Unwarranted and Baseless Accusations

[VivaEspana]

UNWARRANTED AND BASELESS ACCUSATIONS
Discovering discrepancies in official statements of persons expressing unwarranted and outrageous incriminating statements in public have placed some of their founders in extreme precarious situations. They have been considered by those authors of such public utterances as threats thus making the discoverers subject of scrutiny, victims of harrassment, provocations, malicious prosecutions and times, victims of murders or mayhem. The only reason has been that the intended victims of such slanderous statements have been completely vindicated in the eyes of the public.

There have been documented cases that have shown these to be true. One sees them often in the newspapers. There have also been cases that have demonstrated what emboldened these principals of such atrocities. Maybe because the critics were once the least penurious and most ascetic in this supposedly civil society the majority of which have been aiming for the high stakes or the good life. They single out the weak and the hapless. They spare the mighty.

Desperation in life has caused these perpetrators of these crimes to produce these baseless incriminating statements. It might have been that they found out the life has been useless or hopeless because of the quagmire they have been in. Psychologists describe these persons as people "always looking for trouble". Moralists describe them as so very depraved that they want others to be like them or else suffer the consequences. Nonetheless, I have always given every criminal lawyer the benefit of the doubt. Yes, there might be rotten apples. But there have been very best ones aiming for the simple life, and those of truth, honesty and integrity minus the chicanery and mendacities of criminal defense lawyering. They either work for the Solicitor General's Office of the Inspector Generals of CSIS(Canadian Security and Intelligence Service).
It has been incumbent on any lawyer to defend his client. Whether guilty or not, it is imperative for the defense lawyer to object when the question to the client is irrelevant, imcriminating, leading, or immaterial. He sees to it that his or her rights has not been violated.

But there have been times that they go to such extent that unmindful of what society's critical impressions, they practice blatant duplicities, artifices and mendacities or what laymen calls as "double talk". Nonetheless, I opine that chicanery and mendacities have been immaterial when criticizing a criminal lawyer named Rocco or giving what has been due him. Who am I to judge when I have only been a poor factory worker from the city named ______ and subject of slander, slights, and boorish remarks everywhere I go to. I am not God and I do it, too, in my lawyering.

But....why "would CSIS or CIA aim their guns at you", Rocco? If they can tolerate Andrew Mitrovica for numerous counts of allegedly libelous and slanderous statements, thirty counts of unlawful identity disclosures and his explicit premonitions of his "possible indictment under the Anti-Terrorist Act ("Guilty conscience does not need accusers"-PNP), and provisions for his personal security that shall redound to their mutual benefit, much more can they be lenient with an allegedly-once law abiding person like you. American law states that "it would be unlawful for them to carry out assassinations". You have read that. Haven't you?

What CSIS has been fearing most has been that a disgruntled person with unattended gripes against these intelligence agencies makes a sacrificial lamb out of you and later places the blame on them.

This might be remote. But what if one of your terrorist client's victims still suffering on that lingering pain and out of vindictiveness puts the law on his hands and finish you off? As the primitive man says, "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth".

What if one your Arab client's peers uses you too as a tool. You just gave them a very cordial invitation. And that would aggravate the situation CSIS has now been in. Always the blame is on CSIS. "CSIS did it. CSIS is spying on me. CSIS is going to kill me, etc, etc, etc"

You went straightaway in accusing the "US agency" instead of pinning the principal of the crime, the "third man from _____"!! You can easily suggest that because the "alleged has been on ______soil, his phone or the booth can be traced and his identity revealed on those surveillance cameras repleting on those lampposts. Thus if _____ police cannot produce the results with respect to your complaints, then maybe you have no valid case against the US agency or CSIS.

Hammer your way into pinning the "third man from _____!!!!!!!" Do not cease until justice is served!! Go on!! Do it!!!

Andrew Mitrovica with his thunderous and scandalous presences in the Globe and Mail has never elicited these kinds of death threat complaints against CSIS. But until when? His behaviour has been more impudent than yours. Hence, worthy of their animosities.

I pray for you, Rocco. Fervently pray for you and hope that the good God saves you on the Day of Judgment and gives you a trillion more years to live. I pray for you!
　
HulingBaraha, journalist and national security expert, Virginia, USA

[Jessica]

woah..

[Tomisimo]

Is this a chain email or something?

[VivaEspana]

It is my own personal essaay, sir tomisimo. I intend to translate them in Spanish. I have copyright of it.