EU’s top court claims it has sole jurisdiction over European Central Bank’s money-printing decisions, rejecting Germany’s concerns


08-05-20 04:19:00,

The European Union’s highest court said on Friday it alone has legal authority over the European Central Bank (ECB). It rejected the recent ruling in Germany questioning the ECB’s power to print money without members’ consent.

“In order to ensure that EU law is applied uniformly, the Court of Justice (ECJ) alone… has jurisdiction to rule that an act of an EU institution is contrary to EU law,” it said in a statement. “Divergences between courts of the member states as to the validity of such acts would indeed be liable to place in jeopardy the unity of the EU legal order and to detract from legal certainty.”

On Tuesday, Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court cast doubt on the eurozone’s key stimulus program by giving the ECB three months to prove that its key bond-buying program is justified and appropriate. Otherwise, the judges of the Karlsruhe-based court said, Germany’s own national central bank (the Bundesbank) could no longer participate in the program and would even have to sell bonds that it had purchased.

“The Bundesbank may thus no longer participate in the implementation and execution of the ECB decisions at issue, unless the ECB governing council adopts a new decision that demonstrates… the PSPP (public sector purchase program) is not disproportionate to the economic and fiscal policy effects,” they said.

Also on
Brussels rules, Deutschland drools! EU claims Germany has no say on its money-printing policy

In its ruling, the German court broke with the ECJ, which had approved the bond purchases. The ECB has bought more than €2.6 trillion ($2.9 trillion) in corporate and government bonds in an attempt to raise inflation and weak economic growth in the 19 member countries that use the euro.

The ECB has recently also announced €750 billion ($813 billion) in new purchases to cushion the blow from the Covid-19 pandemic.

For more stories on economy & finance visit RT’s business section

 » Lees verder

Assange court hearing scheduled for April 27th – Defend WikiLeaks


24-04-20 08:34:00,

Assange court hearing scheduled for April 27th

Don’t Extradite Assange Campaign press release

Julian Assange’s lawyers will return to court on Monday to argue that his extradition trial should be postponed.

The hearing is due to resume in the court attached to Belmarsh prison on 18 May. But Assange’s lawyers will argue that they have not had full and unfettered access to their client.

The onset of the coronavirus crisis has reduced that already restricted access to unacceptably low levels.

Julian Assange will not even be able to appear by video link at Westminster court on Monday because he has been advised on medical grounds that moving to, and using, the video link room in the prison is too great a risk.

Two prisoners have already died in Belmarsh and inmates are now locked down 23 hours a day. The government has halted its prisoner release programme which was already too restricted to reduce the prison population to safe levels.

The Judge, Vanessa Baraitser, has previously refused to bail Julian Assange.

The prosecution lawyers acting on behalf of the US government have agreed that the remainder of the trial should be postponed.

Journalists and members of the public will be unable to properly and fully attended the trial if it goes ahead in the current health emergency. During the first week of the hearing in February most journalists could not gain access to the courtroom and were consigned to a portacabin in the grounds of the Belmarsh court with an inadequate video link. But even that option would be unavailable or unusable with coronavirus still a significant danger.

The remainder of the hearing, likely to last three weeks, will constitute the vast majority of the trial and will hear all the witnesses, many of whom will be travelling from abroad.

“It is quite clear that this hearing cannot go ahead in just a few week’s time,” said Joseph Farrell, WikiLeaks ambassador. “Julian’s lawyers cannot prepare adequately, witnesses will not be able to travel, and journalists and the public will not have free, adequate and safe access to the proceedings. Justice will neither be done, nor seen to be done.”

The Don’t Extradite Assange campaign will organise a twitter storm on Sunday evening at 6pm ahead of the hearing.

 » Lees verder

EU’s top court says eastern states broke law by refusing to host refugees


02-04-20 10:06:00,

The European Union’s top court has ruled that Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic had broken the law by refusing to host refugees to help ease the burden on Greece and Italy after a surge in migrant arrivals from 2015.

“By refusing to comply with the temporary mechanism for the relocation of applicants for international protection, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic have failed to fulfill their obligations under EU law,” the Luxembourg-based Court of Justice of the EU said on Thursday.

The decision underscores Europe’s divisions over migration. However, the three ex-communist nations face no immediate penalty as the relocation of tens of thousands of people agreed by the EU was only envisaged until 2017, Reuters said.

The eurosceptic governments on the EU’s eastern flank had cited national security reasons in refusing to take in any of the mostly Muslim refugees and migrants from the Middle East and North Africa.

 » Lees verder

A landmark court ruling could ‘protect rights of the poor’ in the A.I. age


12-02-20 08:48:00,

A court ruling in the Netherlands has banned the use of a system that scored citizens on how likely they were to commit certain kinds of fraud. The decision has been hailed as setting “an important precedent for protecting the rights of the poor in the age of automation” by human rights campaigners.

The System Risk Indication system was used by the Dutch government to profile citizens, analyze their personal data, and decide whether they were likely to commit tax or benefit fraud. The system, also known as SyRI, used an algorithm to score citizens. Citizens were not told how the system calculated its decisions.

However, a Dutch court ruled that the government needed to stop using the system immediately as it infringed on human rights. The court decided that the system infringed on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights that guarantees a private life.

The decision has the potential to influence future decisions about how automated systems and artificial intelligence are employed in government decision-making. Amos Toh, a senior researcher in artificial intelligence and human rights for Human Rights Watch, hailed the decision:

“By stopping SyRI, the Court has set an important precedent for protecting the rights of the poor in the age of automation. Governments that have relied on data analytics to police access to social security – such as those in the US, the U.K., and Australia – should heed the Court’s warning about the human rights risks involved in treating social security beneficiaries as perpetual suspects.”

Toh noted that one of the key issues with the system was its opaque operation. Even during the court case, the government did not provide a clear explanation for how the system uses data to arrive at conclusions. This meant people essentially could not challenge their scores, even though the government stored the results for two years. SyRI was also employed entirely in what were termed “problem” neighborhoods.

Notably, the court did not employ Article 22 of the General Data Protection Regulation, which protects against automatic decisions with legal effects. TechCrunch notes that it’s unclear whether Article 22 applies if there’s a human involved in the process,

 » Lees verder

The Court of Appeal of Turin Confirms the Link Between a Head Tumour and Mobile Phone Use – Global Research


20-01-20 09:49:00,

The Court of Appeal of Turin confirms in a full judgment published on 13 January 2020 (904/2019 of 3.12.2019 , Romeo v. INAIL) the decision of the Tribunal of Ivrea of 2017. Judge Fadda considers that the worker’s acoustic neuroma (benign tumour of the head) was indeed caused by the use of the mobile phone.

According to the Court:

“there is protective scientific jurisprudence that supports the assertion of causation based on criteria of “more likely than not”. P.33.”

And to add:

“Epidemiological data, the results of experiments on animals (not contradicted, at present, by other experiments of the same type), the duration and intensity of exposure … which are particularly important in view of the dose-response relationship established – at the scientific level – between exposure to mobile phone radiofrequencies and the risk of acoustic neuroma, as well as the absence of any other factor which could have caused the disease”.

The scientific analysis by independent experts appointed by the Court confirms the causal link

All the scientific elements of the case were re-examined and re-analysed by two new experts appointed by the Court of Turin (Carolina Marino, Angelo D’Errico). The Court of Appeal fully accepted their conclusions and rejected INAIL’s* appeal, stating that CTU had provided:

“strong evidence to assert a causal role between the complainant’s occupational exposure, his exposure to radiation from mobile phones and the disease that occurred”.

This is the second Italian appeal judgment in favour of a worker after the Brescia judgment in 2010, which concluded with the confirmation of the Supreme Court in 2012, case of Marcolini v. INAIL. In this case, the Court of Bergamo had rejected the application in first instance.

A landmark judgment that will have international repercussions

The Romeo v. INAIL case is therefore historic. It is the first in world judicial history to have had two consecutive judgments in favour of the plaintiff. It is also historic because of the principles underlying this decision and particularly because it is written about the conflicts of interest of certain experts close to the mobile phone industry.

Conflicts of interest and the role of the ICNIRP pinpointed by the Tribunal


 » Lees verder

Britischer High Court bestätigt: Britische Geheimagenten haben die Lizenz zum Töten | Anti-Spiegel


30-12-19 09:37:00,

Britische Geheimagenten haben jetzt auch ganz offiziell die Lizenz zum Töten. Das ist keine Geschichte von James Bond, sondern eine Entscheidung des Londoner High Court.

Westliche Politiker und Medien werfen Russland immer wieder – und zwar bis heute ohne einen einzigen Beweis – vor, dass seine „Killerkommandos“ angeblich Menschen umbringen. Diese Vorwürfe sind an Doppelmoral kaum zu überbieten, denn was der Westen Russland vorwirft, tut er selbst unbestritten im großen Stil. Allein mit ihren Drohnenmorden haben die USA Tausende unschuldige Zivilisten ermordet. Und das bei dem Versuch, angebliche Terroristen – natürlich auch ohne jedes Gerichtsurteil – zu ermorden.

Und auch die Briten, die im anti-russischen Chor besonders laut mit singen, töten Menschen ohne Gerichtsverfahren. Nun hat der High Court in London bestätigt, dass diese „Lizenz zum Töten“, die es bereits gibt, auch rechtens ist.

Darüber hat das russische Fernsehen in der Sendung „Nachrichten der Woche“ am Sonntag berichtet und ich habe den Bericht übersetzt.

Beginn der Übersetzung:

Der High Court in London hat britischen Geheimdienstoffiziere und ihren Agenten das Recht gegeben, Menschen zu töten. Die Entscheidung wurde mit drei gegen zwei Stimmen getroffen. Während Scotland Yard und alle anderen Geheimdienste in Großbritannien nach ausgedachten, russischen „Vergiftern“ suchen, bestätigt die dortige Justiz die Tötungsbefugnisse britischer Agenten, wenn Mord im öffentlichen Interesse liegt. Die Entscheidung, in welchem Fall ein Mensch getötet wird, wird vom Agenten selbst getroffen.

Vor Weihnachten machte der High Court in London den britischen Geheimagenten ein Geschenk und erteilte ihnen die Lizenz zum Töten, wenn dies im Interesse der nationalen Sicherheit geschieht.

Der Gerichtshof bestätigte die bestehenden Weisungen des britischen Geheimdienstes, die es ihren Mitarbeitern und Agenten erlauben, „Straftaten zu begehen, um Zugang zu nachrichtendienstlichen Informationen aufrechtzuerhalten, wenn dies nötig ist, um Leben zu retten, schwerere Verbrechen zu verhindern oder den Agenten selbst zu schützen.“

Zwei der fünf Richter des Tribunals lehnten dies ab, aber die Entscheidung wurde mit Mehrheit getroffen. Vier Menschenrechtsorganisationen kündigten an, Berufung einzulegen. Sie fordern eine offene Untersuchung der Aktivitäten der britischen Geheimdienste während des Konflikts in Nordirland.

Einer der prominentesten Fälle ist der Mord an dem Anwalt Pat Finucane. 1989 wurde er von Bewaffneten der Ulster Defence Association erschossen.

„Stellen Sie sich vor, Sie sitzen mit Ihren kleinen Kindern in der Küche und jemand bricht ein und eröffnet das Feuer.

 » Lees verder

Court Rules British MI5 Agents Can Murder, Kidnap and Torture

23-12-19 04:28:00,

Need help? Contact us

We’ve detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you’re not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy.

Need Help?

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Block reference ID:

 » Lees verder

Anti-Assange Court Continues Unfair Extradition Hearing to Railroad Assange to US – Global Research


22-10-19 12:00:00,

On October 21, 2019, Julian Assange appeared in court for an extradition hearing. Assange is being held in a British jail pending extradition to the United States after having served his sentence for skipping bail when he was given asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy to avoid extradition. The court has refused his release pending the extradition hearing and denied him access to computers making it difficult for him to defend himself.

Assange fled to Ecuador’s embassy in 2012 to avoid being sent to Sweden for an investigation of manufactured charges being used to imprison him so he could be extradited to the United Staes. He faced a sex crimes investigation, which is highly suspect and has never resulted in charges despite three investigations. Assange spent seven years in Ecuador’s embassy before he was dragged out with Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno’s consent in April. He now faces 18 counts in the United States.

It is evident from this hearing that Assange is being railroaded and is not receiving due process for an alleged crime that should not exist, i.e. being an editor and publisher that told the truth about US war crimes and other illegal actions, as well as the corporate control of US foreign policy. Assange is facing up to 175 years in prison on more than a dozen charges related to WikiLeaks’ publication of classified documents that exposed American war crimes and its corrupt corporate-dominated foreign policy. Popular Resistance has supported Julian Assange for his journalism and Chelsea Manning for whistleblowing and refusing to testify against Assange. Both need to be released and the charges against Assange dropped.

#Assange and #ChelseaManning had the courage to show the world the truth about #Iraq war. Today they are in danger. Anyone claiming they are anti war should support them. Today Assange court verdict in #UK was an Attack on each one of us. If wikileaks lose then warmongers win!

— Sorayat Yemen (@SorayatYemen) October 21, 2019

Assange arrived for the hearing in a van. There were numerous supporters outside as he arrived but he was driven into a garage with0ut people seeing him.

Assange People outisde of court,

 » Lees verder

Court orders Julian Assange to stay in prison while awaiting US extradition


14-09-19 04:51:00,

A judge has ordered Julian Assange to remain in prison indefinitely while awaiting extradition to the US because of his “history of absconding.”

The WikiLeaks founder was due to be released on September 22 after serving his sentence for breaching bail conditions when he sought refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Assange spent almost seven years inside the embassy. 

On Friday the Westminster Magistrates’ Court claimed there were “substantial grounds” for believing he would flee if released from prison. District Judge Vanessa Baraitser said Assange’s lawyer had not made an application for bail on his behalf, adding “perhaps not surprisingly in light of your history of absconding in these proceedings.”

WikiLeaks and Assange’s mother Christine criticized the court proceedings, saying the judge had refused bail before the defense team had a chance to even request it.

This morning’s hearing was not a bail hearing, it was a technical hearing. Despite this, The magistrate preemptively refused bail before the defence requested it.

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) September 13, 2019

TODAY a corrupt British judge ordered he CONTINUE to be detained indefinitely in harsh Belmarsh maximum security prison

DESPITE serving his sentence for a minor bail violation,

for seeking/being granted political asylum 7 YEARS ago!

AND refused bail WITHOUT a bail hearing!

— Mrs Christine Assange (@AssangeMrs) September 14, 2019

The extradition hearing will start on February 25, 2020, after British Home Secretary Sajid Javid signed off on the extradition request in June. The Australian citizen is fighting extradition to the US where he faces prosecution for allegedly leaking government secrets. 

Also on
‘The state Assange is in, it’s a wonder, don’t know how I would cope,’ Vivienne Westwood tells RT

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

 » Lees verder

Federal court tells Apple & Google to share data of over 10,000 gun scope app users – report


07-09-19 09:11:00,

In an unprecedented federal data grab, the US Department of Justice has called on Google and Apple to disclose the names and data of thousands of users of a gun scope mobile app, reportedly as part of a probe into illicit exports.

Federal investigators are demanding the tech giants hand over information on anybody who downloaded Obsidian 4, a mobile app that allows users to link up their smartphone with specially-made gun scopes, according to a court order filed on Thursday and seen by Forbes before it was sealed.

If the tech firms comply with the feds’ dictate, the disclosure would reveal the names, phone numbers and other data of over 10,000 people – certainly many with no connection to crime – in a massive breach of privacy. The data furnished by Google and Apple would effectively “dox” the thousands of users of the app, revealing their identities without permission.

Also on
Big Tech & Big Brother meet at Facebook HQ to discuss how to ‘secure’ US elections

A page on Google’s Android app store shows Obsidian 4 has been downloaded over 10,000 times, though Apple’s own app store does not include download figures, meaning the number of people exposed in the data dump could be significantly higher.

The court order was prompted by an ongoing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) investigation into illegal exports of weapons and other gun-related gear, including the specially-designed “smart scope” produced by American Technologies Network (ATN), the same firm behind the Obsidian 4 app.

While ATN is not directly implicated in the investigation, ICE wants to find out who is using the company’s scope, and in what countries. International sale of the scope in question is controlled under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, and ICE has made repeated attempts to block exports to buyers who lack the proper licenses, including in Hong Kong, Canada and the Netherlands.

Also on
Google sued for ‘snooping on iPhone users’: Will 5.4mn Brits get compensation?

The DOJ’s order, which will apply to American users of the scope app, has some privacy advocates horrified.

 » Lees verder

French Court Rules Against Utility Smart Meters Because They Are Making People Sick


04-08-19 07:15:00,

By B.N. Frank

Tens of millions of utility Smart Meters have been installed throughout the U.S and around the world so it’s likely that they are installed on your home and throughout your community whether you know it or not.  A documentary was produced about them – Take Back Your Power – because there are so many problems associated with them including adverse health effects and fires.

Merci beaucoup to the French court for ruling against these dastardly devices for health reasons and to the lawyer who continues to fight on behalf of complainants:

A French court has ordered the removal of the controversial Linky electricity smart meters from 13 homes, for medical reasons.

The tribunal de grande instance (TGI or the civil court) of Tours considered the case of 121 “anti-Linky” complainants, and threw out 108 of the claims. The remaining 13 were accepted, with the court conceding a possible link between their medical complaints and their Linky smart meters.

One included a seven-year-old child living in Tours, who was – the court said – in “a state of chronic fatigue” and having “difficulty sleeping”, as proven in a medical note, “which could be linked to the Linky meter”.


Lawyer for the complainants, Arnaud Durand, said that he would push for compensation for “the people who will not be able to live at home”.

In June 2017, medical safety agency L’Agence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire (Anses) concluded that the meters could be linked to some “health doubts” – including the possible consequences of exposure to electromagnetic fields.

He (Durand) is now hoping to bring more cases against the installation of the Linky meter throughout France.

The country has already seen 22 cases brought to court, including in Rennes, Toulouse, and Bordeaux. Most claims were thrown out, except for a few complainants who cited “electro-sensitivity” to the meters.

[…] [T]he meters have been controversial since the beginning, with critics stating concerns over the alleged health risks, fire risks, and the transmission of individuals’ data to a private company.

More than 700 communes have come out against the Linky so far.

 » Lees verder

US Federal Court Exposes Democratic Party Conspiracy Against Assange and WikiLeaks. Judge Dismisses DNC Lawsuit – Global Research


02-08-19 09:01:00,

In a ruling published late Tuesday, Judge John Koeltl of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York delivered a devastating blow to the US-led conspiracy against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

In his ruling, Judge Koeltl, a Bill Clinton nominee and former assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, dismissed “with prejudice” a civil lawsuit filed in April 2018 by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) alleging WikiLeaks was civilly liable for conspiring with the Russian government to steal DNC emails and data and leak them to the public.

Jennifer Robinson, a leading lawyer for Assange, and other WikiLeaks attorneys welcomed the ruling as “an important win for free speech.”

The decision exposes the Democratic Party in a conspiracy of its own to attack free speech and cover up the crimes of US imperialism and the corrupt activities of the two parties of Wall Street. Judge Koeltl stated:

If WikiLeaks could be held liable for publishing documents concerning the DNC’s political financial and voter-engagement strategies simply because the DNC labels them ‘secret’ and trade secrets, then so could any newspaper or other media outlet. But that would impermissibly elevate a purely private privacy interest to override the First Amendment interest in the publication of matters of the highest public concern. The DNC’s published internal communications allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election. This type of information is plainly of the type entitled to the strongest protection that the First Amendment offers.

The ruling exposes the illegality of the conspiracy by the US government, backed by the governments of Britain, Ecuador, Australia and Sweden and the entire corporate media and political establishment, to extradite Assange to the US, where he faces 175 years in federal prison on charges including espionage.

The plaintiff in the civil case—the Democratic Party—has also served as Assange’s chief prosecutor within the state apparatus for over a decade. During the Obama administration, Democratic Party Justice Department officials, as well as career Democratic holdovers under the Trump administration, prepared the criminal case against him.

The dismissal of the civil suit exposes massive unreported conflicts of interest and prosecutorial misconduct and criminal abuse of process by those involved.

 » Lees verder

Court Rejects Industry Appeal and Upholds Berkeley, CA “Cell Phone Radiation Right To Know” Ordinance


05-07-19 06:33:00,

By B.N. Frank

On July 2, a federal appeals court upheld the “Cell Phone Right to Know” law adopted in May 2015 by the City of Berkeley.  This affirms Berkeley’s right to require cell phone retailers in the city to notify prospective customers about cell phone manufacturers’ safety guidelines to ensure consumer safety.

This ordinance took many years of hard work and media coverage to make it happen.  Thanks to all who testified, fought and never gave up.  It’s truly an inspiration for all Americans to fight for the same in local, state, and federal legislation in order to ensure consumer safety.

From Environmental Health Trust:

A landmark 9th U.S. Circuit Court panel has upheld the City of Berkeley’s cell phone right to know ordinance.  That ordinance requires retailers to inform consumers that cell phones emit radiation that can exceed federal cell phone radiation limits when close to the body.  In upholding this decision, the panel concluded that the public health issues at hand were “substantial” and that the “text of the Berkeley notice was literally true,” and “uncontroversial.”

Further, the panel determined that the Berkeley ordinance did not constitute preemption.

“Far from conflicting with federal law and policy, the Berkeley ordinance complemented and enforced it.”

The panel held that Berkeley’s required disclosure simply alerted consumers to the safety disclosures that the Federal Communications Commission required, and directed consumers to federally compelled instructions in their user manuals providing specific information about how to avoid excessive exposure.

Industry is expected to appeal for a full court en banc review, but this reviewing “panel concluded that CTIA had little likelihood of success based on conflict preemption.”


The Berkeley Cell Phone Right To Know Ordinance requires retailers post a notice with the following text.

“The City of Berkeley requires that you be provided the following notice: 

“To assure safety, the Federal Government requires that cell phones meet radiofrequency (RF) exposure guidelines. If you carry or use your phone in a pants or shirt pocket or tucked into a bra when the phone is ON and connected to a wireless network,

 » Lees verder

Court Docs: Monsanto Paid Chemical Industry Front Group to Claim Cancer-Causing Weedkiller ‘Safe’ and Attack Its Critics – Global Research


03-06-19 06:17:00,

Monsanto paid a shadowy chemical industry front group to help push back against the mounting scientific evidence that the company’s signature Roundup weedkiller causes cancer, court documents reveal. 

“If a company like [Monsanto] won’t support us, then who will?” the head of the American Council on Science and Health wrote to a Monsanto scientist in 2015. A day later came the reply: “[T]he answer is yes…. [D]efinitely count us in!!”

Emails between Monsanto and the American Council on Science and Health, or ACSH, and related internal Monsanto emails were first made public during the trial last July of a lawsuit by a former California school groundskeeper who was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after using Roundup. The jury awarded Dewayne “Lee” Johnson $289 million in punitive and compensatory damages, later reduced by the judge to $78 million.

The internal Monsanto/ACSH emails reappeared as evidence in the most recent lawsuit to go before a court, brought by a California couple who were both diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after decades of using the herbicide. In May, the jury ordered Bayer-Monsanto to pay Alva and Alberta Pilliod more than $2 billion in damages.

It was the third verdict in less than a year in which juries found that glyphosate, the key ingredient in Roundup, causes cancer and that Monsanto covered up evidence of its health risk for decades. Last year, Bayer bought Monsanto for $63 billion and is now facing tens of thousands of similar lawsuits.

The emails – here and here – show that in February 2015, Monsanto was working with ACSH to prepare for the expected fallout from a pending report on the safety of glyphosate by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, or IARC. The following month the IARC, part of the World Health Organization, would release a report that classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Anticipating the report, Gilbert Ross, then the acting head of ACSH, asked Monsanto for support, “particularly if ACSH’s commentary is needed to critique an adverse outcome.”

On Feb. 26, Dr. Daniel Goldstein, the head of medical sciences and outreach at Monsanto, wrote to several colleagues, urging them to support continued payment to ACSH for its work.

 » Lees verder

Can AI Be a Fair Judge in Court? Estonia Thinks So | Light On Conspiracies – Revealing the Agenda


03-05-19 04:13:00,

Government usually isn’t the place to look for innovation in IT or new technologies like artificial intelligence. But Ott Velsberg might change your mind. As Estonia’s chief data officer, the 28-year-old graduate student is overseeing the tiny Baltic nation’s push to insert artificial intelligence and machine learning into services provided to its 1.3 million citizens.

“We want the government to be as lean as possible,” says the wiry, bespectacled Velsberg, an Estonian who is writing his PhD thesis at Sweden’s Umeå University on using the Internet of Things and sensor data in government services. Estonia’s government hired Velsberg last August to run a new project to introduce AI into various ministries to streamline services offered to residents.

Deploying AI is crucial, he says. “Some people worry that if we lower the number of civil employees, the quality of service will suffer. But the AI agent will help us.” About 22 percent of Estonians work for the government; that’s about average for European countries, but higher than the 18 percent rate in the US.

Siim Sikkut, Estonia’s chief information officer, began piloting several AI-based projects at agencies in 2017, before hiring Velsberg last year. Velsberg says Estonia has deployed AI or machine learning in 13 places where an algorithm has replaced government workers.

For example, inspectors no longer check on farmers who receive government subsidies to cut their hay fields each summer. Satellite images taken by the European Space Agency each week from May to October are fed into a deep-learning algorithm originally developed by the Tartu Observatory. The images are overlaid onto a map of fields where farmers receive the hay-cutting subsidies to prevent them from turning forests over time.

Coup d’etat in Slowmotion
by Ole Dammegard

For almost 30 years investigator Ole Dammegård has been on a quest to find the truth behind some of the worst conspiracies in the history of world – such as the murders US President John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, John Lennon and the blowing up of m/s Estonia killing at least 852 innocent people. This has taken him on a very frightening and dangerous journey into unknown territories. What has been claimed as acts by lone madmen has turned out to be connected to the International military industrial complex and top level high finance,

 » Lees verder

Appeals Court Rubber Stamps Chelsea Manning’s Unlawful Imprisonment – Global Research


24-04-19 08:17:00,

On Monday, the US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel rubber-stamped Manning’s unlawful imprisonment.

It her cruel solitary confinement punishment to continue, a flagrant 8th Amendment breach. More on this below.

Manning is one of America’s best, a genuine heroic figure. Maliciously oppressed for doing the right, she acted above and beyond the call of duty despite great personal risks to her safety and welfare.

Wrongfully imprisoned for exposing US high crimes of war and against humanity, the Trump regime imprisoned her again for invoking her First, Fourth and Sixth Amendment rights, along with the constitutional right to remain silent, refusing to answer questions from law enforcement or court officials, an internationally recognized right.

Her fundamental rights aren’t good enough in police state America, the rule of law long ago abandoned, anything goes replacing it.

A post-9/11 window of hysteria made anything goes possible, including elimination of fundamental constitutional rights at the whim of ruling authorities – rubber-stamped by Congress and the courts, especially the highest one stacked with majority right-wing extremists, discarding the rule of law, opposing what just societies cherish.

Trump is a front man for Wall Street, America’s military, industrial, security complex, corporate empowerment, and the imperial state – co-opted straightaway in office to serve their interests, his own at the same time.

Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning are martyred behind bars for the “crime” of truth-telling.

When governments fail their people, the way things are today in the West and elsewhere globally, they forfeit their right to rule.

Civil disobedience becomes an essential tool for change, popular revolution the only solution. Nothing else can work. Freedom loving people have a choice – resist or lose everything. There’s no in between.

In early April, Manning’s legal team filed a motion with the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, seeking her immediate release on bail while her unlawful arrest order is appealed.

Under US law, she’s entitled to bail while appealing charges against her. She poses no flight risk, nor a danger to anyone. According to her legal team, denying her bail violated appellate rules, requiring the court to explain in writing why bail was refused.

 » Lees verder

US Supreme Court declares inmates have no constitutional right to ‘painless death’


02-04-19 07:58:00,

The Supreme Court has declared prisoners have no constitutional right to a “painless death,” allowing the execution of a convicted murderer to go forward despite his protestations that lethal injection would cause him to suffer.

Reversing a 2018 decision, the court ruled that death-row prisoner Russell Bucklew’s constitutional protections from “cruel and unusual punishment” did not exempt him from pain and that he’d failed to present sufficient evidence that his preferred method of execution, the gas chamber, was less painful or that it could be “readily implemented.”

The Eighth Amendment does not guarantee a prisoner a painless death,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the court’s majority opinion, “something that, of course, isn’t guaranteed to many people, including most victims of capital crimes.” The court was split along party lines, with five conservatives backing the ruling and four liberals dissenting.

Read more

Did Trump just suggest the death penalty for drug dealers? Twitter freaks out

Bucklew sat on death row for 23 years filing one appeal after another, a fact Gorsuch mentioned in his opinion, which referenced the convicted killer “secur[ing] delay through lawsuit after lawsuit.” His latest appeal did not contest his guilt or even seek to avoid execution, but sought a stay over the constitutionality of execution by lethal injection of pentobarbital – which Bucklew’s lawyer argued would rupture tumors in the man’s face, neck, throat, and head caused by cavernous hemangioma, a rare medical condition, and therefore constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.

Gorsuch and the other conservative justices were unduly “dismissive” in assuming Bucklew’s appeals were meant as a delaying tactic, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion. While the court stayed his execution in 2018, two justices have retired since then and been replaced with Trump appointees Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

Bucklew was convicted of shooting and killing Michael Sanders, the live-in boyfriend of Bucklew’s ex-girlfriend Stephanie Ray, kidnapping and raping Ray, shooting at Sanders’ young son, and wounding a police officer – in 1996. By 2008, he had exhausted his appeals, as well as federal and state habeas corpus challenges. Since then, repeated lawsuits have kept him out of the execution chamber.

 » Lees verder

The Supreme Court and US-Israel Dual Citizenship – Global Research


22-03-19 01:33:00,

As AIPAC preps for its annual policy conference entitled “Connected for Good” with an expected attendance of 20,000 committed Zionists,  its most zealous Zionist Congressional supporters will also likely be in attendance; that is, those who have signed the loyalty oath as well as those who retain dual citizenship to Israel and are thereby entitled to AIPAC campaign support.  

There is always more to the story when it comes to AIPAC and how it has been allowed to circumvent and or manipulate US law as it continues to function unfettered by legal requirements that every other foreign country must adhere to.  To take a critical eye to AIPAC should not be construed as anti-semitic as AIPAC can take credit for motivating and finagling the US into wars in the Middle East at a cost of $4 trillion from the American taxpayer.

With allegedly hundreds of members of Congress and Federal government employees with dual US-Israel citizenship, what has been missing since the Supreme Court’s 1967 decision is scrutiny of the unintended consequences of that decision as it has affected American foreign policy.

To date, there may be no way to confirm which, if any, Members of Congress have dual citizenship with Israel although the informed rumor mill claims that to be the case. In a 2015 interview with Sen. Bernie Sanders, Diane Rehm, claiming to have a list, unequivocally stated that you have dual citizenship with Israel” to which Sanders responded just as unequivocally “No. I am an American.”  It is essential for Members to be forthcoming about their citizenship since real or imagined conflicts of interest can only result in misguided speculation and further alienation.

If the Russians had ever inserted itself into American politics as intimately as the Israelis have, both political parties would be loony-tunes but especially the Dems who appear to have more of a fondness for Zionism.  Clearly no other country has taken advantage of the US largesse as Israel has with its hustle of $233 billion (as of 2014) in foreign aid since 1948 including $38 billion in ‘military assistance’ in 2016 plus other unaccounted-for military projects over the years.  

 » Lees verder