



David Chase Taylor

June 24, 2013

Truther.org

SWITZERLAND, Zürich — For the very first time, the shocking evidence of Obama nuclear terror whistleblower David Chase Taylor’s case for Swiss political asylum will be entered into the official court record at the “Bezirksgericht Zürich” (District Court of Zürich) on June 25, 2013. .

The 9:54 A.M. hearing will be a historic step in Taylor’s quest for political asylum. After 2 years of being denied access to a good-faith asylum hearing of any kind, Taylor will finally be able to declare under oath and on the record why he desperately needs and deserves political asylum in Switzerland.

Although it has not yet been confirmed, it does appear that the case of alleged NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden is yet another elaborate scheme designed by the CIA to divert attention away from Taylor’s case in Switzerland. On June 24, 2013, exactly one day before Taylor’s appearance in a Swiss court where he will outline the evidence in his case for political asylum, Snowden has officially “gone missing” in Russia.

Taylor first applied for political asylum on March 8, 2011, after releasing a book entitled “The Nuclear Bible”—a self-proclaimed “work of love” aimed at preventing a nuclear terror attack in his home country of the United States.

Taylor’s book, released on January 28, 2011, claims to have caught the Obama administration red-handed attempting to conduct an act of nuclear terror at the National Football League’s (NFL) annual championship game entitled the Super Bowl, routinely the most watched television event in America. Why Taylor needs political asylum in Switzerland is not really up for debate; one look at the evidence surrounding Super Bowl XLV in Dallas, Texas, on February 6, 2011, and anyone would conclude that something was clearly amiss that cold Sunday night in Texas.

While there is an overwhelming amount of direct and circumstantial evidence asserting that the premise of Taylor’s book was in fact correct, a few unprecedented news headlines such as “Feds Warn of Disguised Terrorists at Super Bowl” (CBS News), “WikiLeaks: ‘Al-Qaida on Brink of Using Nuclear Bomb’” (Fox News), and “World ‘On Brink of Nuclear 9/11’ as Al Qaeda Plans Large ‘Dirty’ Bomb” (Daily Mail), give a brief glimpse into the sheer terror that Taylor’s journalistic endeavors apparently thwarted.

Interestingly, despite Super Bowl XLV being hosted in Dallas, Texas, hometown to life-long Texan and former Texas governor George W. Bush, the former U.S. President was curiously on his way to Switzerland, a country he never cared to visit in all of his 8 years as President. Once the nuclear terror plot was exposed and subsequently postponed, Bush immediately changed his plans and attended the game in Dallas. In the aftermath of the foiled Super Bowl XLV nuclear terror plot, the head of NFL security suspiciously resigned.

Regardless of the growing evidence indicating that Taylor’s actions prevented a nuclear holocaust, the Swiss government appears to be succumbing to political pressure by the U.S. to deny Taylor political asylum in Switzerland. Whatever the reason, Taylor’s rights, privileges and protections under the Swiss Constitution are grossly being violated, untimely begging the following 10 questions:

Question # 1

Why is the Swiss government denying Taylor political asylum when Officer Ruembeli of the Swiss Federal Police informed Taylor on February 2, 2011, that “U.S. intelligence services” have “demands that we [Switzerland] act“?

[The U.S. government would have no sudden “demands” to interrogate Taylor just 5 days after the release of Taylor’s book entitled “The Nuclear Bible”, if it had not been effective in exposing the Super Bowl XLV nuclear terror plot.]

Question # 2

Why is the Swiss government violating their own asylum policy by denying Taylor political asylum when they know for a fact that a) Taylor is being sought out by U.S. intelligence agencies, b) Taylor has repeatedly informed Swiss authorities that he fears for his life, and c) Taylor will more than likely face imprisonment, torture or death if he is ever forced out of Switzerland to the U.S. or a NATO nation?

[Switzerland's asylum policy states that: "Any person who is threatened or persecuted in their home country in accordance with criteria recognized under international law will be granted asylum in Switzerland".]

Question # 3

Why is the Swiss government repeatedly refusing to issue Taylor a legal and binding document which states the exact asylum laws which apply to Taylor, the holder of a valid Swiss “B” residence permit, a U.S. passport and a German passport?

[By treating Taylor as a political refugee in his bid for political asylum, all of Taylor’s inherent rights, privileges and protections as Swiss “B” residence permit holder as well as his rights as a citizen of both the United States and Germany are ultimately null and void.]

Question # 4

Why was Article 19 of the Swiss Asylum Act repealed, effectively removing jurisdiction of Taylor’s asylum case from the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich, where it belongs, to the Federal Office of Migration in Bern, Switzerland?

[Taylor had effectively managed to force the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich into legal quandary whereby they would, a) have to give Taylor political asylum, or b) be forced to render a legal and binding document stating the specific asylum laws which pertain to Taylor as the holder of Swiss “B” residence permit, a U.S. passport and a German passport. However, before the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich could make this decision, the Federal Office of Migration stepped in and altered the legal jurisdiction of Taylor’s case by repealing Article 19 of the Swiss Asylum Act.]

Question # 5

Why is the “urgent” and unprecedented change to Article 19 of the Swiss Asylum Act only effective until September 28, 2015, just 71 days after Taylor’s Swiss “B” residence permit expires on July 19, 2015?

[If this unparalleled change to the Swiss Asylum Act was permanent it would be more understandable, but it expires roughly 2 months after Taylor will be forced out of Switzerland. By circumventing the local asylum process which Taylor had been engaged in with the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich over the last two years, all of Taylor’s prior progress with the office has effectively been nullified.]

Question # 6

Why is Taylor being forced to surrender his valid Swiss “B” residence permit, his U.S. passport and his German passport before his case for political asylum can even be heard?

[According to Swiss refugee law, upon submitting an application for political asylum, Taylor would subsequently be issued a Swiss “N” residence permit, effectively rendering his current Swiss “B” residence permit null and void. If Taylor’s refugee asylum application is denied, he would be deported from Switzerland within 48 hours, a risk he obviously cannot afford to take.]

Question # 7

Why is a journalist who blew the whistle on the target, date and location of an impending nuclear terror attack being denied political asylum by the Swiss government?

[Just days before Super Bowl XLV, a leading atomic regulator privately warned that the world stands on the brink of a "nuclear 9/11". Furthermore, “diplomatic documents” leaked by Julian Assange of WikiLeaks revealed that Al-Qaida was on the brink of using a nuclear bomb. Since Super Bowl XLV in 2011, the entire notion that Al Qaeda has a nuclear bomb has all but disappeared from the media’s terror narrative.]

Question # 8

In his bid for political asylum, why is Taylor being treated as an illegal-alien/political-refugee with no documents or papers who just entered Switzerland illegally?

[Taylor is being subjugated to Swiss refugee laws and procedures despite the fact that he is the holder of a valid Swiss “B” residence permit, a U.S. passport and a German passport. As the holder of a Swiss “B” residence permit, Taylor is essentially guaranteed the same rights, privileges and protections as a Swiss citizen.]

Question # 9

Why is Switzerland risking their reputation of being politically neutral by acting in a very un-neutral manner in respect to Taylor’s case for political asylum?

[According to the United Nations 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, of which Switzerland is a signatory to (July 28, 1951), "No Contracting State shall expel or return a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion".]

Question # 10

Would Swiss citizens approve of their government denying Taylor political asylum knowing that Super Bowl L will more than likely be hosted in Dallas, Texas, on February 7, 2016, just 6 months after Taylor is forced out of Switzerland on July 19, 2015?

[Although the plot to terrorize America with nuclear weapons was disrupted by Taylor, it apparently has not been canceled. If Taylor is not granted political asylum and is forced out of Switzerland on July 19, 2015, it is highly likely that come February 7, 2016, an act of nuclear terror will take place in Dallas, Texas.

Current Violations of Taylor’s Swiss Constitutional Rights

As a holder of an Ausländerausweis “B” Swiss residence permit, David Chase Taylor is entitled to the same rights and privileges and protections under the Swiss Constitution as a Swiss citizen. As evidenced by the aforementioned legal anomalies, Taylor is being denied basic rights in his bid for political asylum.

1.Taylor’s right to equal treatment before the law has been denied (Art. 8, Sec. 1)

2. Taylor’s right to not be discriminated against based on political convictions has been denied (Art. 8, Sec. 2)

3. Taylor’s right to equal/fair treatment in judicial and administrative proceedings has been denied (Art. 29, Sec. 1)

4. Taylor’s right to have his case for asylum decided within a reasonable time has been denied (Art. 29, Sec. 1)

5. Taylor’s right to have his case for asylum be heard has been denied (Art. 29, Sec. 2)

6. Taylor’s right to have free legal advice, assistance, and representation has been denied (Art. 29, Sec. 3)

7. Taylor’s right to petition the authorities without prejudice has been denied (Art. 33, Sec. 1)

8. Taylor’s right to receive receipt of petitions to authorities has been denied (Art. 33, Sec. 2)

9. Taylor’s fundamental rights have not been upheld throughout Swiss the legal system (Art. 35, Sec. 1)

10. Employees acting on behalf of the Switzerland have denied Taylor his fundamental rights and have forsaken their duty to contribute to their implementation (Art. 35, Sec. 2)

Conclusion

Right now, the Swiss government has an opportunity to help the world’s most endangered journalist. There is no question as to why David Chase Taylor needs political asylum, only why he is being denied.

Peace, human rights, rule of law and political sovereignty are touted as being genuine Swiss qualities, yet Taylor’s case for political asylum is repeatedly being ignored, delayed, and ultimately dismissed due to a lack of commitment to the aforementioned principles.

It is therefore imperative that people worldwide collectively call on the Swiss government to act with the boldness and urgency that this case demands. Switzerland cannot stop at making human rights declarations in legal statutes; they must execute them in principle and ultimately put their words into action.

At this critical juncture in world history, Switzerland must reaffirm their commitment to the human rights and act in a way that is genuine and beyond reproach. After all, if Switzerland is unwilling to give political asylum to a nuclear terror whistleblower, then who are they willing to give it to?