IN
THE
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF FORCES
) ) ) ) Petitioners-Appellants, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ) COL. DENISE LIND, MILITARY ) JUDGE ) ) Respondents-Appellees. ) ) CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, ET AL.,
APPEALS
FOR
THE
ARMED
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION: Crim. App. Misc. Dkt. No. 20120514 USCA Misc. Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR
INDEX Table of Authorities
ii-iv
ARGUMENT:
01-37
[A] The court failed in its responsibility to “search for the truth”, which is the interest that Judges should keep “prominently-indeed, primarily-in mind”. .. .. ....
02-12
[B] Appellants and Amici‟s Reporting on USCAAF: CCR vs. USA (i) Ecocentric Amicus Submission and „tea-leaves‟ Denial by Court, (ii) 10 October 2012 Oral Arguments ...
12-15
[C] Applicants Ecocentric Amicus Meets Supreme Court and Federal Appellate Circuit Court Standards .. .. .. .. ..
15-26
[D] Radical Honoursty TruthSeeking: Investigating whether the Courts decision is a „social trap/fence‟ consequence of political correct colonized minds attempt to avoid debate about the role of Anthropocentric legal doctrine‟s contribution to the Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
26-36
[E] Finite Resources & Control of Reproduction Breeding War Acts of War: Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...
36-37
RELIEF REQUESTED .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .
37-37
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .
38-38
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .
39-44
i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES: Cases: Craig v. Harney 331 U.S. 367 (1947) ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
18
Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 17 Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 646 (1961) .. .. .. .. .. .. . 17,24 Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 17 Oregon ex. rel State Land Bd. v. Corvallis Sand & Gravel Co., 429 U.S. (1977) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 24 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 Del Costello v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 (1983) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17,24 Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 300 (1989) .. .. .. .. .. .. 17,24 Jaffee v. Redmond 518 U.S. 1 (1996) .. .. .. .. . 02, 03, 05, 26 Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003) .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
17
American College of Obstetricians v. Thornburgh, 699 F.2d 644 (3d Cir. 1983) (Higginbotham, J., dissenting) .. .. .. .. 16 Resident Council of Allen Parkway Vill. v. HUD, 980 F.2d 1043, 1049 (5th Cir. 1993) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 17 Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission 125 F.3d 1062 (7th Cir. 1997) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 19-21 National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler 223 F.3d 615 (7th Cir. 2000) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 19-21 Eldred v. Reno, 239 F.3d 372 (CADC 2001) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 In re Paschen, 296 F.3d 1203, 1209 (11th Cir. 2002) .. .. ..
17
Koote-nai Tribe of Idaho v. Veneman, 313 F.3d 1094, 1116 n.19 (9th Cir. 2002) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .
17
Thompson v. County of Franklin, 314 F.3d 79, 98 (2d Cir. 2002) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
17
Neonatology Associates v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 293 F.3d 128 (3d Cir. 2002) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 21-23 The Voices for Choices v. Illinois Bell Telephone Company 339 F.3d 542 (7th Cir. 2003) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 19-20 Al-Marri v. Pucciarelli, 534 F.3d 213, (4th Cir. 2008) .. ..
17
Authorities: Adams T (Autumn 1998): Radical Destabilizing Effects of New Technologies. U.S. Army War College: Parameter .. .. .. .. .. 33 ii
Air Force Material Command (June 1996): Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation: A Review Pertinent to Air Force Operations (AI/OE-TR-1996-0035), Brooks Air Force Base, Texas .. .. .. 33 Akwei, John St. Clair (April/May 1996): Covert Operations of the U.S. National Security Agency1 (Nexus Magazine) .. .. .. .. 33 Begich N and Burke K. (1998): New non-lethal weapons systems may be used against U.S. citizens. Report Presented to the World Foundation for Natural Sciences on October 17, 1998, Interlaken, Switzerland. Published by The Leading Edge and available on Dr. Begichâ€&#x;s website: (www.earthpulse.com) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 Blackmore, Susan (1996/11/10): Waking from the Meme Dream2; Paper presented at: The Psychology of Awakening: International Conference on Buddhism, Science and Psychotherapy Dartington 710 November 1996. Also published in The Psychology of Awakening: Buddhism, Science and Our Day-to-day Lives. Ed. G.Watson, S.Batchelor and G.Claxton; London, Rider, 2000, 112-122 .. .. 32 Caldeira, Gregory A. & Wright, John R. (1988): Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court, 82 AM. POL. SCI. REV. 1109, 1122 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17,18 Caldeira, Gregory A. & Wright, John R. (1990): Amici Curiae Before the Supreme Court: Who Participates, When, and How Much?, 52 J. POL. 782, 784-87 (1990) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 16 Churchland, P.S. and Sejnowski, T.J. (1992) The Computational Brain. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 32 Dennett,D.C. (1991) Consciousness Explained. London, Little, Brown & Co. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 32 Garcia, Ruben J. (2008): A Democratic Theory of Amicus Advocacy, 35 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20,23 Harrington, John (2005): Amici Curiae in the Federal Courts of Appeals: How Friendly Are They?, 55 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 675-76 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17, 20, 23 Johnstone, L (2012/09/13): Founding Affidavit of Lara Johnstone in support of Notice of Motion to Proceed as Amicus Curiae3, in United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Case USCA: 12-8027/AR: CCR v USA & Col. Denise Lind, Military Judge .. . 01
1 2 3
www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scalar_tech/esp_scalartech12.htm www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Chapters/awaken.html issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120914_ccrvusa-rhamicus
iii
Johnstone, L (2012/09/24): Brief in Propria Persona by Amici Curiae Lara Johnstone in Support of an Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security Perspective4 .. .. .. .. 01, 06, 12, 27, 36 Kearney, Joseph D, and Merrill, Thomas W (2000/01/01): The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 148 U. Pa. L. Rev. 743 (2000), pg.743-855. Open access provided by Faculty Scholarship at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. .. .. .. .. .. .. 04, 16-25 Keith J. Mind Control, World Control: The Encyclopedia of Mind Control. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 Kempton, IL. (1997) Adventures Unlimited, 1997, p 264; 267-269 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
33
Manning J and Begich N. (1995): Angels Don’t Play this HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology, Earthpulse Press, Anchorage, AK: Earthpulse Press (www.earthpulse.com) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 Penn State College, The Institute for Non-Lethal Defense Technologies, in cooperation with the United States Marines. 33 Siniscalchi J (March 1998) Non-Lethal Technologies: Implications for Military Strategy. Center for Strategy and Technology, Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. .. .. .. .. .. 33 Tobias, Carl: Resolving Amicus Curiae Motions in the Third Circuit and Beyond, Drexel Law Review, Vol.1:125, pg.125-142 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 16-25 Thomas TL (1998): The mind has no firewall. U.S. Army War College Quarterly, Parameters, Spring of 1998. .. .. .. .. .. 33 Tyler P.S. (1984): U.S. Air Force research paper on the effects of low-level non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation .. .. .. 33 V.N Lopatin and V.D. Tsygankov (1999): Psychotronic War and the Future of Russia5 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 United States Air Force of Aerospace Medicine (Oct 1986) Radiofrequency Radiation Dosimetry Handbook. Texas: Brooks Air Force Base, October 1986. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 United States Military Joint Publication 3-13.1. and United States Army War College (July 1994): Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33
4
issuu.com/js-ror/docs/120924_ccrvusa-amicus www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_psychotronicweapons14.htm
5
iv
IN
THE
UNITED
STATES
COURT OF FORCES
) ) ) ) Petitioners-Appellants, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ) COL. DENISE LIND, MILITARY ) JUDGE ) ) Respondents-Appellees. ) ) CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, ET AL.,
APPEALS
FOR
THE
ARMED
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION: Crim. App. Misc. Dkt. No. 20120514 USCA Misc. Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR
TO THE JUDGES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES: Pursuant to Rule 31 of this Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure,
the
Petitioner,
hereby
respectfully
requests
the
Court reconsider its 09 October 2012 unconstitutional decision, which being unconstitutional, compels the court to reconsider it. In a 09 October 2012 email from Clerk of the Court DeCicco, wrote: ―After reviewing the amicus brief and other documents you sent to the Court, the Judges have decided not to grant your request to proceed as an amicus curiae in the subject case. This means that said brief and documents will not be made part of the record and will not be considered by the Judges in the disposition of the case.‖ Reconsideration
is
appropriate
because
the
Court
has
overlooked or misapprehended the following points of law and fact:
1
Reasons for Reconsideration:
[A] The court failed in its responsibility to “search for the truth”,
which
is
the
interest
that
Judges
should
keep
offered,
what
“prominently-indeed, primarily-in mind”. (1)
In
Jaffee
Redmond1,
v.
Justice
Scalia
Petitioner considers, a Preferred Freedoms doctrine perspective, on the widespread filing of amicus briefs. The Supreme Court was being asked to recognize a ―psychotherapist's privilege‖ under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. opinion
joined
Scalia ―In
in
part
by
Chief
Justice
In a dissenting Rehnquist,
Justice
offered the following observation: its
consideration
of
this
case,
the
Court
was
the
beneficiary of no fewer than 14 amicus briefs supporting respondents, most of which came from such organizations as the
American
Psychiatric
Psychoanalytic
Association,
State
Social
Work
the
Boards,
Professionals
Association,
Association,
and
Workers.
Association,
the
American the
Inc.,
National
the
the
American
Association
Employee
of
Assistance
American
Association
Counseling of
Social
Not a single amicus brief was filed in support of
petitioner.
That
is
no
surprise.
There
is
no
self-
interested organization out there devoted to pursuit of the truth in the federal courts.
The expectation is, however,
that this Court will have that interest prominently-indeed, primarily-in mind. Today we have failed that expectation, and that responsibility.‖
1
518 U.S. 1 (1996).
2
(2)
Justice
Scalia‘s
reference
to
―self-interested
organizations‖ and his lack of surprise in finding no amicus arguing against creation of an evidentiary privilege suggest that amicus briefs reflect a form of interest group lobbying directed at the Court. His remarks further suggest, in keeping with the interest group theory of politics2 that well organized interest groups will be more likely to file amicus briefs than will diffuse and poorly organized interests. Most significantly, Justice Scalia intimates that the over-representation of wellorganized interest groups through amicus filings may have an influence on the outcomes reached by the Court.
He at least
suggests that this is what happened in Jaffee, in which the highly disproportionate amicus support for the respondent may have
sent
recognizing
a a
clear
signal
to
psychotherapist's
the
Court
privilege
that would
a
decision
more
likely
receive acclaim from organized groups than one rejecting such a privilege. (3)
According to Kearney and Merrill in The Influence of Amicus
Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court, there are three different models
of
judicial
decision-making:
model,
the
attitudinal
model
and
the
the
conventional
interest
group
legal theory
2
See, e.g., NEAL K KOMESAR, IMPERFECT ALTERNATIVES: CHOOSING INSTITUTIONS IN LAW, ECONOMICS, AND PUBLIC POLICY 53-97, 123-50 (1994) (explaining the interest group theory of politics and arguing for its extension to judicial processes); Einer R. Elhauge, Does Interest Group TheoryJustify More IntrusiveJudicial Review?, 101 YALE L.J. 31, 35-48 (1991) (arguing thatjudicial processes are subject to the same interest group dynamics as other political processes).
3
model; where Justice Scalia‘s3 aforementioned judging in this matter, fits into the interest group theory model.4 (4)
Under the conventional legal model of judicial decision
making, judges reqard themselves as ―seeking to resolve cases in accordance
with
the
requirements
of
law,
as
understood
by
professional acts in the legal community.‖ Amicus briefs impact their judicial decision-making if they contain ―new informationlegal arguments and background factual material-that would be relevant
to
persons
seeking
the
correct
result
in
light
of
established legal norms‖. (5)
Under the ‗attitudinal model‘ of judging, it is argued by
political
scientists,
that
judges
have
―fixed
ideological
preferences,5 and hence ―case outcomes are a product of the summing of the preferences of the participating judges, with legal
norms
serving
only
to
rationalize
outcomes
after
the
3
Kearney, Joseph D, and Merrill, Thomas W (2000/01/01): ―Justice Scalia, to our knowledge, has not offered a positive theory of judging. But his normative writing clearly presupposes that judges are profoundly constrained by legal rules. See ANTONIN SCALIA, A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION: FEDERAL COURTS AND THE LAW 3, 44-47 (1997) (arguing that an evolutionary interpretation of the Constitution is destructive of its purpose); Antonin Scalia, The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1175, 1177 (1989) (arguing against unlimited judicial discretion). Thus, he too would presumably endorse the legal model as an explanation for judging-at least when judging is done correctly. 4 Kearney, Joseph D, and Merrill, Thomas W (2000/01/01): ―In writings about judicial behavior, Judge Posner has suggested that appellate judges are primarily motivated by the pleasure they derive from participating in the "spectator's game" of deciding cases. See RICHARD A. POSNER, OVERCOMING LAW 126- 35 (1995) [hereinafter POSNER, OVERCOMINGLAW]; Richard A. Posner, What Do Judges and Justices Maximize? (The Same Thing Everybody Else Does), 3 SUP. CT. ECON. REV. 1, 23-30 (1994) [hereinafter Posner, What do Judges and Justices Maximize?]. This theory does not precisely conform to any of the three models of judging we will discuss, but in practice it would appear to fall closer to the legal model than to either the attitudinal model or the interest group model. If judging is like observing a game of tennis or chess, then presumably an important part of the process is understanding and following the rules of the game. 5 See JEMEY A. SEGAL & HAROLD J. SPAETH, THE SUPREME COURT AND THE ATTITUDINAL MODEL 65-73 (1993) (describing the rationale and historical antecedents of the attitudinal model).
4
fact‖. If or where a Judge consequently holds fixed ideological preferences contrary to the information in the Amicus brief, the brief will have ―little or no impact on the outcomes reached by a court, because each judge's vote in a case is assumed to be the
product
of
preferences
his
with
or
her
respect
to
pre-established the
issue
ideological
presented.‖
The
attitudinal model suggests that ―a judge can obtain all the information needed to determine his or her vote, by reading the "Question Presented" and the statement of facts contained in the parties' briefs‖. If or where amicus briefs ―provide additional legal arguments and factual background, under this model they offer information of no relevance to judges‖. (6)
Under
the
‗interest
group
theory‘
model
of
judicial
decision making, it is assumed that judges do not have strong ideological
preferences
about
most
issues.
Instead
they
are
―empty vessels who seek to decide cases so as to reach those results supported by the most influential groups in society that have an interest in the question at hand‖. In this model, Amicus briefs are ―important to the judicial process because of the signals
that
they
convey
about
how
interested
groups
want
particular cases decided‖. As such, as in Jaffee, if a number of parties from an influential corporate, political or media group file amicus briefs, that endorse a particular outcome, ―this tells the judges how to rule if they want to secure the approval of [those] organized groups‖.
5
(7)
It shouldn‘t surprise the court that organisations with a
higher
carrying
capacity
footprint,
i.e.
those
effectively
stealing resources from future generations, are the ones that have been, and are over-represented in Amicus filings, and may have had an influence on the Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket Anthropocentric outcomes – and current Anthropocentric legal doctrine6 - reached by the courts. (8)
In this matter, the court has approved the Amicus from the
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press7 and 31 News Media Organisations:
Allbritton
Communications
Company8,
American
Society of News Editors9, The Associated Press10, Association of
6
Johnstone Ecocentric Amicus (12-09-24) pg.28-37 Wikipedia & rcfp.org: The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) is an American nonprofit organization, founded in 1970, that provides free legal assistance to and on behalf of journalists. the Reporters Committee files legal briefs on a variety of issues that affect a journalist's ability to gather and disseminate news and also maintains a 24hour legal defense hotline for journalists and media lawyers. Funded by corporate, foundation and individual contributions, the Reporters Committee serves more than 2,000 reporters, editors and media lawyers. It also offers: Amicus Briefs and Statements of Support both alone and in conjunction with major news and transparency organizations, the Reporters Committee files or participates in more than 20 briefs each year with the U.S. Supreme Court and in federal and state courts. It is a voice of support for the right to freely gather and disseminate information in any form. 8 Datamonitor.com: Allbritton Communications Company (ACC) owns and operates ABC network-affiliated television stations serving six geographical markets in the US. The company owns a 24-hour cable news channel, NewsChannel 8 that serves Washington. The company primarily operates in the US, where it is headquartered in Arlington, Virginia, and employs 805 people. The company recorded revenues of $196.9 million in the fiscal year ended September 2011, and an operating profit of $65.2 million 9 Asne.org & Wikipedia.org: The American Society of News Editors is a nonprofit association of editors (of big-city papers — limiting membership to editors of newspapers in cities of 100,000 or more), producers or directors in charge of journalistic organizations or departments; deans or faculty at university journalism schools; leaders and faculty of media-related foundations and training organizations and other individuals at the board's discretion. Every U.S. president has spoken at the organization's convention and it is considered a premier venue for politicians to appear. 10 Wikipedia: The Associated Press is an American news agency cooperative owned by its contributing newspapers, radio and television stations in the United States, which both contribute stories to the AP and use material written by its staff journalists. As of 2005, the news collected by the AP is published and republished by more than 1,700 newspapers, in addition to more than 5,001 television and radio broadcasters. The Associated Press operates 7
6
Alternative Newsweeklies11, Atlantic Media, Inc.12, Cable
News
Network, Inc.13, Digital Media Law Project14, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.15, The E.W. Scripps Company16, First Amendment Coalition17,
243 news bureaus, and it serves at least 120 countries, with an international staff located all over the world. 2011 Revenue: US$627.6 million (2011); Net income US$193.3 million (2011) 11 Wikipedia: The Association of Alternative Newsmedia (AAN), formerly known as the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies, is a trade association of alternative weekly newspapers in North America. It provides services to a large number of generally liberal or progressive weekly newspapers across the United States and in Canada, consisting of 131 newspapers which are published in 42 states, Washington D.C., and four Canadian provinces. 12 Wikipedia & Datamonitor: Atlantic Media Company is a print and online media company owned by David G. Bradley and based in the Watergate in Washington, D.C. It publishes several prominent news magazines and services including The Atlantic and Government Executive and those belonging to its National Journal Group subsidiary: National Journal, The Hotline, National Journal Daily, and Technology Daily. 13 Wikipedia: Cable News Network (CNN) is a U.S. cable news channel founded in 1980 by American media mogul and philanthropist Ted Turner. As of August 2010, CNN is available in over 100 million U.S. households. Broadcast coverage extends to over 890,000 American hotel rooms, and the U.S broadcast is also shown in Canada. Globally, CNN programming airs through CNN International, which can be seen by viewers in over 212 countries and territories. Parent company Time Warner 2011 Revenue: US$ 28.974 billion (2011); Net income US$ 2.886 billion (2011). 14 Harvard Univ: Co-sponsored by the Center for Citizen Media and the Berkman Center‘s Clinical Program in Cyberlaw, the Citizen Media Law Project (CMLP) is a new organization aimed at providing legal training and resources for individuals and organizations involved in citizen media. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/research/citmedialaw# 15 Wikipedia: Dow Jones & Company is an American publishing and financial information firm. Its flagship publication, The Wall Street Journal, is a daily newspaper in print and online covering business, financial national and international news and issues around the globe. Revenue $1.5 billion USD (2009); Net income: $386.56 million USD (2009) 16 Wikipedia: The E. W. Scripps Company is an American media conglomerate founded by Edward W. Scripps in 1922, headquartered inside the Scripps Center in Cincinnati, Ohio. The company currently owns and operates newspapers in 13 American markets: Times Record News (Wichita Falls, TX); The Abilene Reporter-News (Abilene, TX); The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN); Evansville Courier & Press (Evansville, IN); The Gleaner (Henderson, KY); Kitsap Sun (Bremerton, WA); The Knoxville News-Sentinel (Knoxville, TN); Naples Daily News (Naples, FL); Stuart News (Stuart, FL); Ventura County Star (Camarillo, CA); San Angelo Standard-Times (San Angelo, TX); Corpus Christi Caller Times (Corpus Christi, TX); The Anderson Independent-Mail (Anderson, SC); Redding Record Searchlight (Redding, CA). Revenue $1.1 billion USD (2007) 17 Wikipedia: The First Amendment Coalition (FAC) is a nonprofit public interest organization committed to freedom of speech, more open and accountable government, and public participation in civic affairs. Founded in 1988, FAC's activities include "test case" litigation, free legal consultations on first amendment issues, educational programs, legislative oversight of bills in California affecting access to government and free speech, and public advocacy. FAC's members are news organizations, law firms, libraries, civic organizations, academics, freelance journalists, bloggers, community activists, and ordinary citizens. Members and supporters are kept abreast of legal issues through FAC‘s newsletter—a combination of original
7
Gannett Co., Inc.18, Hearst Corporation19, Massachusetts Newspaper Publishers
Association20,
The
McClatchy
Company21,
Military
commentaries and summaries of news and legal developments—distributed to 4,000 people every two weeks. FAC conducts annual conferences with its partners the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism and the University of California, Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. Recent speakers have included Jeffrey Toobin, Stuart Taylor, Jr., Arianna Huffington, Daniel Ellsberg, NSA General Counsel Robert Deitz, former NY Times reporter Judith Miller, First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, Commentary Magazine editor Gabriel Schoenfeld, Internet journalism pioneer Dan Gillmor, and leading media lawyers from around the country. FAC has also published ―The Right to Know: A Guide to Public Access and Media Law,‖ (2007), a comprehensive handbook on FOI, First Amendment and news-gathering law. 18 Wikipedia: Gannett Company, Inc. is a publicly traded media holding company headquartered in Tysons Corner, Virginia, near McLean. It is the largest U.S. newspaper publisher as measured by total daily circulation. Its assets include the national newspaper USA Today and the weekly USA Weekend. Its largest non-national newspaper is The Arizona Republic in Phoenix, Arizona. Other significant newspapers include The Indianapolis Star, The Cincinnati Enquirer, The Tennessean in Nashville, Tennessee, The Courier-Journal in Louisville, Kentucky, the Democrat and Chronicle in Rochester, NY, The Des Moines Register, the Detroit Free Press and The News-Press in Fort Myers. Gannett owns 23 television stations through Gannett Broadcasting Inc. and is the largest group owner of NBC-affiliated stations. Gannett also holds substantial properties in digital media including PointRoll, BNQT Media Group, Planet Discover, Ripple6 and ShopLocal through Gannett Digital. Revenue: US$ 5.439 billion (2010); Net income: US$ 588.2 million (2010) 19 Wikipedia & Forbes.com: The Hearst Corporation is an American mass media group based in the Hearst Tower, Manhattan in New York City, New York, United States. Hearst is one of the largest diversified communications companies in the world. Its major interests include 15 daily and 38 weekly newspapers, and more than 300 magazines around the world, including Harper's Bazaar, Cosmopolitan, Esquire, Elle and O, The Oprah Magazine; 29 television stations through Hearst Television Inc. which reach a combined 18% of U.S. viewers; ownership in leading cable networks, including A+E Networks, and ESPN Inc.; as well as business publishing, Internet businesses, television production, newspaper features distribution and real estate. A non-exhaustive list of its properties and investments includes: Magazines: Harper's Bazaar; ELLE; Marie Claire; Cosmopolitan; Esquire; Car and Driver; Country Living; Elle Décor; Good Housekeeping; House Beautiful; O, The Oprah Magazine; Popular Mechanics; Redbook; Road & Track; Seventeen; Town & Country; Veranda; Woman's Day; Nat Mags; Newspapers: San Francisco Chronicle (San Francisco, CA); The News-Times (Danbury, CT); Greenwich Time (Greenwich, CT); The Advocate (Stamford) (Stamford, CT); Connecticut Post (Bridgeport, CT); Edwardsville Intelligencer (Edwardsville, IL); Huron Daily Tribune (Bad Axe, MI); Midland Daily News (Midland, MI); Times Union (Albany, NY); Beaumont Enterprise (Beaumont, TX); Houston Chronicle (Houston, TX); Laredo Morning Times (Laredo, TX); Midland Reporter-Telegram (Midland, TX); Plainview Daily Herald (Plainview, TX); San Antonio Express-News (San Antonio, TX); seattlepi.com, formerly the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, WA); Weekly Newspapers: Darien News (CT); Fairfield Citizen (CT); Greenwich Citizen (CT); New Canaan News (CT); New Milford Spectrum (CT); Norwalk Citizen (CT); Westport News (CT); Marlette Leader (MI); Vassar Pioneer Times (MI); Advertiser North (NY); Advertiser South (NY); Ballston Spa Pennysaver (NY); Clifton Park North Pennysaver (NY); Clifton Park South Pennysaver (NY); Latham Pennysaver (NY); Pennysaver News (NY); Spa City Moneysaver (NY); The Weekly (NY); Bulverde Community News (TX); Business
8
Reporters & Editors22, The National Press Club23, National Press Photographers Coalition25,
Association24, New
York
Daily
New
England
News26,
The
First New
York
Amendment Times27,
Express (TX); Canyon News (TX); Conexi贸n (TX); Hardin County News (TX); Jasper Newsboy (TX); Kelly USA Observer (TX); La Voz (TX); Lackland Talespinner (TX); Fort Sam Houston News Leader (TX); Medical Patriot (TX); Muleshoe Journal (TX); Neighborhood News (TX); North Central News (TX); Northwest Weekly (TX); Our People (TX); Randolph Wingspread (TX); Northeast Herald (TX); Southside Reporter (TX); The Zapata Times (TX). 2011 Revenue: $3.80 billion 20 Masspublishers.org: Formed in 1972, the MNPA is a voluntary association that represents Massachusetts daily and weekly newspapers on legal and legislative matters of concern. 21 The McClatchy Company is a publicly traded American publishing company based in Sacramento, California. It operates 30 daily newspapers in 15 states and has an average weekday circulation of 2.2 million and Sunday circulation of 2.8 million. Dailies: Anchorage Daily News (Anchorage, AK); The Beaufort Gazette (Beaufort, SC); Belleville News-Democrat (Belleville, IL); The Bellingham Herald (Bellingham, WA); Centre Daily Times (State College, PN); The Charlotte Observer (Charlotte, NC); Ledger-Enquirer (Columbus, GA); The Fresno Bee (Fresno, CA); The Herald (Bradenton) (Bradenton, FL); The Herald (Rock Hill) (Rock Hill, SC); The Idaho Statesman (Boise, ID); The Island Packet (Hilton Head, SC); The Kansas City Star (Kansas City, MS); Lexington Herald-Leader (Lexington, KY); Merced Sun-Star (Merced, CA); The Miami Herald (Miami, FL); The Modesto Bee (Modesto, CA); The News & Observer (Raleigh, NC); El Nuevo Herald (Miami, FL); The Olathe News (Olathe, KA); The Olympian (Olympia, WA) ; The Sacramento Bee (Sacramento, CA); Fort Worth Star-Telegram (Fort Worth, TX); The State (Columbia, SC); Sun Herald (Biloxi, MS); Sun News (Myrtle Beach, SC); The News Tribune (Tacoma, WA); The Telegraph (Macon) (Macon, GA); The San Luis Obispo Tribune (San Luis Obispo, CA); Tri-City Herald (Kennewick, WA); Wichita Eagle (Wichita, KA). 22 Militaryreporters.org: The Military Reporters and Editors association exists to advance public understanding of the military, national security and homeland defense; to educate and share information with its members and the public on best practices, tools and techniques for such coverage; to represent the interests of working journalists to the government and military; and to assure that journalists have access to places where the U.S. military and its allies operate. 23 Wikipedia: The National Press Club is a professional organization and private social club for journalists. It is located in Washington, D.C. Its membership consists of journalists, former journalists, government information officers, and those considered to be regular news sources. Regular weekly luncheons for speakers began in 1932 with an appearance by president-elect Franklin D. Roosevelt. Since then the Club has hosted an average of 70 luncheons each year with prominent people. Over the years Nikita Khrushchev, Soong May-ling (Madame Chiang Kai-shek), Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Muhammad Ali, Charles de Gaulle, Robert Redford, Boris Yeltsin, Elizabeth Taylor, Nelson Mandela, Yasser Arafat, and the Dalai Lama and Angelina Jolie have all spoken at the club. 24 Wikipedia: The National Press Photographers Association, is a members organization based in Durham, North Carolina and its mostly made up of still photographers, television videographers, editors, and students in the journalism field. 25 www.northeastern.edu/firstamendmentcenter/: The New England First Amendment Coalition was formed in 2006 by a group of journalists concerned that citizens and reporters, are routinely denied access to the work of government: public documents, meetings, hearings.
9
Newspaper Association of America28, The Newspaper Guild – CWA29, North
Jersey
POLITICO Reuters34,
Media
LLC32,
Group
Radio
Society
of
Inc.30,
Television
Online
News
Association31,
Digital
News
Association33,
Professional
Journalists35,
Tribune
Company36, The Washington Post37 and WNET38.
26
Wikipedia: The Daily News of New York City is the fourth most widely circulated daily newspaper in the United States. 27 Wikipedia & NewYorkTimes: The New York Times (NYT) is an American daily newspaper founded and continuously published in New York City since 1851. Although the print version of the paper remains the largest local metropolitan newspaper in the United States, it is the third largest newspaper overall, behind The Wall Street Journal and USA Today. 2011 Revenue: Profit of $15.7 million 28 Wikipedia: The Newspaper Association of America is a trade association representing approximately 2000 newspapers in the United States and Canada. Member newspapers represented by the NAA include large daily papers, nondaily and small-market publications, as well as digital and multiplatform products. 29 Wikipedia: The Newspaper Guild-CWA is a labor union founded by newspaper journalists in 1933 who noticed that unionized printers and truck drivers were making more money than they did. In addition to improving wages and working conditions, its constitution says its purpose is to fight for honesty in journalism and the news industry's business practices. It has over 32,000 members. 30 Wikipedia: North Jersey Media Group (NJMG) is an independent, family-owned media company providing local news, information and services to the residents of northern New Jersey. The company is headquartered in Woodland Park (formerly West Paterson) and is best known for its flagship daily newspaper, The Record. As of March 8, 2010, North Jersey Media Group is also printing three Gannett Company-owned newspapers out of its Rockaway, New Jersey-based printing presses- the Journal News, the Poughkeepsie Journal, and USA Today. 31 Wikipedia: The Online News Association (ONA), founded in 1999, is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization made up of more than 1,800 members. It is the world‘s largest association of digital journalists. The majority of ONA members are professional online journalists. The association defines "professional members" as those "whose principal livelihood involves gathering or producing news for digital presentation." 32 Wikipedia: Politico is an American political journalism organization based in Arlington, Virginia, that distributes its content via television, the Internet, newspaper, and radio. Its coverage of Washington, D.C., includes the U.S. Congress, lobbying, media and the Presidency. 33 Wikipedia: The Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA), formerly the Radio-Television News Directors Association (RTNDA), is a United Statesbased membership organization of radio, television and online news directors, producers, executives and educators. 34 Wikipedia & Reuters.com: Reuters is an international news agency headquartered in London, United Kingdom and a division of Thomson Reuters. Reuters employs several thousand journalists. 2011 Revenue: Total revenue in the fourth quarter was $3.46 billion (2.15 billion pounds). 35 Wikipedia: The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), formerly known as Sigma Delta Chi, is one of the oldest organizations representing journalists in the United States. SPJ has nearly 300 chapters across the United States that bring educational programming to local areas and offer regular contact with other media professionals. Its membership base is more than 9,000
10
(9)
Petitioner‘s
respectfully
submits
that
her
Ecocentric
Amicus is in line with her culture – the Radical Honesty culture – which is devoted to pursuit of the truth. It is the interest which
is
prominently-indeed,
primarily-in
mind
of
the
Petitioner‘s Ecocentric Amicus arguments. (10)
Conversely,
Committee
for
the Freedom
existential of
the
purpose Press39
of and
the 31
Reporters
News
Media
members of the media. In 2009, The Society of Professional Journalists had revenue of $1.4 million. It spent $1.6 million. 36 Wikipedia: The Tribune Company is a large American multimedia corporation based in Chicago, Illinois. It is the nation's second-largest newspaper publisher. Through Tribune Broadcasting, the company operates 23 television stations, WGN America on national cable, and Chicago's WGN radio. The group's combined reach is more than 80 percent of U.S. television households. Investment interests include Food Network (31%). Tribune Interactive, another subsidiary, manages the interactive operations of major daily newspapers such as Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times and their associated websites. English-language newspapers: Burbank Leader, Burbank, CA; Daily Pilot, Costa Mesa and Newport Beach, CA; Glendale News-Press, Glendale, CA; Huntington Beach Independent, Huntington Beach, CA; Valley Sun, La Cañada Flintridge, CA; Costline Pilot, Laguna Beach, CA; Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, CA; Pasadena Sun, Pasadena, CA; Hartford Courant, Hartford, CT; South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Fort Lauderdale, FL; Orlando Sentinel, Orlando, FL; Chicago Tribune and Redeye, Chicago, IL; Baltimore Sun, Baltimore, MD; The Morning Call, Allentown, PN; Daily Press, Newport News, VA; Spanish-language newspapers: Hoy, Los Angeles & Chicago; El Sentinel del Sur de la Florida, Fort Lauderdale, FL; El Sentinel, Orlando, FL. Revenue: US$3.18 bil (FY 2010) 37 Wikipedia: The Washington Post is a leading American daily newspaper. It is the most widely circulated newspaper published in Washington, D.C., and oldest extant in the area, founded in 1877. The Post is one of a few U.S. newspapers with foreign bureaus, located in Baghdad, Bogota, Cairo, Hong Kong, Islamabad, Jerusalem, Kabul, London, Mexico City, Moscow, Nairobi, New Delhi, Paris, Shanghai, Tehran, and Tokyo. 38 Wikipedia: WNET, channel 13 (also referred to as Thirteen) is a noncommercial educational public television station licensed to Newark, New Jersey. With its signal covering the New York metropolitan area, WNET is a primary station of the Public Broadcasting Service and a primary provider of PBS programming. WNET's Channel Thirteen is the most watched PBS station in the country. 39 Wikipedia & rcfp.org: The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) is an American nonprofit organization, founded in 1970, that provides free legal assistance to and on behalf of journalists. the Reporters Committee files legal briefs on a variety of issues that affect a journalist's ability to gather and disseminate news and also maintains a 24hour legal defense hotline for journalists and media lawyers. Funded by corporate, foundation and individual contributions, the Reporters Committee serves more than 2,000 reporters, editors and media lawyers who call for help each year, as well as the tens of thousands who use its website. In addition to expert legal advice and referrals to volunteer media counsel around the country, the Reporters Committee offers: Amicus Briefs and Statements of Support both alone and in conjunction with major news and transparency
11
Organisations; profits‘ resources
is
not
(exponential for
their
‗truth‘, increased
short-term
but use
their of
profit);
‗economic
growth
non-renewable
finite
at
the
expense
of
‗Planet Earth and her finite resources‘: nature / environment40. (11)
The Courts decision to allow the Amicus of parties whose
purpose is ‗profit‘, while denying the Amicus of an individual, whose culture and religion is to search for the ‗truth‘, was a failure of its responsibility to ―search for the truth‖, which is
the interest that Judges should keep ―prominently-indeed,
primarily-in mind‖. (12)
Unless the Justices were practicing the social science41
truth-seeking investigatory legal model, cause you wanted to see what reaction, if any, there would be from the parties, to the court‘s
irregular
―cryptic/tea-leaves‖42
decision
to
deny
Petitioner‘s Amicus? [B] Appellants and Amici‟s Reporting on USCAAF: CCR vs. USA (i) Ecocentric Amicus Submission and „tea-leaves‟ Denial by Court, (ii) 10 October 2012 Oral Arguments: organizations, the Reporters Committee files or participates in more than 20 briefs each year with the U.S. Supreme Court and in federal and state courts. It is a voice of support for the right to freely gather and disseminate information in any form. 40 Maher, MT (1997/03); Maher, MT (1995); Johnstone (12-09-24) pg.14 41 Johnstone, L (2012/09/13): para.45: ―The applicant consequently recommends the court – as a social science experiment to determine the validity of the Applicants arguments about the alleged motives of First Amici‗s – keenly observe the Anthropocentric response, or lack thereof, by the Appellants socalled ‗national and local news organizations… news… whose journalists … regularly gather and disseminate news and information to the public through their newspapers, magazines, television, radio stations and via the Internet‗ to being provided with this Ecocentric Wild Law Sustainable Security application, to this court, in this matter.‖ 42 USCAAF: CCR v USA: 10 October 2012: Oral Argument: (53:16) JUDGE: you are entitled to more time as a matter of fairness, you are not required to take it, cause the constitution does not so compel. (53:25) FISHER: I‘ll read the tea leaves on that your honour. www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/CourtAudio3/20121010c.wma
12
(13)
Ecocentric
Amicus
Submission
and
„tea-leaves‟
Denial
by
Court: Conspiracy of Silence between Appellants and RCFP Amici regarding Ecocentric Amicus submission. Google is unable to find any
online
article
from
any
appellant
or
RCFP
Amici
about
Petitioner‘s Ecocentric Amicus Curiae submission and the courts irregular and unconstitutional disregard for all Supreme Court, Appellate
Court
and
stare-decisis
rulings
on
Amicus
Curiae
submissions, by denying Petitioner‘s Ecocentric Amicus. (14)
10 October 2012 Oral Arguments:
(15)
Scientific Journalism: Parties Briefs & Oral Argument: 1. NIMJ
Blog
–
CAAFLOG:
Argument
Audio:
Center
for
Constitutional Rights, et al. v. United States and Colonel Lind, No. 12-8027/AR43, by Zachary Spilman was the only article, which included a direct link to USCAAF‘s oral argument: Appellants‘
―Oral brief
Argument
Audio44‖,
(writ-appeal
as
well
petition);
as
to
Appellee‘s
(government) brief; Appellants‘ reply brief; Blog Post: Interesting order from CAAF; Blog Post: Argument preview. 2. Courthouse News Service: Judges Doubt Need for Secrecy in Bradley Manning Court-Martial45, by Adam Klasfeld, provides a direct link to USCAAF Welcome page, direct links to Appellants Writ Appeal and to RFCP Amicus, but no direct links to any of Appellee‘s briefs/responses. (16)
Scientific Journalism Lite: Providing only a direct link to
USCAAF Home Page:
43
www.caaflog.com/2012/10/10/argument-audio-center-for-constitutional-rightset-al-v-united-states-and-colonel-lind-no-12-8027ar/ 44 www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/CourtAudio3/20121010c.wma 45 www.courthousenews.com/2012/10/10/51150.htm
13
1. Associated Press (Amici: Associated Press): Military court poses
hurdle
to
WikiLeaks
in
Bradley
Manning
case,
by
David Dishneau includes a link to USCAAF Home page: ―Audio of
today's
arguments:
www.armfor.uscourts.gov‖,
as
published by San Jose Mercury News46, Marin Independent Journal47, Bellingham Herald48, KTAR: Voice of Arizona49, Rapid
City
Journal50,
Myrtle
Beach
Daily
News57,
Online53, Green
Times
Union51,
Kentucky54,
Field
The
KVUE55,
Reporter58,
Independent52, KOTA56,
Center
Huffington
Post59,
Charlotte Observer60, Daily Journal61, WXVT62. (17)
Non-scientific journalism articles by an Appellant/Amici:
46
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_21745811/military-court-poseshurdle-wikileaks-bradley-manning-case 47 http://www.marinij.com/ci_21745811/military-court-poses-hurdle-wikileaksbradley-manning-case 48 www.bellinghamherald.com/2012/10/09/2723082/media-seek-court-martialfiles.html 49 ktar.com/23/1488501/Court-poses-hurdle-to-WikiLeaks-case-file-access 50 rapidcityjournal.com/news/national/media-seek-court-martial-files-inwikileaks-case/article_c3ad241a-222b-506f-9576-841e2c2cafe6.html 51 www.timesunion.com/news/article/Court-poses-hurdle-to-WikiLeaks-case-fileaccess-3934202.php 52 www.theindependent.com/news/national/court-poses-hurdle-to-wikileaks-casefile-access/article_2a060ddb-db4e-5db2-8c1f-18398a2662ea.html 53 www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2012/10/10/3106620/media-seek-court-martialfiles.html 54 www.kentucky.com/2012/10/10/2366197/media-seek-court-martial-files.html 55 www.kvue.com/news/national/173435921.html 56 www.kotanow.com/story/19779887/media-seek-court-martial-files-in-wikileakscase 57 www.centredaily.com/2012/10/10/3364726/media-seek-court-martial-files.html 58 www.greenfieldreporter.com/view/story/a3579c6122e54495bef62a120d7ae44c/US-Manning-WikiLeaks 59 www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/media-bradley-manning-courtmartial_n_1954972.html 60 www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/10/10/3587935/media-seek-court-martialfiles.html 61 www.dailyjournal.net/view/story/a3579c6122e54495bef62a120d7ae44c/US-Manning-WikiLeaks/ 62 www.wxvt.com/story/19779887/media-seek-court-martial-files-in-wikileakscase
14
1. BradleyManning.org
(closely
related
to
Appellant:
Wikileaks63): “Why can’t you be reasonable?” asks judge in the case to end secrecy in Bradley Manning’s trial64 2. Politico (Amici: Politico LLC): Court hears arguments on Bradley Manning trial access65 (also published on Virginian Pilot/Hampton Roads66 (18)
Other Non-Parties Non-Scientific Journalism Articles: 1. Agence France Presse: US media urges end to secrecy in WikiLeaks case67 (also published on Global Times68) 2. TimesLive: Calls for more open Wikileaks Manning trial69 3. Russia Today: Military court asked to remove shroud of secrecy surrounding Bradley Manning case70 4. TechDirt: Bradley Manning's Prosecutor Scolded For Refusal To Open Access To Court-Martial Proceedings71
[C]
Petitioner‟s
Ecocentric
Amicus
Meets
Supreme
Court
and
Federal Appellate Circuit Court Standards:
63
Advisory Board: Medea Benjamin, Code Pink: Women for Peace; Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, board member for the National Whistleblower Center; Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower; Kathleen Gilberd, Co-Chair of the Military Law Task Force of the National Lawyers Guild; Mike Gravel, former United States Senator (D-AK); Kimber Heinz, War Resisters League; Birgitta Jónsdóttir, Member of the Icelandic Parliament; Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst and activist; Michael Moore, documentary filmmaker, author and activist; Jose Vasquez, Iraq Veterans against the War; Ann Wright, US Army Colonel (retired) 64 www.bradleymanning.org/news/why-cant-you-be-reasonable-asks-judge-in-thecase-to-end-secrecy-in-bradley-mannings-trial 65 www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82269.html 66 hamptonroads.com/2012/10/court-hears-arguments-manning-trial-access 67 www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jPLUcDTFCZHhl3JXpnlrRwA2tajg? docId=CNG.fe2ff3daf8e58cc31b345d078aa8cc9b.461 68 www.globaltimes.cn/content/737811.shtml 69 www.timeslive.co.za/entertainment/2012/10/11/calls-for-more-open-wikileaksmanning-trial 70 rt.com/usa/news/military-appeals-manning-wikileaks-206/ 71 www.techdirt.com/articles/20121010/17365520674/bradley-mannings-prosecutorscolded-refusal-to-open-access-to-court-martial-proceedings.shtml
15
(19) from:
The following argument is verbatim or paraphrased excerpts The
Influence
of
Amicus
Curiae
Briefs
on
the
Supreme
Court, by Joseph D. Kearney, Marquette University Law School, and Thomas W. Merrill, Columbia Law School; and Resolving Amicus Curiae Motions in the Third Circuit and Beyond, by Carl Tobias, Williams Professor, from University of Richmond School of Law. (20)
Amicus
Curiae
practice
is
most
prominent
in
the
United
States Supreme Court, where Justices have traditionally been quite receptive to Amici motions filed under Supreme Court Rule 37. (21)
Rule 37 imposes practically no requirements other than that
the submission informs the Court of the Amicus‘s interest and of ―relevant matter not already brought to its attention by the parties.‖72 (22)
Supreme Court Justices have granted virtually all motions
for leave to file Amicus Briefs, while numerous judges and legal scholars have observed that the Supreme Court effectively allows unlimited participation by Amici, and that the Justices will probably not modify this solicitous approach in the future73.
72
N.Y. v. Uplinger, 467 U.S. 246, 248 (1984) (addressing relevance); see SUP. CT. R. 37(1) (―[A] brief that does not‖ inform the Court of ―relevant matter not already brought to its attention by the parties . . . burdens the Court and . . . is not favored.‖); Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1, 35-36 (1996) (Scalia, J., dissenting); EUGENE GRESSMAN ET AL., SUPREME COURT PRACTICE 734-40 (9th ed. 2007). 73 Am. Coll. of Obstetricians & Gynecologists v. Thornburgh, 699 F.2d 644, 647 (Higginbotham, J., dissenting) (3d Cir. 1983); Gregory A. Caldeira & John R. Wright, Amici Curiae Before the Supreme Court: Who Participates, When, and How Much?, 52 J. POL. 782, 784-87 (1990); Joseph D. Kearney & Thomas W. Merrill, The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court, 148 U. PA. L. REV. 743, 762 (2000); Ruben J. Garcia, A Democratic Theory of Amicus Advocacy, 35 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 348 (2008).
16
(23)
An assessment published during 2000 concluded that Amici
tendered briefs in eighty-five percent of Supreme Court appeals and that the figure increased exponentially over the preceding half century.74 (24) of
Amicus filings have substantially affected the development considerable
figuring
Supreme
prominently
in
Court
such
substantive
landmark
opinions
jurisprudence, as
Sweatt
v.
Painter, Regents of Cal. v. Bakke, and Roe v. Wade.75 (25)
Several empirical studies have ascertained that the briefs
have significantly influenced the Justices‘ determinations to
74
See Joseph D. Kearney & Thomas W. Merrill, The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court, 148 U. PA. L. REV. 744 (2000); see also EUGENE GRESSMAN ET AL., SUPREME COURT PRACTICE 740-41 (9th ed. 2007); JUDITHANNE SCOURFIELD MCLAUCHLAN, CONGRESSIONAL PARTICIPATION AS AMICUS CURIAE BEFORE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT 28 (2005); Linda Sandstrom Simard, An Empirical Study of Amici Curiae in Federal Court: A Fine Balance of Access, Efficiency and Adversarialism, 27 REV. LITIG. 686 (2008) 75 Thornburgh, 699 F.2d at 647 (Higginbotham, J., dissenting) (citing Sweatt v. Painter, 340 U.S. 846 (1950), Regents of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), and Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973); Joseph D. Kearney & Thomas W. Merrill, The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court, 148 U. PA. L. REV. 767-74 (2000); John Harrington, Amici Curiae in the Federal Courts of Appeals: How Friendly Are They?, 55 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 675-76 (2005); see Gregory A. Caldeira & John R. Wright, Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court, 82 AM. POL. SCI. REV. 1109, 1122 (1988). In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 646 n.3 (1961), the Court adopted a rule that only an amicus espoused, and in Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 300 (1989), it ruled on an issue ―raised only in an amicus brief,‖ but the Justices generally do not address issues that only amici raise. See, e.g., N.J. v. N.Y., 523 U.S. 767, 781 n.3 (1998); DelCostello v. Int‘l Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 154 n.2 (1983); see also Joseph D. Kearney & Thomas W. Merrill, The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court, 148 U. PA. L. REV. 745 (2000); See Resident Council of Allen Parkway Vill. v. HUD, 980 F.2d 1043, 1049 (5th Cir. 1993). The rarefied nature of this debate is illuminated by the majority and dissenting opinions in Eldred v. Reno, 239 F.3d 372, 378, 383-84 (D.C. Cir. 2001), aff‘d on other grounds sub nom. Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003); See, e.g., Al-Marri v. Pucciarelli, 534 F.3d 213, 221 n.3 (4th Cir. 2008) (Motz, J., concurring in the judgment); Thompson v. County of Franklin, 314 F.3d 79, 98 (2d Cir. 2002); Koote-nai Tribe of Idaho v. Veneman, 313 F.3d 1094, 1116 n.19 (9th Cir. 2002); In re Paschen, 296 F.3d 1203, 1209 (11th Cir. 2002)
17
grant
petitions
for
writs
of
certiorari
and
the
underlying
Supreme Court decisions on the merits.76 (26)
A majority of the twelve federal appeals courts has not
systematically enunciated criteria for addressing amicus curiae motions to participate or applied standards that the regional circuits have articulated. (27)
In Craig v. Harney77, Supreme Court Justice, Robert Jackson
responding to the Amicus brief filed by the American Newspaper Publishers
Association
expressed
a
view
of
amicus
briefs,
implying support for their curtailment, in circumstances where they simply repeat the arguments of one of the parties: ―[I]t
does
not
cite
a
single
authority
that
was
not
available to counsel for the publisher involved, and does not
tell
us
a
single
new
fact
except
this
one:
"[The
Association's] membership embraces more than 700 newspaper publishers whose publications represent in excess of eighty per
cent
of
the
total
daily
and
Sunday
newspapers published in this country.‖ (28)
circulation
of
78
A few appellate courts, most notably the Seventh and Third
Circuits, have formulated more comprehensive approaches. (29)
Seventh Circuit: Judge Richard Posner has authored three
opinions for the appeals court that comprehensively formulate 76
Joseph D. Kearney & Thomas W. Merrill, The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court, 148 U. PA. L. REV. 787-811 (2000); Gregory A. Caldeira & John R. Wright, Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court, 82 AM. POL. SCI. REV. 1122 (1988); see Jaffee, 518 U.S. at 3536 (Scalia, J. dissenting) (expressing skepticism about amicus briefs); Stephen Breyer, The Interdependence of Science and Law, 82 JUDICATURE 24, 26 (1998) (finding amicus briefs help educate judges). As to the effect on certiorari, see Georgia v. Evans, 316 U.S. 159, 161 (1942) and H.W. PERRY, JR., DECIDING TO DECIDE 135-37 (1991). 77 331 U.S. 367 (1947) 78 Craig v. Harney, 331 U.S. 367 (1947), at 397
18
the standards for resolving amicus curiae motions and how the tribunal
should
justifications
enforce
for
the
criteria
enunciating
jurists stringently applied.
as
restrictive
well
as
standards
the that
The Voices for Choices v. Illinois
Bell Telephone Company79 determination warrants emphasis because it is more recent than the National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler80 and Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission81 decisions and incorporates virtually all of the guidance that the earlier opinions provided. (30)
Judge Posner stated that allowing an amicus to submit a
brief ―is a matter of ‗judicial grace‘‖ and that Seventh Circuit judges have not granted ―rote permission to file such a brief, and in particular they will deny permission to file an amicus brief that essentially duplicates a party‘s brief.‖82 (31)
Judge Posner next stated that ―the criterion for deciding
whether to permit the filing of an amicus brief should be . . . whether the brief will assist the judges by presenting ideas, arguments, theories, insights, facts, or data that are not to be found in the parties‘ briefs.‖83 (32) more
Judge Posner elaborated by observing that the standard will likely
be
satisfied
in:
―case[s]
in
which
a
party
is
inadequately represented; or in which the would-be amicus has a 79
339 F.3d 542 (7th Cir. 2003). 223 F.3d 615 (7th Cir. 2000). 81 125 F.3d 1062 (7th Cir. 1997). Judge Posner wrote Voices for Choices and Ryan in chambers, while he authored Scheidler for a three judge panel. 82 Voices for Choices, 339 F.3d at 544 (citing Scheidler, 223 F.3d at 617) 83 Voices for Choices, 339 F.3d at 545; see also Paul M. Collins, Jr., Friends of the Court: Examining the Influence of Amicus Curiae Participation in U.S. Supreme Court Litigation, 38 LAW & SOC‘Y REV. 807, 815-16 (2004); Michael Rustad & Thomas Koenig, The Supreme Court and Junk Social Science: Selective Distortion in Amicus Briefs, 72 N.C. L. REV. 91, 94 (1993). 80
19
direct interest in another case that may be materially affected by a decision in this case; or in which the amicus has a unique perspective or specific information that can assist the court beyond what the parties can provide.‖84 (33)
Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the earliest
of the three Seventh Circuit determinations, offers additional insights.
Judge Posner, denying an amicus motion, explained
that
was
there
a
tendency
on
the
part
of
numerous
Seventh
Circuit members, including himself, to grant motions without carefully evaluating why an amicus brief was desirable, even though
Rule
29
requires
jurists
to
undertake
this
kind
of
assessment.85 (34)
Judge
scrutiny because
Posner
asserted
that
those
requests
warranted
―in a more careful, indeed, a fish-eyed, fashion‖ after
sixteen
years
determined the vast majority
of
reading
them,
the
jurist
has ―not assisted the judges [and]
are filed by allies of litigants and duplicate the arguments made in the litigants‘ briefs, in effect merely extending the length of the litigant‘s brief.‖86
The jurist contended that
―these briefs should not be allowed.
They are an abuse.‖87
84
Voices for Choices, 339 F.3d at 545 (citing Scheidler, 223 F.3d at 616-17; Ryan, 125 F.3d at 1063); accord Am. Coll. of Obstetricians & Gynecologists v. Thornburgh, 699 F.2d 644, 645 (3d Cir. 1983) (regarding inadequate representation). 85 See Ryan, 125 F.3d at 1063. 86 Ryan, 125 F.3d at 1063 87 Ryan, 125 F.3d at 1063. 16A CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT, ARTHUR R. MILLER & EDWARD H. COOPER, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 3975 (3d ed. Supp. 2008) finds little evidence that jurists outside the Seventh Circuit share Judge Posner‘s views and freely grant amici motions, and that Thornburgh is the last published opinion denying a motion. For additional analysis of the Seventh Circuit jurisprudence, see Ruben J. Garcia, A Democratic Theory of Amicus Advocacy, 35 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 315 (2008); John Harrington, Amici Curiae in
20
(35)
Third Circuit: The Third Circuit opinion in
Associates
v.
Commissioner
of
Internal
Neonatology
Revenue88
sharply
contrasts with, and essentially rejects, the line of Seventh Circuit
precedent
that
restrictively
treats
amicus
participation. (36)
The appellants in the Neonatology Associates case contended
that amici did not satisfy the requirements that the movants be impartial and support unrepresented or inadequately represented parties, which Rule 29 purportedly imposed.89 (37)
Judge Alito observed that the appellants premised their
arguments on a ―small body of judicial opinions that look with disfavor
on‖
decisions,
amicus
briefs,
including
two
Seventh
but the appellants claimed that the
Circuit
―restrictive
standards espoused in these opinions represent the views of ‗the judiciary‘ and are ‗settled law‘ ‗in this jurisdiction.‘‖90 (38)
The jurist rejected appellants‘ contentions, suggested that
the strict interpretation was not Third Circuit law, decided that a broader construction was appropriate, and held that amici satisfied the strictures in Rule 29.91 (39) Rule
Judge 29
as
Alito
characterized
open-ended
and
the
argued
desirability that
―a
criterion
broad
reading
in is
the Federal Courts of Appeals: How Friendly Are They?, 55 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 667 (2005). 88 293 F.3d 128 (3d Cir. 2002). 89 See id. at 130-32; 90 Neonatology Assocs., 293 F.3d at 130 (citing Nat‘l Org. for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler, 223 F.3d 615 (7th Cir. 2000); Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm‘n, 125 F.3d 1062 (7th Cir. 1997)) 91 See Neonatology Assocs., 293 F.3d at 130-33.
21
prudent.‖92 Because the judges who must resolve an amicus motion at
an
appeal‘s
rather
nascent
stage
experience
difficulty
ascertaining the value of a brief and may not ultimately decide the case, the jurist found it ―preferable to err on the side of granting leave.‖93 (40)
Judge Alito next enunciated several contentions against a
restrictive policy for addressing amici motions.
First, the
jurist observed that a restrictive approach might ―create at least the perception of viewpoint discrimination.‖94
Second, the
judge
unfortunate
found
message
this
about‖
practice
the
court‘s
―may
also
convey
openness.95
an
Third,
Judge
Alito
believed that a restrictive policy was an ―unpromising strategy for lightening a court‘s work load‖ because skeptical scrutiny in the motions phase may be as time-consuming as evaluation at the merits stage, and ―unhelpful amicus briefs surely do not claim more than a very small part of a court‘s time.‖ (41)
96
For all of the reasons examined above, Judge Alito asserted
that the Third Circuit ―would be well advised to grant motions for leave to file amicus briefs unless it is obvious that the
92
Neonatology Assocs., 293 F.3d at 132. See id. at 132-33. Judge Alito added that a merits panel can easily detect an unhelpful brief and simply disregard it but admonished that a good brief‘s rejection means the panel ―will be deprived of a resource.‖ Id. at 133. 94 Id. at 133 (―Unless a court follows a policy of either granting or denying motions for leave to file in virtually all cases, instances of seemingly disparate treatment are predictable.‖). 95 Id. For views that agree with this idea and those cited supra in note 46 and accompanying text, see Boumediene v. Bush, 476 F.3d 934, 936 (D.C. Cir. 2006) 96 Neonatology Assocs., 293 F.3d at 133 93
22
proposed
briefs
do
not
meet
Rule
29‘s
criteria
as
broadly
interpreted.‖97 (42)
Judge
Alito
thought
this
approach
comported
―with
the
predominant practice in the courts of appeals.‖98 (43)
Judge
Alito
concluded
by
applying
the
law
he
had
articulated to the facts and determined that amici had satisfied the interest, relevance, and desirability constituents in the rule.99 (44)
Desirability
and
Relevance:
Judge
Posner‘s
is
the
most
clear, when he stated that the criterion for allowing amicus participation is ―whether the brief will assist the judges by presenting ideas, arguments, theories, insights, facts or data that are not to be found in the parties‘ briefs.‖100 (45)
Justifications:
Most
judges
and
lawyers
are
moderately
supportive of Amicus briefs, saying that it can provide valuable assistance
to
the
Court
in
its
deliberations101;
such
as
presenting an argument or citing authorities not found in the briefs of the parties, and these materials can occasionally play
97
See Neonatology Assocs., 293 F.3d at 133 See Neonatology Assocs., 293 F.3d at 133 (citing MICHAEL E. TIGAR AND JANE B. TIGAR, FEDERAL APPEALS-JURISDICTION AND PRACTICE 181 (3d ed. 1999); ROBERT L. STERN, APPELLATE PRACTICE IN THE UNITED STATES 307-08 (2d ed. 1989)); accord Am. Coll. of Obstetricians & Gynecologists v. Thornburgh, 699 F.2d 644, 646-47 (3d Cir. 1983) (Higginbotham, J., dissenting). 99 See Neonatology Assocs., 293 F.3d at 133; see also supra notes 9-11 and accompanying text. For additional analysis of the Third Circuit jurisprudence, see Garcia, Ruben J. (2008); Harrington, John (2005) 100 Thus, an amicus brief that reiterates the ideas that a party‘s brief includes would not satisfy Rule 29. Other judges articulate similar notions. 101 See, e.g., Edmund Ruffin Beckwith & Rudolf Sobemheim, Amicus CuriaeMinister of Justice, 17 FoRDHwAL. REv. 38 (1948); Luther T. Munford, When Does the Curiae Need an Amicus?, 1J. APp. PRAC. & PROCESS 279, 281-83 (1999). 98
23
a
critical
role
in
the
Court's
rationale
for
a
decision. 102
Alternatively, Amicus briefs can provide important technical or background information which the parties have not supplied.103 (46)
Those
sharing
this
perspective
point
to
the
frequent
citation of amicus briefs in the Justices' opinions in support of
the
supposition
that
the
Court
often
finds
such
briefs
helpful.104 (47)
The idea that amicus participation can
improve judicial
decision-making by, for example, introducing new legal theories or contentions or different statutory interpretations, supplying additional factual information, or affording novel, convincing public policy arguments, is critical. (48)
Numerous
additional
practical
and
policy
reasons,
which
Judge Alito enunciated against restrictive application of the Rule 29 criteria, support the proposal that jurists flexibly apply the standards.
These include the difficulties entailed in
102
The Court will on occasion base its decision on a point or argument raised only in an amicus brief. See, e.g., Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 300 (1989) (plurality opinion of O'Connor, J.) (ruling against petitioner on question of retroactivity even though the issue "has been raised only in an amicus brief"); Oregon ex. rel State Land Bd. v. Corvallis Sand & Gravel Co., 429 U.S. 363, 368 n.3, 382 (1977) (overruling an earlier case even though this action was urged only by amici); Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 646 n.3 (1961) (overruling Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949), and adopting exclusionary rule in cases of Fourth Amendment violations by state officials, even though that course of action had been urged only by amicus ACLU). As a general rule, however, the Court will not address issues raised only by an amicus. See, e.g., DelCostello v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151, 154 (1983) (citing United Parcel Sent., Inc. v. Mitchell, 451 U.S. 56, 60 (1981), and noting the Court's hesitation to address an issue raised only by an amicus). 103 Cf Justice Breyer Calls for Experts to Aid Courts in Complex Cases, N.Y. TIMEs, Feb. 17, 1998, at A17 (quoting Justice Breyer as stating that "[amicus] briefs play an important role in educating judges on potentially relevant technical matters, helping to make us not experts but educated lay persons and thereby helping to improve the quality of our decisions"). 104 (analyzing the frequency of references to amicus briefs in the Court's opinions).
24
motions
panels‘
efforts
to
ascertain
the
contributions
that
amici will make, and the concomitant notion that a restrictive policy is an unpromising strategy to reduce judicial workloads as well as avoiding the perceptions of viewpoint discrimination and that courts are not open to the public. (49)
Amicus
judicial
involvement
may
accountability,
also
and
enhance
the
court
transparency,
legitimacy
and
public
acceptability of appellate substantive determinations regarding controversial questions.105 (50)
Promoting access to courts as well may foster important
first amendment values, such as freedom of speech and the right to petition.106 (51)
Conclusion: Petitioners‘ Ecocentric Amicus meets not only
Supreme
Court
and
the
Third
Circuit‘s
Judge
Alito‘s
broad
interpretation test, to provide the court with input, which does not repeat parties arguments, and enhances judicial decisionmaking.107 other
more
It also meets Seventh Circuit Judge Posner‘s, and stringent
tests:
(a)
it
―assists
the
judges
by
presenting ideas, arguments, theories, insights, facts, or data that are not to be found in the parties‘ briefs;‖ (b) it argues on behalf of a party that is so inadequately represented
-
105
See Stephen B. Burbank, The Costs of Complexity, 85 MICH. L. REV. 1466-71 (1987) (reviewing RICHARD L. MARCUS & EDWARD F. SHERMAN, COMPLEX LITIGATION: CASES AND MATERIALS ON ADVANCED CIVIL PROCEDURE (2d ed. 1985)); see also Carl Tobias, Fourth Circuit Publication Practices, 62 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 1733, 1753 (2005). 106 See Ruben J. Garcia, A Democratic Theory of Amicus Advocacy, 35 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 319-20 (2008) 107 RESOLVING AMICUS CURIAE MOTIONS IN THE THIRD CIRCUIT AND BEYOND, by Carl Tobias, Williams Professor, University of Richmond School of Law. www.earlemacklaw.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/law/law%20review/inaugural/Tobias.a shx
25
Planet Earth - as to be deemed by Anthropocentric legal doctrine as unworthy of legal personhood, although thankfully, Government Counsel:
Captain
Chad
M.
Fisher
admitted
in
Oral
Argument
against the wasting of resources ―which are finite‖108; (c) it is impartial,
in
terms
of
–
from
an
Alien
perspective
-
not
endorsing either party, but being focused on a search for the truth, and (d) it provides the court with a ―unique perspective or specific information that can assist the court beyond what the parties can provide.‖ (52)
Finally, Petitioners Ecocentric Amicus also meets Justice
Scalia‘s Preferred Freedoms common sense perspective, in Jaffee v. Redmond. It is an Ecocentric Amicus devoted to pursuit of the truth, not profit. Not Flat Earth Anthropocentric truth, but Planet Earth Ecocentric truth, is its ―interest prominentlyindeed, primarily-in mind.‖ [D] Radical Honoursty Social Science TruthSeeking: Is the Courts decision
is
a
„social
trap/fence‟
consequence
of
political
correct colonized minds attempt to avoid debate about the role of Anthropocentric legal doctrine‟s contribution to the Human Factory Farming War Economy Racket: (53)
The tragedy of the commons is the depletion of a shared
resource according
by
individuals, to
each
acting
one's
independently
self-interest,
and
rationally
despite
their
understanding that depleting the common resource is contrary to 108
10 October 2012: Oral Argument at 44:06: ―The type of transcript that is required, depends on the verdict and the sentence. I would think it would make sense, not to waste allot of resources which are finite, on producing a transcript that may never be required.‖ www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/CourtAudio3/20121010c.wma
26
their
long-term
best
interests.
Ecologist
Garrett
Hardin
famously explored this social dilemma in ―The Tragedy of the Commons‖.109 (54)
Social Trap is a term used by psychologists to describe a
situation in which a group of people act to obtain short-term individual gains, which in the long run leads to a loss for the group
as
a
"brownout"
whole; and
such
as
"blackout"
for
example
power
outages
overfishing, during
energy
periods
of
extreme temperatures, overgrazing on the Sahelian Desert, and the
destruction
agriculture.
of
the
Social
rainforest
fence
by
refers
to
logging a
interests
short-term
and
avoidance
behavior by individuals that leads to a long-term loss to the entire group. (55)
For
a
culture
consequences, individuals
to
they
who
avoid
must
choose
to
the
establish cheat
to
Tragedy a
of
the
system
exploit
Commons
whereby
the
commons
the (in
Ishmael language: the ‗takers‘), are easily exposed, and given the
opportunity
to
follow
their
social
trap
behaviour,
by
removing their genes from the genepool. In the absence, the social trap behaviour of the ‗takers‘, will overpopulate the ‗leavers‘
(living
in
harmony
with
the
commons),
eventually
forcing the ‗leavers‘ to become takers to survive. (56)
Keeping that in mind, before I come to my point in asking
the Justices, whether you are willing to contribute your names – 109
Johnstone (12-09-24): pg. 28-32
27
even
if
only
in
your
individual
capacity
–
to
the
Maria
Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik One Child per Family Price for Peace; I need to clarify a few other points for the Justices: (57)
Radical
Honesty
liberation
of
PC
colonized
Mind:
Non-
violent Fanon „colonized‟ mind liberation by verbal or shocking violence on the rotting mind of the colonizer (pc civilized settler): (58)
Fanon: “To shoot down a white man is to kill two birds with
one stone, to destroy an oppressor and the man he oppresses at the same time” – Jean Paul Sartre (Preface to Frantz Fanon‟s Wretched of the Earth): (59)
Frantz Fanon (July 20, 1925
–
December 6, 1961) was a
Martinique-born French psychiatrist, philosopher, revolutionary and writer whose work is influential in the fields of postcolonial studies, critical theory and Marxism. Fanon was known as
a
radical
existential
humanist
thinker
on
the
issue
of
decolonization and the psychopathology of colonization. (60)
Fanon is the author of
The Wretched of the Earth:
The
Handbook for Black Liberation, which argued that colonialism is a
system
of
systemic
structural
violence
which
eventually
triggers a violent reaction. In his view the violent nature of that reaction is tragic but cathartic. Its catharsis lies in its ability to dissolve the inferiority complex of the colonised and to release the tension which has been inscribed in the body during a lifetime of oppression. The liberation of the Africans 'colonized mind' requires him to enact violence upon the rotting corpses of the settlers. Colonialism, he argues, creates in the
28
native
a
perpetual
tendency
toward
violence,
a
―tonicity
of
muscles‖ which is deprived of an outlet. Hence, the phenomena of ―Niggers Killing Niggers on Saturday Night.‖ (61)
True liberation for Fanon could only be achieved through
violence. False liberation, occurs where ―freedom‖ is granted or ceded by those in power110, such as by the Apartheid regime. For Africans
to
be
truly
free,
Fanon
said
they
must
liberate
themselves by violence. In the absence of the native‘s colonized mind being liberated by physical violence (thereby overcoming his psychological masculine insecurities), on the rotting corpse of the settler; he would never be liberated. The relevance of language and the reformation of discourse pervades much of his work,
which
psychiatric
is
why
concerns
it to
is
so
interdisciplinary,
encompass
politics,
spanning sociology,
anthropology, linguistics and literature. Wretched of the Earth provides an analysis of the psychology of the native: or as 110
Robert C. Smith: Fanon and the Concept of Colonial Violence: In his essay, ―Toward the Liberation of Africa,‖ he writes: ―Violence alone, committed by the people, violence organized and educated by its leaders, makes it possible for the masses to understand social truths and gives the key to them. Without that struggle, without that knowledge of the practice of action, there is nothing save a minimum of readaptation, a few reforms, at the top, a flag waving: and down there at the bottom an undivided masses still living in the middle ages, endlessly marking time‖ (1967:118). .. To understand Fanon‘s insistence on the absolute necessity of violence, one has to understand that violence is more than a mere political method or tool to force the removal of the European oppressor; for Fanon, it is a vital means of psychic and social liberation. He writes, ―Violence is man recreating himself: the native cures himself through force of arms.‖ Thus, unlike Marx, Fanon seems to imply that even if the colonialists peacefully withdraw, the decolonization process is somehow aborted, that liberation is incomplete—the native remains an enslaved person in the neo-colonial social system. .. The native‘s inner violence remains pent up, unexpressed and is likely to explode in renewed inter-tribal war, civil war, coups or other forms of post independence civil violence, deprived of its only viable outlet—the settler. Thus, the function of violence is only incidentally political; it‘s main function is psycho-social. He writes: ―The native‘s weapon is proof of his humanity. For in the first days of the revolt you must kill—to shoot down a white man is to kill two birds with one stone, to destroy an oppressor and the man he oppresses at the same time: (1963:71).‖ www.nathanielturner.com/blackworldandfrantzfanon.htm
29
Fanon refers to the 'colonized mind' and how liberation can only occur
by
means
of
―violence
on
the
rotting
corpse
of
the
settler‖. Wretched of the Earth had a major impact on the anticolonialism
and
black-consciousness
movements
around
the
world111. (62)
Frantz Fanon thinking inspired among others Mandela‘s 1962
speech: A Land Ruled by the Gun112 and ‗liberation struggle‘ and his
Nobel
Peace
Prize
―wretched
of
the
earth‖
acceptance
speech113, Steve Biko's concepts of Black Consciousness114, and President
Barack
Obama115.
Fanon
currently
inspires
Rhodes
University116 and the KwaZulu-Natal Church Land Programme‘s: Land Question117.
111
Black Panther Party Member Eldridge Cleaver once said that ―every brother on a rooftop can quote Fanon.‖ 112 Elleke Boehmer: Nelson Mandela: The Black Elite‘s Curriculum | (1962) Nelson Mandela, "Address at the Conference of the Pan-African Freedom Movement of East and Central Africa‖ www.blackpast.org/?q=1962-nelson-mandel a-address-conference-pan-african-freedom-movement-east-and-central-africa 113 Moved by that appeal and inspired by the eminence you have thrust upon us, we undertake that we too will do what we can to contribute to the renewal of our world so that none should, in future, be described as the "wretched of the earth"." - Nelson Mandela, Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech, 10 December 1993 www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1993/mandela-lecture.html 114 Thomas K. Ranuga: Frantz Fanon and Black Consciousness in Azania (South Africa) | Mandisi Majavu: The Essential Steve Biko 115 President Barack Obama cites Fanon as an intellectual influence in Dreams from My Father (pg 100-101): ―To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist Professors and the structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. We smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night, in the dorms, we discussed neocolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy. When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet or set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting bourgeois society's stifling constraints. We weren't indifferent or careless or insecure. We were alienated.‖ 116 thinkingafricarhodesuniversity.blogspot.com 117 Magobe More: Fanon and Land: ―The Land Question: Fanon similarly contends that the land remains the fundamental object of colonial-racial conflict and violence. Colonialism, he argues, is ―the conquest of a national territory and the oppression of a people‖ (Fanon 1967b:81). The politics of genuine independence thus necessarily becomes the politics of land. Since this is the case, then every program of true liberation must have as its fundamental objective putting an end to colonial occupation by restoring the land back to
30
(63)
Radical Honesty: To
Gunnery Sgt.
honestly
(sometimes by
shouting or verbally violent or shocking language/ideas) expose whiteness (political correctness, two faced hypocrisy, bullshit the public relations) is to kill two Goliath colonized minds with the pebble of honesty/reality, to destroy the political correct
cultural
meme-plex
oppressor‟s
PR
illusion
and
the
fragile ego‟s who invite „whiteness‟ (political correctness, two faced hypocrisy, bullshit the public relations) into their minds and relationships with others, to „be liked‟, to be „civilized‟, to avoid being a „savage‟. (64)
In Radical Honesty we consider ‗colonized minds‘, to be
minds
that
have
discarded
authenticity,
brutal
honesty
and
sincerity. Mind ‗colonized‘ by ‗politically correct‘ ‗civilized‘ ‗Bullshit
the
Public
Relations‘
Image
management
memeplexes;
hence Nelson Mandela‘s Bullshit-the-Public political correctness is
far
more
‗colonialist‘
than
Hendrik
Verwoerd‘s
brutal
honesty, ever was. (65)
But
First:
Descartian
vs.
Radical
Honesty
Thinking:
In
cultures who have adopted western ‗I‘ conceptual thinking, based upon
Descartes
―I
think,
therefore
I
am‖
principles,
they
consider their ‗thoughts‘ to be ‗I‘. Any thought that enters their consciousness, they think ‗I think/thought .. .. ‘.
its original owners (the natives). For, as the epigraph above indicates, land is the most essential requirement for life. What this means is that liberation from colonial oppression can only make sense if the land problem is resolved by its return to the indigenous people from whom it has been violently seized. I argue, following Fanon, that true independence results from reappropriation of land by the colonized from the colonizers and consequently that South Africa‘s recent independence, because it failed to deliver the land back to its original owners, the indigenous African people, amounts to a phantom independence or what Fanon calls ―pseudo‖ or ―flag‖ independence."‖ why-we-are-white-refugees.blogspot.com/2012/10/ church-land-programme-is-fanons.html
31
(66)
Radical Honesty Thinking is based upon Eastern ‗observation
of the mind‘ principle‘s, which consider the being to be ‗I‘, not the mind: ‗I am, therefore I think‘. Hence our sensate being:
legs,
bodies,
sensations
(sweaty
palms,
aches,
tight
chest, etc) are ‗I‘ (our identity), whereas the thoughts that pass
through
our
consciousness
are
not
‗I‘.
We
notice
the
thoughts entering into our consciousness, in the same way, you may listen to a radio discussion or debate, where different, frequently contradictory ideas are expressed. You listen, and don‘t think ‗I think that‘ simply because the thought entered your consciousness. They are just sounds, that are converted into thoughts by your conscious mind; you can agree, disagree, but they are not ‗I‘. (67)
As
Susan
Blackmore
explains
in
her
article
about
how
Memeplexes hijack our minds, by acting no different to Selfish Genes118, in Waking from the Meme Dream119: ―The most obvious (and scary)
conclusion
from
modern
neuroscience
is
that
there
is
simply no one inside the brain. The more we learn about the way the
brain
functions
the
less
it
seems
to
need
a
central
controller, a little person inside, a decider of decisions or an experiencer of experiences. These are just fictions - part of the story the brain tells itself about a self within (Churchland and Sejnowski, 1992120; Dennett, 1991121).‖
118
Dawkins,R. (1976) The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press. Blackmore, Susan (1996/11/10) 120 Churchland,P.S. and Sejnowski,T.J. (1992) The Computational Brain. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press 121 Dennett,D.C. (1991) Consciousness Explained. London, Little, Brown & Co. 119
32
(68)
If it is true that the National Security Agency (Covert
Operations
of
the
National
Security
Agency122)
and
Kremlin
(Psychotronic War and the Future of Russia123) can read people‘s minds, and transmit ideas into people‘s minds; then a Descartian mind, would react to such a transmission, with ‗I thought .. ..‘; whereas a Futilitarian would notice the thought, as simply a message, an idea. If interesting, worthy of consideration or investigation, and if not, to ignore and focus their attention elsewhere. If interesting, they could investigate whether it was possible
for
thoughts.
Of
any
earthly
course,
if
or you
non-earthly wanted
the
entity
to
receiver
transmit
of
such
a
transmitted message, to share it, it would help to find someone, who (a) was not interested in power, and (b) didn‘t give a fuck about their politically correct reputation! (69)
In
Radical
radical
honesty
Honesty –
culture
expressing
our
our
process
being‘s
of
specific
practicing anger
or
appreciations, no matter how idiotic or absurd, face to face is our constant ‗uncivilized/uncolonized‘ liberation generator, by not allowing our minds/consciousness to be colonized by memeplexes that require us to abandon being true to ourselves, being authentic, sincere and brutally honest in our relationships, to be colonized by ‗politically correct‘ ‗civilized‘ ‗Bullshit the Public Relations‘ Image management meme-plexes. Put differently,
122
Akwei, John St. Clair (April/May 1996); See also: Adams T (Autumn 1998); Air Force Material Command (June 1996); Begich N & Burke K (1998); Keith J; Kempton, IL (1997); Manning J & Begich J (1995); Penn State College; Siniscalchi J (March 1998); Thomas TL (1998), Tyler PS (1984); US Air Forces of Aerospace Medicine (1998); US Mil. Joint Publication 3-13.1 (1994). 123 V.N Lopatin and V.D. Tsygankov (1999)
33
practicing radical honesty, acts as a continuous, never-ending Mad
Max
exterminator
of
the
political
correct/Bullshit
the
public relations meme‘s which are constantly fighting a battle to
colonize
our
beings,
and
make
us
‗civilized
colonized
slaves‘, to their PR bullshit. (70)
The Process of ‗Practicing Radical Honesty‘ serves to kill
not only the incoming PC memeplex, but also any guerrilla PC memeplexes
hiding
themselves
in
other
MemePlexes
(religion,
culture, etc) (71) us
The PC memeplex desires to colonize your/my mind by getting to
suppress
our
true
selves,
our
honest
opinions,
by
consciously or unconsciously (culture and religious masculine insecurity doctrine carried over from centuries of masculine insecure male leaders who had little appreciation for honesty, and demanded sycophancy and blind obedience to their opinions and religious edicts) suppressing you/our true self/selves, in order to be 'civilized', where those who refuse to suppress their true selves, who still display any spontaneous, sincere, authentic anger, love, joy or any behaviour that they consider 'should be suppressed' are considered as 'uncivilized'. (72)
Note:
We
do
not
endorse
‗drive
by
verbal
violence‘
or
passive aggressive avoidance poor me victim pity parties; you express your anger and appreciations, face to face, and remain in
the
disagreement,
for
as
long
as
it
takes,
until
it
is
totally resolved. (73)
As stated, by Brad Blanton, in Practicing Radical Honesty:
34
Many
of
us
are
concerned
about
fairness
and
use
the
principle of fairness as our primary rationalization for withholding anger. Advanced instruction in this principle creates lawyers who are miserable people. Divorces handled by lawyers often result in children shot back and forth like missiles between hostile camps. If you force yourself to be fair while still angry, you are a fool, and any agreements you make in such a state won't work for you. Judges and lawyers ignore this fact. Judges and lawyers exist for people who can't handle their anger. A judge tells you what to do, based on what he or she thinks is fair, whether you like it or not, because you haven't been able to work things out on your own. There
is
a
equitable
better
way
the
long
in
to
fight
run,
that
even
turns
though
it
out
to
may
be
look
uncivilized and unfair in the beginning. It might not seem fair
to
express
what
seems
like
intense
resentment
for
petty reasons in the beginning, but the advantages become clear by the time the argument is over. Things turn out fairly when, and only when, people get over being angry. The result of experimenting with this kind of interaction is very dramatic. The major benefit of expressing your anger completely to someone is that, afterward, you can forgive him or her. The reason for forgiving your enemies is not for their benefit but for your own benefit. Holding grudges against other people doesn't hurt them; it doesn't even bother them much— in fact, it even pleases them if they are still mad at you. It's not in your enlightened self interest to hold grudges, regardless of whether it bothers the person you hate or not. Unless you develop the capacity to do what it takes to forgive
other
people,
you
can't
tell
your
story
from
reality, you can't forgive yourself, and you stay trapped in moral condemnation in your mind. 35
[E] Finite Resources & Control of Reproduction Breeding War Acts of War: Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath: (74)
In
appreciation
of
the
government‘s
oral
argument
that
‗resources are finite‘124, and the Central Intelligence Agency‘s ―unvarnished
truth‘125
and
―Follow
the
Truth,
Wherever
it
Leads‖126. (75)
Acknowledging Pfc Manning‘s Anthropocentric and Ecocentric
Military Necessity Motivations for his Actions127. (76)
Challenging
Pfc
Manning‘,
Peacenik
Appellants
and
their
‗Anti-War‘ and ‗Peace‘ community friends: Are you Willing to Pay the One Child Per Family Price for Peace? (77)
Attached please find Petitioner‘s: Maria Bochkareva Leaver
Peacenik One Child Oath: „I am a Leaver, who is willing to pay the one Child per family Price for Peace‟ submitted to USCAAF Judges
and
the
Director
General
Agency: General David Petraeus.
of
the
Central
Intelligence
Among others it says:
I further hereby request, that if Pfc Bradley Manning is willing to take this Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath, that the Director General of the Central Intelligence Agency, make an official request to the relevant authority, for all charges against Pfc. Manning in this matter to be withdrawn
124
USCAAF: CCR v USA: 10 October 2012: Oral Argument: Capt. Fisher: (44:06): ―The type of transcript that is required, depends on the verdict and the sentence. I would think it would make sense, not to waste allot of resources which are finite, on producing a transcript that may never be required.‖ www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/CourtAudio3/20121010c.wma 125 Davis, Jack: Improving CIA Analytic Performance: Analysts and the Policymaking Process; Sherman Kent Center for Intelligence Analysis Occasional Papers: Volume 1, Number 2, Sherman Kent Center www.cia.gov/library/kent-center-occasional-papers/pdf/OPNo2.pdf 126 www.cia.gov/offices-of-cia/inspector-general/index.html 127 Johnstone (12-09-24): pg. 04-07
36
and
the
matter
to
be
considered
amicably
resolved,
forthwith. Secondly,
that
the
Central
Intelligence
Agency‘s
Kent
Center128 establish a fund for contributions in honour of Pfc
Manning,
to
establish
a
bi-annual
‗Maria
Bochkareva
Leaver Peacenik Honor Medal‘, to be awarded on the 23rd of April, of every year, for the individual who has done the most to educate their community, or nation on the role of overpopulation
and
overconsumption
as
factors
pushing
society to conflict and war. (78)
Sincere Peaceniks are challenged to fill out the attached
Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath: „I am a Leaver, who is willing to pay the one Child per family Price for Peace‟ Form; and submit a copy to: 1. USCAAF Clerk of the Court: William DeCicco: bill.decicco@armfor.uscourts.gov 2. USA Counsel: Captain Chad Fisher: Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil 3. Pfc Manning Counsel: David Coombs Esq: coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com 4. General David Petraeus: Central Intelligence Agency, Office of Public Affairs, Washington, D.C. 20505. Fax: (703) 482-1739 (79)
Relief Requested: For
all
of
the
aforementioned
reasons,
Petitioner
respectfully requests the Court reconsider its 09 October 2012
128
www.cia.gov/library/kent-center-occasional-papers/index.html
37
unconstitutional decision, which being unconstitutional, compels the court to reconsider it. Dated at George, South Africa, Pale Blue Dot: 15th day of October 2012 /s/ Lara Johnstone LARA JOHNSTONE, Pro Se PO Box 4052, George, 6539 South Africa Tel/Fax: (044) 870 7239 habeusmentem@mweb.co.za
38
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 24 (d) 1. This brief complies with the type-volume limitation of Rules 24(c) and 26(d) because this brief (Pages 01-38) contains 5,924 words. 2. Complies with typeface and type style requirements of Rule 37 because it was prepared in a monospace typeface using Microsoft Word Version 2007 with a 12-point Courier New font. Dated at George, South Africa, Pale Blue Dot: 15th day of October 2012 /s/ Lara Johnstone LARA JOHNSTONE, Pro Se PO Box 4052, George, 6539 South Africa Tel/Fax: (044) 870 7239 habeusmentem@mweb.co.za
39
CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE I certify that the original was electronically filed to efiling@armfor.uscourts.gov on 15 October 2012; and contemporaneously served electronically to: 1. Petitioner Appellant‘s: CCR Counsel Mr. Shayana D. Kadilal - shanek@ccrjustice.org 2. Respondent Appellee‘s Counsel Captain Chad M. Fisher - Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil 3. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Amicus Counsel: Mr. Gregg P. Leslie - gleslie@rcfp.org 4. Courtesy copy: Pfc Bradley Manning‘s Counsel David Coombs Esq - coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com 5. Courtesy copy: Respondent Appellee Judge Denise Lind - dlind@law.gwu.edu I further certify that the following parties referenced in this Petition for Reconsideration of Ecocentric Amicus will be served honourable transparency copies on 15 and 16 October 2012:
„Control of Reproduction‟ Human Farming War Economy Racket: 1. Norway, Sweden & ICC‟s „War is Peace Whores‟ Committee: Nobel Foundation (comments@nobelprize.org); Nobel Peace Center (post@nobelpeacecenter.org); Norwegian Nobel Institute: Nobel Committee (postmaster@nobel.no); International Criminal Court: Office of the Prosecutor: Ms. Fatou Bensouda of Gambia (otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int), (Information.Security@icccpi.int) 2. SA‟s TRC Fraud „War is Peace Whores‟: Archbishop Desmond Tutu (tutudm@mweb.co.za); Nelson Mandela: c/o Head of Memory Programme at the Nelson Mandela Foundation: Verne
40
Sheldon Harris (Verne@nelsonmandela.org); F.W. de Klerk: c/o: CEO: FW de Klerk Foundation: Dave Steward (dave@fwdeklerk.org) Anthropocentric Masculine Insecurity PR-Breeding War Disputes: 1. Norway v. Breivik: Anders Breivik: Adv Geir Lippestad (geir@advokatlippestad.no); Prosecutor Holden & Engh: Justice Minister: Grete Faremo (grete.faremo@jd.dep.no): 22 July Victims: Adv Siv Hallgren (siv.hallgren@elden.no), Adv Frode Elgesem (elg@thommessen.no) & Adv Mette Yvonne Larsen (mette.larsen@advokatstabell.no); Judges: Judge Wenche Arntzen (Wenche.arntzen@domstol.no), Judge Nina Opsahl (Nina.opsahl@domstol.no), Justice Tore Schei (tore.schei@hoyesterett.no); Court Admin: Sec Gen Gunnar Bergby (gunnar.bergby@hoyesterett.no). 2. Afriforum v. Malema: Afriforum: CEO Kallie Kriel (kallie@solidariteit.co.za), Att Willie Spies (admin@hurterspies.co.za), Adv Martin Brassey (brassey@counsel.co.za); TAU - SA: Henk van de Graaf (koms@tlu.co.za), Att Riaan van der Walt (riaan@louwalt.co.za), Adv Roelof du Plessis (advr@mweb.co.za); Julius Malema & ANC: Min. Derek Hanekom: Nthabiseng Maoela (Nthabiseng.Maoela@dst.gov.za), Melanie Titus (Melanie.Titus@dst.gov.za), Att Byron Morris (morris@mhalaw.co.za), Adv Vincent Maleka (ivmaleka@mweb.co.za); Amici: Afrikaans Regslui: Prof Koos Malan (admin@vra.co.za) 3. Citizen v. McBride: The Citizen: Editor Martin Williams (martinw@citizen.co.za), Att Willem de Klerk (wdeklerk@telkomsa.net), Adv Wim Trengrove (wimtrengove@law.co.za); Robert McBride: Att David Maphakela (dmaphakela@m4attorneys.co.za), Adv DI Berger (diberger@chambers.co.za); 2-5th Amici: Att Dario Milo (dario.milo@webberwentzel.com), Adv Gil Marcus (gjmarcus@mweb.co.za); 6th Amici: Att V Dhuluam (Vdhulam@justice.gov.za) 4. United States v. Lakin, Terrance L: USA Counsel: Major General Karl Horst (karl.horst@us.army.mil); Captain Philip J. O'Beirne (pobeirne@wc.com); Terrence Lakin Counsel: Paul Rolf Jensen (prj@jensenlawyers.com); Neal Puckett (info@nealpuckett.com); Major Martthew Kemkes (matthew.kemkes@us.army.mil) 41
Central
Intelligence
TruthSeeking:
Finite
Agency Resources
&
Pentagon &
Control
Social of
Science
Reproduction
Breeding War Acts of War: Maria Bochkareva Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath: Appellants: CCR: Amy Goodman (mail@democracynow.org); CCR: Glenn Greenwald (Glenn.Greenwald@guardiannews.com); CCR: Kevin Goztola (dissenter@firedoglake.com); CCR: Kevin Goztola (kgosztola@hotmail.com); CCR: Wikileaks (admin@wlcentral.org); CCR: Julian Assange: via Christine Assange (christineassange@gmail.com), CCR: Chase Madar (chasemadar@hotmail.com). Veterans & Anti-War: Francis Boyle (FBOYLE@LAW.UIUC.EDU); War Crimes Times: Ed (editor@warcrimestimes.org); Veterans for Peace: ExDir: Mike Reid (mikereid@veteransforpeace.org); United National Antiwar Coalition (UNACpeace@gmail.com); Iraq Water Project: Art Dorland (artdorland@hotmail.com); BradleyManningOrg: Emma (emma@bradleymanning.org); GI Rights (girights@girightshotline.org); Prosecute US War Crimes Against Humanity Now (prosecuteuscrimesnow@yahoo.com); Veterans for Peace: OfcMng: Virginia Druhe (virginia@veteransforpeace.org); War Crimes Times: Clare (clare@warcrimestimes.org); Veterans for Peace (vfp@veteransforpeace.org); SOA: School of America's Watch (info@soaw.org); King Condemned US Wars Intl Awareness Campaign (coordinatorKingAwareness@yahoo.com); Veterans for Peace: CommCoor: Shelly Rocket (shelly@veteransforpeace.org); VVAW: Vietnam Veterans Against the War (vvaw@vvaw.org); Veterans Today: Gordon Duff (Gpduf@aol.com), Jim W Dean (jimwdean@aol.com), Kevin Barrett (kbarrett@merr.com), Jonathan Azaziah (jonathan.azaziah@gmail.com) Population/Environmentalists: Collapsenet: Mike Ruppert (stgeorge119@gmail.com); Think Population (thinkpopulation@aol.com); Too Many People (2mnyppl@gmail.com); Steven Salmony - Pop. Psych (SESALMONY@aol.com); Peter Salonius (petersalonius@hotmail.com); Jason G. Brent (jbrent6179@aol.com); Jack Alpert (alpert@skil.org); John Cleland - Univ London (John.Cleland@lshtm.ac.uk); NNR: Chris Clugston (coclugston@gmail.com); Dick Smith (dick@dsi.com.au); Derrick Jensen - Endgame (derrick@derrickjensen.org); Env. News Service (news@ens-news.com); ComEnvLegDefFund (info@celdf.org); AU Wild Law Alliance: Dr. Peter Burdon (peter.d.burdon@adelaide.edu.au); AU Wild Law Alliance: Dr. Alessandro Pelizzon (alessandro.pelizzon@scu.edu.au); AU Wild Law Alliance: Brendan Sydes (brendan.sydes@edo.org.au); Kurt Dahl - Pop Elephant (kurtdahl45@hotmail.com); Mark O'Connor (mark@australianpoet.com); US: DeepGreenResistance (deepgreenresist@gmail.com); US: DeepGreenResistance: Lierre Keith (lierrekeith@yahoo.com) 42
Foreign Leaders via Embassies in SA: ARGENTINA: (argembas@global.co.za); Carlos Sersale (carlos.sersale@embassyofargentina.co.za); Javier Fernandes (Javier.fernandes@embassyofargentina.co.za); Lina Jimenez (lina.jimenez@embassyofargentina.co.za); AUSTRIA (pretoriaob@bmeia.gv.at); AUSTRALIA: (pretoria.info@dfat.gov); (info@sahc.org.au); (Will.Butler@dfat.gov.au); BELGIUM: Amb JF Mutton (pretoria@diplobel.fed.be); Belgium Emb Def. Att. (bedao@telkomsa.net); PM Yves Leterme (secr.leterme@skynet.be); PM Yves Leterme (yves.leterme@premier.fed.be); (embulgsa@iafrica.com); CANADA High Comm (pret@international.gc.ca); SWITZERLAND: Amb Baerfuss (cap.vertretung@eda.admin.ch); Comm. des Affaires Juridiques: C.Lenzen (christine.lenzen@parl.admin.ch); Gen. Sec. Parl.: N.Agra (Natalia.Agra@parl.admin.ch); CHINA: Embassy (reception@chinese-embassy.org.za); CZECH.REP Amb (pretoria@embassy.mzv.cz); GERMANY Embassy (info@kapstadt.diplo.de); DENMARK Emb (pryamb@um.dk); ESTONIA Emb (estonia@mweb.co.za); SPAIN Embassy (emb.pretoria@mae.es); ECUADOR: Ecuador Embassy (eecusudafrica@mmrree.gov.ec); FINLAND Emb (sanomat.pre@formin.fi); FRANCE (france@ambafrance-rsa.org); C.Lesaffre (christine.lesaffre@diplomatie.gouv.fr); Anne Sutton - FR Emb. Pta (anne.sutton@diplomatie.gouv.fr); GREECE Emb (embgrsaf@global.co.za); HUNGARY: Embassy (huembprt@mweb.co.za); Hungary Emb (mission.prt@kum.hu), HU Jobbik (jobbik@jobbik.hu); IRELAND Embassy (pretoria@dfa.ie); ISRAEL Emb (caosec@pretoria.mfa.gov.il); IRAN: B.Mohamadi (InternalPolicy@IranEmbassy.org.za); ITALY Emb (segreteria.pretoria@esteri.it); JAPAN Embassy (info@embjapan.org.za); NORTH KOREA Emb (dprkembassy@lantic.net); SOUTH KOREA Embassy (korrsa@mweb.co.za); (embamb@telkomsa.net); LITHUANIA Consulate (lrambizr@netvision.net.il); MONACO: Consul (info@consulatemonaco.co.za), Gov. of Monaco: (centre-info@gouv.mc); NETHERLANDS: Capetown Consul (kaa-cdp@minbuza.nl); Pretoria Embassy (pre@minbuza.nl); Political Officer: Jurgens, Wouter (wouter.jurgens@minbuza.nl); NORWAY Embassy (emb.pretoria@mfa.no); NEW ZEALAND: High Comm (enquiries@nzhc.co.za); Tania Garry (Tania.Garry@mfat.govt.nz); (portemb@global.co.za); RUSSIA: Pretoria Embassy (ruspospr@mweb.co.za); Russia Consul - Capetown (rusco@southernlifecentre.co.za); SWEDEN: Pretoria Emb (ambassaden.pretoria@foreign.ministry.se); Carina Engman (carina.engman@foreign.ministry.se); SERBIA Embassy (reception@srbembassy.org.za); UNITED KINGDOM High Comm. (media.pretoria@fco.gov.uk); Lethabo Lelaka (Lethabo.Lelaka@fco.gov.uk); UNITED STATES Embassy (embassypretoria@state.gov); HOLY SEE Nuncio of the Vatican (nunziosa@iafrica.com) Military Intelligence & Related: Mil Law: CAAflog (caaflog@caaflog.com); Belgium Mil. Intel. 43
(pieter.vankeirsbilck@mil.be); Blackwater/XE (media@xecompany.com); CENTCOM Insp. Gen.(ccig2@centcom.mil); General Bo Gritz; (bogritz@msn.com); Dept. of Defence Counterintelligence Field Activity (loretta.buckley@cifa.mil); Bundesnachrichtendienst (zentrale@bundesnachrichtendienst.de); Dep Judge Adv Gen (JAGCMC@navy.mil); Estonia Min. of Defense (ntselei@kmin.ee), (Info@kmin.ee), (press@kmin.ee); Gen. Anthony Zinni (fwaconsultants@gmail.com); Kremlin Press Office (press_office@prpress.gov.ru); NATO Public Information Office (moc.web@hq.nato.int); NGA-Pathfinder (pathfinder@nga.mil); Norwegian Intel. Svc. (post.etterretningstjenesten@mil.no); NSACSS Chief: (NIASC@nsa.gov); NSA: Stuart Church (swchurc@nsa.gov); VIPS: Ray McGovern (RRMcGovern@aol.com), (rmcgovern@slschool.org); RCMP (webmaster@rcmp-grc.gc.ca); SE Sec. Svc (securityservice@securityservice.se); Unified Quest (lawrence.fowler@us.army.mil); Unified Quest (rachel.fowler@us.army.mil); Unified Quest (Wilma.j.atkins@us.army.mil); Unified Quest (scott.clark2@us.army.mil); US Army Environmental Command (IMCOMServiceDesk@conus.army.mil); JAG (jagweb@jag.navy.mil); Admirality (Admiralty@navy.mil); Gen Stanley McChrystal (rudy@mcchrystalgroup.com); NASA: ECHO Clearinghouse (echo@echo.nasa.gov) | Lt. Gen. AndrĂŠ Blattmann (info@vtg.admin.ch), Karen Kwiatkowski (ksusiek@shentel.net); US: Select Committee on Intelligence (Intelligence.HPSCI@mail.house.gov) Dated at George, South Africa, Pale Blue Dot: 15th day of October 2012 Updated 16th October 2012 [Undeliverable (email@return.ed); add/sub (add@substitute.sub)]
/s/ Lara Johnstone LARA JOHNSTONE, Pro Se PO Box 4052, George, 6539 South Africa Tel/Fax: (044) 870 7239 habeusmentem@mweb.co.za
44
IN
THE
UNITED
STATES
COURT
OF
APPEALS
FOR
THE
ARMED
FORCES
CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, ET AL.,
PETITION
Petitioners-Appellants,
FOR RECONSIDERATION:
Crim. App. Misc. Dkt. No. 20120514
v. USCA Misc.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and COL. DENISE LIND, MILITARY JUDGE
Dkt. No. 12-8027/AR
Respondents-Appellees.
TO THE JUDGES ARMED
OF THE UNITED
FORCES
AND THE DIRECTOR
INTELLIGENCE MARIA WHO
BOCHKAREVA IS WILLING
STATES
AGENCY:
LEAVER
COURT GENERAL
GENERAL
PEACENIK
PETRAEUS:
OATH:
PER FAMILY
of Lara
FOR THE
OF THE CENTRAL
DAVID
ONE CHILD
TO PAY THE ONE CHILD
Declaration
OF APPEALS
'I AM A LEAVER, PRICE
FOR PEACE'
Johnstone
I, Lara Johnstone, declare as follows: [1]
I
am
an
Sustainable BRIEF
IN
SUPPORT
adult
Security
PROPRIA OF
AN
Radical
Honoursty
practicing
PERSONA
BY
ECOCENTRIC
Ecofeminist
paralegal,
AMICI WILD
CURIAE LAW
the LARA
Wild
author
of
JOHNSTONE
SUSTAINABLE
Law the IN
SECURITY
PERSPECTIVE, in this matter; member of Friends of Wikileaks, and the Radical Honesty culture. I reside in George, Southern Cape, South
Africa;
r- :> T? ~
.. c:::-
~ ~
where
<f- 'Z9=>
I
run
a
small
"'1-? SUID-AFRII<AANSE
POLISIEDIENS
.~.
s'TATION COMMISSIONER
2012 -1 0- 1 4
EcoFeminist
pedal-powered
wormery business.
I enclose
for verification [2]
this [3]
provide
declaration,
territories,
which
civilization
is
I
have
for
rapidly
reduce
CIA
very
simple
resulted
in
populations
Pentagon
are
now all to
colonized;
a crisis
of
which
Jack
Dr.
art,
?:.?T ? -==e4-~
will
to less
than
per family
Conflict
spiral;
Decline
S:ATION COMMISSIONER
-----
1m2 -10- '14 STAS:E KOMMISSARIS
~~,.--'A~"~~Q..ry~.--_._~_ ~
-:-:::>
1:1.-
~I
""re.J
t,~_\;"",:",,~:
death
(3) Human behavior
How Much Population
"'-1P-?
_
•••
~_
.••••
..."
it
must
100 million,
to adopt a one child
the death
shows
sustainable,
and technology,
(1) The Scarcity
(4 )
our
Rapid
Dr. Alpert
Collapse3,
population
choosing
which
video:
Alpert's
science,
spiral;
to
new
means
conflict,
to advance
policy:
failure
200 years.
or Civilization
global
how our
colonize
to
to become peaceful,
->
to
explanation
our
1 sqswans.weebly.com/overpopulation-means-murder.html 2 sqswans.weebly.com/human-predicament.html 3 sqswans. weebly. com/rapid-population..sarJR;i'ifR~61tJrti.!l POL/SIEDIENS
---- ->
&
CommonSense Required2
have
watched
(2) The system trips death
Nightline:
human experiment
means of humanity procreation
accordance
Resources Scarcity Death Spiral, which
heading
Decline
and continue
in
the
it:
Better
surplus
also
the
act,
Alpert's
the wars of the past
Population
the
Jack
the Conflict pressured
that
Dr.
limitations
previously
[5 ]
Agency with
and Resources Wars1 videos.
process
dwarf all
to
the Ted Koppel's
HumanPredicament:
understand
Intelligence
and authority
I have watched
thought
Central
should I violate
on Overpopulation
video:
the
declaration
I have watched
[4]
Passport
purposes.
I hereby following
a copy of my South African
<.' !'••••__, _-..;r
'::'~_~"":"'"-=.~~~,~.~:~
by only
spiral; trips Saves
Civilization?;
(5) Are you sure
below 100 million?
(a) What if
bigger? / (b) What if What if
people
What if
the richest
advances Decline [6]
faster
then
that
towards
I hereby declare child,
[8]
or less,
violate the
this
Central
Leaver
the
this CIA to
2072
onto
a
to pay the one
that
if
I
authorize
remove me and my children
genepool,
I hereby
Prosecutorial
if
One Child Oath,
further
inform
CIA
confirms
the
with my violation
or Police
to be wasted on the matter,
-10- 1 4
causes
remove my dishonourable
in accordance
S:;.TfOi'J COMMISSIONER
the root
I thereby
Leaver Peacenik
occurred
POLISIEDIENS
who is
by assassination.
assassination
are required
Population
peacenik,
I understand
One Child Oath,
that
SUID-AFRIKAANS5:
Rapid
humans on Planet
that
Office,
no further
(d)
of peace.
Prosecutor's
oath,
It's
who is willing
Agency to
Should I have violated
from the
/ (c)
improvement? /
by addressing
declare
Leaver Peacenik
require
is
peace.
hereby
Intelligence
and thereby
self
( 6)
to move the
I am leaver,
from the Leaver genepool, [9]
spread
are shorter?
I am a sincere
per family price
I furthermore
rich-poor
richer? / (e) What if technology
of peace,
and helping trend
population
collapse.
to pay the price
procreation
reduce
times for
we expect?;
declare
of conflict,
to
initial
desires
keep getting
or Civilization
willing
the
re-generation
have undying
I hereby
[7]
soil
we have
Investigation
genes
the that
local my
of this resources
of my assassination.
[10]
I further hereby
willing
request,
that if Pfc Bradley Manning
is
to take this Leaver Peacenik One Child Oath, that the
Director
General
of the
official
request
to
against
Central
the
Pfc. Manning
Intelligence
relevant
authority,
in this matter
Agency, for
all
to be withdrawn
make
an
charges and
the
matter to be considered amicably resolved, forthwith. [11]
Secondly,
that
establish
Center4
Manning,
to
a
the fund
establish
Peacenik Honor Medal',
a
Central for
Intelligence
contributions
bi-annual
'Maria
in
Agency's honour
Bochkareva
Kent
of
Pfc
Leaver
to be awarded on the 23rd of April,
of
every year, for the individual who has done the most to educate their
community,
or nation
on the role
of overpopulation
and
overconsumption as factors pushing society to conflict and war. [12]
Pursuant
to 28
u. S.C §
1746, I declare under penalty
of
perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed this 14th day of October, 2012 George, South Africa
SUIO-AFRIKi>,ANSE POLISIEDIENS STATJON COMMISSIONER
Lara Johnstone 2012 -10- 1
i,
STASIE KOfv1MISSARIS GI::UKI.;it:
i,]b4~"iWM;'~~ ~i:.§1~~kent ~""9.'
"" ••••~J;
,\,~""':
•..•·,,",:L
_
~
_
,.-~:::
~:;"_=
",,,,\.-.:::,_
-center-occasional-papers/
index. html
= === = = = =
E2=.S
Passport I Passeport
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA I REPUBLIQUE D'AFRIQUE DU SUD ripelryr-~
,~'!}h,'
'Cx~:j;;~ay..s
C.our.'lj't:OOe
PA
.••..,
C>.;
;..asseoo~':
A00011592
ZAF
$t;ma.~ / N()f1)
JOHNSON LARA Na!~'Y/~i;stiC:"ah!~
SOUTH
I
AFRICAN
SUD-AFRICAIN ldtJntiry J"kJ1 Nodidl!nrite
04 DEC 1966 S./?x;
ZAF
).J:e ':~,;ssu'<?t Ca~'·:if!
<~
f1AY 2009
~ .~ DEPT
:..~"
OF HOME
05 MAY 2019
PAZAFJOHNSON«LARA««««««««««««« A000115928ZAF6612049F19050546612040012086<42
Ek (;<.",
~?n; n~o/2'r oat hir:1G1G rl:')Kumcnt 'n WGifJ s:.f~(\rjfi5i vnn ;:,J.,:;,;i·':'~ \l';:i (.1::'.;; rny ~?-i)(~o-rriUk bev~stjg is en dati
\!(/ '1?'~" 111/ \iJ,r,,},';;z:rni;igs, die oorspronkHke \,Irf&\~g~WY~!k!I:;.nle
rJit:
SUID-AFRIKAANSE
nie op enige
$;ATION
c;~:'tiI'! th:.:t th!n document is a true reproduction/copy of the ,rigi,1:1: Ychlch \'lUG >1xamil,,,d by me and thai, from my ·bsl~r''ll.k.n;:;, thl~ cr:gil1JJI h;18 not been altered in any manner,
POLISIEDIENS
COMMISSIONER
J
.,,~~~
14
iJ-Aufflcf!~t f A!,,~Q(h~
~if>.~;1
Oa:5of eX"~1/ C1it~If~tWaN;r:
-~/
L~.$-~,t" "1'~~
Se,re
F
06
6612040012086
2012
c ••.•. -r- ?-~'-fCJ="7-7 . )_.~•.~•••• '.~"'..,.-.._ I..... "'.~~'.H..
-10- 1 4
STASIE I<OMMISSARIS
~-"-
~~At"'!Ei ~""'a~"'I~~#~~~~-"'-:-''''--'' ~",~~~-::/.4:' ;~-:~!'-~~~ ,~~'4'.
~ ••.•~ ~~J.
". ;;_"~
\,
'~"'-''''''
. ~~
~~_J~
.•••-
AFFAIRS
CERTIFICATE OF FILING & AUTHORISATION TO CIA: DIR.GEN. PETRAEUS
I certify
that
on 15 October
my MARIA BOCHKAREVA verification Central
to
General
D.C.
granting
General
I certify
that
at 18:34
HRS
(GMT+2),
I faxed
LEAVER PEACENIK ONE CHILD OATH and passport
Intelligence
Washington,
2012
David
Petraeus,
20505, Petraeus
by
of
Office
Agency,
facsimile
the relevant
I electronically
Director
General,
Public
Affairs,
authorization,
submitted
on
482-1739,
(703)
to:
as stated.
16 October
2012;
copy to: 1. USCAAF
Clerk
of the Court:
William
DeCicco:
bill.decicco@armfor.uscourts.gov 2. USA Counsel:
Captain
Chad
Fisher:
Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil 3. Pfc Manning
Counsel:
David
Coombs
Esq:
coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com 4. US House
Intelligence
Committee:
Intelligence.HPSCI@mail.house.gov
Executed George,
this
16th day
of October,
2012
South Africa
,
Lara
Johnstone
a