Dan,
Your comment about the necessity of citizens to seek the truth when a
conspiracy has been brought to the light of day, even partially, is quite
important.
I have just learned about the meaning of "presentment" by a grand jury in
the 5th amendment to our Constitution. Before I go further, the reason
most of us don't pay attention to it is that, in 1946, the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure were rewritten and the only mention of "presentment"
in the revision is:
"Note 4: Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal
accusation, since *presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions
are obsolete*, at least as concerns the Federal courts."
This clever trick was/is unconstitutional on its face. If *obsolete*
could be used to change the Constitution, we would be permitted to declare
the Presidency obsolete. As far as I know, the Supreme Court has not yet
been called upon to address this trick, but it is easy to understand why
such an attempt has been made once we see what it is.
A "presentment" by a grand jury need not involve ANY governmental
official, as understood through early American common law leading up to
its incorporation into the amending Bill of Rights of the Constitition.
A presentment is a right of citizens AS SUCH to have a person "answer for
a capital or otherwise infamous crime". It is parallel to, but distinct
from, a grand jury indictment. No prosecutor (understood as a
governmental official) need be involved. The grand jury considering a
"presentment" has the right of subpoena ANY official (extremely
important).
There are persons much more knowledgeable about "presentment" procedures
who are pursuing this vis-a-vis 9-11-2001.
Louis brought up the concept of "state terrorism" as being applicable to
our discussion. I refer him to "September 11 as 'Machiavellian State
Terror'" (Chapter 6). A citizens' "presentment" is a weapon against
Machiavellianisms.
In no way, should I be taken to mean that "presentment" is the only
weapon available to citizens.
Paul Z.
***************************************************************
THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11-2001, P.Zarembka, ed, Elsevier, 2006
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka/volume23.htm
***************************************************************
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Dan Scanlan wrote:
> ...
> The point I am trying to make is that when a conspiracy is even
> partially exposed, it is up to the citizenry, its press and its law
> enforcers to find out the truth of the matter. In every instance in
> my lifetime that is important and that has involved a conspiracy of
> some kind -- JFK, MLK, Fred Hampton, Gulf of Tonkin, Ruben Salazar,
> Iran-Contra, crack cocaine, BCCI, Iraq War, election of GWB, the 911
> circus, for starters -- citizens, the press and lawmakers have all
> pull back on the reins as soon as they smell shit. Unless each of the
> segments -- the people, reporters and cops -- does its job, none have
> any right to complain of the smell on their plates and should not
> expect their lives to improve.
>
> Conspiracies exist naturally. The noxious thistle in the garden
> starts out with a beautiful, inviting flower before it destroys the
> harvest. When we citizens call off our investigations of wrongdoing
> by dangerous people, or hamper those who are investigating by
> dismissing them as conspiracy nuts, we're just pushing the day of
> reckoning into the future, probably our children's.
>
> Dan Scanlan
