12-10-15: USCAAF: CCR v USA: Petition for Reconsideration ITO Rule 31

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