THIS LAWSUIT CREATED BY JEFF WILLIAMSON AUGUST 11, 2006
|
| ||||
"Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to come a law unto himself. It invites anarchy." (United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438 (1928). The Department that calls itself Justice "There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice ..." - U.S. v. Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982) DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing
-- "The Declaration of Independence" http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm WARNING FEDERAL AGENTS - CONSTITUTIONAL ASSASINS & PROFESSIONAL LIARS
DEATH PENALTY
LETHAL INJECTIONS
|
THE DJ BLAZE REPORT
http://www.myspace.com/djblazereport
http://www.freewebs.com/renegademovement
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JEFF H. WILLIAMSON,
RECIEVED
PLAINTIFF FEBRUARY 22, 2007
VS Case No: C 07-00992 JCS
AMENDED COMPLAINT
GEORGE W. BUSH ) RULE 15 FED R CIV PROCEDURES
GEORGE H W BUSH )
JEB BUSH )
NEIL BUSH )
JONATHAN BUSH )
MARVIN P BUSH )
WILLIAM H.T. BUSH )
RICHARD CHENEY )
DONALD RUMSFELD )
PETER PACE )
MICHAEL HAYDEN )
PORTER GOSS )
ROBERT SWAN MUELLER III )
CHARLENE THORTON )
CNDICE M WILL )
ALBERTO GONZALES )
WAN J KIM )
H. MARSHALL JARRET )
GLENN FINE )
WILLIAM LEONE )
DEBRA YANG )
KEVIN RYAN )
MIKE FRANCIS )
'JOHN DOE" GREEN )
ARTHUR BALIZAN
BRIAN SMITT )
STEVE OLSON )
RICHARD C POWERS )
DAVID PRICE )
DR KELLI LEWIS )
NATIONAL COMMISSION on TERRORIST
ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES )
DR CHUNG HWAN KWAK )
TOM CURLEY )
BOB WRIGHT )
ROBERT IGER )
LESLIE MOOVES )
RUPERT MURDOCH )
JIM WALTON )
JONATHON KLEIN )
RUDI BAKHTAIR )
MIKE GALONOS )
OTHER UNNAMED NATIONAL and
LOCAL MEDIA REPRESENTATIVES ) and
OTHER UNKNOWN GOVERNEMENT
AGENTS, AGENT PROVACUTUERS,
HOSTILE THIRD PARTIES and INFORMANTS
and
UKNOWN INDIVIDUALS
DEFENDANTS
INTRODUCTION
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEqtaWpKEU&search=JFK%20on%20Secret%20Societies
http://www.bushflash.com/mlk.html
http://www.freewebs.com/renegademovement (Watch the videos and read the liks located in the Plaintiffs Blogs/Websites)
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
1. The Plaintiff started a movement called the Watchdog Group who had over eighty (80) websites and/or blogs on the internet about United States Governement Corruption and Coverups. The defendants have violated all of the Plaintiffs rights-stripping the Plaintiff of all his Constitutional and Civil Rights. The defendants have destroyed the Plaintiffs life and disc jockey career. The defendants have disrupted and blocked the Plaintiffs income. The defendants have destroyed the Plaintiffs life with continued Obstruction of Justice only to boast that the Plaintiff would have to kill someone before anything would happen. The defendants have abandon the (Levi) guidelines and encouraged the defendants and FBI to attack dissent with a free hand. It is clear their intention is not about fighting terrorism, its about suppressing dissent. Thats what the FBI Constitutional Assassins have always been about. The Watchdog Group is a Peaceful Non-Violent Movement.Therefore for the complete review of the complaint-It is necessary for the Honorable court and jury to review plaintiffs complaint on the internet at the following website addresses so he can get the relief he deserves:
http://www.freewebs.com/nationallawsuit
The Plaintiffs Watchdog Group websites/blogs and links were:
http://www.freewebs.com/govwebsites
http://www.freewebs.com/watchdogmovement
http://www.freewebs.com/topissues
The Plaintiff donated his websites and blogs to the National Lawyers Guild, The Center For Constitutional Rights, and United For Peace and Justice and started a new movement-The Renegade Movement http://www.freewebs.com/renegademovement and the DJ Blaze Report
http://www.myspace.com/djblazereport
2. It is a civil rights action brought pursuant to the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. 1981; 42 U.S.C. 1983; 42 U.S.C. 1985 (2) and (3); 42 U.S.C. 1986 42 U.S.C. 3789 (k) and challenging the constitutionality of the acts, policies, practices, and/or customs of the defendants that are a violation of numerous federal laws and serious federal crimes 18 U.S.C. 241 and 18 U.S.C. 242;18 U.S.C. 3: 18 U.S.C. 4. 18 U.S.C. 1510: 18 U.S.C. 2261(a) and 18 U.S.C. 1091; 18 U.S.C. 1001;18 U.S.C. 1512(a) 1c,2c,3c,b3,d2; 18 U.S.C. 1513(a) 1b,2b, e; 18 U.S.C. 371; 18 U.S.C. 2441, 18 U.S.C. 2330c; 18 U.S.C. 2382;18 U.S.C. 2340A.; violation of article 1 Section 9, clause 7 of the Constitution; violation of 31 USC 3729(a)(7); 10 USC 114; 10 USC 119; 10 USC 126; 10 USC 127; 10 USC 127 (a) which is reported to the Honorable Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4 that is required to be presented to a federal grand jury in light of the defendants Obstruction of Justice; Unlawful Coercion; and Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice. All of these defendants have overall resposibility to ensure the Plaintiff and America people recieve uncensored news free of blackouts or propaganda tactics for it is the central tenant of the First Amendment the government must remain neutral in the media, market place of ideas and opinions as a matter of public interest and concern that is essential to the common quest for the truth and vitality as a whole as required under the First Amendment-Right To A Free Press.
3. The defendants have violated the Plaintiffs rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States of America while they acted under color of law and/or have oppressed, threatened, and intimidated the Plaintiff in his exercise and enjoyment of his rights and priviledges secured to him by the United States Constitution and laws of the United States of America. The Defendants institute, authorize, tolerate, ratify permit and acquiesce in policies, practices and customs of detentions, interrogations, searches and seizures without probable cause, harass without reasonable, articulable suspicion of crime, in their provision of government, law enforcement services or corporate media as the acts were done with diliberate indifferance, knowingly in violation of plaintiffs’ legal and constitutional rights, without good faith, and have directly and proximately caused plaintiffs’ humiliation, physical injuries yet to be determined that were covered up by the defendants, mental pain and suffering and violation of public trust with the defendants gross negligence, reckless and/or callous indifferance to the rights and safety of the Plaintiff and acted in the face of perceived risks that would violate federal law all to the damage of the Plaintiff which constitutes a serious miscarrage of justice.
4 The Plaintiff will also prove there is no law that requires him or any American to pay income taxes and the CIA- National Media secret project "operation mockingbird" violates the Plaintiffs right and every Americans First Amendment-right to a free press that concerns all 50 states. The Plaintiff will also expose through numerous videos and testimony the corruption and coverups behind the defendents National ID and Micro Chip plan, the Iraq War, the Unconstitutional Patriot Act, the CIA Black Projects and the Funding behind those projects, the CIA child sex rings used for blackmail against congressional representatives for decisions that affect the Plaintiff and all Americans.http://www.freewebs.com/renegademovement for some of these documentaries and videos for the Courts review.
5 The defendants use of ECHELON on the Plaintiff and private citizens is unconstitutional , unlawful, and anti-democratic in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and 18 U.S.C. section 1385 and cannot be enforced. The disinformation of the NSA operating the ECHELON is a complete fraud and coverup-it is operated by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA). In 1981, President Regan issued Executive Order 12333 which authorizes the military and law enforcement at all levels to attack and silence the voices of a "subversive" ( a subversive is anyone who disagrees with government policies or the President). This Order is also unconstitutional , unlawful, and anti-democratic in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and 18 U.S.C. section 1385 and cannot be enforced.
6. The defendants activities amounts to the existance of a racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 USC 1962 b, c , d with proof of each defendant's association with this criminal enterprise that has a pattern of racketeering within the last thirty years. Moreover, the defendants have conspired to engage in criminal conduct in agreement to commit the crimes with conduct that constitutes a substantial step torward the commission of crimes that strongly corroborates the intent by the defendants with defendant George W Bush at the center of the RICO conspiracy who exhibits sufficient control, influence and manipulation of the United States government for their illicit ends with politically motivated suppression of the Plaintiffs information and links listed in the Watchdog Group websites in which the defendants activities as a direct and proximate result caused the Plaintiff economic loss including but not limited to the destruction of the Plaintiffs Disc Jockey career, theft of Plaintiffs music-over 150 compact disc valued at over $4,000.00 that included a classic trance collection and his national issue theme songs listed in http://www.freewebs.com/topissues , the destruction of the Plaintiff as a member of the Watchdog Group, lost business opportunities, lost wages, and the economic loss of the Watchdog Group by the defendants blocking the Plaintiff from opening checking accounts to post Pay-Pal accounts for donations and a legal fund all to the damage of the Plaintiff in an effort to prevent him from exposing the defendants corruption and coverups. In addition to the defendants RICO Act violations and conspiracy against the Plaintiffs rights 18 USC 241 and 18 USC 242 and 18 USC 1091 the defendants have made at least two attempts on the Plaintiffs life with blocked police reports which amounts to attempted murder and obstruction of justice that include all the defendants in this conspiracy which has continued in this district.
7. Each of the defendants knew of the activities of the co-conspiraters after notice from the Plaintiff and should have logically expected that he or she was part of this criminal enterprise and conspiracy against the Plaintiffs rights. The defendants have knowledge of the unlawful activity and/or show reckless indifference torward the Plaintiff allowing the illegal activity with a degree of participation and the extent the defendants benefit from these schemes that are so extensive to compell a conclusional continuity which has included the defendants attempted frame-up of the Plaintiff and the defendants in the Executive Branch have knowingly and willingly concealed, covered up, schemed, device material facts, made material and use of false statements in the criminal racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 USC 1001; the defendants have engaged in money laundering in violation of 18 USC 1956 and 18 USC 1957 and contract fraud, illegal immigration, election fraud; the defendents have used unknown military and CIA-DOD black op's agents in the criminal racketeering enterprise and agaisnt the Plaintiff in violation of 18 USC 1385 and the Posse Comitatus Act; the defendants have tampered with the Plaintiff in the criminal racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 USC 1512 (a) 1c, 2c, 3c, b3, d2; the defendants have retaliated against the Plaintiff in the criminal racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 USC 1513 (a) 1b, b2, e; the defendants have conspired to cross state lines with intent to stalk and harass the Plaintiff in the criminal racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 USC 2261 A.; the defendants have conspired to committ offense against the United States in the criminal racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 USC 371; the defendants have financed terrorism in the criminal racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 USC 2339 c; and the defendants have comitted war crimes in violation of 18 USC 2441; and the defendants have committed torture in violation of 18 USC 2340 A; and the defendants have violated 18 USC 2382 serious crimes within the existance of a racketeering enterprise that includes but not limited to war profiteering and creating a fake war on terrorism with activities that amount to a violation of 18 USC 1505 obstruction of "the due administation of justice" and the Plaintiff demands damages threefold pursuant to 18 USC 1964 (c). The defendants and legislative branch have illegally voted and passed and signed the Patriot Act without reading it in which several provisions and laws are Unconstitutional and Unlawful.
8 In any civil action instituted under 18 USC 1966 by the United States in any district court of the United States, the Attorney General may file with the clerk of such court a certificate stating that in his opinion the case is of general public importance. A copy of that certificate shall be furnished immediately by such clerk to the chief
judge or in his absence to the presiding district judge of the district in which such action is pending. Upon receipt of such copy, such judge shall designate immediately a judge of that district to hear and determine action. Since defendant Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General is named a defendant, the Plaintiff respectfully request the Honorable Court issue any ORDER it deems appropriate pursuant to 18 USC 1964 (a) and ORDER the appropriate representative from the United States Department of Justice to immediately proceed with this action in the interest of justice and general public importance with a civil investigative demand pursuant to 18 USC 1968 and 18 USC 1964 (b) to prevent any further obstruction of justice in this matter
Senator Robert C Byrd on Alberto Gonzales: http://www.alternet.org/story/21170/
9. The defendants activities against the Plaintiff are willful, wonton, outragous, morally depraved, in violation of various statues, constitutional provisions and common decency and is regarded as atrocious and intolerable in a civilized society who are conspiring and acting in concert to suppress, chill and "neutralize" the Petitioners constitutionally protected activities in defense of government reform so he cannot expose government corruption and coverups, and otherwise injure him and abridge his civil rights.Plaintiff's charge further that the violations and injuries complained of herein were brought about by conspiracy among some or all of the defendants, agents, media representatives and others, whereby there was a Meeting of the Minds among them regarding their desire to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit or otherwise neutralize' and otherwise suppress, punish and chill the protected activities of the Plaintiff, The Watchdog Group.
10. The Plaintiff hereby reports the defendants federal crimes 18 U.S.C. 241 and 18 U.S.C. 242;18 U.S.C. 3: 18 U.S.C. 4. 18 U.S.C. 1510: 18 U.S.C. 2261(a) and 18 U.S.C. 1091; 18 U.S.C. 1001;18 U.S.C. 1512(a) 1c,2c,3c,b3,d2; 18 U.S.C. 1513(a) 1b,2b, e; 18 U.S.C. 371; 18 U.S.C. 2441, 18 U.S.C. 2330c; 18 U.S.C. 2382;18 U.S.C. 2340A.; violation of article 1 Section 9, clause 7 of the Constitution; violation of 31 USC 3729(a)(7); 10 USC 114; 10 USC 119; 10 USC 126; 10 USC 127; 10 USC 127 (a) which is hereby reported to the Honorable Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4, all to the damage of the Plaintiff.
11. The defendants have subjected the Plaintiff to COINTELPRO-COINTELPRO is the FBI acronym for a series of covert action programs directed against domestic groups. In these programs, the Bureau went beyond the collection of intelligence to secret action defined to "disrupt" and "neutralize" target groups and individuals. The techniques were adopted wholesale from wartime counterintelligence, and ranged from the trivial mailing reprints of Reader's Digest articles to college administrators to the degrading sending anonymous poison-pen letters intended to break up marriages and the dangerous encouraging gang warfare and falsely labeling members of a violent group as police informers. The defendants continue the FBI policy and practice of COINTELPRO against the Plaintiff without cause or justification-techniques that carry a serious risk of physical, emotional, and economic damage and callous disregard of clearly established law in violation of specific crimianal statutes that involve risk of serious bodily injury or death to the target-the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has no violent history to justify the defendants misconduct and civil rights violations against him. The fact is the defendants have no excuse for the destruction of the Plaintiffs life and carreer other than to silence him for reporting the defendnats crimes, plans, and murders in this shocking injustice across the board. http://www.freewebs.com/fbiharassmnet
Hijacking Catastrophe: The Rise Of The Neo-Cons (Video)
World conquest takes time, and even with a military force superior to any other, it might require many years from inception to impose a new world order. What was needed was something to frighten and mobilize the citizens of the homeland; something that would garner public support for the subjugation of foreigners, and allow for sweeping reforms to control the public by removing many of their civil rights, in part to eliminate the “enemy within”; something to create a domestic atmosphere where anyone not supporting the agenda would be seen as an enemy of the people. What was needed was a terrorist attack upon the homeland-the people of the United States of America and the defendants made it happen and allowed it to happen on September 11, 2001.
15. The defendants PNAC people are to be found in the media, heading unions, as church leaders and founders of religious organisations. They are professors in colleges, writers, and politicians. Most are involved in major corporations, the majority of which are military contractors. Although some may be considered simply as misguided idealists, the majority stand to gain substantially, in a financial sense, from prolonged warfare, occupation of resource-rich regions, and the crippling of economic competitors. The defendants and PNAC benefits greatly from manipulating Christian and Jewish fundamentalist movements, but their goal is not so much an imposition of religious ideology, as it is the building of a military and economic empire. The defendants and PNAC will eventually lead to the ruin of America, in fact attitudes are such at this time that much of the world would cheer such an eventuality, but it should matter that millions of innocent people will die due to the defendants and PNAC's misguided objectives. Perhaps defendant George W Bush's administration can strangle its more powerful targets by occupying the Middle East and cutting off their oil supply; but perhaps these nations will not simply sit by and watch. Some of the planned confrontations may lead to consequences far more dire than anyone would wish to imagine, for desperate circumstances can provoke desperate measures, and a nuclear power always possesses one final option placing the United States of America in grave risk and danger.
16 The defendants and the Bush administration gave the Taliban, arguably the most repressive regime in the world, and the government harboring the most dangerous terrorist in the world, $43 million for declaring that growing opium is "against the will of god." This made the United States, in 2001, the world's greatest monetary supporter of the Taliban. This is after defendant Bush was advised that al qaeda was responsible for the Cole bombing and with Former Presdent Clinton's plan to attack Afghanistan in his hand!. Defendent BUSH BLOCKED TERRORIST INVESTIGATIONS.John P. O'Neill had been a Deputy Director of the FBI, and Osama bin Laden's main pursuer in the US government. O'Neill had investigated the bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993, a US base in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the US embassies in Nairobi and Dar-Es-Salaam in 1998, and the USS Cole. O'neill resigned from the FBI and reported the Bush Administration was slowing down, stopping, and blocking terrorist investigations "The main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were US oil corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it," O'Neill reportedly told intelligence analysts. Several other FEDERAL WHISTLEBLOWERS such as Robert Wright, Ted Gunderson, Sibel Edmonds, John Peeler, David Shayler, and many more confirm the COVERUP and INSIDE JOB. President Bush signed Presidential Decision Directive W199i, pulling FBI agents off of the suspected terrorists.17 This was no intelligence failure . This was strategic deception,a combination the KGB called 'disinformatzia' and 'maskirovka'. This was facilitated by an ideologically and religiously extreme president; a Dr. Strangelovian vice-president lusting for war and oil; neocon ideologues and a cowardly Congress that violated its most basic responsibility to the nation. It is the politicians, the Pentagon, the FBI, the CIA, the CIA controlled media & 9-11 Commission, who misled New York and the American people in the 9-11 Coverup and INSIDE JOB of the CIA BLACK OP's and DOD MILITARY- ELECTRONICALLY HIGHJACKED-REMOTE CONTROLLED AIRCRAFT then led the U.S. into a catastroph war that has so far cost the lives of more than 2300 Americans, injured over 17,000 , killed innocent Iraqi civilians, War cost over $440 billion dollars, and ruined the good name of the United States of America around the world.
18 The defendants and unknown US Government CIA-DOD Black Op's Agents used 10 lb to 90 lb Minimum Residual Radiation (MRR) Atomic Munitions (bombs for use in demolition work) W-54 or Red Murcury to murder over 3000 people in the World Trade Center. The WTC could handle stress 2000 times its weight accorging to engineers and could have only been brought down with a demolition team with expert skills and percise timiming not a bunch of radical arabs with box cutters. The evidence listed in this section is overwhelming and it is clear the 9-11 WTC attacks was a complete coverup by our government.
19 The defendants and FBI lied and claimed the highjackers were traced through the use of credit cards to buy tickets in their own names. The Court should contact American Airlines about the passenger list. Critically, the passenger manifests for all four aircraft serve as the final (independent) proof that no alleged hijackers or anyone of Arabic name boarded any of the four aircraft used in the attacks.The American Government realizes the dangers of allowing the public access to such incriminating documents. For that reason here is the list of full manifests on a separate page. To view the passenger list see section below
http://www.geocities.com/mknemesis/passengers.html
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/07/02/article_tro.htm
23. Another conventionally stated goal of first Amendment protection- the "public order function"- also cries out for recognition of a right of access to the mass media. The Plaintiffs freedom of expression cannot be secured because entry into the communication media is not free but is confined as a matter of discretion by the Central Intelligence Agency and those private hands and the defendants being restricted by the government and the defendants. The perserving public order is lost because access to the communication media is foreclosed to dissendent groups and the plaintiff. It is a measure of the jaded and warped standards of the media.
24. The view that freedom from prior restraint rather than freedom from subsequent punishment was central to eighteenth century notion of liberty of the press. The Plaintiff's concern with suppression before dissemination is doubtless to assure that ideas would reach the public. The Plaintiff has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; the defendants activities forbid and/orblock it destroys the freedom of the press. Only the Plaintiff proposed new media of communication can lay sentiments before the public, and it is they rather than the government who can most effectively abridge expression by nullifying the opportunity for an idea to win acceptance..
25. The Defendants mass media have become pervasive and influential to a degree unknown to any previous generation permitted to be altogether free to determin news content. The emergence of the defendants has brought new threats to the free exchange of thought in the form of concentrated economic power which inhibits ideological debate and offers constantly increasing barriers to the Plaintiff or those who would establish new media outlets.
26. Since the enactment of the Radio Act of 1927 followed by the federal Communications Act of 1934, Congress and the Courts have treated the broadcast media differently than the print media. In contrast to newspaper publishing the operations of a defendant broadcater have been subject to elaborate governmental control extending to virtually all aspects of the broadcast industry. The defendants broadcast media have a greater impact on the public, and consequently a greater danger for abuse than the print media. Absent any regulation, the internal pressures on the defendant broadcasters to avoid controversial programming are significantly stronger than those on the press.
27. There are many duties required by the "Fairnes Doctrine" that include but not limited to affording a reasonable oppertunity in the defendants overall programming for the presentation of contrasting views-attaches to the defendant only when a "controversial nature of public importance " is presented. The Fairness Doctrine requitres a demonstrated analysis of imbalance on controversial issues. This cannot be avoided by recourse to a subjective and impressionistic recording of overall impact.Some the Plaintiffs complaints arise from programs on which controversial issues of public importance are discussed that sre expressly stated.
28. The Plaintiff claims a right of access to the defendnats mass media and argues that there is a public and /or constitutional interest in his paticular voice being heard on the air even over the opposition of the broadcaster or news anchor because of political editorial and/or a partisan political broadcast as it is essential that not everyone shall speak, but that everything worth hearing shall be said.. The essential basis for any fairness doctrine...is that the Plaintiff and American public must not be left uninformed...The Plaintiffs uninhibited, robust, and wide-open debate "is furthered by the presentation who believes in the cause for which he speaks.
29. The unused Federal Communication Commission powers include fines up to $1000 per day. id at 503(b), 504(a) and referal of a complaint to the U.S. Justice Department for criminal sanctions,id at 501, 502. The commisions authority to renew or deny renewal of broadcast licenses evry three years constitutes the major source of commission review of the overall conduct of a licensee and , therefore serves as a focal point for viewing the implementation of FCC broadcast policies.The defendants failure to comply with fairness doctrine and misrepresentations to the FCC concerning their programming and other blatant and continuous violations and conscious deception of the FCC have not been enforced.
30. A license renewal can also be denied to an incumbent licensee through the "comparative hearing" process.When a competing application is filed against an incumbant broadcaster who has applied for renewal of his broadcast license, the FCC must hold such hearing to determine, by reference to certain comparative criteria, whether the public interest is better served by granting the renewal to the incumbant or by granteing the competing application. The defendants unlawful and illegal activities are decribed in the statement of the facts. Several of the media defendants corporate owners have a long criminal rap sheet that call into question their license. http://www.freewebs.com/mediacrimes
31. The defendants flat ban on paid public issue announcements is in violation of the First Amendment , at least when other sorts of paid announcements are accepted and the plaintiff has established a limited constitutional right to the airwaves in the mass media. Based on the Plaintiffs news gathering and his Watchdog Group to expose U.S. government corruption and coverups, the interest of the of the public are found to outweigh the legitimate journalistic interest of the defendants in which government power should be asserted within the framework of the FCC.Thus, the Plaintiffs right of access to the defendants media is necessary to allow the plaintiff and the Watchdog Group the opportunity for self-initiate speech.
32 The First Amendment protects the press and mass media defendants from government interference; it confers no analogous protection on the government. The Plaintiff holds that the defendants activities and actions is government activities and actions which simply STRIPS the media defendants of their own First Amendment rights. Therefore the media defendants are required and obligated to grant the demands of the Plaintiff and all citizens to be heard over the air, subject only to reasonable regulations as to "time and manner". The media defendants are Government for First Amendment purposes inevitably drawn to the position of common carriers as this is precisely the status of government with respect to public forums-a status mandated by the First Amendment.
33. The media defendants activities and actions are governmental activities and actions to produce a result wholly inimical to the media defendants own First Amendment rights,and wholly at odds with the broadcasting system establised by Congress with the many decisions approving those legislative provisions.The old fashioned First Amendment is our only guideline; and one hard and fast principle which it announces is that governmnet shall keep its hands off the press. That principle has served us through the days of calm and eras of strife and the Plaintiff demands we abide by it immediately.
34 The activities of defendant Michael Hayden and government are in a position of control over the media defendants is appalling, even to the extent of the fairness doctrine. The struggle for liberty has been a stuggle against the government. The essential achemme of our Constitution and Bill of Rights was to take government off the backs of people. Seperation of powers is one device. An independent judiciary is another device. The Bill of Rights is still another. And it is anathema to the First Amendment to allow defendant Michael Hayden and the government any role of censorship and/or propaganda over our newspapers, magazines, books, art, music, tv, radio, or any other aspect of the press.There is unhappiness in some cicles at the impotence of government but if there is to be a change let it come by constitutional amendment.
35 Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts permits the inclusion of uncharged misconduct evidence to show motive, intent, plan, or absence of mistake or accident, and is applicable in civil and criminal cases.Thus, prior instances of similar misconduct carried out by other agents acting under the same or related FBI policies, much of which was perpetrated in exactly the same way is highly probative. When intent, motive or lack of mistake are in issue, evidence of prior similar misconduct is admissible.
36.Rule 404(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts. –Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the characterof a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent,preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excusespretrial notice on good cause…
37. Uncharged Misconduct Evidence § 7:02: Intentional torts present the strongest analogy to criminal misconduct. As in a criminal prosecution, the plaintiff's most difficult problem of proof is often establishing the defendant's wrongful intent. Thus, like a prosecutor, the civil plaintiff often has occasion to introduce uncharged misconduct to prove intent.See also Admissibility of Evidence of other Crimes, Wrongs or Acts under Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, in civil cases, 64 ALR Fed 648.
38. The respondents, co-conspirators and George W Bush's criminal enterprise and others uncharged evidence is admissible to show the FBI's 65-year policy and practice of Cointelpro and/or engaging in similar misconduct – on the issue of unlawful motive A number of cases have held that evidence of a history of policy and practice is admissible as probative on the issue of unlawful or discriminatory motive. The respondents, co-conspirators, and George W Bush's and the criminal enterprise related offenses tending to show a consistent pattern of conduct is admissible if accompanied by appropriate cautionary instructions.(1) U.S. v. Nemeth, C.A.6 (Ky.) 1970, 430 F.2d 704. And such evidence includes subsequent acts of misconduct (2) – consistent with plaintiffs proffer. U.S. v. Olivo, C.A.10 (Okla.) 996, 80 F.3d 1466, certiorari denied 117 S.Ct. 265, 519 U.S. 906, 136 L.Ed.2d 189, holding that trial court properly admitted subsequent similar acts as evidence to show intent, knowledge, and lack of accident or mistake, where both subsequent act and charged offense involved the same modus operandi.
JURISDICTION and VENUE39 Jurisdiction and Venue: This action arises under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourtennth Amendments to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. 1981; 42 U.S.C. 1983; 42 U.S.C. 1985 (2) and (3); 42 U.S.C. 1986 and challenging the constitutionality of the acts, policies, practices, and/or customs of the defendants that are a violation of numerous federal laws-serious federal crimes 18 U.S.C. 241 and 18 U.S.C. 242;18 U.S.C. 3: 18 U.S.C. 4. 18 U.S.C. 1510: 18 U.S.C. 2261(a) and 18 U.S.C. 1091; 18 U.S.C. 1001;18 U.S.C. 1512(a) 1c,2c,3c,b3,d2; 18 U.S.C. 1513(a) 1b,2b, e; 18 U.S.C. 371; 18 U.S.C. 2441, 18 U.S.C. 2330c; 18 U.S.C. 2382;18 U.S.C. 2340A.; violation of article 1 Section 9, clause 7 of the Constitution; violation of 31 USC 3729(a)(7); 10 USC 114; 10 USC 119; 10 USC 126; 10 USC 127; 10 USC 127 (a); and 18 USC 1961 through 1968 all to the damage of the Plaintiff which is reported to the Honorable Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4 and needs to be presented to a federal grand jury in light of the defendants Obstruction of Justice; Unlawful Coercion; and Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice.. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Honorable Court pursuant to 28 USC 1331, 1343(a)(3) and 1346. Venue is proper in this Honorable Court pursuant to 18 USC section 1965 (a) and (b)
40 The Plaintiffs claim for declaratory and injunctive relief are authorized by 28 USC 2201 and USC 2202, by Rules 57 and 65 of the federal Rules of Civil Procedure, by 5 bUSC 702 and by the general legal and equitable powers of this Honorable court.
41. The Plaintiffs claim for damages is made pursuant to the First Amendemnt to the US Constitution and 42 USC 1983 and 18 USC 241 and 242. Plaintiffs prayer for relief regarding cost, including reasonable attorney fees is authorized by 42 USC 1988 and 28 USC 2412
42. This Honorable Court has suplemental subject matter jurisdiction over pendant state law claims alledged herein pursuant to 28 USC 1367(a), in that the claims are so related to the federal claims that they form the same case of controversy.
43 The defendants conspiracy against the rights of the Plaintiff are in criminal civil rights violations 18 USC 241 and 242 which need to be presented to a federal grand jury in light of the defendants Obstruction of Justice; Unlawful Coercion; and Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice.
44 The Plaintiff has properly exhausted his administrative remedies in the manner described by law as a precondition to bringing this civil action pursuant to 28 USC 2675(a) and (b).
45. This is an action to compel an officer of the United States to perform pursuant to 28 USC 1361
46. Senate Actions 28 USC 1365
47. 18 USC 1961(1) and 1964(a) and (c) and 1965 (a), Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO ACT) civil remedies and Bibens v Six Unknown Narcotics Agents, 403 US 388 (1971)
48. The Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of the State of California
49. George W. Bush is the President of the United States. Note that while many of the acts and omissions alleged in this complaint against George W. Bush and other defendants who are now, or who were at the time of the acts complained of, the holders of public offices (federal or other) and such acts and omissions were or may have been done under color of their official authority, plaintiff sues each of said defendants in his or her individual and official capacity as certain acts complained of were not within the scope of such defendants・official duties, but were crimes and unlawful acts outside the scope of such duties, and plaintiff seeks recovery for the acts and omissions of each such defendant individually and from his or her personal assets, not against the government body that is (or was) such defendant痴 employer at the time of the acts complained of.
50. Richard Cheney (Cheney is the Vice-President of the United States. He was formerly Secretary of Defense in the Bush I Administration, and a Republican Congressman from Wyoming.
51. Donald H. Rumsfeld (Rumsfeld・ is the Secretary of Defense.
52. The defendant Michael Hayden is the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (hereinafter CIA). He is the covert action arm of the President of the United States foreign policy advisors of which disinformation is a large part of its responsiblity with the Plaintiff and American people being the primary target of its propaganda. He has overall responsibility that CIA agents do not perform operations in the United states and promote public safety to the American people and public interest. He is being sued in his individual and official capacity.
53. The defendant Rober Swan Mueller III is the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter FBI) and he is resposible for the overall crimes, acts, omissions,policies, practices, and/or customs of his agents, employees, contractors, and others engaged under color of law and/or federal authority and he is resposible for the Denver, Colorado FBI Field Office that employs denfendants "John Doe" Powers; Brian Schmidt; Steve Olsen; "John Doe" Price and others. All of these defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacity and are at all times relevant herein.
55 The OIG has jurisdiction over all complaints of misconduct against Department of Justice employees, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Drug Enforcement Administration; Federal Bureau of Prisons; U.S. Marshals Service; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; United States Attorneys Offices; and employees who work in other Divisions or Offices in the Department of Justice. (The one exception is that allegations of misconduct involving Department attorneys that arise from their authority to investigate, litigate, or provide legal advice are the responsibility of the Department's Office of Professional Responsibility.)
56 Section 1001 of the USA Patriot Act, signed into law by the President on October 26, 2001, directs the Inspector General to review information and receive complaints alleging abuses of civil rights and civil liberties by Department of Justice employees. The OIG has created a special section in its Investigations Division to process these complaints. This section will identify the more serious civil rights and civil liberties allegations and assign them to OIG employees for investigation. The OIG will refer other complaints to Department components for their review and handling.
57. The defendants Dr. Chung Hwan is chief executive officer (hereinafter CEO) for United Press International; Tom Curley is the CEO of the Associated press; bob Wright is the CEO of NBC; Robert Iger is the CEO of ABC; Leslie Moonves is the CEO of CBS; Rupert Murdoch is the CEO of FOX news; Jim Walton is a executive at Cable News Network (hereinafter CNN); Jonathon Klein ia a executive at CNN. All of these defendants have overall resposibility to ensure the Plaintiff and America people recieve uncensored news free of blackouts for it is the central tenant of the First Amendment the government must remain neutral in the media, market place of ideas and opinions as a matter of public interest and concern that is essential to the common quest for the truth and vitality as a whole as required under the First Amendment-Right To A Free Press. All of these defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacity.
58. The defendments Rudi Bakhtiar and Mike Galonos are news anchors employed with CNN . These defendants are at all times relevant herein, acting within and outside the course and scope of their employment and in concert with other defendants in violation of 18 USC 241. These defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacity.
At all times relevant hereto, the defendants acted willfully and wontonly and with diliberate indifferance to the rights and feelings of the Plaintiff. At all times relevant hereto, the defendants acted in accordance with an established policy, practice, custom, procedure, and/or conspiracy which violated the Plaintiffs known constitutional rights. The defendants knowingly and willfully violated 18 U.S.C. 241 and/or 242 and have Obstructed Justice attemping to coverup these
STATEMENT OF THE FACTSWRITS & LAWSUITS & LETTERS & COMPLAINTS filed or submitted by the Plaintiff
Writ filed in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals by the Plaintiff: http://www.freewebs.com/govoig
http://www.freewebs.com/bushwrit The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the relief the Plaintiff sought in this writ without any opinion. 18 U.S.C. section 3771 (d)(3) clearly states "If the court of appeals denies the relief sought, the reasons for the denial shall be clearly stated on the record in a written opinion" not simply DENIED.
The Obstruction of Justice is evident in this case. The Plaintiff reported several of the respondnats crimes to the Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 4 and other laws. The Court knowingly and willfully allowed the repsondants, San Francisco FBI and others to attack the Plaintiff on a daily basis after the writ was denied without the reasons being clearly stated on the record.
Judges O'Scannlan, Silverman, and Graber issued no arrest warrents after the crimes were reported to Court under the law and did nothing to protect the petitioner-the plaintiff from the respondents continued Obstruction of Justice. http://www.freewebs.com/bushwrit
Writ filed in 10th Circuit Court of Appeals by the Plaintiff: http://www.freewebs.com/bushimpeachment
Harassment incident with the defendants using the San Francisco police officers to harass the Plaintiff http://www.freewebs.com/sfpolice
Civil lawsuit submitted in United States District Court, District of Colorado in Denver, Colorado http://www.freewebs.com/fedlawsuit
Emails and letters to various officials and government departments http://www.freewebs.com/watchdogletters
Letter to the San Bernardino District Attorney concerning malicious prosecution and proof of emails to himhttp://www.freewebs.com/maliciousprosecution
Letter to several offcials http://www.freewebs.com/crimereportnotice
Harassment incidents and tag numbers http://www.freewebs.com/watchdogledger
Police reports filed online with San francisco Policehttp://www.freewebs.com/sfpolicereports
DJ Blaze Blog on Various misconducthttp://www.freewebs.com/governmenttarget
Gang Stalking and Tag numbershttp://www.freewebs.com/tagnumbers
Civil Lawsuit submitted in United States District Court, District of Colorado-Denevr Coloradohttp://www.freewebs.com/irslawsuit
SEE Exhibit (B) for tampering with Plaintiffs websites/blog
60 For at least six years the defendants have used and exposed the Plaintiff to microwaves, ELF and VLF fields and used other illegal weapons against him with intent to torture, cause serious bodily injury and permanant mental impairment not detectible by an ordinary doctor. The Plaintiff will prove through experts Dr. Peter Moscow, US Psychotronics Association and Dr. Colin A Ross, Ross Institute and Howard Zinn and Flynt Taylor the defendants techniques carry serious risk of physical, emotional and economic damage which also includes callous disregard of clearly established law with intent for the prevention and disruption of the Plaintiffs exercise of First Amendment Rights and interference with and abuse of the judicial process methods the defendants use for neutralizing and destroying political targets. (see paragraphs 35 through 38) http://www.freewebs.com/fbiharassment
EXPERT WITNESSES
http://www.psychotronics.org/ Dr Peter Moscow
http://www.rossinst.com/ Dr Colin A Ross
http://www.judibari.org/COINTELPRO-OOP_020514.pdf Howard Zinn and Flynt Taylor
COVERT ACTION AGAINST AMERICANS & COINTELPRO
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=cointelpro
TARGETED INDIVIDUALS
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=targeted+individuals
DISSIDENT ASSASINATIONS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmQ9_g9b5Hk
63 The following is a list of the plaintiffs symptoms which people experience. Not everyone experiences all of these symptoms, but most victims share a large number of them. The Plaintiffs injuries are yet to be determined based on the need of a physician familiar with the defendants dirty tricks that cause physical damage.
http://www.freewebs.com/maliciousprosecution
Under Cal. Gov’t Code § 815.2 and California common law, the City of Ontario, California-San Bernardino, California is liable in respondeat superior for the false arrest and imprisonment of plaintiff Jeff Williamson by its employee officers, committed within the scope of their employment. As such, the City and its employee officers breached a mandatory duty to refrain from causing false arrests (4 Total) and imprisonment on a frivilous charge already dropped in Court that is was on the NCIC Database, as set out in the California Constitution, Article 1, §§ 7 and 13, and California common law. The warrent on the NCIC comes up as "explosives and weapons"-Cointelpro Harassment-arrested for a tire thumper & case dropped in Court. Since the Plaintiff was being harassed at some of the nightclubs, he started moving furniture not to subject the club staff to these dangerous Cointelpro techniques. After discussing returning to the dj booth-the Denver FBI stole all of his compact disc (police report) blocking and stopping all of his plans. The Plaintiff is a government target for exposing US government corruption and coverups and for no other reason which has lead to the destruction of his DJ career and life and blocking the Watchdog Group for massive non-violent peacful demonstrations and the Renegade Movement
68 On September 14, 2006 at Third Street and Market Street at aproxiamtely 5:50 pm the defendants continue to attempt to frame the Plaintiff by an individual named Dean who offered to shake the Plaintiffs hand in which Dean had some sort of plastic bag balled up in his hand to make it appear as if the Plaintiff passed it to this frame artist Dean. The plaintiff stands ready to call former government agents to testify about these type of criminal activities by the defendants in their effort to send the Plaintiff to prison for a crime he did not commit so the illegal criminal enterprise can continue with the illegal conduct. The Plaintiff placed another 911 call to the San Francisco police about this incident.
70. CIA-MEDIA
THE DEFENDENTS ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE PLAINTIFFS RIGHT TO A FREE PRESS FIRST AMENDMENT
"A free press stands as one of the greater interpreters between the government
and the people. To allow it to be fettered is to fetter ourselves."
Grosjean v. American Press Co. 56 S Ct. 444 (1936)
With the Bush Administration's and the PNAC criminals secret blueprint for US global domination is their secret project called "OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD" to use Media propaganda tactics that include blackouts, misdirections, expert opinions to echo the Establishment line, smears, defining popular opinions, mass entertainment distractions, and Hobson's Choice the media presents the so-called conservative and liberal positions against the American people. The website below provide an insiders critique of how the defendants and CIA and Corporate Press Lords constrict the free flow of ideas and information. Interviews with celebrated journalist provide case studies of stories which were spiked and reporters who were demoted or fired at prestigious organizations like the Atlanta Constitution, The New York Times, NBC News, and other Networks. From this intimidation, other journalist quickly learn to practice SELF CENSORSHIP whenever a story exposes the Government in Corruption and Coverups or conflict with the interest of their Corporate employers. This is in violation of the First Amendment-Right to a free press that concerns all 50 states and also violates every US citizen right to a free press in which a class action lawsuit can be filed NATIONWIDE naming all Americans as plaintiffs.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_louise_01_03_03_mockingbird.html Operation Mockingbird Descibed Here-The CIA controls the media:
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/mockingbird.htm Operation Mockingbird
VIDEOS
Fear & Favor in the Newsroom
http://www.freespeech.org/videodb/index.php?action=view&video_id=9830&media_id=5563&browse=1
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/mockingbird4.htm
http://www.u-r-next.com/MEDIA-LIES.htm
http://www.freewebs.com/ciacensorship
http://unitedpeoples.net/cia.html
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/media/2003/1229propcontrol.htm
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696
NATIONWIDE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
http://www.freewebs.com/medialawsuit
CORPORATE MEDIA CRIMES
http://www.freewebs.com/mediacrimes
71. IRS-TAXES
THERE IS NO LAW THAT REQUIRES THE PLAINTIFF TO PAY TAXES
WATCH THE TAX VIDEOS ! ! !
TAX INTRO CLIP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPypDaXfIV8&mode=related&search=
FREEDOM TO FACISM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=america+From+Freedom+to+Facism
WE THE PEOPLE FOUNDATION
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5133348075322180707&q=no+law+to+pay+taxes
THEFT BY DECEPTION
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7521758492370018023&q=no+law+to+pay+taxes
FREE ENTERPRISE SOCIETY
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-540302368760724158&q=tax+videos
TAX LINKS
http://www.freewebs.com/notaxes
http://www.freewebs.com/taxproblems
On October 4, 2004, during a meeting in the offices of their Congressional Representative Peter Hoekstra, the Lears formally served their Challenge of Authority on three IRS agents and engaged in a significant discussion about the limits of their authority. The IRS agents refused to respond to the Challenge of Authority simply stating that it is not the “practice” of IRS to respond to such requests.
What the agents did not know, however, was that two weeks earlier, on September 24th, the Lears had filed the same document as a formal public legal record in their local county courthouse at office of the Registrar of Deeds.
Because under Rule 902 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, a court cannot deny the admissibility of relevant evidence consisting of certified copies of public legal records as they are presumed to be self-authenticating and valid as evidence.
By withdrawing the IRS complaint against Lear, DOJ avoided having to publicly attempt to rebut Lear's legal research and having to admit that the government could not cite any legal authority requiring the filing of a 1040 Individual tax return.
BONUS
"IRS summonses apply no force to taxpayers, and no consequence whatever can befall a taxpayer who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until that summons is backed by a federal court order…[a taxpayer] cannot be held in contempt, arrested, detained, or otherwise punished for refusing to comply with the original IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer's reasons, or lack of reasons for so refusing.”
"Income Tax-16th Amendment" Issue
The I.R.S. was created in Delaware, July 11, 1933. Entered into a service agreement with the
United States Treasury Dept. and Agency for International Development (A.I.D.) (Treasury
Delegation Order No. 91 & 22 U.S.C.A. 611(c)(iii)
The A.I.D. is a paramilitary operation focusing on creating a dictatorship over finance in the
United States. (1985 Edition Dept. Army Field Manual, FM 41-10, pg 3-8; Senate Report 93-549 pg.186.
The I.R.S. is a member of the International Police Crime Organization supplying information to
150 foreign powers -- 22 U.S.C.A. 263(a); 22 U.S.C.A. 285(G) & 287; 22 U.S.C.A. 6103 (k)(4);
United States Government Manual 1990-91 Pg. 385
I.R.S. Agents are trained under the Division of Human Services and the I.R.S. Commissioner
under the Office of Personal Management. The Office of Personal Management is under the
Director of the Secretary General of the United Nations -- 1976 Edition of 22 U.S.C.A. 287; 1979
Supp III pg. 474; Executive Order No. 10422; Treasury Delegation Order 92
Sec.17 Title 15--Commerce and Trade Page 148
Sec. 17 Antitrust laws not applicable to labor organizations.
"The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce.
Nothing contained in the anti-trust law shall be construed to forbid the existence
and operation of labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations, instituted for
the purposes of mutual help, and not having capital stock or conducted for profit,
or to forbid or restrain individual members of such organizations from lawfully
carrying out the legitimate objects thereof; nor shall such organizations, or the
members thereof, be held or construed to be illegal combinations or conspiracies
in restraint of trade, under the antitrust laws.
(Oct. 15, 1914 ch.323, sec. 6, 38 Stat. 731.)
"W-4 is only for government employees" -- Title 5 U.S.C. 2105
"Income excludes wages, salaries, and tips" -- Graves vs. People of N.Y.
exrel O'Keefe 59 S.Ct 595 (1939)
"AGENTS...Our tax system is based on voluntary assessment and voluntary
compliance....the material contained in this handbook is confidential in character.
It must not under any circumstances be made available to persons outside the
service." -- Mr. Mortimer Caplan, IRS Commissioner
"Our system of taxation is based on voluntary assessment and payment, not
upon distraint. [Distraint means force] -- Flora vs. U.S., 362 US 145
""[The I.R.S.] taxes only income 'derived' from many different [U.S.] sources;
One does not 'derive income' by rendering services and charging for them." --
Edwards vs. Keith, 231 Fed. Rep. 113
"No inference, implication or presumption of legislative construction shall be
drawn or made by reason of the location or grouping of any particular section or
provision or portion of this title {26}, nor shall any table of contents, table of
cross-references, or similar outline, analysis or descriptive matter relating to the
contents of this Title be given any legal effect." -- IRC Section 7806(b)
"...an estate or trust, as the case may be, the income of which comes from
sources without [federal] the United States which is not effectively connected
with the [performance of the functions of a public office] within the [federal]
United States, is not includeable in gross income under subtitle A." -- IRC Section
7701(a)(31)
"Anyone may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury."
-Judge Learned Hand, Helvering v. Gregory (1934)
COURT ORDERS FEDERAL RESERVE ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL
http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/piratenewsrss/message/196
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553&q=federal+reserve
"It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our
banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there
would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."
-- Henry Ford
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." Written by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin (1802). .
The defendents criminal enterprise can be reviewed in a writ of mandamus submitted to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Case # or reviewed at http://www.freewebs.com/bushwrit . The Plaintiff has reported several state and federal crimes and criminal civil rights violations to the Honorable Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4, 18 U.S.C. 2382, and 18 U.S.C. 1512(d)(2) all against and to the damage of Plaintiff. The Defendants, Bush Crime Family, Co-conspirators and others crimes, criminal civil rights violations and misconduct described in the action, plaintiff websites, and other writs and lawsuits, they will continue to engage in the willful, wonton, and diliberate violation of the laws of the United States of America and Constitutional rights of the Plaintiff who will continue to suffer gross violations of his Constitutional rights and gross indignities with serious injury or death almost certain and the respondents obstruction of justice harms the Plaintiff's health and welfare by knowingly and willfully allowing these crimes and criminal civil rights violations continue each of which constitutes irreparible injury for which the Plaintiff has no immediate remedy at law.
It has been reported to several city, state, federal agencies and members of congress for the past six months that defendants, co-conspirators and Denver FBI agent Brian Smidt and others illegally blocked the opening of two Petitioners Checking account at US Bank, 6011 West 44th Avenue, Wheatridge, Colorado through bank representatives Rebecca Swiney and Chris Nicholls with threats any account opened would be seized by the Denver US Attorney William Leone which prevented the Petitioner from creating a Pay-Pal account to post on his websites for donations and a legal fund and have harassed, interfered with, and blocked Petitioners income.
As a direct and proximate result, the Petitioner has suffered delayed contributions, delayed profits, interference with prospective economic advantage/business advantage, defamation-false and misleading statements about the Petitioner and the Watcdog Group, malicious prosecution-see http://www.freewebs.com/maliciousprosecution , injury to the value and reputation of the Petitioner, his Disc Jockey career as DJ BLAZE and the Watcgdog Group all malicious interference with a business to the extent of forseeable consequences which constitutes irreparible injury for which the Petitioner has no immediate adequete remedy at law. The Petitioner did have a verifiable address and explained the bank accounts were going to be used for the purposes described above.
(see paragraphs 35 through 38)
US GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION & COVERUPS
http://www.skolnicksreport.com/bio.html
CHICAGO LEGEND SHERMAN SKOLNICK
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unlawfully and unconstitutionally violate the Plaintiffs right to a Free press in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably constrict the free flow of ideas and information and news which were spiked and reporters who were demoted or fired at prestigious organizations like the Atlanta Constitution, The New York Times, NBC News, and other Networks. From this intimidation, other journalist quickly learn to practice SELF CENSORSHIP whenever a story exposes the Government in Corruption and Coverups or conflict with the interest of their Corporate employers. This is in violation of the Plaintiffs First Amendment-Right to a free press that concerns all 50 states and also violates every Plaintiff's and US citizen's right to a free press and in violation of 18 U.S.C. 241 and 18 U.S.C. 242;18 U.S.C. 3: 18 U.S.C. 4. 18 U.S.C. 1510: 18 U.S.C. 2261(a) and 18 U.S.C. 1091; 18 U.S.C. 1001
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally did violate the Plaintiffs Freedom of Speech in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably acted in concert to suppress, chill and "neutralize" the Plaintiffs constitutionally protected activities in defense of government reform so he cannot expose government corruption and coverups, and otherwise injure him and abridge his civil rights.Plaintiff's charge further that the violations and injuries complained of herein were brought about by conspiracy among some or all of the defendants, agents, media representatives and others, whereby there was a Meeting of the Minds among them regarding their desire to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit or otherwise neutralize' and otherwise suppress, punish and chill the protected activities of the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unlawfully and unconstitutionally violate the Plaintiffs right to a Free press in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably constrict the free flow of ideas and information and news which were spiked and reporters who were demoted or fired at prestigious organizations like the Atlanta Constitution, The New York Times, NBC News, and other Networks. From this intimidation, other journalist quickly learn to practice SELF CENSORSHIP whenever a story exposes the Government in Corruption and Coverups or conflict with the interest of their Corporate employers. This is in violation of the Plaintiffs First Amendment-Right to a free press that concerns all 50 states and also violates every Plaintiff's and US citizen's right to a free press and in violation of 18 U.S.C. 241 and 18 U.S.C. 242;18 U.S.C. 3: 18 U.S.C. 4. 18 U.S.C. 1510: 18 U.S.C. 2261(a) and 18 U.S.C. 1091; 18 U.S.C. 1001
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably use Cointelpro techniques on the plaintiff that have caused physical, emotional, and economic damage and have made two attempts on the Plaintiffs life in violation of 18 U.S.C 241; 18 U.S.C. 241; 18 U.S.C. 1091 as described in the complaint which carry serious penalties.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unlawfully and unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to illegal domestic surveillance in violation of the Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968(82 Stat. 211, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2520), Congress enacted legislation broadly regulating all forms of wire and electronic surveillance. Title III prohibits all private wiretapping or electronic surveillance. The U.S. Supreme Court place a further limitation on wire and electronic surveillance under Title III SEE 18 U.S.C. 2516 (1) and violates the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably use wire taps and electronic and domestic surveillance on the plaintiff
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to illegal activities described in the statement of facts in violation of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably deprive plaintiff his freedom of speech, used illegal wire and electronic surveillance, used illegal search and seizure, denied plaintiff due process, inflicted cruel and unusal punishment, all pursuant to the USA Patriot Act because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably deprive plaintiff equal rights under the law because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 11
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably obstruct justice and conspire to obstruct justice of the crimes against the plaintiff as desribed in the statement of facts in this case
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably oppress, threaten, and intimidate the Plaintiff in his exercise and enjoyment of the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully violate the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States while they acted under color of law
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully violate the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, his national Watchdog Group and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part the Plaintiff as a member and leader of his group
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally rip-off the plaintiffs and citizens taxpayer money -a blantant violation of article 1, Section 9, clause 7 of the Constituion, unlawful and is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably steal the plaintiffs and citizens taxpayers money
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants CIA black budget budget process to obtain funds is without regard to any provision of law and violates the United States Constitution and is unlawful and is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff and in violation of 31 USC 3729(a)(7); 10 USC 114; 10 USC 119; 10 USC 126; 10 USC 127; 10 USC 127 (a) as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably obtained taxpayer funds.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants 1949 CIA ACT is unlawful and is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff and in violation of 31 USC 3729(a)(7); 10 USC 114; 10 USC 119; 10 USC 126; 10 USC 127; 10 USC 127 (a) as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably obtained taxpayer funds.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally deprive, block, and disrupt the plaintiffs income in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 1091; 18 U.S.C. 241 and 242 and the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably deprive, block, and disrupt the plaintiffs income because of his Watchdog Group activities in violation of the Eighth Amendment
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably knowingly and willfully (1) falsified, concealed, and covered up by the use of tricks, and schemes material facts and (2) made materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representation to the Plaintiff and American People publicallyabout the attacks and over 3000 murders that occured on September 11, 2001Hijacking Catastrophe: The Rise Of The Neo-Cons (Video) in violation of 18 U.S.C section 1001
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably obstruct justice and threatened Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably deprive plaintiff his rights and priviledges under the law because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably block and prevent with threats of attacks and violence against the Plaintiff the reporting to a law enforcement officer and judge of the United States numerouse federal offenses described this this complaint and the Plaintiffs websites described in the above paragraphs against Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities and to Obstruct Justice.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably involve unknown others in vehicles, individuals and groups to harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities.(see tag numbers recorded and reported)
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably involve unknown others in vehicles, individuals and groups to harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities.(see tag numbers recorded and reported)
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably involve unknown others in vehicles, individuals and groups to harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities.(see tag numbers recorded and reported)
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 29
COUNT 30
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully conspire either to commit and/or conceals the crimes described in this complaint and failed to disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State,
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully outside the United States commits and attempted to commit torture resulting in deaths from defendants conduct
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants and former public officials in the Executive Branch and the CIA and Michael Hayden and Robert Mueller III and government agencies agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably knowingly and willfully finance terrorist inside and outside the United States under illegal operations that placed U.S. citizens at grave risk of injury or death with injuries and deaths resulting from these policies and practices and illegal operations.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably make two attempts on the Plaintiffs life; harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably fail to properly supervise which lead to defendants make two attempts on the Plaintiffs life; harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably fail to train personell which lead to the defendants making two attempts on the Plaintiffs life; harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably show a systematic pattern of corruption, coverups, framing targets, obstruction of justciec all to the damage of the Plaintiff in which the defendants made two attempts on the Plaintiffs life; harass and intimidate and try to frame the Plaintiff for a crime causing the Plaintiff to have fear of bodily injury and death and being put in prison for a crime the Plaintiff did not commit with intent to terrorize the Plaintiff because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably take control over State and local criminal justice agencies and officers because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably use services, facilities, or personnel of the Central Intelligence Agency because of his Watchdog Group activities
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably use the military against the Plaintiff and Amecian people
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to illegal search and illegally spy on the Plaintiff for his political beliefs in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably engage in activities against the Plaintiff acting in concert to suppress, chill and "neutralize" the Petitioners constitutionally protected activities in defense of government reform so he cannot expose government corruption and coverups, and otherwise injure him and abridge his civil rights.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
VIOLATION 42 USC 1983; FIRST-FOURTH-FIFTH AMENDMENT VIOLATIONS
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully violate the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, his national Watchdog Group and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part the Plaintiff as a member and leader of his group
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 44
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in which the conduct and activities violated the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to attempt to murder the Plaintiff twice; destroy, in whole or in substantial part, his national Watchdog Group and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part the Plaintiff as a member and leader of his group and stole the Plaintiffs music compact disc destroying his Disc Jokey career all to the damage of the Paintiff that has caused severe economic-financial loss to the Plaintiff.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 45
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants have conspired to unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in which the conduct and activities would violate the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to attempt to murder the Plaintiff ; destroy, in whole or in substantial part, his national Watchdog Group and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part the Plaintiff all to the damage of the Paintiff that would continue to cause severe economic-financial loss to the Plaintiff.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 46
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants did unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in which the conduct and activities violated the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to attempt to murder the Plaintiff twice; destroy, in whole or in substantial part, his national Watchdog Group and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part the Plaintiff as a member and leader of his group and stole the Plaintiffs music compact disc destroying his Disc Jokey career all to the damage of the Paintiff that has caused severe economic-financial loss to the Plaintiff.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 47
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants did unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in which the conduct and activities violated the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to attempt to murder the Plaintiff twice; destroy, in whole or in substantial part, his national Watchdog Group and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part the Plaintiff as a member and leader of his group and stole the Plaintiffs music compact disc destroying his Disc Jokey career all to the damage of the Paintiff that has caused severe economic-financial loss to the Plaintiff.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 48
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants did unconstitutionally subject plaintiff to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in which the conduct and activities violated the Plaintiffs rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to attempt to murder the Plaintiff twice; destroy, in whole or in substantial part, his national Watchdog Group and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part the Plaintiff as a member and leader of his group and stole the Plaintiffs music compact disc destroying his Disc Jokey career all to the damage of the Paintiff that has caused severe economic-financial loss to the Plaintiff.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants violation of plaintiffs rights, the plaintiff has suffered direct and irreparable injury, and he is entitled to damages.
COUNT 49
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants George H W Bush, George W Bush, Jeb Bush and unknown others did unconstitutionally murder investigator Ray Lemme subjecting him to cruel and unusal punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and laws as applied to the states and their political subdivisions under the Fourteenthn Amendment, and 18 U.S.C. section 4, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in which the conduct and activities violated his rights under the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent to to murder him so the criminal enterprise could continue. These defendants are also involved in or connected to or associated with dozens of other murders through the criminal enterprise as described in the complaint http://www.newcriminologist.co.uk/news.asp?id=1185989364
COUNT 50
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in violation of the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent so the criminal enterprise could continue. http://www.campaignwatch.org/more1.htm
COUNT 51
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in violation of the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent so the criminal enterprise could continue. http://www.campaignwatch.org/more1.htm
COUNT 52
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in violation of the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent so the criminal enterprise could continue. http://www.campaignwatch.org/more1.htm
COUNT 53
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in violation of the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent so the criminal enterprise could continue.
The Bush Connection to a Child Sex Ring
In May 94 the Discovery Channel was Pressured by Top Republican Leaders Not to Air this Video-The child Sex Ring That Reached Bush SR at the Whitehouse and the linkage of Franklin to some of this country’s top politicians in Washington, and in the US Congress, with particular attention on those who attended parties held by Larry King at his Washington mansion on Embassy Row and are secretly being continued today by and through the CIA. It is a fact that during the 1980's, child sexual services were provided by top Republican officials to key, bureaucrats and diplomats but most importantly, there is a chilling proximity of all of these events and personalities, to the President of the United States at the time, George H.W. Bush. Former republican Senator John Decamp was involved in the production a documentary called "Conspiracy of Silence" it was to air May 3, 1994 on the Discovery Channel. This documentary exposed a network of religious leaders and Washington politicians who flew children to Washington D.C. for sex orgies. At the last minute before airing, unknown congressmen threatened the TV Cable industry with restrictive legislation if this documentary was aired. WATCH VIDEO HERE: http://www.freewebs.com/childsexalert
http://www.cerebellum.tv/fvideo/mckinney_v_rummy.php Congresswoman McKinney Grills Rumsfeld
COUNT 54
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully engage in a criminal illegal enterprise in violation of the U.S. Constitution and laws of the United States with the specific intent so the criminal enterprise could continue.
The Bush Connection to a Child Sex Ring
In May 94 the Discovery Channel was Pressured by Top Republican Leaders Not to Air this Video-The child Sex Ring That Reached Bush SR at the Whitehouse and the linkage of Franklin to some of this country’s top politicians in Washington, and in the US Congress, with particular attention on those who attended parties held by Larry King at his Washington mansion on Embassy Row and are secretly being continued today by and through the CIA. It is a fact that during the 1980's, child sexual services were provided by top Republican officials to key, bureaucrats and diplomats but most importantly, there is a chilling proximity of all of these events and personalities, to the President of the United States at the time, George H.W. Bush. Former republican Senator John Decamp was involved in the production a documentary called "Conspiracy of Silence" it was to air May 3, 1994 on the Discovery Channel. This documentary exposed a network of religious leaders and Washington politicians who flew children to Washington D.C. for sex orgies. At the last minute before airing, unknown congressmen threatened the TV Cable industry with restrictive legislation if this documentary was aired. WATCH VIDEO HERE: http://www.freewebs.com/childsexalert
http://www.cerebellum.tv/fvideo/mckinney_v_rummy.php Congresswoman McKinney Grills Rumsfeld
COUNT 55
By reason of the aforementioned acts and omissions and policies, practices, customs, or laws, engaged in under the color of state and/or federal law or authority, defendants have conspired to unlawfully and unconstitutionally violate the Plaintiffs rights to force to payment of taxes in violation of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution , and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the defendants agreed to and engaged in overt acts that did unlawfully and unreasonably force, trick, and lie to the plaintiff about his requirement to pay taxes.
This is in violation of the Plaintiffs Sixteenth Amendment- because the 16 Amendment was never radified that concerns all 50 states and also violates the Plaintiff's and every US citizen's right and is in violation of 18 U.S.C. 241 and 18 U.S.C. 242;18 U.S.C. 3: 18 U.S.C. 4. 18 U.S.C. 1510: 18 U.S.C. 1001
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays that a judgment and decree be entered against each of the defendants:
File the criminal charges the Plaintiffs reports and describes in this complaint and Counts pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 4
1. Adjudging or decreeing that each of the defendants acted unlawfully as alleged respectively in Counts 1- 55 above, and that the respective plaintiff as to such Counts was injured as alleged;
2. To permananently enjoin defendants, their employees, agents, contractors, and successors in office from formulating, adopting, implementing, and/or enforcing any act, policy, practice, custom, law, and/or decision having the effect of unlawfully preventing Plaintiff and others from engaging in peaceful, constitutionally protected demonstrations in Washington DC or elsewhere in the United States including enjoining the use of FBI policy and practice of Cointelpro.
3. To permananently enjoin defendants, their employees, agents, contractors, and successors in office from formulating, adopting, implementing, and/or enforcing any act, policy, practice, custom, law, and/or decision having the effect of unlawfully using surveillance against the plaintiff or private citizens as described in this complaint or any form whatsoever.
4. To permananently enjoin government defendants, their employees, agents, contractors, and successors in office from formulating, adopting, implementing, and/or enforcing any act, policy, practice, project, custom, law, and/or decision having the effect of unlawfully controlling and/or influencing the mass media
5. To permananently enjoin defendants, their employees, agents, contractors, and successors in office from formulating, adopting, implementing, and/or enforcing any act, policy, practice, project, custom, law, and/or decision having the effect of unlawfully using Media propaganda tactics that include blackouts, misdirections, expert opinions to echo the Establishment line, smears, defining popular opinions, mass entertainment distractions, and Hobson's Choice the media presents the so-called conservative and liberal positions or any propaganda whatsoever against the Plaintiff and American people
6. Awarding the plaintiff against each of the defendants a declaratory judgment that the FBI policy and practice of 'Cointelpro' is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff;
7. Awarding the plaintiff against each of the defendants exemplatory damages; compensatory damages; nominal damages; punitive damages The defendants have violated the Plaintiffs rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States of America while they acted under color of law and/or have oppressed, threatened, and intimidated the Plaintiff in his exercise and enjoyment of his rights and priviledges secured to him by the United States Constitution and laws of the United States of America. The Defendants institute, authorize, tolerate, ratify permit and acquiesce in policies, practices and customs of detentions, interrogations, searches and seizures without probable cause, harass without reasonable, articulable suspicion of crime, in their provision of government, law enforcement services or corporate media as the acts were done with diliberate indifferance, knowingly in violation of plaintiffs’ legal and constitutional rights, without good faith, and have directly and proximately caused plaintiffs’ humiliation, physical injuries yet to be determined that were covered up by the defendants, mental pain and suffering and violation of public trust with the defendants gross negligence, reckless and/or callous indifferance to the rights and safety of the Plaintiff and acted in the face of perceived risks that would violate federal law all to the damage of the Plaintiff-a serious miscarrage of justice.
8.. Awarding the plaintiff against each of the defendants a declaratory judgment that the USA Patriot Act and/or provisions is unlawful and is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff;
9. Awarding the plaintiff against each of the defendants a declaratory judgment that the CIA, DOD, and defendant Porter Goss's black budget process to obtain funds is a rip-off of the plaintiff and taxpayers moneys; a blantant violation of article 1, Section 9, clause 7 of the Constituion, unlawful and is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff;
10. Awarding the plaintiff against each of the defendants a declaratory judgment that the CIA black budget process to obtain funds is without regard to any provision of law is unlawful and is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff and in violation of 31 USC 3729(a)(7); 10 USC 114; 10 USC 119; 10 USC 126; 10 USC 127; 10 USC 127 (a)
11. Awarding the plaintiff against each of the defendants a declaratory judgment that the 1949 CIA Act is unlawful and is facially unconstitutional and is unconstitutional in its application to plaintiff;
12. Awarding the plaintiff the damages alleged as against each of the defendants, jointly and severally, in Counts 1-55;
13. Awarding an injunction in favor of the plaintiff against each of the defendants in Counts 1-55;
14. Awarding the plaintiff punitive damages against each of the defendants, jointly and severally, as to Counts 1-55, in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact;
15 The defendants be responsible for any and all medical cost for plaintiffs injuries and for those cost yet to be determined.
34. Granting a preliminary and temporary injunction against the defendants and any other agency of contractor that may arguably may act in this matter under color of law from taking any further retalitory actions against the Plaintiff.
35. Awarding the plaintiff attorneys' fees against each of the defendants, jointly and severally;
36. Awarding the plaintiff pre-judgment interest as appropriate and post-judgment interest;
37. Awarding the plaintiff costs against each of the defendants;
38. Order defendant Michael Hayden and media defendants to write "Operation Mockingbird" 10,000 times and return the lesson to the Honorable Court;
39. Expediting these proceedings where this matter will be set for trial;
40. Place this case on a fast track to prevent any inordinate delays;
41. Retain jurisdiction in this action to ensure compliance with the Courts decisions;
42. Awarding the plaintiff such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Jury Demand
FEBRUARY 22, 2007 JEFF H WILLIAMSON
