Russia does not have a functioning criminal justice system at all, in the sense of a trial mechanism aimed at determining innocence or guilt. Exactly as in Uzbekistan, the conviction rate in criminal trials is over 99%. If the prosecutors, who are inextricably an arm of the executive government, want to send you to jail, there is absolutely no judicial system to protect you. The judges are purely there for show.
When critics of Putin like Alexei Navalny are convicted, therefore, we have absolutely no reassurance that the motivation behind the prosecution or the assessment of guilt was genuine. Which is not to say that Navalny is innocent; I am in no position to judge. People are complex. I sacrificed my own pretty decent career to the cause of human rights, but in my personal and family life I was by no means the most moral of individuals. I see no reason for it to be impossible that all of Navalny’s excellent political work did not co-exist with a fatal weakness. But his criticisms of Putin made him a marked man, who the state was out to get, and the most probable explanation – especially as prosecutors had looked at the allegations before and decided not to proceed – is that he is suffering for his criticisms of the President rather than a genuine offence.
It fascinates me that the Western media view the previous decision by the prosecutors not to proceed as evidence the case is politically motivated against Navalny; but fail to draw the same conclusion from precisely the same circumstance in the Assange case.
David Ward MP has not been sent to jail. He has however had the Lib Dem whip removed, which under Clegg’s leadership perhaps he ought to consider an honour. It is rather a commonplace sentiment that it is a terribly sad thing, that their community having suffered dreadfully in the Holocaust, the European Jews involved in founding the state of Israel went on themselves to inflict terrible pain and devastation on the Palestinians in the Nakba. Both the Holocaust and the Nakba were horrific events of human suffering. For this not startling observation, David Ward is removed from the Liberal Democrats. He also stated that, with its ever increasing number of racially specific laws, its walls and racially restricted roads, Israel is becoming an apartheid state. That is so commonplace even Sky News’ security correspondent Sam Kiley said it a few months ago, without repercussion. In Russia you cannot say Putin is corrupt; in the UK you cannot say Israeli state policy is malign. Neither national state can claim to uphold freedom of speech. Meanwhile, of course, David Cameron announces plans to place filters on the internet access of all UK households.
In the United States, the House of Representatives failed by just 12 votes to make illegal the mass snooping by the NSA which was not widely publicised until Edward Snowden’s revelations. What Snowden said was so important that almost half the country’s legislators wished to act on his information. Yet the executive wish to pursue him and remove all his freedom for the rest of his life, as they are doing to Bradley Manning for Manning’s exposure of war crimes and extreme duplicity.
Around this complex of issues and the persons of Manning, Navalny, Snowden and Assange there is a kind of new ideological competition between the governments of Russia, the US and UK as to which is truly promoting the values of human freedom. The answer is none of them are. All these states are, largely in reaction to the liberating possibilities of the internet, promoting a concerted attack on freedom of speech and liberty of thought.
States are the enemy. We are the people.
You might like this better, Phil-
http://info.publicintelligence.net/bilderberg-members-2009-press-release.pdf
Looks unimpeachable to me, but maybe it’s a forgery?
Mandelson and Shell figure prominently too.
Google disables Press TV Youtube account
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/28/316016/google-disables-press-tv-youtube-account/
Mandelson was there this year, too, in
exactly the same influence-suckingan entirely different capacity. Ed Balls also outed as a globalist. Labour, eh? Gotta love them.This year’s list:
http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/bilderberg-2013-the-official-attendees-list/
Hmmm. Not completely disabled then?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKZwOSdoeeA
I’ll check back in a while and see if the report’s still there….
Flaming June
28 Jul, 2013 – 12:36 pm
“Are the Palestinians considered to be ‘citizens’? Will they get a vote?”
“Israeli cabinet backs referendum bill for peace process”
“The Israeli cabinet has approved a bill requiring any peace deal with the Palestinians to be put to a referendum.”
Mary, Palestinians living in Israel (“proper”) will get to vote.
No Palestinians in the West Bank will be able to vote. However all Jewish settlers in the west bank will have the vote.
That’s Israeli democracy for you.
Thanks Komodo.
I can’t check – my connection’s too wonky;
Komodo 29 Jul, 2013 – 2:03 pm
“You might like this better, Phil-http://info.publicintelligence.net/bilderberg-members-2009-press-release.pdf”
I wonder where these lists come from. Are there any attendance lists whose provenance is endorsed by someone we might trust?
Both the official lists I looked at lack all the military/spooks names that the unofficial lists have.
According to foi request doc from the us gov, the general secretary of the tuc attended in 1996: http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/International_security_affairs/other/824.pdf
Dreoilin at 12.39 pm.
Signed and spread.
Ok, the nsa director alexander is listed on the official bilderberg list for 2012:
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants2012.html
Are there any attendance lists whose provenance is endorsed by someone we might trust?
Depends who you trust, doesn’t it? And where you find the endorsement. F’rinstance if I found a authentic-looking mediaeval document outlining the early history of the Illuminati lizards on the David Icke site, with the annotation, “This document has been verified and is confirmed genuine by Jesus Christ”, my disbelief would be automatic. But there’s no particular reason to lie about Alexander’s attendance at Bilderberg – he seems like a probable attendee, indeed – and less still to forge document facsimiles, such as the one I linked, to encourage that belief. The balance of probability is that he was, IMO. That’s my null hypothesis. Got a better one? Tell us, with at least as much adduced evidence, please.
Personally, I’m much more worried that oleaginous crawling vermin like Mandelson are encouraged (it’s by invitation) to promote their personal agendas at these functions. Someone whose record is an unbroken catalogue of policies adopted and actions taken in his own interest alone is not someone I like to think is influencing global events in any way at all.
Press TV’s video article “Google blocks Press TV’s access to its YouTube account”….on YouTube….is still up. (re. mine at 2.13)
Someone 29 Jul, 2013 – 12:26 pm
“Father of Edward Snowden…denouncing “Orwellian surveillance programs””
He has moved from calling for his son to come home to campaigning the issues. Good man. Can’t have been easy.
To be honest I am not overly interested in bilderberg attendees. I certainly wasn’t suggesting alexander didn’t attend – I just happened to notice the source in the original link.
I’m sure the powerful have numerous ways to communicate informally and maybe bilderbrg is an anachronism that will fade as light shines upon it.
Navalny: thoughtful piece here:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a3c701c-f78b-11e2-87ec-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2aRrSTVFB
More than meets the eye?
Wired report the US is researching a technology, to be sold as a convenience, that could be described as crowd-sourcing intelligence gathering.
Wired seem to suggest the hope is that this system, developed by the government, will be widely and voluntarily adopted, led by the business community.
Phone calls immediately transcribed into text files: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/03/darpa-speech/
“I’m sure the powerful have numerous ways to communicate informally and maybe bilderbrg is an anachronism that will fade as light shines upon it.”
Bilderberg is more like a lightning conductor, in my opinion. There are others of these policy forming groups – the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, for example – of which we know less, and undoubtedly others of which we know nothing. The fact that the MSM is prepared to publicise the Bilderberg meetings is suspicious and probably means that it is fairly low level as these things go. There are no Rothschilds on the BIlderberg list, for example – they feel it’s sufficient to send their messenger boy Mandelson along.
Let the masses vent their spleen on Bilderberg while the real business takes place elsewhere.
Ray McGovern on the Edward Snowden case.
Puttin’ the Pressure on Putin
By Ray McGovern
The Obama administration continues to compound the diplomatic mess around former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. The latest blunder was announcing that the U.S. wouldn’t torture or execute Snowden, a reminder to the world how far Official Washington has strayed from civilized behavior, notes ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.
July 28, 2013
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article35681.htm
Putin needs the G20 until BRICS is fully operational, June. Plus he’s got his own domestic troubles with dissidence and he doesn’t need another rash of headaches over one person.
Holder and the other empty suits are busy with other headaches, as well. DOJ has spent 10,000 man hours chasing after the DOTcom guy in NZ, but I think a lot of folks see his assurances that no death penalty and no torture is like the old saying “fool me once…..” and the suit becomes like the Emperors new clothes. Congress is ratcheting up more anti-section 215 legislation and at this point, I think we can declare Snowden’s actions a victory from a public relations standpoint. For the first time since 9/11 a majority of Americans see civil liberties as most important than their so-called ‘security’ from terrorism.
@ Anon
“Doug Scorgie at 9:44 pm:
“Habbabkuk, if you want to start a discussion about political, social or human rights abuses in ANY country please do so. Perhaps there could meaningful intercourse on the subject.”
There would be little point in that, Doug. What would inevitably happen would be that a Murrayista would find some instance of Western support for that country’s regime in the past, or blame the situation on colonialism, and the finger of blame would be pointed straight back at the West!”
________________
Exactly my thought as well, Anon.
For those who rely on counterpoint for discussion, it’s deadly to proffer a premise which just might get shot down. Such risk is above their pay grade.
@ Passerby (and, tangentially, Komodo) – 12h45 :
“Komodo says:
Because these are our countries and their allies, and the abuses are conducted in our name. We object.
An excellent observation. Throughout this thread and others too, the hasbara vermin constantly point out the same feeble, weak, inane propositions; why don’t you talk about this abuse, instead of that?”
____________
Wow, one “pissant” and three “hasbara vermin”, not to mention signs of great emotion in the grammar and structure of your post at 12h45! My comment and Anon’s excellent follow-up comment obviously got under someone’s skin! 🙂
Anyway : nobody here is asking you or the other Eminences to talk about “this abuse” rather than “that abuse” – we just wonder why you don’t talk about both.
The only reason you don’t that occurs to me is that you think human rights are divisible – omportant for the West to maintain, not important for others.
That’s probably it, isn’t it.
@ Flaming June (13h20)
“BREAKING NEWS:Lady Thatcher’s funeral cost taxpayers £1.2 million, according to figures released by the government
I would have dig a hole here for a fiver and she could have laid alongside the remains of two dear cats and two dear dogs.”
________________
And I seem to recall that you, my dear, at the time, were waxing indignant that the funeral would cost £10 million.
Some of us tried to tell you, but you wouldn’t listen. It would be a lot less than that, and the Thatcher family would be paying for a lot of it, we told you.
Time for hat, eating of, methinks. Bon appétit!
(Likely response from F.J. : “oh, it wasn’t actually me who said that, I was just passing on info from the msm” 🙂 )
@ Mr Scorgie (14h18) :
““The Israeli cabinet has approved a bill requiring any peace deal with the Palestinians to be put to a referendum.”
Mary, Palestinians living in Israel (“proper”) will get to vote.
No Palestinians in the West Bank will be able to vote. However all Jewish settlers in the west bank will have the vote.
That’s Israeli democracy for you.”
__________________
Yes, indeed.
Have you perchance forgotten to mention that President Mahmoud Abbas has said that the Palestinians will also be asked to vote in their own referendum on any peace deal?
Which seems rather fair to me – both sides to any peace deal will have their say in referenda.
Jackpot again. Three lemons in a row.
There has just been a bad head-on railway accident in Switzerland in which 44 people have been injured.
http://news.sky.com/story/1121900/swiss-train-crash-44-passengers-injured
I always believed that Swiss trains were particularly safe but not so according to this article.
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_news/Swiss_rail_accidents_raise_safety_questions.html?cid=35219000
This really is bad news especially coming so soon after the coach accident in Italy and the train derailment in Spain in the last few days.
Israel getting its sticky fingers into India`s communications systems.
http://thehackernews.com/2013/07/israels-verint-systems-get-contract.html
Earlier today I wrote it needed less than 3,000 signatures to reach the target 100,000 for the Nobel Peace Prize for Bradley Manning. Now it needs less than 200.
http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=7612&track=MM&tag=MM
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)
29 Jul, 2013 – 7:33 am
@ Doug Scorgie (23h53 yesterday):
“I wonder how much she { ie, Theresa May }got paid for her story.”
“May I remind Doug of his request posted on the “getting back into the water” thread at 21h06 on 26 July, which read as follows :”
“When putting points of view forward your opinions must be supported; you should produce your evidence and explain why this evidence supports your point of view; if used, you should always quote sources and give references”.
“Off you go, laddy.”
Habbabkuk, how is saying, “I wonder how much she got paid for her story”, putting forward a point of view?
Your incompetence in logic and argument is breath-taking for all to see.
Jonathan Cook on Gibney’s film about Julian Assange.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/07/29/the-assassination-of-julian-assange/
@ Mr Scorgie
“Habbabkuk, how is saying, “I wonder how much she got paid for her story”, putting forward a point of view?”
___________________
Your point of view, which you express as fact, is that Theresa May “got paid”. Your only question was “how much”.
Evidence, sources, references to back up your point of view please, Mr Scorgie.