Intercontinental Brigading - Part XXI - Techrights Was Right, So Why Was It Punished by Lawfare While the Culprits Walk Away Scot-free?
Techrights did a public service, cautioning about real risks to the public, but the people who caused the problems walk away scot-free
Hours ago:
Previous Parts:
This week we'd like to focus on technical matters, not legal matters. GGG ("Restricted Boot" Garrett, "Microsoft Plagiarism" Graveley & "Gas The Jews" Lozza) detest technical matters because they're not Computer Scientists; one promotes an attack on security, another promotes plagiarism (and an attack on the GPL). They're not "lone wolves". They talk to one another and coordinate their censorship attempts, which are moreover spearheaded by their hired guns in London. I receive death threats from them.
As a bit of background, Garrett and Graveley spent money they do not even have (no income sources), relying financially on third parties and maybe a CFA. Their lawfare is overlapping [1, 2]. They even use the same texts! They are doing all this from America, where being held accountable for swatting, death threats and losses in Court would be challenging. For example, had I beaten Garrett in Court, he would not pay. So it would be a pyrrhic victory. In Graveley's case, he would not even put down money to ensure I get my costs covered when his case gets tossed out. Therein lies the political battle we have; we've managed to convince ministers that our legal system in the UK is easy to abuse from outside the UK. Garrett knows that enforcing libel judgements against him is not possible when he's based in the US.
Against that background, consider what they did. Consider the serious harm they caused to GNU/Linux, as shown in the news this week. Who's going to hold them professionally accountable?
The problem is, they get salaried (or got salaries in the US) to do this serious harm, globally. And yet, nobody wants to talk about it. They'd rather talk about penises.
Threats to sue (distracting from the real scandals) go back 5 years, as Garrett sent me a nastygram just 6 days before his litigation friend Graveley got arrested as a Microsoft employee.
Nowhere in Garrett's nastygram was Restricted Boot mentioned. He described himself as a security person (a made up claim, that's like me claiming to be a geneticist) and years later Graveley branded himself a "CEO" (of himself) and "AI" expert. These aren't serious people, they're charlatans and frauds who pursue money and try to silence critics, even their own spouses.
We'll try to focus more (perhaps later today) on some of the technical sabotage before we proceed to showing documents pertaining to swatting (clear attempts to get British Police to harm my wife, who had been subjected to hate crimes and cybercrimes just months after Garrett and Lozza had collaborated, repeatedly, against two webhosts in two continents).
Garrett is now pouring out about a quarter million dollars into attempts to imprison my wife like he had done to his own spouse! Equipped with a 12-month-long (maybe longer, we pursue an appeal) litigation campaign, he tries to convince a foreign state (he left the UK in 2009) to imprison the victim whilst in absentia (he doesn't even attend any of his own hearings, same as Graveley). These are mentally unwell people and Garrett openly admitted in IRC that he had sought professional psychological help. This came up a year ago in the trial. Garrett presents a real threat to people around him, including his own spouse. █
Someone needs to think twice (or more) before bringing up "Hans
Reiser"