En Svensk Håller Truten: “A Swede Holds His Mouth Shut”; or alternatively: “A Swede Holds a Gull”.

Our Swedish correspondent Mårten Gantelius (who is sometimes known as “Styrbjörn”) wrote last month about Lena Hellblom Sjögren, a Swedish psychologist who wrote a book, The Child’s Right to a Family Life, about the damage done to children when they are alienated from their fathers by their mothers. Dr. Sjögren’s book was suppressed (the publisher discontinued it), and the author was condemned by the Swedish establishment for her heresy against Orthodox Feminism.

Mårten sent me this follow-up on the case (and its implications in the larger scheme of things) last week, but its posting was delayed by the fundraiser:

Baron,

I wrote about “The True Merchandise” — what individuals and organizations really intend to accomplish, as opposed to their ostensible, stated intentions — in “The Breivik Ideology and Media Disinformation”. But regarding the late Danish sociologist Torben Bo Jansen, I wasn’t quite honest: I had presented the way of thinking to him, and not the other way around.

In 1993, I realized that TTM of the Family Law Industry — with the support of many “average” people, too — was to destroy a person mentally and make him/her of minor value in the society. And that they would go on torturing until the goal was achieved. This understanding is absolutely necessary for survival, but not sufficient. In 1993, I laid out a strategy which I’ve stuck to strictly since. In this twenty-year period, I’ve been down to nine in the count four times. One of the times, I was saved by the gong-gong. The other times, I miraculously managed to get back on my feet again.

At this time, many Swedes (and Danes!) have discovered that I have cheated them. The only thing they regret is that they didn’t kill me physically when they had the chance.

In 1996, I had developed a model for recruiting top leaders. The idea arose when I read one idiotic ad after another where they asked for “dynamic persons with social competence”. When I presented the concept to Torben, naturally he immediately understood what I was talking about, and we had some good laughs together.

What is the most favorable for a client? 400 applications weighing one kilo each, or 15 highly interesting applications, each on a maximum of three A4 pages? Here’s the “tip of the iceberg”:

1.		The applicant is supposed to make a speech to the personnel of the company/organisation. Maximum 5 minutes, and the topic is of his/her own choice. The speech will be video-recorded.
2.		The applicant has to perform a set of practical tasks — for example building a house with Lego bricks. Some of the tasks will be under time pressure. Video-recording.
3.		The applicant will be asked questions where he/she is asked to characterize himself/herself (Multiple choice). Based on the material, we will measure a “D” — the difference how we judge the person and how he/she characterizes himself/herself.
4.		We’ll pick three applicants for the final judging. At this point, the backgrounds of these three persons will be meticulously examined.
5.		Any application of more than three A4-pages will be rejected.

By providing this information in advance in the ad, unserious persons would be chased away.

I made a thirty-minute presentation of the concept to Coopers & Lybrand in Copenhagen — they had announced that they wanted to expand their recruiting department. Of course I knew the result in advance. My concept was highly threatening to TTM of a big and powerful branch.

As I wrote in “The Breivik Ideology and Media Disinformation”, TTM of the MSM is disinformation and witch-hunting. With this in mind, you can actually get information out of them. Their approach is probably diametrically opposite the truth. The items of information they omit are the most interesting ones. Sorry, but I’m not inclined to pay for that product.

Consider the case of Lena Hellblom Sjögren, the Swedish psychologist who was recently defended at GoV (“The Swedish Model”):

1.		I backed her up immediately when I got in contact with her in May 2013.
2.		I bought her book and paid expensive shipping costs to Martinique.
3.		I read her book — 535 pages — very thoroughly.
4.		I wrote a review of the book to the best of my ability. No one had reviewed the book before I did.
5.		I paid 1.30 SEK + VAT per word to get the review translated into British English.
6.		At GoV, her story was published internationally in its proper context. Diana West’s comment on her blog was perfect regarding both contents and timing.
7.		I mailed the dianawest.net link to the lawyer that represents LHS in the case against the Swedish Psychological Association. Even if he is a mediocre lawyer — and there are many of that kind — he should make ketchup of the Swedish Prosecution Authority (SPA) in court. If he is only medium good, he should also be able to get Studentlitteratur to republish the book in its original form. It’s no merit for them to have given in to a hate campaign.

Points 1-5 were OK. But 6-7 were not. The True Merchandise of LHS was unfortunately that she wanted to be a victim. My spending time and money on her was totally fine, but my delivering results was not. I destroyed her TTM.

I haven’t heard a word from her, and certainly not any “thanks”. Without understanding TTM, her ingratitude would have made me sad and angry (which, by the way, is her intention.). Now I can just shrug and leave it behind.

The True Merchandise of Islam is not even hidden, and has been the same for 1400 years!

Thomas Hellström is my old friend from my time at the University of Lund, Sweden. What he doesn’t know about waste, water and ecology is not worth knowing (you can find him at marquiswhoswho.com). During more than 25 years, Thomas has been challenging “The Environmental Industry” (analogous to The Family Law Industry, which I challenged in 1992.). The most favorable characterization of Thomas in the MSM has been “Brain Dead”.

A few years ago, Thomas was sacked by Svenskt Vatten (Swedish Water), an umbrella organisation financed mainly by Swedish municipalities to provide them with research results. During his last years at work, Thomas was muzzled and wasn’t allowed to publish anything anywhere. When he was sacked, he was forced to sign an agreement — “silence for the rest of your lifetime”.

I haven’t sent this paper to Thomas, but he has been informed that TTM is the issue, and that he can expect to be contacted by you.

I haven’t contacted Mr. Hellström yet, but maybe he reads Gates of Vienna…