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

[Christophera]

A filing at a U.S. District court was completed on February 18, 2010 disclosing misprision of treason.

Local court rules had no accommodation to present any letter to a judge. Such is specifically against the rules. U.S. code requirements did not matter. After a few trips to the court house a criminal filing was made pursuant to evidenced violations of law and actions constituting evasion or concealment of acts embodying treason. This page has links to all exhibits and photographic panels.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

As can be seen on the below conformed face page, this made possible an "ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE" relating to Title 18 authority and duty of a judge within federal criminal procedure.

Accordingly, assertions of "steel core columns" in the core of the Twin towers is misprision of treason IF the violation of law enabling the deception by FEMA of NIST and the public is not observed AND evidence from 9-11 showing the supposed steel core columns in the core area is not provided to substantiate they existed.

All reference to steel core columns without such respective action is misprision of treason.

 

[Fizz]

you are a moron!!

 

[Christophera]

You have no evidence. You appear to support treason. Cease.

 

[Fizz]

You have no evidence. You appear to support treason. Cease.

no evidence of what?

you are the one claiming there was treason.

PROVE IT!!!!

 

[Christophera]

You have no evidence. You appear to support treason. Cease.

no evidence of what?

you are the one claiming there was treason.

PROVE IT!!!!

It's proven.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

and thanks for the proof you are acting as a part of the treason alleged in the linked page where the District court filing is documented.

 

[Gamolon]

You have no evidence. You appear to support treason. Cease.

no evidence of what?

you are the one claiming there was treason.

PROVE IT!!!!

It's proven.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

and thanks for the proof you are acting as a part of the treason alleged in the linked page where the District court filing is documented.

Watch out Fizz!!! He'll threaten you with preparing a jail cell for you also!!!!

 

[Fizz]

having a fucking lunatic that blames the lack of a paper from 1876 as the reason he didnt pay $30,000 claim there is treason is not proof of treason.

filing a lawsuit doesnt make it true. anyone can file a lawsuit for anything. you have already proved that.

i can file a lawsuit and say you are flying over my house dressed in a chicken suit. it doesnt mean its actually happening.

you remind me of this guy...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA1hyqA6UTY]YouTube - Paranoid schizo complains to city about "rogue helicopter pilot"[/ame]

 

[Gamolon]

having a fucking lunatic that blames the lack of a paper from 1876 as the reason he didnt pay $30,000 claim there is treason is not proof of treason.

filing a lawsuit doesnt make it true. anyone can file a lawsuit for anything. you have already proved that.

i can file a lawsuit and say you are flying over my house dressed in a chicken suit. it doesnt mean its actually happening.

you remind me of this guy...
YouTube - Paranoid schizo complains to city about "rogue helicopter pilot"

Does Leslie Robertson know that you have named him in legal documents in which you are accusing them of hiding information about the deaths of 3,000 people?

I wonder....

 

[Liability]

You have no evidence. You appear to support treason. Cease.

no evidence of what?

you are the one claiming there was treason.

PROVE IT!!!!

It's proven.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

and thanks for the proof you are acting as a part of the treason alleged in the linked page where the District court filing is documented.

It's proven?

Where?

When?

You mean you think the filing of a document in Court constitutes PROOF?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[Christophera]

It contains proof. Recognition of it is required to end treason.

Unlikely you are interested in that because you seek to further it with your post.

BTW, null post moron. No evidence countering what is presented as proof.

BTW moron, did you notice the violation of law enabling the misrepresentation of the core structure?

BTW, if you don't notice that . . . it puts you on the wrong side of the law and party to treason.

 

[Fizz]

It contains proof. Recognition of it is required to end treason.

Unlikely you are interested in that because you seek to further it with your post.

BTW, null post moron. No evidence countering what is presented as proof.

BTW moron, did you notice the violation of law enabling the misrepresentation of the core structure?

BTW, if you don't notice that . . . it puts you on the wrong side of the law and party to treason.

contains proof of what? where?

you really are fucking nuts. a big fucking squirrel is going to come and eat you.

 

[DiveCon]

It contains proof. Recognition of it is required to end treason.

Unlikely you are interested in that because you seek to further it with your post.

BTW, null post moron. No evidence countering what is presented as proof.

BTW moron, did you notice the violation of law enabling the misrepresentation of the core structure?

BTW, if you don't notice that . . . it puts you on the wrong side of the law and party to treason.

contains proof of what? where?

you really are fucking nuts. a big fucking squirrel is going to come and eat you.

LOL
hes just totally gone

 

[creativedreams]

A filing at a U.S. District court was completed on February 18, 2010 disclosing misprision of treason.

Local court rules had no accommodation to present any letter to a judge. Such is specifically against the rules. U.S. code requirements did not matter. After a few trips to the court house a criminal filing was made pursuant to evidenced violations of law and actions constituting evasion or concealment of acts embodying treason. This page has links to all exhibits and photographic panels.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

As can be seen on the below conformed face page, this made possible an "ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE" relating to Title 18 authority and duty of a judge within federal criminal procedure.

Accordingly, assertions of "steel core columns" in the core of the Twin towers is misprision of treason IF the violation of law enabling the deception by FEMA of NIST and the public is not observed AND evidence from 9-11 showing the supposed steel core columns in the core area is not provided to substantiate they existed.

All reference to steel core columns without such respective action is misprision of treason.

What do you believe will come of your filing?

 

[DiveCon]

A filing at a U.S. District court was completed on February 18, 2010 disclosing misprision of treason.

Local court rules had no accommodation to present any letter to a judge. Such is specifically against the rules. U.S. code requirements did not matter. After a few trips to the court house a criminal filing was made pursuant to evidenced violations of law and actions constituting evasion or concealment of acts embodying treason. This page has links to all exhibits and photographic panels.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

As can be seen on the below conformed face page, this made possible an "ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE" relating to Title 18 authority and duty of a judge within federal criminal procedure.

Accordingly, assertions of "steel core columns" in the core of the Twin towers is misprision of treason IF the violation of law enabling the deception by FEMA of NIST and the public is not observed AND evidence from 9-11 showing the supposed steel core columns in the core area is not provided to substantiate they existed.

All reference to steel core columns without such respective action is misprision of treason.

What do you believe will come of your filing?

it was already decided and he lost

 

[Fizz]

it was already decided and he lost

i think this is a different one than the one you are thinking. the date is february of 2010. was this one decided?

 

[DiveCon]

it was already decided and he lost

i think this is a different one than the one you are thinking. the date is february of 2010. was this one decided?

oh, he filed a new one?

well, it wont matter
he'll lose this one as well

 

[Christophera]

Agents pretending confusion as if they were not guilty of misprision of treason in an extension of the same covert act themselves.


This action is completely new and was developed by presenting the USC itself to clerks and attorneys for optimization. As far as outcome, we shall have to see how well judges adhere to their oaths in the face of treason.

 

[Liability]

A filing at a U.S. District court was completed on February 18, 2010 disclosing misprision of treason.

Local court rules had no accommodation to present any letter to a judge. Such is specifically against the rules. U.S. code requirements did not matter. After a few trips to the court house a criminal filing was made pursuant to evidenced violations of law and actions constituting evasion or concealment of acts embodying treason. This page has links to all exhibits and photographic panels.

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

As can be seen on the below conformed face page, this made possible an "ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE" relating to Title 18 authority and duty of a judge within federal criminal procedure.

Accordingly, assertions of "steel core columns" in the core of the Twin towers is misprision of treason IF the violation of law enabling the deception by FEMA of NIST and the public is not observed AND evidence from 9-11 showing the supposed steel core columns in the core area is not provided to substantiate they existed.

All reference to steel core columns without such respective action is misprision of treason.

Since nobody buys the insane bullshit you are peddling, ChristoFEARa, nobody could be guilty of the misprision of treason.

But I did enjoy that "PBS documentary" that doesn't exist.

Nice touch!

I am going to play prognosticator for you. The "case" or whatever the fuck you think your filing constitutes, will not be treated to any judicial consideration EXCEPT as follows: "dismissed."

 

[elvis]

You have no evidence. You appear to support treason. Cease.

Is rhianna pressing charges against you again, chris brown?

 

[Liability]

ChristoFEARa,

English may not technically be the official language of the United States of America (although it ought to be).

It is considered polite, however, to actually USE English when filing shit with the Court.

Your description of your Exhibit B is not written in standard English. WTF does "deprival of construction drawings not used by NIST" mean?