Does Gates of Vienna Oppose Breivik being given a Free and Fair Political Necessity Trial? Why?
Andrea Muhrrteyn | 09 December 2011 | Norway v. Breivik
The following comment was posted to Gates of Vienna: People like Fjordman; and then later deleted by Gates of Vienna admin.
Why do so many 'conservatives' who allegedly value the principle of personal responsibility, support Breivik being denied the right to a free and fair trial, to take personal responsibility for his actions? Why are so many 'conservatives' supporting liberal and communist values of shutting anyone up who does not follow their particular method of protest or action, by implementing communist political psychiatry?
Are these outspoken conservatives who are screaming from rooftops about how Breivik is allegedly insane; 'uncommitted rightwing types'; who dilute the movement; as Theodore Kaczynski described 'uncommitted leftwing types' who dilute the movement?Kaczynski holds that the values of gender equality, pacifism, leisure time etc. while still admirable, are exactly the values of techno-industrial civilization and its promised techno-utopia. Second, he holds that having such an interpretation is counter-productive to the ultimate anti-civilization/anti-tech goal as it attracts "leftist types" who are by nature uncommitted and act to dilute the movement.
Two subsequent comments were posted to Gates of Vienna after this one. They have not yet been published.Perhaps Mr. Lippestad and Breivik are responding to the issues raised in the following application filed with the Oslo court; a copy of which was sent to over 2083 Norwegian Politicians and Media Officials; which deals with among others Breiviks Political Necessity defence (which allows for expert witnesses to be called to testify to the issues alleged by the accused to have been his grounds for political necessity):
In the matter between: KINGDOM OF NORWAY v. ANDERS BEIHRING BREVICK
An Application has been filed in terms of Article’s 2, 4, 85, 100, 110a, 110b, of Norwegian Constitution; and Article’s 1, 5, 6, 9, 13 and 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
The application requests Judge Nina Opsahl to issue an order that (A) Anders Breivik be requested to provide his approval to the court to issue the following writs on his behalf:
[I] A writ of Habeus Mentem on behalf of Anders Breivik psycho-cultural integrity right to a free and fair trial; and [II] writ of Certiorari/Review of the Psychiatric Evaluation Report of Psychiatrists: Synne Serheim and Torgeir Husby as to the Mens Rea political necessity criminal liability of Anders Breivik terrorist acts, on 22 July 2011.
The writ of Habeus Mentem – the right of a wo/man to their own mind and culture – and writ of Review (of the Psychiatric Report) are invoked specifically against Anders Breivik’s attorney: Geir Lippestad, and Psychiatrists Synne Serheim and Torgeir Husby; and indirectly against the Norwegian multi-culti liberal political, legal, academic and media establishment who appear to be deliberately and perhaps maliciously attempting to deny Anders Breivik a free and fair trial, by means of a fraudulent and politically motivated ‘political psychiatry’ ‘insanity’ report and public media statements, so as to deny Mr. Breivik his day in court.
» » » » [Screen Shot]