Title 18, "Misprision of treason" filed in District Court

[Rat in the Hat]

If I get something from the bot agent in the mail, I will scan it and post it here. the downside is that might tend prove that the bot might be.....well, human.

Or it may just be some other kind of bipedal lifeform.

But please, by all means, either post or PM it's "test".

Fair is fair, and to be fair if I get something from agent chri$$y I will PM the bot to make sure it sent it, and, for an OK to post it, then post it in the thread.
I really don't know if agent chri$$y will send me something by mail or not, so I will just wait and see what happens.

I will actually be surprised if I get something.

You'll probably just get a picture of the FEMA drawing with a hand-written "show me this core" in crayon.

 

[Christophera]

In concealing treason FEMA misrepresented the core structure to NIST. With violations of law the ex mayor took the building plans and 6,000 photo files so NIST could state they did not have the plans. This is the only statement of structural sources I found in the entire NIST product.

Elevator guide rails are misrepresented as "core columns". Butt plates are too weak to use for joining core columns. Also no diagonal braces are seen.

 

[DiveCon]

no one is concealing treason, moron

 

[Liability]

There is no treason to conceal in this matter.

There was an attack.

al qaeda done did do it.

The core was steel as ALL of bot's posts and images conclusively establish.

Bots should pay their child support and stop wasting time on conspiracy theories that are not buttressed by ANY underlying -- you know -- conspiracy.

 

[Ozmar]

In concealing treason FEMA misrepresented the core structure to NIST. With violations of law the ex mayor took the building plans and 6,000 photo files so NIST could state they did not have the plans. This is the only statement of structural sources I found in the entire NIST product.

Elevator guide rails are misrepresented as "core columns". Butt plates are too weak to use for joining core columns. Also no diagonal braces are seen.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-VigkME40k[/ame]

 

[Christophera]

When the chief justice directed the US district court judge to reassign the criminal "in re" to the civil clerk, I must logically consider that the court has designated that I may now civilly prosecute for concealing treason.

9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

agents here ONLY do that. They have never recognized violations of law that deprive 3,000 murder victims of due process and ALL American citizens of "equal protection of law" and compromised Constitutional rights.

 

[DiveCon]

he did no such thing you moronic liar

 

[Ozmar]

Is Christophera an actual person?

 

[DiveCon]

Is Christophera an actual person?

yes, but he needs serious professional help

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Is Christophera an actual person?

At one time, he could have been.

But, sadly, he failed.

 

[Liability]

When the chief justice directed the US district court judge to reassign the criminal "in re" to the civil clerk, I must logically consider that the court has designated that I may now civilly prosecute for concealing treason.

9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

agents here ONLY do that. They have never recognized violations of law that deprive 3,000 murder victims of due process and ALL American citizens of "equal protection of law" and compromised Constitutional rights.

You "must" do no such thing. You are free to consider a lump of manure to be priceless gold, but that wouldn't make you right.

Actually, by reassigning the matter to a civil realm, it only means that a "notification" is more civil in nature than it is criminal.

There aint nuthin to prosecute and you aint a prosecutor in any event.

Before you go off half cocked (you do have at least half a cock, don't you you unmanly piece of crap?) and try to "civilly prosecute" anybody (whatever you imagine that might mean), you MIGHT want to check with a lawyer, first.

And, by the way, I do NOT "recognize" that the acts taken by al qaeda on 9/11/2001 constitute murder or a violation of due process. I do recognize that the actions of al qaeda constitute terrorist acts of war in violation of the laws and rules of war, however. "Due process" is not a concept that has ANY applicability to what happened to those victims. "Equal protection" of the law is ALSO not a concept that has ANY applicability to what happened to them.

Your ignorance is astounding, bot.

 

[Christophera]

When the chief justice directed the US district court judge to reassign the criminal "in re" to the civil clerk, I must logically consider that the court has designated that I may now civilly prosecute for concealing treason.

9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

agents here ONLY do that. They have never recognized violations of law that deprive 3,000 murder victims of due process and ALL American citizens of "equal protection of law" and compromised Constitutional rights.

You "must" do no such thing.

If I am to "support and defend the Constitution" I must. You don't care about that, and seek to destroy it, so logically the need to prosecute treason is not something you will acknowledge.

Are you going to be stand up enough to provide an mailing address so you can be sued agent?

 

[DiveCon]

goof-o-phera, seek out professional psychiatric help
you REALLY need it
have yourself committed for your own safety

 

[Liability]

When the chief justice directed the US district court judge to reassign the criminal "in re" to the civil clerk, I must logically consider that the court has designated that I may now civilly prosecute for concealing treason.

9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382
9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

agents here ONLY do that. They have never recognized violations of law that deprive 3,000 murder victims of due process and ALL American citizens of "equal protection of law" and compromised Constitutional rights.

You "must" do no such thing.

If I am to "support and defend the Constitution" I must. You don't care about that, and seek to destroy it, so logically the need to prosecute treason is not something you will acknowledge.

Are you going to be stand up enough to provide an mailing address so you can be sued agent?

You are not a sworn officer of the U.S. military nor a sworn public official nor a law enforcement officer. Thus, you have no such duty.

That said, there would be nothing wrong with striving to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution. But the bullshit YOU spew, you arrogant, petty, dishonest, ignorant scumbag has nothing to do with protecting the Constitution.

Acts of war (even by those who engage in warfare outside the bounds of the laws and the rules of war) are not matters which implicate Constitutional rights of the victims, you dense jack-off. And falsely declaring, as you always do, that our own government was behind the attacks of 9/11/2001 gives aid and comfort to the fucking enemy that actually committed those barbaric acts.

You are a vile aider and abettor of the terrorist enemies of this Republic. You do not protect or defend the Constitution. Your actions serve only to undermine the Republic in your retarded (albeit limited) way.

You are very much an agent of al qaeda.

 

[slackjawed]

You "must" do no such thing.

If I am to "support and defend the Constitution" I must. You don't care about that, and seek to destroy it, so logically the need to prosecute treason is not something you will acknowledge.

Are you going to be stand up enough to provide an mailing address so you can be sued agent?

You are not a sworn officer of the U.S. military nor a sworn public official nor a law enforcement officer. Thus, you have no such duty.

That said, there would be nothing wrong with striving to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution. But the bullshit YOU spew, you arrogant, petty, dishonest, ignorant scumbag has nothing to do with protecting the Constitution.

Acts of war (even by those who engage in warfare outside the bounds of the laws and the rules of war) are not matters which implicate Constitutional rights of the victims, you dense jack-off. And falsely declaring, as you always do, that our own government was behind the attacks of 9/11/2001 gives aid and comfort to the fucking enemy that actually committed those barbaric acts.

You are a vile aider and abettor of the terrorist enemies of this Republic. You do not protect or defend the Constitution. Your actions serve only to undermine the Republic in your retarded (albeit limited) way.

You are very much an agent of al qaeda.

I second that!

 

[Christophera]

You "must" do no such thing.

If I am to "support and defend the Constitution" I must. You don't care about that, and seek to destroy it, so logically the need to prosecute treason is not something you will acknowledge.

Are you going to be stand up enough to provide an mailing address so you can be sued agent?

You are not a sworn officer of the U.S. military nor a sworn public official nor a law enforcement officer. Thus, you have no such duty..

agents can pretend to be morons as much as they need to gain the approval of the infiltrating perpetrators of mass murder. For example, are you saying an immigrant has more duty to "support and defend the constitution" than a natural born citizen?

The Oath of Allegiance
The final step in the naturalization process is the reciting of the "oath of allegiance" by the applicant, in which he or she makes several promises upon becoming a U.S. citizen. The oath of allegiance is:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."


The perpetrors would like very much that you misrepresent the duty and allegiance of Americans to their consitution.

 

[slackjawed]

If I am to "support and defend the Constitution" I must. You don't care about that, and seek to destroy it, so logically the need to prosecute treason is not something you will acknowledge.

Are you going to be stand up enough to provide an mailing address so you can be sued agent?

You are not a sworn officer of the U.S. military nor a sworn public official nor a law enforcement officer. Thus, you have no such duty..

agents can pretend to be morons as much as they need to gain the approval of the infiltrating perpetrators of mass murder. For example, are you saying an immigrant has more duty to "support and defend the constitution" than a natural born citizen?

The Oath of Allegiance
The final step in the naturalization process is the reciting of the "oath of allegiance" by the applicant, in which he or she makes several promises upon becoming a U.S. citizen. The oath of allegiance is:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."


The perpetrors would like very much that you misrepresent the duty and allegiance of Americans to their consitution.

As a natural born citizen, I never took such an oath. I think it is expected of the parents and the schools to provide us 'natural borns' with the knowledge of what the requirements are to remain a citizen. You obtained this knowledge somewhere, right?


Now how is this, which I am sure is a valid point of some sort, just how is it germane to the conversation at hand?

 

[Rat in the Hat]

If I am to "support and defend the Constitution" I must. You don't care about that, and seek to destroy it, so logically the need to prosecute treason is not something you will acknowledge.

Are you going to be stand up enough to provide an mailing address so you can be sued agent?

You are not a sworn officer of the U.S. military nor a sworn public official nor a law enforcement officer. Thus, you have no such duty..

agents can pretend to be morons as much as they need to gain the approval of the infiltrating perpetrators of mass murder. For example, are you saying an immigrant has more duty to "support and defend the constitution" than a natural born citizen?

The Oath of Allegiance
The final step in the naturalization process is the reciting of the "oath of allegiance" by the applicant, in which he or she makes several promises upon becoming a U.S. citizen. The oath of allegiance is:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."


The perpetrors would like very much that you misrepresent the duty and allegiance of Americans to their consitution.

by the way what is a "perpetror"? and what is a "consitution"?

 

[Christophera]

You are not a sworn officer of the U.S. military nor a sworn public official nor a law enforcement officer. Thus, you have no such duty..

agents can pretend to be morons as much as they need to gain the approval of the infiltrating perpetrators of mass murder. For example, are you saying an immigrant has more duty to "support and defend the constitution" than a natural born citizen?

The Oath of Allegiance
The final step in the naturalization process is the reciting of the "oath of allegiance" by the applicant, in which he or she makes several promises upon becoming a U.S. citizen. The oath of allegiance is:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."


The perpetrators would like very much that you misrepresent the duty and allegiance of Americans to their constitution.

As a natural born citizen, I never took such an oath. I think it is expected of the parents and the schools to provide us 'natural borns' with the knowledge of what the requirements are to remain a citizen. You obtained this knowledge somewhere, right?

The point is that IF you are a natural born citizen THEN you have at least the allegiance and duty of an immigrant. Maybe you don't claim or acknowledge that.

Now how is this, which I am sure is a valid point of some sort, just how is it germane to the conversation at hand?

Lilybelly says I only have a duty to "support and defend the Constitutiton" if I'm military or a public official and I've proven that agent wrong since my very first post. Just did it again. Maybe you don't claim or acknowledge that duty.

If you do, law is vital. Law is how you evaluate " military or a public officials" performance. When they cease to conform to law or the principles of the Constitution, they at least lose their position.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

agents can pretend to be morons as much as they need to gain the approval of the infiltrating perpetrators of mass murder. For example, are you saying an immigrant has more duty to "support and defend the constitution" than a natural born citizen?

The Oath of Allegiance
The final step in the naturalization process is the reciting of the "oath of allegiance" by the applicant, in which he or she makes several promises upon becoming a U.S. citizen. The oath of allegiance is:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."


The perpetrators would like very much that you misrepresent the duty and allegiance of Americans to their constitution.

As a natural born citizen, I never took such an oath. I think it is expected of the parents and the schools to provide us 'natural borns' with the knowledge of what the requirements are to remain a citizen. You obtained this knowledge somewhere, right?

The point is that IF you are a natural born citizen THEN you have at least the allegiance and duty of an immigrant. Maybe you don't claim or acknowledge that.

Now how is this, which I am sure is a valid point of some sort, just how is it germane to the conversation at hand?

Lilybelly says I only have a duty to "support and defend the Constitutiton" if I'm military or a public official and I've proven that agent wrong since my very first post. Just did it again. Maybe you don't claim or acknowledge that duty.

If you do, law is vital. Law is how you evaluate " military or a public officials" performance. When they cease to conform to law or the principles of the Constitution, they at least lose their position.