Sunday, August 9, 2015


                                                  CHAPTER NINE


In 1937,  upon a fraud investigation, the Immigration and Naturalization Services in the State of New York was discovered to have employed criminals who made fraudulent immigration documents. "174 indictments were handed down in fraudulent naturalization cases." See Patrick Weil, The Sovereign Citizen: Denaturalization and the Origins of the American Republic, University of Pennsylvania Press, November 29, 2012 (accessed July 5, 2015), page 49.  These crimes  apparently had no effect on the enforcement of immigration laws. Indeed, Patrick Weil did use the same page to disclose that Congress asked Roosevelt to remove the Secretary of Labor for flagrantly refusing to enforce such laws.
     Modern American government was discovered to be having its own employees make and sell the most important government documents, and an appropriate response has never even begun. By the year 2000 permanent residency in the United States, that includes the best employments and all the benefits, could be achieved by any foreign national without much effort.  When appropriate, the permanent resident mush be investigated or seriously suspected of immigration fraud, regardless of how authentic the documents appear to be. 
      Accordingly, the extremely easily obtained birth certificate "is really the document of choice" for illegal immigrants, according to James R. Hess, Chief intelligence Officer at the Forensic Document Laboratory (at I.N.S., in the year 2000). He insists that, with the fraudulent birth certificate, a social security card, a driver's license, and a passport can be very easily obtained. See RENWICK McLEAN, "False Birth Certificates Let Immigrants Outwit System," New York Times, May 29, 2000 (accessed on July 8, 2015). During a very great many previous decades, the most undesirable and defective aliens used the most criminal frauds very easily, and became the most abominable tyrants while posing as American citizens.
     The aforesaid permits the introduction of Judge  Robert Kaufman. He literally led a government mob, during the McCarthy era, and lynched (murdered) a sweet little lady who was very plainly a paragon of moral principals. She was Ethel Rosenberg, and her trial never suggested the protection of fundamental due process rights. Her little white hands were strapped in, and smoke had to rise from her little head before the government doctor could pronounce her dead. Moreover, Kaufman used constant police protection to watch him and his family every minute of every day that followed.
     Kaufman had not only denied to her and her husband (Julius Rosenberg) the vindication of their most fundamental rights (his primary duty), he climbed into the very gutter that Joseph McCarthy was in, insanely accused her of starting the Korean war, starting a nuclear-bomb race, and refused to listen to law enforcement's request not to execute her.  Kaufman was plainly an anti-Stalinist and  despised all Jews who were against Israel and pro-Stalinist. 
    It is also plain that he was a defective knave from the time of his birth, and was among the many millions of permanent residents who were here as a direct result of fraudulent documentation.
     The judges in the defendant's case (the case of Frederick Alexander Jones) must be suspected in this light. Such judges routinely demonstrate depravity, and are tyrants to American citizens.
Patrick Weil

Tuesday, August 4, 2015


                                                 CHAPTER EIGHT

The Hateful Arrest and American Society's Outrageous Search for the Truth

     On October 9th 1984, the defendant, Frederick Alexander Jones, was arrested by the fraudulent use of extraordinarily vindicating medical records. At the arraignment, a new york legal aid society lawyer represented him without any suggestion that the defendant permitted him to do so.  This lawyer told the judge a very long list of lies that were a false story of a very long history of mental illness. Actually, the defendant never spoke to a psychiatrist nor a psychologist prior to that time. When the defendant attempted to speak to the judge, the judge became furious and angrily ordered him not to say a single word. "Your lawyer is representing you !" he yelled at the defendant. This demonstrated a criminal scheme, and the judge was complicit.
     Later that month, in a segregated area within a very massive atrium of prison cells, a very loud and very constant wheezing could be heard everywhere. The medical staff were apparently foreign nationals, and they denied to the defendant most of his asthma medications. He, for many weeks, was literally drowning, and nearly died on several occasions. It was generally known that a guilty plea would result in a change of prisons and adequate medical care. Moreover, the fraudulent use of the aforesaid medical records would not be sought to be disclosed by the defendant (personally) in a possible trial, if such a plea could be coerced.
     The criminal betrayal by the defense lawyer (The New York Legal Aid Society) had been made easy by the United States Supreme Court. Accordingly, earlier that year (May 14, 1984) Sandra Day O'Connor wrote a decision that established the standard for determining when a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated by the counsel's inadequate performance. The indigent defendant took a great blow. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).
    "The counsel is strongly presumed to have rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment" (466 U.S. 668,690). In addition, "A particular  decision not to investigate must be directly assessed for reasonableness in all the circumstances, applying a heavy measure of deference to the counsel's judgments" (466 U.S. 668, 691). It follows that in a routinely empty criminal courtroom that has a routinely hateful conspiracy among officers of the court (including the judge, the defense lawyer, and the court reporter) many circumstances will be deliberately suppressed, and the trial transcripts will be a routine fraud. 
     Upon the foregoing, the Press (the monolithic media) and its readers (those who access the internet and newspapers) must plainly use contemporary public scrutiny  (open hearings) as the last hope in the search for the truth. Please, consider Oswald Arnold Gottfried Spengler:
     "What is the truth? For the multitude, that which it continually reads and hears. A forlorn little drop my  settle somewhere and collect grounds on which to determine "the truth" - but what it obtains is just its truth. The other, the public truth of the moment, which alone matters for effects and success in the fact-world, is to-day a product of the Press. What the Press wills, is true. Its commanders evoke, transform, interchange truths. Three weeks of press work, and the truth is acknowledged by everyone." See, The Decline of the West: The Complete Edition, Oswald Spengler, Alfred A. Knopf: New York, Volume Two, 1926, Translation by Charles Francis Atkinson, page 462.
     Spengler continues to describe the aforesaid Press on page 463:
     " It can condemn any "truth" to death simply by not undertaking its communication to the world - a terrible censorship of silence, which is all the more potent in that the masses of news paper readers are absolutely unaware that it exists".
                                                           Oswald Arnold Gottfried Spengler