#Scandal | Political censorship of teh Pirate Party!

Popular pirates excluded from EU debate

Copied in its entirety from European Pirates
European Pirate Party candidate for the President of the European Commission, Amelia Andersdotter, has been denied participation in a debate with the other candidates. This despite the fact that Amelia, together with Peter Sunde, are the most popular candidates according to the organization VoteWatch’s poll.

Today, April 28, the televised “First European Presidental Debate” is held in Maastricht in front of 700 young voters. The debate is announced as taking place between the nominated candidates to the presidency of the European Commission; however, Amelia Andersdotter, Member of the European Parliament for the Swedish Pirate Party and nominated candidate, has been excluded from participating.

“I don’t like to see myself as a victim. However, the fact that I’m denied access to the first debate between candidates, despite us having followed all the rules for participation and having political support, makes me feel censored for the first time during my time as an EU politician”, says Amelia Andersdotter.

Amelia Andersdotter was nominated for the presidency along with Peter Sunde, former spokesperson for The Pirate Bay, by the European political party European Pirates, which Andersdotter is the chairperson of.

The justification for the exclusion is that she has worked together with the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament and somebody considered that since one of the candidates who will participate in the debate is from the European Green Party, Andersdotter’s participation would give them two candidates from the same movement. This argumentation has holes, however, as the candidates are nominated by the European political parties, not by the European Parliament political groups.

This decision seems to be taken by the organisers despite the fact that Andersdotter and Sunde’s candidacy has received the highest support by those who have participated in the organisation VoteWatch’s poll.

“I have made my utmost efforts to be represented in each of those debates where European top-level politicians present their visions for the future. There is no reason to block me from these debates just because my political party has been good at cooperating with other political parties in the European Parliament. This is very poor behavior from our competitors. We’re the the youngest party by age of members. Ousting us from a debate targeted at young voters is nonsensical and shows someone is misusing their position”, states Amelia Andersdotter.

Published 2014-04-28 and copied in its entirety from European Pirates

TTIP Updates – The Glyn Moody blogs

Tracking the twists and turns of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and spelling out what it really means

Published 16:23, 28 November 13

At the start of 2012 I began a series of posts about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement – ACTA. These took the form of updates on how ACTAwas developing. I did this because I had a sense of how quickly things were moving, and how complicated the issues were, and I wanted to try to track those as they happened.

To make that easier, Computerworld UK brought those updates together on a single page. It turned out to be an extremely exciting ride as opposition toACTA grew across Europe, culminating in the rejection by the European Parliament on 4 July last year.

However, one thing we have learned is that those behind unbalanced laws like SOPA and treaties like ACTA, never give up. If they fail with one, they just try again with another. And so it turns out in the wake of ACTA’s demise. We are now witnessing exactly the same secretive approach being applied to TTIP – the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – originally known as TAFTA, the Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement.

Although TTIP only began a few months ago, it is becoming increasingly controversial as more people begin to realise what is at stake. As I explain in several updates below, one of the key problems is the presence of “investor-state dispute settlement” – ISDS – which I predict will prove to be the most contentious part of TTIP.

Indeed, I think it is likely that ISDS will generate so much resistance among the European public that ultimately it will be removed from TTIP completely in order to give other parts more chance of being passed by the European Parliament, which must approve the agreement once it has been negotiated. What follows is my attempt to track the twists and turns of the journey to that final, fateful vote.

TTIP Update l

A review of the few details that emerged from the first round of negotiations, including an attempt by the European Commission to convince us that TAFTA/TTIP is not another ACTA.

TTIP Update ll

An introduction to investor-state dispute resolution (ISDS), and why its presence in TAFTA/TTIP is a grave threat to European sovereignty, open source and the Internet.

TTIP Update III

A point-by-point rebuttal of a document in which the European Commission tries to prove that the presence of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in TTIP is not a problem.

TTIP Update IV

An exploration of how the public is kept in the dark over TAFTA/TTIP, and the dangrous asymmetries it contains.

TTIP Update V

A discussion of a major Wikileaks document discussing intellectual monopolies in TAFTA/TTIP’s sister agreement, TPP, and what it means for TTIP.

TTIP Update VI

An analysis of a leaked document outlining the European Commission’s communication strategy forTAFTA/TTIP, and a look at how disastrous other trade agreements like NAFTA and KORUS have been.

TTIP Update VII

Yet another, increasingly desperate attempt to justify the unjustifiable inclusion of ISDS in TAFTA/TTIP, and why the arguments simply don’t stand up to scrutiny.

TTIP Update VIII

Lifting the lid on how a new transatlantic “TTIP Regulatory Council” would bring in massive deregulation, with a consequent lowering of food, health and environmental standards in Europe.

TTIP Update IX

How an astonishing attack on Corporate Europe Observatory reveals a floundering European Commission increasingly concerned that it is losing control of the TAFTA/TTIP debate.

TTIP Update X

Another (failed) attack, this time by Karel De Gucht, the EU’s trade commissioner, who laughably tries to claim that there is no lack of transparency in the TAFTA negotiations, and that it’s worth accepting the threats posed by ISDS.

TTIP Update XI

So it looks like TAFTA/TTIP is, in fact, ACTA by the backdoor – despite what Mr De Gucht has said…

TTIP Update XII

Why the US Fast Track bill guarantees that TAFTA’s ISDS chapter will be one-sided and unfair for EU companies

TTIP Update XIII

Big news: EU pulls ISDS to allow unprecedented public consultation; UK report says ISDS in TTIPwould bring little or no benefit

TTIP Update XIV

What new CETA leaks tell us about EU’s plans to re-vamp ISDS – and why they aren’t enough to protect European sovereignty or democracy

TTIP Update XV

There are growing calls to keep data protection out of TAFTA/TTIP – and to reject the agreement if the privacy of European citizens is not adequately protected

TTIP Update XVI

More details emerge on ISDS provisions, and a rather ironic call for transparency from the paranoically opaque USTR

TTIP Update XVII

Bad news, lots of leaks, plus debunking another misleading European Commission document

TTIP Update XVIII

New leaks, new Web sites, a hidden threat from the “most-favoured nation” approach, and an astonishing claim that Germany wants ISDS out of TTIP

TTIP Update XIX

A newly-discovered CETA bug shows why the European Commission needs transparency; also, why regulatory data must be opendata

TTIP Update XX

All about transparency in TTIP – or, rather, the almost complete lack of it; includes details of three phantom EU consultations I never heard about, and few took part in

TTIP Update XXI

Why that best-case “€119 bn” GDP boost to EU economy equates to just an extra cup of coffee every month

TTIP Update XXII