Those suddenly concerned about the European Arrest Warrant in Westminster last night were notably silent when it was used against Julian Assange, with a case that had more holes in it than a condom torn by Anna Ardin, the noted CIA agent.
Not only was the evidence against Assange not tested, the Supreme Court accepted that a Swedish prosecutor with a screaming political agenda was a “judicial authority”, despite her being neither a judge nor a court. That extraordinary ruling was itself dependent on two even more extraordinary false premises, directly stated in Lord Phillip’s judgement.
1) That the French term “autorites judiciaires” has a “wider meaning” than the English term “judicial authorities”. That is simply untrue.
2) That the French language version of the treaty is “authentic and original” and to be preferred to the English version. That is absolutely untrue – the different language versions are explicitly equal. That is a fundamental rule of EU (and UN)treaties, both of which I have personal experience of negotiating.
The bottom line being, if the Establishment wants to get you, it will, irrespective of the letter of the law.
“He was murdered because the uniformed thugs that make up the Met lost control. Nothing more. The only conspiracy was the attempted cover up.”
_______________________________________
For a start, it was subsequently proven that de Menezes was not wearing a large overcoat as the police had falsely claimed; he was wearing a t-shirt, lightweight jeans and a short, light denim jacket. He had no bag with him and nor was he carrying anything else that could have been mistaken for a bomb or explosive device.
In fact the whole story about him fleeing and the police giving chase into Stockwell tube station was a complete fabrication. Jean actually sauntered into the station, used his ‘Oyster’ pre-paid travel card in the normal fashion and headed for a train bound for his destination of North West London where he happened to be working at the time.
Having disembarked from the escalator at the appropriate platform, a train was just arriving and so he jogged leisurely along the platform and boarded the train carriage. He sat down at a convenient seat and took out the newspaper he had with him, to read on the journey. At this point an undercover, plain-clothed police officer standing in the tube carriage identified Jean to nearby (similarly plain-clothed) officers at which point they raced onto the tube-train carriage, dragged him out of his seat, held him down and shot him as described previously, killing him instantly.
Incidentally, the bullets used were known as ‘dum dum’ bullets which are particularly vicious, causing maximum possible damage to human flesh and bone. These bullets are ‘illegal’ in international warfare so it really does beg the question as to why the Metropolitan police were issued with them – or indeed was this a ‘special’ case that warranted their use?
________________________________
Those officers, or killers, were under orders to make sure De Menezes died, and they made sure alright.
The Met operatives who murdered Jean Charles are thugs and cowards, very much like the IDF.
There should have been a verdict of ‘unlawful killing’ but the coroner decided otherwise. Another travesty of British justice.
Open verdict at Menezes inquest
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7764882.stm
Craig wrote:
The Disgraceful Sir Michael Wright, A Grovelling Tool of the Police State http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2008/12/the_disgraceful/
Still alive by the looks of it, unlike Jean Charles. I would have thought an 82year old (he was born in 1926 and the inquest took place in 2008) was unsuitable for the task.
http://www.debretts.com/people-of-today/profile/6719/(John)-Michael-WRIGHT
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sir_Michael_Wright_AB.JPG
Peacewisher
“what have I fallen for?”
__________________
Republicofscotland’s conspiracy theory, given in his post at 14h29.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have you and others considered the possibility that RoS is an agent provocateur, whose posts are little hooks designed to reel you in and land you on the bank? Be careful….
@Kempe
‘He was murdered because the uniformed thugs that make up the Met lost control. Nothing more. The only conspiracy was the attempted cover up.’
‘Fraid not dude, the order came from high up, higher in fact than Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick
One of the Special Branch officers who took surveillance notes that day admitted deleting arguably the most significant note of all in which Cressida Dick said Jean Charles de M should be allowed to get on to the Tube because he was not ‘carrying anything’. She was over-ruled by an unidentified male officer. So who was that? This mystery figure, seemingly more powerful than Cressida Dick, was essentially the guy who ordered the assassination.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3192792/Jean-Charles-de-Menezes-inquest-officer-admits-changing-evidence.html
Julian Assange, the controversial co-founder of WikiLeaks opened his new talk show, ‘The World Tomorrow’, at the Russian Television (RT) with an interview with the leader of Lebanese Islamic Resistance, Hizbullah, Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah. Watch video below.
Hizbullah is the only Arab Army or militia group which has defeated the Jewish army twice – in 2000 and 2006. Hizbullah is country’s largest social organization, military resistance and political party. Hizbullah has two cabinet ministers in Lebanese government. Hizbullah is classified as a terrorist group by Israel, United States and Canada only.
It’s Sheikh Nasrallah’s first interview to an international media since Israel’s 34-day invasion of Lebanon in Summer 2006. Nasrallah answered Assange’s questions regarding Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Middle East and religion – during 30-minutes interview through a translator. Nasrallah also made some jokes to lighten-up the conversation.
Read the interview below.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/04/19/assange-interviews-hizbullah-leader-at-rt/
“Incidentally, the bullets used were known as ‘dum dum’ bullets which are particularly vicious, causing maximum possible damage to human flesh and bone. These bullets are ‘illegal’ in international warfare so it really does beg the question as to why the Metropolitan police were issued with them – or indeed was this a ‘special’ case that warranted their use?”
No, hollow nosed ammunition is standard for police firearms officers. They are illegal for the armed forces but not the police. The argument is that the police never shoot to wound, if lethal force wasn’t necessary then firearms wouldn’t be being used and that a hollow nosed bullet hits something and stops. A normal bullet can quite easily go right through somebody and kill an innocent bystander.
Who do you think you are kiddin Habbabkum?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfQwHb1pWPE
The first explosion was initially reported as a power surge, confusion reigned as usual. There was no power surge and if the NWO Lizards wanted to cause one they’d surely have the expertise and not have to outsource it to some jobbing electrician whose knowledge of LUL’s high voltage DC systems was likely to have been nil. It’s a double red-herring which makes zero sense but of course that’s never been a barrier to truthers.
RoS has carefully copied out the pathetic tissue of lies the Met tried to use to cover their arses. It does not prove de Menezes was deliberately targeted.
I completely agree with the tenor of this article.
The Swedish authorities are persecuting Julian Assange for political reasons on behalf of the United States, and the Brits are accessories to that persecution. There is no possible legal justification for either the Swedish or the British actions. And you are right that the British establishment are being brazen about their contempt for justice and international law, which they often are when push comes to shove. Britain has a duty to protect the victims of political persecution, not to assist with that persecution.
But on the pedantry, at a lower and relatively irrelevant legal level…
…although you are obviously right to say that it’s absolute bullshit to assert that “the French language version of the treaty is ‘authentic and original’ and to be preferred to the English version” (many treaties have versions in more than one language which are all explicitly held to be equivalent)
…it is nonetheless true that the French term ‘autorités judiciaires‘ does have a “wider meaning” in the French judicial system than the English term ‘judicial authorities’ has in any of the British judicial systems. And there’s no reason why the English term “judicial authority”, when it appears in an international treaty which has been signed and ratified in equally authoritative versions in different languages, should be applied exclusively in the sense in which that term is used in the British systems.
Consider the role of the French “public prosecutor”. Such a personage is an “autorité judiciaire”. But there is no equivalent role in any of the British judicial systems, and so when interpreting the meaning of the term ‘judicial authority’ used in the English version of the treaty, it is legitimate to give it a wider meaning than it has in the British systems and to consider how the French term is used in France.
Which is actually irrelevant against the background of the persecution of Julian Assange and the accessory role played by the British ‘executive’ and ‘judicial’ authorites, so you will have to excuse my pedantry!
“For all Castro’s faults is not Guantanamo Bay the biggest crime on the island?”
No, not even by the most febrile stretch of the imagination
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Cuba
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
Compare and contrast.
The usual garbage from our Holodomor and Holocaust denier and former Labour Party infiltrator I’m afraid. No wonder he was unable to express support for Solidarity and other free trade unions in the Soviet bloc.
Hizbullah is classified as a terrorist group by Israel, United States and Canada only.
Not true
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah
Also not the long series of terrorist attacks attributed to them – I’m sure Assange gave Nasrallah a hard time in return for taking the Putting shilling!
A further note…
we shouldn’t allow how we conceive of bits of the system to be determined by how that system presents itself or how its scribes describe it…just as one doesn’t judge a person by how they perceive themselves.
I’ve long considered the conceptualisation of the state as divided into “executive”, “legislative” and “judiciary” to be a absolute load of old bourgeois cock.
Go away Montesquieu, you and the “separation of power” aren’t wanted!
That division has just the same flavour to my nostrils as the repetition by Norman St John Stevas or Harold Macmillan of the fawning rubbish spewed out by 19th-century royal favourites about how the role of the monarch includes “to be consulted, to encourage and to warn”.
Save us from such rubbish pseudo-thought!
The legislative and the judiciary are both parts of the executive.
The state is executive; it is an executive arm of big business. Rapacious, plutocratic big business.
That’s the reality we’re in. Bourgeois democracy isn’t going to help us.
Judges are bureaucrats. You might as well call them civil servants, for that’s what they are.
That can be a breakthrough realisation for some people.
If anybody doesn’t get it, please try getting it and then you may get a different take on how the stock ‘critical’ call in Britain is so often for an ‘inquiry’ to be set up…and lo and behold it’s always under Lord Muck…
…and the establishment goes about considersing what the establishment has done…
…and everyone suspends their disbelief, and chatters about how His Lordship should do this or shouldn’t do that…
…and the fawning press produce the same old cover-up euphemisms (“cash for questions”, “MPs’ expenses”, and so on) to hide the essence and centrality of the corruption.
And curiously, while ministers and even a Commons speaker can fall, the fucking judges and the fucking civil service go on as if forever, with their prestige as if continuously enhanced, with the poor old chattering classes left without the intellectual grappling irons required to get a decent grip…
…and then the next ‘issue’ comes along…is it the previous Iraq invasion?…is it the Murdoch media?…
…and it all happens all over again…
Oh your Lordship!
RoS is only suggesting a theory. It doesn’t fit the facts but he’s certainly no worse than the mm in that respect, and probably a lot more truthful. Why was Charles deM under surveillance, Habby… and as he WAS under surveillance how could he have been mistaken for a suicide bomber? Can’t have it both ways… if he was under surveillance they would have known enough about him to know ne was a Brazilian who worked on the underground… unless the surveillance was based on a “tip off”, in which case any solitarily living Londoner could have been the victim that day.
“The first explosion was initially reported as a power surge, confusion reigned as usual. There was no power surge and if the NWO Lizards wanted to cause one they’d surely have the expertise and not have to outsource it to some jobbing electrician whose knowledge of LUL’s high voltage DC systems was likely to have been nil. It’s a double red-herring which makes zero sense but of course that’s never been a barrier to truthers.
RoS has carefully copied out the pathetic tissue of lies the Met tried to use to cover their arses. It does not prove de Menezes was deliberately targeted.”
Watch the film Kempe before shooting your gob. It’s only two hours and twenty minutes long. What’s wrong with you?
RD, have the spooks got you out of their special drawer to praise Guantanamo again. I recall a long session of your support for that US gulag of criminality. You are the pits: a two-faced, double-dealing, self-congratulatory, duplicitous, sock-puppet of the worst kind. Defending the agent who bared all to ensnare a good man. Shame on you, if you ever get to know the meaning of the word shame.
But after that roasting perhaps you might like to say whether you would have asked the the right-wing CIA-funded fascist parties of Cuba what were their plans for Guantanamo Bay. It is the logical question ommitted by Ardin in her thesis. Get it? Or have you never written a thesis?
@Peacewisher
The accepted known facts about the Menendez shooting are damning. They screwed up big time and killed an innocent member of the public they are meant to protect then lied to the media to try and wriggle out of it. That is known, accepted and provable.
To mind giving it the Ike treatment is to the advantage of the authorities not the people. We have enough to damn them anyway why spoil that?
RD, even though I am very sceptical of some of the stuff in Wikipedia, including references to my own work on Robert Bage, much of it is good research. However on the few occasions when I have ever tried to change anything, I have not been allowed by those who have the power. So I never try. There are only so many hours in a day.
But I did read your first link, which is more than you ever seem to do with mine. Most of it was historical, western historical, until it came to the present day and we got this.
“The report found that “[s]cores of political prisoners arrested under Fidel continue to languish in prison, and Raúl has used draconian laws and sham trials to incarcerate scores more who have dared to exercise their fundamental rights.”
The word “scores” did not amuse me. I do not like to think of anyone wrongfully imprisoned. But was that fifteen, twenty, thirty … but anyway less than a hundred. There have been near 800 detainees in Guantanamo Bay. Get a grip! Your street-cred on this blog is already well below zero.
N
Aah, there’s the nub. While it is undoubtedly true that there is no British equivalent of the French public prosecutor, and there is no doubt that the French public prosecutor is an authority of some kind, are you quite sure that a French public prosecutor is indeed correctly described as an autorite judiciaire, or is that term reserved to courts and judges and not prosecutors? We need a French lawyer.
@Fred… agreed. So why no justice! RoS isn’t giving it the Ike treatment though, I think, in the sense of a global conspiracy. It’s just an alternative hypothesis.
The most despicable claim of yours “No wonder he was unable to express support for Solidarity and other free trade unions in the Soviet bloc” is the lowest plumbing to which anyone can sink without proof. Where is it?
Spirit & letter of the law. Had some fights over that with a minority of grad students.
Also, am very happy you have moved to Edinburgh. Adds value as far as I’m concerned.
“Aah, there’s the nub.” Good pun. Rub might have worked quite as well.
But anyway this case which has taken away “years” I use this like RD’s sources use “scores” of a man’s life because the CIA set him up, and someone who claims to be a vegetarian and animal rights’ supporter, which I am, Anna Ardin, has not the conscience to tell the truth and release somebody because the US secret services have offered her big bucks to condemn him. As Tony Blair said about his decision to involve the UK in war in Iraq “History will judge”. Of course this is only true if Tony Blair and his cronies get to write the history.
Some More on Britain’s security state:
From Naomi Wolf –
” From our Scottish friend Jordan…shocking apparent recriminations against those who reported electoral problems that were systemic in the Scottish referendum…also puzzling that I gave the spreadsheets of 400 plus signed named dated located blank ballot reports to the Scotsman, the Herald on Sunday and the Guardian…with supporting documents about how police send complaints to the EC and the EC to the police…and that has not resulted in either news or arrests…but a whistleblower about the same story gets arrested? ”
https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=957554680925931&id=100000142241229&pnref=story&refid=52
From Jordan –
…. ” Also, Melissa Snp Moore was recently handed a bundle of unused ballot papers, postal ballots etc at a rally, which was believed in itself to have alleged electoral fraud during the referendum, in light of the “blank backed ballots” situation as investigated by Naomi Wolf. These papers raised questions as to what ballots were handed out during the vote if the legal, official ones were found in a bin? After handing them in to the police, Melissa was asked to return home by the police and when she arrived, she was handcuffed, put into the back of an unmarked police car, arrested, detained and interrogated – for handing in papers that she had been issued. Councillor Pat Lee:
“Today the Police contacted Mellisa and advised her to return home. Which she dutifully adhered to. On arriving home she was approached by two female officers who asked her to sit in the police car(unmarked), when she asked why they could not, discuss the issue in her house she was grabbed by the arms. Then a male officer came at her and proceeded to cuff her. She was then detained and rushed to a station and interrogated. The end result was she was arrested for stealing or handling papers that were handed to her at a public gathering.
Is this over the top policing or big brother sending out a message?
The answer I leave to you.
Pat.”
Pat & Melissa have sought legal assistance and as of 11 Nov the investigation is ‘ongoing’ so they may need help further down the line.
Can’t you see it all around you? The police are using classic authoritarian tactics to subvert and subdue – big issue for all of us with plans of speaking out against current issues such as fracking, TTIP etc or taking steps to raise awareness of what’s going on…we might just find ourselves with the Counter Terrorist Unit on our doorsteps. Democracy? I don’t think so.”
Craig & N,
The Supreme Court was doubly deceitful with that “autorite judiciaire” line in Assange’s case as they were well aware that Marianne Ny had elected to be both Chief Investigator and Prosecutor in this instance. That in itself is unusual, even in Sweden’s system where police and prosecutor roles are not strictly defined. As I understand it, the police deal with very minor crimes or the early stages of preliminary investigations. Marianne Ny took over this particular preliminary investigation (as Chief Investigator) way earlier than is normal, especially as there was no arrest warrant issued for Assange (after the first 24-hour one was cancelled by the original prosecutor, Eva Finne) until at least a month later on 27 September 2010 (and that one was never executed on the day – Assange was able to board his flight to Berlin and “lose” his war crime evidence-carrying laptops – and that warrant mysteriously vanished from the public record for a while).
Here’s the Swedish Prosecution Authority website’s explanation:
http://www.aklagare.se/In-English/The-role-of-the-prosecutor/Preliminary-investigation/Police-or-prosecutor/
At any rate, the clue is in her title – Chief Investigator – Ny’s role is much closer to that of police than prosecutor, ie. she’s definitely part of the executive, an official, not part of the judiciary at all.
On Monday, Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz reported that British opposition Labour party is losing Jewish donors as result of its leader Ed Miliband’s (Zionist Jew) criticism of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian Territories (Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem).
On November 9, the UK Independent reported that Labour party is facing desertion by Jewish donors and supporters because of Ed Miliband’s “toxic” anti-Israeli stance over Gaza and Palestine.
http://rehmat1.com/2014/11/12/uk-ed-miliband-loses-jewish-donors/
@Craig
“are you quite sure that a French public prosecutor is indeed correctly described as an autorite judiciaire”
The word “autorité” may perhaps not have been used in their job titles, but in the Princess Diana case both Maud Coujard (public prosecutor, procureure) and Martine Monteil (of the judicial police) had jobs that were described officially as “judiciaire”.
The Guardian has been censoring comments on Assange on an article about the EAW.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2014/11/11/bernard-porter/assange-and-the-european-arrest-warrant/
” While it is undoubtedly true that there is no British equivalent of the French public prosecutor,”
Isn’t the Scottish system similar?
John Goss
Where is my praise of Guantanamo – please let me know or failing that apologise for another lie. Also where have I supported the “US gulag of criminality” – just because I don’t support all your febrile and extremely one sided criticisms, no doubt driven by your support of self confessed terrorists, that doesn’t mean that I support all aspects of the US judicial system. This is just your typical Stalinist if you are not with us you are against us game.
As for your selective quote from the Wikipedia article on Cuba – how anyone who can profess intelligence beyond the most basic level – read the whole article and compare with that on Guantanamo and then tell me that I haven’t answered your original question.
As for you not being able to express support for Solidarity and other free trade unions in the Soviet bloc – I asked the question a number of times and you failed to respond.