IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Evidence That Will Stand Up In Court, What evidence? Who in court? When?

u2r2h
post Dec 3 2007, 04:35 AM
Post #1





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-August 07
Member No.: 1,653



One day we will have enough evidence to go to court.

If you think we have enough evidence already then why aren't we discussing

- what do we take to court
- who will do it
- which court

But we probably don't have enough evidence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 3 2007, 06:10 AM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



I'd say the best evidence is the FDR evidence that Rob and the guys here exposed, and the Thermate related evidence that Steven Jones put together. The problem isn't evidence though. A criminal case against a sitting president or vice-president will be most likely thrown out because of "sovereign immunity" issues, and to bring a civil suit you need claiments who were directly harmed by the crime, i.e. surviving relatives of victims.

This article is a couple of years old, but summarizes some of the lawsuits that had been filed as of 2005. I don't know of any legal battles currently in the courts dunno.gif
http://www.onlinejournal.org/Special_Repor...12805floum.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
u2r2h
post Dec 3 2007, 07:29 AM
Post #3





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-August 07
Member No.: 1,653



A criminal case against a sitting president or vice-president will be most likely thrown out because of "sovereign immunity" issues, and to bring a civil suit you need claiments who were directly harmed by the crime, i.e. surviving relatives of victims.

Both is factually wrong and defeatist.

"sovereign immunity" is not enshrined in law.
"indirectly" harmed is reason enough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 3 2007, 08:21 AM
Post #4



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



A federal judge threw out Stanley Hilton's class action lawsuit citing Sovereign Immunity, and that wasn't even a criminal case ... the Supreme Court had ruled in Jones v Clinton that even a sitting president could be sued if the complaint was unrelated to the president's official duties, yet the judge in the Hilton lawsuit just ignored that Supreme Court decision and threw it out.

I don't mean to be defeatist, I was just attempting to point out what the obstacles are. I'd love to see a strong class action suit brought, I believe the evidence is there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Dec 3 2007, 01:18 PM
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Over on 911blogger.com in mid-Sept. 2007, there was a thread about attempted? "War Crimes" Immunity for the Bush Administration going back to Sept. 11, 2001. I suspect that particular date has some significance as far as the [mis]Adminstration's intent IMHO.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/11503

Could similar "immunity" be in the works for for the "non-war" obstruction of justice, foreknowledge/negligence, and evidence tampering perpetrated on and since Sept. 11, 2001?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Dec 3 2007, 04:59 PM
Post #6





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (u2r2h @ Dec 3 2007, 03:35 AM)
One day we will have enough evidence to go to court.

If you think we have enough evidence already then why aren't we discussing

- what do we take to court
- who will do it
- which court

But we probably don't have enough evidence.

We probably don't have a court.

QUOTE (Sanders @ Dec 3 2007, 07:21 AM)
I believe the evidence is there.


It will have to be used democratically first in order to purify the courts.

Now think about the farmer in the field, "You can't get there from here".

Then think about the "core lie" and how it could be used to gain media. Think opinion, think democracy, think court.

Or should I forget this line of reasoning because you can't think that FEMA might misrepresent the core?

This post has been edited by Christophera: Dec 3 2007, 05:05 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
u2r2h
post Dec 5 2007, 06:08 PM
Post #7





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-August 07
Member No.: 1,653



you might be right. The sentence:

EVERYTHING HITLER DID IN GERMANY WAS LEGAL

may not be literally true, but the NAZI "justice" system committed the most abhorrent crimes and more importantly for us, neglected to prosecute officials for obviously breaking law.

Today it is accepted that the solution is the International Court of Justice in THE HAGUE.

You cannot frighten and threaten foreigners as much as you can suppress dissent at home

Maybe we should try to bring the United States to this court... like Nicaragua did

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Dec 7 2007, 05:05 PM
Post #8





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (u2r2h @ Dec 5 2007, 05:08 PM)
you might be right.  The sentence:

EVERYTHING HITLER DID IN GERMANY WAS LEGAL

may not be literally true, but the NAZI "justice" system committed the most abhorrent crimes and more importantly for us, neglected to prosecute officials for obviously breaking law.

Today it is accepted that the solution is the International Court of Justice in THE HAGUE.

You cannot frighten and threaten foreigners as much as you can suppress dissent at home

Maybe we should try to bring the United States to this court... like Nicaragua did

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States

Excellent point.


I mean REALLY good. I've followed a link from that wiki page and found this, basically your point but more detail.

http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/55750.html

Its impact on the immediate controversy appears slight; the United States Government has strongly indicated its view that the Court lacked jurisdiction over the controversy, 2 has vetoed subsequent proposed Security Council resolutions on the subject, 3 and is appropriating additional funds for the contested activities, without apparent reference to the Court's decision.


Basically, to continue with the relevance you bring to the moment, or how we might be potentially effective, which verifies what I post relating to u2r2 and Sanders posts, which you comment on.

QUOTE (Christophera,)
QUOTE (u2r2h @ Dec 3 2007, 03:35 AM)
One day we will have enough evidence to go to court.

If you think we have enough evidence already then why aren't we discussing

- what do we take to court
- who will do it
- which court

But we probably don't have enough evidence.

We probably don't have a court.

QUOTE (Sanders @ Dec 3 2007, 07:21 AM)
I believe the evidence is there.


It will have to be used democratically first in order to purify the courts.

Now think about the farmer in the field, "You can't get there from here".

Then think about the "core lie" and how it could be used to gain media. Think opinion, think democracy, think court.

Or should I forget this line of reasoning because you can't think that FEMA might misrepresent the core?


We need to abandon immediate reliance on any governmental systems or rightful authority (there is none) and instead work on bridging the many societal and cultural gaps that corporate media has created in our populations for the express purpose of disabling us from having any effect on the agenda that is now enacted.

Accordingly I feel we should work on a petition which defines exactly this point, with extended dynamic and evidence to what has already been shown and sourced here, and create a joint statement signed by as many as possible, then present that via certified mail to as many 9-11 and other organizations devoted to; peace, justice, liberty etc, that asks them to publicize the petition, define it in terms that supports their purposes and requests their members to examine the petition and perhaps sign it IF they see it as accurate and functional towards their purposes. The goal of this is a commitment from each signer to work with others locally, coordinated by a national program; defined and accepted by citizens to begin activism directed at unity circumventing this intentionally developed (by infiltrators) barrier of non functional courts/government incapable of observing constitutional limits; for the purpose of altering government behaviors.

What do you think?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
u2r2h
post Dec 17 2007, 08:36 PM
Post #9





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-August 07
Member No.: 1,653



Is anyone aware of any 911-related submission to THE HAGUE?

Is anyone aware of any 911-related submission to THE HAGUE?

Is anyone aware of any 911-related submission to THE HAGUE?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Dec 26 2007, 04:36 PM
Post #10





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (u2r2h @ Dec 17 2007, 07:36 PM)
Is anyone aware of any 911-related submission to THE HAGUE?

Is anyone aware of any 911-related submission to THE HAGUE?

Is anyone aware of any 911-related submission to THE HAGUE?

From my meager knowledge of the world court I believe I understood that they only accept things from the US by US citizens against US government that have been through US courts.

Of course all actions in the US related to 9-11 have been dismissed on pre trial motions which is psychologically disabling to most plaintiffs so nothing has, although it could, been through the supreme court.

I'm very interested in that and would like to be a part but the movement is too fractured by infiltrations of psyop to even agree on what kind of structure stood, so a open minded regroup is in order. And, ........ with "conditionally applied" rules,

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...showtopic=8354

that looks like a catch 22. Read all of my posts and you will see the size and shape of the problem.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Carl Bank
post Dec 28 2007, 05:57 PM
Post #11





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,114
Joined: 21-October 06
From: Berlin
Member No.: 121



QUOTE (Christophera @ Dec 26 2007, 10:36 PM)
I'm very interested in that and would like to be a part but the movement is too fractured by infiltrations of psyop to even agree on what kind of structure stood, so a open minded regroup is in order.  And, ........ with "conditionally applied" rules,

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...showtopic=8354

that looks like a catch 22.  Read all of my posts and you will see the size and shape of the problem.

@Chris: John 1:25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christophera
post Dec 29 2007, 04:29 PM
Post #12





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 494
Joined: 14-November 07
Member No.: 2,482



QUOTE (Carl Bank @ Dec 28 2007, 04:57 PM)
QUOTE (Christophera @ Dec 26 2007, 10:36 PM)

I'm very interested in that and would like to be a part but the movement is too fractured by infiltrations of psyop to even agree on what kind of structure stood, so a open minded regroup is in order.  And, ........ with "conditionally applied" rules,

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...showtopic=8354

that looks like a catch 22.  Read all of my posts and you will see the size and shape of the problem.

@Chris: John 1:25

That doesn't make sense Carl.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
u2r2h
post Mar 16 2008, 07:56 AM
Post #13





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-August 07
Member No.: 1,653



I did some more research into the ONLY POSSIBLE method how the perps did the aeroplane illusion.... hologrammes:

Maybe worth a read for yous:
http://u2r2h-documents.blogspot.com/2008/0...holography.html

of course you all know about the update from Morgan Reynolds:
http://u2r2h-documents.blogspot.com/2008/0...court-case.html

I can't wait to see John Lear's testimony about hologrammes in court.
COURT TV should be *very* interested in that trial, right?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Mar 16 2008, 09:59 AM
Post #14





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,743
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



QUOTE (u2r2h @ Mar 16 2008, 12:56 PM) *
I can't wait to see John Lear's testimony about hologrammes in court.
COURT TV should be *very* interested in that trial, right?


I read through most of your 2 links and couldn't find anything about John Lear's testimony in the Woods/Raynolds trial.
Could you point us to the passage, plse?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tnemelckram
post Mar 16 2008, 02:23 PM
Post #15





Group: Contributor
Posts: 767
Joined: 30-January 08
Member No.: 2,690



I'm a lawyer but I am not concerned about whether the evidence is admissible in court or whether it is enough to make out a civil or criminal case on any cause of action. They say that the winners write history, so I am concerned about who gets to write the historical record.

I want the 911 Commission Report and Official Conspiracy Theory discredited before the bar of history. All that is needed to accomplish that end is enough evidence to riddle it with holes and show that there are umpteen more plausible accounts of the events on 9-11-2001.

All of the evidence produced here and by CIT admirably accomplishes that end.

Having considered all of that evidence, I have my own theory about what happened that is ore plausible than and rejects the OTC but might differ from the theories of others who reject the OTC. It is not important whether my theory is correct. What is important is that my theory and all others rejecting OTC preclude OTC from being the verdict of history.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
u2r2h
post Mar 16 2008, 07:19 PM
Post #16





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-August 07
Member No.: 1,653



Zaparap: I haven't written about John Lear. I just HEARD that he is a hologrammer.

tnemelckram: As a lawyer you should be concerned about justice.
Your sarcastic views of justice maybe fitting when talking about the past,
but in future we do not want the crimes to continue.

To me it makes no sense what you say. The 911-Commission-report is a piece of sh*t,
we all know that. You don't need to *WANT* it to be discredited. You just need to be
HEARD and UNDERSTOOD. So why don't you start a court-case yourself?
Since the danger is grave .. isn't there a law that allows immediate remedy to prevent
further mayhem? The US military will gladly help arrest the people who did 911.
THAT I AM SURE OF. Imagine... tanks surrounding the CIA headquarters!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Mar 16 2008, 09:48 PM
Post #17





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (tnemelckram @ Mar 16 2008, 02:23 PM) *
I'm a lawyer but I am not concerned about whether the evidence is admissible in court or whether it is enough to make out a civil or criminal case on any cause of action. They say that the winners write history, so I am concerned about who gets to write the historical record.

I want the 911 Commission Report and Official Conspiracy Theory discredited before the bar of history. All that is needed to accomplish that end is enough evidence to riddle it with holes and show that there are umpteen more plausible accounts of the events on 9-11-2001.

All of the evidence produced here and by CIT admirably accomplishes that end.

Having considered all of that evidence, I have my own theory about what happened that is ore plausible than and rejects the OTC but might differ from the theories of others who reject the OTC. It is not important whether my theory is correct. What is important is that my theory and all others rejecting OTC preclude OTC from being the verdict of history.



Very good post! thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Mar 16 2008, 11:47 PM
Post #18


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (u2r2h @ Mar 16 2008, 03:19 PM) *
<s>
The US military will gladly help arrest the people who did 911.
THAT I AM SURE OF.
<s>


Well, GEE WHIZ, u2, you are so SURE are you?

I'll tell you what I'm sure of:

• -- The Offices of Army and Naval Intelligence have far more evidentiary information about what happened on 9/11 than do we.

• -- The military were involved in numerous exercises on 9/11, some involving hijacked airliners.

• -- Military spokesmen have changed their official account of what happened on 9/11 at least three times.

• -- There are many more security cameras around the Pentagon that could, conceivably, give us a much better picture of what, if anything, hit it on 9/11 -- yet the Department of Defense has not released footage from any of them.

So, prey tell u2, how can you be so SURE the military would "gladly" arrest the perpetrators of 9/11? I'm just dying to know. After all, they've had over six years to do it and they haven't done it yet.

Oh, yeah, I can imagine tanks surrounding Langly all right: All facing out at us.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
u2r2h
post Mar 17 2008, 06:18 AM
Post #19





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 171
Joined: 9-August 07
Member No.: 1,653



yes it is me. You prey, I tell.

Of course I meant the average soldier... not the commanders.
But you are right.. there is no military without hierarchy.

True, it is VERY NAIVE of me. But in my defence I can say that THE MOMENT 911 IS OUT the world will change, hierarchies will have to justify themselves...

Last Saturday 220 cities in Italy celebrated f*ck-Off Day:

http://tangibleinfo.blogspot.com/2008/03/2...t-saturday.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nunyabiz
post Mar 17 2008, 10:33 AM
Post #20





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 233
Joined: 8-February 08
Member No.: 2,727



There have been 6 World Tribunal's held since 2004 and all 6 have found the Bush regime GUILTY of War Crimes and crimes against humanity.

Brussel's Tribunal

International Criminal Tribunal For Afghanistan at Tokyo

War Crimes Trial to indict George W. Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard Christchurch, New Zealand.

Iraq War Crimes Tribunal in NYC

World Tribunal on Iraq DemocracyNow

2 Hours of video taken from WTI

International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes against Humanity committed by the Bush administration


"Some" evidence of Depleted Uranium use at the Pentagon on 9/11, but literally TONS of evidence of its use by the US military in Iraq and elsewhere which is yet another provable war crime & crime against humanity.

INTERNATIONAL CITIZENS 9/11 WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL

3 good videos about DU & Treason


The clear complicity of the Corporate Media.

Media Complicity


The evidence for War crimes and Crimes against humanity is absolutely overwhelming which is of course why I believe for the first time ever a US pResident refused to sign the ICC treaty.

In the view of anyone SANE the evidence that 9/11 was in some way committed by a faction of the US Government is also copious & rather damning, BUT the main problem with "convicting" these blatant criminals Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, Rice, Rove, and numereous other cronies is trying to pin that evidence on them personally.
As far as US courts go that will never happen because clearly US courts are totally compromised by Reich wing lunatics & Neofascist operatives.
Would be like trying to convict Hitler in Germany in the 30s, if anything the person bringing the charges would have been taken out back and shot.

There are only 2 possibilities, a full blown revolution with 10s of millions of American citizens taking back the country and issuing real justice on the Bush administration, every signer of the PNAC and basically every single member of Congress & the USSC.
or a huge International Coalition of countries that place trade embargoes on the USA, this country would crack & fall apart in 30 days.

This post has been edited by Nunyabiz: Mar 17 2008, 02:59 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th February 2020 - 09:09 AM