressen then ran a front-page sensationalist and factually inaccurate story saying Julian was being hunted down for double rape. It’s important to note here that Julian had not been informed that any allegations had been made against him, he found when he read the paper the next day. That Expressen article went around the world with many millions of hits on the story in the first day.

E.G: So it just went viral immediately?

C.A: That’s right, and from that point on, because Julian is famous the word rape attached to his name sells many papers. So they’re profiteering from the sensationalism, that’s one of the reasons. The second thing would be that it’s in the interests of people who WikiLeaks have exposed as being corrupt to discredit Julian, because they can’t actually discredit WikiLeaks. In its six-year history of publication not one Government or major Corporation has stated that the documents or any information that WikiLeaks ever released have been not authentic. How many other media organisations can boast that quality of record? So their next strategy to silence WikiLeaks is to smear the editor-in-chief personally, and in fact a number of data intelligence firms have been hired to do exactly that.

E.G: Could you expand on that, which firms were involved in the smear campaign?

C.A: Firstly; WikiLeaks received documents allegedly from the group Anonymous which showed that data intelligence firm HB Gary in conjunction with Berico Holdings and Palantir Technology had been hired by the Bank of America via their lawyers to bring down WikiLeaks, with one of the strategies being a smear campaign. It is my understanding that the lawyers hired by Bank of America were recommended by the U.S department of Justice ( Here’s a link to a techdirt article covering that. The powerpoint demo created by Palantir Technology and HB Gary with regard to attacking WikiLeaks can be seen here. )

The second private intelligence company exposed for attempting to smear and bring down WikiLeaks was the Texas-based U.S company Stratfor. Its’ emails revealed that journalists were on their payroll, and that they were aware through personal contacts who knew one of the women at the centre of the sex allegations that there was no basis for the allegations. ( the Stratfor emails are here )

E.G: Do you think the U.S influenced the push for the rape allegations?

C.A: I’m not aware of any direct evidence of that yet, but what is of great concern is that the current political advisor the Swedish PM Frederick Reindfelt is none other than Karl Rove, the notorious, disgraced ex-political advisor to George W. Bush. He is infamous in the U.S for orchestrating vicious smear campaigns against Democratic political opponents and had to leave the country in 2007. He is also friends with Carl Bildt the Swedish Foreign Minister. The diplomatic cables from the U.S embassy in Sweden released by WikiLeaks describe relations between the two countries;

” Both Bildt ( Swedish Foreign Minister ) and Reindfelt ( Swedish PM ) have strong interests in working closely with us “( Cable 09STOCKHOLM266 )

E.G: So you think they were behind re-igniting the rape allegations which had originally been dismissed?

C.A: A number of high-profile people have put this forward as a distinct possibility. Tony Kevin, the ex-DFAT Diplomat and Ambassador has raised this concern in his brief to the Australian MP’s on the 2nd of March 2011. Another intriguing facet of this possible scenario, on the 18th of August 2010 ( two days before the sexallegations were made on the 20th of August 2010 ) Anders Helner, a senior policy advisor at the Swedish Foreign Policy Institute stated in an interview for Swedish Television’s news Report;

” The situation is escalating because an official Swedish party which is represented at the European Parliament ( the Pirate Party, which had announced that it would host WikiLeaks servers ) is taking on what the United States views as a very controversial role. The Americans are looking to stop this somehow…” ( Link )

E.G: Has there been any support for your assertion that these rape allegations are not a valid investigation?

C.A:Yes Emmanuel, firstly I would like to draw your attention to a legal brief made by Jennifer Robinson, Julian’s Lawyer to Australian MPs’ in Canberra on 2nd of March 2011. Jennifer listed the many breaches of Sweden’s own police and prosecutorial procedures on Julian’s case. Firstly as I’ve stated before woman A.A was a friend of the interrogating police officer Irmerli Krans who interviewed woman S.W. Secondly: The women were not videotaped during their interview, which is a breach of police procedure. Thirdly; the police gave the tabloid newspaper Expressen access to the police file which is also a breach of procedure while refusing to give the same file to Julian’s lawyer. Fourthly: Julian was not informed of the appeal. There are many other serious breaches, I have not listed all of them. ( For more read Jennifer Robinsons’ brief to the Australian Parliament here )

C.A: There are a number of people on record, such as world-renowned U.S feminist Naomi Wolf who has written two scathing articles about the breaches of normal police and prosecutorial procedure on the Assange case. She has concluded that Julian is being persecuted with rape allegation for political purposes to silence WikiLeaks and has stated in her article:” J` ACCUSE:SWEDEN, BRITAIN, AND INTERPOL INSULT RAPE VICTIMS WORLDWIDE ;

“That is not the state embracing feminism, that is the state pimping feminism.”

Women Against Rape in the U.K have spoken out, saying that this rape allegation is being used to suppress WikiLeaks and the free press with a letter to The Guardian by spokesperson Katrin Alexlsson on the 8th of February 2010.

C.A: Also another good quote from Naomi Wolf is:

“The political background-and the fact that Assange was under surveillance by Swedish and U.S intelligence services before he ever went home with Ms W or Ms A, is all important to consider in light of the serious consequence taking place in Britain now”

From the article ” KARL-ROVE, SWEDEN, AND THE 8 MAJOR ABBERATIONS IN THE POLICE SEX CRIME REPORTING PROCESS IN THE ASSANGE CASE

E.G: It appears that there is no evidence to the rape allegations, why has been pursued to the level of an EU arrest Warrant?

C.A: Those who have investigated the case facts carefully believe this is nothing more than a holding case awaiting a U.S extradition warrant. Julian did not flee Sweden to avoid questioning, he remained five weeks to answer the allegations against him, but all his offers to hear his side of the story were rejected by Marianne Ny. She gave him permission to leave on the 15th of September 2010 to attend a business meeting. He offered to fly back in to Sweden to be interviewed between the 9th-10th of October 2010, but she rejected this because it was a weekend ( My bolding-E.G) . He then offered the Monday the 11th of October, and she rejected this because it was too far away. It should be noted that the EU arrest warrant was served around the time of publishing of the CableGate documents. Marianne Nys’ policy on sex cases is to lock up the man prior to questioning incommunicado on indefinite detention, which if Julian had remained in Sweden would have prevented the publishing of CableGate. Julian spent most of October and November in the U.K at the FrontLine Journalists’ Club, processing and releasing the Iraq War logs and CableGate. His lawyers offered through the normal protocol of Mutual Legal Assistance in cases where an interview is required in another country, to make Julian available for video link, Skype, Phone, or Interview. Ny refused every offer made. She took out an EU arrest warrant for questioning only, and yet for the 15 months that Julian has been under house arrest in the U.K, has refused all his offers to be interviewed at Scotland Yard or the Swedish Embassy. In addition, she has falsely stated to the Swedish people, and to the media, that she is not allowed to question Julian in the U.K or via Mutual Legal Assistance. The Swedish Supreme Court made a ruling that the proportionate way to question is via Mutual Legal Assistance. So it would appear that there is no other conclusion that one can come to other than there is no interest for Sweden to clear up this allegation, but the interest is holding Julian in one place so the U.S indictment can be served upon him.

E.G: With all the information that you’ve given me, what is Sweden’s motivation in taking out the EU arrest warrant?

C.A: People don’t realise Sweden has moved away from neutrality and is now very close to the U.S. Sweden is in the top-ten of arms manufacturers in the world, and this year recorded a rise of arms trading by 31% in comparison global arms trade has risen by 24% ( Stockholm International Peace Research Institute ” Swedish Arms Exports Booming -From The Local 19/3/12″ ) . The U.S and the U.K are among it’s major clients in the arms trade, and Sweden was the major supplier to the U.S during the second Iraq war. Some of the cables released by WikiLeaks revealed close, covert ties between the U.S and Sweden. These covert ties have been used to circumvent the democratic process in Sweden. For example Sweden secretly agreed to allow the U.S access to huge amounts of data on its citizens, avoiding parliamentary scrutiny. A member of Parliament, Cammilla Lindberg resigned in protest when Sweden passed a controversial surveillance law after intense lobbying from the U.S which allowed Sweden to give this data to the U.S. To quote Cammilla;

“ By selling out it’s own people, the Government has sought to curry the favour of the U.S.; little by little we continue to dismantle democracy ”

( Link to a justice4assange article covering that here).

I would like to thank Christine for taking the time to speak with me, and the valuable insight into her sons’ persecution that she has provided. This interview was completed some weeks ago, but personal commitments and time restrictions prevented me from finishing the editing.

Follow Christine on Twitter @AssangeC, Follow us @MiniMisInfo. Some useful hashtags are #Facts4MP, #FreeAssange & #Assange4Senate . http://wlcentral.org/node/2486 ( A simple, factual timeline of WikiLeaks and the Assange extradition ). http://www.justice4assange.com ( Extensive database on the Swedish extradition, with resources for journalists ).You can help by donating to WikiLeaks or Julian’s Defense Fund at: http://shop.wikileaks.org/donate ( easy as, you can even donate Via SMS ) or pick up some WikiLeaks swag over at http://beattheblockade.org/ they have T-Shirts, Bags, heaps of stuff. But most of all you can help by writing a letter to your MP encouraging them to speak out on behalf of Julian if they haven’t already done so ( most of them haven’t unfortunately ) or by joining a day of action in your city. Don’t see your city? Organise an event and let the good people at WikiLeaks Central know about it!

Story by Emmanuel Goldstein for The Ministry of (Mis)Information. Reproduce freely without restriction. Don’t be a jerk by copying and pasting this article as your own, use excerpts and link back to us if you liked the article.