Wednesday, 24 May 2017

What Pisses Me Off About The Ariana Grande Terrorist Attack - Molyneux


Stefan Molyneux breaks down the necessary courage needed in the world to help prevent future attacks like the one at the Arianda Grande concert in Manchester, England. Stop changing your avatars, stop praying for X - start talking about real problems in your country and society. Your choice is clear: popularity or survival.



There is such a thing as sedition. Those that encourage the overthrow of the existing State, rather than simply reforming it so that the system works better, who want an oppressive rights-destroying theocracy (or other liberty wrecking system), are guilty of sedition and must be arrested. Those attacking the country from within, in the name of an outside power, are guilty of treason.

Laws must be enforced.

Some level of national unity is warranted.

Furthermore, corrupt ideologues (traitors), who promote violence and oppression, who are in favour of terrorist attacks on civilians, most likely don't give a F*CK about calls for peace or 'understanding'. Many of them will see this as a sign of weakness and an advantage they have over their soft 'enemies'.

Two things need to happen: A crackdown on traitors and a crackdown on the warmongers in Westminster and Washington that have fuelled wars in the Middle East leading to the rise of ISIS (which inspired the latest round of attackers in Europe). If not for Western support for regime change in the Middle East there would be no ISIS terrorist group.

ps. There are no ideal, non-confrontational solutions here. Assad must win in Syria. The Government in Iraq must defeat ISIS. The Saudis, Turks and other participating countries, including Western Countries, that support jihadists in the Middle East, must be opposed. A crackdown on extremists of all sorts must occur in the West. The other option is to accept people being blown apart, shot, or run over every few months, and endless war. We especially need to clean house with our own corrupt war-mongering Governments in the West whose intelligence agencies engage in false flag attacks from time to time to stir up trouble. An ugly reality needs to be addressed.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 24th, 2017.]

Trump & 55 Muslim-Majority States Sign Pact Pledging 34,000 Troops to Fight ISIS in Iraq & Syria


The exact membership of what the communique called the Middle East Strategic Alliance will be decided next year, but putative members have committed to assembling “a reserve force of 34,000 troops to support operations against terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria when needed.”

Currently the burden of anti-IS combat in both states is being shouldered mostly by local troops and Kurdish forces, with the international coalition providing air support, equipment and funding.

Despite a stated desire for inclusivity and tolerance – the declaration advocates “a rejection of any attempt to draw a link between terrorism and any religion, culture or race, affirming their determination to protect and promote a culture of tolerance, coexistence and constructive cooperation among different countries, religions and cultures” – an entire third of the resolution was aimed specifically against Iran, a Shia-majority state, and its “sectarian agendas.”

“The leaders confirmed their absolute rejection of the practices of the Iranian regime designed to destabilize the security and stability of the region and the world at large and for its continuing support for terrorism and extremism,” said the final communique, which also accused the Islamic Republic of running a “dangerous ballistic missiles program” and “continuing interference in the domestic affairs of other countries.”

While rich in specific epithets, the declaration broadly followed the agenda of Sunday’s Sunni-dominated Riyadh summit, and the speech delivered by Trump, which mentioned Iran a dozen times, and accused it of “spreading destruction and chaos across the region.”

‘Drive them out’

Trump’s speech called on the leaders of the Muslim world to join their efforts in fighting terrorism and extremist ideologies, and pledged unconditional support to the US’s old and new allies in the region.

“Our goal is a coalition of nations who share the aim of stamping out extremism and providing our children a hopeful future that does honor to God,” Trump said.
https://www.rt.com/news/389152-trump-muslim-leaders-terrorism/

This will be used as a pretext to occupy Syrian lands, to destroy their Government and be used as cover to ramp up defence spending.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 24th, 2017.]

KIM DOTCOM WILL INFORM WORLD THAT SETH RICH IS WIKILEAKS SOURCE: Kim Dotcom Worked With Seth Rich




Kim Dotcom will release more info Tuesday ... videos by H.A. Goodman.

Story thanks to Trump is Right.

Related:

THE YOUNG TURKS SETH RICH COVERAGE EXACTLY LIKE CNN, BUZZFEED: TYT Frightened of DNC Lawsuit


[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 24th, 2017.]

Hillary Lost Truth Meme



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 24th, 2017.]

All Power to the Banks! The Winners-Take-All Regime of Emmanuel Macron


ghost of the past was the real winner of the French presidential election. Emmanuel Macron won only because a majority felt they had to vote against the ghost of “fascism” allegedly embodied by his opponent, Marine Le Pen.  Whether out of panic or out of the need to feel respectable, the French voted two to one in favor of a man whose program most of them either ignored or disliked.  Now they are stuck with him for five years.

If people had voted on the issues, the majority would never have elected a man representing the trans-Atlantic elite totally committed to “globalization”, using whatever is left of the power of national governments to weaken them still further, turning over decision-making to “the markets” – that is, to international capital, managed by the major banks and financial institutions, notably those located in the United States, such as Goldman-Sachs.

The significance of this election is so widely misrepresented that clarification requires a fairly thorough explanation, not only of the Macron project, but also of what the (impossible) election of Marine Le Pen would have meant.

From a Two Party to a Single Party System

Despite the multiparty nature of French elections, for the past generation France has been essentially ruled by a two-party system, with government power alternating between the Socialist Party, roughly the equivalent of the U.S. Democratic Party, and a party inherited from the Gaullist tradition which has gone through various name changes before recently settling on calling itself Les Républicains (LR),in obvious imitation of the United States.  For decades, there has been nothing “socialist” about the Socialist Party and nothing Gaullist about The Republicans.  In reality, both have adopted neoliberal economic policies, or more precisely, they have followed European Union directives requiring member states to adopt neoliberal economic policies. Especially since the adoption of the common currency, the euro, a little over fifteen years ago, those economic policies have become tangibly harmful to France, hastening its deindustrialization, the ruin of its farmers and the growing indebtedness of the State to private banks.

This has had inevitable political repercussions. The simplest reaction has been widespread reaction against both parties for continuing to pursue the same unpopular policies. The most thoughtful reaction has been to start realizing that it is the European Union itself that imposes this unpopular economic conformism.

To quell growing criticism of the European Union, the well-oiled Macron machine, labeled “En Marche!” has exploited the popular reaction against both governing parties.  It has broken and absorbed large parts of both, in an obvious move to turn En Marche! into a single catch-all party loyal to Macron.

The destruction of the Socialist Party was easy. Since the “Socialist” government was so unpopular that it could not hope to win, it was easy to lure prominent members of that party to jump the sinking ship and rally to Macron, who had been economics minister in that unpopular government, but who was advertised by all the media as “new” and “anti-system”.

Weakening the Republicans was trickier. Thanks to the deep unpopularity of the outgoing Socialist government, the Republican candidate, François Fillon, looked like a shoo-in.  But despite his pro-business economic policies, Fillon still cared about preserving France, and favored an independent foreign policy including good relations with Russia.  It is unknown who dug into old records to come up with information about the allegedly fake jobs Fillon gave to his wife and children in past years, and how they were passed on the weekly Canard Enchainé to be revealed at a critical moment in the campaign. The uproar drowned out the issues. To an electorate already wary of “establishment politicians”, these revelations were fatal.  The impression that “politicians are all corrupt” played into the hands of Emmanuel Macron, too young to have done anything worse than make a few quick millions during his passage through the Rothschild Bank, and there’s nothing illegal about that.

In France, the presidential election is followed by parliamentary elections, which normally give a majority to the party of the newly elected president. But Macron had no party, so he is creating one for the occasion, made up of defectors from the major defeated parties as well as his own innovation, candidates from “civil society”, with no political experience, but loyal to him personally.  These “civil society” newcomers tend to be successful individuals, winners in the game of globalized competition, who will have no trouble voting for anti-labor measures. Macron is thus confirming Marine Le Pen’s longstanding assertion that the two main parties were really one big single party, whose rhetorical differences masked their political convergence.

The Macron victory demoralized Republicans. Weakening them further, Macron named a Republican, Edouard Philippe, as his Prime Minister, in a government with four Socialist and two Republican, alongside his own selections from “civil society”.

Transforming France

Macron won in part because older voters in particular were frightened by his opponents’ hints at leaving the European Union, which they have been indoctrinated to consider necessary to prevent renewal of Europe’s old wars.  But only the hysterical anti-fascist scare can explain why self-styled leftist “revolutionaries” such as François Ruffin, known for his successful anti-capitalist movie “Merci Patron”, could join the stampede to vote for Macron – promising to “oppose him later”. But how?

Later, after five years of Macron, opposition may be harder than ever.  In recent decades, as manufacturing moves to low wage countries, including EU members such as Poland and Rumania, France has lost 40% of its industry.  Loss of industry means loss of jobs and fewer workers. When industry is no longer essential, workers have lost their key power: striking to shut down industry. Currently the desperate workers in a failing auto-works factory in central France are threatening to blow it up unless the government takes measures to save their jobs.  But violence is powerless when it has no price tag.

Emmanuel Macron has said that he wants to spend only a short time in political life, before getting back to business. He has a mission, and he is in a hurry. If he gains an absolute majority in the June parliamentary elections, he has a free hand to govern for five years. He means to use this period not to “reform” the country, as his predecessors put it, but to “transform” France into a different sort of country. If he has his way, in five years France will no longer be a sovereign nation, but a reliable region in a federalized European Union, following a rigorous economic policy made in Germany by bankers and a bellicose foreign policy made in Washington by neocons.

As usual, the newly elected French president’s first move was to rush to Berlin to assert loyalty to the increasingly lopsided “Franco-German partnership”. He was most warmly welcomed by Chancellor Angela Merkel, thanks to his clear determination to force through the austerity measures demanded by the Frankfurt budget masters. Macron hopes that his fiscal obedience will be rewarded by German consent to a European investment fund for stimulating economic growth, but this implies a degree of federalism that the pfennig-pinching Germans show little sign of accepting.

First of all, he has promised to complete the dismantling of the French labor code, which offers various protections to workers. This should save money for employers and the government. For Macron, the ruin of French industry and French farming seem to be welcome steps toward an economy of individual initiative, symbolized by startups.

The Macron program amounts to a profound ideological transformation of the French ideal of égalité, equality, from a horizontal concept, meaning equal benefits for all, to the vertical ideal of “equality of opportunity”, meaning the theoretical chance of every individual to rise above the others. This is an ideal easily accepted in the United States with its longstanding myth of the self-made man. The French have traditionally been logical enough to understand that everyone can’t rise above the others.

Horizontal equality in France has primarily meant institutional redistribution of wealth via universal access to benefits such as health care, pensions, communications and transportation facilities, allocations for families raising children, unemployment insurance, free education at all levels. These are the benefits that are under threat from the European Union in various ways.  One way is the imposition of “competition” rules that impose privatization and favor foreign takeovers that transform public services into profit-seekers. Another is the imposition of public budget restrictions, along with the obligation of the State to seek private loans, increasing its debt, and the loss of tax revenue that all end up up making the State too poor to continue providing such services.

Very few French people would want to give up such horizontal equality for the privilege of hoping to become a billionaire.

Macron is sufficiently Americanized, or, to be more precise, globalized, to have declared that “there is no such thing as French culture”. From this viewpoint, France is just a place open to diverse cultures, as well as to immigrants and of course foreign capital.  He has clearly signaled his rejection of French independence in the foreign policy field.  Unlike his leading rivals, who all called for improved relations with Russia, Macron echoes the Russophobic line of the neocons. He broke tradition on his inauguration by riding down the Champs-Elysées in a military vehicle. A change of tone is indicated by his cabinet nominations. The title of the new foreign minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, who served as defense minister in the Hollande government, is “Minister of Europe and of Foreign Affairs”, clearly giving Europe preference in the matter. Sylvie Goulard, an ardent Europeist who has remarked that “she does not feel French”, has been named Minister of Armies and Minister of Defense. Clearly national defense is an afterthought, when the main idea is to deploy the armed forces in various joint Western interventions.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/all-power-to-the-banks-the-winners-take-all-regime-of-emmanuel-macron/5591208

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 24th, 2017.]

CDC Forced to Release Documents Showing they Knew Vaccine Preservative Causes Autism


PhD Scientist and Biochemist Reveals Hidden CDC Documents Showing Thimerosal In Vaccines Increase Neurologic Disorders
The CDC has been shunning the correlations between thimerosal and neurological disorders for a very long time. Although the FDA gave a two year deadline to remove the mercury based preservative from vaccines after the neurotoxin was banned in 1999, it still remains to this day in 60 percent of flu vaccines. A vaccine industry watchdog has now obtained CDC documents that show statistically significant risks of autism associated with the vaccine preservative, something the CDC denies even when confronted with their own data
 
For nearly ten years, Brian Hooker has been requesting documents that are kept under tight wraps by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). His more than 100 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests have resulted in copious evidence that the vaccine preservative Thimerosal, which is still used in the flu shot that is administered to pregnant women and infants, can cause autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.
 
Dr. Hooker, a PhD scientist, worked with two members of Congress to craft the letter to the CDC that recently resulted in his obtaining long-awaited data from the CDC, the significance of which is historic. According to Hooker, the data on over 400,000 infants born between 1991 and 1997, which was analyzed by CDC epidemiologist Thomas Verstraeten, MD, “proves unequivocally that in 2000, CDC officials were informed internally of the very high risk of autism, non-organic sleep disorder and speech disorder associated with Thimerosal exposure.”
 
Factually, thimerosal is a mercury-containing compound that is a known human carcinogen, mutagen, teratogen and immune-system disruptor at levels below 1 part-per-million, and a compound to which some humans can have an anaphylactic shock reaction. It is also a recognized reproductive and fetal toxin with no established toxicologically safe level of exposure for humans.
 
In November, 1997, the U.S. Congress passed the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act, requiring the study of mercury content in FDA-approved products. The review disclosed the hitherto-unrecognized levels of ethylmercury in vaccines.
 
In July 1999, public-health officials announced that thimerosal would be phased out of vaccines. The CDC, American Academy of Pediatrics, and FDA insisted that the measure was purely precautionary. They requested of all vaccine manufacturers to eliminate mercury from vaccines.
 
The requests were denied by vaccine manufacturers and continued every year thereafter.
 
The FDA does not require ingredients that comprise less than 1 percent of a product to be divulged on the label, so a lot more products may have thimerosal and consumers will never know.
https://healingoracle.ch/2017/04/30/cdc-forced-to-release-documents-showing-they-knew-vaccine-preservative-causes-autism/

There are real concerns about big corporations selling faulty products to consumers. The call is not for zero vaccines, but SAFE ones. Stories such as this should be of interest to the public. The problem is having a mature discussion about the topic without being labelled an 'anti-vaxxer', or some such thing. 

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 24th, 2017.]

Climate Scientists Are (Quite Literally) Flat Earthers - Tony Heller




[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 24th, 2017.]

Tuesday, 23 May 2017

Here’s Why Saudi Arabia and Israel are Allies in All But Name


Those who claim that Israel is opposed to Donald Trump’s now openly warm relations with Saudi Arabia are missing the actual point. On the surface, many assume that Israel and Saudi Arabia have poor relations. Neither country has diplomatic relations with one another, one is a self-styled Jewish state while the other is a Wahhabi Sunni monarchy.

But they both have the same regional goals, they both have the same enemies and both are intellectual anachronisms in a 20th century that has seen the fall of multiple monarchies, the end of traditional European colonialism and the fall of segregated regimes in Africa (Apartheid South Africa and UDI Rhodesia for example).

Israel and Saudi Arabia have always been enemies of secular, Arab nationalist states and federations. Whether an Arab state is Nasserist, Ba’athist, socialist, Marxist-Leninist or in the case of Gaddafi’s Libya a practitioner of the post-Nassierist Third Political Theory: Israel and Saudi Arabia have sought to and in large part have succeeded, with western help, at destroy such states.

Unlike Israel’s Apartheid military state and Saudi Arabia’s human rights free monarchy, the aforementioned Arab styles of government are worthy of the word modern. These are countries which had progressive mixed economies, had secular governments and societies, had full constitutional rights for religious and ethnic minorities, they championed women’s rights and engaged in mass literacy programmes and infrastructural projects. In the case of the Syrian Arab Republic, such things still apply.

Such things still have wide appeal not just in the Arab world but universally. The very charter of the UN subtly implies that such goals are the way forward.

Secular Arab governments have therefore not fallen due to their lack of popularity but they have fallen due to political and military aggression from Israel, monetary blackmail and terrorism funded from and by Saudi Arabia and a combination of all of the above from the United States and her European allies. Useful idiots in the west who claim that groups like the obscurantist and terroristic Muslim Brotherhood represent majoritarian public opinion in secular Arab states are simply worse than useful idiots: they are lying, dangerous idiots.

This is why Syria is a country that Israel and Saudi Arabia are both interested in destroying. Both countries have indeed invested time and money into destroying Syria and thus far they have not been successful.

Syria is the last secular Arab Ba’athist state in the world. Unlike in Israel, minorities have full constitutional rights and unlike in Saudi Arabia, all religions are tolerated. In Syria, women can act, speak and dress as they wish.

Syria’s independence has in the past thwarted Israel’s ambition to annex Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and additional parts of Syria itself (Israel still occupies Syria’s Golan Heights). Syria has also been a true ally of the oppressed Palestinians living under Israeli occupation.

Likewise, Syria has hurt Saudi Arabia and fellow backward Gulf state Qatar’s ambitions to expand their petro-empires. Qatar remains desirous to construct a pipeline running through Syria, something Qatar wants done on its terms and its terms alone.

Furthermore, since Saudi Arabia has little to offer the world in terms of culture, Saudi attempts to control and colonise their more educated and worldly Levantine Arabs is done through a combination of bribery and through the use of Salafist terrorist proxies such as ISIS and al-Qaeda.

There is also a psychological element to the mutual warfare which Saudi Arabia and Israel have waged on secular states like Syria.

So long as Syria exists, Saudi Arabia cannot say that there is no alternative to its backward style of  government in the Arab world. Of course, others like Iraq, Lebanon and Egypt are secular states (Iraq less so now than at any time since independence), but these states have been wholly compromised through war and in the case of Egypt through political malaise.

Syria remains strongly independent and refuses to surrender its values.

Both countries also seek to destroy Iran. Iran unlike Saudi Arabia and Israel, practices an ethical foreign policy. Far from wanting to export its Islamic Revolution, Iran has been a staunch ally to secular Syria and has been at the forefront of the fight against Salafist terrorism like ISIS and al-Qaeda.

Iran has also taken a principle stance on Palestine, whilst most Arab states with the exception of Syria, have long ago given up on the Palestinian cause.

Israel and Saudi Arabia have superficial differences in foreign policy, but their main goals are exactly the same. Both seek to retard the progress of the Arab world and to taint Islam as something it is not.

Saudi Arabia and Israel both want non-Muslims to think of Islam as something representing bombs, female enslavement, physical mutilation and barbarity. Syria has shown the world that real Islam looks a lot like Christianity and frankly a lot more like Christianity than atheistic Europe does in 2017.

Saudi Arabia and Israel are allies in the material and psychological war against secular, modern Arab countries. It is a war which the United States has been fighting on behalf of Riyadh and Tel Aviv for decades.
http://theduran.com/heres-why-saudi-arabia-and-israel-are-allies-in-all-but-name/

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 23rd, 2017.]

Trump/Kushner Sell 110 Billion in Weapons to Saudi Arabia - Styx


Not great.



Related:

Trump Team Targets Iran (Global Research 13th Jan, 2017)

Wall Street Sends Kushner & Trump To Saudi Arabia - Brother Nathanael


[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 23rd, 2017.]

Austrian Town Refuses to Accept Asylum Seekers After 15yo Girl 'Brutally Raped'


The mayor of Tulln in Lower Austria has announced the town will stop accepting refugees and asylum seekers. The ban comes after a sexual assault on a teenage girl, allegedly carried out by refugees.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 23rd, 2017.]

A Smart Move: Romphim Marketing "Adult" Rompers to Generations of Whining Babies - Styx




Rompers are baby cloths.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 23rd, 2017.]

This Week in Stupid (21/05/2017) - Sargon of Akkad


Your feelings are not an argument



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 23rd, 2017.]

The Weaponization of "Science" - Corbett Report


"Science" is being turned into a political weapon. Not the scientific method, but the reified "science" of scientism, exemplified by the politically-motivated March For Science, the politically-biased peer review process, the politically-charged infotainment from political hacks like Bill Nye, and the politically-appointed scientific regulators who always put their corporate interests and political worldview ahead of scientific accuracy.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 23rd, 2017.]

The Fake News 97% Consensus - Tony Heller




[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 23rd, 2017.]

Monday, 22 May 2017

Battle For Raqqah: Preconditions, Opposing Forces, Forecast - South Front




[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 22nd, 2017.]

Getting Assange: The Untold Story - John Pilger


Julian Assange has been vindicated because the Swedish case against him was corrupt. The prosecutor, Marianne Ny, obstructed justice and should be prosecuted. Her obsession with Assange not only embarrassed her colleagues and the judiciary but exposed the Swedish state’s collusion with the United States in its crimes of war and “rendition”.

Had Assange not sought refuge in the Ecuadorean embassy in London, he would have been on his way to the kind of American torture pit Chelsea Manning had to endure.

This prospect was obscured by the grim farce played out in Sweden.
“It’s a laughing stock,” said James Catlin, one of Assange’s Australian lawyers. “It is as if they make it up as they go along”.
It may have seemed that way, but there was always serious purpose. In 2008, a secret Pentagon document prepared by the “Cyber Counterintelligence Assessments Branch” foretold a detailed plan to discredit WikiLeaks and smear Assange personally.

The “mission” was to destroy the “trust” that was WikiLeaks’ “centre of gravity”. This would be achieved with threats of “exposure [and] criminal prosecution”. Silencing and criminalising such an unpredictable source of truth-telling was the aim.

Perhaps this was understandable. WikiLeaks has exposed the way America dominates much of human affairs, including its epic crimes, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq: the wholesale, often homicidal killing of civilians and the contempt for sovereignty and international law.

These disclosures are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama, a professor of constitutional law, lauded whistle blowers as “part of a healthy democracy [and they] must be protected from reprisal”.

In 2012, the Obama campaign boasted on its website that Obama had prosecuted more whistle blowers in his first term than all other US presidents combined. Before Chelsea Manning had even received a trial, Obama had publicly pronounced her guilty.

Few serious observers doubt that should the US get their hands on Assange, a similar fate awaits him. According to documents released by Edward Snowden, he is on a “Manhunt target list”. Threats of his kidnapping and assassination became almost political and media currency in the US following then Vice-President Joe Biden‘s preposterous slur that the WikiLeaks founder was a “cyber-terrorist”.

Hillary Clinton, the destroyer of Libya and, as WikiLeaks revealed last year, the secret supporter and personal beneficiary of forces underwriting ISIS, proposed her own expedient solution: “Can’t we just drone this guy.”

According to Australian diplomatic cables, Washington’s bid to get Assange is “unprecedented in scale and nature”. In Alexandria, Virginia, a secret grand jury has sought for almost seven years to contrive a crime for which Assange can be prosecuted. This is not easy.

The First Amendment protects publishers, journalists and whistle blowers, whether it is the editor of the New York Times or the editor of WikiLeaks. The very notion of free speech is described as America’s “ founding virtue” or, as Thomas Jefferson called it, “our currency”.

Faced with this hurdle, the US Justice Department has contrived charges of “espionage”, “conspiracy to commit espionage”, “conversion” (theft of government property), “computer fraud and abuse” (computer hacking) and general “conspiracy”. The favoured Espionage Act, which was meant to deter pacifists and conscientious objectors during World War One, has provisions for life imprisonment and the death penalty.

Assange’s ability to defend himself in such a Kafkaesque world has been severely limited by the US declaring his case a state secret. In 2015, a federal court in Washington blocked the release of all information about the “national security” investigation against WikiLeaks, because it was “active and ongoing” and would harm the “pending prosecution” of Assange. The judge, Barbara J. Rothstein, said it was necessary to show “appropriate deference to the executive in matters of national security”. This is a kangaroo court.

For Assange, his trial has been trial by media. On August 20, 2010, when the Swedish police opened a “rape investigation”, they coordinated it, unlawfully, with the Stockholm tabloids. The front pages said Assange had been accused of the “rape of two women”. The word “rape” can have a very different legal meaning in Sweden than in Britain; a pernicious false reality became the news that went round the world.

Less than 24 hours later, the Stockholm Chief Prosecutor, Eva Finne, took over the investigation. She wasted no time in cancelling the arrest warrant, saying,
“I don’t believe there is any reason to suspect that he has committed rape.” Four days later, she dismissed the rape investigation altogether, saying, “There is no suspicion of any crime whatsoever.”
Enter Claes Borgstrom, a highly contentious figure in the Social Democratic Party then standing as a candidate in Sweden’s imminent general election. Within days of the chief prosecutor’s dismissal of the case, Borgstrom, a lawyer, announced to the media that he was representing the two women and had sought a different prosecutor in Gothenberg. This was Marianne Ny, whom Borgstrom knew well, personally and politically.

On 30 August, Assange attended a police station in Stockholm voluntarily and answered the questions put to him. He understood that was the end of the matter. Two days later, Ny announced she was re-opening the case.

At a press conference, Borgstrom was asked by a Swedish reporter why the case was proceeding when it had already been dismissed. The reporter cited one of the women as saying she had not been raped. He replied, “Ah, but she is not a lawyer.”

On the day that Marianne Ny reactivated the case, the head of Sweden’s military intelligence service – which has the acronym MUST — publicly denounced WikiLeaks in an article entitled “WikiLeaks [is] a threat to our soldiers [under US command in Afghanistan]”.

Both the Swedish prime minister and foreign minister attacked Assange, who had been charged with no crime. Assange was warned that the Swedish intelligence service, SAPO, had been told by its US counterparts that US-Sweden intelligence-sharing arrangements would be “cut off” if Sweden sheltered him.

For five weeks, Assange waited in Sweden for the renewed “rape investigation” to take its course. The Guardian was then on the brink of publishing the Iraq “War Logs”, based on WikiLeaks’ disclosures, which Assange was to oversee in London.

Finally, he was allowed him to leave. As soon as he had left, Marianne Ny issued a European Arrest Warrant and an Interpol “red alert” normally used for terrorists and dangerous criminals.

Assange attended a police station in London, was duly arrested and spent ten days in Wandsworth Prison, in solitary confinement. Released on £340,000 bail, he was electronically tagged, required to report to police daily and placed under virtual house arrest while his case began its long journey to the Supreme Court.

He still had not been charged with any offence. His lawyers repeated his offer to be questioned in London, by video or personally, pointing out that Marianne Ny had given him permission to leave Sweden. They suggested a special facility at Scotland Yard commonly used by the Swedish and other European authorities for that purpose. She refused.

For almost seven years, while Sweden has questioned forty-four people in the UK in connection with police investigations, Ny refused to question Assange and so advance her case.

Writing in the Swedish press, a former Swedish prosecutor, Rolf Hillegren, accused Ny of losing all impartiality. He described her personal investment in the case as “abnormal” and demanded she be replaced.
Assange asked the Swedish authorities for a guarantee that he would not be “rendered” to the US if he was extradited to Sweden. This was refused. In December 2010, The Independent revealed that the two governments had discussed his onward extradition to the US.

Contrary to its reputation as a bastion of liberal enlightenment, Sweden has drawn so close to Washington that it has allowed secret CIA “renditions” – including the illegal deportation of refugees. The rendition and subsequent torture of two Egyptian political refugees in 2001 was condemned by the UN Committee against Torture, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch; the complicity and duplicity of the Swedish state are documented in successful civil litigation and in WikiLeaks cables.
-------------------------
The Metropolitan Police say they still intend to arrest Assange for bail infringement should he leave the embassy. What then? A few months in prison while the US delivers its extradition request to the British courts?

If the British Government allows this to happen it will, in the eyes of the world, be shamed comprehensively and historically as an accessory to the crime of a war waged by rampant power against justice and freedom, and all of us.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/getting-assange-the-untold-story/5591118

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 22nd, 2017.]

China Threatened War if Philippines Drills for Oil Near Disputed Islands, Duterte Seems Amused - Styx


He (Duterte) claims he'd go to war anyways if it were his decision.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 22nd, 2017.]

The Lawyer Bringing The Lawsuit Against The DNC Speaks Out - Redacted Tonight


In this latest episode of Redacted Tonight VIP, Lee Camp talks to Jared Beck, the attorney leading the lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee, and its former leader Debbie Wasserman Schultz, for rigging the 2016 Democratic Primary for Hillary Clinton. Beck goes into detail with Lee about how Bernie Sanders and his supporters got screwed by an organization that, according to court hearings, felt no obligation to be transparent or impartial during the election process. While one would think such a blatant disrespect for the democratic process would get more play in the mainstream media, it's falling on deaf ears. In the second half, Lee Camp gets into the importance of the release of prisoner Chelsea Manning, who was originally sentenced to 35 years for revealing classified information about inhumane behavior in the U.S. military, including the slaughter of innocent civilians. Manning isn't the only one who suffered the worst for revealing the ugly truth about our country. Lee digs into other examples of how our government has made a habit of punishing people whose only mission was to reveal abuses in our society.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 22nd, 2017.]

SHOCKING! Democrats Argue Their RIGHT to Keep Rigging Elections!


Documents recently emerged showing that the Democratic National Committee opposed Bernie Sanders and actively worked against his campaign. Jared Beck joins Stefan Molyneux to discuss the class action lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz for supporting Hillary Clinton’s campaign instead of remaining neutral.

Jared Beck is a practicing lawyer with Beck & Lee Trial Lawyers and also founded the progressive grassroots Super PAC JamPAC. Beck is one of the attorneys involved in a class action lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee.



[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 22nd, 2017.]

DNC LAWSUIT MEDIA BLACKOUT EXPLAINED: Even Progressive Media Frightened of Standing Against DNC


Kim Dotcom KNEW Seth Rich and Kim Dotcom KNOWS he’s a WikiLeaks source and will meet with legal team, provide a statement THIS TUESDAY.



Story thanks to Trump is Right.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 22nd, 2017.]