EPO People Power - Part XXXII - Little Hope That European Press Will Attempt to Expose Drug Abuse in Europe's Second-Largest Organisation
Also see: Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V | Part VI | Part VII | Part VIII | Part IX | Part X | Part XI | Part XII | Part XIII | Part Part XIV | Part XV | Part XVI | Part XVII | Part XVIII | Part XIX | Part XX | Part XXI | Part XXII | Part XXIII | Part XXIV | Part XXV | Part XXVI | Part XXVII | Part XXVIII | Part XXIX | Part XXX | Part XXXI
We have been fortunate enough to speak to many whistleblowers lately. We have a 100% source protection track record (in November this year it'll be a 20-year track record). Many but not all whistleblowers are from the EPO, Europe's second-largest institution. The media doesn't like to talk about EPO affairs, only to parrot what the EPO pays (bribes) it to parrot.
"I really hope you can convince some of your colleagues," an EPO whistleblowers recently told us, "maybe you have people you can trust in this field, to collaborate with you in this matter because the more journalists from different outlets will push on each individual tile the easier it will be to topple others."
Well, I spent 3+ months already speaking to people about EPO Cocainegate and it became apparent journalists are aware of this and aren't denying what we published. It's just that they're afraid to cover it.
What does this tell us about the press in Europe?
If dictators like Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos can control by press by merely taking a seat at the EPO (then SLAPPing reporters and bribing large publishers - clearly a gross misuse of EPO budget), are we living in a free society? If my wife and I receive threats this month from Americans (via "hired guns" in London), are we a society based on the Rule of Law or based on bullying and lawfare disguised as "law"? The skeletons in the closet can come out. In a functioning democracy, criticism is encouraged, not just permissible. █