Smear Campaign Against Fathers Rights Activist?

Two articles from the BBC. Here's the first, from the 13th of December:

Newport fathers campaigner on explosives trial

A campaigning father planned to use bullets and explosives to shut down his home city, a court has heard.

Father-of-three Matthew Starmore, of Newport, was found with smokeless gunpowder, ammunition rounds and bullet heads when police raided his house.

Mr Starmore, branch secretary for New Fathers 4 Justice, had a list of targets in his diary, Cardiff Crown Court heard.

He denies possessing explosives, ammunition and handling stolen goods.

The court heard that Mr Starmore, 31, had promised "The most hard-hitting events since World War Two" for Newport.

Prosecutor Roger Griffiths said a diary entry read: "This will be the most dramatic, climatic and hard-hitting events since World War Two.

"This is just the start of a nationwide campaign."

Mr Griffiths said Mr Starmore's diary had a "to-do" list of targets that included sites key to the city's infrastructure.

'Hypothetical'

Mr Griffiths said: "He wanted to shut down the city and pull in police and emergency services from far and wide.

"Starmore wanted to escalate the activities of Fathers for Justice by using the bullets.

"He had these items and he was going to use them to carry out some kind of publicity for Fathers For Justice."

Mr Starmore told police he and his housemate had found the items in a lane and taken them so they were not picked up by children.

He told police the entries in his diary were not written by him and that they were "hypothetical" thoughts.

The trial continues.

Yikes! Sounds pretty scary, doesn't it! What a scary man!

But then, four days later:

Matthew Starmore cleared of all charges

A Cardiff Crown Court jury has cleared a campaigning father of all charges relating to possessing gunpowder and bullets.

Matthew Starmore, 31, of Newport, said he knew the materials were in the house but denied they were his.

Mr Starmore, ex-branch secretary of New Fathers 4 Justice, said he was shown the items by another man, David Hodge, who lived in the shared property.

Hodge had already pleaded guilty to possessing the material.

The court previously heard that police searched the house in Newport in October last year and discovered bottles of gunpowder, 24 rounds of ammunition and 108 bullet heads.

The jury was told that when police arrived, Mr Starmore asked if they had come about the bullets.

He said he had been shown the items by Hodge and had advised him to go to the police.

The police had not been contacted by Hodge and officers discovered the gunpowder and bullets when searching the house for another reason.

Mr Starmore was cleared of all charges: Possessing an explosive substance with intent to endanger life or property, two counts of possessing prohibited ammunition and one count of handling stolen goods.

Assange Attacks Feminism

Oh, you've done it now.

Did you really think you'd get away with attacking the left's most revered figure and still maintain your favoured position among them?

Watch over the coming years as this splinter turns into an enormous crack right through the middle of the political left.

Just how much longer will men on the left defend feminism, once they see that feminism is in the business of attacking all men?

Feminists have no interest in 'sparing' leftist men from persecution - that's something I hope leftist men realise sooner rather than later, for their own sake.

We might have our disagreements, but I don't want to see you guys locked up for things you didn't do.

Julian Assange has explicitly attacked feminism in an interview with The Australian - that's right, not just the two women (Anna Ardin/Bernardin and Sofia Wilen) who went to the police, not just the Swedish or US governments - he has explicitly linked what is happening to him, to the ideology named feminism.

Julian Assange just went from falsely accused victim to anti-feminist hero.

WikiLeaks founder baffled by sex assault claims

Mr Assange is now wanted on suspicion of rape, sexual coercion and sexual assault. It is important to him that it is known he has not yet been charged with any crime anywhere else.

Mr Assange regards himself as a victim of radicalism. "Sweden is the Saudi Arabia of feminism," he said. "I fell into a hornets' nest of revolutionary feminism."

Feminist Comment of the Week - 25th December 2010

Happy Christmas to all my readers. Christmas is a time for cheer and goodwill, and I hope you all have a great day.

But, Christmas is like any other day, in that you must remember who your enemies are - because systematic abuse doesn't take a vacation.

Catherine Comins says:

To use the word [rape] carefully would be to be careful for the sake of the violator, and the survivors don't care a hoot about him ... [falsely accused men] have a lot of pain, but it is not a pain that I would necessarily have spared them.

If he hasn't actually committed rape, then how is he a 'violator'? Perhaps he made an unfriendly comment? I'm guessing that 'violation' shall refer to whatever feminists want it to in order to justify the systematic abuse of men. Right here we have not only an admission but an endorsement that women falsely accuse men of rape. This is feminism unmasked.

Another Must Read: Stuart Morris on False Allegations

False Allegations

By Stuart Morris, from insidetime issue November 2010

Stuart Morris looks at the nightmare of being falsely accused

Imagine a scenario which starts with the ringing of the door bell, you answer and there stands a policeman. ‘May I come in?’ He says, seriously, and you allow him to enter with his colleague in tow. That could be the end of your life as you know it. Someone – a relative, an old flame, or even a stranger – has accused you of committing one of the most horrendous of crimes- rape-and says that it happened many years ago.

If you are guilty then I hope they lock you up and throw away the key. But what if you are not? What if you are actually the victim here and someone has made a false allegation against you? I’ll tell you what you will do – you will PANIC! The way the law deals with rape cases since the introduction of Sections 32 and 33 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 means the scales of justice have been tipped against you. Unless you can prove your innocence you WILL be convicted. The Prosecution don’t even have to try.

The laws of our land are supposed to be a framework of guiding lights that shine upon the innocent and leave the guilty in the dark. Yet since 1994, one by one these lights have been switched off and the innocent now stand in shadow, vulnerable to attack. This has been caused by successive governments driving through law after law, with the purpose of increasing convictions. Not even ensuring convictions of the guilty, just ensuring more and more innocent people are being wrongfully convicted and punished for crimes they never committed.

Yet the Home Office are well aware that there are innocent people rotting in our penal system, and are fairly clued up on why they are there. When the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act was introduced in 1996, its aim was to – ‘effectively bring about acquittal of the innocent and conviction of the guilty, whilst ensuring efficiency in focussing on key issues at trial and fairness towards all those affected’. This is the law that demands a statement from the defendant before any extra disclosures are made which might undermine the prosecution case. In reality this is the law that allows the prosecution to withhold or misplace any sensitive evidence that may damage their case.

After this law had been in force for a few years the Home Office commissioned a research study and found that 88% of barristers, 87% of defence solicitors, and 61% of judges were dissatisfied with the way it was operating. They stated that relevant information continues to exist in many locations without ever becoming part of a prosecution file (Naylor L.A. 2004).

Prior to 2004, the Home Office stated in its own bulletin that it was aware of 3000 wrongfully convicted people being put in prison every year, while allowing the guilty to walk free (Naylor L.A 2004). No, that is not a typo, it is 3000 real people, most with families, partners, and children. Tens of thousands of people affected by this injustice, and yet the government allows it to continue to make their conviction statistics look good.

Thousands of families are being ripped apart by this growing culture of compensation for false allegations, although in some cases the accuser is not always to blame for this. Your accuser could be the victim of malpractice by a psychotherapist, who can call themselves ‘qualified’ after only a 20 week correspondence course, and work in this field of therapy which has no regulations. In comparison a psychology degree will take years to acquire.

Psychotherapists, who often appear as expert witnesses, are sometimes the creators of false memories that surface during therapy. Chris French, a professor of psychology, wrote in The Guardian newspaper in March 2010 – ‘Because there is no ‘buried memory’ to recover, the search for repressed memories can itself lead to the mental construction of completely false scenarios. Indeed the claims upon which this therapeutic approach is based is not supported by any convincing scientific evidence. Yet the damage that can be done to patients and their families by such psychotherapists is well documented’.

In America in the 1990s, hundreds of ex patients sued their therapists on the grounds of malpractice, because they had implanted false memories of abuse and destroyed family relationships. Not all false allegations come via implanted memories; some are made purely as a way of revenge or even for financial gain. But until false allegations are proved to be false they are accepted as fact and allowed to be put forward as the only evidence necessary to gain a prosecution in a criminal trial. The extremely low level of proof required in cases of a sexual nature, in contrast with all other offences, is surely questionable. Why aren’t all crimes subject to the same level of proof?

As many high profile people, like football and showbiz types, seem able to prove that any allegations made against them are false, is down to the fact that they can afford to pay for a decent legal team. But those who rely on a state funded defence team are unable to do the same. This proves that there are two different levels of justice – one for the rich and another for the poor.

The legal profession are doing nothing to fight this injustice, and all the small groups pushing for change seem to be following personal agendas. What is needed is for all of these groups and professionals to join forces, which might raise a shout so loud that the government realise that mistakes in our legislation must be remedied now! Until then 60 more people every week will be wrongfully imprisoned, some of them for historic offences that never happened.

Finally, if you find yourself to be one of the lucky innocents who can prove your innocence before charges are brought against you then you may think that would be the end of the matter? WRONG! If anyone requests a CRB check on you it will show that you were arrested for ‘an offence’ but that there was ‘insufficient evidence’, so ‘no further action’ was taken. It appears that the word ‘innocent’ does not compute on the Police National Computer. So, as soon as an accusation is made it could be the end of your life as you know it.

Must Read: Pedohysterical Operation Ore Imprisons Innocent Men

‘Massive miscarriage of justice’

By Louise Shorter, from insidetime issue November 2010

Legal action set to take place in the Court of Appeal in London could pave the way for hundreds of child pornography convictions, secured during Operation Ore, to be overturned in what is being described by campaigners as a ‘massive miscarriage of justice’

Operation Ore, the codename for the police investigation which began in 2002, was launched after information supplied by US law enforcement agencies purported to show that more than 7,000 UK men used their credit cards to access online child pornography sites. It netted high profile figures such as The Who guitarist Pete Townshend and fed the nation’s fear that paedophilia is endemic throughout modern cyber-savvy society.

But the police operation which ran for more than five years is steeped in controversy, with critics claiming the computer database of users’ names and credit card details was riddled with fraud. Defence experts say the fraud being perpetuated was simple and effective: owners of websites including legal adult pornography re-used credit card details supplied to them to sign up for their illegal services, child pornography. Chris Saltrese, the solicitor representing Anthony O’Shea whose case will be heard at the Appeal Court this month, says: “there are hundreds of people who’ve been convicted of one of the worst crimes imaginable. Lives and families have been destroyed. But the evidence now shows that many of those convicted weren’t paedophiles at all. They were victims of straightforward online credit card fraud.”

Anthony O’Shea’s house was one of more than 4,000 homes raided during the police operation which ultimately led to 2,000 convictions and 140 children being removed from their homes. Though no illegal paedophile material was found on Mr O’Shea’s computer, his credit card had been used attempting to pay for access to sites. In 2005 he was convicted, sentenced to 5 months in jail and placed on the sex offender register for 7 years. His life, he says, and that of his wife, children, sibling and parents have all been destroyed.

Throughout all of the original trials, defence teams were denied access to the full computer database which provided the list of credit card details on which the Ore prosecutions were brought. Taking more than 5 years to secure sight of the database, a defence expert who has examined it now claims ‘indicators of fraud are present in abundance.’ Those indicators include evidence that subscribers paid to access these illegal sites but then failed to view the material paid for, and that credit cards were used to pay for multiple subscriptions even though only one was required.

Last month, in a separate case, a London based businessman, Chris Singam, was awarded £180,000 damages after charges of downloading child pornography were thrown out two weeks before the case was due to be heard in court. Having lost his business, been threatened and ostracised, Mr Singam was eventually told the computer evidence the CPS relied on was “flawed” – his computer had been infected with a virus.

To date, 39 men caught up in Operation Ore are said to have committed suicide.

Swedish Woman Makes False Rape Accusations for Money

No, it's not Anna Ardin or Sofia Wilen - at least as far as we know. This story is from August 2010.

Britons 'trapped in false rape sting by blonde Swede on Greek island’

Men have been warned to be on their guard after the 26-year-old woman claimed a total of €800,000 (£666,315) in insurance after lodging allegations of rape on the island of Kos.

It is believed that her victims include at least four Britons, according to a lawyer representing one of the falsely accused.

An international hunt involving Greek and Swedish police and Interpol has failed to find the woman, described as an attractive blonde.

Ross Mitchell, a teacher from Nottinghamshire, met his accuser in Kos in June 2008. He was jailed and forced to pay £2,000 bail before the case collapsed because the woman fled the country. He is still waiting for the money to be returned.

He met her in Kardamena, a busy resort popular with young Britons.

It is believed Mr Mitchell was working in a bar when they met. She claimed he tried to rape her in her hotel room.

Mr Mitchell, who denied all allegations, was arrested, charged and held in custody while police investigated.

In her initial complaint, she said she could identify him only from the smell of his sweat and his hairstyle.

She then fled to her native Sweden and failed to attend a subsequent magistrates’ court hearing. It is believed that she denies the allegation of making false claims.

According to the Greek media, she was involved in “organised fraud” and was “fabricating charges of being raped so that she could draw large amounts of insurance as compensation”.

Mr Mitchell was freed on bail before the case was formally dropped. His lawyer, Alcybiades Hajantonis, said Swedish authorities disclosed that she had pulled the scam on at least three other occasions, claiming €200,000 (£166,500) each time.

Mr Mitchell said yesterday he was “stunned” to be told that the woman was a serial con artist. He said: “I had no idea there were allegations she had done this to other men.”

His father, Les, said the case had been a “nightmare” for his son.

“Being a teacher he doesn’t really want all this publicised,” he said. “Even a false accusation can ruin a career. It’s certainly affected him.

“The whole thing was a load of rubbish from start to finish, but the police took it seriously and he ended up in jail. Then they let her slip through their fingers and disappear and as far as I’m aware haven’t been able to catch her since.”

Mr Hajantonis, who is based on Kos, said: “We have been trying to find the accuser so she can sign acceptance of the court decision so Mr Mitchell can get back his bail money.

“In the process, I contacted Interpol and Swedish police to find her, only to be informed that she has made three similar rape claims and earned an additional €600,000 in compensation. Swedish authorities cannot find her and we still can’t get back the bail money. She obviously does this on a systematic basis”.

Greek police said there appeared to be an increasing number of false rape claims at Greek holiday resorts.

They blamed the notoriety that British holidaymakers had developed for getting drunk and raping or sexually assaulting women.

A police spokesman said: “This may be yet another case of a woman claiming rape to get compensation, because British men are so often arrested on such charges.”

This story is strangely in contrast to everything that feminists have told me about women - that they are poor, innocent victim-angels who would never do a thing like lie about rape.

Clearly, the article must be misogynistic.

After all, telling the truth about women is what passes for misogynistic these days.

The Feminist Backlash Against Assange Drones On

I guess I should acknowledge this, since, by providing a name and pictures to Ferdinand Bardamu, I must be one of the "misogynist right wing bloggers" that Tracy McVeigh complains about.

Funny, I've never really seen myself that way. I see myself as a humanist, not a misogynist (humanism today necessarily involves staunch opposition to the anti-human, anti-freedom ideology of feminism); as belonging to neither left nor right wing; and I'm not much of a blogger either, since all I really do is spread around information that was already out there.

Still, if it helps Ms McVeigh sleep better at night to imagine that I am an opponent she need not acknowledge beyond lightweight aspersions, Princess can go right ahead and call me whatever names she likes. I've been called names by feminists all my life, and today I'm happily exposing the names of false rape accusers to a wider audience. What makes her think that calling me more names is going to discourage me?

Anyway, here's the scoop.

Writing for the Guardian, reporter Tracy McVeigh reports on the overwhelming wave of anger over Assange’s arrest with thinly-veiled unease, revealing feminist concerns about their tenuous claim to favorable public sentiment.
In what is an obvious reference to Ferdinand Bardamu’s posts on The Spearhead and In Mala Fide, she blames “misogynist right wing bloggers” for outing Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen:

Dismissed by his supporters as a smear campaign, the case against Assange now threatens to move from a sideshow to overwhelm the main act – the work he has done in his public life as editor of WikiLeaks. In part, Assange, 39, who has become a figurehead for whistleblowers, can blame this on supporters who have pressed accolades on the man rather than the cause, and who range from left wing historians, feminists and human rights campaigners to misogynist right wing bloggers and a porn baron.

[...]

A range of deeply misogynistic blog posts have blamed “feminists”, despite insistence from people close to Assange that there is no conspiracy.

[...]

The paper is reflecting a growing discomfort among many, in both camps, at the widespread vilification – and naming – of the two alleged victims on websites and blogs, and also of the kind of language being used by people including Assange’s own lawyer Mark Stephens who referred to the allegation as a “honeytrap” .

Whatever one feels about Assange, there is something very suspicious about these rape allegations, especially the fact that Anna Ardin/Bernardin, the woman who made the decision to go to the police, has been tied to shady, CIA-funded groups in Cuba, and left Sweden days before new charges were filed, running off to the remote town of Yanoun in the Palestinian West Bank, possibly to spy on Hamas and Orthodox Jewish settlers.

McVeigh dismisses any allegations that “feminists” were behind this, but Anna Ardin/Bernardin is a self-described feminist activist who has made accusations before – against her own students – and was thrown out of Cuba for her involvement with a right wing, CIA-supported feminist group. Furthermore, there is nothing odd about feminists working with the CIA; Gloria Steinem received funds directly from the intelligence organization while employed by Ms. Magazine.

The “discomfort” at the naming of Ardin and Wilen is felt by establishment feminists like McVeigh, who want to be able to decide what should be reported and what shouldn’t — oddly similar to the dispute over Wikileaks. Yet her own publication, even as it denounces those who have exposed Assange’s accusers, claims that it upholds the principle of disclosure, writing:

The process of editing, contextualising, explanation and redaction is a painstaking one. It is part of the craft of journalism. Journalism is also about disclosure. It is at its best when it is the disclosure of matters of high public interest. Judge Assange on that score, as much as any other.

If the participation of a feminist activist who may be a spy in what looks like a frame-up of a highly controversial journalist is not a matter of “high public interest,” what is?

The Latest on Assange

Julian Assange has been granted bail.

He told Good Morning America the sex attack allegations made him 'clearly a victim of a smear campaign'.

'This has been a very successful smear campaign,' he said, stressing how Google searches of his name invariable come up with mentions of the rape investigation.

'But I think it's days are numbered, and people are starting to wonder if it's really true - and if it is, where's the evidence? Why has no evidence been provided even to me and my attorneys?'

Asked outright if he had sex with these women against their will, he stated confidently: 'Absolutely not. And that is what I have stated, and what my counsel has stated, from the very beginning.'

He insisted that 'something is very wrong' in Sweden and the U.S. that everything was being 'conducted in secret'.

'The whole damn thing is kept secret' he complained, adding that it appears 'no evidence was needed whatsoever' to bring court cases against him.

... While promising to work faster now that he is back 'directing our ship' he must also fight Sweden's attempt to extradite him on allegations of rape and molestation

Assange insisted again that he was being subjected to a smear campaign and 'what appears to be a secret grand jury investigation against me or our organisation.'

He did not elaborate, but said he had retained an unnamed U.S. law firm to represent him.

Part of me hoped he would simply disappear - and I don't mean he would 'be disappeared,' as some Republican politicians would like to happen. I mean he would simply run off. I'm sure he has the means and the contacts to do this.

On the other hand, that would look like he was running away from something.

Then again, I thought - he has plenty to run from. US politicians have openly called for his assassination, and Fascist Sweden is seeking to capture him for an inquisition. (Did you know that rape trials in Sweden are run sans jury, and that the judge is sole arbiter of both guilt and sentencing? Note how Jessica Valenti gushes over Sweden's legal system, and the pieces should start to fall into place.)

The fact is, he should not have to stand trial in Sweden at all.

The charges were only ever brought up again (after being dismissed as lies within 12 hours of the first report to the police) when Wikileaks began releasing damaging material.

So, if he were suddenly to disappear, it would only indicate a man's will to survive - that he would be running from those who seek to do him harm. He would be running not from justice, but from imminent injustice.

The feminist response has been predictable. As reported at the False Rape Society, one feminist had a blackout over Michael Moore's backing of Julian Assange. They quote her screeching, incomprehensible diatribe:

We believe that accuser-shaming, accuser-harassment, victim-blaming, and the suppression of rape cases all serve one distinct purpose, which is: TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO RAPE US AND GET AWAY WITH IT. To make us scared to report our rapes, even to the people we know. And we will not stand for it any more. We require — not ask, not prefer, absolutely require – progressive media and public figures to stand against rape in every case.

How sweet that a feminist nobody believes she can make demands of all forms of progressive media.

As FRS puts it in the same post,

The same feminists having a conniption over Mr. Moore's remarks are conveniently silent when someone publicly assumes the guilt of a man accused of rape.

An earlier FRS post elaborates on the same theme:

... of course, every feminist is an authority on false rape claims. For example, they often feel perfectly justified popping onto this blog to "educate" us, in a most self-righteous and sarcastic manner, about a subject we follow intensely and they don't. We, of course, are biased and unworthy of belief, simply by virtue of the fact that we have the audacity to speak for a group of citizens normally treated as flotsam.

Well, they are coming out of the woodwork with hand-wringing and solemn pronouncements about the Assange rape claims. One writer said this: "The next phase of the Wikileaks coverage has already begun. The fact that there is no public evidence one way or another about the rape case has led into a tiresome, pedestrian argument over the usual sexual battlegrounds. Soon, commentators will start on the prevalence of false rape accusations, and the feminist slant that is inherent in sexual assault charges. Stay tuned for a discussion on men’s rights, the inevitable backlash that ensues, and the inevitable backlash to the backlash, until Julian Assange sneaks away while we’re all yelling at each other."

Comments by feminist Kate Harding, writing in Salon deserve special mention:

As of today, even Naomi Wolf -- Naomi Effin' Wolf! -- has taken a public swipe at Assange's accusers, using her status as a "longtime feminist" to underscore the absurdity of "the alleged victims ... using feminist-inspired rhetoric and law to assuage what appears to be personal injured feelings."

Wow. Admittedly, I don't have as much experience being a feminist as Wolf has, but when I see a swarm of people with exactly zero direct access to the facts of a rape case loudly insisting that the accusation has no merit, I usually start to wonder about their credibility. And their sources.

Tell us, Ms. Harding, how do you react when you see a swarm of people with exactly zero direct access to the facts about an alleged rape case -- a he said/she said case where the only evidence is her say so -- loudly insisting that the accusation has merit? 

How do you react then?  Does that bother you? Even a little?

Because that's what we almost always hear. That's how the news media and the feminist blogosphere treats virtually every allegation of rape, even the ones supported by no evidence beyond her say-so in a "he said/she said" dispute; even the many that turn out to be false. 

Tell me, girlfriend, do you "usually start to wonder about their credibility" in that case?

Somehow, I doubt it. Somehow I suspect you have precisely zero inclination to pound out an angry, sarcastic Internet piece about the innumerable rushes to judgment that crucify innocent men and boys with false rape allegations.

Can you say "Hofstra"? 

Funny, girlfriend, you've written a ton on that horrid Roman Polanski. How did you feel about Hofstra?

Doesn't interest you, does it?

Weather Girl Makes False Rape Accusation

Good Morning America weather girl quizzed over 'falsely claiming she was raped while jogging in Central Park'

A television weather girl was suspended today after police claimed she had falsely cried rape.

Heidi Jones, a meteorologist for WABC and Channel 7 who often fills in on ABC's Good Morning America, told police that she had been sexually assaulted in New York’s Central Park while out jogging in September.

But after police spotted discrepancies in the 37-year-old's story they confronted her - and she allegedly admitted that she had made up the attack.

She was charged on Monday with filing a false report, a Class A misdemeanour.

If convicted of lying, Miss Jones could face up to a year in jail, or be fined $1,000 (£640).

She is also facing losing her job from WABC, where she has worked since 2005.

She informed police on November 24 that she was jogging in the famous park on the afternoon of September 24 when a Hispanic man grabbed her from behind.

Note: false accusers in the US typically target Hispanic or black men because it makes their story - in their eyes - more believable. Otherwise known as racism.

After being confronted with the discrepancies, the New York Post’s source said Miss Jones admitted that she had made up the story.

Miss Jones allegedly said her relationship was not going well and that she concocted the tale in a plea for sympathy, the Daily News reported.

Above: Heidi Jones - WABC and Channel 7 weather girl, nation's sweetheart, running enthusiast, false rape accuser, racist.

Feminist Comment of the Week - 17th December 2010

Jessica Valenti says:

. . . we should look to [Swedish rape laws] as a potential model for our own legislation.

In fact, some activists and legal experts in Sweden want to change the law there so that the burden of proof is on the accused; the alleged rapist would have to show that he got consent, instead of the victim having to prove that she didn't give it.

Woman and White Knights Team Up to Torture Man

It tends to be that way, doesn't it?

Former beauty queen jailed for arranging to have her ex-boyfriend kidnapped and tortured

A former beauty queen accused of orchestrating the kidnapping and torturing of her ex-boyfriend has been jailed.

Kumari Fulbright, 28, was sentenced yesterday to two years in prison and six years' probation.

... Fulbright, a University of Arizona law school student, arrested with three men in December 2007 after the ex-boyfriend told police he'd been tied up and kept captive for eight to 10 hours, robbed and tortured.

A former UA law school student and beauty queen was sentenced to two years in prison plus six years' probation for her part in the kidnapping and torture of her former boyfriend.

Fulbright was dating Joshua Conway when she asked him to sell jewellery she was given by her former boyfriend, Robert Ergonis, according to prosecutors.

When Ergonis came back into Fulbright's life, she lied and told Ergonis that Conway had stolen and sold the jewellery.

Fulbright lured Conway to her flat and Ergonis and David Radde jumped him, the prosecutors said.

Another man, Larry Hammond, helped to detain him.

Conway was beaten, cut with a knife and held at gunpoint for hours until he was able to escape.

Life is, like, so unfair.

Why can't empowered grrlz torture men and be celebrated for it? (Well - there is a certain type of person who will always celebrate them for it, of course.)

Nothin' Makes a Gina Tingle Like a Kriminal

'Infatuated' female prison officer had sex with drug addict inmate in his cell

A female prison officer who had sex with with an inmate in his cell brought shame on herself and her profession, a judge ruled today.

Donna Stanton, 28, began a sexual relationship with heroin addict Eric Fitzgerald while he was serving the last few months of a seven-year sentence at Bedford prison.

She was jailed for two years.

... She lavished gifts and money on him and even gave him a car to use on his release.

But when the relationship turned sour she made a statement to police saying Mr Fitzgerald was blackmailing her and he was arrested. In turn, this led to her own arrest.

Feminist Fascism in Sweden

From Swedish Dad at The Anti-Feminist:

Sweden prides itself with being “the most equal” country in the world, but it´s all a big scam. Over 5000 men , while only 294 women are serving jailtime( KVV 2009). The Swedish government are jailing men for violence or sex crimes against women and children without any proof at all. One member of the supreme court has stated publicly that “If we can keep the number of innocent that are convicted under 500 a year, we should be happy”. This would mean that over a 1000 men (one fifth) of all imprisoned men are innocently locked up at the moment. In the international statistics of convicted for rape, Sweden is number two, after Lesotho in Africa. Still the feminist state is not content. So now they are proposing a law that would outlaw sex without a written contract. No I am not joking. I wish I was, believe me.

At the same time the custody fights have doubled in the last ten years. Over 7000 children a year are now being forced to experience their parents tearing each other to shreds in the family courts and the fathers are almost always destined to loose. At the same time the authorities totally denies any illegal discrimination. Even though several Swedish district courts (ex Lund, and Jönköping) have been found giving single custody to the mothers in 100 % of all custody fights, they still totally deny any illegal discrimination.

You just have to compare how many complaints that have been made, with the number of times anyone have been convicted. The authority in Sweden that handles this is DO (diskrimineringsombudsmannen).

Many of the men ending up in jail are fathers that tried to stand up for their rights to see their children after a divorce.

Over 300 000 Swedish children now see their father 2 days every two weeks or less. If they are lucky enough to see him at all. People that are trying to protest and speak up about this gross injustice are being harassed and persecuted. Very few people dare anymore.

This is the truth about the “Equal” state of Sweden. But just parts of it. The “victims” lawyer Claes Borgström is a political puppet. He got the former prime minister candidate Mona Sahlin freed from charges of fraud in the 90´s, and after that he became in charge of “JÄMO” former “bureau of equality”.

But when the Swedish government talk about equality they mean feminism. In Sweden these two words are now one and the same. How corrupt Claes Borgström really is was revealed by Swedish journalist Hannes Råstam last year when he made a documentary i two parts about Thomas Quick. Swedens first real “serial killer”. Convicted of 8 murders. It turned out though that he never committed a single one of them. He was just a mentally ill man high on drugs, that happily confessed to everything as long as they kept feeding him his drugs.

His lawyer was Claes Borgström. [Moderator: this comment has been edited] Any sane democracy would make that conclusion after what he have done. But Sweden is no longer a sane democracy. It is a feminist banana republic with a judicial system that makes even the Iranian look pretty ok.

Who am I? A swedish dad that have been denied my human right to see my daughter for 5 years this christmas, without any justification at all. She will be 6 years old the 17 of december. Just another one of the thousands of swedish children that are beeing violently torn from their fathers each year. You really want to know about swedish justice? Make sure you can handle the smell.

Seeing All Men as Predators

Tarring Men
by Nicole Sprinkle

When it comes to our kids, men get a pretty bad rap. As a society we talk ad nauseum about racism and other forms of discrimination. But when it comes to men, no one seems to have much to say.

Ms Sprinkle goes on to describe how she needed a babysitter.

there was also this 23-year-old young man who responded to my ad on our neighborhood’s Listserv. He was well spoken and exuded a quiet friendliness over the phone. He was studying to become a paramedic (great to have around in case of emergencies), lived his whole life in the neighborhood, had a mother who owned a local daycare, and worked as a summer camp counselor at the very preschool my daughter was now attending – and got rave reviews from his supervisor there. In his e-mail to me, he said he would be interested in the job if my child was a boy. When I spoke to him on the phone and asked why he’d stipulated the male gender, he openly explained that he understood that many parents felt uncomfortable having a man watch a young girl. Touché. And extra points for sensitivity. I told him I did, indeed, have a 3-year-old daughter. He replied that he had no problem with that. Hmmm, but did I? Well, yeah, I did. Or at least I was learning that I did.

Since he was being so forthright with me, I told him frankly that I liked him best of all and yet still wasn’t sure I could make the leap of letting a man watch my daughter: one who might have to help her wipe, clean her up in case of an accident, who would be alone with her everyday for several hours.

I also told him that I felt really awful about having to feel this way, and that it was such a shame that society forced us to discriminate against kind, competent men as caregivers for our kids.

Nobody forced you to discriminate, Ms Sprinkle, any more than whites were 'forced to discriminate' against blacks in the early twentieth century Deep South. Society does not 'force' a prejudice upon you as if you are merely an empty vessel without moral or critical autonomy.

Yes, I know that statistically a man is far more likely to molest a child than a woman but,

It's statistically more likely to be reported, and statistically more likely to make headlines, I think that's about all we can say regarding that particular can of worms.

I told him I needed to think about it for a day or two.

He very kindly told me he understood and would wait for and respect my decision. Two days later I called him to tell him I was so sorry but I was going with the local mom. Again, he pleasantly told me he completely understood but to feel free to call him if it didn’t work out. I hung up the phone feeling sheepish.

You should feel more then sheepish, Ms Sprinkle. You are a prejudiced human being who judges other people as child molestors for no reason other than their sex. You acted on the very same forces that give rise to racist lynchings and homophobic murders.

Finally, to round out the week, a big brouhaha broke out on my neighborhood’s parent’s Listserv. A number of men playing chess on the stone chess tables inside one of our local playgrounds were given citations by the police. The reasoning? No adults allowed in a children’s playground without a child. (That’s the rule in all city playgrounds.)

Parents online became incensed – most felt the police were doing their job. The men didn’t belong there and a law’s a law.

A law's a law? Separate but equal, right? To draw another parallel to the early twentieth century US, white privilege was upheld through laws being laws. What we learn from those experiences is that it takes brave people to challenge unjust laws, and privileged, moralising chatterers to defend them.

And of course - the police are just doing their job. Adolf Eichmann merely 'did his job' too. Ms Sprinkle apparently believes that, when it comes to the most crucial moral questions of our time, it is best to disdain our critical faculties and perform the tasks we have been allocated.

'The men didn't belong there' - can anyone tell me where we think men do belong? There are women-only spaces that women fought hard for; they simultaneously fought to open up men-only spaces to everyone. The result is that men have nowhere of their own. As Ms Sprinkle herself admits:

I couldn’t help thinking that had it been a group of women playing chess, the police nor the parents would have given it a second thought.

I just know that as a mom who was faced with a tough decision along the gender divide, I can’t help feeling saddened by my well-meaning bias

I am sure that white men too thought it was 'well-meaning bias' when they 'protected' white women by persecuting black men.

Ms Sprinkle is cognizant enough to understand that men are being similarly persecuted, but ultimately doesn't care enough to do a thing to fix this situation; and, it seems, would prefer that it remains this way.

With this kind of anti-male discrimination being so widespread, is it any wonder that so many false accusations against men are made?

On that note, the False Rape Society weighs in:

What is both infuriating and chilling is that Sprinkle doesn't have the first clue how offensive it is ... Sprinkle ended up hiring a woman over the best candidate, solely because the best candidate is male.

After this unpardonable display of misandric pyrotechnics, Sprinkle feigns sensitivity toward the plight of good men ...

I can just hear Sprinkle telling a black person in the 1950s: "It's really awful that I have to feel this way, and it is such a shame society forces us to discriminate against good people like you, but I really don't want my daughter being in the same school as your child."

Sprinkle backs up her unbridled prejudice with an offhand comment that "statistically a man is far more likely to molest a child than a woman," blinking at the fact that the vast majority of child abuse is committed by women, and that a child is more likely to choke on pretzels than to be sexually molested by a man. But of course, we ban men, not pretzels, from our children's lives.

Sprinkle ends her hateful piece with the following attempt to paint her as an enlightened good parent: "I can’t help feeling saddened by my well-meaning bias . . . ."

As one comment under the story astutely pointed out, there is no such thing as "well-meaning bias." It is either bias or it isn't. You can't gussy up bigotry as good parenting by hiding behind the argument "but it's for the kids!"

In an era when we are telling men that they need to unshackle themselves from their masculine stereotypes and spend less time being breadwinners and more time being fathers, somehow Ms. Sprinkle, and a number of women commentators under the story, are perfectly OK with the view that men can't be trusted around children ...

If men are legitimately scary, Ms. Sprinkle, shouldn't we make it a crime for fathers to be alone with their own children? Logically, that has to be the next step, doesn't it?

Frankly, I fear for Ms. Sprinkle's daughter. It's not the new babysitter who is a concern, it's Ms.Sprinkle herself. She can't help but pass on to her daughter a wildly unreasonable fear of almost half the population of planet earth.

Carey Roberts on Domestic Violence

I'm just going to post the whole thing.

Yippee, We’re All Abusers Now!

By Carey Roberts

Domestic violence has been plummeting in recent years. In 1976, the toll of men and women killed by their partners registered 2,944 deaths. Now it’s half that number.

But what comes as good news to American families turns out to be a mixed blessing for the domestic violence industry. After all, the Abuse Mavens don’t want to see their generous paychecks trimmed!

So a few years ago someone ginned up this grand scheme: Let’s exponentially broaden the definition of domestic violence.

And sure enough, the 2005 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act featured this open-ended definition: “The term ‘domestic violence’ includes felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence.” The law’s artful use of the word “includes” sent a clarion signal to lawmakers throughout the country – an expansive range of conduct could now be considered to constitute abuse.

According to a recent report, “Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence” (http://www.saveservices.org/downloads/Expanding-Definitions-of-Domestic-Violence ), 63% of states include emotional distress in their statutory definition of domestic violence. That means any person who claims to be “fearful” – no evidence necessary — is entitled to a protective order and the generous cornucopia of bennies that comes with it.

Do you live in California, Delaware, Michigan, Montana, or Virginia? In these states, the mere feeling of “apprehension” of harm qualifies you as an abuse victim. In New Jersey, if your partner interferes with your “well-being,” that counts, as well.

In Illinois, “interference with personal liberty” — whatever that means — makes you a domestic abuser. And the Delaware statute throws in the catch-all “any other conduct” for good measure.

But domestic violence runs rampant and proto-abusers need to be held accountable – or so the domestic violence industry claims — so why not swell our definitions even more?

Now, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, partner violence also includes “Getting annoyed if the victim disagrees” and “Withholding information from the victim.” If that doesn’t suffice, “Disregarding what the victim wants” also counts as a punishable offense.

That’s right guys, if your heart-throb thinks she’s an abuse victim, you’d better get her that pedicure she’s been pestering you about – and fast!

Pro-immigration groups have broadened the playing field even more. The N.O.W. Legal Momentum says “possessiveness” is a sure sign of imminent violence. The Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago counts a person who needs to “walk on eggshells” as an abuse victim. ASISTA posits “what tone of voice was used” is incontrovertible proof, as well.

In an article recently published in Social Science and Medicine, the elastic band of abuse is stretched to even more preposterous lengths. According to “Male Reproductive Control of Women who Have Experienced Intimate Partner Violence,” a man who attempts to sway his wife’s reproductive status is guilty of “reproductive control.”

So wise up, guys. If you ever told a woman you didn’t want her to get an abortion or refused to pay for contraception, you are guilty of “reproductive control.” According to the feminist catechism, that’s a mortal sin, which of course constitutes violence against women.

But these definitions have a built-in limitation: They all require the alleged abuser to commit a specific unlawful act. This can make it difficult to prove your case in a court of law. The solution? Balloon the definition even more!

Go to the website of the federal Office of Violence Against Women. The OVW informs us domestic violence is a “pattern of abusive behavior in any relationship that is used by one partner to gain or maintain power and control.”

Maintain power and control?

Ladies, if you nag your husband to mow the lawn, that’s power and control. Men, quit telling your wife to not overdraw the ATM – same thing. If you get into a disagreement over the TV remote control, you guessed it, that’s proof of an obsessive need for power and control. That’s a heinous offense, according to Big Sister.

In the former Soviet Union, criminal laws were crafted to ensnare the daily activities of innocent citizens. As former KGB director Lavrenti Beria famously warned, “Show me the man, and I’ll find you the crime.”

Once possessed of the mission of curbing partner abuse, the domestic violence industry now foreshadows the recrudescence of the horrific memories of a dystopian past.

Julian Assange: Update

I haven't written on Julian Assange in a few days, because other people have got that covered better than me. So here's a roundup.

As of the time of writing, Julian has been arrested, purportedly for extradition to Sweden to face those 'rape' charges. He has not been granted bail.

What is really interesting, from an MRA's point of view, is that the issue transcends left and right. For those who think of the left wing as feminist lapdogs, think again - the very least we can say is that the left values freedom of information over female caprice.

From the left comes an article named Assange Beseiged, the subtitle to which - Making a Mockery of the Real Crime of Rape - would fit perfectly into virtually any False Rape Society post, but crucially, not any feminist article dealing with false rape accusations, (which tend towards shameless apologia). Given that the guys who run and write FRS are fairly conservative, I think it's fair to say that there are significant elements on both the left and the right who strongly and staunchly believe in the liberty of individuals to not be interfered with, particularly by the state.

... the farcical rape charges have once again been leveled against the Pentagon’s Public Enemy Number One. Julian Assange now stands accused of: (1) not calling a young woman the day after he had enjoyed a night with her, (2) asking her to pay for his bus ticket, (3) having unsafe sex, and (4) participating in two brief affairs in the course of one week. These four minor charges, worthy of Leopold Bloom’s mock trial in the Nightown chapter in Ulysses, have been shaken and fermented until they were able to cook up a half-baked rape case! Step down Iran; Sweden takes the cake! While Iran is notorious for unyielding conservative sentences against adulterers, Sweden shows us what the liberal side of the coin looks like as she invents criminal charges for failing to telephone and for careless use of preservatives in consensual acts of affection.

... For a smear that really sticks, you need to get it from an ex-apostle. An accusation by a Caiaphas does not impress. If you are targeting a leftist, hire leftists. For example, Trotskyites were willing and useful tools against the Communists. Pseudo Anti-Zionists are currently being used to hamstring a genuine Pro-Palestinian movement. Who are the Judases of this campaign against our Julian?

Anna Ardin (the official complainant) is often described by the media as a “leftist”. She has ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups. She published her anti-Castro diatribes (see here and here) in the Swedish-language publication Revista de Asignaturas Cubanas put out by Misceláneas de Cuba. From Oslo, Professor Michael Seltzer points out that this periodical is the product of a well-financed anti-Castro organization in Sweden. He further notes that the group is connected with Union Liberal Cubana led by Carlos Alberto Montaner whose CIA ties were exposed here. Note that Ardin was deported from Cuba for subversive activities. In Cuba she interacted with the feminist anti-Castro group Las damas de blanco (the Ladies in White). This group receives US government funds and the convicted anti-communist terrorist Luis Posada Carriles is a friend and supporter.  Wikipedia quotes Hebe de Bonafini, president of the Argentine Madres de Plaza de Mayo as saying that “the so-called Ladies in White defend the terrorism of the United States.”

However we do not have to accept the single-bullet theory. Life is more complicated than that. In addition to her anti-Castro, pro-CIA streak, Anna Ardin apparently indulges in her favorite sport of male-bashing. A Swedish forum reports that she is an expert on sexual harassment and the male “master suppression techniques”. Once, as she was lecturing, a male student in the audience looked at his notes instead of staring at her. Anna Ardin reported him for sexual harassment because he discriminated against her for being a woman and because she claimed he made use of the male “master suppression technique” in trying to make her feel invisible. As soon as the student learned about her complaint, he contacted her to apologize and explain himself. Anna Ardin’s response was to once again report him for sexual harassment, again because he was using the “master suppression technique”, this time to belittle her feelings.

Ardin is apparently involved with a “Christian” Social-Democrat group. The Swedish church has a precious few male priests: what was once the struggle for female equality has ended up with men being effectively removed from service. Nowadays very few Swedish male-female couples marry in the church, or get married at all; most Swedish gay couples, however, are proud to become “man and wife” in the church. This is all good news for wealthy Swedes: deserted churches sell their properties (once enjoyed by the community) to be fenced off by the nouveau riche created by the latest privatization wave. So much for Swedish social democracy!

The second accuser, Sofia Wilen, 26, is Anna’ friend. Here is a video of an Assange press conference where one can see the girls together. Those present at the conference marveled at her groupie-like behavior. Though rock stars are used to girls dying to have sex with them, it is much less common in the harsh field of political journalism. Sofia worked hard to bed Assange, according to her own confession; she was also the first to complain to police. She is little known and her motives are vague. Why might a young woman (who shares her life with American artist Seth Benson) pursue such a sordid political adventure?

Rape is a horrible crime, and it should not be stretched to encompass minor misdemeanors and moral failings (like the failure to give an encouraging phone call the next day). Tellingly, when the complainant’s advocate was asked why the young women were unsure whether they were raped, he replied: “They are not lawyers”. Rape (like murder) is a crime that one needs no lawyers to understand. Rape is a capital crime: if the rape charges are proved false, then certainly the complainant should be charged with criminal defamation.

And now for a piece from the right, entitled Julian Assange’s Honey Trap: That’s Rape in Sweden:

Julian Assange of Wikileaks infamy was arrested in England today. But it isn’t for espionage—his Interpol “red notice” made no mention of the hundreds of thousands of classified government documents he has released illegally over the past year.
Neither does it mention the word “rape,” but you wouldn’t know that from the news reports. Searching Assange’s surname alongside the word “rape” on Google yields nearly 10 million results. Ever since Swedish authorities initially filed—then dropped—then reinstated—sex-crime charges against him late last summer, the words “Assange” and “rape” have been irrevocably wed online.
In a society hypersensitive about gender issues to the point of psychosis, a rape accusation is perhaps the worst claim you could lodge against someone short of adding that their victim was underage. But although certain gender-crazed pompom girls insist that false rape accusations are a vicious patriarchal fiction, by one estimate about half of all official rape complaints are entirely fabricated. Merely searching the word “false” alongside “rape” on Google News will yield a fresh crop of verifiably bogus allegations nationwide with each new sunrise. Try it if you don’t believe me.

... For both girls it was consensual, but suddenly it wasn’t consensual, but he wasn’t violent, but then again he wouldn’t take ‘no’ for an answer, but neither of them are afraid of him, anyway, even though he’s twisted.
Prosecutors bucked Swedish legal tradition and leaked Mr. Wikileaks’ name to the Swedish press even before contacting Assange. They issued a warrant for his arrest late on August 20th—around the same time the story hit the Swedish tabloids and exploded online.
Then, 24 hours later, they dropped the charges.
On September 1st, Sweden’s director of public prosecutions Marianne Ny issued new sexual-assault charges against Assange for his trysts with Ardin and Wilen. Assange now faces charges in Sweden for what is legally known there as “sex by surprise.”
Ardin and Wilen have hired Swedish celebrity lawyer Claes Borgström, who has uttered such gems about the case as “He had sex against their will one way or the other” and explained that even though the girls insisted Assange didn’t use force, they don’t understand they’ve been raped because “They’re not lawyers.”

... I don’t live in Sweden. But after reading literally thousands of online forum comments about the case, many of them appearing to be from bona fide Swedes, I realize those blond bastards define rape as broadly as our fair galaxy. Everything is rape to them. Apparently there’s a running joke—“That’s rape in Sweden.” Did you spill your coffee? “That’s rape in Sweden.” Did you cough too loud during the board meeting? “That’s rape in Sweden.” What, you don’t understand the joke? “That’s rape in Sweden.”
Not much has been made public about where Sofia Wilen stands regarding the Gender War, but for now let’s say there’s not nearly the shit-ton of excruciatingly damning evidence against her that exists against Anna Ardin.
While a student at Uppsala University, Ardin led a campaign to ban student songs with bawdy, woman-hating lyrics such as “in every hole/do we stop our eels.” Ardin also worked on “women’s issues” and “sexual harassment cases” at Uppsala. It’s hard to conceive that she never rubbed elbows with Professor Eva Lundgren at the school’s Department of Gender Science. Lundgren claims that half of all Swedish men are violent toward women. She also insists there’s a Swedish epidemic of male Satanists committing hundreds of ritual baby murders. When former Uppsala professor Max Scharnberg published a book critical of Lundgren, the university banned and then literally burned it.
Following in such unimpeachable footsteps, Ardin once reportedly filed a sexual-harassment complaint against another student for looking at his notes and not paying attention to her—while she was apparently giving a lecture on sexual harassment!—and thus using “male suppression techniques” to make her feel inferior and unwanted. When the male student learned of the complaint, he apologized to Ardin, who filed a NEW harassment complaint arising from his apology.
In various post-college blog posts, many of which have since been purged, Ardin was found saying things such as “It is time to end the male ideal” and “Rape is a part of male power.” She apparently believes in a literal patriarchy that conspires to keep her down. Another entry details a fictional nonconsensual sexual encounter between a man and a woman that is so graphic, you start thinking Anna Ardin imagines such scenarios all the time.
But Ardin’s self-delivered knockout punch came on January 19th of this year in a blog post (here’s the original and a rough translation) titled “7 Steps to Legal Revenge.” Although the steps themselves were lifted from a non-Swedish source, Ardin begins her post with, “I’ve been thinking about some revenge over the last few days.” Step 3 counsels: “For example if you want revenge on someone who cheated or who dumped you, so should the punishment with the dating/sex/fidelity to do. [sic]” In Step 4, we are encouraged to “Use your imagination!” The seventh and final step reeks of All Things Stalker: “And remember what your goal is, while you are operating, ensure that your victim may suffer the same way he made you suffer.”
It’s said that Ardin was once tossed out of Cuba for subversive political activities and that she has ties to some sort of CIA operative. And when rape charges were first lodged against Julian Assange, he insisted the CIA or Pentagon set him up in some sort of “honey trap” with Ardin and Wilen, but he later backpedaled on that charge.

In other news, Ferdinand Bardamu at In Mala Fide actually posted the home addresses and contact details of the two women who have accused Julian.

Julian Assange: The Charges

Courtesy of the BBC, we now know the charges against Mr. Assange. Please remember when reading the following that Anna Ardin is a radical feminist bent on getting 'legal revenge' against men. And we should all know what those kind of people get up to.

Used his body weight to hold down Miss A (Anna Ardin) in a sexual manner.

This could describe virtually any act of coitus since time began. It doesn't matter which partner is 'on top', they could fairly be described as 'using their body weight to hold down' the partner 'in a sexual manner.' This is a charge, not of rape, but of sex.

Had unprotected sex with Miss A (Anna Ardin) when she had insisted on him using a condom.

As far as I know, this has not been refuted. So, if this fiery and strong radical feminist was so insistent on him using a condom, why didn't she just tell him 'no' when he refused to wear one? Why did she say, 'well okay then' - on her own admission? Again, this is a charge, not of rape, but of sex.

Molested Miss A (Anna Ardin) "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".

Again, this could describe virtually any act of copulation - if it's the kind of thing you go looking for. I'm sure he did 'violate' her. But once more, that makes it a charge, not of rape, but of sex.

Had unprotected sex with Miss W (Sofia Wilén) while she was asleep.

Now, this is a new one - not just that it is an actual charge of rape, but that it hasn't appeared anywhere before. Now it comes up out of the blue.

Five people, including journalist John Pilger, film director Ken Loach and Jemima Khan, the sister of Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith, offered to put up sureties.

But district judge Howard Riddle refused bail for Mr Assange and he was remanded in custody until 14 December.

Judge Riddle said he believed Mr Assange might flee and he also feared he "may be at risk from unstable persons".

Unfortunately, Mr. Assange may be a little too late to avoid the risk from certain unstable persons.

The Charges Against Julian Assange are Part of a Smear Campaign

Pundit Will Heaven is very confused. The title of his commentary on Julian Assange's arrest makes that clear enough:

Julian Assange arrest: This isn't about WikiLeaks, it's about an accusation of rape

Of course these are two unrelated issues that just happened to occur at exactly the same time. Despite the fact that there were many months between the charges being made and Wikileaks releasing those cables, and that an international warrant for his arrest could have appeared at any moment in the intervening time period.

As readers of this blog may know, I’m not a fan of Julian Assange and think his professional life is a troubled one. But I can say this confidently: I have ABSOLUTELY no idea whether he is a rapist or not.

Will Heaven has not been paying attention, then; he would do well to catch up to the facts. Such as the fact that neither Anna Ardin nor Sofia Wilén - the two women who he is alleged to have raped - have actually made an official police complaint. Or the fact that both women have admitted that the sex was consensual, he just didn't wear a condom. Or the fact that having consensual sex but not wearing a condom does not constitute rape in Sweden or anywhere else in the world. Or the fact that Anna Ardin is a radical feminist who talks about 'getting revenge' against men. Or that Anna Ardin specialises in getting 'legal revenge' against men. Or the fact that Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén went to the police station only asking for advice on what to do if raped, knowing that the police would have to charge Mr. Assange, but the women could not be held accountable if the story turned out to be false. See here.

The WikiLeaks revelations, published by the Guardian and other newspapers, were at times fascinating – but they did not suggest that the USA is in the habit of forcing foreign courts to fabricate criminal charges.

Actually, sexual misconduct has, historically speaking, been the smear of choice of the United States government. The USA is by no means above interfering in the business of other countries, and does so, often in the most pernicious manner.

I am quite happy to entertain the idea that the US government did not have a hand in all this. I absolutely will not entertain the idea that the US government could not have done.

Will Heaven continues with a couple of rhetorical questions, designed to dismiss all opponents of his view as unreconstructed chauvinists and barbarians:

Who are we to offhandedly dismiss two women’s claims that they were harmed? Why are Assange’s supporters so quick to abandon their belief in international law and women’s rights?

And I put it to you, sir: who are we to offhandedly dismiss one man's claims that he did nothing of the sort? Why are Assange's detractors so quick to abandon their belief in international law and men's rights?

Because, you see, the reason we have trials is that we don't know who's telling the truth. If Ardin and Wilén are lying, as many of us suspect, then this is a men's rights issue - because a man's rights will have been violated. If they are telling the truth, then it could fairly be called a women's rights issue, on much the same grounds. So then, why mention women's rights at all? Are they held to be more important than men's rights? This all strikes me as a simpering display of international chivalry.

If we are to listen to one lawyer defending his client, we should also listen to the other side. Here’s what Claes Borgstrom, who represents both the women, said in September when Sweden reopened its investigation: “This is a redress for my clients, I have to say, because they have been dragged through the mud on the internet, for having made things up or intending to frame Assange… There is not an ounce of truth in all this about Pentagon, or the CIA, or smear campaigns, nothing like it.”

I can fully accept that the complaint was not provoked by any institution of the United States government; the fact is, women, and particularly feminist-minded ones, make false accusations every single day. This could quite conceivably have happened on its own. What absolutely is certain is that these charges, and this 'manhunt' for him, have been trumped up because of Wikileaks.

The issues are one and the same; it's simply the tried and tested method for ruining a man's career, his reputation, and his life. Given that Julian Assange is Public Enemy Number One, I would be a lot more shocked if something of this nature had not happened.

This is about Wikileaks, and it is also about an accusation of rape.

False Rape Accuser Jailed for Six Months

Girl, 16, who cried rape after cheating on boyfriend is jailed for six months

A teenage girl was locked up for six months today for crying rape - after she lied to stop her boyfriend finding out she'd cheated on him.

The 16-year-old girl made up the rape allegation after going home for sex with innocent Alex Lewis, 20, on a night out.

She lied to police that she was abducted, attacked and forced to perform a sex act during a violent assault by three men.

It led to Mr Lewis being arrested and held in custody for 36 hours. He spent two months on bail until the girl confessed it was all lies.

I am glad that she has been jailed - though not nearly for long enough.

What I find truly offensive is the following:

The girl, whose name cannot be revealed for legal reasons ...

A judge yesterday ordered the girl should not be named - even though three innocent men she accused of rape were identified in court.

There was a proposal, this year, from the Coalition government, to grant anonymity to men accused of rape.

The feminist lobby quashed it.

So, while it's fine to name and shame innocent men, criminals who happen to be female, such as the disgusting little liar in this story, retain their anonymity.

The trio, all aged 20, were arrested, quizzed and forced to give ‘intimate’ samples during their ‘terrifying’ ordeal after the girl's false claims.

But she will not even be named.

Even the judge who granted her anonymity admitted the following:

‘False allegations of rape can have dreadful consequences to the men concerned.

‘For innocent men to be confronted with an allegation like that, held in custody for 36 hours and subjected to intrusive medical examinations is a terrible experience.'

The prosecution at least called for her to be named. In response, the judge - having apparently already forgotten that she is a criminal and should be duly punished, for the sake of the men she victimised and potential future victims - said that

‘the long-term need for rehabilitation’ meant she should be given anonymity.

The defence claimed that

‘She should not be labelled for the rest of her life within the close community.’

And yet, the men who were entirely innocent, and victimised by her malicious lies, will now be labelled rapists for the rest of their lives. A simple Google search will turn up their names in connection with this horrid accusation. A Criminal Records Bureau check will show that they have been accused of rape.

They will have to live with the consequences of this, for the rest of their lives.

She gets off scot-free, after a short prison spell of which she can expect to serve half.

Julian Assange's False Accusers: Recap

To recap.

Julian Assange's false accusers are:

1. Anna Ardin, a radical feminist seeking 'revenge':

2. Sofia Wilén:

Ferdinand Bardamu reports the following information from a number of blogs:

Anna Ardin, a notorious radical known in Sweden for her feminism views on how men achieve social dominance through sex, has been known to be bent on revenge. On January Ardin posted a blog entry on ‘7 Steps to Legal Revenge by Anna Ardin’, which included a statement, I’ve been thinking about some revenge over the last few days… An article on the blog can be read here - http://progressivealaska.blogspot.com/2010/08/strangest-blog-thread-yet-on-swedish.html .

It is also noted that this is not the first time Ardin has accused someone for molestation of a sexual nature in Sweden.

Ardin invited Assange to Stockholm, and was briefly appointed his press secretary during his visit.

The story begins the weekend of August 15. Assange wanted to attend a Swedish crayfish party, Ardin made the arrangements.

According to the Swedish newspaper Expressen, Assange sexually harassed a woman (Ardin) in Stockholm then two or three days later traveled 20km to Enköping where he supposedly raped another woman (Ardin’s friend). The Expressen concludes by an astonishing coincidence, the two women were friends. They decided a week later to go to a police station together saying that “Assange raped and harassed us”.

Do you understand this? Assange’s “victim” is a twisted, man-hating cunt who was bent on getting revenge for being played. She fabricated a rape charge because she was mad at him for porking her younger hotter tighter girlfriend within two days of putting it in her. Ardin is a sick puppy whose petty act of vengeance will damn an innocent man.

We must sound the bell – Julian Assange’s rape accusers are nothing more than lying feminist slags. The name “Anna Ardin” must go down with Crystal Gail Mangum and Katelyn Faber in the Hall of Girls Who Cried Rape. We must make the definitive case as to how feminists have destroyed modern society by making it easy for mentally disturbed groupies to make false rape accusations because their feeeeeeelings were hurt. We must hang this albatross around the feminists’ necks and give them a blow that they will never recover from.

STOCKHOLM/MELBOURNE (Rixstep) — The charges against Julian Assange were indeed trumped up. Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén planned it all. They went to the police station asking for advice, knowing the police would turn it into an accusation of rape. They’re also the ones who leaked the story to the tabloid Expressen.

A bit of a recap first.

Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén approached the Klara police station in Stockholm on the afternoon of Friday 20 August 2010 to ask questions of the police, purportedly about forcing someone to submit to STD/HIV tests.

The policemen on duty rang up prosecutor on duty Maria Kjellstrand even before the formal interrogation had begun. Kjellstrand - working with no paperwork at all at this point – issued an ‘APB’ for Assange and had the police search the Stureplan district of Stockholm for Assange, ostensibly to bring him in for questioning (and a tour of Swedish isolation cells).

The formal interrogation of Sofia Wilén was only concluded hours later and the interrogation of Anna Ardin didn’t take place until the day after - by telephone.

As seen from Anna Ardin’s SMS history, Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén made the whole thing up - and even decided to leak the story to notorious Swedish tabloid Expressen. The story reached Niklas Svensson and others at Expressen at 19:52.

A colleague of Svensson’s rang up Maria Kjellstrand to find out if the story was true - and Kjellstrand, violating the rules of her office, told the reporter that it was.

Wilén is apparently a photographer by trade.

And from a False Rape Society comment:

It was known from the start that Ardin didn’t make an official allegation of rape at the police station. She merely “wanted some advice on what to do” perhaps knowing that by doing so, legally she couldn’t later be accused of making a false accusation or charged with wasting police time if the allegations turned out to be false. However, if she had an in-depth knowledge of the legal procedure when it comes to reporting rape in Sweden, she may have known that legally, the police had to record it as a rape incident and thus set the wheels in motion to capture the so called rapist.

In other words, it’s a legal loophole that makes it possible to make a false accusation with no fear of recriminations for wasting police time or making false accusations.