Tag Archives: Orly Taitz

When the Prosecution is the Crime, and the Defendant is Freedom: Terry George Trussell Convicted and Taken Immediately into Custody (But What was Orly Taitz doing in Dixie County just before trial????)

Southern Constitutional Patriot, Common Law Activist, and former Statutory Grand Jury Foreman Terry George Trussell was found guilty of five of fourteen counts today by a Jury in Dixie County, Florida, and taken immediately into custody.  

As much as needs to be said about this event, a full legal discussion will have to wait for another day except for gross generalities and some random surrounding peculiarities and idiosyncratic events.

Suffice it to say, about the prosecution, that it was 100% a political show trial, initiated of the prosecutors, by the prosecutors, and for the prosectors designed to maximize their power as agents of “Big Brother” to control the legal system, in particular the so-called “criminal justice system” in the United States, against any and all claims of right by the people to have a say in social control through law.

As a curious but extremely significant aside (actually a complete “side show”), the trial was closely watched and broadcast by one of the nastiest bunch of lying Communist Sympathizing cluster of hateful sneering legal elitist bloggers in the whole USA, namely the Fogbow, which was cheering and cackling like a bunch of witches and warlock trolls for Terry’s conviction.   

I have been a particular target for the Fogbow crew of anonymous Goblins since 2009 when I participated in and supported the legal challenges to Barack Hussein Obama’s accursedly fraudulent candidacy and election to the highest “constitutional” office in the United Staes, perhaps the world.  

This group of bloggers (mostly establishment lawyers) claims that their noble purpose is to highlight truth and expose lies and deception in the “birther” movement, although they have moved on to attack so-called “Sovereign Citizens” and other constitutional grass roots activists who oppose the centralized state and governmental monopoly on legal process and thought.

Although ostensibly organized to ridicule Orly Taitz and her role in the “Birther” Movement, in effect the group has served to keep  a spotlight of attention on her activities which long since faded from the first, second, or even third page of news reports, and to criticize and attack all those around her.

For a while in 2009-2010, I was very much “around Orly” and I tried to assist her and inform and shape her legal crusade.  The professional side of my relationship with this Dentist-Lawyer-Real Estate Agent-Tai Kwon Do expert was fraught with constant conflict and argument over strategy, although she used some of my writings and took some of my advice.

Orly needed followers and she needed sensation, and she hated caution and careful reflection and would have no part of legal research…. this was strange in a lawyer trying to lead what needed to be the most sophisticated legal challenge against a sitting President in world history.  

But Orly’s need to make radical statements which her uneducated followers could cheer was paramount to anything else, and so in one episode in Georgia, she insisted on disrespectfully challenging the authority of a Federal Judge, and calling him a traitor.

Fogbow founding member “Sterngard Friegen” has been particularly hateful towards me for 7 full years now, and in this latest go round about the Terry Trussell trial, he accused me of taking advantage of  Orly Taitz’ naivetee and forcing her to file sanctionable documents WHICH I HAD ACTUALLY FOUGHT WITH ORLY TO PREVENT HER FROM FILING NIGHT AFTER NIGHT AFTER LONG NIGHT.  

It seemed strange to me that he has always been so obsessed with me and so interested in defending Orly while ostensibly being her greatest critic…. how strange…. Anyhow, I had for a very long time now suspected it was all a show and a fraud, and apparently I was finally vindicated.

Terry’s lawyer Inger Michelle Garcia reported back to me today that Orly was IN CROSS CITY, DIXIE COUNTY, without ever having articulated any interest in Terry’s trial, and that she had revealed herself as one of, if not the primary force behind the Fogbow, as I have suspected from the very beginning.

Ah, the sweet taste of VINDICATIO!  Orly was not the “Queen” but rather the Court Jester, the “Clown Princess” of the Constitutional Eligibility Movement, aka “the Birthers” for the purpose of making the Constitutional Challenge to Obama’s presidency as humiliatingly stupid and ridiculous as could be…. and in this case, Orly’s strategy, performance, and tactics were all brilliantly successful, and the coincidence of her involvement with the Fogbozers in Dixie County is proof positive of this bizarre but brilliant conspiracy of ridicule and comedy as political attack and disruption.  

I am infinitely grateful to my freshman Anthropology professor Victoria Reifler Bricker for introducing me to the importance of ridicule in social control (her doctoral dissertation at Harvard concerned “Ritual Humor” as subversive political dialogue among the Maya of Chiapas under Spanish Occupation).  

From my beginnings studying at Vicky’s brilliant footsteps in New Orleans, I learned later from Sally Falk Moore, Clifford Geertz, Marshall Sahlins, and Valerio Valeri about ritual performances as “reifying” historical myths and “enactments” which prove and confirm stereotypical theories about human behavior which effectively become enactments  and pronouncements of law.  

I now realize more than ever the importance of so deconstructing the rituals of the modern courts, and modern propagandists like the Fogbozers, to revealing the truth about political process, and to make people free from illusion and free from the deception that such ritualized enactments create.  

The manipulative deceptions attempted and in fact achieved by the Fogbow perfectly exemplify the Cultural Marxist methods of Saul Alinsky and others.  These methods must be exposed and, to the extent possible, attacked and dismantled.   It is just sad to think that techniques originally evolved for the degenerates in the big cities have filtered down all the way to poor little Cross City in Dixie County, the least populous and most isolated of all of Florida’s  68 counties…

GILAD ATZMON: The Most Extraordinary Jewish Writer of Modern Times…..he calls himself a “Hebrew-Speaking Palestinian” and I am very proud to know him…

Controlled Opposition –From Goldstein to Soros and Beyond, Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 1:29PM

Gilad Atzmon

http://www.counterpunch.org

By Gilad Atzmon

Jewish power is the unique capacity to stop us from discussing or even contemplating Jewish power.   It is the capacity to determine the boundaries of the political discourse and criticism in particular.

In his new book, “The Invention Of The Land of Israel”, Israeli academic Shlomo Sand, manages to present conclusive evidence of the far fetched nature of the Zionist historical narrative – that the Jewish Exile is a myth as is the Jewish people and even the Land of Israel.

Yet, Sand and many others fail to address the most important question: If Zionism is based on myth, how do the Zionists manage to get a way with their lies, and for so long?

If the Jewish ‘homecoming’ and the demand for a Jewish national homeland cannot be historically substantiated, why has it been supported by both Jews and the West for so long?  How does the Jewish state manage for so long to celebrate its racist expansionist ideology and at the expense of the Palestinian and Arab peoples?

Jewish power is obviously one answer, but, what is Jewish power? Can we ask this question without being accused of being Anti Semitic?  Can we ever discuss its meaning and scrutinize its politics?  Is Jewish Power a dark force, managed and maneuvered by some conspiratorial power? Is it something of which Jews themselves are shy? Quite the opposite – Jewish power, in most cases, is celebrated right in front of our eyes. As we know, AIPAC is far from being quiet about its agenda, its practices or its achievements. AIPAC, CFI in the UK and CRIF in France are operating in the most open manner and often openly brag about their success.

Furthermore, we are by now accustomed to watch our democratically elected leaders shamelessly queuing to kneel before their pay-masters. Neocons certainly didn’t seem to feel the need to hide their close Zionist affiliations. Abe Foxman’s Anti Defamation League (ADL) works openly towards the Judification of the Western discourse, chasing and harassing anyone who dares voice any kind of criticism of Israel or even of Jewish choseness. And of course, the same applies to the media, banking and Hollywood. We know about the many powerful Jews who are not in the slightest bit shy about their bond with Israel and their commitment to Israeli security, the Zionist ideology, the primacy of Jewish suffering, Israeli expansionism and even outright Jewish exceptionalism.

But, as ubiquitous as they are, AIPAC, CFI, ADL, Bernie Madoff, ‘liberator’ Bernard Henri Levy, war-advocate David Aaronovitch, free market prophet Milton Friedman, Steven Spielberg, Haim Saban, Lord Levy and many other Zionist enthusiasts and Hasbara advocates are not necessarily the core or the driving force behind Jewish Power, but are merely symptoms. Jewish power is actually far more sophisticated than simply a list of Jewish lobbies or individuals performing highly developed manipulative skills. Jewish power is the unique capacity to stop us from discussing or even contemplating Jewish power. It is the capacity to determine the boundaries of the political discourse and criticism in particular.

Contrary to popular belief, it is not ‘right wing’ Zionists who facilitate Jewish power, It is actually the ‘good’, the ‘enlightened’ and the ‘progressive’ who make Jewish power the most effective and forceful power in the land. It is the ‘progressives’ who confound our ability to identify the Judeocentric tribal politics at the heart of Neoconservatism, American contemporary imperialism and foreign policy. It is the so-called ‘anti’ Zionist who goes out of his or her way to divert our attention from the fact that Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and blinds us to the fact that its tanks are decorated with Jewish symbols. It was the Jewish Left intellectuals who rushed to denounce Professors Mearsheimer and Walt, Jeff Blankfort and James Petras’ work on the Jewish Lobby. And it is no secret that Occupy AIPAC, the campaign against the most dangerous political Lobby in America, is dominated by a few righteous members of the chosen tribe. We need to face up to the fact that our dissident voice is far from being free. Quite the opposite, we are dealing here with an institutional case of controlled opposition.

In George Orwell’s 1984, it is perhaps Emmanuel Goldstein who is the pivotal character. Orwell’s Goldstein is a Jewish revolutionary, a fictional Leon Trotsky. He is depicted as the head of a mysterious anti-party organization called “The Brotherhood” and is also the author of the most subversive revolutionary text (The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism). Goldstein is the ‘dissenting voice’, the one who actually tells the truth. Yet, as we delve into Orwell’s text, we find out from Party’s ‘Inner Circle’ O’Brien that Goldstein was actually invented by Big Brother in a clear attempt to control the opposition and the possible boundaries of dissidence.

Orwell’s personal account of the Spanish Civil War “Homage To Catalonia” clearly presaged the creation of Emmanuel Goldstein. It was what Orwell witnessed in Spain that, a decade later, matured into a profound understanding of dissent as a form of controlled opposition. My guess is that, by the late 1940’s, Orwell had understood the depth of intolerance, and tyrannical and conspiratorial tendencies that lay at the heart of ‘Big Brother-ish’ Left politics and praxis.

Surprisingly enough, an attempt to examine our contemporaneous controlled opposition within the Left and the Progressive reveal that it is far from being a conspiratorial. Like in the case of the Jewish Lobby, the so-called ‘opposition’ hardly attempts to disguise its ethno-centric tribal interests, spiritual and ideological orientation and affiliation.

A brief examination of the list of organisations founded by George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) presents a grim picture – pretty much the entire American progressive network is funded, partially or largely by a liberal Zionist, philanthropic billionaire who supports very many good and important causes that are also very good for the Jews. And yet, like staunch Zionist Haim Saban, Soros does not operate clandestinely. His Open Society Institute proudly provides all the necessary information regarding the vast amount of shekels it spreads on its good and important causes.

So one can’t accuse Soros or the Open Society Institute of any sinister vetting the political discourse, stifling of free speech or even to ‘controlling the opposition’. All Soros does is to support a wide variety of ‘humanitarian causes’: Human Rights, Women’s Rights. Gay Rights, equality, democracy, Arab ‘Spring’, Arab Winter, the oppressed, the oppressor, tolerance, intolerance, Palestine, Israel, anti war, pro-war (only when really needed), and so on.

As with Orwell’s Big Brother that frames the boundaries of dissent by means of control opposition, Soros’ Open Society also determines, either consciously or unconsciously, the limits of critical thought. Yet, unlike in 1984, where it is the Party that invents its own opposition and write its texts, within our ‘progressive’ discourse, it is our own voices of dissent, willingly and consciously, that are compromising their principles.

Soros may have read Orwell – he clearly believes his message – because from time to time he even supports opposing forces. For instance, he funds the Zionist-lite J Street as well as Palestinian NGO organisations. And guess what? It never takes long for the Palestinian beneficiaries to, compromise their own, most precious principles so they fit nicely into their paymaster’s worldview.

The Visible Hand

The invisible hand of the market is a metaphor coined by Adam Smith to describe the self-regulating behaviour of the marketplace. In contemporary politics. The visible hand is a similar metaphor which describes the self-regulating tendency of the political-fund beneficiary, to fully integrate the world view of its benefactor into its political agenda.

Democracy Now, the most important American dissident outlet has never discussed the Jewish Lobby with Mearsheimer, Walt, Petras or Blankfort – the four leading experts who could have informed the American people about the USA’s foreign policy domination by the Jewish Lobby. For the same reasons, Democracy Now wouldn’t explore the Neocon’s Judeo-centric agenda nor would it ever discuss Jewish Identity politics with yours truly. Democracy Now will host Noam Chomsky or Norman Finkelstein, it may even let Finkelstein chew up Zionist caricature Alan Dershowitz – all very good, but not good enough.

Is the fact that Democracy Now is heavily funded by Soros relevant? I’ll let you judge.

If I’m correct (and I think I am) we have a serious problem here. As things stand, it is actually the progressive discourse, or at least large part of it. that sustains Jewish Power. If this is indeed the case, and I am convinced it is, then the occupied progressive discourse, rather than Zionism, is the primary obstacle that must be confronted.

It is no coincidence that the ‘progressive’ take on ‘antisemitism’ is suspiciously similar to the Zionist one. Like Zionists, many progressive institutes and activists adhere to the bizarre suggestion that opposition to Jewish power is ‘racially motivated’ and embedded in some ‘reactionary’ Goyish tendency. Consequently, Zionists are often supported by some ‘progressives’ in their crusade against critics of Israel and Jewish power. Is this peculiar alliance between these allegedly opposing schools of thoughts, the outcome of a possible ideological continuum between these two seemingly opposed political ideologies? Maybe, after all, progressiveness like Zionism is driven by a peculiar inclination towards ‘choseness’. After all, being progressive somehow implies that someone else must be ‘reactionary’. It is those self-centric elements of exceptionalism and choseness that have made progressiveness so attractive to secular and emancipated Jews. But the main reason the ‘progressive’ adopted the Zionist take on antisemitism, may well be because of the work of that visible hand that miraculously shapes the progressive take on race, racism and the primacy of Jewish suffering.

We may have to face up to the fact that the progressive discourse effectively operates as Israel’s longest arm – it certainly acts as a gatekeeper and as protection for Zionism and Jewish tribal interests. If Israel and its supporters would ever be confronted with real opposition it might lead to some long-overdue self-reflection. But at the moment, Israel and Zionist lobbies meet only insipid, watered-down, progressively-vetted resistance that, in practice, sustains Israeli occupation, oppression and an endless list of human rights abuses.

Instead of mass opposition to the Jewish State and its aggressive lobby, our ‘resistance’ is reduced into a chain of badge-wearing, keffiyeh-clad, placard-waving mini-gatherings with the occasional tantrum from some neurotic Jewess while being videoed by another good Jew. If anyone believes that a few badges, a load of amateur Youtube clips celebrating Jewish righteousness are going to evolve into a mass anti-Israel global movement, they are either naïve or stupid.

In fact, a recent Gallup poll revealed that current Americans’ sympathy for Israel has reached an All-Time High. 64% of Americans sympathise with the Jewish State, while only 12% feel for the Palestinians. This is no surprise and our conclusion should be clear. As far as Palestine is concerned, ‘progressive’ ideology and praxis have led us precisely nowhere. Rather than advance the Palestinian cause, it only locates the ‘good’ Jew at the centre of the solidarity discourse.

When was the last time a Palestinian freedom fighter appeared on your TV screen? Twenty years ago the Palestinian were set to become the new Che Guevaras. Okay, so the Palestinian freedom fighter didn’t necessarily speak perfect English and wasn’t a graduate of an English public school, but he was free, authentic and determined. He or she spoke about their land being taken and of their willingness to give what it takes to get it back. But now, the Palestinian has been ‘saved’, he or she doesn’t have to fight for his or her their land, the ‘progressive’ is taking care of it all.

This ‘progressive’ voice speaks on behalf of the Palestinian and, at the same time, takes the opportunity to also push marginal politics, fight ‘Islamism’ and ‘religious radicalisation’ and occasionally even supports the odd interventionst war and, of course, always, always, always fights antisemitism. The controlled opposition has turned the Palestinian plight into just one more ‘progressive’ commodity, lying on the back shelf of its ever-growing ‘good-cause’ campaign store.

For the Jewish progressive discourse, the purpose behind pro-Palestinian support is clear. It is to present an impression of pluralism within the Jewish community. It is there to suggest that not all Jews are bad Zionists. Philip Weiss, the founder of the most popular progressive pro-Palestinian blog was even brave enough to admit to me that it is Jewish self -interests that stood at the core of his pro Palestinian activity.

Jewish self-love is a fascinating topic. But even more fascinating is Jewish progressives loving themselves at the expense of the Palestinians. With billionaires such as Soros maintaining the discourse, solidarity is now an industry, concerned with profit and power rather than ethics or values and it is a spectacle both amusing and tragic as the Palestinians become a side issue within their own solidarity discourse.

So, perhaps before we discuss the ‘liberation of Palestine’, we first may have to liberate ourselves.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics and Jewish Left’s spin particular Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk

Article originally appeared on Gilad Atzmon (http://www.gilad.co.uk/).
See website for complete article licensing information.

Gilad Atzmon on his support for Dieudonne—interviewed on Al Jazeerah—I had the honor and privilege of meeting Gilad Atzmon last week in New York

I have been following Gilad Atzmon’s writings and advocacy for about six years now, and I consider him one of the foremost cultural, ethnic, socio-historical and political philosophers of our time.  Gilad is traveling in the United States and, if you get a chance to listen to his lectures or music, I urge you to do so.  I have NEVER met anyone quite like him.  I met him last week in New York City when he was staying as the guest of Michael Santomauro on the Upper East Side.  The several days spent with these two were one of the most intense intellectual experiences of my life, fully comparable to any seminar discussion on historical formation or cultural process, micro-or-macro evolution and ethnic identity or politics that I ever had in Anthropology, Biology, or History at Harvard or in Law at the University of Chicago—the level of feverish debate was (in my personal memory anyhow) closest to in chambers meetings between law clerks and Externs for the Ninth Circuit between clerks for Stephen Reinhardt and Alex Kozinski….  Everyone concerned with American, European, or Middle Eastern Culture, Economy, or Politics today needs to read Gilad Atzmon’s latest book The Wandering Who?

Al-Jazeerah: Cross-Cultural Understanding

Opinion Editorials, February 2014




Dieudonné, Alain Soral, and Zionism:Gilad Atzmon Interviewed By Alimuddin UsmaniAl-Jazeerah, CCUN, February 24, 2014

AU: What led you to offer Dieudonné such support in his struggle against the French government?

GA: Dieudonné is the true meaning of resistance.  Being cogent and coherent, he has managed to expose in France the corrosive bond between contemporary Zionised socialism and Jewish political power.

For some time now, many of us who, in the 60s and 70s, were inspired by Left thinking have been confused by contemporary ‘progressive’ politics. For some reason, the so-called ‘New Left’ was very quick to compromise on crucial issues to do with labour and working class politics. Instead of siding with the workers and those struggling in society, the post-68 Left  adopted an identity-politics discourse that was actually aimed at breaking up society and the working class into isolated marginalisd groups. This led to political paralysis which in turn prepared the way for the invasion of big money, monopoly culture and globalization. It is this that Dieudonné, has managed to expose. He has also identified the power of the Holocaust religion and Jewish lobby power at the very heart of political establishment. Being the author of The Wandering Who – the book that took apart Jewish identity politics, I see Dieudonné as a continuation of myself. He is my twin and I stand up for both him and his cause.

AU: Dieudonné’s detractors accuse him of antisemitism and as evidence they offer that in his show, (now banned) he said this about a prominent Jewish radio journalist: “You see, when I hear Patrick Cohen speak, I think to myself : Gas chambers…too bad”. His supporters explain that Dieudonné was simply responding to a provocation from this journalist who said that Dieudonné must be blacklisted from mainstream media and that people with “mental illness ” shouldn’t be invited to comment publically. What do you think? Did he go too far or do you think he had the right to respond to someone who wished for his social, economic and professional demise?

GA: Those Jews who insist that the Holocaust become our new state religion must accept that such a claim comes with a price. If you choose to identify yourself with gas chambers, Auschwitz and victimhood you must also accept that you will be identified as such by others.  I have no problem with Dieudonné’s reaction to Cohen. Dieudonné is an artist, his duty is to reshape and revise the vision of the world around us. Accordingly, placing a mirror in front of Cohen was a most appropriate thing to do.

AU: The only main political party in France who didn’t join in this “Dieudonné bashing” is the nationalist National Front founded by Jean-Marie Le Pen. What is your explanation of that?

GA: It obviously means that in terms of tolerance and multi-cultural/ethnic openness your Nationalists are way ahead of any so called ‘progressives’ and the Left. But this does not surprise me. The Left has always found it difficult to bond with working people, in fact, the entire ‘progressive’ ethos is elitist to the bone. And again, this should come as no surprise. After all. identifying oneself as  ‘progressive’ surely means that someone else must be ‘reactionary’ – and that someone else is the working man or woman. This may explain why being ‘progressive’ is so attractive to so many Jews – it offers a godless alternative to their traditional choseness. It also explains why the workers generally stay away as far from the Left as they can. They much prefer identifying with the whole, the grand collective narrative, with the flag and with the language. rather than be progressive, they prefer to be patriotic and nationalist. And the outcome is clear: The  left eventually drifts away into a state of total detachment which is the exact state of the French socialist at the moment.

Now, Dieudonné, has managed to galvanize this Left detachment. Here we have a black person who enjoys the support of the National Front and is cheered on by a massive popular movement consisting of migrants and White working class – and all this has now matured into one giant Left collective neurosis. How amusing is this?

AU: Thanks to Nicolas Anelka, the British Media started to talk about Dieudonné. According to Alain Soral, the  BBC conducted quite fair interview with him : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8gdbXHsVks

Can you explain to us why the French media seem unable to give the same fair treatment to this story?

GA: To start with, let’s not delude ourselves. It is easy for Brits to mock French kosher totalitarianism but believe me, no one in the BBC dares discuss the embarrassing fact that 80% of our Tory MPs are Conservative Friends of Israel. No one in the BBC has ever been brave enough to delve into the embarrassing fact that when Tony Blair took us into an illegal war in Iraq, his chief fundraiser was Lord Levy and the LFI (Labour Friends of Israel). But let me answer your question as concisely as I can.

Jewish power is the capacity to control and limit the discussion on Jewish power. CRIF and BHL are not the essence of Jewish power, they are just symptoms of this power. The real Jewish power is the capacity to silence all discussion of the Lobby, CRIF and HBL. So Alain Soral should carry the ban against him as a badge of honour. It only reaffirms that the media doesn’t find within itself the intellectual capacity to challenge him and his work. This is hardly surprising, I’ve now begun to realise that George Orwell might well have been the last thinking person in the Left. The contemporary Left is a soundbite culture far removed from any dialectical thinking or intellectual exchange. It is indeed a tragedy.

AU: In our last interview you told us that you “learned that most Palestinian NGOs are funded by liberal Zionist George Soros’ Open Society Institute.”  A French cartoonist named Joe le Corbeau, who was briefly arrested over a photo of a quenelle http://www.crescentcityjewishnews.com/man-arrested-over-photo-of-quenelle-in-front-of-toulouse-jewish-school/, suggested in one of his cartoons that Femen are funded by Soros : http://judeologie.com/2013/05/28/the-femen-powers-prostitutes-par-joe-le-corbeau/

Do you think that may explain why these women perform only in mosques and churches and never in synagogues?

GA: Obviously, I don’t know whether Femen is funded by Soros but it wouldn’t surprise me if they are. Soros’ philosophy, as far as I understand it, is very simple. He is a Liberal Zionist who funds a lot of ‘good causes’ – causes that just happen to also be ‘good for the Jews’.

Now, let me address Femen’s preferred choice of ‘artistic’ venues. As you probably know, Post-Structuralism is pretty much a French philosophical school of thought and may be  defined as an attempt to dismantle all ‘grand narratives’ except the Jewish one. In concert with the spirit of the 68 students’ revolution and the Frankfurt Yeshiva, Femen are more than happy pull apart every French cultural heritage – except the Jewish ones. Just follow the money trail, those people who facilitated their move to France – the record label and the ANR who signed them. Surely, you’ll find the answers within just a few minutes.

Here is an interesting anecdote that may throw some light on the topic. It was recently pointed out to me that in spite of the fact that Jewish radicals despise the Talmud and the Rabbinical culture and have been caught burning many religious congregation houses, mainly churches in Spain and the Ukraine etc.,  they have never burned a single synagogue.

AU: People who support the right of Femen to blaspheme are often the same people who call for the banning of Dieudonné’s shows. Don’t you think that these kinds of double standards will lead people to rise up against the elite?

GA: No doubt at all, and as we see, it’s already happening.

AU: Former Israeli minister Shulamit Aloni, who recently passed away, once said that accusation of antisemitism is a “trick” used to shut down critics of Israeli policy:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbtu0-mgvw  How do you explain the current weakness of the Israeli left?

GA: ‘Weakness’ is an understatement. The Israeli left is non-existent and for a good reason: Jewish Left is an oxymoron. While ‘Left’ is a universal concept, Jewishness is a tribally driven ideology. Even Aloni,  whom I admired, wasn’t exactly a ‘universalist’. She didn’t really campaign for the return of the Palestinian refugees to their homes and villages, she was mainly concerned with Israel being a ‘Jewish civilization’ as opposed to a universal one.

It is not a secret that the so-called ‘Jewish Left’ is in practice, a form of National Socialism. Those ‘radical’ Israeli leftists support a racially-driven ‘egalitarian’ philosophy – which applies to Jews only. In other words, they are full of contradictions so it’s hardly surprising that they are now pretty much extinct. On the other hand, right wing Israeli politics,  is as consistent as it is crudely unethical. It postulates that Jews are entitled to return to Palestine, and it draws on a vile, militaristic ideology and practice that aims to maintain this  Jewish hold on the land. Right-wing Zionist  leaders admit daily to not being ethical – but they justify their national project in terms of survival. Since Israel defines itself as the Jewish State, it is only natural for Israelis to identify with a consistently tribal right-wing ideology instead of some half-baked, convoluted and totally inconsistent (but always kosher), socialist clap-trap.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity politics and Jewish Power in particular – available on Amazon.com  Amazon.co.uk

Interview: Atzmon on Dieudonné, Alain Soral and Zionism

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/interview-atzmon-on-dieudonne-alain-soral-and-zionism.html

Interviewed by Alimuddin Usmani

http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/

Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah & ccun.org.

editor@aljazeerah.info editor@ccun.org

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20Editorials/2014/February/24%20o/Dieudonne,%20Alain%20Soral,%20and%20Zionism,%20Gilad%20Atzmon%20Interviewed%20By%20Alimuddin%20Usmani.htm

Happy Birthday, Robert Rivernider, of Wellington, Florida! Lessons about Never Giving Up, and Fighting no Matter how much they lie about you…..

My friends and former allies Bob Rivernider and Robert J. Ponte are now in Federal Penitentiaries, sentenced (respectively) to 12 and 7+ years plus five years supervised release.  For men near my age, this is a virtual death sentence.  LOTS of people die in American prisons….that’s a reality not everyone knows.  I did not always agree with these two gentlemen, did not always (well, actually, never) understand their business plans, but one thing I am pretty sure: they are not and never were dangerous criminals.  The real question is whether they were criminals AT ALL, in any sense.  It seems to me that they are part of a growing universe of white men in white collar positions who are being punished for making bad business decisions.  In essence, business failure, like poverty itself, is now a crime in America.  In terms of their personalities, Bob Rivernider was gruff and cantankerous—perhaps why he got a 144 month sentence.  Robert J. Ponte was much smoother and sweeter—perhaps that why he “only” got 7 1/2 years….  

The names “Rivernider” and “Lincoln” have for a long time been hyper-linked in Google Searches, especially if paired with two other search terms: “Palm Beach” and “Orly Taitz.”  Ok, we all know that anything that Orly touched in my life was a fricking disaster…. But Orly was not responsible for Bob Rivernider’s troubles—although the real power behind her, namely the lying and deceitful, treacherous American Executive Branch, certainly was.

The Orly phenomenon originated and found extravagant sponsorship in the local Washington, D.C., branch of the Globalist government by financial-military-industrial cartel.  This Cartel, official leaders Larry Summers, John Shepard Reed***, Jacob Joseph (“Jack”) Lew, and their crowd of corrupt financiers, designated Orly as their “Clown Princess” and Jester extraordinaire to the Courts in defense of Obama’s qualifications to serve as Chief Executive after having been elected by the Bilderbergers.  Orly, as a movement and phenomenon, was created in the brilliant “reverse logic” (Kafkaesque, or more to the point, positively Saul Alinskyesque) defense of Barrack Obama’s citizenship by absurdist attack.  Only Orly Taitz’ ludicrous behavior could have made the world safe for Obama, the most Constitutionally unqualified and inappropriate president imaginable.  Only Orly could have turned strict construction of the Article II Presidential eligibility clause into the laughing stock of the entire nation, and the world which once again had to endure the shakes of the 6 billion heads who live outside of the boundaries of “E Pluribus Unum” to wonder how Americans could possibly be so stupid and gullible.

This same cartel, for less obvious reasons, apparently found in Robert Rivernider an extreme threat and made him a “high value target” even before I first met Bob in 2008-9 at one or more of Bob Hurt’s seminar/conferences in and around the Tampa Bay Area, Florida.   Bob Rivernider now wears an ankle bracelet and has a 7:00 curfew as he awaits final sentencing pursuant to a plea bargain he probably never should have entered.  I know a thing or two or three about the U.S. Government’s ability to coerce plea agreements out of innocent people:  “you agree to this or you’re going away for life while we impoverish your family” is extremely persuasive, no matter what the truth may be.  But in Bob Rivernider’s case—they talked him into going away for life, or something pretty close to it, AS his plea bargain, after he had already started a trial.  Since Bob was certainly never going to be subject to the death penalty, it was hard to see how he had struck a good deal here…..so I was anxious to hear his story.  I had known and celebrated his birthday with him in 2009, but had forgotten all about it in the intervening years—but right now I can say I am only hopeful that (if there’s anything at all to Astrology, though frankly I doubt there is) my son will turn out to be a man of half the fighting character and spirit of resistance I see in Bob Rivernider.  I would like to see Bob Rivernider on his birthday again, maybe before another four years have passed.  It would be a bad thing, and a great loss to society, for him to be locked up for the next 25 or 30 of his birthdays.  It would be a major miscarriage of justice….

Partly in Honor of my son’s 21st birthday, which I could not share with him because of choices apparently made either by him or his mother, and otherwise partly because of a frivolous motion filed against me in a case in the 15th Judicial Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, I came back to my old haunts in beautiful Palm Beach 33480 for the first time since just after Easter 2010.

Nobody would say that this is the best, or even a pleasant, time to come to South Florida.  Late August is the heart of hurricane season.  But even without any hurricanes, South Florida is hotter and more humid than New Orleans, and nowhere near as pleasant as Yucatán, México, in this season.  This is true only because it rains so much more in South-pointing Florida’s North-pointing Southern opposite Peninsula just across the Gulf.  The greater daily rainfall and cloudcover in México means that the full tropics of Southeastern México are actually cooler than the Florida subtropics just to the north in the USA.  

It has turned out to be one of the best and most exciting weekends I’ve had in a very long time, primarily because I met my new lawyer, my new partner and representative, Dara Leigh Bloom, for the very first time when I arrived here Saturday evening, and other my new partner and expert witness in securitization and pooling analysis—Mario Kenny, on Sunday afternoon.  It occurred to me while here that although I have worked hard, been worried, and been angry from time-to-time in Palm Beach County, this is one part of the world where I can truly say I have never been really unhappy or deeply depressed. 

Sunday morning I got up early and went to 8:00 Holy Communion and Eucharist at Bethesda-by-the-Sea—a Parish Church significantly grander than Christ Church Cathedral in New Orleans, though not even half as old and lacking the same amazing direct connexions to Southern American history.  Located just south of the Breakers at 141 South County Road, Bethesda-by-the-Sea is the Church where my son Charlie was Baptized on the Feast of the Epiphany in 1993.  It was an honor and privilege to return here, and to sit a while in Bethesda’s beautiful gardens after the 8:00 service was over, contemplating the Rector’s sermon on Sabbath being a time for thinking, reflecting, and doing nothing.

Doing nothing, of course, was not a significant part of the plan for coming to Palm Beach.  Just after 10:00 a.m., Bob Rivernider arrived at the Bradley Park Hotel at 280 Sunset, across from Publix and just five very short blocks from our old home here on the Island, where my son Charlie spent just over the full first year of his life, after being born on the eve of Hurricane Andrew while I completed my term as Judicial Law Clerk to Kenneth L. Ryskamp of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida.

Bob Hurt of Clearwater, old friend, frequent recent critic, whom I had not so long ago written that I disowned writing, “I know thee not old man”….came down with his charming wife Maria to visit for the weekend and argue some more.  I had walked to Bethesda before the morning service but by the time it was over, it was too bloody hot to walk back and Bob Hurt did me the courtesy of picking me up.

We arrived back at the Bradley just as Bob Rivernider was pulling up.  And then Bob began to tell us his story…. to a small audience consisting of me, Dara Leigh Bloom, and Bob Hurt.

For two and a half hours, Rivernider expostulated to us regarding the devious, manipulative stratagems and trickery that the U.S. Attorneys’ Office (and his own CJA Attorneys) in Connecticut, used to get him, his former partner Robert Ponte, and his sister Lorraine Seneca, to plead guilty almost a month into a jury trial in Hartford, Connecticut.  

I can’t say that I really understood Bob’s business before or now.  It may have been a good business plan, it may not have been, but what it fairly clearly was, was an honest business plan, even if “high risk” was written all over it.  Robert Rivernider and Robert Ponte somehow planned to generate high returns on investments in real estate and foreign exchange swaps to their clients, who invested hundreds of thousands, in some cases millions of dollars.

So far as I can tell, the great sin that Ponte & Rivernider committed in all this was to try to piggy-back on the real estate speculation in which the major banks of the world were so famously engaged in the middle of the first decade of the new Millennium.  Because they were doing this, they were apparently “high value” targets to be designated “fall guys” for the fallout and collapse of this speculative roller-coaster.  Everyone over the age of 14 knew that ONLY real estate speculation of the wildest and most absurd nature could have driven the market as it climbed up to its peak in 2007, triggering the collapse of 2008-9.  

In 2008 the banks of the United States, along with other major industries (e.g. the automobile industry, especially the “Big Three” GM, Ford, & Chrysler) were effectively nationalized—although nobody important or “in control” used that term or word publicly, or if they did, not very much or very often, at least on prime time TV.   Yet it was precisely at the end of the W. Bush’s term and the beginning of Obama’s that full scale Socialism was instituted in the USA.

Among the significant but lower profile announcements of the new Obama administration was that the Department of Justice would be going after “White Collar Crime” involved in and relating to the banking collapse.  And it was then that Robert Rivernider, Robert Ponte, Lorraine Seneca, and so many others suddenly crossed over from being “the managers of distressed businesses” to “high value targets of criminal investigation.”

As a practical matter, targeting failed business enterprises like the Ponte-Rivernider-Seneca group was a way of declaring war on the White Middle Class which Obama so clearly despises.  Ponte-Rivernider-and-Seneca were accused, among other things, of a “scheme to defraud” under 18 U.S.C. §1343 (“Wire Fraud”) of a scheme to manipulate real estate appraisals unrealistically high to obtain greater extended credit leverage from banks.   Again, as every person who was at least 14 after 2000 must have known—well over half the population was playing Real Estate Roulette at this time (2000-2007)—not merely with the full cooperation and collusion but egged on by the banks and, for that matter, State and Federal lawmakers and regulators.  

Scapegoats are always necessary in such situations—you can’t very well sacrifice the real criminals like Lawrence Summers, John Shepard Reed, and Jacob Joseph  Lew, so you look for “little people” like Ponte and Rivernider.

After listening to Rivernider’s story, all I can say is this: (1) the U.S. Attorneys in Connecticut were prosecuting to cover up Bank misconduct and justify bank losses, (2) the C.J.A. (government-paid-defense) attorneys appointed to defend Rivernider at least (he told mostly his own story), were not accidentally incompetent, but active members of the prosecutorial team.  Listening to Rivernider, it seemed that his defense team chronically and repeatedly failed to make proper and warranted objections, failed to offer well-founded affirmative defenses, and above all, pushed Rivernider, Ponte, and Seneca to plead guilty BEFORE the U.S. had even rested its case.  The defense team did this after announcing that they would put on no defense whatsoever (and hence waiving what could have been a very strong defense on the part of the three defendants).

The U.S. District Court seemed to have cared much more about the jurors’ time and length of trial than whether the Defendants had full and fair opportunity to challenge the facts alleged against them.  It seemed that the Prosecution’s consistent strategy was one of deception, disguise, and dissimulation ranging from willfully misrepresenting the obvious meaning of words and phrases in e-mails up to making outbursts in Court which we were taught in law school and bar review courses, and saw as practitioners, would have been grounds for immediate motions for mistrial (e.g. the prosecutor calling out “He’s Lying” during a witnesses’ testimony in front of the jury and later apologizing to the Court).  It seemed that the Defense strategy was to meekly accept all prosecutorial misconduct and not to object.

Among the most disturbing direct quotes that Bob gave us were that his attorney told him, “I was hired to get you the best sentence possible” and the prosecutor admitting to the Court that certain behaviors alleged in the indictments forming the basis for a lengthy sentence recommendation were “not per se illegal.”

Bob Hurt chimed in at this point, “what does “not per se illegal” mean?”  I opined that “not per se illegal” could be reasonably translated out of prosecutorial lingo into English as “not illegal at all”, i.e. “legal” meaning “the Defendants conduct was in fact lawful and therefore unimpeachable.”

Bob Rivernider says that his PSI “number” is 41, and that the prosecution is seeking a 25-30 year sentence, quite plausible given what I know of the Federal Sentencing guidelines (I think my PSI number was 5-6 when I agreed to give up my law license in Texas in August 2000 but I can’t remember exactly anymore).  Bob said that Monday, August 26, 2013, was his 48th birthday.  He looks a lot older than that, closer to 58 to me—and he’s significantly grayer than when I last saw him in the Spring of 2010.  

Listening to Bob talk on Sunday and then again on Monday, seeing the obvious rage in his face and heart, I tend to think that his cause was just and that he should probably try to withdraw his guilty plea (even though that’s very difficult to do) or do an appeal, conditional or otherwise, on the constitutionality of the proceedings.  I think that 18 U.S.C. §1343 has been stretched beyond its reasonable limits.   Any law or statute becomes “void for vagueness” if stretched too thin, and “fraud” means very little if it is said that every business deal that turns out bad was “fraudulent”—although this is an argument consistent with Obama’s communistic hatred of free enterprise, which always implies reasonable assumption of risk, even in the simplest and most honest businesses.

To hear Rivernider talk, the government’s case against him sounds flimsy and borderline insane, justifiable only by deep-seated hatred and anxiousness to make him (and Ponte and Seneca) suffer for the government-sponsored, bank sponsored rampage of speculation that led to the financial collapse of 2008-2009 AND (not coincidentally) the election of Barack Hussein Obama.  

Bob asked me to try to help him promote “the truth” and all I can say is, that’s the best present I know how to give him, and this little write-up is about the best I can do based on the state of my knowledge at this point.   I have not defended Bob’s business plan, but I do not think it was inherently or even tangentially fraudulent,  because “fraud” implies (and requires) “intent to deceive as to material facts.”

My only truly analytical thought is this: I wonder whether Bob (& Ponte & Lorraine) would have been prosecuted if he (they) had taken out “business liability insurance” which would have covered all losses, like the Government’s FDIC and similar programs, TARP, for instance, to bail out the banks.  Does purchasing insurance against likely losses make one more honest or more obviously aware of the likelihood of loss?  Would anyone be willing to ensure real estate practices such as those in which the Banks engaged OTHER than the U.S. Government?    

Are we so afraid of the “failures of freedom” and free enterprise that we would or should require every business to carry “loss insurance”, or stay out of business?  Is that a productive and constructive way to advance science and industry, or to create new wealth?   Or should we point our fingers at the banks, as Rivernider, Ponte, and Seneca, were given some sort of authority to do in February 2013, shortly before the pled guilty.  

Rivernider says that his defense attorneys hired a psychiatrist to convince him that he did not understand the wrongfulness of his own conduct, due to a psychological “executive function deficit” of some sort, and that he could receive lenity at sentencing by acknowledging his condition.   This, again, is a rather extraordinary element of Rivernider’s story.  I had never heard of “executive function deficit” before (although it sounds fairly applicable to about half a dozen recent Presidents I can think of, and several dozen current and recent bank Presidents and high officers).

I strongly doubt, however, on listening to him, Bob Rivernider’s “Executive Function” operates at a lower level than, say Orly Taitz’ or Barack Obama’s—unless surviving and doing what you were assigned to do (e.g. Keep Obama immune from Constitutional attack, in Orly’s case, dismantled the U.S. Constitution as a whole, then institute communism, in Obama’s case) is the SOLE test.  

Rivernider’s prosecutors seem to have twisted facts and misrepresented circumstances and presented an altered, fractured, reality consistently enough to the Court as to constitute actual “witness tampering” and obstruction of justice (and only coincidentally, I guess, thereby effecting a denial of due process of law).  Orly also has twisted facts, misrepresented circumstances, and presented an altered, fractured, reality to MANY courts.  Orly has done so quite incompetently, although as noted above, her monotonously consistent incompetence appears to have been her intentional modus operandi and raison d’etre, and Rivernider’s defense attorneys seem to have done something quite similar, or aided and abetted the prosecution to do so.

My friends, as I have written on these pages many times before, do not judge harshly anyone you know or hear of who is prosecuted these days.  “Everybody knows that the system’s rotten.”  Good people go down every day, and the American jails are filled with innocent people, whom you might be proud to know and happy to have to your home as guests.    The American Criminal Justice system is BROKEN, CORRUPT, and needs to be torn down to the ground and rebuilt from the bottom up—if at all.  

Perhaps the power to identify, prosecute, and punish criminals should be returned to the people, as it was throughout history, essentially until the 20th century, everywhere.

***”There’s no clearer example of the collusion between government and corporate finance than the Citicorp-Travelers merger, which — thanks to the removal of Glass-Steagall — enabled the formation of the financial behemoth known as Citigroup. But even behemoths are vulnerable; when the meltdown hit, the bank cut more than 50,000 jobs, and the taxpayers shelled out more than $45 billion to save it.”  http://billmoyers.com/segment/john-reed-on-big-banks-power-and-influence/

Voting Libertarian—feeling very unsatisfied…. And (what I hope will be) my last word on Orly Taitz….

I watch very little television.  I watch even less political television because TV if anything is entertainment, not a quiet forum or arena to think and reflect, nor even for meaningful discussion.  The worst 3 minutes I saw on Political Television were the 3 minutes 39 seconds Gary Johnson got from Geraldo at Large on October 21.  What a pathetic FARCE—the mainstream media managed to give a genuinely different candidate almost LESS THAN NOTHING—just enough time to emphasize how little importance they gave him.  It was at that moment that I decided I had to support Gary Johnson for President—even if I hadn’t voted Libertarian in the last several elections.  

I had very briefly considered a true “protest vote” for Roseanne Barr and Cindy Sheehan (more out of respect for Cindy Sheehan), but I decided I just didn’t like Cindy enough to make up for bearing the shameful stain, for the rest of my life, of having voted (even in protest) for Roseanne Barr…..  So I voted for a fine, decent, constitutionally sound man who doesn’t have a chance in Hades of ever winning anything….  I confess that I also couldn’t bring my “right wing right hand” to fill in blanks for a party called “Peace and Freedom”—at least not in these United States with our dismal recent history of post-1984 constant Orwellian doublespeak…..

As I stated, I have already cast my ballot by mail and may or may not try to avail myself of the call in and reference privilege to see whether LA County counted it or not.  I know that Gary Johnson will probably not in fact win even 1% of the popular vote nationwide and no Libertarian candidate has ever earned even a single “pledged” electoral vote, which means that the Libertarian parties lag behind not only the American Independents under George Corley Wallace and the States’ Rights Democrats under Strom Thurmond but also non-candidates such as Harry Flood Byrd (“Harry F. Byrd, Sr.”) who in 1960 received 14 unpledged electoral votes.  

As for “faithless” electoral votes in 1968, Virginia Elector Roger McBride, pledged for Republicans Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, cast his electoral votes for Libertarian candidates John Hospers and Theodora Nathan. McBride’s vote for Nathan was the first electoral vote cast for a woman in U.S. history.  Roger McBride became the Libertarian candidate for President in the 1976 election, on which occasion he received no electoral votes, although Ronald Reagan (not running in the general election) got one “faithless” electoral vote.

California has all but banned write-in candidates and so it is impossible to vote for really minor party candidates.  I might have liked to have voted for Merlin Miller and Virginia Abernethy of the American Third Position Party, but it’s not an option.  I hope that Californians will see the counterproductive tyrannical nature of “top two” candidates for federal legislative office (House and Senate) because this cuts out third parties and independent candidates all together.  And just perpetuates the Democan and Republicrat content free monopoly on party politics, where there’s “not a dime’s worth of difference” between the major party nominees anymore….. George Wallace Democrats and John Ashbrook Republicans who were a vital part of the 1972 election 40 years ago are a thing of the past.   There are now ONLY McGovern lefty Democrats and Rockefeller-Nixon left-wing Republicans, at least in the mainstream—  There are not even any Goldwater Republicans aside from Ron Paul or really any moderate Democrats left in the arena.

So the thinking person hungers for the creation of an American Equivalent of the French Front National—a conservative party that offers a real difference to Mitt Romney wishy-washy Northeastern liberalism and Barack Obama’s hardcore socialism.  The British BNP is (a) an electoral flop and a failure, (b) plagued by constant infighting in the tiny British conservative wing, and yet the BNP is more viable in the UK than either the Libertarian or the AP3 parties.  Gary Johnson was a fine governor of New Mexico, but he has all the charisma of Ron Paul, which is why Ron Paul could never get on the Republican Party Ballot or steal an electoral vote even from a faithless elector.  AP3 is ONLY on the ballot in 3 states (Colorado, Tennessee, and New Jersey—and after Sandy the turnout in New Jersey is probably going to be pretty damned weak).  

In closing, I see that my former flame Orly Taitz has filed another set of electoral challenges right before the election in addition to her continually pointless comedy of errors to disqualify Obama.   I wish to offer what I suspect will be the final word on Orly, or at least my final word on Orly: she is a total and complete, unmitigated, unredeemable fraud.  Her crusade over the past four years has done  NOTHING except to discredit all critics of Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility.   She has squeaked and squawked “louder and higher” than anybody else, but she has not learned from her mistakes or altered her strategy in the least.  I accuse Orly Taitz of being just another tool for Obama’s campaign of deception and deceit.  All “birthers” are stained by her disastrous, unprofessional  litigation campaigns.  All “conservatives” who question Barack Obama are lumped with Orly’s otherwise undistinguished platform of Empty Neo-Con Platitudes.  There was a time, in 2009, when I believed that it was possible to use the litigation process to challenge Obama, but Orly blew every possible opportunity and her strategy was aimed to HER PUBLIC AUDIENCE, not the Courts, and she admitted as much to me in private.  

All constitutional conservatives, all who believe as I do that Obama should never have been President, should shun Orly Taitz and let her sink silently into the rubbish heap of history.  Her own campaigns for California Secretary of State and U.S. Senate were disgraceful self-funded plans of self-glorification with not one iota of sincere belief or genuine crusade…..

Merlin Miller is a film-maker, and I hope he will use his talents to develop an alternative media campaign and some documentaries which will advance the cause of true conservatism.   I recommend documentaries on the decline and fall of the American Family with the help of American Family Courts, as well as on the mortgage crisis and the role of foreign investors and international bankers in all but obliterating true private home ownership as a realistic dream for most of the middle bourgeois and all of the working classes.   I think we should have documentaries on how feminism has resulted in increased numbers of women opting for prostitution and the various “sex-trade” businesses, for the simple reason that the modern norm of state-licensed marriage is hardly distinguishable (either morally or economically) from late 19th century licensed prostitution.

This year, the “Moonrise Kingdom” reminded us of how beautiful and innocent life in the antique (1965) homogeneous middle class society could be, even through the tempestuous early teen years of adolescence, even in the face of bureaucratic obstinancy and legal stupidity.  The movie “Hunger Games” showed us the bleak future of an America governed by an “Obamanation”-type plutocratic socialist elite which squeezes every last drop of blood out of the strongest and most worthy of the ordinary, common people.  The movie “Batman: Dark Knight Rises” served as a cover for the worst of the tendencies in our nation precisely TOWARDS the plutocratic socialist oligarchy of the “Hunger Games” and was simultaneously used as a screen of a completely different kind in Aurora, Colorado, to promote the step-by-step obliteration of liberty and any semblance of justice and constitutional due process of law in these United States of America.  “Batman”, in short, became emblematic for our descent into darkness, not our rise from it.

I predict Obama will win the election and that all the worst fears expressed by Dinesh D’Souza in “Obama 2016” will fade and look pale in comparison with reality.   If Mitt Romney wins, I will smile, very briefly, just to think that I can actually look at a picture of the de facto but Anti-Constitutional President without ralphing.  I think Romney is probably technically qualified to be President in the ways that Obama was not, but in all probability we’ll have Four More Years (some say eight) of Kenyan Dictatorship in store for us….

Go Suck a Lemon, Orly: Or whoever it is that keeps writing these Retarded Attacks on me in the Ripoff Reports!

(see Saturday afternoon 5:55 PM update below—this may go on for a while–)

I have no idea anymore what the real purpose of the Ripoff Report is—it obviously has nothing to do with Consumer Protection—I wonder whether Orly and Yosi Taitz have used their ill-gotten wealth and indirectly taken control or is Ripoff Report just too good to pass up for the purpose of content-free anonymous slander?  The latest appeared today at 12:13 High Noon…. when Orly or one of her flying monkeys just wrote on the Ripoff Report:

SUBMITTED: Saturday, October 13, 2012

AN INDICTMENT IS NOT A CONVICTION and I have never been convicted of FORGERY or BANK FRAUD or anything like that.Yes you took a plea rather than face your crimes!The reason why Marcelina Alvarado’s affidavit was in perfect English is that most people DO NOT write there own affidavits they tell there story and a lawyer or legal assistant writes it and they sign it. Even you where not this incompetent as a lawyer, rather than be a man and admit your crimes this is a pathetic attempt to manufacture a “conspiracy” against you.You get no mercy Mr Lincoln, everyone will know of your scams, you are merciless with your victims, you lie and steal until there is nothing left, or you have been exposed, then you file suite or lean their house! You are a disgusting human being inside and out!

(Whoever you are that’s writing all this crap: I love you, I forgive you, but I neither love nor forgive your spelling, grammar, and I think you’re pretty disgusting impersonation of a human being inside and out too—and I think you should be made to stay in time-out in the closet while all of the rest of the class has recess on the playground, OK?  TEACHER!!!!  Will you do what you can, Mrs. Cadwalader?  THIS PERSON’S WHO’S WRITING ALL THESE THINGS ABOUT ME IS A REALLY NASTY BULLY, CAN YOU CALL THE SPLC PLEASE TO PROTECT ME???????)

But to ORLY TAITZ, or whoever this is, I replied within two hours:

(1)  Even if it’s true that most people don’t write their own affidavits or declarations, which I’m not at all sure about, especially in initial reports to the police, it’s true that, to be real, a complaint has to be both signed and understood by the person who wrote it—Marcelina’s complaint against me, as described above, was NEVER signed nor any indication that she gave a statement in Spanish.

And of course, it was NOT Marcelina’s LAWYER or LEGAL assistant who prepared Marcelina’s complaint against her—it was Lieutenant REYES of the Lago Vista Police Department who summoned MY HOUSEKEEPER to the Police Station—and Marcelina NEVER signed that statement.  All the members of the Western District of Texas Admissions Committee who supposedly heard her speak said to me and my lawyer she was “a very credible witness” but since my lawyer and I never got a chance to see how credible (or otherwise) she might have been.  This is the way tyrants have brought false charges against people since the beginning of time, but it was outlawed in the English system after the unjust execution of Sir Walter Raleigh under King James I in

(2)  The Admissions Committee of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas never allowed me (or my attorneys John F. Campbell and Mark Clemens) even to SEE Marcelina Alvarado testify, or provide any actual transcript of her “testimony, “much less allow me the right to cross-examine her—NO—they kept Marcelina and her husband Timoteo in separate rooms to make absolutely sure that they didn’t say anything on the record—except for the Judge-appointed committee’s summary of what they claimed she said.

(3)  Once I saw her from a distance going into one of the admissions committee hearings and Marcelina seemed to look sadly at me and mouth the words “perdoname Mr. Lincoln” (forgive me, Mr. Lincoln).

(4)  The one time anyone of them ever appeared in Court, MUCH later, Marcelina said nothing and Timoteo said only that he thought Marcelina’s story was true—but he had no personal knowlege of anything.

(5)  the Plea I took on the advice of Edwin G. (“Gerry”) Morris—a hero of the Waco Branch Davidian Defense among many others—was for a “strict liability” offense, and Gerry’s advice, and my wife Elena’s advice, was that they wanted me out of the Bar, and so long as I resigned and accepted the stain of a felony, nothing else would happen to me.

More or less this was true.  For all the secret “audiencias” and hearings that took place about Marcelina Alvarado, I didn’t plead guilty to ANYTHING even remotely relating to her allegations (four counts in the December 7 1999 indictment) about counterfeiting and bank fraud—any of which would have had me locked up for years—and Gerry assured me that if I had gone to trial on any of those counts, he would have obtained a Rule 29 Judgment of Acquittal—before anything would have gone to the jury.

But, at least as the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (of which Texas is a part) had then construed 42 USC 408(a)(7)(B) at that time, the Social Security count had no defense (required not even a scintilla of proof of intent or motive or gain) and Gerry said, and I remember his words I think pretty exactly, “they will do everything they can to poison the jury about you, and so, even if only that one count goes to the jury, even without the original document (which had been lost at Wells Fargo—ONLY fairly bad copies existed)—they COULD find you guilty and give you the maximum penalty on that one count”.

So I am not sure whether it is even right to say I plead guilty to a “crime”—because I neither admitted to nor was any “mens rea” proved.  So this is a warning, my friends and fellow Americans: believe it or not, misstating your social security number unintentionally and/or FOR NO REASON AT ALL is still a Felony in the US.  They do not have to proof that you either gained anything to which you were not entitled nor AVOIDED any debt you owed because ALL THE OTHER INFORMATION WAS COMPLETELY ACCURATE!).

So the simple truth is: I do not need Mercy—the people of the United States need the “Mercy” of genuine legal reform—by the abolition of judicial immunity, prosecutorial immunity, and secret trials and secret agreements fixed without juries or public oversight or insight of any kind.

The illegitimate-state-sponsored monopolies created by the licensure of attorneys and the resultant Judge-Appointed and Approved State Bar Associations create something like absolute power for judges and those attorneys who collaborate closely with them—but I never joined that club and they hated me.  In this modern context of monopoly, the Judges are Corrupt, the Prosecutors are Corrupt—they saw my civil rights litigation and my refusal to join any of the GOOD OLD BOYS clubs in Austin and Central Texas law as a totally viable threat to the status quo.

They saw me as a person who would upset the whole system by arguing against Police Departments, Qualified Immunity, and for the extension of the Civil Rights Laws to all people, even to Middle Class White People for whom those laws were clearly NOT designed.

But the irony is that back in 1997, I thought and considered NOTHING except that I was doing the right thing—I never imagined that filing suit against Police Brutality and abuse in my little soft-living Lakeside Community of Lago Vista, surrounded by golf courses, Lake Travis, and the Balcones National Wildlife Refuge would cause such a ruckus in the news or such a severe rupture in my life.

But ever since then, I have dedicated my life to reform—that was the real result of my indictment—they took a very socially mild conformist conservative and turned him into a radical agains the system—they forced me to see a lot of things I never dreamt I would see, that I never wanted to see, but that, now having seen them, I can never again ignore.

So in my life after my social and professional death at the hands of Judges Nowlin and Sparks, these are my mottos: “IN GOD I TRUST,” “SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS” and “DEO VINDICE.”

What exactly are YOUR mottos, Orly, or whoever keeps writing these stupid little Ripoff Reports?  I suppose EVERYONE KNOWS that former indictments cannot be used in civil cases to impeach a witness after ten years—but on the Ripoff Reports I guess the limit is a hundred or more?

AND AT 2:41 Orly (or whoever) “reported again” and I had to reply (again)—but now this is getting beyond stupid:

SUBMITTED: Saturday, October 13, 2012

How about the hundreds of thousands in sanctions you racked up?Lincoln was kind enough to post a picture of his scam partner Peyton Freiman, when Peyton shows up he will need 2 things a bath and your money! If you put your money in a pile and burn it you will get light and some warmth with is more than you will get from Lincoln and Freiman! Once the money stops get ready to be sued!!

My reply was:

Yes, I suppose I was overly ambitious to try and politically naive to think I might succeed in my attempt to have the Texas Family Code declared unconstitutional in both State and Federal Courts, and to abolish Judicial Immunity on grounds that it is totally unconstitutional, because it is.  I regard the sanctions issued against me by Texas District Judge James F. Clawson in the 395th Judicial District of Williamson County, when I was represented by Attorneys Francis Wayne Williams-Montenegro and Valorie Wells Davenport, and by U.S. District Judge Walter S. Smith of Branch Davidian infamy in Waco, to be the brightest of the red badges of courage I wear……

For the Record, Judge Walter S. Smith imposed $150,000.00 on me based on ridiculous hearsay allegations in a case wherein I was never a party or a witness and to hearings in which I was never even invited…..all because I had supported a friend, Daniel Louis Simon, of Liberty Hill, Texas….

PS: This is the second time you (Orly, Yosi—who never met Peyton) or whoever, you have complained about Peyton needing a bath.  You must be writing about a different Peyton from the one I know.  But WHOEVER you are, please SHUT UP and crawl into a hole and just disappear from the internet—you are now repeating yourself and this is really getting BORING!