About | ACP | Buy | Forum | Industry Watch | Learning Curve | Search | Twitter | Xnews
Home » Industry WatchThe Technological » Hall of Monkeys » Heroes Banquet)

What Kind of Judiciary

Flashback's 'guaponi' has the word. Happy New Year.


Buy It

Try It

STOCKHOLM/GOTHENBURG/LONDON (Rixstep) — Flashback forum member 'guaponi' had a few things to say about the resident forum troll earlier today.

'Psychopaths lie and manipulate. You're the psychopath in this forum. An extreme psychopath. Most trolls give up after a while when confronted with irrefutable evidence, but you? You disappear for a while, dodge the questions tossed at you, and then return to heave up all the earlier bile all over again. You disgust me.'

But that wasn't the end. That was only the beginning.

Here's guaponi's entire post, formatted as a list.

Happy New Year.

What Kind of Judiciary

  1. Assange hasn't been granted asylum for some nonpolitical crime. Stop falsifying. Here's a video that clearly shows why Assange is entitled to asylum.

  2. Other countries would grant him asylum. At what other countries has he tried to get asylum? Where do you get your information? And you don't think that Snowden should be granted asylum either! Not a single western state is willing to grant Snowden asylum. But if he was CHINESE and still done the same thing, there wouldn't be a single western land which wouldn't grant him asylum! It's more than sufficiently clear that Europe is being run like a puppet in this case (Hague's plan to storm the Ecuador embassy) and in similar cases (forcing down the presidential plane of Evo Morales in the Snowden case) or by using various pressure points to influence a country's judiciary (the trial of The Pirate Bay).

  3. You're a torturer-hugger. You are, straight through and through, an evil human being. That's bloody obvious to all.

  4. Why do you call Ecuador a 'banana republic'? Keep to the facts of the case. It's through eminently accessible information, in the form of electronic correspondence, that we see clearly that there is one part acting constructively and an opposing part doing the opposite. One part which on over thirty occasions tried to arrange for constructive dialogue and the opposing part which refused. You have the one part which through its incompetence cannot submit an application for interviews in time. You have one part that blames it all on the other part and comes with unfounded claims about granting Assange asylum, claiming the other part obstructed with unreasonable demands, delays, and so forth. All of this spread to the world media. The sad fact is that when this all comes up on the table (I hope the prevaricators read it) then it will be shown to be the exact opposite. All the while Ecuador tried to help, Sweden behaved like a rogue state. This is today well documented, no longer open to discussion.

And when it comes to the judiciary. What state would have a 'special' prosecutor's office to jump in when the ordinary prosecutor already ruled that 'no crime has been committed'? What state has a judiciary with a 'special' prosecutor who thinks it's a good idea to punish people, who make her 'uncomfortable', with extrajudicial sentences? What judiciary plants cocaine as evidence, has police who lie under oath, and who sends people around over and over again, to have them tried for the same thing in new jurisdictions?

What state detains people on completely undocumented interrogations? What judiciary lames out about recording witness testimony - and only for the prosecution, never for the defence? What country only uses the European Arrest Warrant in very serious cases, except in one case where there most likely is no crime at all committed and where crime can never be proved?

The list is endless. Swedish justice is a catastrophe from beginning to end, and in the Assange case, they've outdone themselves in incompetence. Clearcut cases, where serious crime has been committed, are closed - not because crime cannot be proven, but because the police suddenly 'ran out of resources' - whilst at the same time, they waste inordinate sums in persecution of people that those in power find 'uncomfortable'.

I'm so sick of it all. Will it never end? At any rate I want to say the other girl's just as much to blame.
 - Anna Ardin

Apparently Swedish laws are unique. If you have a penis you're half a rapist before you even get through customs.
 - Scott Adams

If I am able to reveal what I know, everyone will realise this is all a charade. If I could tell the British courts, I suspect it would make extradition a moot point.
 - Björn Hurtig

I can tell you that the Swedish prosecution still hasn't provided copies of those SMS texts that have been referred to. Those texts are some of the most powerful exculpatory evidence. In Australia prosecutors have a very grave duty to disclose such evidence to courts when seeking the grave exercise of a court's power against an individual. Yet in Sweden in this case, in the first hearings to obtain an arrest warrant, those texts were not submitted to the Swedish court, which is highly improper.
 - James Catlin

The prosecutor could achieve this broadening of the law during Assange's trial so he can be convicted of a crime that didn't exist at the time he allegedly committed it. She would need to. There is no precedent for this. The Swedes are making it up as they go along.
 - James Catlin

Julian Assange will surely learn that considering what WikiLeaks has published, he's got a few enemies in the Pentagon, the CIA, and the White House. Sweden began an investigation into rape which was later dismissed. Assange was even denied residence in Sweden. One can only speculate to what extent the security agencies of the US were involved. And considering the obvious interest of the US to silence WikiLeaks, is it likely Assange will have an accident of the 'Boston brakes' kind in the coming years? Or will he be snared with compromising information of the 'honey trap' kind?
 - 'Drozd' at Flashback 23 October 2010

The truth will out, the truth wins out. Let no journalist ever again speculate into what the protocols say. Six months of digging and the people at Flashback have the actual documents. The sleaze printed by rags such as the Daily Mail, Sweden's Aftonbladet and Expressen, and perhaps above all the toxic Nick Davies of the Guardian, can stand no more. Yet more: these documents are an indictment of the 'news organisations' who've printed deliberate inaccuracies all along or even worse: refused to print anything at all. Nick Davies' account of the protocols was maliciously skewed; both Aftonbladet and Expressen had copies early on and printed nothing. Bloggers had copies but arrogantly kept the information to their Smeagol selves.
 - The Assange Police Protocol: Translator's Note

See Also
Industry Watch: 'It is a fact'

About | ACP | Buy | Forum | Industry Watch | Learning Curve | Search | Twitter | Xnews
Copyright © Rixstep. All rights reserved.