TOKYO MASTER BANNER

MINISTRY OF TOKYO
US-ANGLO CAPITALISMEU-NATO IMPERIALISM
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]

*U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR*

Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
[info from Craig Murray video appearance, follows]  US-Anglo Alliance DELIBERATELY STOKING ANTI-RUSSIAN FEELING & RAMPING UP TENSION BETWEEN EASTERN EUROPE & RUSSIA.  British military/government feeding media PROPAGANDA.  Media choosing to PUBLISH government PROPAGANDA.  US naval aggression against Russia:  Baltic Sea — US naval aggression against China:  South China Sea.  Continued NATO pressure on Russia:  US missile systems moving into Eastern Europe.     [info from John Pilger interview follows]  War Hawk:  Hillary Clinton — embodiment of seamless aggressive American imperialist post-WWII system.  USA in frenzy of preparation for a conflict.  Greatest US-led build-up of forces since WWII gathered in Eastern Europe and in Baltic states.  US expansion & military preparation HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED IN THE WEST.  Since US paid for & controlled US coup, UKRAINE has become an American preserve and CIA Theme Park, on Russia's borderland, through which Germans invaded in the 1940s, costing 27 million Russian lives.  Imagine equivalent occurring on US borders in Canada or Mexico.  US military preparations against RUSSIA and against CHINA have NOT been reported by MEDIA.  US has sent guided missile ships to diputed zone in South China Sea.  DANGER OF US PRE-EMPTIVE NUCLEAR STRIKES.  China is on HIGH NUCLEAR ALERT.  US spy plane intercepted by Chinese fighter jets.  Public is primed to accept so-called 'aggressive' moves by China, when these are in fact defensive moves:  US 400 major bases encircling China; Okinawa has 32 American military installations; Japan has 130 American military bases in all.  WARNING PENTAGON MILITARY THINKING DOMINATES WASHINGTON. ⟴  

March 18, 2015

Sweden / Assange - Many Investigation Irregularities Pointed Out by Former Prosecutor Hillegren


GOOGLE TRANSLATION
SvD OPINION
http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/aklagaren-i-assange-fallet-bor-bytas-ut_4414639.svd
The prosecutor in the Assange case should be replaced

Marianne Ny has increasingly painted himself into a corner. Is it even possible to imagine that she, after completing interviews with Assange in London, concludes that the investigation should be closed down? writes former prosecutor Rolf Hillegren.
March 17, 2015 at 13:19, Updated: March 17, 2015 at 13:20 FOCUS | ASSANGE CASE
Rolf Hillegren

The prosecutor is solely responsible for the investigation is driven forward and his duty to be objective makes the task delicate.

Rolf Hillegren

On June 19, 2012 took Julian Assange refuge in Ecuador's embassy in London and on 16 August the same year he was granted political asylum in Ecuador. Since then, it should have been clear to most people except for the public prosecutor Marianne Ny Assange does not intend to voluntarily waive their asylum and go to Sweden where he since November 2010, detained in absentia for sexual offenses. The prosecutor has simply failed to act on the unique situation arisen with Assange's occupation of the embassy. She has consistently maintained that the only way to push the investigation forward is that Assange is available for questioning in Sweden.

The detention decision was appealed and the decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal in 2010. In conjunction with the new appeal in November 2014 the Court of Appeal found that Assange would remain in custody but claimed that the prosecutor's failure to consider alternative ways not consistent with the obligation to pursue the investigation forward. This was ignored by the prosecution despite stating that the issue is continuously considered.

Court of Appeal's decision was appealed to the Supreme Court and 10 March 2015 requested the HD to the Prosecutor-General's opinion on the matter and in particular with regard to investigations and proportionality.

Then the prosecutor has suddenly changed her mind and already March 13, 2015 decided that the hearing be held in London. By way of explanation, she stated that some of the crimes approaching limitation but adds that the investigation loss of quality of interrogations held in London. Apparently, she has overlooked that even protracted investigations have negative effects.

For me who has been a prosecutor and has years of experience of listening to dubious corrections and afterwards constructions appear Marianne Ny explanation for its change of position as unconvincing.

Her lack of action over the past few years can only be interpreted to mean that she harbored the prejudice that further questioning of Assange could only lead to his prosecution. But then, a prosecutor does not behave.  [Uncertain what he is getting at.  That prosecutor biased in the belief that questions would produce a prosecution?  That only works if you actually believe that any of this is a genuine prosecution.  In my view, that resurrected (originally dismissed investigation) and conspicuous Sweden delay, both serve to keep Assange (and WikiLeaks) 'on ice' while enabling the US authorities to mount their case and extradition of Assange to the US.]

As prosecutors must act completely unbiased manner and constantly be prepared for all eventualities. It is very common - particularly in sexual offense investigations - that the investigation is closed down on the grounds that crimes can not be substantiated. The possibility seems prosecutor to have completely disregarded in the Assange case. This is especially remarkable as proof mode is rather doubtful, as those who so wish can state when the previous study is available online.

If the prosecutor acted in the only way that was it reasonable, she should have questioned Assange as soon as possible in autumn 2012. The most likely scenario is that she then found reason to discontinue the examination on the grounds that crimes can not be substantiated. As it stands, there are many indications that Assange has so far spent over two and a half years at the embassy in vain.

The thing is that it was quite possible to interrogate him in London long before he went to the embassy. This is not good enough as some assert that "he must blame himself."

The prosecutor is solely responsible for the investigation is driven forward and his duty to be objective makes the task delicate. It is equally likely that an innocent being unfairly treated as a civil party, it will be if the investigation is not conducted expeditiously.  [Not sure what he's saying beyond prosecutor's duty to be objective & push investigation forward.  Bad translation.  Maybe he's saying failure to conduct timely investigation = innocent party unfairly treated?]

Should the prosecutor, on the other hand, after questioning Noting that the prosecution shall be instituted had the problem persisted but the prosecutor's conduct would have seemed less culpable. Entirely unobjectionable, it had not been. I content myself here with a reminder that the matter quickly closed down by an experienced prosecutor in 2010 and I am convinced that the majority of the country's senior prosecutors would have done the same.

As the years have gone by the prosecutor's prestige and passivity made her increasingly painted himself into a corner from which no honorable way back there. Is it even possible to imagine that she, after completing interviews with Assange in London, concludes that the investigation should be closed down? What criticism would she suffer? And what criticism would be directed against the Prosecution?

Given that the prosecutor so far demonstrated a lack of objectivity and pushed the investigation in violation of their duties and the usual practice is an imminent risk of a hearing in London will lead to her against his better judgment and reasons of prestige finds that the prosecution should be brought. Should this happen, there is still the possibility that HD highlights arrest in view of the proportionality principle and the realization that Assange did not get to go to Sweden voluntarily.

If the arrest on the other hand is not lifted learn Assange will remain at the embassy and the timing of the overall scandal of the judiciary will be further postponed.

Ideally, Marianne Ny himself realized that she should leave the investigation and that it should continue to be handled by someone who is completely outside her command of marketing. Realizes she's not there should Prosecutor-General acting and refer the case to a new prosecutor - preferably one with high integrity. It is also strange that a överklagare, which in this case after the decision to reopen the investigation itself chooses to pursue it further. It is not usual.  [överklagare could = 'over complainer' ... but I don't know what is meant by that.  Supervisor?  Maybe a supervisor.  So he's saying:  strange that a supervisor, after deciding to re-open the investigation, elects to pursue it further.  Hillegren says:  it is  NOT USUAL.]

No matter how the case will be terminated, it is evident that the case is already qualifies as legal scandal. Through its actions, the prosecution has produced a situation that is far more serious than the crimes for which Assange is suspected. And because the case attracted international attention, she has not only drawn ridicule Prosecution but also disgraced the country - a feat that few suspects usually succeed.

ROLF HILLEGREN
http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/aklagaren-i-assange-fallet-bor-bytas-ut_4414639.svd
---------------------------------------------------
COMMENT

Another exciting article.  This one Swedish.  Written by a former prosecutor, Rolf Hillegren.

Too scattered to focus on this right now.  Check out the highlights.  Wow!
Been directed to a proper translation of the article:

The prosecutor in the Assange case should be replaced

ASSANGE IN SWEDEN

http://assangeinswedenbook.com/2015/03/17/the-prosecutor-in-the-assange-case-should-be-replaced/

Best to check out the good translation referred to above - here.  
Mystery solved:  that word was 'Chief  Prosecutor' (not 'supervisor', as I figured).

Regardless, it is referring to Ny, who resurrected the dismissed 'allegations' and then proceeded to investigate the matter herself:
"It is also remarkable that a chief prosecutor, after reopening a case that’s already been closed, appoints herself as its lead investigator. This is not common." [AiS]
It is argued that such a prosecutor cannot be an 'impartial authority', and I can see how that would be a strong argument given this scenario.  However, this is no usual investigation.  The Assange investigation is a highly political matter.

The series of uncommon features pointed out in relation to this investigation:
  1. I was a prosecutor for years, and have years of experience listening to questionable corrections and constructions after the fact. And to me, Marianne Ny’s explanation for her change of position is unconvincing.
  2. Prosecutors must remain completely unbiased and be constantly prepared for the unexpected. It’s very common – particularly in sexual offence cases – that the investigation is closed on the grounds that the crimes cannot be substantiated. The prosecutor seems to have completely disregarded this possibility in the Assange case. This is especially remarkable, as the evidence is rather dubious, as anyone can see, with the preliminary investigation available online.
  3. If Marianne Ny had acted in the only reasonable way, she would have questioned Assange as soon as possible in autumn 2012.
  4. The thing is that it was quite possible to interrogate him in London long before he went to the embassy.
  5. The prosecutor is solely responsible for seeing the investigation moves forward ...
  6. It is also remarkable that a chief prosecutor, after reopening a case that’s already been closed, appoints herself as its lead investigator. This is not common.
[Source: Assange in Sweden]
demonstrates a highly unusual pattern to a Swedish legal investigation that has snared a high profile whistle-blower publisher target who just, ummm ... coincidentally, happens to be the target of a major US legal and intelligence investigation.
'Bias', 'incompetence', 'prestige' issues, and so on, is just a smoke-screen for the ugly truth.














VIDEO - Alabama 3 - Hello... I'm Johnny Cash (Live in Sydney) | Moshcam







Alabama 3 - Hello... I'm Johnny Cash 

(Live in Sydney) | Moshcam




SOURCE:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU1m07IrchE&index=5&list=PLa95GV8GKQ1gbxM0xor_SxZ8fuaEmZB_d




Enjoying listening to this at the moment ... over and over again.
If I like something, I like it A LOT ...  :)






Matt DeHart: ex US Air National Guard / Persecuted for his Connections to WikiLeaks & Anonymous



MATT DeHART

#freemattdehart
Legal defence fund:  https://fundrazr.com/campaigns/drgc5/ab/c40Ci5
TWITTER:  @FreeMattDehart
Lawyer:  Tor Ekeland
Lawyer Website: https://torekeland.com/
Lawyer e-mail:   tor*at*torekeland.com


COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
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. 
MATT DeHART - IV DRUGGED AGAINST HIS WILL BY FBI, TORTURED & DENIED ACCESS TO LAWYER BY FBI
February 11, 2015 by freemattdehart | Media
Denial of Refugee Protection For Matt DeHart

NEWS RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11TH, 2015

CANADIAN IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE BOARD, REFUGEE DIVISION’S DENIAL OF REFUGEE PROTECTION FOR MATT DEHART

On Monday, February 9th, Matt DeHart’s parents, Paul and Leann, received notice by mail from the Refugee Protection Division of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board that the family’s claim for Refugee Protection had been denied. The family fled the United States after Matt was interrogated and tortured during an FBI espionage investigation in which child pornography charges were hastily filed after Matt was detained at the Canadian border, an action which was triggered by an espionage alert.

The Refugee Protection Division determined that because they found no “credible and trustworthy evidence” to support the US government’s child pornography charges against Matt, the DeHarts weren’t excluded from refugee protection on the basis of those criminal charges. However, the determinative issue for the board was whether they considered the DeHarts would be afforded adequate protections by the United Sates.

Since the Board found the US to be a “democratic country with a system of checks and balances” and that Matt had the “ability to access and retain counsel for the purposes of defending himself” the Board ultimately ruled the DeHarts were not persons in need of protection at this time.

The DeHarts’ Refugee Protection process was frustrated by the fact that there was “no indictment or prosecution with regards to the National Security issue at the present time in the US.” But this has never been a case about child pornography; In this context the child porn charges appear to be nothing more than a pretext to discredit and silence a whistleblower who came across information implicating criminal activity against United States citizens by their own government.

As noted in the ruling, after FBI Agents detained Matt at the Canadian border, the “first notations in documents regarding his detention by the US authorities in August 2010 were made with respect to espionage” — not child pornography. During his detention by the FBI at this time, as also noted in the ruling, Matt was drugged against his will, tortured, and denied access to a lawyer. The criminal complaint and arrest warrant for Matt came later in the day after he was detained at the border on the espionage alert — a timeframe that speaks volumes given that the alleged crimes occurred in 2008 and, despite an investigation, no previous charges had been filed.

Matt brought two thumb drives of data implicating United States government agencies in criminal activity to Canada, which supported his claim for refugee protection. He gave them to the Canada Border Services Agency for use at his refugee hearing. The thumb drives were then retained by the CBSA, who refused to give Matt’s attorneys access to them. Therefore, a significant portion of evidence was not considered by those making the refugee decision

READ FURTHER AT SOURCE - here.

WHO IS MATT DEHART?

Matt DeHart is a 30 year old U.S. Citizen and former US airman with Top Secret clearance who the US government detained at the US Canadian border on an alleged “espionage matter.” While detained he was drugged via an I.V. without his consent and repeatedly interrogated about Anonymous, Wikileaks, and a file allegedly detailing an FBI investigation of post-9/11 domestic criminal activity by a US intelligence agency that appeared on a server he was an admin on. Later that day the government hastily drafted and filed a criminal complaint, in what looks like a smear campaign, charging Matt with the solicitation of child pornography based on two-year-old allegations it had previously investigated but never filed charges on.

Wiped

The child pornography investigation began after an irate mother reported Matt following a prank involving the toilet papering of a house. At the time of the incident, no child pornography accusations were made. No child pornography has been found on any of Matt’s devices, and he vehemently denies the allegations. Following his detention at the Canadian border, the FBI interrogated Matt in Maine without a lawyer for over a week, even after one was appointed for him at his federal detention hearing, and never questioned him about matters relating to the child pornography allegations.

Evidence III

Matt’s parents, Paul and Leann DeHart, are active in Christian ministry, and both had Top Secret clearance while they worked for the US Military as linguists analyzing signals intelligence. After the FBI interrogation and nearly three years of trying to work through the US legal system the whole family fled to Canada to seek asylum under the UN Convention Against Torture.

READ FURTHER AT SOURCE - here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT

How creepy is what's happened to Matt DeHart?
This shouldn't be happening in a proper democracy.









TWITTER CENSORSHIP - CABLEDRUM / WIKILEAKS




TWITTER CENSORSHIP








COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
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.







CABLEDRUM







“The WikiLeaks Supporters Forum” at wikileaks-forum.com website, the pseudo forum:












AUSTRALIA: AFP Access Journalists' Metadata / Australian Greens - STOP Data Retention











AUSTRALIA - POLICE STATE



COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
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.















See ADAM BRANDT video:  

#StopDataRetention -- Adam Bandt








Adam Brandt is deputy leader of the Australian Greens.

Why is there such a zeal to monitor what people do online?

Labor has joined with the Liberals to push through poorly thought out legislation that violates the principle of prevention of government intrusion (eg state/police intrude only on those suspected of having committed a crime - not intrude upon entire civilian population, as is the case with mass surveillance & retention of data). 

Brandt also pointed out that:

  • Criminals can switch to international web-based servers and won't get caught by data retention bill, but the bulk of the unsuspecting population will (so this legislation does not serve the purpose it purports to serve).

  • EUROPEAN UNION and NETHERLANDS have opted out of the data retention step, for good reason.

  • Opens the public up to potential CIVIL LAWSUITS if information subpoenaed  (eg media conglomerates / copyright)

--

HYPOCRITE LABOR JOINS LIBERALS TO RUSH THROUGH LEGISLATION

Brandt says the public is told that there will be protection for journalists in the Bill and Labor says they'll back up the Liberal government, but no amendment has been circulated in the chamber or made publicly available and the Labor Party is prepared to take the LNP government on faith; but Greens are not.  Why should parliament be required to vote on legislation without a chance to properly look through amendments:  this is complicated & giving people protections from these kinds of laws is complicated.
--

COMMENT
Government intent on giving journalists protections?  Got to be kidding.  The police state is already violating the liberty of journalists.
I'm shocked.

If journalists are subject to state violation and intimidation, what hope of freedom has the average person got?








HUMOUR - Dave Cameron's 'The Sun' Promo From Hell







Dave Cameron
'The Sun'
Promo
HELL




COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
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.

Got a few laughs out of the comments people made.  ;)
Do I detect hostility ahead of  an election?  LOL


















March 17, 2015

REUNIFICATION OF CRIMEA WITH RUSSIA




US Plays Double With Russia After Plans for Base in Crimea Failed - Experts
© Sputnik/ Vasiliy Batanov
Opinion
23:11 16.03.2015(updated 08:15 17.03.2015)

After NATO and the United States' hopes for a military base in Crimea failed due to the reunification of the peninsula with Russia, the West has been playing double to continue sanctioning Moscow, experts told Sputnik on Monday.

MOSCOW (Sputnik), Anastasia Levchenko — The reunification of Crimea with Russia, which took place after a referendum exactly one year ago, has been dubbed an "annexation" by Western states and has led to numerous rounds of sanctions imposed on Russia.

Misplaced US hopes

"NATO very much wanted to have a base in the Crimea, to have a base in Sevastopol, because that would have meant that Russia's positions in the Black Sea would have been greatly diminished. America has long had ambitions for the Crimea, and now that has been blocked indefinitely," Marcus Papadopoulos, British political expert and editor-in-chief of Politics First magazine, told Sputnik.

The United States considers the whole post-Soviet area as a geopolitical playground for rivalry with Russia, and the ultimate objective in this game is regime change in Moscow, according to Srdja Trifkovic, foreign affairs analyst and former advisor to two Serbian presidents.

High military ambitions and double play have always been features of US foreign policy. Thus, Trifkovic reminded that in 1990, then US Secretary of State James Baker gave guarantees to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on behalf of then US president George H.W. Bush that NATO would not advance to the East if the Soviet Union accepted Germany's reunification. However, NATO saw two expansions afterward, and the Baltic countries are now the scene of the deployment of heavy US weaponry.

"So, anyone who thinks that NATO will virtuously refrain from turning Sevastopol into a US navy base, should look into this record. And if they still maintain that NATO did not have such intentions, meaning the United States, they live in a dream-world, in a fairy-land," Trifkovic, who was the director of the Center for International Affairs at the Rockford Institute, said.

Sevastopol base in the Black Sea, which is of high strategic importance, has been under close US scrutiny for the last 20 years, according to Papadopoulos.

"Sevastopol is the most incredible navy base in the world. NATO's ambitions in Eastern Europe have taken quiet a knockback," Papadopoulos said.

Crimea as pressure tool: too comfortable to quit

The severe Western criticism that Russia has been subjected to since Crimean reunification is a clear example of doubletalk in politics, if one recalls the situation with the separation of Kosovo from Serbia.

The precedent of changing internationally recognized borders in post-1945 Europe was set under NATO and EU auspices in 1999 during the Kosovo war.

"Of course, those who did it claim that Kosovo did not constitute a precedent, but they can huff and puff, the precedent indeed was created, and Russia's right to re-incorporation of Crimea, which had been part of Russia since the time of Catherine the Great, was infinitely greater than the right of the Albanians of Kosovo to create their quasi-state, to which they never had any legal or moral claim," Trifkovic told Sputnik.

Papadopoulos also noted that the United States broke international laws and destroyed the mechanisms of the United Nations "when they tore Kosovo away from Serbia and made it an independent state."

The West does not consider Crimea's referendum as a free and democratic vote, though as many as 96 percent of Crimean voters chose to break away from Ukraine and join Russia during a referendum.

Having obtained a comfortable tool to pressurize Russia, the West will not be willing to let it go even if the Ukrainian crisis is finally resolved.

"Crimea to them is a very handy tool with which to beat Russia and to continue sanctioning Russia, even if the Ukrainian crisis were to be resolved peacefully… I think the recognition by the Western powers is out of the question for the simple reason that they want to keep in their arsenal the weapon with which they can continue sanctioning Russia, criticizing Russia and demonizing Putin whenever they wish to do so," Trifkovic explained.

Recalling the referendum

Remembering the day of the referendum, Trifkovic, who was an observer at the popular vote, spoke to some Crimeans to find out their preferences and feelings.

The observer remembers that people he spoke with after the vote claimed they accepted living as part of the Soviet Union, because they had no choice, and after Ukraine became independent – because they enjoyed considerable rights of autonomy.

"But with chaos in Kiev and illegal overtake of government, they felt no longer secure, and they certainly did not want to live under Banderist Ukraine, in which their identity and personal security would no longer be guaranteed," Trifkovic continued.

In a documentary titled "Crimea. Way Back Home" released on Sunday by Rossiya-1 TV Russia's President Vladimir Putin explained the motives behind Russian policy toward Crimea. He made it clear that Russia's actions in the Crimea were defensive and primarily aimed to protect ethnic Russians and the Russian speaking people in Crimea.

"For the Americans and Europeans, it is very unlikely that they will recognize Crimea as being a part of Russia, but the reality is that it is a part of Russia, and nothing will ever change that," the expert concluded.

Crimea became a Russian region following a referendum held March 16, 2014, in which over 96 percent of Crimean voters backed a move to leave Ukraine and rejoin Russia. Crimea's reunification with Russia followed the February 2014 coup in Ukraine.

http://sputniknews.com/analysis/20150316/1019588225.html

COMMENT

What a good article that was.  Really enjoyable read.