Sunday, January 30, 2011
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Lawyers for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said today they fear he could face execution in the United States if he is extradited to Sweden.
The 39-year-old whistleblower is wanted by the Swedish authorities over claims that he sexually assaulted two women during a visit to Stockholm in August.
But his defence team believe there is a 'real risk' he could be extradited on to the U.S., where he could be detained in Guantanamo Bay or even face the death penalty.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, flanked by his lawyers Mark Stephens and Jennifer Robinson, addresses the media outside Belmarsh Magistrates Court today
Assange is pictured leaving the courthouse after his two-day extradition hearing was confirmed for next month
The claim emerged in a skeleton argument released by Assange's lawyers in the wake of a preparatory legal hearing at Woolwich Crown Court.
Assange's legal team suggested that extraditing him to Sweden could breach Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which bans torture.
They wrote: 'It is submitted that there is a real risk that, if extradited to Sweden, the U.S. will seek his extradition and/or illegal rendition to the USA, where there will be a risk of him being detained at Guantanamo Bay or elsewhere, in conditions which would breach Article 3 of the ECHR.
'Indeed, if Mr Assange were rendered to the USA without assurances that the death penalty would not be carried out, there is a real risk that he could be made subject to the death penalty.'
Today it was confirmed Assange’s lawyers will begin a full two-day extradition hearing on February 7.
Assange supporter and British socialite Jemima Khan (centre) at Belmarsh Magistrates' Court this morning
Human rights advocate Bianca Jagger also attended
In a 10-minute hearing at Belmarsh Magistrates' Court, his QC Geoffrey Robertson said all legal preparations are in place.
Hannah Pye, for the Swedish authorities, said she had no objection to the date in four weeks time.
District Judge Nicholas Evans released Assange, who spoke only to confirm his name, age and address, on conditional bail.
Assange's bail was varied so he is able to stay at the Frontline Club, in Paddington, on February 6 and 7.
Mr Robertson said the long journey from his temporary home on the Norfolk/Suffolk border made it difficult to get to court on time.
Assange, who wore a dark suit and light-coloured shirt, leaned forward and listened intently during the hearing.
Mr Robertson said he is 'confident' everything will be in place by February 7.
He added that Assange's legal team is collecting evidence from further witnesses in Sweden.
But the judge said the Swedish authorities are likely to take the view that the extradition warrant will stand nevertheless.
Speaking outside court after the hearing, Assange said he was 'happy about today's outcome' and vowed that WikiLeaks's activities would continue.
'I would also like to say that our work with WikiLeaks continues unabated and we are stepping up our publishing for matters relating to 'cablegate' and other materials,' he went on.
WikiLeaks supporters brought banners and flyers to the hearing
Photographers jostle to get shots of Assange as he arrived at court this morning
'This will shortly be occurring through our newspaper partners around the world, big and small newspapers and some human rights organisations.'
Assange spent Christmas at a manor home owned by friend and Frontline Club founder Vaughan Smith.
His barrister said he would like to stay at the Frontline Club, in Southwick Mews, Paddington, on the nights before the hearing.
The judge granted the request but said he wanted written confirmation from Assange's bail sureties saying they agree with the arrangement.
Assange walked into a consultation room with his legal team, including solicitor Mark Stephens, after the hearing.
He was pursued by a group of several dozen reporters but made no comment as police officers followed close behind.
Assange, seen here addressing the media after his court appearance, is wanted by the Swedish authorities over claims he sexually assaulted two women during a visit to Stockholm in August last year
The computer programmer was released on £240,000 bail by a High Court judge last month after spending nine days in Wandsworth Prison.
He denies committing any offences and his supporters claim the criminal inquiry and extradition request is unfair and politically motivated.
The controversial figure was behind the release of hundreds of United States diplomatic cables, as well as information about the Iraq war, that sparked global uproar.
Assange recently signed a book deal for his life story as the U.S. authorities stepped up their pressure on WikiLeaks by demanding information from Twitter.
The hearing took place under intense media scrutiny with journalists from around the world packing 100 seats in the court and an annex connected by video link.
The high security court house has been the scene for a string of terrorism trials including the airline bomb plotters and London Glasgow suicide bomber.
Located on the outskirts of south east London, it is adjacent to Belmarsh Prison and connected to the secure prison complex by a tunnel.
Earlier, supporters of Assange including human rights campaigner Bianca Jagger, socialite Jemima Khan and Gavin MacFadyen, director of the Centre for Investigative Journalism, arrived at court.
Lawyers for the WikiLeaks boss fear there is a risk he could be extradited to the U.S. where he could be detained in Guantanamo Bay or even face the death penalty
Saturday, January 15, 2011
THIS is what we need to pay attention to, not terrorism or war or healthcare.
The truth is the truth.
PROVE IT WRONG OR PASS IT ON
How dare you put a deranged gunman and an isolated incident into a tidy package with all those other sane Americans that not only question 911 but government in general? So, I'm a danger to the people and our nation because I'm a patriot and am not blindly led by my leaders? What kind of America does Glen Beck think this is? Questioning government is the most American thing a person can do.
GB is a scare-mongering shill and his show is completely staged and deliberately meant to throw YOU off the trail of TRUTH. Disinformation is his game and playing the dumb innocent American isn't helping our nation become informed. Nice slant, McCarthy Junior. Is GB now in charge of the media based "witch-hunt" that is quickly dividing the people into separate "camps"? Watch out for this guy, America.
If you watch him, do yourself a favor and don't. He's NOT for the people.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Thursday, January 13, 2011
I have a few questions that I wanted to ask you but I don't want you to think I'm one of the "crazy" ones. My questions and thoughts are not crazy to me. Do I have something to fear by asking them or questioning you or your administration? Isn't that what you're there for? I was behind you, man. I thought things were going to CHANGE but they really haven't. Not the way I had HOPEd, anyway. Not the ways that you promised they would. Is it un-American of me to ask why? Why did you lie about all the things you said would be different if we got behind you? Why is it worse and why can't I show curiosity, without the fear of being dragged out of a room or off property and away from you, if I happen to phrase my question the wrong way or use the wrong words? May I ask you without having this fear? Can I have your word? Why are your secret police so afraid of me and my questions? They don't seem unreasonable to me and my friends. We talk about them all the time and discuss how we can make them better and we don't drag each other out of the room when the topic gets heated. Why do you? We can talk about them but what do you have to fear by the questions we have? What or who are you protecting?
Sir, I don't own a corporation, so I know I'm limited that way on your list of priorities. If I did, I'm sure you'd have a little time for me but I don't so Americans like me, with silly questions like mine don't get your ear like those who do. I thought that was one of the things that YOU were going to change? Maybe it's too early in your term to do this yet, perhaps there is a good reason behind it. I don't know. I only know that I'm trying to be patient and wait for the right time but you're very busy and never seem to have the time for me and my friends and our questions. Maybe if we elect you for a second term, we'd have some time then but it seems unlikely. Will I have to wait for the next HOPE, the next term, the next President? That's what the last one said too. Is this a government that is "by the corporations, for the corporations" or is it for the people and BY THE PEOPLE? I'm one. The friends I spoke of are some. Will you listen if we call out to you? We're afraid of what you're doing to our country. We're wary of you and your crew. We are doing what we think we're supposed to do. QUESTION GOVERNMENT.
Do we have to beg for a moment in time where questioning government through direct questions to those who are leading us would be appropriate? When is a good time, Mr. President? Freedom of speech seems to be something that only happens during business hours and is limited to an "approved" and diminishing list of topics? Could you tell me when you're open to answer some of the questions the people have for you? I know your ears are usually taken by your lobbyist friends, and they can pay a lot more than we can. We've had a hard couple years and aren't doing as well financially as we have in past years. Is there some forum where an open discussion of current troubling events and struggles could be discussed? We have some questions. They're not coming from crazy people but even if they were, is that prohibited? Are only questions from sane individuals allowed and if so, who decides who's on that list? Are certain questions off limits? Do certain topics offend you or scare you guys? I'd hate to ask a question that did make you feel uncomfortable; uncomfortable enough to feel threatened by me and the question. I'd hate to get tased or billy-clubbed like a baby seal for asking the wrong question or mentioning a "touchy" subject with you. Will you consider us for what we are, free-thinking dissenters that needs to be reckoned with and that we're not against you, unless you prove to be against us and that we're not domestic terrorists or trouble-makers. Quite the contrary. But we do however understand the wisdom behind history and those who lived it. Consider the words of one of my friends I speak of, Sir.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?"
"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all."
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
He also said that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." has been called "one of the best-known sentences in the English language" and "the most potent and consequential words in American history".
Is this the best known line for a reason? Is it to overshadow the line just prior to this one? Let's take a look at what comes just before this most famous of lines.
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE: source
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
"The first sentence of the Declaration asserts as a matter of Natural law the ability of a people to assume political independence, and acknowledges that the grounds for such independence must be reasonable, and therefore explicable, and ought to be explained."
Let's take a look at what comes next?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Hey, it says so right there that I'm doing the right thing. Questioning you is AMERICAN, not criminal. This is my duty and my responsibility.
You took an oath, Mr. President and I'm only trying to hold up my end by holding you to yours. So, why is it that the people are demonized, scrutinized and ridiculed by your secret service, your media and your administration for acting out the words of this Declaration? We are specifically told that the taking of this action is what will keep my country together, strong and independent. If we fail to exercise the right to question government, we will fail as a free people and become slaves to debt. Did something change? What was it, so I can tell my friends and fellow Americans, so that we will be the best Americans we can be? We want to support you and your work but if things are different, what are the new rules and guidelines?
I was wondering if you have a newer copy or edited version of it and if so, could you email it to me? I'm confused by your actions and the actions of your predecessors and get the strong impression that you've ALL been misunderstanding where you stand compared to where the people stand. I wanted to try to make it clear to you, Sir and with all due respect, that you work for us. We are both held contractually to each other to do certain things and although, we the people are guilty of not holding up our end, we feel that administration after administration, the same can be said of you. I wanted to ask if we can fix that? I am going to my brother and asking you to work with us and try to complete our obligation to one another, people and government. Otherwise, Sir and again with all due respect, we're ordered to throw you out of your position. That's not my idea, I'm just referring to our end of the agreement, contract and obligation as the "people". Can we come to terms? Are you willing to cooperate?
"...,That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
So, what is it going to be, Mr. President?
ONE of the PEOPLE
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Sound familiar? The high school kids that made this GREAT little video figured it out. Can you connect the dots to a more current "ism"? Thanks Edward Murrow for shining the porch-light on what's what, like we should be doing now for ourselves but are too fluorided, chemtrailed, aspartamed, BHT'd, MONSANTOED, prescriptionized, nutrient-depleted, scared, comfortable, hypnotized, entertained, Starbucked, misled, disconnected, overworked, tired, stupid, selfish, shy, overmedicated, smart, BUSY or lazy to care. Just sayin...
Monday, January 10, 2011
Nothing to really expound upon here, just some REALLY SCARY WEIRD SHIT!
It's right in front of our faces. By seeking the safety of denial, we ignore the wisdom of obvious logic behind the actual truth, removing ourselves from the fundamental obligation of personal accountability and moral responsibilities to the basic, yet paramount requirements of being an American, by continually testing and questioning government; and thus lose the beloved liberties of one in the process. It's up to us.
Dare to think for yourself, sheep taste like chicken.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
ALL TIME - Most Popular Posts
Just in case you were unaware of these remarkable likenesses of the buildings attacked, here are some of the photos that may help. They we...
Her Name Was "Smoking Gun" Of the many horrific scenes we may recall from the events of September 11th, this one stands out in m...
This is going to be the only video I post today. The idea being that the time of my readers would be better spent passing this video out,...
The oddities surrounding September 11th are simply too many to mention but the pieces come together if you keep digging. I absolutely assu...
"..., one cannot change the past, but everyone can work together for a peaceful future..." -Phan Thị Kim Phúc The year was ...
FOR ANYONE NEW TO MY PAGE AND DO NOT KNOW OF ALBERTO RIVERA, HE'S A PERMANENT FEATURE FOR A VERY GOOD REASON. HERE IS A LITTLE INSIGHT...
In the Vatican-museum the crest of the Vatican is the oldest and central piece of their collection. Underneath you can see a photo of this....
VATICAN CITY, SEPT. 26, 2010 ( Zenit.org ) - The next World Meeting of Families is not until 2012 in Milan, but Pope Benedict XVI is ask...
"Do not fear your enemies, The worst they can do is kill you. Do not fear your friends, At worst, they may betray you. Fear those who do not care, They neither kill nor betray, but betrayal and murder exists because of their silent consent"
If you're not confused, you're not paying attention.
- Tom Peters
Good character is more to be praised than outstanding talent. Most talents are, to some extent, a gift. Good character, by contrast, is not given to us. We have to build it, piece by piece -- by thought, choice, courage, and determination.
- H. Jackson Brown
This I believe: That the free, exploring mind of the individual human is the most valuable thing in the world. And this I would fight for: the freedom of the mind to take any direction it wishes, undirected. And this I must fight against: any idea, religion, or government which limits or destroys the individual.
- John Steinbeck
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety."
Character is like a tree and reputation like a shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.
- Abraham Lincoln
"I don't want a nation of thinkers, I want a nation of workers."
- John D. Rockefeller, (1839-1937)
One who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; one who does not ask a question remains a fool forever.
- Chinese Proverb
IF VOTING REALLY CHANGED ANYTHING, IT WOULD ALREADY BE ILLEGAL.
One who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; one who does not ask a question remains a fool forever.
- Chinese Proverb
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Prove it wrong or pass it on..., DO SOMETHING.
IF VOTING REALLY CHANGED ANYTHING, IT WOULD ALREADY BE ILLEGAL.
“Most charities are public relations for the rich, a scam on the middle class, and a disservice to the poor.”
Put not your trust in the donkey or the elephant, but in the Lamb.
Obama the New Messiah? WHAT THE...?
Bush Illegally Turns Army Inwards – Urge Moderators to Raise Issue During Presidential Debates
Gas Prices Daily
If you only read books that you agree with, you're not being educated, you're being indoctrinated.
The past present and future of America...and the world.
"Our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we can not submit. I have ever thought religion a concern, purely between our God and our consciences, for which we were accountable to him and not to the priests. For it is in our lives and not from our words that our religion must be read. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared ascent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is that there would never have been an infedel, if there had never been a priest."