From Norway Tjen Folket: What is the content of the charges made against you? Kjell Gunnar: Beyond creating possibilities to monitor Tjen Folket, statements linked to the funding that SOS Rasisme has gotten through state funding and Frifond. It was stated that offenses were made to increase the funding we were receiving and that I was responsible. The police cannot prove this. It was also claimed that I was responsible for laundering money. I was, as stated earlier, laundering money from 2007 already in 2006, in other words; I had invented a time machine. As I said in the court meetings in the beginning of May, I wouldn’t have been in custody if I had actually invented one. It is difficult to understand the allegations of money laundering. Such a claim must be based on a claim that SOS Racism had black revenue. Such a claim is impossible for the police to prove. It seems as if the police are presenting a principle of double jeopardy. Firstly, it is illegal to perform fraud, but also it is illegal to use this money on anything. I realize that if you rob a bank then it is illegal, but if this money is spent on bread from the store then that action is also illegal? I am having difficulties understanding this, luckily I have not commit fraud. The police attempt to forge a story from my cash withdrawals. This is money that is sent further to refugees all over the country that are in hiding because the state wishes to kick them out. These are people who risk their life if they are sent out. It is completely out of question for me to provide any form of information that might help the police in tracking them down. This entire case is characterized by two relations, the first one is secrecy, even my lawyer does not have access to all of the polices claims without signing on a paper stating that he will not tell me of it’s content. He has denied to do this. The second is that the police uses the method of throwing shit and see what sticks to said shit. It is evident 28 months after the raid against the offices of SOS Rasisme that they don’t have any questions about the content of the endless binders they took from me. This entire case is well summarized by Mao in the 26th of May, 1939: I hold that it is bad as far as we are concerned if a person, a political party, an army or a school is not attacked by the enemy, for in that case it would definitely mean that we have sunk to the level of the enemy. It is good if we are attacked by the enemy, since it proves that we have drawn a clear line of demarcation between the enemy and ourselves. It is still better if the enemy attacks us wildly and paints us as utterly black and without a single virtue; it demonstrates that we have not only drawn a clear line of demarcation between the enemy and ourselves but achieved a great deal in our work. tjen-folket.no/Sentralt/view/11703
Posted on: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 16:48:11 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015