mubarakisation of sweden

a transcript

damn i am angry. the whole assange case is subject to a mis,- and des information campaign,
infos disappearing, storys changed and changing

all to put him in a more negative light and cover up the political aspects.
it's a completely bankrupt thing, a showtrial even now.

there is no mention of violence (as opposed to intimity's legally ) in the swedish case
and the whole fk based his prosecution on the term, yesterday and as i understand still in court,
and as i understand it they are still to understand this in court, i can think of that i would find a few things in todays article.

montgomery was yesterday featured on wikipedia as a swedish prosecutor, or where was it, names and context disappeared that were quite obvious,

wikipedia, that i looked into to see if i thought he was usian agent
/all to perfect cover, but independently very active, so probs not
not to sure for the ideal fit/and thereby somewhat probable/ aspects of his life i expected than
came to see him as quite ok
neway


a fake trial, it never bodes much good

wish i knew what to do

they do it to us all (the "activists") and me in person all the time, faketrials

altho there have maybe been some improvements, we regard many criminal trials and much of its detail also as fake trial ofcourse, me , plenty ppl i know, several distinct groups in society.

groups - treats so strongly persons have to label themselves with it to deal, basically
not to say they are all great persons, but the experience is the same in many areas

people should be responsible in person not to break a law, since most do, by having a job and signing conditions, they are far beyond in legal justification

is that behind?
beyond i think is behind

neway. to an extent this goes for julian assange as an independent

especially since eg. the swedish at first mentioned abandonment constitutes rape, and that was an argument, i think england should decide there is no possible credible procedure,

but since that also disappeared from public sight, at least mostly, and hard to manage, (as from internet), we see there is a censoring case being made, for a procedure that has once again been called explicitly(i think) not political

.
angry

twice before this court been referred as nonpolitical. under most doubtfull circumstances,(1) ...

ridiculous

But when asked what he would have done if faced with similar allegations, Alhem said: "If I was in his shoes then I would have gone to Sweden to give my version of events".

thats such bs!

if he had been julian assange, he would now not be his lawyer, but someone who escaped a double trial, under more, different, overtly political circumstances, and the rest.

.. so he wouldnt have gone ? obviously

but hes a fat lawyer, thats probably not even in a condition to have sex with two women
so he would have done it.. yeah right?

perhaps he could have proven he was not in sweden or sth

what a ridiculous notion in an international paper (and probs sth like reuters(2)) about an english court. don't even know immediatly who made the contempt for courtS:
rereads..
the guy making the question

it doesnt tell who that was.
...
judge allying with the prosecutor..

must say judges are absolutely great in finding their own stupid little pretences

and even still , if it was a trap ...

Alhem says: afaik i would be innocent, and not fear extradition, but its not if it was him..(3)

and probs julian assange might not fear extradiction, if he wasn't someone already under stress of an illconceived prosecution.(3a)

so its a silly lawyer also

cus that is in no obvious way bad for assange (4)
well thats what i think


look , if you would have been julian assange, would you have gone to sweden for the (same..?) next prosecution?
what do you think?

i could proof i was not in stockholm you thought ?

"i could not proof that i was not in a bed with her naked after having had sex already"
or with pyamas, lol

technically she was quite prepared with the condom, or so it appears
perhaps there was a camera in the room?

tjah
i think that dubious political persona with expensive habits like that should not be to much allowed to acquire such "evidence"

interesting point.

only means less
means..

you would have to raise the treshold for criminal not lower it., under this circumstance of observation.

lowering it in public constitutes a "rape" , against fundamental, human and i think even military justice

wich is obviously "political' (5)

thus
it is
a political trial (!)


and the problem is, i dont want to read prepared lies about evrything and all, all the time just to spare few some.

some of what they and moreso the others still get inflicted on them (6)


i dont think i have to much experience with honourclaimscases (lol)

sth. julian could explain about privacy here.(7)


egypt

suleiman has to go also, what keeps a guy like him going??

he should opt for baradei, step back from the secret service and police, be explicit that baradei is "just a democrat" for the us, and give his opinion on what he thinks, will be the consequences of what he now sees as a great need for (rather fictive) security. (8)
-,

in public so people know what would have been the things they could be controlled over
then..(8b)

we will find a woman for vice president. mubarak is gone, and elections in say 3 months,
or i think that is quite feasible, two, after that.

ofcourse people will want to spoof the parliament, more precise the "government(9)" circles

i hope we have a good case study to base us on in tunesia by now.

the parliament is probably completely illegal , imo also for international law,
and as such depriving the egyptian people of rights

like flexible interpretations of privacy indeed don't work in the same way as flexibel interpretations of labour policy.

flexible labour not labour"mobility", but weird working hours
flexible privacy indeed "weird working(sic) hours". not mobility of the legal development.

illegal representation can easily be disadvantaged because theirs is no true legal base.

go egyptians, legalise yourself! go europe reaffirm your laws!






(1)(in wich i would refer to wikileaks also)
(2) compare :"political"
(3) the trial is against someone with an entirely different background and an at least very annoying experience with swedish prosecution.
(3a)political
(4) and Alhem didnt manage to follow up on it
(5)technical infringement of laws is not only political, it is even the area of politics, and not of (show) trials.
(6) in terms of gross neglect of justice
(7) applications for and against privacy turned into a specialist area , that unfortunately is mostly represented by extrajural people.
(8) he didn't, he went for the cosmetic requirement of stopping the protests.
(8b) think moderating looting and destruction of property that has uses after the revolution also.
that does not definitily include property's with a strong symbolic value , before an actual change of power materialised.
(9) an illegal shape of government: dictatorship