The Abel Danger White House Group to those whom it may concern November 28, 2011
Marcy Court of Appeals and General Haig’s Star-Chamber pig-farm oath
We believe that Crown Agents’ Sister Kristine Marcy used the U.S. Military Court of Appeals to enforce Star Chamber oaths of allegiance as allegedly sworn by the late General Alexander Haig and targeted guests at the Pickton pig farm in British Columbia, and thereby extort their support for the Matrix 5 man-in-the-middle propaganda attacks of 9/11.
“9/11 Alexander Haig Had Inside Knowledge Of "The World Trade Center Bombing"” Prequel 1
McVicar's Pig-Farm Clipper Chipper - MDA's 'Cestui Que Murder For Hire Service'? - Pickton Pig Farm - 'Women In Chains'
Class act.
DRAFT 45 PREAMBLE FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDY TO PRIVATE-EQUITY RACKETEERING AND TWO-PARTY CORRUPTION IN GLOBAL GUARDIAN 9/11
See #1
Abel Danger Mischief Makers - Mistress of the Revels - 'Man-In-The-Middle' Attacks
“[AD makes a spoliation inference that the Court of Star Chamber has contracted out cestui que rights to conduct oath-ceremonies to its members’ allies, allegedly led by Kristine Marcy and her associates in the United States Senior Executive and the U.S. Court of Military Appeals] The ex-officio oath (also known as the Star Chamber oath) was an English judicial and ecclesiastical weapon developed in the first half of the seventeenth century, and used as a form of coercion, persecution, and forcible self-incrimination in the religious trials of that era. It took the form of a religious oath made by the accused prior to questioning by the Star Chamber, to answer truthfully all questions that might be asked. It gave rise to what became known as the "cruel trilemma” where the accused would find themselves trapped between a breach of religious oath (taken extremely seriously in that era, a mortal sin, and perjury, contempt of court for silence, or self-incrimination. The name derives from the questioner putting the accused on oath ex officio, meaning by virtue of his office or position. Outcry against this practice (particularly in the trials of John Lilburne ("Freeborn John") around 1630 - 1649) led to the establishment of the right to not incriminate oneself in common-law. This was the direct precursor of similar rights in modern law, including the right to silence and non-self-incrimination in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The right itself appears as item 16 in the Levellers Agreement of the Free People of England (1649) and first appeared in US law in the Massachusetts Body of Liberties and the Connecticut Code of the same era. The Star Chamber itself, as a judicial body, was abolished by Parliament as part of the Habeas Corpus Act 1640. Right of non self-incrimination Early examples of a codified right appears in the Levellers manifesto Agreement of the Free People of England (published 1 May 1649): "[I]t shall not be in the power of any Representative, to punish, or cause to be punished, any person or persons for refusing to answer questions against themselves in Criminall cases", The right first appeared in US law in the Massachusetts Body of Liberties and the Connecticut Code of the same era. The United States Supreme Court summarized the events of the time as part of the historical background in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona: Perhaps the critical historical event shedding light on its [ie, the privilege against self-incrimination] origins and evolution was the trial of one John Lilburn, a vocal anti-Stuart Leveller, who was made to take the Star Chamber Oath in 1637. The oath would have bound him to answer to all questions posed to him on any subject. He resisted the oath and declaimed the proceedings, stating: "Another fundamental right I then contended for, was, that no man's conscience ought to be racked by oaths imposed, to answer to questions concerning himself in matters criminal, or pretended to be so." On account of the Lilburn Trial, Parliament abolished the inquisitorial Court of Star Chamber and went further in giving him generous reparation. The lofty principles to which Lilburn had appealed during his trial gained popular acceptance in England. These sentiments worked their way over to the Colonies and were implanted after great struggle into the Bill of Rights.”
“[AD makes a spoliation inference that the Court of Star Chamber has contracted out cestui que rights to torture its enemies to Kristine Marcy and her associates in the United States Senior Executive and the U.S. Court of Military Appeals] There is no case for torture, ever .. Detainees face torture in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Yemen English law has long recognised that extracting information by threats and brutality is barbaric. Moreover, such evidence is unreliable. Nick Cohen Sunday October 24, 2004 The Observer .... Until the war of terror, it was inconceivable that an English court would accept that a man could be jailed on the basis of torture, albeit torture conducted by shifty foreigners. The English didn't do torture. Uniquely in medieval Christendom, the English common law forbad the extraction of evidence under duress. The exception to the benign rule was the Court of Star Chamber, which was allowed to torture the king's enemies. Its barbaric practices were one cause of the civil war. Such was the hatred it aroused that 'Star Chamber justice' remains a contemptuous condemnation of arbitrary power to this day. Writing at the high point of liberal Victorian self-confidence Lord Macaulay said that Star Chamber was an aberration which, 'after the lapse of more than two centuries,' was still 'held in deep abhorrence by the nation'. It 'displayed a rapacity, a violence, a malignant energy, which had been unknown to any former age'. I'm not sure if the English can be quite as self-confident about the decency of the national tradition today. It's not that Star Chamber is back, rather that, as with so many other services, torture has been out-sourced to the third world [and allegedly, the Pickton pig farm] where bothersome regulation is less intrusive. What is dispiriting about the degeneracy of the Government and the Court of Appeal is that the old lessons have to be learned once again. The reasons why first England and then the civilised world rejected torture were practical as well as moral. Most people break under torture. Most people say whatever they have to say to stop the pain. When names are suggested to them, they agree. If the torturer wants to implicate the innocent or invent imaginary plots, he usually gets what he wants from his victim. If the Law Lords [and allegedly Kristine Marcy’s American colleagues] doubt the wisdom of centuries and are considering upholding the Court of Appeal's verdict, may I suggest a small experiment? If they give me a law officer, the Lord Chancellor perhaps, or the Director of Public Prosecutions [and the Star Chamber's Sisters Airlie and Wheldon], and a couple of heavies, and leave us alone in a locked room, I think I can guarantee that within a week he will have revealed that the entire senior judiciary are members of al-Qaeda.”
“Kristine Marcy (nee McConnell) [Revised November 28, 2011: Kristine Marcy is a Matrix 5 principal and the 1979 de facto founder president and alleged extortionist of man-in-the-middle members of the Senior Executive Service (‘SES’) and the Bar Associations of the District of Columbia, U.S. Court of Military Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court; she allegedly used the Court of Appeals to enforce Star Chamber oaths of allegiance allegedly sworn by the late General Alexander Haig – and fellow guests at the Pickton pig farm in British Columbia – whose silent support was needed for a Matrix 5 man-in-the-middle propaganda attack on 9/11; she allegedly ordered Robert Hanssen and her Femme Comp associates to administer Star Chamber pig-farm oaths to entrap foreign and domestic officials in the United States; she allegedly used a ceremonial blindfold of the type associated with oath taking by Penn State’s pedophile Greek Life community to warn Tom Ridge against linking the United Flight 93 crime scene to the attacks of 9/11; she allegedly formed a joint venture between Macdonald Dettwiler and Associates and the U.S. Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System (‘Con Air’) to use Saber seat reservation technology to monitor the movements of pig farm oath takers; she allegedly used SBA 8(a) protégé companies to modify an EC135C Speckled Trout aircraft carrying General Henry Shelton to support the attempted overthrow of the United States government on 9/11; she allegedly set up a revolving fund (# 15X4275) with bona vacantia – ownerless goods – in a joint venture with Star Chamber insiders, the Treasury Solicitor, Permira (Schroder Salomon Smith Barney in WTC#7) and organized crime groups to finance modifications of aircraft for the 9/11 attacks; she allegedly used Clipper PKI to manipulate content of NDS and News Corp pay-per-view television through 9/11; she allegedly procured ‘Con Air’ Lear Jet aircraft for use by Bombardier's homicidal EW pilot, Russell Williams to support the SES Speckled Trout chain of command and the decoy-and-drone maneuvers of 911; she allegedly used USIS files and Canadian Privy Council insider and NAPA vice president Lena Trudeau to create virtual ‘al-Qaeda’ operatives; she auctioned off SBA 8(a) CDOs just before the 9/11 attacks and assigned patented-device incendiary liquidation rights to D2 Banking and KPMG clients at Canary Wharf; she allegedly used images of pig farm oath ceremonies to extort 9/11 cooperation from the likes of Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Frank Carlucci, Lynn McNulty, Dr. David Finkleman, Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, Rear Admiral Gordon Piche, Robert Mueller, Bruce McConnell and Generals Haig, Shelton and Shalikashvili; she is the de facto President and Chief Executive Officer of Washington D.C.-based NAPA (The National Academy of Public Administration); she allegedly infiltrated pig farm Greek Life oath takers into George Washington University, University of Chicago and Northwestern University and University of Hawaii (BA French) and Georgetown University ( MFS, master foreign service); she allegedly adopted Rippergate oath ceremonies developed by Jane Addams at Hull House; she allegedly organized the theft of PROMIS from owners and translation into French for La Sûreté du Québec and Francophonie 9/11; she recently made a 'Mindless Breathers - Useless Breeders' comment, characteristic of a psychopath to her brother, Field McConnell; she appears to have exfiltrated U.S. Marshals from Murrah Building OKC before initiating the bombs fraudulently attributed to the decoy, Timothy McVeigh; she appears to have used .tv snuff films to blackmail the Office of Personnel Management; she appears to have prevented the timely release of `paperclip' passport files which would otherwise show Obama's status as CUKC alien and links to a Mau Mau ‘pig farm’ oath taking family in Kenya; we infer from spoliation through pay-per-view encryption that she re-assigned SBA liquidation rights in patent pool devices used on 9/11, including .tv to Crown Agents' City & Guilds Livery Companies such as the Worshipful Company of Spectacle Makers]”
“[Evidence that U.S. military court of appeals procedures date back to pre-Revolutionary times when oaths of allegiance were sworn by investors (?) and users of cestui que trusts to individual members of the Star Chamber] Establishment Since October 31, 1952, the Court has been located in Judiciary Square in the federal courthouse at 450 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20442-0001. The courthouse, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, was erected in 1910, and was formerly the home of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Persons interested in visiting the courthouse should contact the Clerk of the Court. History Courts-martial are judicial proceedings conducted by the armed forces. The Continental Congress first authorized the use of courts-martial in 1775. From the time of the Revolutionary War through the middle of the twentieth century, courts-martial were governed by the Articles of War and the Articles for the Government of the Navy. Until 1920, court-martial convictions were reviewed either by a commander in the field or by the President, depending on the severity of the sentence or the rank of the accused. The absence of formal review received critical attention during World War I, and the Army created an internal legal review process for a limited number of cases. Following the war, in the Act of June 4, 1920, Congress required the Army to establish Boards of Review, consisting of three lawyers, to consider cases involving death, dismissal of an officer, an unsuspended dishonorable discharge, or confinement in a penitentiary, with limited exceptions. The legislation further required legal review of other cases in the Office of the Judge Advocate General. The military justice system under the Articles of War and Articles for the Government of the Navy received significant attention during World War II and its immediate aftermath. During the war, in which over 16 million persons served in the American armed forces, the military services held over 1.7 million courts-martial. Many of these proceedings were conducted without lawyers acting as presiding officers or counsel. Studies conducted by the military departments and the civilian bar identified a variety of problems in the administration of military justice during the war, including the potential for improper command influence. In 1948, Congress enacted significant reforms in the Articles of War, including creation of a Judicial Council of three general officers to consider cases involving sentences of death, life imprisonment, or dismissal of an officer, as well as cases referred to the Council by a Board of Review or the Judge Advocate General. During the same period, Congress placed the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force under the newly created Department of Defense. The first Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal, created a committee under the chairmanship of Professor Edmund Morgan to study the potential for unifying and revising the services’ disparate military justice systems under a single code. The committee recommended a unified system applicable to the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. The committee also recommended that qualified attorneys serve as presiding officers and counsel, subject to limited exceptions. Numerous other changes were proposed by the committee to enhance the rights of service members in the context of the disciplinary needs of the armed forces. The recommendations included creation of an independent civilian appellate court. The committee’s recommendations, as revised by Congress, became the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), enacted on May 5, 1950. Article 67 of the UCMJ established the Court of Military Appeals as a three-judge civilian court. The Report of the House Armed Services Committee accompanying the legislation emphasized that the new Court would be “completely removed from all military influence of persuasion.” The legislation became effective on May 31, 1951. In 1968, Congress redesignated the Court as the United States Court of Military Appeals. As initially established, the Court was the final authority on cases arising under the military justice system, except for a limited number of cases considered by the Supreme Court of the United States under collateral proceedings, such as through writs of habeas corpus. In 1983, Congress authorized direct appeal to the Supreme Court of cases decided by the U.S. Court of Military Appeals, except for cases involving denial of a petition for discretionary review. In 1989, Congress enacted comprehensive legislation to enhance the effectiveness and stability of the Court. The legislation increased the Court’s membership to five judges, consistent with the American Bar Association’s Standards for Court Organization. In 1994, Congress gave the Court its current designation, the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.”
“Welcome: The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces exercises worldwide appellate jurisdiction over members of the armed forces on active duty and other persons subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Court is composed of five civilian judges [allegedly selected by Kristine Marcy, from pig farm Star Chamber oath takers] appointed for 15-year terms by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Cases on the Court’s docket address a broad range of legal issues, including constitutional law, criminal law, evidence, criminal procedure, ethics, administrative law, and national security law. Decisions by the Court are subject to direct review by the Supreme Court of the United States.”
We invite Grand Juries to test Kristine Marcy’s associates in the Court of Appeals for ongoing violations of laws which abolished rights to take a Star Chamber oath in the United Kingdom but appear to have kept rights to do so at a pig farm in British Columbia.
Open Demand for a [Runaway] Grand Jury Investigation - Apparent Spoliation of Evidence - Destruction of Boeing 757–222 Aircraft - UA Flt 93 - 9/11
See #1
Abel Danger Mischief Makers - Mistress of the Revels - 'Man-In-The-Middle' Attacks
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.