Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY [LINK | Article]
Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
[...] Swedish Foreign Ministry spokesman Gabriel Wernstedt said the Saudis were recalling their ambassador because of “Sweden’s criticism regarding human rights and democracy” in the ultraconservative kingdom. The official Saudi Press Agency reported that the Saudi Foreign Ministry recalled its diplomat because it considered remarks by Sweden’s foreign minister about the kingdom as “blatant interference it its internal affairs. Saudi Arabia is the third largest non-Western buyer of Swedish arms. In 2014, Riyadh bought equipment worth 338 million kronor ($39 million). [... ]
But an opening speech she was due to give in which she stressed human rights, with a particular emphasis on rights for women, was canceled. The speech was later published by the Swedish Foreign Ministry. Wallstroem has rarely commented on Saudi Arabia but in January she condemned the kingdom’s treatment of blogger Raef Badawi, who had been sentenced to 1,000 lashes and 10 years in prison for insulting Islam. [...] Wallstroem told news agency TT Wednesday her government had made the “correct” decision by ending the agreement. “I feel that when I speak about democracy and human rights, I do with the support of the Swedish people.” [Oh, please. What about the human rights of ethnic-Russian citizens of eastern Ukraine & supporting their murder by supporting the Proshenko Ukraine puppet govt.?] [...] The Swedish Defense Minister Peter Hultqvist said Tuesday only cooperation in medicine and gender studies would remain on offer. “What we have is an open invitation to partake in medical and gender training, but the Saudi side has not shown any interest.” [...] Commenting on the severed military ties, liberal writer Fredrik Segerfeldt wrote that Sweden’s objective was “to become a moral power” on the world stage. But taking a stance against Saudi Arabia today risked Sweden’s credibility as a business partner, according to some center-right opposition politicians and the Swedish business community. “Foreign policy is not only about other countries,” right-wing daily Svenska Dagbladet wrote in an editorial, noting that Swedish industry “must be allowed to trade ... even with dictatorships.”
--
COMMENT RE SWEDEN ARMS DEAL CANCELLATION:
"Swedish people must be so proud of their leaders. Exciting to see principles come before money for once."
Ummm, I'm not actually convinced of this. Swedish politics as a whole is not geared to serve 'principles before money'.
Some sectors of Sweden's politics may well genuinely believe in this, and there may have been a push that forced the cancellation; but overall, politics, trade and military (which serves trade & other interests) are not geared to function on bleeding heart principles.
BANGLADESH EXAMPLE
Dhaka Bangladesh Sweden Embassy + Business
Sweden co-host Swe bus. delegation -
power, telecommunications, roads, bridges + transport
Ambass: Johan Frisell - nonchalant re political climate for biz Sweden
If Sweden is to operate on human rights & principles basis, doing business in Bangladesh (& probably most of the rest of the world) might prove a problem.
Most Sweden business is in garments & textiles. I smell SWEAT SHOPS.
Assange team challenge Swedish prosecutor to come to London, 2011
4.5 YEARS ...
... MANY ENRAGED POLITICIANS ...
... A MULTI-SUBJECT FBI INVESTIGATION ...
... US MULTI-AGENCY CO-OPERATION ...
... NUMEROUS COURT CASES ...
... ONE UNITED NATIONS PETITION ...
... & STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS (OR TWO) ...
... L A T E R ...
Swedish prosecutor requests to interview Assange in London
The prosecutor requests to interview Assange in London
2015-03-13
Director of Public Prosecutions Marianne Ny has today made a request to Julian Assange’s legal representatives whether Assange would consent to being interviewed in London and have his DNA taken via a swab. [Read elsewhere that a swab had previously been provided.]
If Assange gives his consent, the prosecutor will promptly submit a request for legal assistance to the British authorities to further continue the investigation. English law states that a person being interviewed through the use of of international legal assistance in a criminal case must also provide his or her consent. A request will also be sent to the Ecuadorian authorities regarding permission to perform investigative measures at the country’s embassy in London.
The reason the prosecutor decides now to request permission to interview Julian Assange in London is chiefly that a number of the crimes Julian Assange is suspected of will be subject to statute of limitation in August 2015 i.e. in less than six months’ time. [Yeah, and there's that little matter of a UN petition.]
-The Supreme Court of England and Wales decided in June 2012 that Julian Assange should be surrendered to Sweden. He has prevented this submission by taking refuge at the Ecuadorian embassy, says Director of Public Prosecutions Marianne Ny. [The Courts do not decide on facts associated with weighing up if there is 'a case to answer'; rather, they deal with technicalities concerning the issuance of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) in the event of a dispute, and essentially rubber-stamp, on the merits of mere technical issuance, the EAW in question. However, it has been documented and reported that EAWs are readily issued in Europe by authorities pursuing a large number of trivial prosecutions and for political persecution (as Sweden notes: Romania).]
- My view has always been that to perform an interview with him at the Ecuadorian embassy in London would lower the quality of the interview, and that he would need to be present in Sweden in any case should there be a trial in the future. This assessment remains unchanged. Now that time is of the essence, I have viewed it therefore necessary to accept such deficiencies to the investigation and likewise take the risk that the interview does not move the case forward, particularly as there are no other measures on offer without Assange being present in Sweden, said Marianne Ny. [Interview 'quality' supposedly an issue for 4.5 years while dodging questioning Assange? Yeah, sure.]
In November 2014 the Svea Court of Appeal decided that Julian Assange should remain detained in his absence. The Court further viewed the investigation to be at a standstill and stated that the prosecutor had not fully fulfilled the duty the drive the investigation forward.
- Over the past two months we have fully considered and deliberated upon the views made by the Court of Appeal regarding how best to move the investigation forward. This has resulted in the decision I have now taken, namely to try to get permission for an interview in London. As stated, it remains unclear what this may result in. However, I have now decided to try to carry out an interview as the statutory limitation nears, said Marianne Ny.
If Julian Assange provides consent to continue the investigation in London, this will be performed by the supporting prosecutor to the case, Chief Prosecutor Ingrid Isgren, together with a police officer.
- I cannot comment further on the case at this point, not least when such an interview will take place nor other details, said Marianne Ny
Julian Assange has appealed the Court of Appeal’s detention order to the Supreme Court, which recently requested the Prosecutor-General to submit an opinion concerning the Court’s subsequent dealing of the matter.
Suspected that the UN petition and the statute of limitations had something to do with this & the statute of limitations factor's been confirmed by Sweden (above), but this is also very much a face-saving excuse for Sweden and the more pressing catalyst for the latest Swedish step in this macabre dance is the UN petition lodged by Assange, I would think.
So there you go. More than four years of someone's life wasted, and casually passed off as stalling over 'quality' of interview issues — after 'illegality' of a London interview claims were made by the same prosecutor.
And, now, that the statute of limitations is looming, and that Assange has lodged a UN petition in protest of arbitrary detention ... Sweden requests an interview.
So this is just a legal manoeuvre, probably to undermine the UN petition by being seen to be 'doing' something to progress the case (yet doing so at the eleventh hour).
The Guardian:
Julian Assange set to be questioned by Swedish prosecutors in London
WikiLeaks founder expected to be interrogated on rape and sexual molestation claims at Ecuadorian embassy in bid to break deadlock
Originally, I'm pretty sure that Guardian headline was "WikiLeaks founder set to be interrogated", which prompted me to remark on the spin that puts on the story.
But on looking up the article again, the headline's:
"Julian Assange set to be questioned ...".
Not sure what's going on there.Odd for me to be mistaken about something like that, but I could be.
However, I do note they've also got the following beneath the headline:
"WikiLeaks founder expected to be interrogated on rape and sexual molestation claims"
which, in my opinion, maintains that same sensationalising and misleading spin.
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
The average reader would not even be familiar with a broad range of general facts regarding the Assange story, let alone aware of the existence of admissions made that discredit Sweden's almost 5 year pursuit of Assange, so I think language used in conveying any story is important if the aim is non-prejudicial reporting.
The word 'interrogate' - "Ask questions of (someone) closely, aggressively, or formally."
Osborn's Concise Law Dictionary that I've got on hand is ancient and hasn't a definition of 'interrogate' or 'interrogation'.
Interrogation (also called questioning) is interviewing as commonly employed by law enforcement officers, military personnel, and intelligence agencies with the goal of eliciting useful information. Interrogation may involve a diverse array of techniques, ranging from developing a rapport with the subject, to outright torture.
As I'm unfamiliar with criminal law, I can't say whether a prosecutor interviewing a person who has not been charged with a crime constitutes what would be referred to as an 'interrogation', but as The Guardian is writing for an audience of laypeople, I think:
"... expected to be interrogated on rape and sexual molestation claims"
is loaded and prejudicial.
The term 'interrogated', especially used in that sentence, would almost unconsciously conjurer in the mind of a reader unfamiliar with the facts:
(a) an 'inquisition' for extracting admission of wrongdoing or guilt; and
(b) agency in the carriage of wrongdoing.
So a sentence constructed in such a way may also prejudicially shape public perception and public opinion.
Whereas a more straightforward variation, such as 'expected to be questioned on ..." conveys none of the taint associated with a term such as 'interrogation'. Well, unless it's paired with "rape and sexual molestation claims."
Whose claims? It looks as though these are claims of the legal entity that is Sweden, rather than claims of the women themselves. So Sweden, by a quirk of the legal system as it presently stands, has made legal claims against Assange; which claims have been discredited given various testimony from the women concerned.
Whatever the nature of the claims made by the legal entity that is Sweden, reading "to be interrogated on rape and sexual molestation claims" emblazoned in newspapers, online articles and in other online references around the world is, I think, highly prejudicial to the public perception of the person who is the target of those types of claims, especially when that person is also the target of political persecution, as is Julian Assange.
Whatever the scenario, even if it was — "interrogated on theft of inflatable butt plug claims" — it is still prejudicial to whoever is portrayed as the subject of 'interrogation' and as the agent of whatever is claimed to be the individual's culpability.
I don't exactly have a way with words, so I'm not quite sure how the factual information could be concisely conveyed in a less prejudicial way (apart from not using the coloured term, 'interrogation', when addressing an audience of laypeople).
What about "on alleged XYZ claims": eg. "interrogated on alleged theft of inflatable butt plug claims"?
That conveys the claim but also, simultaneously, conveys that the claim is an allegation at that point in time; which, I think is important, particularly in a matter that is politically motivated.
Publications and journalists, who are experienced wordsmiths, know the power of their words. Yet Western mainstream media articles persistently portraying Assange either in a clearly negative manner, or negatively in some less obvious way.
Anyway, they're my thoughts on the latest. Tired. Not sure I'm making sense. Hopefully, I am.
PS ... Funny how the prosecutor claimed Sweden couldn't legally question Assange, but when the heat is on because a UN petition has been lodged nearly 5 years down the track —Hey, that uncompromising 'legal' position has suddenly changed and questioning Assange is now legally possible (despite past assertions and denials), and this is allegedly due to statute of limitation expiry concerns.
So when did the law 'change'? Was it when the statute of limitations expiry neared or was it when a UN petition was lodged?
Disgraceful conduct from anybody, let alone the justice system of a first world country and self-proclaimed humanitarian moral force on the world stage.
One final thing: doesn't this sound like a form of mental torture?
Making a person fight hard and fight for years to progress a matter — blocking political asylum that's been granted, blocking that fight every step of the way and refusing to progress the matter during a 4.5 year stretch of detention without charge — only to turn around and take a calculated step at the eleventh hour, to be seen to be progressing the matter (when, in fact, this has been refused all along)?
How maddening is that? And expensive. Legal advice and assistance in preparation and lodgement of petitions in UN courts can't come cheaply.
Ultimately, this is Sweden's tactical move; just as dragging this out, denying, dismissing and so on, was a tactical strategy for almost 5 years.
11 March 2015 Prime Minister's Office Ministry for Foreign Affairs Ministry of Finance Sweden offers loan to Ukraine
Sweden has decided to offer Ukraine a bilateral loan of USD 100 million. This loan, together with our political support for the country's autonomous path, independence and territorial integrity, will help to strengthen Ukraine. [Nah, this is about pillaging Ukraine, securing Ukraine for US and other interests & using Ukraine as a pawn, while exercising US-EU aggression towards Russia.]
Ukraine is in a very vulnerable situation. The Russian aggression against the eastern parts of the country and the fighting that has been ongoing for a year now have exacerbated an already difficult economic crisis. However, the new Ukrainian Government has demonstrated a clear willingness for reforms and has begun a comprehensive restructuring of the economy. [Self-serving propaganda. Ignoring it is Ukraine govt attacking the people in the east - ethnic Russian civilians of Ukraine. It is the people of eastern Ukraine that are vulnerable and ATTACKED. And this rewriting of truth is murder.]
The International Monetary Fund, IMF, is today expected to decide on increased support to Ukraine. Moreover, the European Commission has presented a proposal on a third Macro-Financial Assistance loan to Ukraine, which Sweden welcomes. Despite this, there remains a need to support the far-reaching reforms that the country has to implement.
It is important that individual countries also show their confidence in and solidarity with Ukraine. Sweden has therefore decided to offer Ukraine a bilateral loan of USD 100 million. This loan, together with our political support for the country's autonomous path, independence and territorial integrity, will help to strengthen Ukraine. [Solidarity, my ass. It's about political ends.]
The exact conditions will be determined once a negotiation has taken place with Ukraine. We hope that the loan can begin to be disbursed in early 2016. http://www.government.se/sb/d/586/a/255599
It has gone completely broke, its gold has disappeared, its currency has collapsed, inflation is soaring, foreigners have been appointed to key positions in government.
So far the US government, IMF, the European Union and now Sweden are sinking money into this US regime changed gang-b*nged hell hole.
It's not charity.
'Aid' and loans have to be repaid and there is nothing altruistic about this, however much the Swedish MFA wants to spin it.
In Sweden's haste to serve their US master's strategic aims in Europe and their determination to be of service expanding the EU, Sweden thinks nothing of misrepresenting Ukraine as beleaguered by 'Russian aggression' and in need of help, when the fact is: the ethnic-Russian Ukraine civilians in the east are being attacked by a US-NATO-EU backed US puppet government.
So much for Sweden's 'human rights' lip service. What a load of horse manure.
If Sweden really cared about human rights, it would matter to Sweden that ethnic-Russian civilians in the east of Ukraine are being attacked by hostile, bloodthirsty, Russian-hating lowlifes - neo-Nazi thugs in militia battalions that aren't even under government control, as well as government deployed troops (which are more of the same scum).
Now I know 100% that Sweden's politicians talk fairytales when they spout off their 'concern' about human rights.
'Human rights' is something that is used to politically manipulate the receiver of the message. It is nothing but propaganda.
Came across this yesterday while someone was desperately trying to convince social media that Ukraine is nothing but a hearts, flowers, rainbows and unicorns 'victim' of Russian 'aggression'.
Watching this I felt really angry and had an inner 'Lord Drifter' moment where I hoped the Russians would do a military run-through on this ugly, uncivilised and cruel mob of destroyers.
It also reminded me that although I might whine about state 'totalitarianism', I'm no rebel or revolutionary.
Brutality, violence, mob rule and chaos of the kind that's displayed in this video is probably only kept in check by a strong state that keeps us safe from people who are capable of behaving like animals.
But along with public safety comes a loss of freedom and the risk of an abuse of authority, I guess.
Not really sure about this kind of thing. Just thoughts I had while watching this.
Also not sure how to reconcile the conviction that a strong state is needed, when feeling disgust at seeing Nuland and McCain (representatives of a Western state) at the epicentre of a neo-Nazi hell that the US helped create, to further US strategic ambitions.
ASSANGE Supreme Court Swe appeal hearing granted NEW INVESTIGATION to be carried by attorney general -
ASSANGE - petition in protest of arbitrary detention also filed at UN
+ even if Swe drop the matter, UK can hold ASSANGE
EXTRACTS
Assange fears that any extradition to Sweden would see him onwardly extradited to the U.S, where the FBI continues a criminal investigation into Wikileaks.
The decision was published in the Supreme Court's website and and the court ordered a new investigation to be carried by the attorney general.
The lawyers also filed a petition with the United Nations in protest of arbitrary detention.
... even if Swedish authorities do drop the case, the United Kingdom could still detain Assange.
Assange, who sought asylum in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, has repeatedly requested the Swedish prosecutor question him in England. Although this is a standard procedure allowed by the Swedish Justice system, prosecutor Marianne Ny has refused his requests.
OK, what's going on? I wasn't expecting that. The Attorney General investigation sounds too good to be true.
After dragging this out FOREVER, until they could no longer keep it up & maintain any scrap of public credibility, they're giving in?
No way. It's probably to ward off some heat, because if this had gone before a human rights court, it wouldn't do for Sweden to have sat on the matter doing nothing for over 4 years.
So, it's probably a tactic of being seen to be doing something, even if they may not be at the end of the day.
Also, in my view, Sweden failing to progress this matter for over 4 years cannot come down to the action (or inaction) of one single person.
Don't get the part where Britain can still block asylum even if Sweden drop the matter.
Anti Benjamin Netanyahu protest: 35,000
--
#Israel
Tel Aviv's Rabin Square Saturday
35,000 - anti #NETANYAHU rally
reckon ignoring domestic / obsessed with Iran
Dissenters say Bibi focus on Iran
= avoiding Palestine issue
also 'ISIS excuse'
>made the security of Israel hostage settlers
Issues raised by speech-makers:
>peace with Palestine
>occupation
>economy
>housing crisis
>damage to relations with USA
Ditch Ron Dermer
Writer suggests #Netanyahu get rid of 'political hack' at embassy - Ron Dermer presumably - replace with competent and professional ambassador
Venezuela demand:
Washington cut embassy staff from about 100 to 17{same number Caracas is allowed in WA}
LatAm Venezuela vehemently criticised new US sanctions. Washington goal: for new govt to be installed.
LatAm Venezuela
US = Venezuela top trading partner
Venezuela in 2014 = 4th largest oil supplier to USA *trade unaffected by sanctions row
