Eric Holder: Organized Crime’s Man of the Year hails Sweden as ’human rights champion’

When down is up, and wrong is right, and warmongers receive peace prizes, it’s no surprise that Sweden should be praised for its human rights record by, of all people, Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States (or “Organized Crime’s Man of the Year” as some call him).

George Mantor writes about Holder’s distinguished career in crime:

Eric Holder: Organized Crime’s Man of the Year

If I were a high level criminal, I would sleep with a life-sized blow-up doll of Eric Holder. How could I not love this man?

When it comes to the drug war, we wouldn’t even have one, and that would be very, very bad for very, very big business.

Prohibition is good for big business. It allows for the creation of extraordinary after cost profits while keeping competitors under control.

When you can grow your own weed or get it from your neighbor, the profit drains out of it. If you can grow Asteraceae, you can grow Cannabis. Who the hell would drop four bills for a lid of daisies?

Money laundering? No problem if you do it on a large enough scale. Government keeps the small players out of illegal activities and collects small penalties, commissions really, for not prosecuting the big boys. That is racketeering. HSBC and Wachovia come to mind.

Eric Holder has gone from the role to chief law enforcement officer of the people to a collector of commissions for providing protection to high level criminals.

If you say something the government doesn’t like, he will send a drone for your ass. It seems about the only punishable crimes left in America are speaking out and smoking dope.

Last week, Eric Holder shrugged off prosecuting bankstas because he thought it might be bad for the economy. And, he did it with a straight face.

Refusing to prosecute the largest ongoing global Ponzi scheme in all of history because it could hurt the economy? WTF? What economy? The Ponzi scheme and fiat money are the economy.

Most frustrating of all, perhaps, is that when Holder leaves office, he’ll have a lifetime lucrative job with one of the entities he refused to prosecute. It’s all so blatant. Who could deny that Eric Holder is anything but a facilitator of the corporatocrocy, and certainly not a servant of the people?

Read the full article at: zerohedge.com

[For more, see Eric Holder’s complete criminal bio]

Holder will be stepping down this year, probably to sighs of relief from the U.S. population. In his time Holder became infamous for a long string of Justice Department scandals including: spying on Associated Press journalists and seizing their phone records, the ’Fast and Furious’ gun trafficking disgrace, and being held in contempt of Congress for withholding documents related to investigations.

The damage has been done, but Holder can’t go without shoring up the stage for the continued ’Egalitarian Utopia’ theater.

During the first ever visit of a top U.S. legal official visit, Holder praised Sweden as a “champion of human rights”.

From TheLocal.se:

“I have repeatedly seen the significant, positive difference that Swedish engagement brings to the international stage,” Holder told the gathered audience of politicians, dignitaries, and representatives from various human rights groups in Sweden.

Holder, the first African American Attorney General of the United States, went on to praise Sweden for passing the Discrimination Act of 2008 and for being a leader in recognizing same-sex marriages.

“By becoming the seventh nation in the world to extend the right to marry to gay and lesbian couples, you’ve stabilized families and expanded individual liberty,” he said.

He went on to reference Sweden’s tradition of being a “safe haven” for refugees dating back to the granting of asylum to Jewish migrants fleeing persecution during World War II.

“You’ve shown that, although it is seldom easy, it is both noble and, more importantly, right to fight the short term comfort of indifference; to welcome those who flee from persecution; and to shelter those who struggle to survive in the lands where they were born,” he said.

The speech, billed as a talk about confronting contemporary civil rights challenges, comes as Holder faces questions back home and from leaders in Europe about the surveillance methods of the National Security Agency (NSA).

The issue came up once again during questions following the Tuesday’s speech in Stockholm, when Holder was asked whether individual privacy protections need to be strengthened following revelations about the extent of the NSA’s data gathering activities.

“The activities undertaken by the NSA are legal under American law,” Holder pointed out.

“But that doesn’t answer the question. Simply because we have the technical ability to do certain things and the legal ability to carry out certain surveillance activities, the question we need to ask ourselves is whether or not this is something that we should do.”

He added that he, along with the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, is now engaged in an effort to review US surveillance methods.

“It’s with the understanding that we want to keep the American people safe; we want to help keep the citizens of our allies safe,” said Holder, adding he hopes to “strike a balance”.

Read the full article at: thelocal.se

This message is a striking discord to what journalist and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has voiced regarding society and law in Sweden, stating the country is the “Saudi Arabia of feminism”.

Considering the known human right abuses and other implementations of “soft tyrannical policies” in Sweden, it’s strange that Holder would approve of Sweden like this. Or is it?

Why would Eric Holder praise Sweden?

Well, they banned homeschooling

Swedish social child services still haven’t given back the abducted Domenic to the Johansson family

Sweden as a trailblazer is pushing for the end of cash

Sweden has illegally wiretapped since at least 1970 by SÄPO

Then in 2008 it finally became “legal”: See here and here

The program has since expanded immensely

They’ve been promoting neutrality, while arming the world

And despite the Swedish model / the Nordic model is continuing to be promoted,cracks in the facade have finally become visible to some that have been pushing it as a cure-all

Again, there is the Assange story and how Sweden treated him

Not to mention the CIA and NATO connections

Or the accusations that Swedish authorities are separating innocent families

Also, please never speak of the ongoing gender war, and how by law, Swedish men are 2nd class citizens

Even homeless people in Sweden are forced to pay mandatory TV-license fees to fund the state owned propaganda machine

Chillingly, Sweden is a stalkers paradise, where no privacy remains

So yes, of course a criminal like Eric Holder would promote and praise a system that completely ignores human rights, is involved in social engineering on a massive scale, and promotes a “soft tyranny” to the extent that British author Ronald Huntford in the late 70’s realized that Sweden had fulfilled the role of the Orwellian state that George Orwell predicted in his book, 1984. You can read more about The New Totalitarians here.

For all the things you never knew about Sweden, please listen and learn:

Red Ice Radio: What You Didn’t Know About Sweden

Homeless man ordered to pay TV license fee

A homeless man has been asked to pay the Radiotjänst license fee, which funds Swedish public service radio and television, despite having neither a home nor a TV.

image

The Metro newspaper reported on Tuesday that the man received an invoice for a year’s worth of watching television. He has since appealed the 2,702 kronor ($415) fee to an administrative court, which did not rule in his favour.

“I will never pay because I think I’ve been wrongly treated,” the man told Metro.

image

After the man’s television broke in early 2012, he requested that he be exempt from paying the fee. As he became homeless shortly thereafter, he never received the letter and invoice from Radiotjänst explaining that his request had been denied.

The license fee has made the news several times this past year as it was extended to owners of smartphones, computers, and tablets. The law states that a person with a device that can access public service Sveriges Television (SVT) must pay the fee.

It also emerged last year that the prime minister had not paid his TV license fee at the official residence Sagerska huset. The government said it considered the residence part of the government offices and as such should be covered by its license fee.

“The obligation to pay the TV license covers all Swedish citizens, with some exceptions for elder care facilities and diplomats”, Radiotjänst CEO Carl Gustav Johansson told local media at the time. “There is no exception for, for example, the royal family or the prime minister.”

Source: thelocal.se

Comment: Oh you precious equality! This is further proof off the insanity of Swedish state enforced “equality” and a “one size fits all” mentality that has gone way overboard. More importantly, it demonstrate the madness of state owned media, subsidies for the press and that this “we’ll force you to pay, because you might watch our content” mentality is beyond backwards and absurd. It is in fact tyrannical collectivism. How is this “mandatory” fee not theft? It’s not voluntary, so is it not theft? The state takes your money and then funds the state propaganda with that money. The state is a parasite that creates nothing and generates nothing. I say: Let them compete on the market (in the few remnants that is still the free market) and we’ll see how many would voluntarily pay for your services SVT & SR!

Sweden’s health system ‘worst in the Nordics’

but, but, but…. wasn’t Sweden’s brilliant healthcare system one of the major reasons why the feudal kingdom time and time again get’s voted as one of the “happies” and “best” place one earth, by neo con organisations like Legatum? This is after all the socialist egalitarian utopia where “free” healthcare is forced on you whether you want it or not.

Long queues to see a doctor and get treatment in Sweden have dragged the country far down a European ranking of healthcare providers, with Sweden now the worst among its Nordic neighbours despite efforts to cut waiting times.

Continue reading

A Short History of Sweden’s Entitlement Society

During his long reign, Tage Erlander, Swedish prime minister between 1946 and 1969, spoke grudgingly of the impending “discontent of growing expectations.” He was referring to how the Swedish labor movement, after decades of expansive welfare reforms, rather than being gratified, seemed incessantly focused on what it had not yet received from the perennial Social Democratic government.
Erlander’s misgivings turned out to be accurate. The entitlement society is indeed a beast that feeds on itself. From 1959 to 1977 the total tax burden in Sweden grew from a moderate 25.2 percent to a staggering 47.5 percent, topping out in 1990 at 52.3 percent. During the same time, the public sector share of GDP doubled, while private payrolls fell, predictably causing a decline in economic growth. In 1970 Sweden’s growth was second in the world only to Japan’s; in 1990 it was second-lowest in the OECD, even as entitlements and the public sector kept growing. Hence, a familiar choice: Either stop spending, or keep borrowing on the backs of future generations.
But making such a choice is no simple thing. A universal welfare state has consequences that run deeper than the economy, and are more difficult to reverse even than a two-decade-long economic disaster. Fundamental structures of civil society wilt when human responsibilities—including those towards future generations—are subsumed under government entitlements (in Sweden, giving to charity, absurdly, came to be considered a lack of solidarity, since it undermined the need for the welfare state); a sense of passivity spreads when people feel that personal happiness or despondency is independent of their own actions. The bureaucratic framework of the welfare state also locks in electoral support as a growing share of the voters move from private to public payrolls—why vote yourself out of a job? All of these factors made the prospects for Sweden to break the vicious spiral bleak indeed.
Sweden is a country that only 30 years ago was on the brink of socializing corporate profits so as to continue down the road to ruin.
Against all odds, voters defied political expectations. In 1991 they removed the Social Democratic government, and put in place a center-right government that promised to attack the fundamental problems of the welfare state. When the Social Democratic party was voted back in three years later—as a consequence not of the reforms, but because the economic recovery was not coming soon enough—it continued on the road to reform, keeping in place the essential transformations.
Sweden is a country that only 30 years ago was on the brink of socializing corporate profits so as to continue down the road to ruin.
Excerpts from: weeklystandard.com
Ed comment: The article gives the illusion that it’s “better” in Sweden now. Sweden is still very much an entitlement society. There has been a very clever program of privatizations that gives outsiders the illusion that Sweden is much more “liberal” economically speaking. In other words less “left” and more “free market.” This is indeed only an illusion. Government regulates like a monolithic monster it has become and there are not many alternate paths for those who want to go above and beyond the playpen that the government has drawn for the tightly regulated business world. Government, together with the few mega monopoly companies regulate to a point where the smaller companies can’t keep up and fulfill the ridiculous jumping of hoop to attain licenses, inspections, approvals, paper work and not to mention the sky high taxes. The “competition” is effectively eroded away pretty early in the game. There is also, more worryingly, no incentive to work hard in Sweden. To “over-achieve” is furthermore a cultural taboo. From the article: “Folkhemmet” – Sweden’s Fascism in slow motion we can read:

After their big economic meltdown in the early 90′s (huge unemployment and welfare benefits that could no longer be paid for) they undertook an exemplary program of privatizations and made big cuts to both taxes and welfare benefits but there are still huge disincentives to work in Sweden. Incomes are kept pretty uniform regardless of what you do — meaning that there is little incentive either to improve one’s skills or to work hard — and the sickness benefit side of the welfare system is still a huge racket. People on sickness benefits no longer get a higher income than they would by working but the benefits are still close to wages and access to the system is very easy. So huge numbers of Swedes have declared themselves too ill to work.

As a consequence, average Swedish incomes have fallen well behind American standards — as indexed by the most objective criterion we have: GDP per capita. When purchasing power is taken into account, the picture is even worse. A cup of coffee, for instance, is likely to cost you three times as much in Sweden as in the USA.
There is much more behind the “transition” from the seemingly endless reign of Tage Erlander, Olof Palme and the social democrats, then the article suggests. When the question was raised to potentially socialize corporate profits, at some point around 1985, it must have been “decided” at a higher level to simply remove Palme from his position of power. Palme was assassinated in February 1986.
But the tyranny remains and slowly.. SLOWLY Sweden is moving in a direction of centralization, control and totalitarian social planning.

“Folkhemmet” – Sweden’s Fascism in slow motion

Excerpts from John J. Ray

The dominant political party in Sweden since 1932 on has been the Social Democratic Party. The program and policy of the Social Democrats centred around transforming Sweden into a folkhemmet (A home for the people). This became the dominant Swedish concept of Sweden in 1932 with the accession to power of the Social Democrats but was well in evidence before that. The concept is usually traced to a book, The State as a Live Form ( Staten som livsform ), written by Rudolf Kjellen in 1910.

Folkhemmet is probably best translated as “a home for the Swedish people”. And this idea of what Sweden should be was what the Swedish Social Democratic Party preached. The concept is the core of the “Swedish model” and what it brought about was essentially just another version of the characteristic Fascist “corporate” or “collectivist” State. So, like Fascism generally, the Swedish model was seen as a Third Way between Communism and Capitalism.

The Swedish corporate State really got going only in 1938, however, with the Saltsjobaden Agreement between the unions and the employers. This agreement outlawed strikes and created a central wage-fixing system for the whole country.

And Sweden has been essentially a socialist one-party State since 1932, with the socialists being out of power for brief interludes only. But what exactly the folkhemmet should consist of evolved and developed only very slowly and gradually. Change in Sweden is glacial even in the hands of Leftists so the fundamentally paternalist folkhemmet took many years to develop a sweeping dominance of Swedish life. Bit by bit taxes were raised, business was regulated and taken over and welfare programs were expanded. It was not in fact until the early 1990s that the whole edifice came crashing down. So the concept of a fatherly government was there from the beginning, the one-party State was there and a quiet conviction of Swedish superiority and unique wisdom was also there.

Like all Fascist ideologies, however, folkhemmet had its own unique national character. Sweden experienced nothing remotely like the huge interwar disruptions that took place in Germany and Italy — for the excellent reason that Sweden stayed out of WW1. So Swedish nationalism was much calmer and less excitable. Which led to it being neither strident nor expansionist. Swedes felt perfectly comfortable with the burgeoning wealth being produced by their own country and so felt no need for foreign adventures or huge and sudden changes.

The Swedish Social Democratic party was founded on its popularity and was achieved by constitutional rather than revolutionary means.

So the Swedish folkhemmet State was welfarist, nationalist, paternalist and essentially all-powerful. Because it used its power very sparingly and cautiously, however, and respected civil liberties, it was undoubtedly the mildest of the Fascist States. Fascism varied greatly from country to country (to take a rather striking example, Sir Oswald Mosley initially used to expel from the British Union of Fascists anyone who made antisemitic remarks!) and the distinguishing feature of the Swedish version was undoubtedly that it was the least authoritarian. And after the war the Swedish Social Democrats did as all Leftists did and abandoned overt nationalism.

After their big economic meltdown in the early 90′s (huge unemployment and welfare benefits that could no longer be paid for) they undertook an exemplary program of privatizations and made big cuts to both taxes and welfare benefits but there are still huge disincentives to work in Sweden. Incomes are kept pretty uniform regardless of what you do — meaning that there is little incentive either to improve one’s skills or to work hard — and the sickness benefit side of the welfare system is still a huge racket. People on sickness benefits no longer get a higher income than they would by working but the benefits are still close to wages and access to the system is very easy. So huge numbers of Swedes have declared themselves too ill to work.

As a consequence, average Swedish incomes have fallen well behind American standards — as indexed by the most objective criterion we have: GDP per capita. When purchasing power is taken into account, the picture is even worse. A cup of coffee, for instance, is likely to cost you three times as much in Sweden as in the USA.

Leftists who advocate high taxes and pervasive welfare need to be told that the country that went furthest in that direction hit a rock years ago and has been paddling in reverse ever since.

There is an assumption that the welfare states of Scandinavia were high-tax regimes which tried to redistribute wealth from rich businessmen to the average person. This is not the case at all. On the whole the Scandinavian systems are not meant to be redistributive states. Nor are businessmen the targets. Business is relatively lightly taxed compared to many developed nations. It is not the earnings of businesses that the bureaucrats want to control but people. (Comment: This point might be true for BIG corporations that are running the country together with the government (Revolving door business/politics – the same people on the board of a large company take turns to sit in government positions). Small individual business owners are taxed in to oblivion, unable to employ and survive for the most part. Privateers are unwanted in Sweden. They want you working for BIG companies. Entrepreneurship is pretty much non existent in Sweden. As long as you are dependent sucking of the corporate-fashist-government teet, it’s ok.)

The Swedish welfare state, in particular, was designed so that the average individual was highly taxed. There was even the well-known case of Swedish author Astrid Lindgren, of Pippi Longstocking fame, who discovered that her tax bill was 102% of her earnings. Consumers are highly taxed, while business itself is not so highly taxed.

The reason for this is simple. Taxation is a means of control. The object of control in the Swedish system is not business, they produce the golden eggs after all. The object of control is the individual. The Swedish system doesn’t so much redistribute your wealth but confiscate it and return it to you provided you spend it in ways approved of by the political elite.

Consider how this system works. Say you are taxed $100 on earnings of $150. The state may now say that can have $20 back in education vouchers for your children, $30 in health “benefits” and so on. If you choose to spend in other ways you will not receive the money back. In essence the Swedish system was created to take control of the individual Swedish consumer, not redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. While some redistribution is inevitable that is not the reason why the system was created.

Swedish business is more lightly taxed because the government wants business to provide jobs for workers. Once the workers are employed the state can tax them and control their spending. Approved spending is subsidized with the tax money that consumers pay in, unapproved spending is not subsidized or may be heavily taxed. This system of coercive incentives is meant to regulate how people act.

While many in the world think that the “third way” of Sweden was a “socialistic” policy of helping the needy, the reality is closer to a “fascistic” policy of manipulating the consumers into behaving in ways that politicians want.

Outcry over Sweden’s Persecution of Homeschoolers Grows

By Alex Newman | thenewamerican.com

As homeschooling families continue to flee Sweden in the face of escalating persecution, the global outcry over the controversial Swedish policies is growing louder. More than a few critics and reporters have even blasted the government’s actions and behavior as reminiscent of the former Soviet Union.

In recent days, a senior U.S. lawmaker and popular televangelist Pat Robertson have spoken about the situation as well. And Jews around the world are concerned about the fate of a Jewish homeschooling family being targeted in Sweden, too.

The Swedish government was already facing worldwide criticism from human rights groups for what opponents called its “kidnapping” of Domenic Johansson. The then-7-year-old homeschooler was abducted from an airplane bound for India by police after his parents refused to stop educating him at home — and that was in June of 2009, while homeschooling was still technically legal. The boy remains in state custody, completely isolated from his parents.

The ongoing tragedy drew prompt condemnation from around the world. Organizations like the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), Advocates International, the Network for Freedom in Education, the Nordic Committee for Human Rights, and many more all got involved. Media outlets from every corner of the globe picked up the story, too, shattering Sweden’s image as a “social utopia.”

And now, the pressure just got turned up another notch. After a tear-jerking report about the Johansson family’s plight by the Christian Broadcasting Network, popular television evangelist Pat Robertson — an American media icon with incalculable global influence — offered his comments: “It’s so amazing — this family was leaving,” he said. “They were on an airplane — on an airplane leaving — so what do the Swedes care whether they were homeschooling their kid? They were leaving the country!”

And the tragedy is a consequence of overbearing government, he warned. “This is what socialism does. This is what the Big Brother does. And they never want to admit a mistake. That’s what happened here,” Robertson said during a segment of The 700 Club, an enormously influential Christian TV program aired throughout the U.S. and around the world. The show reaches hundreds of millions of people in more than a dozen nations every year.

“They made a mistake and they won’t admit it, so this poor child is being destroyed — the family is being ruined — because of a bureaucratic mistake,” Robertson continued, calling the tragedy “unbelievable.” “It breaks your heart. That’s why we have got to fight for your freedom. Fight for your freedom here in America — don’t give up your liberties.”

Robertson’s co-host, Kristi Watts, agreed. “My heart is just on the floor right now,” she said, asking parents around the world to pray for the family and the little boy.

Before Pat Robertson and CBN’s most recent segment on the Johansson family, Fox News personality Judge Andrew Napolitano exposed the tragedy on Freedom Watch as well. And as time goes by, pressure on the Swedish government is intensifying. But it is not just the Johansson family that has been targeted.

In 2010, Sweden’s Parliament passed a draconian law essentially banning homeschooling while forcing all schools to teach the highly controversial government curriculum. The measure officially made Sweden the first Western nation since Nazi Germany to prohibit home education.

Homeschoolers in the Scandinavian nation, terrified of what might happen after the Johansson saga, began to flee. Families moved to Canada, the Czech Republic, various Nordic nations — all of which allow home education — and other nations. So far, however, despite the persecution, no homeschooled children in Sweden have been enrolled long-term in government schools.

After the controversial law went into effect last year, Jonas Himmelstrand, the president of the Swedish Association for Home Education (ROHUS), decided to stay and fight — at least until the persecution campaign intensified. But enormous fines and threats from the social services finally forced him to seek asylum with his family in neighboring Finland, where he now lives in the same area as other Swedish homeschooling exiles.

And the world has taken notice. Most recently, U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) sent a letter to the Swedish Ambassador to the United States, Jonas Hafström, inquiring about the Himmelstrands. According to reports, Sen. Blunt wanted to know why they were forced to flee from their homeland.

The response from Ambassador Hafström has human rights advocates very concerned about the situation. “Sweden believes in defending the rights of the child, and as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Sweden offers strong legal protection to the rights of children,” Hafström claimed in the letter.

Analysts seized on the comment to re-emphasize the potential dangers of the highly controversial UN CRC treaty, which the U.S. government has not ratified. However, others have noted that multiple UN and EU treaties specifically permit homeschooling, thereby rendering the Ambassador’s response bizarre, according to critics.

“Parents have a prior right to determine the form and content of their children’s education,” explained HSLDA Chairman Mike Farris, who also leads the group ParentalRights.org. “In … Sweden, we see a one-size-fits-all approach to education that seeks to restrict, if not deny, a parent’s ability to teach what they believe.”

The Swedish government, apparently, does not see it that way. “All children in Sweden have the right to education on the same terms and high quality instruction, and we find that compulsory schooling is a way to guarantee that this right is fulfilled for all children. Under Swedish law, school instruction must be comprehensive and objective,” Ambassador Hafström’s response continued, misusing the term “rights” to refer to state mandates instead. “The government does not find that homeschooling is necessary for religious or philosophical reasons.”

But along with Christians, atheists, and others, Jews in Sweden and around the world disagree. In the Swedish city of Gothenburg, authorities are attempting to force a respected Jewish family — using official threats and intimidation — to violate their values by sending their remaining school-age children to government school.

Out of 11 children, four are still young enough to be subject to the government edict, though they have been educated successfully outside of the Swedish system by their parents and through a Jewish distance-learning program. The family’s older children — most of whom were also taught at home — were all educated to a much higher standard than their Swedish peers.

“This is a stain on the reputation of a country that takes pride in equality as a fundamental value,” said Rabbi Alexander Namdar, a representative of the Chassidic movement to Sweden for over two decades. The family’s attorney told reporters that the case would be a critical test of Sweden’s religious freedom, and the government’s threats have already created a firestorm of controversy.

Homeschooling families and human rights advocates around the world have been engaged in a massive letter-writing campaign asking Swedish authorities to respect international treaties and individual rights. Other outraged activists have even called for a boycott of Swedish goods. Some are simply praying. But across the globe, pressure is mounting and will almost certainly continue to build.

Source: http://thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/11283-outcry-over-swedens-persecution-of-homeschoolers-grows

The Dark Side of Government Schooling in Sweden

In 2011 Sweden banned homeschooling “except under exceptional circumstances,” forcing some families to immediately leave the country in order to continue homeschooling and others to stay and see what would happen. Those who stayed have faced very stiff fines for every day they homeschool their children, though to date no one has been taken to court for payment. But it appears this will soon change. Swedish educationists want to be sure that children have the right to go to school, but not the reciprocal right to decline and learn in other types of settings, such as at home and in their communities. A strange “right” this is—the right to be forced to attend school under threat of fines, the right to lose your children to social services, and the right to only follow instructions from government agencies about what you can and can’t do for your children’s education.

There is a Swedish news article about making this explicit in their law; my friends in Sweden have translated this blog entry by one of the proposal’s proponents, Lotta Edholm:

Today I have written an opinion piece together with Ann-Katrin Åslund (Liberal Party) in Aftonbladet asking that the social services act be changed so that the social authorities have the possibility act when children are held from away school by their parents – often for religious or ideological reasons. Every child has a right to an education. The school law states that education shall “be designed in accordance with democratic values and human rights”. This is incompatible with a system where parents simply can refuse to send their children to school and the social services has no support in law to intervene. Deputy Minister of Social Affairs, Maria Larsson, who is also responsible for conditions for children, should take an initiative to change the social services act so that the social authorities can intervene when children are kept away from school by their parents.

 

There are significant differences in social attitudes and laws between Sweden and the United States, so it is not useful to simply say that US law is better than Swedish law and they should be more like us. But there is a very strong assumption by the Swede’s that education is a science that can only performed by those who are certified in it, and challenging that perception may be the hinge for successfully challenging the Swedish homeschooling ban. Here are some ideas on that topic:

If there is one correct way to educate all children, why are there so many different pedagogies? If education is only the result of instruction performed by professionals in schools, why do countries with lots of educational options, such as Finland and Denmark, flourish? There is a large research base that supports informal learning and other models besides government schooling: How does Sweden justify ignoring a human’s innate ability to learn on his or her own, as we’ve done for centuries before compulsory schooling became the norm (around 1850), as well as all the research that supports intrinsic motivation, autodidactic behavior, and learning by doing as deep sources for educational excellence? What about the Pippi Longstockings—those children who do not respond to control and prediction in classroom settings but nonetheless succeed in life? Getting parents involved in their children’s education is vital according to every piece of research I have read, so why must parents stop at a certain point? Why must education be either/or (school/homeschool) and not both/and? I can go on, but I’ll stop here for now.

Underlying a lot of this discussion, from what I can tell by reading in translation, is also a fear of “the other”: people whose religious, educational, or political beliefs are different from the government’s beliefs. We have struggled with this issue in our own country and have created a pluralist society that tolerates many ways of living and growing, though it is hardly perfect. Nonetheless, we are at least making an effort at inclusion in the United States; it remains to be seen if such tolerance for “the other” will continue in Sweden.

http://patfarenga.squarespace.com/pat-farengas-blog/2012/1/12/the-dark-side-of-government-schooling-in-sweden.html

New Education Law Makes Homeschooling Illegal in Sweden

How the Swedish Government voted against a human right.
The Swedish Parliament passed a new school law on Tuesday, June 22, 2010.

This is the first completely re-written school law since 1985 and it is about 1500 pages long. Two or three of these pages concern ”completing the school obligation in other ways”, or in other words homeschooling. The new law even further restricts an already highly restrictive policy on homeschooling in Sweden, making it pretty much illegal. Here is the story.

What does the new law on homeschooling say?

The writing on homeschooling in the new law is basically the same as in the old law. The law requires a fully satisfactory alternative to school and that the authorities can look into the homeschooling. However, the new law adds a third requirement: “there must be exceptional circumstances”. Lawyers have told us that “exceptional circumstances” in a Swedish juridical context means as close to a definite “no” as you can get, regardless of the circumstances.

Also in the motivational text of the law, which explains how the new law on homeschooling is to be interpreted, the following can be read (my translation):

“Current school conventions make it clear that the education in school shall be comprehensive and objective, and thereby be created so that all pupils can participate, no matter what religious or philosophical views the pupil or its legal guardian/s may have. In accordance with this it is the opinion of the Government that there is no need of a law to make possible homeschooling based on the religious of philosophical views of the family.”

Page 523 in Prop. 2009/10:165 (Swedish Government proposition)

This means that religious or philosophical convictions are no longer valid reasons for homeschooling under the new school law.

How Rohus worked to stop the law

Using all of its rather limited resources Rohus has worked vigorously to stop this new law ever since it was proposed on June 15, 2009. Rohus was asked by the Ministry of Education to give a consideration on the new law, which we did in September 2009 in a full 228 pages. During the spring we have lobbied Members of Parliament and written countless e-mails to the Parliament and to the Government. We have worked hard with media getting more published articles and TV-spots on homeschooling in the last six months than probably in the last ten years all put together. We have sent many requests to the Minister of Education asking for a meeting, but have always been turned down. In the last week before the vote Rohus wrote one e-mail per day, each with a new argument for homeschooling, to all 349 Members of Parliament. Several members responded to us in agreement or disagreement. Obviously, there was a reaction to the e-mails we were sending.

In the vote of the new law the red-green opposition – the Social-democrats, the Green Party and the Leftist Party – voted against the law with the basic reason that there was not enough time to evaluate the law. The centre-right government side of the parliament voted for the law – the Liberal Party, the Moderate Party, the Centre Party and the Christian Democrats. Thereby this centre-right Swedish Government approved of a law clearly violating human rights in Sweden.

No true majority for all aspects of the new lawIn truth, however, there was no majority in Parliament in favour of passing the whole law. We knew from the e-mail responses and from personal meetings with several Members of Parliament that they were probably a dozen members on the Government side who did not want to restrict homeschooling. How could the law still be passed? ”Well, such is democracy”, says a member of the Christian Democratic Party, one of those who did not want to restrict homeschooling. What this person meant was: The mandate of the Government, the party line and the bureaucratic procedures. There was no possibility to vote ”no” only to the pages on homeschooling, and a ”no” to the entire law would have inflicted a Government crises. In this way a human right was terminated with few people realizing it.

One dissident on the law in the Swedish Parliament

One member on the Government side, however, did not want to vote against her conviction and was replaced by another person in the vote. Maria Kornevik Jakobsson from the Centre Party was critical both to the restriction on homeschooling, and to the view of the new law to make day care and pre-school regarded as a form of school. She was concerned that this was first step to make day-care and pre-school compulsory. This made a new split in the current Government coalition visible: On one hand, the rationalist and neo-liberal Liberal Party and Moderate Party; On the other hand the more more traditionally liberal and developmentally oriented Christian Democrats and the Centre Party.

A weak Swedish democracy made the ban on homeschooling possible

The new school law has brought into the open a much bigger issue than the question of homeschooling. No democratic Government should have the possibility to abolish a human right through law. There needs to be rules to what a Government can do. In other countries this is called a constitution. Sweden lacks a true constitution and an elected Swedish Government has great freedom to do whatever it wishes. The only real control is at election every fourth year. If Sweden had been a true democracy, the Supreme Court council on new laws (Lagrådet) could have stopped the law. The Lagrådet also criticized the new key words in the law restricting homeschooling: ”exceptional circumstances” in chapter 24, paragraph 23. The Lagrådet found the term ill defined. But as the Lagrådet at present only has an advisory function the Government did not need to care, and indeed they did not.

The only power in Sweden seems to be able stop a human right from being terminated by law is the media. If the opinion in media is strong enough, the Government gets cold feet in fear of losing votes. The fifty or so Swedish Homeschooling families were simply too few, in spite of hard work and wonderful international support – too few to make sufficient headway in the media.

Human rights are not strong in Sweden

Human rights do not have strong support in Sweden. In Sweden it is possible for a human right to be abolished in Parliament based on prejudices and ignorance – this is exactly what we witnessed just now. This is the ultimate reason for homeschooling being restricted as close to being fully illegal as can be. The worst part is that the present Swedish Government actually used this democratic weakness. It is hard to write in a civilized way what Swedish homeschoolers feel about this.

Still, there is hope for the future

But not everything is on the dark side. A human right living in the heart of some citizens can never be abolished through a vote in Parliament. And Rohus has definitely made some inroads into top politics. Several embarrassed Members of Parliament have tried to sheer up Rohus board members during personal encounters outside the Parliament building this Monday. The say that homeschooling has not been made illegal, there is still some possibilities to get permission, especially for secular members of Rohus. Of course, Rohus will confront them with this if Swedish homeschoolers get problems with the new school law.

International pressure is paramount

During the informal talks on Monday we also learnt that the Swedish Government is not happy about the international attention the new law restricting homeschooling has attracted. Again, the international help given to Rohus has had a definite effect. A plausible conclusion could be that the Ministry of Education has lately realized that the restriction may not have been worth its political cost, but that stopping the law again was not possible for reasons of political prestige. An optimistic view of this conclusion would be that the Swedish Government does not want to see any spectacular cases of exile, political asylum in other countries or homeschoolers put in jail, and that it will do what it can to stop this. The could lead to a mild interpretation of the new law, and international pressure will certainly help in this respect.The law could be short-lived.

In September Sweden has national elections and the law cannot be considered to be in effect until after the election. The outcome of the election is by no means certain and new parties could cause a complicated political situation. The fate of the new school law is therefore at present in the hands of the September election. Parts of the law could be very short-lived.

Homeschooling in Sweden will continue

Swedish homeschoolers will not be intimidated by the new law. They will continue to homeschool. They will either fight in court or go in political exile – they need not go further than the neighboring Nordic countries which all allow homeschooling under workable circumstances. Rohus will continue to work politically to change the law, through new connections established and through the new awareness of homeschooling which seems to be growing, even if it is slowly, in Parliament.

Jonas Himmelstrand

President of Rohus – The Swedish Association for Home Education

PS.

Please, also sign our petition HERE if you want to support us in our work to ensure that home education becomes a legal alternative to school.

Soviet-Swedish Social Services Kidnap and Abuse Domenic Johansson – Why? Home-Schooling!

From: cbn.com

Comment: An Open Society? A Democracy? Freedom of Choice? NO NO NO!

It’s been called one of the worst cases of government abuse ever committed against a home schooling family: the abduction by Swedish authorities of Domenic Johansson, a happy, healthy, 7-year-old boy taken from his parents Christer and Annie Johansson in 2009 as they waited to leave Sweden on a flight to India.

After the abduction, the Johanssons’ story spread quickly on the Internet.

But three years later, Domenic is still being kept from his parents, and Swedish authorities keep finding new reasons for why the child can’t go home.

friendsofdomenic.blogspot.se

The Abduction

“This is about the most fundamental right you have. You have the right to your own children, or you should have,” Christer told CBN News during the first television interview he and his wife have given since their only child’s abduction.

In 2008, Christer and Annie were making plans to leave Sweden for humanitarian work in Annie’s native India.

They decided it would be best for Domenic to be home-schooled during the final months before their departure, rather than enroll him in public school.

Christer says Sweden’s Ministry of Education told him they could home-school, but local officials levied steep fines and threatened the couple to discourage them from doing so.

Then, as the parents sat on a plane at Stockholm airport for their scheduled trip to India, police came aboard and took Domenic away.

“They took Domenic from the plane,” Christer recalled. “Then he threw up until they took him to ER. That’s how severe the trauma is. If someone throws up so you have to take him to the hospital, that’s severe.”

“I have no clue what went on,” Annie added. “There was just a stampede. My child had no clue, and I have no clue still what’s going on. I can just hear the screams of my child all the time.”

Cat and Mouse

According to Christer, the couple was supposed to have Domenic back a few days later. But when they went to pick him up, authorities changed their story.

Officials decided Domenic was “at risk,” because he had cavities and did not have every recommended vaccination. They also noted he was shy.

Gotland Social Services then found more problems — claiming the Johanssons’ home didn’t have enough furniture, and that Christer was a drug addict with a mental illness, even though he passed a drug test and psychiatric examination.

“I went to psychiatric clinic and said, ’Check me thoroughly,’ and they did. So I took that paper to court and it had no effect whatsoever,” Christer recalled. “I said, ’I’m healthy,’ but the Social Services and Social Services’ lawyer said ’No, you are suffering from personality disorder.’”

Social Services said Domenic was developmentally delayed, although videos show him flying a plane on a flight simulator before being abducted at age 7, and also speaking clear English.

Authorities were also disturbed that Domenic was too affectionate with other children, greeting his friends with a hug and kiss on the cheek. They called this “deviant behavior.”

Christer was then labeled a “human rights fanatic.”

Christer said authorities have resisted all attempts to reunite the family. And evidence showing that the pair are good parents has been completely ignored.

“It doesn’t matter if we have professors or doctors to speak for us. It just doesn’t matter,” he said.

Swedish Soviet Union?

Exasperated, Christer brought Domenic home without permission in Nov. 2010. Police then raided their home with guns and dogs and took Domenic away again. Christer was put in jail for two months.

“The Domenic Johansson case is the home-school tragedy of Sweden. I believe this was simply a mistake,” Jonas Himmelstrand, who heads the Swedish Homeschooling Association (Rohus), told CBN News.

“Officials didn’t realize they couldn’t take a child on home schooling charges alone. So after they took him, they invented all kinds of other reasons — and also pride, which is well-known among Swedish authorities, that once they’ve made a mistake to never admit it,” he said.

Michael Donnelly, an attorney for the Home School Legal Defense Association, which is helping the Johanssons, said, “It’s astonishing to me that free governments who know about this case have not done more.

Donnelly compared the Swedish government’s behavior to the Soviet Union.

“This local government, backed up now by Swedish courts, have demonstrated that they are capable of visiting the most totalitarian acts on their own citizens, reminiscent of the Soviet Union and communist countries in recent history,” Donnelly said.

The Emotional Fallout

Annie and Christer were only allowed to visit Domenic for one hour every five weeks, but even that has stopped. Christer said the son who so obviously loved his parents before the abduction, now no longer wants to see them.

“We haven’t had any contact with him since Nov. 2010 – not a phone call, not one. We don’t know how he is. We don’t know anything,” Christer said.

Annie suffered an emotional breakdown after the abduction and now suffers from panic attacks when she talks about what happened.

The Gotland Social Services Board has told the media that secrecy prevents it from discussing the case. But Sweden’s ambassador to the United States has defended his government’s actions.

Meanwhile, the Johanssons’ attorney Ruby Harrold-Claesson says the police abduction of Domenic from the plane was illegal, and another court hearing is scheduled for May.

But photos of Domenic before and after the abduction show what Christer describes as boy who has already been “broken into a million pieces.” Annie and Christer keep hoping this nightmare will end.

“How can you live without your children?” Annie asked. “It’s devastated our life. This has in fact devastated everything in our life.”

Source: cbn.com

Ed Comment: This is the essence of life in Sweden. CONFORMITY and UNIFORMITY. “Oneness”, all the same, do the same, shut up and go back to sleep. Law of Jante

Please listen to our commentary: The Nordic Model, a Template for Global Enslavement

Red Ice Radio

John Taylor Gatto – History of Education, Social Engineering & Indoctrination in the School System

Hour 2 of this interview: here

EU “cyber snoops” sue Sweden for fighting Big Brother – Although Big Brother already is here

By Henrik Palmgren | redicecreations.com

Sweden government is picking a fight with the EU over plans to monitor and store all telecom and internet traffic, when every call, every text, even every email will be watched if the EU has its way.

Here is the video from RT at YouTube

Watching this report from RT might give you the impression that Sweden has until now been spared from the global emerging surveillance society, and if you for a moment were thinking about escaping to Sweden in an effort to escaping Big Brother in your own country, I’m sorry to make you disappointed.

Although this report is focusing on the most recent battle Sweden is having with the EU, there are a few errors in this report that needs to be pointed out. First off, what is not taken into account is the already existing Swedish FRA law. A government snooping system that has been in place since 1st of Januari 2009.

The FRA law is a legislative package that authorizes the state to warrantlessly wiretap all telephone and Internet traffic that crosses Sweden’s borders. It was passed by the Parliament of Sweden on June 18, 2008, by a vote of 143 to 138 and took effect on January 1, 2009.

In more detail, “FRA-law” is the common name for a new law as well as several modifications to existing laws, formally called Government proposal 2006/07:63 – Changes to defence intelligence activities. It was introduced as anti-terrorism legislation, and gives the government agency Swedish National Defence Radio Establishment (FRA, Swedish Försvarets radioanstalt) the right to conduct signals intelligence on – to intercept – all internet exchange points that exchange traffic that crosses Swedish borders, though experts argue that it is impossible to differentiate between international traffic and traffic between Swedes.

News reports from Sweden’s state broadcast network and other sources report that FRA have in fact been conducting eavesdropping on Swedish citizens for a decade. According to the Swedish National Defence Radio Establishment’s Director-General, Ingvar Åkesson, they destroy the data collected after eighteen months, but they confirm that they have, in fact, been collecting information not just on foreigners but also on Swedes as the presence of Swedish search terms used on the data would indicate.

Read more on Wikipedia

While it may be true that there is no established CCTV system in operation in Sweden, the number of stores, banks and government buildings that have their own private cameras (that can be accessed by government) is enough to create, if nothing else, the feeling that you’re constantly monitored. Meaning, it’s really no better then Britain. Who despite numerous reports by the Police has shown that the massive spread of the CCTV system in the UK has failed to slash crime.

Here are some selected articles detailing the already massive Big Brother system that exists in Sweden:

There is furthermore a massive network of surveillance cameras around the roads in Sweden, including speed cameras is not mentioned in the report.

The Goliath beast system of surveillance have most certainly established itself in Sweden already.

The only thing that can make the situation even worse is if the European project Indectbecomes a reality.

 

The European Union is developing a 21st century panopticon, a beast surveillance system that critics describe as “Orwellian,” “sinister,” and “positively chilling,” that would collate data from numerous sources, including surveillance cameras and personal computers, in order to detect “abnormal behavior” across the entire continent.

In a broader sense, this is part of the move towards creating a pan-European federal police force, where information and powers are shared as part of a centralized system. It is also a giant step towards the creation of a European CIA tasked not with keeping tabs on foreign enemies, but spying on its own population.

The surveillance system, known as Project Indect, promises to collect information by way of “continuous monitoring” of “web sites, discussion forums, usenet groups, file servers, p2p networks [and] individual computer systems”. It will also use CCTV feeds and other surveillance methods to develop models of “suspicious behavior” by analyzing the pitch of people’s voices (suggesting that private conversations will be recorded) as well as “the way their bodies move”.

Read more

Common RT sharpen up!

Sweden’s new wiretapping law ‘much worse than the Stasi’

By Rickard Falkvinge | thelocal.se

 

With just a week to go (published June 10th) before the Swedish parliament is expected to pass a controversial wiretapping law, Pirate Party leader Rickard Falkvinge urges people to do all they can to block the legislation.

On June 17th the Swedish parliament is set to vote on the introduction of a new “signal surveillance” law.

What the law means is that all telephone and internet operators will be forced to attach a large cable to the state’s supercomputer, where the state will be able to keep a record of everything said in telephone conversations, surfed on the web or written on the internet.

The law can best be described by the more explanatory term “general surveillance”. Instead of just criminal suspects having their phones tapped, now everyone will be tapped via their phones, emails, web surfing, faxes etc.

But the state won’t keep a record of everything. First it will scan all phone calls, emails and so on, in real time. Anything that is “considered interesting” on the basis of 250,000 search criteria, will be saved for further investigation.

All our phone calls, emails and surfing habits will be observed by Sweden’s National Defence Radio Establishment (Försvarets Radioanstalt – FRA), which is why the proposed legislation is known as the “FRA law”.

There are no courts involved, and the government and all its agencies – including the police and the security police – will be able to snoop around in the tapped phone and email correspondence of its citizens.

This is much, much worse than the East German Stasi, which was only capable of tapping a small sector of the population. This is also something that has been pointed out by German members of parliament with first-hand experience of the Stasi.

Proponents of the law say it “only concerns cross-border communications”. Unfortunately this is a bare-faced lie. Records of communications will be kept at 20 nodal points, strategically placed to capture all communications that cross Sweden’s borders. But any internal communications that happen to come into contact with any one of these nodes will also be analyzed by the state. Essentially this means that everyone will be affected since, for technical reasons, most phone calls and emails between two Swedes pass through another country.

Proponents say that “this has absolutely nothing to do with Swedes; FRA isn’t allowed to investigate Swedes if there is no substantial cause”. This is a dishonest formulation. Another way of saying exactly the same thing would be: “FRA may snoop on Swedes as part of this mass wiretapping scheme if certain criteria are met”. In fact, the entire statement is dishonest, since the legislation up for debate only concerns signal surveillance for the military. What these people don’t mention is that the FRA already carries out surveillance for the police using exactly the same staff and the same wiretapping network.

Proponents say that “only a very small amount of information will be listened to”, and refer to the pieces of information that will be sifted out for further examination. This is also a direct lie. Everything will be listened to. Whatever information is then selected for further examination is irrelevant; the violation of personal integrity occurs when the state gives itself access to its citizens’ private communications, not when one of the search terms it uses to filter the data happens to match.

Democracy is reliant on the transparency of power, not the transparency of citizens. All places where the opposite has been the case – where it has been impossible to examine the powers that be, while citizens lack any right to a private life – have been really nasty places to live.

Signal surveillance is supposed to protect us against external threats. In reality, however, it is the surveillance itself that constitutes a direct threat against Swedish democracy.

Aftonbladet has written about the law today (the first time old media have really contributed to the debate). Unfortunately they present the proponents’ propaganda as fact. Proponents of the law have shown themselves to be completely unreliable. On May 31st I put forward evidence [in Swedish] showing that they know they are breaking the constitution but they just don’t care.

The Pirate Party has long campaigned for the right to a private life. For example, we held a demonstration in central Stockholm recently demanding the right to civil liberties and for an end to all plans for general surveillance.

A campaign site has just gone online called stoppafralagen.nu (Stop the FRA law) with more information about this draconian piece of legislation.

It’s high time to get involved. Write to your local member of parliament, talk to friends and acquaintances about what’s happening. Anything. Just do something. Before it’s too late.

Article from: http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=12334&print=true

Sweden a Trendsetter for Global Tyranny – As Sweden Goes, So Goes the World: The Beginning of the End of Cash

From: theatlantic.com

Sweden could be pointing the way to a (nearly) cash-free economy.

There are many, many things to dislike about analog money. Cash and coins are unwieldy. They’re heavy. They’re dirty. They leave no automatic record of the financial transactions that are made with them.

Here in the U.S., despite Square and PayPal and other services that would seem to herald the end of cash, bills and coins still represent 7 percent of our total economy. In Sweden, however — which ranked first in this year’s Global Information Technology Report from the World Economic Forum — cash is scarcer. And it’s becoming, the AP reports, scarcer still. While Sweden was the first European country to introduce bank notes in 1661, it’s now come farther than any other country in the attempt to eradicate them. In most Swedish cities, the AP notes,

public buses don’t accept cash; tickets are prepaid or purchased with a cell phone text message. A small but growing number of businesses only take cards, and some bank offices — which make money on electronic transactions — have stopped handling cash altogether.

Even houses of worship are becoming increasingly friendly to cash-free transactions: At the Carl Gustaf Church in Karlshamn, southern Sweden, Vicar Johan Tyrberg recently installed a card reader to allow worshipers to tithe in digital form.

This isn’t, right now, the end of cash — in Sweden or anywhere else. As Lars Nyberg, the deputy governor of Sweden’s central bank, put it last year: Cash will survive “like the crocodile, even though it may be forced to see its habitat gradually cut back.” But it may be the beginning of the end. Sweden’s innovations suggest a future in which cash is increasingly rare.

A cash-reduced culture gives rise to new concerns — of cybersecurity and, of course, about privacy. Oscar Swartz, the founder of Banhof, Sweden’s first Internet provider, puts it like so: “One should be able to send money and donate money to different organizations without being traced every time.”

But a cashless world could also lead to some significant social improvements. Swedish crime statistics, fascinatingly, seem to suggest a correlation between cash and crime. The number of bank robberies in Sweden has dropped from 110 in 2008 to 16 in 2011 — “the lowest level,” reporter Malin Rising notes, “since it started keeping records 30 years ago.” The Swedish Bankers’ Association also says that robberies of security transports are down.

The benefits seem to cut more broadly, as well. Sweden has less of a problem with graft, the AP says, than countries with a stronger cash culture. “If people use more cards, they are less involved in shadow economy activities,” economics professor Friedrich Schneider argued. And others note that a cash-reduced culture will disincentivize pickpocketers and muggers: When a card can simply be cancelled, what’s the point?

Source: theatlantic.com