Mag
Opinion
Reykjavík Nine: A Statement Regarding The Ruling

Reykjavík Nine: A Statement Regarding The Ruling

Published February 18, 2011

The ruling of Reykjavík’s District Court is a sentence for the sake of appearances. It is not at all in accordance with the serious accusations that we have had to live with for the last year. It is soft enough to tranquillize people’s possible fury but at the same time, tough enough to fulfill the State’s need to punish, cover its shame, and encourage continuing persecution of its political opponents.
We have this to say about the case:
The Parliament (Alþingi) is a disgrace to Iceland’s society and holds the original responsibility for this case. Numerous parliamentarians and parliament staff members—particularly the speaker of parliament, the prosecution’s cheerleader—actively participated in delivering slander about us. The tiny attempts of a handful of parliamentarians to counterbalance this campaign of lies were silenced by the same people who most actively lied. Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir and company: We despise your opportunistic and desperate attempt to save your own skin at the last minute.
The office of the State Prosecution is a remotely operated persecutor and acted with the instructions of those who really wanted us sentenced. When the office gets complaints against The State (e.g. the police), the cases are usually dismissed because of an unlikely conviction. That rule however does not apply when The State is the accuser.
The Court, which is hired by those in power, making it highly political, handed the authority of the lawsuit to the police, from day one. The truth is often stranger than fiction: Those who controlled the trial were the same people who in the end testified against us.
The largest media outlets’ editors are the Goebbels’ of the Icelandic state and global capitalism, and they sentenced us as soon as the accusations were published. According to that political judgment they intended to steer the discussion to the direction of condemnation, not only by the courts, but also by the society. At the same time, they cried out and tried to push the nation’s emotional buttons when the State intervened with the business of suit-dressed money and power-figures. Thus they revealed their attitude towards the alleged justice of the constitutional state. Justice that is never supposed to touch those who sit at the top of the pyramid.
Society is traditionally co-dependent and it is in a state of denial: The State cannot be wrong. It shows apathy when it has the chance to be effective. But as the court case continued, more and more people started to question The State’s apparent position against its political opponents. As a result, we witnessed an uncommon restraint towards The States’ arm of enforcement. Despite attempts of the above-mentioned parties to control and mislead the discussion, people managed to reveal the error and display an inconvenient but true picture of the case.
We are convinced that the solidarity we were shown in many different ways, both in Iceland and abroad, was crucial. We are deeply thankful for all that support. At the same time we encourage people to continue the same restraint against the state and to turn the defense into attacks: bombard the power elite’s colossus as well as all other institutions that preserve the social structure we live in.
Finally, we declare complete support with all the people that have stood, currently stand and will stand in our footsteps, wherever in the world.
Sólveig Anna Jónsdóttir
Snorri Páll Jónsson
Þór Sigurðsson
Steinunn Gunnlaugsdóttir
Ragnheiður Esther Briem
Teitur Ársælsson
Jón Benedikt Hólm
Andri Lemarquis



Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Down To The Dog Den

by

Anyone familiar with the vertical structure of just about all workplaces—from old school industries and services to the arts, to the innovation and public sectors—understands the universal logic of The Boss. No matter how pleasant it might feel to fulfil one’s working tasks and hours; irrelevant of how invisible the allegedly inherent antagonism between the social hierarchy’s different layers might seem; no matter how much one might actually doubt the current relevance of an analysis based on the concept of hierarchy—or even the very existence of the phenomenon itself; at the end of the day there’s no question about the

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

What If Sunday is on the Phone to Monday?

by

Nothing like a country that every day walks further down the path of its own inexorable decline. Nothing better than an ever more provincial country run by a rotating crew of the same incompetents, dishonest, corrupted by their support of a permanently and totally corrupt regime. What is better than living in a land where justice is a bazaar? What artist wouldn’t dream of such a nation? —Said filmmaker Jean-Luc Godard in the 1980′s, regarding France. Mutatis mutandis … we are not there yet. Iceland seems corrupt yes, at times fundamentally so. And yet the work may not be completed.

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

The Best Place In The World To Be A Woman?

by

Women are reportedly more equal to men in Iceland than any other place in the world. But does this mean that we have reached the goal of gender equality? In international media and discourse, Iceland is often portrayed as the best place to be a woman. We certainly use it to market ourselves to tourists and boast of it in our own media. This is in large part due to the recognition we have received from the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index. For four years in a row now, Iceland has been ranked as number one on the

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

So What’s This I Hear About Iceland Being The 17th Best Country In The World?

by

Something called The Good Country Index was published recently. It is a list of 125 countries ranked according how much good they do in the world, from Ireland at the top to Libya at 125th. As a marketing stunt, it was brilliant, generating a few hundred thousand news articles around the globe. It was, predictably enough, conceived by a marketing guy who, even more predictably enough, paid someone else to do all the hard work. You can take a wild guess at which one got most of the media attention. The guy who did all the work? No. But let

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Ask Not on Whom the Sun Shines

by

If the State Prosecutor decides to take the Interior Ministry to court, for breach of confidentiality, slander, and abuse of public office against two asylum seekers, the Capital Area Police will in all likelihood handle the criminal investigation, as it has until now. Since the police is subordinate to the Interior Ministry, the police thereby investigates its own superiors. There seems to exist little, if any, protocol for that, which calls for some improvisation. Which is the best way forward? Which way towards a convincing, ethical code of conduct? Should the Minister resign? —No, you are confusing Iceland with some

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Ungoo

by

[Continued from Ungoo: Part IX] Earlier this year, a free-trade agreement between Iceland and China took effect. Iceland is the first, and so far the only, European country to make such an arrangement with the People’s Republic of. No one knows what that means. Literally no one. Perhaps some politicians, administrative staff or business managers think they do: they probably have some rough estimates about the agreement’s effects on our GDP, and at some point may have read an article or two about whether or not China has any imperial ambitions in the arctic. By and large, they would seem

Show Me More!