Dick Rizzler🏴‍☠️🇦🇺✝️

@Dragsta4444 @2worldsPodcast The Judge was completely biased - a leftist globalist who hates Australia and real (ie Anglo Saxon) Australians. Same as you, apparently

@2worldsPodcast The judge throwing the 5 out. Was because the information was found to be unreliable, inconsistent & tainted by collusion. Court ruled they had coordinated their stories. This is a very complex case, atleast put the following details after your small snippet of information ..

“Breaking Down The 21 Witnesses”. Want to support me? Links in bio to my Patreon program and merch.

@UnoHaydo @DrewPavlou That was the woman who was paid $700K by Nick Mackenzie to lie in court against BRS btw

@DrewPavlou So you read about him beating his wife and his girlfriend, you read about his fellow soldiers testifying against him, you read about him hiding evidence in his backyard, you read about him murdering innocent or even disabled civilians and still decided to defend him. 🫵🤡

I spent three hours reading Ben Roberts-Smith court documents this morning and found something pretty incredible. TLDR: Previous court cases addressing Ben Roberts-Smith war crime allegations relied on the testimony of illiterate Afghan villagers who called him an infidel. Part of the war crimes claims made against Ben Roberts-Smith relied upon the testimony of Afghan villagers who openly told Australian courts that they viewed Roberts-Smith and Australian soldiers as infidels. Nine Media relied upon the testimony of three key Afghan witnesses in order to support the claim that Roberts-Smith executed a farmer named Ali Jan who he claimed was a Taliban spotter. These men were illiterate subsistence villagers who expressed hatred for ''infidels'' including Australian soldiers during the trial. Hanifa, pictured in court drawings wearing a green shawl, acknowledged directly that foreign soldiers were called ''infidels'' or ''kafir'' and that he did not like them. He also confirmed that persons killed by soldiers were called ''martyrs'' and that he hated Australian soldiers for going near ''our women.'' He said: "If they are coming to our houses, go inside to our women, of course that's what we call them infidels." Mangul, pictured in the court drawings wearing a blue shawl, expressed hatred of foreign soldiers and confirmed his view that they were infidels or kafir and that those they killed were martyrs. He said he did not like the Taliban but still referred to Australian soldiers as infidels. According to Daily Mail court reporting, when asked if he hated the soldiers who invaded his country and did not share his Islamic faith, Mangul said: ''Yes, it is like that.'' Hanifa also told the court that when the soldiers arrived by helicopter, he took a donkey from Ali Jan in an attempt to make them both appear to be nomads: ''I took one of the donkey from him thinking that we will look like nomads and the foreign forces will think that we are nomads.'' The actual mechanics of their testimony is incredible in and of itself. Hanifa told the Federal Court that a man named ''Dr Sharif'' paid for his accommodation, food and transport for up to a year in support of his ability to testify against Roberts-Smith. Dr Sharif worked for representatives of Nine newspapers as a fixer in Afghanistan. Each Afghan key witness said that a local representative for Nine Media paid their family's living expenses since moving to Kandahar, then Kabul, earlier in the year. According to Daily Mail court reporting, one key witness was accompanied by his wife and five children, another by his wife and six children and a third had 14 relatives with him. And the logistics regarding court translation were incredible. The only available court-certified Pashto interpreter lived in Ontario, Canada. When hearings commenced at 10:15am in Sydney, it was 8:15pm in Ontario and 4:45am in Kabul. The Afghan witnesses therefore gave evidence about murders in a Taliban stronghold through a three-way international audiovisual link at dawn, interpreted by someone in a different hemisphere. The court-certified Pashto interpreter conceded that he had difficulty translating from classical Pashto to the rural Pashto dialect the men spoke. All three ultimately testified that they did not see the alleged shooting execution of Ali Jan, but two said they directly observed Roberts-Smith kick him off the cliff. Roberts-Smith has always maintained that Ali Jan was a Taliban spotter in a village that was a Taliban stronghold. It is a matter of historical fact that there was confirmed armed Taliban presence in the village of Darwan the day of the raid and that Roberts-Smith killed a confirmed armed Taliban militant during the wider operation. Roberts-Smith was operating in the village of Darwan while searching for Hekmatullah - a Taliban sleeper agent in the Afghan National Army who massacred three Australian soldiers in cold blood as they prepared to sleep on their own base. This massacre of Australian soldiers was technically a Taliban war crime. By enlisting in the Afghan National Army and wearing its uniform, Hekmatullah had presented himself as a co-belligerent fighting alongside Australian forces - not against them. This made him guilty of the war crime of perfidy. Judge Besanko ultimately dismissed the infidel/kafir argument in a single paragraph for each witness, bracketed with the Dr Sharif financial support argument, writing: ''However, I do not consider (the infidel argument), or indeed the other general motive to lie advanced by the applicant of the sustenance (food and transportation) provided by the respondents through Dr Sharif, to be strong motives for Mohammed Hanifa to lie." In my opinion, this represents an instance of the Australian legal system failing to grapple with the cultural gulf between Australian morals and Pashtunwali morals - raised in a deeply conservative Pashtun culture in which foreign soldiers are categorically viewed as enemies of the faith, living day to day in a Taliban stronghold village, I believe the hatred that these men had towards Australian soldiers means that their testimony cannot be fully trusted. Roberts-Smith's barristers directly put it to Mangul that his religion permitted lying to infidels in some circumstances. Mangul rejected the suggestion — but the mere fact that Roberts-Smith's own counsel felt compelled to raise the question in open court speaks to the cultural gulf I am describing. It must be said that their testimony was not the only testimony against Roberts-Smith that day - their words were held up as corroborating the words of an Australian soldier, Person 4. Besanko J and the Full Court both wrote that even setting aside the Afghan witnesses' evidence, Person 4's account stood. That said, it feels deeply wrong to me that the Australian courts did ultimately choose to rely upon the evidence of men who openly admited they viewed Australian soldiers as infidels and subjects of contempt. It feels like a particularly troubling example of misplaced institutional deference - treating the admission of deep religious hostility as insufficient to question the reliability of evidence. These Afghan witnesses may now testify again in the criminal trial against Roberts-Smith where the standard of proof is ''beyond reasonable doubt'' rather than the civil ''balance of probabilities.'' The criminal standard of ''beyond reasonable doubt'' is substantially higher than the civil ''balance of probabilities'' standard at which the defamation findings were made. It is hard to see their evidence alone passing muster at a criminal standard.

@HazelAppleyard that’s disgraceful. that slothful woman absolutely deserved a strong spanking on the buttocks. An absolutely biblical whalloping on her backside - over and over again

Til death or severe mental illness do us part

@TruthseekersInc @MickamiousG Mate that defamation trial was a miscarriage of Justice. Nick McKenzie is caught on tape breaching journalistic ethics and 9media paying a $700K bribe to a witness to give false testimony against Australia's legendary war hero

Following a civil defamation trial in 2023 (upheld on appeal in 2025), a Federal Court judge found on the balance of probabilities that he committed multiple war crimes in Afghanistan between 2009 and 2012. Today (7 April 2026), he was arrested by the Australian Federal Police and is expected to face five counts of the war crime of murder. Core Findings Establishing the Case for Justice The court accepted as substantially true that Roberts-Smith: Kicked an unarmed, handcuffed Afghan civilian (Ali Jan) off a cliff in Darwan in 2012, then ordered soldiers to execute the injured man. Murdered an unarmed Afghan man with a prosthetic leg during a raid on a Taliban compound (Whiskey 108) in 2009. Was involved in or directed the unlawful killings of other unarmed civilians and prisoners who were not taking part in hostilities. These acts align with the Brereton Inquiry’s 2020 findings of credible evidence of unlawful killings by Australian special forces in Afghanistan (39 civilians across 23 incidents). Australia is a party to the Geneva Conventions and has incorporated war crimes into its Criminal Code (Division 268). Wilful killing of protected persons (civilians or detainees not participating in hostilities) is a grave breach and a serious indictable offence carrying life imprisonment. The rule of law requires investigation and, where evidence warrants, prosecution. regardless of rank, medals, or service record. Impunity would place Australia in the same category as the regimes it condemns. The victims were unarmed Afghan civilians. Justice demands that their deaths be examined in open court so families and the Australian public can see due process applied. The SAS’s elite status and the public trust placed in it require the highest standards; tolerating unlawful killings erodes the moral authority of the entire force and the “rules of engagement” that protect both our troops and civilians. The defamation judgment was not a criminal conviction, but it was reached after 110 days of evidence, including eyewitness testimony from fellow SAS soldiers. Combined with the Inspector-General’s inquiry and the Office of the Special Investigator’s five-year probe, this meets the threshold for criminal proceedings. The presumption of innocence applies at trial, but the evidence is now strong enough that failing to charge would undermine public confidence in military justice. Australia has committed to the principle of complementarity (prosecuting our own to avoid ICC intervention). The first war-crimes trial of an Australian soldier in decades is already underway for a related SAS case. Roberts-Smith’s prosecution tests whether accountability applies even to the most celebrated figures. It affirms that heroism in battle does not grant a licence to commit murder. In short, facing justice is not about punishing a hero, it is about proving that the Australian military and justice system uphold the very standards of discipline and humanity that separate professional forces from militias. The arrest today shows the process is finally moving forward; a fair trial will determine guilt beyond reasonable doubt. What is astounding in this day and age is the amount of propagandised imbiciles out there who automatically and without question, feel hatred for an entire religious group they know absolutely nothing about because if they did, they would not participate in the divide and conquer meatgrinder they are in. That goes for anyone who hates all Muslims, Jews, Christians ect. Whats worse is that you have Pauline Hanson and Malcolm Roberts of the Australian One Nation Party perpetuating this hatred. "It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society" J Krishnamurti

How to Destroy any remaining confidence in Australia’s Federal Police Department. Arrest Australia’s Most Decorated Former SAS Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith, but instead of organising it to be done privately, they stage the arrest and notify the media for MAXIMUM exposure & damage. Just think about that for a second. How was Channel 9 able to get ‘exclusive footage’ unless…….. Either the Australians Governments Attorney Generals office leaked this was going to happen…. Or….

@NorthsideBiy @adonispara They didn't - they were compelled with threats of prison and induced bribes of payouts. The whole episode stinks to high heaven. The leftists responsible for the persecution of BRS deserve to face a firing squad.

@adonispara Must be a right piece of shit to say his own ratted him out

> Born 1978 in Perth Australia > Joined the army at 18 > Passed SAS selection (90% fail) > Gave up his rank to start again as a trooper > Six tours of Afghanistan > June 2010 his Helicopter gets ambushed > Roberts-Smith got up > Sprinted 40 metres across open ground toward the guns > Destroyed three machine gun positions > Cleared the village > The Taliban retreated from the entire district > Awarded the Victoria Cross (Australia's highest military honour) > Went back to Afghanistan in 2012 > Led over 50 high-risk operations as patrol commander > Left the army as the most decorated living soldier in the country > Named Australian Father of the Year > Started an MBA. Moved into corporate life > Face of the Australian War Memorial > National hero Free Ben Roberts-Smith!

@SandraR12178853 @FreedomAus80100 @BMAU000 no he isn’t. he used the battlefield authority that was vested in him and made a judgement call that certain individuals were actual combatants and performed war acts upon them. the allegation is that they weren’t actually combatants. good luck proving that beyond doubt.

@FreedomAus80100 @BMAU000 I’m extremely confused. He is a war criminal. Shouldn’t we be better than that?

Pauline Hanson announced she will pardon Ben and grant him immunity when she wins power at the next election. One more reason to vote One Nation

@7NewsBrisbane This is disgraceful for Australia. They believe a bunch of terrorists over a national hero. Time for Australians to rise up, they are trying to replace you.

@ausstockchick because of the NDIS

You have to ask yourself the question… Why is Australia hiking interest rates so aggressively compared to other first world nations? The Reserve Bank of New Zealand is holding a policy meeting today and is likely to keep interest rates on hold. #ausbiz

@KennySuch4 @TruthFairy131 Its a deliberate policy to replace the electorate and dispossess Anglo-Australians of their birthrights skynews.com.au/opinion/andrew…

@TruthFairy131 Low IQ you say. OK, 200 people vote. Say 120 of them voted labour. You claim they are low IQ. Next election, those 200 then 120 voted liberals. So are you saying part of those 120 that voted labour the first time you called low IQ are still low IQ as they now voted libs?

We can’t vote our way out of this. Too many immigrants, low IQ people & the system is rigged. This is insane

@TruthFairy131 Exactly - we need to seize government by force and suspend democracy until such time as remigration can restore the electorate to its legitimate composition.

@BiereHQ @aus_pill are you saying that pauline hanson worships a paedophile ?

@dick_mojo @aus_pill One nation voter?

Ben Roberts-Smith > 6’7, 250lbs (200cm, 110kg) > Taliban described him as the ‘big soldier with blue eyes’ > Fought with crusader’s cross patch > SASR, Victoria’s Cross recipient

@aus_pill “if you kill a cockroach you are a hero, if you kill a butterfly, you are evil. morals have aesthetic criteria.” Friedrich Nietzsche

@BiereHQ @aus_pill who do i support who worships paedophiles?

@dick_mojo @aus_pill Take that cross out of your bio, you support someone who worships pedofiles

Young Christian man, show this to your girlfriend. If she doesn’t like it, dump her. You can thank me later.

On BRS, (and warfare more broadly) The term "war crimes" is one of the most stupidly brilliant pieces of intellectual fraud ever sold to the public by the managerial regime and its court eunuchs in the NGOs and the press. It pretends that industrialised slaughter between nation-states or in the case of these endless imperial expeditions, between a high-tech expeditionary force and a pack of low tech, sand dwelling, fantical spastics can somehow be sanitized into a regulated sport with referees, scorecards, and penalties enforced by the losers lawyers. War is not a crime. War is the state of nature rendered absolute. Everything else is propaganda for the weak. Mainly leftoids, some conservatards or the associated milieu of anti-war types will often bandy about terms like 'muh heckin' international rules-based order' and 'muh Geneva convention.' Geneva Conventions were written by European libtards who still believe the next war would look like 1914; neat lines, honorable surrenders, and a return to the officer's mess for cognac and maps. They collapsed the moment total war arrived. The British burned Dresden (which was full of women and children at the time) to ashes and called it strategy. The Americans turned Tokyo into an inferno and dropped the sun on Hiroshima twice and called it peace. No one was hauled before a tribunal for those acts because the winners write the history and the winners do not prosecute themselves. BRS alleged offenses, whatever their factual merit, are simply what happens when you send elite soldiers to do violence on your behalf and then recoil in horror when they prove too good at it. The AuZOG regime does not want killers anymore. It wants compliant technicians who will fill out the proper forms, observe the proper optics, and lose gracefully so the think-tank class can keep publishing papers about "muh counter-insurgency best practices." A soldier who hesitates to kill the enemy because some future prosecutor might call it a crime is not a moral actor. He is a dead man. BRS and men like him represent the last remnant of a martial ethos that the post-1945 order has been trying to geld for eighty years. "War crimes" is the legalistic cope of a civilisation that has lost the will to win and therefore must punish those who still remember how. The real crime is not what happened in some Afghan compound in 2012. The real crime is the pretense that war can be made humane, and that the people who make it humane deserve medals while the people who merely win it deserve prison. Free BRS and Hail Australia

This is the state of our country today. Unfucking believable.

@BOptimist1973 @DemoniacoASX There were no civilians - they were Taliban insurgents

@DemoniacoASX The brutal truth is that many of the people reflexively defending BRS don't think war crimes should count if the civilians being murdered are Muslims.

What's truly embarrassing are the people who support Ben Roberts-Smith as if his actions were in fact those of a distinguished war hero Imputation 1: murdered an unarmed defenceless Afghan civilian by kicking him off a cliff Imp 4: Committed murder by pressuring a newly deployed inexperienced soldier to execute an elderly unarmed man in order to "blood the rookie". Imp 5: Commit murder by machine-gunning a man with a proesthetic leg, then celebrating his trophy kill by drinking out of his prosthetic leg He's now being charged for additional murders. Yeah, this sounds like an upstanding Aussie soldier. He's a piece of shit that needs to rot for life behind bars along side his tarnished Victoria cross medal. Maybe look up "defenceless" and "civilian" in his last trial before making shit up about how heroic he was for murdering these people: smh.com.au/interactive/hu…

@PaulMBrisbane @K0RS41R @PeterOB24979769 💯💯

@dick_mojo @K0RS41R @PeterOB24979769 Waste of time Dick. The man is too lazy to wade through the trial, and the outcome, let alone read all the stuff that preceded the trial and triggered the entire affair. I believe #BRS and the others should never have been investigated, as much of this is the result of #envy

I have never in the entire time I’ve been on Twitter blocked so many people. That tally has doubled in 24 hours. You either support the ADF and BRS or you can piss off.