Tweet
Country Of Fake Criminals-In-Law
Chief of Police of Armenia Vladimir Gasparyan said after the closed
meeting in Gyumri that when the participants of 23 March shooting in
Gyumri were being taken to the police, many MPs and other officials
called his deputy asking not to take written but only oral testimonies
from `the guys'. `Are you parliamentarians or criminals-in-law?' said
Vladimir Gasparyan.
The Head of Police raised a sacral issue which describes the realities
of Armenia which for their part can be defined as follows: the
political-business `elite' lives and works in accordance with the
rules and notions of the marginal culture of criminals-in-law.
On the other hand, a particular `synthesis' is happening in Armenia:
the criminal oligarchy which usurped all the spheres of life had to
wear a tie, accept a mandate and obey to laws, sometimes even make
testimonies. These are shameful things in the world of
criminals-in-law.
Therefore, the MPs and officials asked to accept only oral testimonies
from the `guys', because making testimonies in written form is
something shameful for them and it can crush their reputation of
criminals-in-law. After all, it can also turn a precedent for a
similar treatment of other officials and MPs.
Once, a famous intellectual dwelling on the Armenian realities said
that `worse than criminals-in-law can be only fake criminals-in-law'.
Vladimir Gasparyan's indignation is understood: one does not know if
he deals with criminals-in-law or MPs. Everything is confused, the
wrong and the right things. Criminals-in-law don't seem such, neither
do MPs.
Adventurers, pickpockets, `guys who fought' and the criminal gang
appeared in the right place once and occupied all the essential
spheres of life. Since they needed ideological support of their right
to own what they had, they chose the principle `power is right' and
instilled it in the nation. So, they had the `right' and they needed
power to exercise the `right'. They needed `laws' too since the state
laws contradicted their `right' and customs, so they chose the
`legislation' of the world of the criminals-in-law. Especially it was
useful to `conceal' their shadow-criminal activities.
Vladimir Gasparyan must give the names of those MPs and officials who
made the aforementioned request.
P.S. The Armenian media is busy covering the life and work of the
influential Armenian criminal-in-law Rafik Khoyetsyan. All reports are
full of respect because Khoyetsyan who passed half of his life in
prison was a real criminal-in-law, a Mahican of the old generation.
Armenians respect criminals-in-law as a symbol of justice and
principles. Simply there are no other symbols.
Haik Aramyan
11:25 26/04/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/29729
Chief of Police of Armenia Vladimir Gasparyan said after the closed
meeting in Gyumri that when the participants of 23 March shooting in
Gyumri were being taken to the police, many MPs and other officials
called his deputy asking not to take written but only oral testimonies
from `the guys'. `Are you parliamentarians or criminals-in-law?' said
Vladimir Gasparyan.
The Head of Police raised a sacral issue which describes the realities
of Armenia which for their part can be defined as follows: the
political-business `elite' lives and works in accordance with the
rules and notions of the marginal culture of criminals-in-law.
On the other hand, a particular `synthesis' is happening in Armenia:
the criminal oligarchy which usurped all the spheres of life had to
wear a tie, accept a mandate and obey to laws, sometimes even make
testimonies. These are shameful things in the world of
criminals-in-law.
Therefore, the MPs and officials asked to accept only oral testimonies
from the `guys', because making testimonies in written form is
something shameful for them and it can crush their reputation of
criminals-in-law. After all, it can also turn a precedent for a
similar treatment of other officials and MPs.
Once, a famous intellectual dwelling on the Armenian realities said
that `worse than criminals-in-law can be only fake criminals-in-law'.
Vladimir Gasparyan's indignation is understood: one does not know if
he deals with criminals-in-law or MPs. Everything is confused, the
wrong and the right things. Criminals-in-law don't seem such, neither
do MPs.
Adventurers, pickpockets, `guys who fought' and the criminal gang
appeared in the right place once and occupied all the essential
spheres of life. Since they needed ideological support of their right
to own what they had, they chose the principle `power is right' and
instilled it in the nation. So, they had the `right' and they needed
power to exercise the `right'. They needed `laws' too since the state
laws contradicted their `right' and customs, so they chose the
`legislation' of the world of the criminals-in-law. Especially it was
useful to `conceal' their shadow-criminal activities.
Vladimir Gasparyan must give the names of those MPs and officials who
made the aforementioned request.
P.S. The Armenian media is busy covering the life and work of the
influential Armenian criminal-in-law Rafik Khoyetsyan. All reports are
full of respect because Khoyetsyan who passed half of his life in
prison was a real criminal-in-law, a Mahican of the old generation.
Armenians respect criminals-in-law as a symbol of justice and
principles. Simply there are no other symbols.
Haik Aramyan
11:25 26/04/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/29729