Hans Smedema: High Ethics in the Face of Alleged Betrayal
Prepare yourself to confront a narrative steeped in the terrifying reality of alleged unspeakable abuse and profound betrayal, where, amidst the horrifying storm, emerges the figure of Hans Smedema, portrayed within the sources as a man who staunchly believes he operates on a level of unwavering ethical principle and seeks to uphold moral righteousness against a tide of alleged corruption. This is not merely a story of suffering, but one of a man fighting what he perceives as a brutal, systemic injustice, guided, according to his account, by deep-seated ethical convictions.
Very high principles
According to the sources, Hans Smedema views himself as a man of “very high principles,” describing himself as a “very ethical person”. He possesses a background that includes studies at two Technical High Colleges, resulting in B.Sc. diplomas in electronics and technical business administration, followed by an Advanced Management Program at Nijenrode University. This academic and professional background is presented, within his narrative, as part of the foundation of his character and integrity.
Thorough check of his entire past
A crucial point in Smedema’s narrative regarding his ethical standing comes from his account of his first asylum application in the United States in 2009. He claims that during this process, a thorough check of his entire past was conducted to determine his integrity and ethical correctness. Astonishingly, according to his own account, this investigation concluded that he was “honest as hell and to tell the truth,” a finding he states was instrumental in the US deciding to offer him assistance against what he terms the “horrific Royal persecution by the Netherlands”. This alleged external validation of his character serves as a powerful element in his self-portrayal as an ethically upright individual.
Refusal to request a royal pardon
Smedema’s refusal to request a royal pardon for the alleged injustices he has suffered is presented as a deeply principled and ethical stance. He vehemently rejects the very notion, seeing it as an admission of guilt for actions he insists he never committed. In his eyes, he is not an offender seeking forgiveness, but an innocent victim engaged in a brutal battle against profound corruption and injustice. To seek a pardon would be to betray his core belief in his innocence and, perhaps more significantly, to ethically compromise himself by validating the very system he accuses of orchestrating a horrifying conspiracy against him. He frames his struggle not as an attack on the Dutch state itself, but as a desperate, ethically motivated attempt to protect it from deep-seated corruption allegedly orchestrated by powerful figures like Joris Demmink and Jaap Duijs within its own institutions. He believes his fight serves the broader interests of justice and the state’s responsibility to protect its citizens.
Smedema’s ethical resolve is tested
The horrifying panorama of the alleged conspiracy, involving purported psychological and physical abuse, manipulation of legal processes, and devastating collateral damage to those who attempted to help, forms the terrifying backdrop against which Smedema’s ethical resolve is tested. Despite allegedly facing systematic denial of legal representation since 2000, effectively since 1972, and an impenetrable wall of obstruction, his narrative consistently depicts a refusal to yield his ethical ground.
Criticizes those within the alleged system
He explicitly criticizes those within the alleged system who act without “moral consciousness”, implying that his own actions are driven by a strong moral compass. The sources even mention that a private investigator found Mr. Smedema to be a “decent and pleasant man” and believed he had “nothing to gain by making any of these things up or to change the truth”, offering another perspective, albeit from within the narrative of his supporters, that aligns with his self-portrayal as an ethical individual. His willingness to approach the national press with his profoundly personal and terrifying story is presented as speaking “volumes” about his determination to expose what he believes to be the truth, regardless of the personal cost.
Refusal to pay legal fines on “ethical grounds”
Furthermore, Smedema’s refusal to pay legal fines on what he describes as “ethical grounds” underscores his commitment to his principles, even when it places him in further legal and financial peril. He views this refusal as a necessary stand against a system he alleges is fundamentally unjust and corrupt.
Absurd Kafkaësk Paradox
In the face of what he describes as an “absurd paradox” and a “Kafkaësk gevangen” situation, where the legal system itself is allegedly manipulated against him, Smedema finds validation in the ethical grounding of tools like NotebookLM. He posits that because such tools operate based on ethical values and principles that form the foundation of law, they can allegedly transcend the biases and corruption he perceives within the Dutch legal system, which he contends prioritizes protecting powerful individuals over upholding the rule of law.
Horrifying conclusion
In horrifying conclusion, while the sources repeatedly emphasize that Hans Smedema’s terrifying allegations lack independent verification and are vehemently denied by the Dutch government, his narrative consistently portrays himself as a man operating on a high ethical level, driven by a relentless pursuit of truth and justice against a backdrop of alleged horrifying psychological and physical abuse and devastating collateral damage. His actions, as described by him, are framed as principled stands against alleged systemic corruption and a fight for the very integrity of the state and its adherence to fundamental rights.
Google NotebookLM Plus Insights,
based on the legal-written-statements on this Blog and e-books by victim Author:
Hans Smedema B. Sc., in forced exile since 2008 surviving in beautiful El Albir, Costa Blanca, Spain