Varför är lilleman på bilden så glad? Jo för att han bor i Sverige och där har hans regering nu äntligen bestämt att han inte kommer att behöva riskera att förlora sin pappa på grund av diskriminering, fördomar, myter och orättvisa lagar. Även om mamma vill ta bort lillemans pappa, så har regeringen bestämt att hans rätt till en nära kontakt med sin pappa väger tyngre än hennes rätt att slippa honom.

Undra på att Lilleman är glad. Undra på att han känner sig trygg med en regering som skyddar honom från alla slags övergrepp och misshandel.

På regeringens hemsida kom i natt glädjebeskedet som så många både barn och vuxna har längtat efter och jobbat så hårt i en evigt tjutande motvind för att en dag få läsa. Detta känns på något vis helt overkligt. 

Det ryktas dock om domedagsstämning på ROKS där man i en första kommentar menar att regeringen är kvinnohatande  pedofilkramare. 

Här på Daddys Sverige firar vi däremot och skickar ett jättegrattis till alla barn vars rättigheter enligt barnkonventionen nu äntligen kan upphöjas till svensk lag efter 21 års väntan. 

Hämtat från regeringens hemsida i natt:

"These are two young women that unfortunatly share the experiance with many other women." Mr Borgström says. That is sadly correct. About 5000 cases of rape are reported in Sweden each year. That is over 50 per 100 000 citizens. In our neighbouring country Finland the same number is 17 per 100 000. About 240 men are convicted each year. Women however very seldom or never get convicted for accusing falsely.
If they win, they get their revenge and a couple of hundred grand, if they loose...well tough shit. 

I am not saying that women should not report being raped. Of course they should. All I am saying is that women that get exposed with lies and false accusations should be put to trial  and punished just like the rapists get.  Is that too much to ask for?
 
This means that Julian Assange now risk go to prison in Sweden for not making sure his partner was fully awake, and not "half asleep" as she has stated herself, before she willingly had sex with him.  A womans statement is often enough in a swedish court. The women accusing him on the other hand don't risk any kind of punishment, should their accusations turn out to be false. How´s that for equality?  In my opinion it's rape either way.

Anyway, without further ado, Mr Claes Borgström:

The swedish documentary "The gender war" by journalist Evin Rubar still is, as far as I know, the only investigative journalistic examination ever made, about the Swedish state feminism. How it all ties together with big politics.  Especially the mighty Swedish social democrat party.

Today I can publish the whole documentary translated in English thanks to the person calling himself "Figaropravda" on Youtube that has been kind enough to subtitle it. But first I'd like to share some facts and history about the documentary that managed to shake the ugly totalitarian giant that Swedish state feminism has become. At least for a short sweet moment.

Those of you who want to be on the right side of the state enforced rules and regulations should not watch this film however. The swedish state TV & Radio review board have banned it from ever being broadcasted again. However it does specifically say "on  TV" I believe, and do not say anything about blogs or Youtube, so it's kind of a grey area? You may have to decide for yourself.

My advice? Come on, be a rebel. It's definitely worth it!  This is some of the weirdest shit, and most fucked up fanatics you will ever see. You will probably even have a hard time believing just how bad the situation is in this country. This film will also answer a lot of questions. Not least how  a man like Julian Assange can get crucified by the Swedish state, for a crime he demonstrably never committed, without a single Swedish journalist lifting a finger in his defence. Shit like that happens daily here. 

The documentary caused an uproar in Sweden when it was televised in 2005, and the chairman of ROKS (organisation for womens shelters) "Irene Von Wachenfeldt" was eventually forced to resign. About half of the 150 womens shelters also withdrew from the  motherorganisation and formed their own. Sveriges tjej och kvinnojourers riksförbund. SKR. Same shit just a little less dirty name. 

But nothing of course really changed. It have just kept on getting worse under the tight media seal. Especially with the new custody law that the feminists enforced in 2006, that made sure more and more children would have to grow up fatherless.

This ensures that the profitable business of the so called "care institutions" for troubled children  can keep filling their empty spaces with fresh young children. Every child will pay the owners up to 6000 SEK per day. The swedish state is a major player on this lucrative market themselves. Through state owned "caregiver" SiS, (state institution board) they each year sell "youth care" for over 4 billion SEK. The taxpayers pick up the tab.

This is a classic example  of a state producing problems for itself to solve. The LVU law  gives the swedish state the right to just steal our children anytime they want. Not seldom the police knock down doors and drag crying children from the arms of their parents. This law is the tool they use. But first they have to destroy the families and split the parents.  Tomas Bodströms new custody law combined with the new laws about womens peace and rape, have taken care of that. First they remove the fathers, the kids natural protectors. The better he is, the less chanse he has in court. After loosing their fathers, the kids often get into trouble, and voila, another bed is filled at the institutions. Caching! 

Cynikal, you bet! It is child trafficking under the protection of the state. And the big media do NOT give a shit.

 The wackjob "Von Wachenfeldt" was after she got sacked,by the way recruited by the swedish church, where she among other things tought "feministic self defence" to young women. Can you believe that?

Swedens bravest journalist?

Evin Rubar did a very brave thing in making this documentary, and she of course paid a steep price. Branded as a "traitor" to her "sisters" she was threatened and harassed to a degree that forced her to go underground after it was televised in 2005. The year after in 2006 she recieved the prestigious investigative journalism award "guldspaden" (The golden shovel) for her documentary, shortly after it was banned and prohibited, by the  TV & Radio review board, from ever being televised again.

Evin Rubar is originally from Kurdistan. She is a brilliant and courageous journalist and a strong believer in both womens and human rights. Maybe that is a clue to why she had the guts to do, what no other swedish journalists have ever done, either before or after?  It was also made possible by the fact that she herself is a woman. The people she interviewed would not have spoke that freely with a male reporter.

The TV & radio review board was biased

The Gender War,  was censored by the review board on the 22 March 2006. On the board sat among others Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth (current Minister of Culture in Sweden). Lena A.L has a past as chairman of one of  ROKS shelters for women. 

This should of course have disqualified her for taking part in this decision. When Swedish television later interviewed Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth, she  first claims that the program was banned because of it's  handling of Professor Eva Lundgren. But when the interviewer  informs Adelsohn Liljeroth that the decision, according to the commisions own protocol, was not about Eva Lundgren at all, but rather about Roks belief in satanic pedophile cults, she suddenly turned 180 degrees and conveyed  a very different basis for the decision.

Adelsohn Liljeroth: "I am active in the movement myself."
Reporter: "Yes?"
Adelsohn Liljeroth: "And I have never encountered this."

Saying this, Adelsohn Liljeroth not only admits that she should have been disqualified from taking part in the decision. As she serves on a board of the organisation that the documentary criticises . But what is even more astounding, she points directly to her bias as the basis for the decision!?

They have now infiltrated every party, board, committee and organisation in Sweden

But it gets even better. Another of the review board members, Annika Åhnberg (pictured), former Communist party member, who later stepped over to the Social Democrats and served as minister of agriculture in the last Persson Administration, have stated that ROKS chairman Ireen von Wachenfeldt was speaking as a private person!! in the documentary, and that THIS was the basis for the boards decision to forbid the documentary. That must be one of the dumbest excuses I have ever heard.

Annika Åhnberg was elected 2001 as chairman of the rich, powerful and influential organisation "Rädda Barnen" (Save the Children). Perhaps it was then the organization took the radical feminist and misandric turn we see today? Most people however,  have not understood this, and the organisation keep getting big sums of money from naive goodhearted people that think their money will actually help children.

Currently Åhnberg is working as President of the Royal Forest and Agricultural Academy.

Evin Rubar and Johan Brånstad who made the documentary "The gender war"  reported the TV ¨broadcast commission  to the parliaments justice department (JO), but they, not surprisingly, did not even criticise the commission.

This is not the first time JO turn a blind eye to the broadcast comminssions obvious conflicts of interest. 

They ban the truth and free the lies

The more politically correct investigative news program "Uppdrag granskning" often get reported to the  TV & Radio review board. In one of their documentaries, they hung out coroner Teet Härm as a murderer who had killed and chopped up a swedish prostitute named Catrine Da Costa. That program recieved a total of 11 complaints to the  TV & Radio review board, that however chose to free the program on all accounts.

They freed a newsprogram where an innocent man gets identified as a murderer. complaint to JO is available here (in swedish).

The case that started the witchhunt

That case, in Sweden known as "The pathologist and the coroner"  or simply the Da Costa case, was the one that started the whole witchhunt and mystique regarding men and fathers in Sweden. It all started as a  custody fight of course between the pathologist and his wife. The one witnessing against the father was their daughter who at the time was 1,5 years old.  The doctor has not been able to see his daughter for over 20 years. Both of them lost their medical licenses. None of these men have yet to this day been given even an apology by the swedish state. They are still fighting in court for redress. But the court refuse to even hear their case. Instead they fine the victims millions of kronors for the states lawyer bills.

The lies are freed, the protocols get censored

One more recent "uppdrag granskning" documentary  that mandated lots of complaints to the  TV & Radio review board was the so called "Bjästa case". About a 15 year old boy who, in spite of being convicted in two cases of rape stubbornly claims to be innocent. 

The TV reporters Nicke Nordark and Hasse Johansson made a reportage where they defended the justice system against the child(!) instead of the other way around, which resulted in that the the boy and his whole family was forced into hiding after having recieved more than 3000 death threats the day after the broadcast alone. A 15 year old boy was branded as a pedophile and child rapist by the whole swedish media. 

The columnist in Expressen, Britta Svensson compared him to Anders Englund. A grown psychopath who serves a lifetime sentence  for murdering at least two women, of whom one was a child. The boys  alleged victim was a 14 year old girl from the boys school, 8 months younger than him. The boy was sentenced to 4 months in a state juvenile detention center. He was supposed to be released a year ago, but have not been released yet. And neither will he be until he is 18 years old. He has of course done the time the court sentenced him to, but after that they of course LVU:d his ass. They demand that he confesses to being a rapist. Otherwise he can not, as they say, undergo "treatment". 

I have studied all the evidence in this case thoroughly. And I can guarantee that there is lots of reasonable doubts.They really did a number on this kid.  If anyone is interested to learn more about this really ugly story I have all the facts. The lying TV reporters was given the "big journalist award". Noone questions. Noone wants to know. Except me and a few other journalists that in vain have tried for more than half a year to get the editors and the reporters on SVT to answer our questions.

The Bjästa reportage resulted in 18 complaints to the review board. Their decision to free the show came as no surprise. Neither did their decision to censure the decision protocol. (Those are  normally public and published on the SVT homepage). The official reason for not publishing this one was that "people could get identified". But I have read the whole protocol. There is not a single name anywhere in it. Lies, lies, lies!

If the review board would use the same reasoning as it did when it forbid "the gender war", the "Bjästa story" would of course also have been criticised and banned. The story folds as a house of cards if you just breathe on it. But doing that could get hazardous for your reputation in this country. Ask me. I was subjected to a flaming attack by anonymous feminists on Flasback, after publishing articles about the case, that must be one of the dirtiest in FB history. The thread about me was about 1500 pages long when it suddenly died after I finally reported three named women to the police. 

One of the women who complained about "the genderwar" to the review board, was Alexa Wolf. She is also one of the women in the movie who led the exodus to Norway to "save the girls" from the Swedish "satanic pedophile networks." Alexa Wolf in a recent article on Newsmill wrote how bad and unfair, she and feminism as a whole had been treated by Evin Rubar. 

SEE this film and judge for yourself. 
You want to know the ugly truth about the ideology that has kidnapped the state of Sweden and is now being used to destroy our youth, steal our kids and silence people like Julian Assange, Evin Rubar, Me and others who try to get the truth out?

Here you go. (Thank "Figaropravda" on Youtube for the translation)
PS  If you don't see the English subs, click on the red square with the letters ”CC”in the bottom of the frame.

I helgen har föreningen grävande journalister seminarium i Skövde. Då skall man bland annat dela ut guldspaden för årets bästa grävande reportage. 

I den här artikeln ska vi titta på en av dom största lögnerna och myterna i svensk nutidshistoria. En lögn som, trots att den är vetenskapligt motbevisad tillåts fortsätta krossa barn och föräldrar, fortsätta skörda liv. År ut år in. Man kan inte kalla detta ett scoop, eftersom denna information har funnits sedan länge, och därmed inte är en nyhet. Att den däremot troligen kommer som en för dom flesta av er, är en annan sak.

Själv förärades jag på tal om priser i Februari, utmärkelsen  månadens bloggskunk. Eller var det blogghunk? Oavsett så är jag naturligtvis hedrad. Att reta upp pappahatarna Viktiga Lena  och Monica Antonsson och deras svans är buslätt. Åtminstone för mig. Jag tillhör nämligen den kategorin människor dom hatar mest av alla. Pappor som tar sig ton när det gäller ungarna. Det är för övrigt den första utmärkelse jag fått för någonting. Nu väntar jag naturligtvis på något slags plakett eller dylikt, som jag stolt kan visa för mina vänner.

Jag talade med Nils Hanson på uppdrag granskning i Göteborg häromveckan. Han trodde att hans och Janne Josefssons avslöjande om mutskandalen i Göteborg hade en chans på guldspaden. Det tror tyvärr inte jag. Inte när media och kulturelitens absoluta favorit alla kategorier är nominerat. Jag talar om Bjästa - den andra våldtäkten, som fortfarande är ett osant och oärligt vinklat reportage (styrkt). Jag lovar härmed Nils, att jag bjuder på lunch på valfri restaurang i Göteborg om jag har fel. Vi har ju ändå en del att  diskutera eller hur?

Vi har svalt myterna som möjliggör dom verkliga övergreppen.

De fakta och forskningsresultat jag publicerar längst ner på bloggen idag är långt ifrån nya. Ändå kommer dom att förvåna dom allra flesta av er. Inte minst gäller det alla er journalister (i princip samtliga) som fortsätter att i all sin okunskap fortsätta sprida myter och lögn. 

Samma myter som sedan oljar maskineriet, i vilket fler och fler barn idag utsätts för dom verkliga övergreppen. Dras genom förhör på BUP, barnhus och annat jävelskap. Det görs mot  så unga barn som 4 år. Dom utsätts, liksom mitt, för vedervärdiga polisför av skruvade barnutredare med sjukliga snoppfixeringar, ofta flera månader, ibland tom år, efter dom redan tvångsskilts från sin pappa. 

Sedan spelar det ingen större roll om pappan slängs i fängelse eller inte. Målet är ändå redan uppnått. Pappa-barn bandet är avslitet och kommer så förmodligen att förbli livet ut. Däri ligger det egentliga övergreppet. Och däri ligger det egentliga straffet. Vad hade du valt? Ett eller två år oskyldigt fängslad där du får umgänge med ditt barn, eller bli friad och få spendera en livstid utan henne?

Vår drift att skydda barn exploateras skamlöst

Den för våld och övergrepp anmälande föräldern, (nästan alltid mamman)  får därmed efter sin anmälan, barnet helt i sitt våld och även god tid på sig att "förbereda" och "coacha" innan man ens genomför ett första videoförhör. BUP, kvinnojourer, BRIS, Rädda barnen och socialtjänst är gärna behjälpliga i dessa övergrepp. Även dessa människor har förblindats av myten och lögnen.  

Dessa övergrepp begår man för barnens bästa! För vi vet ju att pappor mer eller mindre är pedofiler allihop Eller hur? Våra lagstiftare är dom som ytterst har möjliggjort detta med sina special lagar där en misstanke om övergrepp eller misshandel mot ett barn eller kvinna alltid måste utredas. Att påståendet kommer från en part i en tvist, som redan tidigare anmält och vittnat falskt har ingen betydelse.

Detta visar varför könskriget av Evin Rubar var så nödvändig. Också varför den fälldes och förbjöds av en ROKS infekterad granskningsnämnd. Det är inte svårt att förstå hur galna kvinnor som Eva Lundgren, Dahlström Lannes, Von Wachtmeister, Margareta Winberg m fl lyckades piska upp en sådan hysteri gällande övergreppsbrott mot barn. Alla med kanske några få undantag tycker vi väl om barn. Vi har alla, både män och kvinnor en inbyggd drift att skydda och värna dom små. Denna drift kan lätt exploateras av människor med agendor. 

Uppmaning till föreningen grävande journalister

Jag vet hur mycket ni älskar att avslöja pedofiler. Kanske ni då bör pröva att tänka lite utanför boxen och rikta blickarna mot ett annat håll än det sedvanliga någon gång?
Professor Eva Lundgren har skrivit en bok om det s k Södertäljefallet. La de sma barnen komme til meg. Jag har läst lite i den. För den som finner glädje av att läsa påhittad, grovt sadistisk barnpornografisk litteratur kan den möjligen rekommenderas. Vi andra bör nog undvika verket i möjligaste mån. Att låta små barn komma till henne är absolut inte heller något jag skulle rekommendera.

Detsamma gäller andra mer eller mindre perversa, påstått sanna, fantasiverk som "När blodsbanden brister" av "Hanna Svensson",  "Vem vågar tro på ett barn" av Birgitta Allmo. "Att leva med sanningen" av Camilla Danilda. "Catrine och rättvisan" av Hanna Olsson. För att inte tala om det mest brömda falsariet "Gömda" av Liza Marklund. Etc etc. Stanna upp och ställ er frågan. Om övergrepp av fäder är så vanliga, varför tycks det så svårt att hitta sanna historier att dokumentera? För visst, det finns gräsliga fall där barn misshandlas, och till och med dödas, Såsom Bobby, och Baby P tex. Om man nu vill skriva hemska sanna böcker där stackars olycksbarns öde beskrivs, så vore väl dessa två fall idealiska? Bara ett problem, dom innehåller inga pappor.

Dessa påhittade sannhar blivit en hel genre. Kanske lönsam? Men är pengar det enda som driver dessa kvinnor att sitta och fantisera ihop dessa vidrigt perversa historier? vad tror ni hade hänt om jag eller någon annan pappa hade gett ut en bok med dylikt innehåll, och  det sen visat sig att  vi suittit och fantiserat ihop vidrigheterna? Vi hade slängts på bålet direkt. Att även kvinnor kan ha fantasier om barn och konsumera förbjuden pornografi fick vi ju ett unikt exempel på nyligen. 
Våran sexualitet sitter inte i könet, den sitter i huvudet. 

Idag kan vi ju skratta åt fd professor Lundgren och enkelt avfärda henne som en galning med sina fantasier om manliga padofila satanistsekter som torterade och halshögg barn, kopulerade i deras avhuggna halsar och åt deras inälvor. Men 1993 då spektaklet i Södertälje utspelade sig, satt gravallvarliga nyhetsankare kväll efter kväll i TV och rapporterade om alla pedofila  ritaulmord på barn som försiggick lite varstans i vårt land. 

För att inte tala om alla krigsrubriker på löpen. Tror ni att det sedan hjälper att lögnerna avslöjas? Läkaren & obducenten, Tomas Qvick, Billy Butt, Tito Beltran, Södertäljefallet m fl. Nej för avsikten är, tror jag  mer sublimenal. Ju mer dom skriver om alla dessa bloddrypande hemska fall där pappor och män förgriper sig, och våldtar kvinnor och barn, ju mer formar dom vår världsbild. Våra sinnesintryck och känslor är det som formar den. Och den är ju aldrig osann? Sen har det ingen betydelse att ett och annat rättsövergrepp avslöjas. Vår världsbild är stadigt planterad av decennier av lögner och ruckas inte för det. 

Dom har lyckats över förväntan. Idag tycker ingen journalist att det är konstigt, eller värt att skriva om att barn och pappor tvångssepareras i tusental varje år. Att vi med stor sannolikhet har över 1000 dömda oskyldiga i våra fängelser, många är pappor dömda för brott mot sina barn, och brännmärkta för livet. Det brutala och onormala har blivit normalt. Vad spelar det sen för roll att Eva Lundgren får sparken. Hon har redan gjort sitt jobb. 

Peter Martens redovisar en undersökning över anmälda sexualbrott mot 886 barn under 1984. En fjärdedel av brotten hade som misstänkt gärningsman fadern, lika många någon vuxen bekant, en tredjedel obekant vuxen och resten ungdomar (Martens, 1991). Antalet anmälda brott (1997) under rubriken sexuellt tvång eller utnyttjande riktat mot person under 15 år som står i nära relation med offret är, som kan utläsas av bilaga 1 och 2, i förhållande till andra brottsrubriceringar gällande sexuellt tvång, utnyttjande mm, tämligen lågt (BRÅ, 1998/Tabell 100, bilaga 1 och 2).

Dessa siffror antyder proportioner men eftersom undersökningar baserade på anmälningar troligen har ett högre mörkertal än offerintervjuer har jag här koncentrerat mig på de senare. 

Jag har valt far/dotter-incest eftersom denna form av föräldraövergrepp anses vara vanligare förekommande än far/son, mor/dotter eller mor/son (se t.ex. Finkelhor, 1984:166, Martens, 1989:114, Sariola, 1990:95). Undersökningarna är tyvärr inte standardiserade och i de fall far/dotterincest inte har kunnat separeras, har den närmast specificerade gruppen där denna ingår medtagits. Även gruppen som omfattar samtliga sexuella övergrepp mot barn har medtagits eftersom uppsatsens hypotes ju utgår från att denna huvudgrupp ofta (och i Ekots programserie i synnerhet) sammanblandas med föräldraincest. 

Med dessa kriterier fann jag nedannämnda svenska och finska undersökningar kompletterade med några ofta refererade amerikanska. En översikt av prevalensstudier över uppskattade sexuella övergrepp, gjord av Underwager och Wakefield, uppvisar ett spektrum som sträcker sig från 6 - 62 % för kvinnor till 3 -30 % för män (Underwager & Wakefield, 1988:261-266). Officiella noteringar i USA visar ganska entydigt att ca 85 % av anmälda fall av sexuella övergrepp gäller flickor. Självrapportering från offer ger ca 2/3 flickor/-kvinnor (Underwager & Wakefield, 1988:266). 

1 % av kvinnorna i Kilpatricks självrapporteringsstudie i Georgia och Florida rapporterade incestuösa erfarenheter från sin barndom, de flesta av dem med bröder (Kilpatrick, 1986:221-242).

Då det gäller incest mellan ospecificerad far (dvs. att det inte framgår om det är fråga om biologisk-, styv-, adoptiv- eller fosterfar) och dotter fann Finkelhor att 1,3 % av de svarande flickorna hade dylika erfarenheter (Finkelhor, 1979:113) vilket kan jämföras med Kinsey-rapporten från 50-talet där motsvarande siffra var 0,5 %. 1,5 % av de intervjuade kvinnorna i Kinsey-rapporten hade även haft sexuella kontakter med djur före puberteten och 3,6 % efter densamma (Kinsey m.fl.., 1953:117-118).

Enligt Russel hade 4,5 % av flickorna i San Fransisco-studien blivit utsatta för någon form av sexuella övergrepp av fäder, styvfäder eller fosterfäder. Detta är för övrigt den högsta siffra som framkommit i denna genomgång. Av förövarna, då det gällde sexuella övergrepp, var 15 % främlingar, 42 % ytligt bekanta och 41 % släktingar. Av incestuösa förövare var 17 % styvfäder och endast 2 % biologiska fäder. 

Sammantaget hade 54 % av kvinnorna i Russels Boston- och San Fransiscostudier varit utsatta för sexuella övergrepp. Av dessa innefattade 38 % någon form av beröring (Russell, 1983). Kritik har riktats av bl.a. Sariola mot Russels metod, t.ex. att upptagningen inte skedde godtagbart slumpmässigt, 50 % bortfall, hög (18 år) åldersgräns (bl a var fem av offren för sexuella övergrepp mot barn gifta med förövaren), samt att man betalade ut deltagarhonorar. Detta sistnämnda förhållande samt uteslutningen av personer som var bortresta eller hade en argsint hund på tomten framför sitt hus kan tänkas ha minskat de mera väletablerade kvinnornas proportionella andel. Liknande kritik riktar Sariola även mot Wyatts (se nedan) resultat (Sariola, 1990:27). Även Finkelhor har kritiserat Russels och Wyatts resultat och i en jämförelse med sitt eget material som korrigerats för samstämmighet låg Russels och Wyatts resultat ändå nästan tre gånger högre (Finkelhor, 1986:27).

I en finsk enkätstudie, utförd 1988 och omfattande 7549 barn i åk 9, visade sig risken (uträknad på basis av självrapporteringen) för att en 15-årig flicka i någon form varit utsatt för sexuella handlingar från sin biologiske fars sida vara 0,2 %, och 0,1 % för en 10-åring. Inkluderas pojkarna faller prevalensen ytterligare.

Styvfäder inkluderade stiger dock siffran markant men ligger för en 15-åring fortfarande under 0,5 %. I 86 % av fallen hade fadern alltid eller oftast varit berusad (Sariola 1990 och 1996).

Far/dotter- och styvfar/dotterincest rapporterade 0,47 % av de svarande flickorna i Sariolas studie. Detta kan jämföras med 17,8 % för sexuella erfarenheter med vuxna som är minst fem år äldre. Incestupplevelser med biologiska fäder rapporterade 0,24 % av flickorna. (Sariola, 1990:69, 87). Endast tre av sammanlagt 16 flickor hade varit under tio år när övergreppen började (ibid., 91).

Intensiv uppmärksamhet och fördömande av incest borde rimligen, om övriga förhållanden är oförändrade, öka anmälningsbenägenheten och sänka brottsbenägenheten. Orimligt utvidgad definition på sexuellt utnyttjande kan, enligt Sariola, förhindra en exakt bedömning av antalet barn som verkligen behöver hjälp. Många fall är, enligt Sariola, också så lindriga att de bäst kan bekämpas genom upplysning (Sariola, 1990:12).

Enligt Kinberg låg incestfrekvensen på 40-talet kring 0,5 per 100.000 invånare/år (Kinberg, 1943). Detta kan jämföras med fem per 100.000 invånare/1997 för antalet anmälda fall av sexuellt tvång, utnyttjande mm. mot person under 15 år av annat kön i nära relation (se bilaga 2).

Rönström fann att 8 % av 444 slumpmässigt utvalda vuxna kvinnor i en svensk brottsofferstudie rapporterade om upplevelser av sexuella övergrepp före 18 års ålder. 1,1 % hade erfarit sexuella övergrepp av en förälder/föräldragestalt (Rönström, 1983). I en uppföljande undersökning 1985 var målgruppen ca 500 kvinnor i åldern 16-24 år och här rapporterade 7 % om sexuella övergrepp under barndomen. Andelen övergrepp av förälder/föräldragestalt var lägre i denna grupp (Martens, 1989:157-162). Könsfördelningen framgår inte men om man utgår från att minst hälften var flickor blir prevalensen < 0,6 % vilket kan jämföras med Sariolas uppgift om 0,47 % för biologisk + styvfaderincest.

I SAM (Tonåringar - sex och samlevnad) 73 -90 -undersökningen, omfattande 2.000 17-åringar, uppger sig 3 % av pojkarna och 7 % av flickorna någon gång ha blivit utsatta för sexuella övergrepp. En fjärdedel av dessa (1,1 %) uppgav att gärningsmannen var en "närstående" dvs. förälder, styvförälder, fosterförälder, syskon eller släkting (Edgardh, 1992). Även denna siffra är i överensstämmelse med Sariolas undersökning (0,9 % utgående från Sariolas uppgift om att 2 % av de sexuella erfarenheterna gällde inom familjen och 3 % med släktingar). Andelen biologiska föräldrar framgår inte i SAM 73-90 liksom inte heller andelen föräldrar sammanlagt. I den finländska undersökningen (liknande SAM 73-90 till metod men mer omfattande och detaljerad) rapporterade 0,55 % av flickorna om incest inom kärnfamiljen. Av förövarna var åtta biologiska fäder (obs. att det biologiska släktskapet ej är säkert fastställt - min anm.), tio styvfäder och tre bröder. Enligt Sariola skulle alltså 1 % av pojkarnas och 2 % av flickornas sexuella erfarenheter ha tillkommit inom familjen. (Sariola, 1990:78).

Utgående från hypotesen att pojkar enligt ovan är mindre utsatta än flickor och att mödrar är mindre frekventa som förövare än män kan nedanstående siffror ses som tilltagna i överkant då det gäller förekomsten av föräldraincest enligt offerstudier.

Resultaten ovan ger sammanfattningsvis vid handen att den lägsta prevalensuppgiften för biologisk far/dotterincest, 0,14 %, gäller den biologiska "kärnfamiljen" (jmf Sariola, 1990:89). Utslaget på bägge könen ger det för biologisk föräldraincest en prevalens på < 0,07 %. Detta kan jämföras med undersökningar som visat att 67 % av kvinnor råkat ut för sexuella övergrepp under sin barndom (Wyatt, 1985:509). Den sammanlagda siffran för incest med någon familjemedlem var i Sariolas studie 0,7 % och då det gällde släktingar utanför familjen 0,8 % (Sariola, 1990:11, 93). 

Ett i sammanhanget beaktansvärt förhållande är att fosterföräldrar vanligen utgör en del av det system som är avsett att skydda barn då dessa far illa hos sina egna föräldrar. Samtidigt verkar just fosterfäder, tillsammans med styvfäder (jmf Russell nedan och Sariola ovan) utgöra en betydligt större statistisk riskfaktor än biologiska fäder.

Crewdson varnar för "smarta pedofiler", dvs. män som blivit styvfäder i syfte att komma barn nära (Crewdson, 1988, p. 31). I Russells San Fransisco-studie framgick det att en av sex som hade haft en styvfar som förälder även varit utsatt för sexuella övergrepp av denne (Russell, 1984:21). Förhållandet liknar det Sariola fått fram ovan även om totalprevalensen hos Russell ligger avsevärt högre. Däremot fann Russell till skillnad från Sariola (1990:89-90) att styvfädernas övergrepp var grövre (Russell, 1984:19).

The 3 October 2009 a secret document was leaked and published by Wikileaks. The document was leaked from the ministry of defence in London and identifies the greatest threats to the national security of the west.

At the top of the list are terrorists and russian spies. 

But by far the biggest threat is said to come from one group,  journalists. Investigative journalists.

In other words, journalists who do their job, who tell you, the public which and why politicians lie to you, start wars in your name and  threaten your security. These journalists must somehow be stopped, coerced or smeared.

There is another secret document as well.  This one is from the pentagon and explains a great deal about the predicament facing Julian Assange at the moment. It's dated 2008, almost exactly three years ago, under the former president, and describes the planning of a smear campaign to destroy Wikileaks. By destroying Wikileaks public trust, their "center of gravity". And this would be achieved by [quote] "threats of exposure and criminal prosecution."

Whistleblowers are dealt with

We can now see the desperate attempts by the US, British, Australian and Swedish gouvernments to silence Wikileaks by any means necessary. The US treatment of US army private Bradley Manning is another horrifying example of how citizens are being punished for telling the truth about our western governments warcrimes.

This way of dealing with whistleblowers isn't anything new to the Bush administration. One of many that can testify to this is former CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson. Her husband former US ambassador Joe Wilson was sent to Niger before the Iraq war to investigate claims that Iraq had purchased large amounts of uranium for their alleged WMD program. 

Wilson investigated and came to the conclusion that No such transaction was ever made. He stated this in his report. When this supposed deal was later used as an excuse to start the Iraq war anyway, Wilson got angry and wrote an article in the Times exposing the lie.

A couple of days later his wifes status as a CIA agent was exposed in the media. The order came from inside the whitehouse. This costed many people around the world their lives, and of course Valerie her career. Valerie later wrote a book about what had happened, a book that now have been made into a movie called "Fair game" starring Sean Penn. 

 Don Siegelman framed?
Another case where suspicion of wrongdoings have been raised is the conviction of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman.

In that case another brave person stepped up and spoke out.  A Republican lawyer, Dana Jill Simpson of Rainsville, Alabama, signed a sworn statement that, five years earlier, she had heard about a plan to neutralize Siegelman politically with an investigation headed by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Simpson's house burned down soon after she began whistleblowing, and her car was driven off the road by a private investigator and wrecked. As a result of the timing of these incidents, Simpson said, "Anytime you speak truth to power, there are great risks. I've been attacked," explaining she felt a "moral obligation" to speak up.

The common nominator 

So what is the common nominator in these three cases? Julian Assange swedish rape charges, Valerie Plyme Wilson And Don Siegelman?


Well one of them is definitely the man to the left. His name is Carl Rove. Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff to former President George W. Bush until Rove's resignation on August 31, 2007. He has headed the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Public Liaison, and the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives. Rove has appeared in numerous criminal investigations, but he has never been prosecuted.

Now according to the american blog the legalschnauzer, he has a new job. Helping our own swedish prime minister Fredrik Reinfeldt to handle the Julian Assange affair. Just as he helped his party Moderaterna to win the 2010 swedish election. This guy seem to go way back with swedish prime minister Fredrik Rheinfeldt and his Moderate party.It seems like Karl Rove views himself as a swedish descendant. It wouldn't surprise me one bit.

This has hardly been mentioned mentioned at all in the swedish media. They all seem to be in total agreement that Julian Assange should willingly put himself in the "safe" hands of the Swedish justice department. The same justice department who uses legal advisors from private american lawfirms, representing the powerful intellectual-property rights lobby.

For you who have wondered what I mean when I write about swedish gender apartheid laws, and the feminist driven discrimination against fathers in this country, I will exemplify it by telling you a true story. 

 This is Conny Olausson. Or rather, it was. After six years of fighting the swedish social services, police, tax office, womens shelters and prosecutors, who hid his children from him and refused him the right to even talk to them.  Conny finally gave up and ended  his life at 4pm , Saturday, 11 August 2007. 

It is now almost four years ago the "threat" against the childrens mother took his life, but she is still living with protected personal data, still  supported by the social services, tax authorities and women's shelters. Now apparently it is the childrens grandparents who have become the threat. They have, as far as I know, still not been allowed to meet and spend time with their grandchildren. 

Neither was Conny's children allowed to attend their fathers funeral. The social Services did not find it necessary to pass on that information to them. 

The children will get all the documents

I called Conny's father one evening after having read the obituary on another swedish fathers rights website.  He had  just come home from the hospital. 

He gladly told me his story, and he didn't mind me writing it, but he had made the descision to give up the fight for visitation and redress. He had really given it his all. He had also tried to contact virtually every newsdesk in Sweden but noone was interested in this story. Conny was a man, and abused men have not interested the Swedish media. And as soon as you even breathe the word custody fight the call will be cut short.

Connys father was getting old and weak, and he had now been ordered by his doctor he had to drop what had happened to his son and his grandchildren. His heart wouldn't take more of the abuse.  He said he would do his best, but added "the children will get all the documents when they get older". "I have sorted them all and saved them for the kids." 

That was the last thing he said before we said goodbye. After the call I sat stunned for a while trying to grasp how Swedish authorities can be allowed to commit these crimes to it's citizens.  Slowly torturing them, to death. Under the feminist war cry "Men's violence against women", they have destroyed a lot of innocent fathers and children. You could say they reserve the right to use violence themselves with complete impunity.  

He went 182 fights, but lost the most important

Conny was a fighter. He went 182 matches in the ring. Many of them in the blue and yellow swedish national team dress  in welterweight. His trophy collection is large, but in the one fight that really meant everything, he didn't stand a chanse. 

After six years of fighting for his life, he finally fell and never got up again.  Killed by criminals who hide behind good intentions and what they call "in the best interest of the child". Seducing people with their wise and obvious messages. "We have a responsibility to protect women and children".

For decades they have managed to sprinkle dust in our eyes and the eyes of our politicians with their false reality descriptions and their spiked statistics.  I have seen some of the falsified stories  they wrote to influence our politicians 2006,  before the vote for the new custody law was to take place. To make sure it got the desired content, they put together the most horrible stories about psycho fathers and called them true.
"Buried alive" was just one of them". A lot of fathers, mothers and children have had to pay dearly for this. Some like Conny and his kids payed the ultimate price. 


A malignant mother can easily get rid of the father

Swedens most powerful feministic lobbygroup ROKS have together with their  politician friends armed  women to the teeth, with an ever increasing number of appropriate laws to choose from, if they want to falsely accuse a father in a custody fight. A formidable smörgåsbord. Womens peace, assault, rape, prostitution, sexual assault, pedophilia, incest, Just take your pick! In our courtrooms there are 4 judges that decide who is most credible when word stand against word. One real one, and three politicians without any legal education at all. And when you bear in mind that all parties in Sweden are more or less feminist orientated, you can easily calculate the odds that they side with the father.

Conny was a man that used to fight fair. In his career, leading up to the national team in boxing, he had been taught that. Therefore, he became an easy target for a corrupt  social services and the women's shelter. The children were so terrified of their abusive mother that they locked themselves in their room when they were told to go home from their grandfather. Neither the social services or the womens shelter cared about that.
 
In 2002 the mother of Conny's children took them with her and went into hiding. Telling the CPS the usual sob story and with that Conny was doomed. Of course they don't want to proove the allogations in a courtroom, and they don't have to. 

Instead they have instated what they call "preliminary hearings" with only one purpose. To brand the father as dangerous so that he can't  get any unsupervised visitation. This is a mere formality for in the preliminaries no witnesses are heard no evidence presented. The mother's words will suffice. This is just the first stationen on the long road to take away the rights of the children to their parent . Conny's last meeting with his children lasted for two hours in a social service apartment guarded by two "supervisors".

Six years of constant pain and worry

After those two hours Conny never sees his children ever again.  Conny's custody investigation is handled by a woman from a external staffing agency called Manpower.

No evidence of abuse were ever presented. But the meer accusation is enough.  The woman that was put in charge of four peoples lives and future talked to both the mother and to Conny. The mother in person, and with Conny through a questionnaire with check boxes.

He is tricked with false promises of visitation with his kids, by the social services, to go to the wrong city, while they assist the mother to yet again move and hide. Although he  knew where his ex was living with the children, and never once went there uninvited. When he finally understood that they had tricked him, he got angry and said "forbidden things" inside the social services office. They  immediately called the police and for the first time in his life Conny was arrested. Threatening a public servant.  An honest man who always stood up for the young kids all through his life. Supporting and training them in the boxing club. Conny loved children, especially his own. His love was very much answered. Kids looked up to him.

When he was released from jail, he was so broke that police had to take out their coffee box to buy him a bus ticket home. When Conny later called  KRIS (a support group) to get some support and advice regarding his situation, he reached a woman who seemed interested and understanding. Conny felt relief that someone at least was willing to listen to his story. After a while he in his frustration blurted out "It feels like I could kill her." He should not have said that. This time they senta whole police task force from Gothenburg. They kicked the door in with drawn guns and forced Conny down on the floor.  And suddenly, Conny had been transformed from an honest citizen and  diligent athlete to a serial offender and a woman abuser.

Conny tried several times to write to his children, but because he was forced to send everything through the tax office, which is the authority in Sweden in charge of hiding women and children from dangerous fathers,  he knew that none of the  letters would ever reach them. Especially now when he actually had become a convicted criminal.


Never forget to take care of eachother

Finally one day Conny, after having spent  six years in "fathers hell"  decided to end it all. Some people, however strong, can not take this abuse forever. But first he sat down and wrote one final letter to his children.

Martin and Jessica!

You should know that I have really  tried everything to get to see you ant to get to know where you are. 

I have missed you so bad that I have become completely sick in my nerves. 

I have been wondering how you are  today.  Sweden is a sick country in how they treat people.  It has been so difficult to live without you because you were my whole life. 

I Have wondered a lot how people can be so heartless to you my beloved children.  I so wish that you are allright. I have been so worried about you. 
You were my children. My whole life. Take care, Jessica and Martin and never forget to help each other. Never forget to take care of each other.

Dad.

Police: But if he hanged himself, what's the hurry?

August 11 2007  Conny's father recieve a phone call from the guy living next to the caravan that at this time was Connys home. He said it was dark and dimmed in the caravan. That worried him because it was not like Conny not to open the door and pull up the drapes.  Conny's father immediately called the police in Lidköping. The first call was made  at 12:05 pm that day. Connys dad asked them to please hurry to check on his son. 

At 2:15 pm no cops had arrived. Then the worried Grandpa called again and got the  answer: "Yes, but if he has hanged himself, it can't be so urgent, can it?". 
One hour later, the police call back to Conny's mother and father and in a dry voice informs them that their son is dead. That he had hanged himself. He had now been cut down and taken to the morgue, and if they wanted his wallet and keys they were available at the station.

The mother? Yes she is said to live in the neighborhood of Skoghall. She had given birth to two children before Connys, but she had already abandoned them. She had been witnessed several times beating up Connys  children.  She has a documented addiction to pills and is difficult and very unstable.

This story is true. It happens over and over again, but still noone wants to talk about it, or discuss it. In Sweden we only have problems with wifebeaters, rapists and pedophiles. If you are a man who resists giving up your kids, you will likely end up in one of these categories.

Why is this abuse and torture not illegal?

Conny was fair. He was one of us ... us that no one listens to. We are invisible, we don't exist. We are the strange fathers rights movement. According to the swedish feminists we are just a pedo lobby that sacrifice all so we can abuse our kids. 

If people would see what we have seen. Experienced just one day of the pain we are forced to carry for years. They would understand and perhaps even demand change. But that cannot be allowed. Too powerful and profitable forces would be threatened. Feminism is today a global multi billion industry, and the custody fights are just a tool so they can split the parents, give the child to the least suitable, and thereby making it easier to steal the kids, and feed them into the profitable juvenile detention industry.
 
That is why Connys father never succeeded in getting any swedish newspaper to write his story.  These stories are taboo in swedish media. They get buried. They much rather write about cases of abused and discriminated women. 

But the worst kind of torture is not what is done to you. It is much worse and much more effective to hurt your kids, while you are restrained. Everyone subjected to that kind of torture will break. So why is it not even punishable by law in Sweden?

Hope you have found peace Conny. Your kids will someday find out the truth about their dad and be proud of you. You did everything you could. They will see that and feel your strength and iron will within themselves.  Sometimes the poorest man leaves his children the richest inheritance. 

Look at this statement that was sent to the british prosecution office by the Swedish justice department and their prosecutor Marianne Ny. This was after her decision to reopen the case and issue the international warrant for Assanges arrest. The first page is signed Nils Västberg "Legal adviser".

First of all, why would a highly ranked swedish prosecutor need a legal adviser to make this kind of statement? Usually these top pages are signed by a secretary or a paralegal.
And why is a missive from the swedish state justice department and their director of the public procecution authority signed by a lawyer that works for the private american lawfirm Kilpatrick Townsend Stockton LLP?  

That Mr Nils Västberg is in fact an employee of that lawfirm in Stockholm is shown here.

It is the anonymous person "TrenterX" on the swedish webforum Flashback that should be credited for this discovery. He also tried calling the number stated to mr Västberg in the letter from the swedish ministry of justice, but he just reached an answeringmachine for a completely different person.

The lawfirm of James P Cain

Another employee of Kilpatrick Townsend is James P Cain. Cain has been with the firm for 20 years, except during the three years he served as the american ambassadour in Denmark. Handpicked by George W Bush as the man for the job. Maybe as a thank you for serving as Regional Chairman and the State Finance Vice Chairman for the Bush-Cheney 2004 Campaign.  He rejoined the lawfirm in 2009 and today he seems to work with business & Finance and "gouvernment relations". I wonder which gouvernments?

Recently though, James P Cain is probably most known for his public statements that Bradley Manning should recieve the death penalty and be executed. That is the name gouvernments use when they murder people. And this guy apparently thinks it is justified to murder and imprison  journalists and whistleblowers for exposing the truth. 

When Woodward and Bernstein exposed Richard Nixons lies, they got the pulitzerprice and Nixon resigned. But I guess we live in different times now.

Mr Cain himself was mentioned in one of the cables. He tried to convince the danish newspaper "Jyllandsposten" not to republish the so called "Muhammed drawings". But in that case I agree with him. Why insult a lot of peoples religion when it serves no purpose? That is not what freedom of speech should be about. Not in my book.  

As Ambassador, Cain oversaw the 13 agencies of the American government that comprised the 150-person U.S. Embassy in Copenhagen. His energies focused on areas of national security, counter-terrorism, energy security, commerce and investment, and promotion of shared values. Ambassador Cain was a strong believer in public diplomacy, getting out of the Embassy and "Selling America." 

He must have done hell of a job selling it to Sweden.

Why the swedish justice department use legal advisors from the private american lawfirm of James P Cain is a question that they should have to explain, but knowing the swedish authoritys it will be hard to get a straight answer. But one can always try.

What rings in my ears as I write this is swedish prime minister Reinfeldts words as he surprisingly made a public statement in the Assange case. "Sweden has a good justice system that is completly separate from politics. Everyone in Sweden knows that"

May god protect the free internet and the people brave enough to use it.Veritas liberabit vos

The safest way to lie is to withhold the truth

If this information is correct, it would mean that the whole thing was a setup organized by swedish lawyers and politicians in collution with foreign intelligence agencies.

So have they been lying to us all along? Do our own government lie to their employers? Us, their own people?

Stupid question really. You bet they do. That has allready been proven by Wikileaks releasing the truth about swedens new surveillance  laws, IPRED and FRA. They were instated on "request" by the US.  Sweden today is just an American lapdog. One reason could be that we are totally depending on US weapon systems. Especially the robots that are used to arm our fighter jets. The AMRAAM for instance. 

We still call ourselves a neutral country. That is one of the biggest lies in swedish history. We are not neutral, and we never have been. The main reason for instating the mass surveillance law FRA, was so the US could monitor the computer traffic from Russia. 80 percent of it passes Sweden. It was never meant to protect us from any terrorists. They lied straight in our faces.

They lie  all the time. Their most popular method of lying is not telling actual lies. No they have learned that the best way is by not telling us anything at all. Keeping their little secrets to themselves. Julian Assange has made that difficult, that's why they want him dead.

The swedish media is just a big propaganda tool

If you read the Swedish press it is easy to get the impression that Julian Assange is disliked in Sweden. I would say that is wrong. He is disliked by people that have bought the myths and lies we have been fed for decades. But they are, thanks to the internet, getting fewer and fewer. And he is of course disliked by our gullible and politically correct media that for some strange reason take offence when Sweden is criticised  internationally. In this article in Expressen swedish procecutor Thomas Ahlstrand claim we do not have secret trials in Sweden.  They are just conducted behind closed doors to protect the integrity of the victims of rape. 

What the hell is the difference?

Funny isn't it. Clare Montgomery that represent Sweden in the case against Julian Assange in London, apparently thinks it's totally obvious that he should be extradited, to face a secret trial behind closed doors in Sweden.

"It's plain Mr. Assange is alleged to have used violence," montgomery have stated, describing the two separate cases of suspected sexual offenses. 

Well apart from the fact that he according to the two alleged victims has not, there is another thing that is obviously wrong with this womans sense of justice. 

Clare Montgomery is the same attorney that represented Augusto Pinochet and fought successfully to stop britain from extraditing the bastard to Spain, to stand trial for his crimes against humanity. Nobody heard her say back then  "It's plain Mr. Pinochet is alleged to have used violence" . 

In that case probably nobody would dispute the fact.So one can not help but wonder, what is the difference here, except the obvious of course. One is innocent and the other is guilty of massmurder and torture.

Back then in the house of lords Ms Montgomery said: "The concept of crimes against humanity emerged during World War II, they were invariably associated with the waging of international war". Which means that it´s not ok for a president to torture and massmurder civilians during a war, but it's quite ok to do it once the war is over??

Anyway, she obviously pleads, as an attourney for the swedish state, that a broken condom (witch lacks DNA), is grounds for an extradition and a possible death penalty, while torturers and massmurderours should be protected. Law is a funny business indeed.

The swedish tabloid Expressen today run the story about the police investigator that interrogated the two accusing women in the Assange case. (the article in swedish here.) These facts are not new to us that follow the case closly here in Sweden. And neither does Expressen give us the whole story.


The swedish police today confirms this, but says that Krans did not interrogate Anna Ardin. Only her friend Sofia Wilén. What they don't say however is that Anna Ardin was present in the room during the whole interrogation. This according to the israeli journalist and peoples rights activist Israel Shamir. If this is correct, it is a serious violation of juistice. Probably even grounds for discharge.


Irmeli Krans, also known as the "gay police" is working at Klara Policestation in Stockholm. She is a politically active socialdemokrat and very outspoken in matters regarding feminism and gay rights. Every year she can be seen in the Stockholm pride parade, where she walks in her police uniform.

Klara policestation is situated in the center of Stockholm. Anna Ardin lives in another part of town called "Söder". So if Anna Ardin wanted to bring Sofia Wilén (who lives in Enköping) and go to the police for "counseling" as she has stated, the normal thing would have been for her to go to her local police station on "Söder". But she didn't. She went to Klara. And she also waited until after 4 pm to make sure that Iremli Krans was there. She started her shift at 4 pm. Why?

One can only speculate, but here are some facts. Irmeli Krans and Anna ardin are friends since several years. They are also friends on facebook. They are both members of the swedish socialdemocrat party, and both pretty radical in their feminist views. Of course they both support the gender apartheid laws that Sweden has instated.

But it gets better.

Krans: Assange is an overrated bubble ready to burst

Expressen writes: "On her own Facebook-page the police interrogator two weeks ago praised the lawyer of the two women and described Assange as the "overrated bubble ready to burst".

The praised lawyer of the two women is Claes Borgström. And guess what? He is also a socialdemocrat, and also a collegue to Tomas Bodström, former minister of justice in Sweden. Bodström also happens to be a member of the socialdemocrat "brotherhood movement". Same as Anna Ardin. What a coincidence. 

Tomas Bodström formed the gender apartheid laws

Regarding Tomas Bodström there is a lot to say. Feminist of course, but in his case his intrest for women isn't so much about their "liberation". Tomas Bodström was the crown prince in the socialdemocrat party. But right before the current leader Mona Sahlin stepped down from her post, he went to the US.  He stated "private family reasons" for his sudden trip to the states. And he also declined the chanse of becoming our next prime minister.

Well according to sources the truth was that he couldn't accept, even though he really wanted to. The tabloid Expressen is said to have a list consisting of at least 10 women that the married father Tomas Bodström has had a little extramarital adventures with. If Bodström had joined the race for partyleader, this list would have become public. And he would have been screwed anyway.

This was the "private family reasons". His wife was simply fed up. One of the women on Expressens list is said to be the famous swedish feminist and author Liza Marklund that was heavily debated a few years ago, when it was revealed that her "true" story "Gömda" (buried alive), was a forgery. This "true" feministic fairytale became the most read book in Sweden, and was partly responsible for instating the new misandric laws of womens peace and it also helped change the custody laws to the mockery of justice they are today.

Krans has friends in high places

But back to Irmeli Krans. Ardins police friend that deduced that Julian assange commited rape on his visit to Sweden. When you go to Irmeli Karppila Krans Facebookpage you will see that she has 1003 friends on her friendslist. This list is a veritable "who's who" in the higher circuits in Stockholm. 

Socialist and leftparty politicians mixes with famous swedish journalists. She also happens to have a chairman of a "socialnämnd" from a swedish kommun on there. Guess which one? 

For the swedish readers of this blogg the name will ring a bell. He is the politician from Bjästa, Jan Olov Häggström, that became famous after the so called Bjästa case, or "the second rape" as it was named in the praised swedish media show that lied to us all. Another weird coincidence? Well everyone is free to draw their own conclusions. 

There are other connections as well,  the common denominator is in both cases the feminist socialdemocrat party. One of its members, Stig Malm recently called his own party Stalinistic. There is definitely some truth in that. But not even the Soviet union had politicians as judges as we do here.

 Here are some examples of Irmeli Krans facebookfriends: (some of them has however, since Expressen published their article removed themselves from Krans friendslist). This list was made two weeks ago. (Ckick on the images for more info).

Top "socialdemokrat" politicians: