OLAF “POLIŢIA POLITICĂ” MAFIA COMISIA UE, ACUZĂ OMNIS
“Multe scrisori aduc acuze si fac plingere impotriva Comisiei Europene si OLAF, si a membrilor acestora, de exemplu referitor la “abuz de putere, “conflict de interese”, “protectia crimei organizate de catre institutii”, “experti in dezinformare si propaganda”, OLAF “investigatii corupte”, inalti demnitari “corupti”, “retinere ilegala de inscrisuri si informatii”, abuz al “Drepturilor Fundamentale”, incalcarea Tratatului de Functionare al Uniunii Europene”.
Many letters make accusations and allegations against the European Commission and OLAF, and their individual staff members, such as, about „abuse of power”, „conflict of interest”, „protection by the institutions of organised crime”, „experts in disinformation and propaganda”, OLAF’s „corrupt investigations”, „corrupt” high level bureaucrats, „withholding evidence and information”, „abuse of the EUHR onvention”/”Infringement of the TFEU” etc.
OLAF PUNE OMNIS PE “LISTA NEAGRA”
Avind in vedere ca Omnis a investigat si probat cele mai sus mentionate, OLAF – Politia Politica a Mafiei Comisia UE, a pus Omnis pe “lista neagra”, astfel incit sa poata manipula in continuare DNA pentru a proteja infractiunile comise in Romania si in Europa incepind din anul 2004 pina in prezent.
(Document OLAF atasat in limba engleza)
Doamnă Procuror Şef DNA,
Va solicitam cu fermitate sa aparati Statul Roman impotriva abuzurilor, fraudelor, dezinformarilor si propagandei promovate incepind din anul 2004 de Comisia UE, si in primul rind de Presedintele acesteia Manuel Durao Barroso si grupul infractional din care acesta face parte, in conformitate cu probele depuse la Dosarul 85/P/2011.
Microsoft – Fujitsu Siemens – EADS – Medist – RSC – Asesoft – Teamnet si alte entitati nu au corupt numai politicieni Romani, timp de un deceniu, acestea au corupt in primul rind politicieni si demnitari la cel mai inalt nivel in Uniunea Europeana, care la rindul lor au incurajat si sustinut mecanismele de coruptie din Romania, pe care MCV le acuza.
Mecanismele de coruptie pe care Comisia UE le acuza in cazul Romaniei, in contextul in care aceasta refuza sa renunte la MCV astfel constituit si mentinut cu incalcarea reglementarilor si angajamentelor UE, au fost in fapt initiate si promovate de catre inalti birocrati corupti, atit in Romania cit si pe plan international.
DNA este in continuare obligata sa protejeze ilegalitatile si abuzurile flagrante comise de catre acestia in Romania pina in prezent (Case OLAF OF/2005/0417, Case OLAF OF/2010/0068, Dosar 85/P/2011).
Comisia Barroso (2004 – 2014) a incurajat, legitimizat, protejat si beneficiat in urma promovarii infractiunilor comise de Ecosistemul Microsoft, dupa cum Omnis si noi personal probam incepind din anul 2004 pina in prezent.
Va solicitam cu fermitate sa respectati Drepturile Fundamentale (CEDO Beraru vs. Romania), Constitutia si Legea, si sa incetati cu efect imediat abuzurile comise impotriva Statului Roman, a Omnis si a noastra personal.
Aveti obligatia conform Constitutia Romaniei – art. 31 – Dreptul la informatie
(1) Dreptul persoanei de a avea acces la orice informatie de interes public nu poate fi ingrădit. (2) Autoritătile publice, potrivit competentelor ce le revin, sunt obligate să asigure informarea corectă a cetătenilor asupra treburilor publice si asupra problemelor de interes personal, sa informati corect cetatenii si pe noi personal referitor la investigatiile pe care DNA le face incepind din anul 2005 pina in prezent asupra celor mentionate.
Omnis a identificat si probat legal si dincolo de orice de dubiu posibil urmatoarele :
MCV este un mecanism de santaj si presiune, folosit de Presedintele Comisiei “Barroso” si de grupul infractional mentionat, in scopul protejarii fraudelor comise de cei mentionati, si a garantarii faptului ca “beneficiile” obtinute in detrimentul Statului Roman si a companiilor si persoanelor care nu sunt afiliate gruparilor infractionale, vor fi impartite intre inalti demnitari din UE, Romania si corporatii pradatoare din Europa (Siemens, EADS), Japonia (Fujitsu) si SUA (Microsoft).
Va dorim succes
BARROSO, UN TĂRICEANU MAI TICĂLOS
“In calitate de cetatean Portughez si European nu accept sa imi fie limitate drepturile. Tot ce am facut (in calitate de Presedinte al Comisiei Europene) a fost transparent si in conformitate scrupuloasa cu legea.” – Manuel Durao Barroso
(„As a Portuguese and European citizen I do not accept being limited in my rights. I have done everything transparently, scrupulously following the rules,”
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-ethics-barroso-idUSKCN11T1ZH)
„A fost nu numai pentru a satisface sentimentul de piață, dar, de asemenea, pentru a transmite mesaje clare la poziția Comisiei și Uniunii Europene. ”
(“Tratava-se não só de conhecer o sentimento dos mercados, mas também de passarmos mensagens claras com a posição da Comissão e da União Europeia.”)
Mesajele clare transmise de Barroso si grupul infractional au fost ca in Romania legea o face Ecosistemul Microsoft – Fujitsu Siemens – EADS – Medist – RSC – Asesoft – Teamnet si ca acestia pot jefui in liniste astfel protejati de Comisia UE.
DNA considera ca cetatenii portughezi, germani, austrieci si americani au toate drepturile, fata de cetatenii romani, care nu au nici un drept in comparatie cu acestia.
Romania este tratata de DNA, Comisia UE si Microsoft drept o tara in care cetatenii nu pot beneficia de Drepturile Fundamentale, Constitutie si Lege, daca acestea aduc prejudicii retelelor internationale de crima organizata.
BARROSO, CAPUL MAFIEI COMISIA UE
Doamnă Procuror Şef DNA,
Va rugam sa cititi cu atentie documentul ce urmeaza si sa evaluati nivelul de implicare politica internationala si infractionala la care va expuneti in urma citirii documentului si a fisierelor atasate, in contextul refuzului de a dispune eliberarea unei copii legale a Raportului Final OLAF OF/2010/0068, in atentia Omnis si a cetatenilor interesati de modul in care sunt folositi banii publici.
Va aducem la cunostinta ca acest Raport Final (in versiunea informala pe care o detinem) contine mai multe afirmatii false si neadevaruri flagrante, care au drept scop protejarea fraudelor si ilegalitatilor comise de Comisia “Barroso” in Romania si UE in perioada 2004 – 2014.
In urma informarilor si probelor prezentate Comisiei UE incepind din 5 Mai 2005 de catre Omnis Group, aceasta avea obligatia, autoritatea si competentele garantate de cadrul legal de a VERIFICA Contractul PHARE – Proiectul RO 0007.02, cod RO 0007.02.02.01.2195.
Comisia a REFUZAT VERIFICAREA si a retinut ca probele si informatiile corecte si legale prezentate de Omnis nu confirma fraudarea fondurilor UE, stabilind astfel “criteriile” de livrare a platformelor software in piata uniunii, pe care acum, dupa ce investigatiile penale in curs au fost facute publice incepind din anul 2013 de catre FBI – DoJ – FCPA – SEC, le denunta in cadrul MCV.
Dupa cum bine cunoasteti, singura informatie si obligatie a Comisiei este de a verifica Contractul Phare si, eventual, investigarea fraudelor fondurilor UE.
Ilie Botos, Irinel Paun si Claudiu Dumitrescu s-au substituit la cererea lui Sebastian Vladescu si Calin Popescu Tariceanu si, cu aprobarea Delegatiei UE, institutiilor corupte al Comisiei UE, care acum deleaga DNA responsabilitatea infractiunilor comise de inaltii demnitari UE in Romania, asteptind ca DNA sa protejeze in continuare infractiunile probate exhaustiv inca din anul 2004.
OF/2005/0417: OMNIS submitted complaints to the EU Delegation which provided the information to OLAF. OLAF dismissed the case in 2006 as the information provided was deemed insufficient to justify the opening an investigation.
Acesta este modul scrupulos de legal si transparent in care Comisia UE actioneaza si va obliga si pe Dumneavoastra sa actionati ilegal, imoral si criminal.
Scrisoare primita de Omnis Group din partea Comisiei “Barroso” :
The Director-General OMNIS GROUP
Mr Dragos RISCANU
7 Amiral Constantin Balescu, Bucharest, RO 011953 ROMANIA
E-mail: Dragos@omnis.ro Brussels
THOR/C4/HC/im/(S)(2014)8869
Subject: Discontinuation of correspondence
OF No: OF/2005/0417, OF/2010/0068, OF/2012/0648
Dear Mr Riscanu,
I am replying also on behalf of the European Commission, following our letter to you dated 20 December 2013. Since then the European Commission and OLAF have subsequently received more than 20 communications from you, addressed to President Barroso, Vice-President Almunia and a number of European Commission officials. That list of correspondence is annexed to this letter.
I wish to now address the issue which was brought to your attention
in the letter to you dated 20 December 2013. This explained that the European Commission reserves the right to discontinue correspondence with you, where correspondence could be considered improper. While your correspondence contains many elements that are repetitive, abusive and/or pointless and could be considered improper, this right to discontinue correspondence with you is without prejudice to legally required procedural steps, for example, for requests for access to documents or to personal data.
Therefore, this letter does not concern your current access to documents request to OLAF, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001[1] regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents. Accordingly, OLAF is treating your confirmatory application separately, as identified in your letter dated 10 February 2014, registered in OLAF on 17 February 2014, under your reference OG 25, whereas other aspects of that letter are dealt with in this letter.
- Background
- OF/2005/0417: OMNIS submitted complaints to the EU Delegation which provided the information to OLAF. OLAF dismissed the case in 2006 as the information provided was deemed insufficient to justify the opening an investigation.
(Standardele de jaf si tilharie Barroso – Scheele – Buttice – Kessler – n.a)
- OF/2010/0068: This is an on-going investigation. OMNIS is the source of the information.
(Calitate in care facem solicitarile legitime si legale – n.a.)
- OF/2012/0648: OMNIS provided information to OLAF and was informed in 2013 that OLAF has dismissed the case.
(OLAF protejeaza crima organizata din UE- n.a.)
- Right of the Commission to discontinue correspondence
The right to good administration was included in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Article 41 of the Charter is based on case law of the Court of Justice and refers to different principles of good administration. The main document which puts the principles of good administration into practice is the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour endorsed by the European Parliament in September 2001. Article 14 of the Code refers to the acknowledgement of receipt as well as to the possibility to discontinue correspondence with the members of public:
- Every letter or complaint to the institution shall receive an acknowledgement of receipt within a period of two weeks, except if a substantive reply can be sent within that period.
- The reply or acknowledgement of receipt shall indicate the name and the telephone number of the official who is dealing with the matter, as well as the service to which he or she belongs.
- No acknowledgement of receipt and no reply need be sent in cases where letters or complaints are abusive because of their excessive number or because of their repetitive or pointless character.”
Further, the Commission adopted its Code of Good Administrative Behaviour – Relations with the public. Article 4 of this Code specifically refers to the situation where correspondence received from the citizen could be considered as improper.
„These rules do not apply to correspondence which can reasonably be regarded as improper, for example, because it is repetitive, abusive and/or pointless. Then the Commission reserves the right to discontinue any such exchanges of correspondence.”
- Reasons for discontinuation of correspondence
Firstly, the rule on discontinuing correspondence is an exception to the European Commission’s general duty to correspond with citizens. It must be narrowly construed and must therefore be regarded as a means of last resort[2]. OLAF informed you on 20 December 2013, that the European Commission reserves the right to discontinue correspondence with you.
Prior to OLAF’s letter dated 20 December 2013, you had written at least 120 letters during 2013 to the European Commission and OLAF, particularly to the President of the European Commission, Mr. Jose Manuel Barroso, and you have also addressed or copied letters to President Barroso, Vice-President Almunia, Commissioner Semeta and to the European Commission Secretary-General Mrs Day and OLAF. OLAF has replied to many of those letters, where applicable, stating that it can only investigate matters that fall within its competence, and that in relation to all information provided by the OMNIS Group, the European Commission and OLAF have considered the information within their respective mandates.
Secondly, the European Commission and OLAF consider that your letters are repetitive as they reiterate arguments that have already been put forward, but also that the letters repeatedly criticise OLAF’s dismissal of (a) case/s but do not submit any factual elements beyond those already considered. OLAF has informed you, for example, in its letter dated 20 December 2013, that „the Commission took the necessary steps to check all of the allegations raised by you (including allegations against EU/OLAF Staff) to the extent that they fall within its/OLAF competence and, where appropriate, you were duly informed about the outcome; and where actions undertaken are not yet complete, you will be informed in accordance with the applicable rules”.
It is perhaps not sufficient to discontinue correspondence with you only on the basis of the fact that you have used repetitive arguments that have already been put forward[3]. However, the European Commission and OLAF have considered not only the volume and quantity of the correspondence, but have taken into account all the circumstances of this matter. As stated above the European Commission and OLAF have verified each time if indeed the letters contain any new evidence or any new factual elements of the issue at stake, as well as matters within OLAF’s mandate.
Many letters make accusations and allegations against the European Commission and OLAF, and their individual staff members, such as, about „abuse of power”, „conflict of interest”, „protection by the institutions of organised crime”, „experts in disinformation and propaganda”, OLAF’s „corrupt investigations”, „corrupt” high level bureaucrats, „withholding evidence and information”, „abuse of the EUHR onvention”/”Infringement of the TFEU” etc.
Your letters provide pages of accusations, press releases on political events, during which you raise arguments and ask questions which are linked to, and aimed exclusively at, supporting your initial main assertions, and reiterating the issues where you do not agree with the steps taken by the European Commission and OLAF.
Therefore, the European Commission and OLAF now consider that your correspondence is repetitive within the context of the reasons stated: quantity, circumstances of the matter, lack of new factual elements within OLAF’s mandate, and reiterating the issues where you do not agree with the steps taken by the European Commission and OLAF. Thus in the European Commission’s and OLAF’s view your correspondence is „unreasonable”[4].
In summary, your correspondence can reasonably be regarded as improper, in particular, because it is repetitive, abusive and/or pointless.
- Conclusion
Following an assessment of all correspondence sent to the recipients, mentioned in my first paragraph of this letter, since the beginning of 2013, and particularly since I wrote to you on 20 December 2013, informing you that the European Commission reserves the right to discontinue correspondence with you, where correspondence could be considered improper, I now conclude that the conditions in order to apply Article 14 of the Code for ending the correspondence are fulfilled.
From the date of this letter the European Commission and OLAF will no longer respond to your correspondence where the substance reiterates matters that have already been raised.
Your attention is drawn to the privacy statement below.
Yours sincerely,
Giovanni Kessler
[1] OJ L145, 31.05.2001, page 43.
[2] Point 106 of Decision of the European Ombudsman, complaint 1437/2006 (WP)BEH,
[3] Point 105 of Decision of the European Ombudsman, complaint 1437/2006 (WP)BEH,
[4] Points 27-28 of Decision of the European Ombudsman, complaint 0946/2008 (BEH)(VL)ANA,