The extradition process initiated in Sweden against the WikiLeaks founder is to the uppermost extent POLITICAL

All across this process, the facts have indicated that the case against the WikiLeaks founder has been politically motivated, politically orchestrated, and politically profited. I have even concretely signalled the main beneficiaries.

Statement with reference to the equivocal, fact-against notion “the process in Sweden against the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is not political”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNN_zeHLgUs

Main beneficiaries of the phony process against the WikiLeaks founder:
a) The political sectors in the Swedish government seeking even a more favourable status in NATO, mainly on behalf of Sweden’s corporative interests (Sweden is reputed being the third weaponry export-country);
b) A sector of the Swedish radical feminists movement, seeking a broaden enhancement of the rape legislations, including further positions of privilege in the courts of justice from a supremacist-feminist perspective. This, mainly a right-wing radical-feminist cohort, includes notorious former gender-ombudsman Claes Borgström and several other politicians from the Social democratic party such as accuser Anna Ardin, the Political Secretary of the social democratic “Brotherhood” – as well as from State-feminists.
This feminist campaign has declared openly and publicly that the case Assange is a symbol in such struggle.
c) Some political opportunists, bureaucrat officials, and journalists pursuing career advances in the premises of political correctness, and – despicably – by using spurious methods to position a chauvinist, pseudo-nationalist psychosocial campaign. That has been the case, for instance, of the smear-campaigns devised to blame WikiLeaks Julian Assange for the drop down of Sweden’s international prestige.
d) The political character of these endeavours were further placed in evidence by the interferences in the “legal” process  by Sweden’s Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfelt 2011 and 2012.e)  Exactly as it was in the case of dictator Augusto Pinochet during the extradition process in London (Pinochet’s lawyer being the very same Ms Montgomery, chosen by the Swedish government to defend their interests upon the very same courts): Finally the decision is taken at the political, executive level. Is ultimately the Swedish government, –which in a highly political decision – shall rule the extradition fate, and life, of Julian Assange.
The neglecting or denial of the facts above indicates either simply naivety, or a despicably opportunism.
Excerpts of the video above, quoted from the full transcription by RT in “Sweden unbiased? Assange appeals extradition”:
“[[Others have gone beyond legal arguments, saying that the storm raised by Julian Assange through WikiLeaks has made him a target for political interference. It is a charge which has met with anger from senior figures in Sweden’s legal establishment.
“Political reasons are ridiculous,” said Sven-Erik Alhem, a former Swedish prosecutor. “I am very, very tired of hearing anything about that, because so many statements have been made in London and elsewhere about political reasons and that is ridiculous, nothing less than ridiculous.” 
However others point to wider trends, trends as wide as those washed over by the WikiLeaks flood itself. Across the Atlantic, US authorities enraged at having their secret documents exposed, might seek to have Assange extradited there to stand trial.
Surely Sweden’s famed neutrality would prevent such a thing?
“I would disagree as to whether Sweden is a neutral country,” Stockholm University professor Marcello Vittorio Ferrada de Noli told RT. “Sweden has a very clear-cut proximity and collaboration, even in military operations such as campaigns initiated by NATO. You have, for instance, the Swedish presence in Afghanistan.
“You have a clear-cut pro-NATO policy on the part of Sweden and that is not neutrality,” Professor Noli added.]]”
Be Sociable, Share!