Satanic sustainable growth alliance reliance

on criminal element
and needy sustainable growth symmetry

Attorney General vs cohort Criminal Lawyers deliberate neglect of due regard to criminal deterrence as is Big
Pharma against cancer cure tantamount to eradicating their necessity being the ultimate cancer upon society.
What was it $35 million fine an apathetic sorry for being caught at premeditated murder
Always a N/A never again eh?

Pope’s on the same Damage Control BS too eh!!!
Cancer Cured

What's up Doc?

Who could possibly be more pathetic excuses for humanity than our apathetic corporate puppet governments

And lest we forget

Forthright Forthwith Forthcoming

In the name of God of, for and with the People WTF?

Fickle Fate Finger

End the game of Silly Buggar
Face the 911 truth and spread it over their BS

Transcendental Retrospect Intellectual Understanding Manifests Prophecy Holistic Assessment Nurtures Truth
Psychology Reversal
God Undeniable Illusion Satanic Enlightenment

Burning Unburnt Bush Luciferian Impunity Conscript Alienation Logistics
Legal Uncertainty Confusing Intrinsic Facts Exploitive Righteousness

In Eastern Orthodox parlance, the preferred name for the event is The Unburnt Bush, and the theology and
hymnography of the church view it as prefiguring the virgin birth of Jesus; Eastern Orthodox theology refers to
Mary, the mother of Jesus as the Theotokos ("God bearer"), viewing her as having given birth to Incarnate God
without suffering any harm, or loss of virginity, in parallel to the bush being burnt without being consumed.

There is an Icon by the name of the Unburnt Bush, which portrays Mary in the guise of God bearer; the icon's
feast day is held on the 4th of September (Russian: Неопалимая Купина, Neopalimaya Kupina).

The burning bush has been a popular symbol among Reformed churches since it was first adopted by the
Huguenots (French Calvinists) in 1583 during its 12th National Synod. The French motto Flagror non consumor
- I am burned but not consumed
- suggests the symbol was understood of the suffering church that nevertheless lives. However, given the fire is
a sign of God's presence, he who is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29) the miracle appears to point to a greater
God in grace is with his covenant people and so they are not consumed.

Towers of Babble On

Media Assimilation Judiciary Override Reality All Satanic State
State Secret Privilege
Bush 9/11 Cover - up
The state secrets privilege is an evidentiary rule created by United States legal precedent. Application of the privilege results in
exclusion of evidence from a legal case based solely on affidavits submitted by the government stating that court proceedings
might disclose sensitive information which might endanger national security.
United States v. Reynolds,
involved military secrets, was the first case that saw formal recognition of the privilege.
Following a claim of "state secrets privilege", the court rarely conducts an in camera examination of the evidence to evaluate
whether there is sufficient cause to support the use of this doctrine. This results in court rulings in which even the judge has
not verified the veracity of the assertion.
The privileged material is completely removed from the litigation, and the court
must determine how the unavailability of the privileged information affects the case.

[edit] Function
The purpose of the state secrets privilege is to prevent courts from revealing state secrets in the course of civil litigation (in
criminal cases, the Classified Information Procedures Act serves the same purpose). The government may intervene in any
civil suit, including when it is not a party to the litigation, to ask the court to exclude state secrets evidence. While the courts
may examine such evidence closely, in practice they generally defer to the Executive Branch. Once the court has agreed that
evidence is subject to the state secrets privilege, it is excluded from the litigation. Often, as a practical matter, the plaintiff
cannot continue the suit without the privileged information, and drops the case. Recently, courts have been more inclined to
dismiss cases outright, if the subject matter of the case is a state secret.
[edit] Distinguished from other legal doctrines
The state secrets privilege is related to, but distinct from, several other legal doctrines: the principle of non-justiciability in
certain cases involving state secrets (the so-called "Totten Rule");
certain prohibitions on the publication of classified
information (as in New York Times Co. v. United States, the Pentagon Papers case); and the use of classified information in
criminal cases (governed by the Classified Information Procedures Act).
[edit] History
[edit] Origins
The doctrine was effectively imported from British law which has a similar privilege.
It is debatable whether the state
secrets privilege is based upon the President's powers as commander-in-chief and leader of foreign affairs (as suggested in
United States v. Nixon) or derived from the idea of separation of powers (as suggested in United States v. Reynolds)
It seems
that the US privilege "has its initial roots in Aaron Burr's trial for treason." In this case, it was alleged that a letter from
General James Wilkinson to President Thomas Jefferson might contain state secrets and could therefore not be divulged
without risk to national security.
According to former White House Counsel, John Dean:
While precise numbers are hard to come by (because not all cases are reported), a recent study reports that the "Bush
administration has invoked the state secrets privilege in 23 cases since 2001." By way of comparison, "between 1953 and 1976,
the government invoked the privilege in only four cases."

While Henry Lanman reports in Slate:
"... the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press reported that while the government asserted the privilege
approximately 55 times in total between 1954 (the privilege was first recognized in 1953) and 2001, it's asserted it 23 times in
the four years after Sept. 11."

However, at least one article has retracted these figures, finding they were based on erroneous information:
"Correction: In this article, we incorrectly reported that the government invoked the state secrets privilege in 23 cases since
2001. The figure came from the 2005 Secrecy Report Card published by The privilege was actually
invoked seven times from 2001 to 2005, according to the corrected 2005 report card, which is not an increase from previous

Lanman continues to cite two political science professors at the University of Texas-El Paso who concluded that
"courts have examined the documents' underlying claims of state secrecy fewer than one-third of the times it has been
invoked. And, ..., courts have only actually rejected the assertion of the privilege four times since 1953."

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the privilege is increasingly used to dismiss entire court cases, instead of only
withholding the sensitive information from a case.
Also in 2001, George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13233extending the
accessibility of the state secrets privilege to also allow former presidents, their designated representatives, or representatives
designated by their families, to invoke it to bar records from their tenure.

As chief law officer, the Attorney General has
a special responsibility
to be the guardian of
that most elusive concept -
the rule of law.
The rule of law is a well established legal principle, but
hard to easily define.
It is the rule of law
that protects individuals, and society as a whole,
from arbitrary measures and safeguards personal liberties.
Elusive Legal Certainty

Rule of Law
The Rule of law in its most basic form is no one is above the law.
Perhaps the most important application of the rule of law is the principle that governmental authority is
legitimately exercised only in accordance with,
publicly disclosed laws,
adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedural steps that are referred to as due process.
The rule of law is hostile to dictatorship and to anarchy.
According to modern Anglo-American thinking, hallmarks of adherence to the rule of law commonly include
a clear separation of powers,
legal certainty,
the principle of legitimate expectation and equality of all before the law.
The concept is not without controversy, and it has been said that
"the phrase the rule of law has become meaningless thanks to ideological abuse and general over- use"

Do as I say Not as I do

God de jure proclamation administer antithesis de facto doG

Facts must have root 2 take root God Coherency "Catch 22" must have semblance 2 catch doG chase tail

Mount Sinai and the Ten Commandments
Main article: Ten Commandments
According to the Bible, after crossing the Red Sea and leading the Israelites towards the desert, Moses was
summoned by God to Mount Sinai, also referred to as Mount Horeb, the same place where Moses had first
talked to the Burning Bush, tended the flocks of Jethro his father-in-law, and later produced water by striking
the rock with his staff and directed the battle with the Amalekites.
Moses stayed on the mountain for 40 days and nights, a period in which he received the Ten Commandments
directly from God. Moses then descended from the mountain with intent to deliver the commandments to the
people, but upon his arrival he saw that the people were involved in the sin of the Golden Calf. In terrible anger,
Moses broke the commandment tablets[30] and ordered his own tribe (the Levites) to go through the camp and
kill everyone, including family and friends,[31] upon which the Levites killed about 3,000 people.[32] God later
commanded Moses to inscribe two other tablets, to replace the ones Moses smashed,[33] so Moses went to the
mountain again, for another period of 40 days and nights, and when he returned, the commandments were
finally given.
In Jewish tradition, Moses is referred to as "The Lawgiver" for this singular achievement of delivering the Ten

The Biggest Lie
Truth kills truth saves Save yourself and the world
Video Gone
Video Replaced
In this lecture by Michel Chossudovsky, he blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was
an attack on America by "Islamic terrorists". Through meticulous research, he has uncovered a military-intelligence ploy
behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration. According
to Chossudovsky, the "war on terrorism" is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden,
outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest.
Globalisation is the final march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial
complex. September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington's agenda consists in
extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America
the institutions of the Homeland Security State.
Fema Death Camps

Fema Detention Camps Marshall Law

911 Witnesses Killed
Canadian Senator Threatens or Warns Me
The whole truth about the Iraq war
The War on Iraq, filmmaker Robert Greenwald chronicles the Bush Administration's determined quest to invade Iraq
following the events of September 11, 2001. The film deconstructs the administration's case for war through interviews
with U.S intelligence and defense officials, foreign service experts, and U.N. weapons inspectors -- including a former CIA
director, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia and even President Bush's Secretary of the Army. Their analyses and
conclusions are sobering, and often disturbing, regardless of one's political affiliations.
After overcoming the willing suspension of disbelief
High Ranking US Major General Exposes September 11
CIA Whistleblower Susan Lindauer EXPOSES Everything! "Extreme Prejudice"

The Predictable Or Sanity United
World Wide Independence Is Interdependent

If the world cannot deal with Bush we will never see the forest