No argument with you whatever, Mate, but imagine how much harder a false flag would have been on 911. With the moon landings, you were not murdering thousands of innocent people, and thousands more, such as meddling self appointed amateur sleuths or mercentaries in for a quick profit and film rights, were not busy sniffing out every move you made, as well as all those cops, muddying the waters.
And just tell me that you can snatch four huge airliners and fake off all kinds of crap without a hitch or anybody getting drunk and blowing it!
Finally, with all these Muslims suicide bombers just about every day, you have to find some way of assuring that some holy warrior doesn't blow it for you by either (a) denying they were connected with it or (2) taking credit when their particular tribe of babarians were not involved in it, which they often do. One of the biggest troubles of counterterrorsim is that all kinds of rival schmucks take credit for a deed they never in fact committed! All these factors the 911 black flaggers had to make sure didn't screw them up.
"It's true, it's true! The law has been decreed.
We must divide the assets equally.
A law was made a distant moon ago here.
That battles based on fault should not be fought.
So now we use accountants, not P.I.'s, dear.
In Fam-i-lawt, support is paid according to a guideline.
We all know what is income and what's not.
And no one ever overstates their child-time in Fam-i-lawt Familawt,
Familawt. We're not just members of the bar Here in Familawt,
Familawt.
We're connoisseurs of the bizarre!"
This twisted symphony tune of sorts titled "Familawt" featured six
judges from various counties of the State of California, performing a
metaphorical musical version to "Camelot." Its disturbing display is
pictured online, that shows these judges dressed like kings and
queens of the Round Table, dated in May of 2002.
They appear to be mocking the primary division of law that they're
sworn to preside over without prejudice or bias, in the court of law.
I was too disgusted by this "song" to even complete its lunacy
lyrics, shown above for this story.
One of these performing" queens" is San Francisco Family Law
Commissioner, Judge Marjorie A. Slabach, of the Unified Family Court
Division, at the San Francisco Superior Courthouse. Since Judge
Slabach was appointed in 1997 to preside over cases involving family
law, child dependency and custody cases, she has banged her gavel
with a brutal blow, to the lives of single mothers, without impunity.
I wrote an article of a young hardworking African-Descendent Man,
with a disability (name only disclosed as "Mr. James" for system
abuse security reasons) who was going through a custody battle with
Child Protective Services, a month ago, titled "A new breed of
monster."
Judging by what I've seen, thusfar (no pun, I swear) from Family Law
Commissioner, Judge Marjorie A. Slabach throughout 2007, and ten
percent of this year of 2008, that very title may have very well
found its host.
There was an online message posted by the Domestic Violence Industry
Awareness Campaign (DVIAC) in 2006 titled, "Is SF Family Court
Commissioner Marjorie Slabach a crook?"On March 24th, 2006, an un-
identified party without a lawyer (a pro se litigant) went before
Judge Slabach to cross-examine their accuser, Helen J. Wong, with a
list of questions they had prepared beforehand to ask the opposing
party.
Slabach denied the party to cross-examine their accuser, Helen J.
Wong (possibly violating their Sixth Amendment right of the U.S
Constitution) then abruptly rendered her verdict, then concluded the
hearing by ruling the party guilty, while the opposing side left the
building.
The unidentified party then examined the transcripts of the hearing,
and discovered that the transcripts of that hearing were tampered
with to a more modified version of the events that were recorded. In
this version, the un-identified party is appear to be asking Judge
Slabach to cross-examine his accuser after the hearing and not before.
From where many people that are involve in these particular cases
sit, this sounds incredibley illegal and criminal, for this may
violate judical code of ethics, if it is proven that Slabach rigged
the court reporter into altering the hearing of court record into
concealing the true accuracy of events, from public record.
Throughout the Summer of 2007, my fellow POOR comrade, and co-founder
of POOR Family Project, June Strohlin, a.k.a "Jewnbug" has had biased
and prejudicial encounters with Judge Slabach, regarding a
restraining order matter.
I viewed Jewnbug's transcripts, in which Slabach at one particular
hearing, regarded her as a "vengeful glee" and even stating that she
had been "observing her presence since she walked into the
courtroom."
One question comes to mind is this: Why are you focusing your
attention, while you're behind a secret black curtain, on one
litigant in the courtroom, and not everyone in attendance to the
hearing, including the spectators?
"I found Judge Marjorie Slabach to be very biased and partial to my
case by her showing blatant favortism to the opposing party," stated
Jewnbug in an interview. "This was based on the fact that the
opposing side party failed to appear on more than one ocassion. The
bottom line is that Judge Slabach is a waste of people's time and
money in family law!"
Another fellow POOR comrade, poverty scholar, and revolutionary poet,
Kim Swan, a.k.a "Queenandi" experienced Judge Slabach's bias and
prejudice, on February 5th, 2008, during a visitation modification
hearing regarding Kim, her three year old daughter, and the
daughter's father. Kim appeared before Judge Slabach believing the
hearing to be just that, a visitation modification hearing.…….or so
she thought.
Without prior notification, the court's hearing calendar produced an
additional matter, regarding Kim and her ex-boyfriend, the daughter's
father, Marcus C. Hayes. This second hearing was for the father to
challenge the petition of the restraining order that Kim filed
against him, three weeks prior to this hearing.
Kim was very upset that she was never served with a notice, for this
second hearing and didn't have sufficient time to prepare for it. Kim
attempted to explain to Judge Slabach the dangers of giving Hayes
visitation, of their three year old daughter.
Kim argued this to Judge Slabach of why she opposed this, on the
grounds that Hayes was an irresponsible parent, who has brought their
three year old daughter around unsavory people and places, and that
he used to have heated disputes with her over very petty things, such
as grocery bills, utility bills, and paying for a car seat, which is
required by state law.
Hayes has had violent episodes towards her, even coming to her job
and harassing her, in front of staff. "What about his violent history
towards other women, and what about his whereabouts when he brings
our child around unstable people, in high crime areas?"
While Kim continued to summarize how unstable Hayes was to the well-
being of their daughter, she was interrupted with sarcasm by the
judge, not uncommon of Slabach, when she replied, "Why don't you show
some mental stability and be quiet!"
In a recent, most alarming custody battle case that is currently
being fought by a single mother of three, name Sandra Thomsen, a
criminal justice student of San Francisco City College. Sandra has
had, an unbelievable encounter with Judge Marjorie A. Slabach,
regarding the custody of her seven year old son.
Sandra came to POOR in November of 2007 regarding a serious
situation, at S.F City College, between her and a college professor.
In addition, she explained her situation of a restraining order
regarding her ex-spouse, who was very violent towards her, during
their marriage.
Sandra appeared before Judge Slabach, on December 11th, 2007. Sandra
was accompanied by co-founder of POOR Magazine, "Tiny" Lisa Gray-
Garcia, and staff POOR reporters, Bruce Allison, Joseph Bolden, Sam
Drew, among others who came in support of her.
In a similar instance to Kim Swan's situation, Sandra was at the
hearing, in anticipation to finalize her restraining order, against
her ex-spouse. As soon as Sandra's case was called, Judge
Slabach "changed" the hearing into a child custody case. According to
Tiny, Sandra's lawyer, Ronald P. St. Clair did not talk with Sandra,
throughout the entire period before the hearing even commenced, not
even once.
In fact, St. Clair not only didn't meet with his client, but was
actually interacting with the opposing side, and San Francisco
Unified School District Attorney, Vicki Trapalis, an attorney that
represents children "regarding their best interests." The ruling
ordered by Slabach, was for the father to have temporary custody of
the child, as what was also recommended by Trapalis, who submitted
her report to the court, on December 4th, 2007.
Sandra did not like Trapalis from the very start, because she felt
that Trapalis was more in favor of the father, than her, despite
Craft's violent history towards Sandra and her children. Trapalis
inaccurately stated in her report of Sandra "fabricating allegations"
to her child to make the father appear to be very abusive.
Sandra was not only shocked, but very devastated by this order of
Judge Slabach that literally placed her seven year old son's very
life in danger, by giving Craft even a fraction of custody to him.
Sandra still suffers great shockwaves behind Slabach's outrageous
decision.
As it really turns out, Ronald P. St. Clair, Vicki Trapalis, and her
ex-spouse, Melbia Craft, all agreed to a court motion, a motion that
is very frequent, by lawyers that file them at the San Francisco
Unified Family Court Division, called ex parte motions. Ex parte
motions are motions filed by one party, without advanced notice to
the opposing side.
They are decided by a judge, without requiring all of the parties to
the controversy to be present.
A series of these motions were astoundly filed by Craft, throughout
the Year of 2006, without Sandra's knowledge. Craft even forged her
signature on April 3rd 2006, so that a stipulated request filed to
the court, would be official, for Judge Marjorie A. Slabach to sit
and act as a Judge Pro Tempore, (temporary) in a matter involving
their seven year old son.
Even more astounding, a court hearing minutes document claimed that
Sandra was "present" at the April 3rd, 2006 hearing, although she
soundly swears that she was not.
"You're very biased and corrupted for putting my son's life in danger
of an ex-abuser I want to motion, for you to recuse yourself as the
judge in my custody case!" Sandra exclaimed, with a booming voice
that echoed within the eardrums of all single moms in attendance,
during a December 27th, 2007 and January 25th, 2008 hearing.
Of course, Judge Slabach swiftly denied Sandra's request, for
possibly fearing an admission of her own guilt of judical abuse of
authority, as a presiding magistrate that presides over family law
and child dependency cases.
"As a poor mom advocate, I was shocked to witness Judge Marjorie A.
Slabach's flagrant, anti-mother biased rulings, and her behavior in
general; not to mention her disrespect of judicial procedure when it
came to women and mothers!" Tiny, co-founder of POOR Magazine has
often scowled, in a very temperamental tone regarding Slabach's
judicial misconduct towards single mothers.
Ex parte motions are sharply limited by the U.S Constitution's 5th
and 14th Amendment, as they infringe upon a U.S Citizen's Right to
Due Process of Law. If so, then why are many single mothers that
appear at the San Francisco Unified Family Court, many whom from
which are in poverty, unrepresented, or ineffectively represented in
child custody cases are "infringed upon" and "limited" to the Right
to Due Process of Law?
"I told you, your honor, you devil in a pitch black gown, that I had
no time to prepare for this hearing, but you're not hearing me.
What I say to you goes out one ear, and quickly out the other:
What kind of a monster are you to callously decide my child's fate,
because you say your rule is great?! You just can't give my son to
animals like you, by separating him from his sister, or my daughter
from her brother!:"
A poem by Marlon Crump, February 14th, 2008 titled "Callous Court
Corruption."
When gently, but firmly he was corrected time and time again for his job performance, Richard Childers seems to have taken immediate umbrage at the insult to his delicate sensibilities, lashed out at management, acted like a know it all, and refused to do the work given to him. So abruptly, His Majesty Richard Childers, was fired for non compliance from managment!
When Richard Childers told his story about his misconduct at Feeva on Craigslist, he gained no sympathy. It had no effect. Yet Childers continues to blight the board with his dirty laundry, which the community responds to with fllaging, and sometimes defamatory behavior, which he brought on himself. The truest things are often said in jest.
It's certainly not David Nguyen, or someone associated with Feeva, doing his or her level best to keep Richard Childers unemployed ... Childers is simply unemployable. He is a paranoid sociopath, with loads of constant problems in all areas of his life. As he exposes his problems ad nausem on Craigslist, some members of the community have taken to warning people about his lunacy as a public service.
Oracle? That was over a decade ago. Yet Richard Childers continues to constantly remind everyone about his lousy job performance there, and still refuses to take responsibility for his actions, instead blaming Lesbians and Jews
Someone in San Francisco Superior Court or employed by WOMAN, Inc? That was years ago, too. And again, he continues to blame the death of his stepfather on them and blames them for his failed relationships. Did I not mention loads of constant problems in all areas of his life?
Besides, who was it who displayed poor anger management skills in the first place, that led to Childers' termination? RICHARD CHILDERS THAT'S WHO! Not Helen Wong. Not San Francisco Superior Court. Not Craig Newmark. Not Oracle. Not Elena Egan-Caceres. Not the Family Courts. Not Marjorie Slabach. Not Donna Hitchens. Not Penny Salanave. Not Feeva. Not Thomas Childers. Not WOMAN inc. Not Paul Vixie. Not Larry Ellison. Not the JDL. Not David Nguyen. Not the Seven Dwarfs. It was RICHARD CHILDERS!
It seems to me that there are loads of people on CL that are sick of Childers abusive crap, and only want to warn folks not familiar with his history. It has nothing to do with employees of Feeva.
I wonder if David Nguyen is still employed by Feeva? We do know Richard Childers is incapable of being employed at all.
But Richard Childers is the one obsessively posting his delusions to craigslist.
For example, Olga Kvitko two years ago wrote Childers a single, three word e-mail ("PLEASE, CALL ME"), and to this day Childers still obsessively posts on craigslist his imaginary fear that the government is out to get him.
February 16, 1993: At the hearing for Childers' first restraining order, Childers’
ex-girlfriend testified that Childers slapped her in the face and in the mouth, and
that Childers tripped her. And that Childers broke the glass on her door.
Specifically:
JUDGE: Did you break the glass on her door?
CHILDERS: Yes. I knocked. Her doorbell was disconnected and that’s probably the
same spot that everyone else knocked.
Despite Childers’ denials, the judge believed the ex-girlfriend, and Childers was
served with a three-year restraining order. In 1996, Childers’ attempt to vacate
and expunge the order failed.
The Second Restraining Order:
June 2005 (Note: 12 years later): Childers leaves a letter the house of the same
ex-girlfriend, stating, among other things, “I am wondering how much longer we are
going to remain at war?”
July 1, 2005: Her birthday. Childers leaves flowers and a letter at his
ex-girlfriend’s house, stating, among other things:
“I am your ‘ex’... but your ‘ex’ will not just go away” and that “you will always
have a relationship with your ‘ex.’ ”
“I am a convinced it is in your best interest to give me a fair hearing.”
“But by evading the consequences of your actions you have only put off the moment
of reckoning. It is still pending.”
July 7, 2005: Childers visits his ex-girlfriend’s house. She pretends to be not home.
July 8, 2005: Childers leaves a letter at his ex-girlfriend’s house, stating, among
other things, “I need some answers and I am not prepared to wait another twelve
years for you to accumulate your courage.”
Then, Childers includes with his letter an article about a murder-suicide where an
ex-boyfriend, so distraught over his breakup, kills his ex-girlfriend and then
himself.
On which, Childers commented, “I know the parking lot he killed himself in; I spent
a lot of time there, thinking about killing myself, too, over a decade ago. For
similar reasons. So I can identify with him ... politically incorrect though it may
be, I have compassion for this man, who murdered his spouse, and then himself.”
July 15, 2005: Childers leaves flowers and a letter at his ex-girlfriend’s house,
inviting her to lunch.
July 22, 2005: Childers leaves flowers and a letter at his ex-girlfriend’s house,
stating, among other things: “I find that I still have strong feelings for you” and
“I still love you.”
August 5, 2005: Childers leaves flowers, a letter, and some pictures of his children
at his ex-girlfriend’s house.
August 19, 2005: Childers leaves flowers and a letter at his ex-girlfriend’s house,
stating, among other things: “How come I don’t hear from you?”
August 20, 2005: Flowers are delivered to his ex-girlfriend’s house. No card.
September 6, 2005: Childers’ Craigslist postings begin. Childers posts an article
detailing a man who murdered his wife and kids.
October 20, 2005: Childers leaves a letter at his ex-girlfriend’s house, stating,
among other things: “I am still patiently waiting for you to find the courage to
face me.”
January 6, 2006: Childers leaves a cookie and note at his ex-girlfriend’s house.
January 13, 2006: Childers leaves a crafting catalog (presumably a hobby of hers) at
his ex-girlfriend’s house.
February 14, 2006: Valentine’s Day. Childers leaves flowers and a letter at his
ex-girlfriend’s house, stating, among other things: “At least I can see you are
still coming, and going.” Childers writes, “I go out of my way” to walk by her house
“four to six times” daily, and that Childers has rented a storage space (that
Childers sometimes sleeps in) that is only ten minutes from her house.
The letter also states: “Is it so wrong for me to care about you?”
February 16, 2006: Childers leaves a letter at his ex-girlfriend’s house on what he
describes as their “anniversary,” i.e., the anniversary of when the first
restraining order went into effect. Childers letter states, among other things,
“Breaking off communications, changing telephone numbers, and disconnecting
doorbells are exactly the sort of counterproductive, self-sabotaging actions, in my
opinion, that lead to accidentally cracked door glass.” Also, Childers states that
he is waiting for her to admit that she is sorry.
March 22, 2006: After the judge finds Childers’ conduct to be harassing and
threatening, the second restraining order is issued against Childers. This time it
is for five years. And Childers is ordered to surrender his firearms (two shotguns
and a .38) to the police.
It's happened and every one must know. Tell every one you know to see these videos.
2 Different Series of videos called "TheUncounted" & "Hacking Democracy".
Part of the oath to take public office is to defened The Constutition & be Fiscally responsible.
United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 8
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States".
Look at the National Debt increase as a percentage based upon the National Debt as of September 1981 [$998 Billion].
From: Sep 1981 ……..…….. $997 Billion
To: ... Aug 2008 ……..……..$10.5 Trillion
......................................................................... National Debt Growth 10,100%
Source: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
ADD ON THESE EXPENSES: August 2008 Till Apr 2009:
~ $29.5 Billion Bailout of Bear Sterns
~ $97.2 Billion Bailout of BofA
~ $97.4 Billion Bailout of Auto Industry
~ $112 Billion Bailout of AIG
~ ~ (NOTE: It only cost $115 Billion to rebuild Europe after WW2)
~ $139 Billion Bailout of GE
~ $235 Billion Bailout of CitiGroup
~ ~ ~ [This group of expenses Totals $710 Billion bailout of Banks & Corporations.]
~ $300 Billion Bailout for unpaid mortgages.
~ ~ (NOTE: Slightly less than WW1 debt $324 Billion)
~ $400 Billion Bailout of Fannie May & Freddie Mac.
~ $700 Billion to buy bad loans through TARP.
~ $787 Billion Stimulus package
SUB TOTAL [1] $4,000,000,0000,000.00.
~ ~ SPENT in 7 months (Aug 08 to May 09) $4 TRILLION spent in 7 months.
Our government has committed to spend $7 Trillion MORE in the next few years.
SUB TOTAL [2] $12,000,000,000,000
~ $12 Trillion Current & Future spending created by our government in 7 months August 08 – April 09.
SUB TOTAL [3] April 2009 National Debt (approximately) $14,024,724,896,912.49 ($14 Trillion, 24 Billion).
SUB TOTAL [4] INCLUDE future committed expenses & it totals - $19.8 Trillion!!!! (Unpaid SSI remittances $40 Trillion more!!!)
GRAND TOTAL - including all future committed expenses
~ ~ ~ [SSI unpaid remittances & current National Debt] - $59,800,000,000,000.00 / $59.8 Trillion!!!!!
~ ~ ~ (Rumor has it – one Senator claims our future expenditures for SSI could up to $100 Trillion.)
National Debt INCREASE From 1981 TO Apr 2009 ~
....................................... .................................. National Debt Growth 14,500%
National Debt INCREASE From 1981 TO Apr 2014 ~
.......................................................................... National Debt Growth 20,080%
Correlate the debt with growth of illegal immigration: From 1981 to Apr 2009.
Illegal immigration estimated population growth (from 3 million to 30 million) ...............................................................................………….. 1,000%
Illegal immigration expense deficit 1981 – 2009 (in my humble estimate) at least .......................................................................................…........ $15 Trillion
Why won't the news share these facts with you?
** Do yourself and your kids a favor - See at least 10-20 of the videos on page 1 & 2 from these Educational Video PlayLists -
(It's not just one fact that hurts us. It's a conglomeration of many facts & associated risks that explain how congress has betrayed us. Beginners will need to spend 5-10 hours watching videos for starters to see the conglomeration.)
* * Proof the Illegal Immigration Crisis Exists www.IllegalImmigrationCrisis.com ~ Educational Video Library
Associated FACT: Presidents Hoover, Truman & Eisenhower chose to be Fiscally Responsible and deported millions of illegal aliens!:
A) During the Great Depression, President Herbert Hoover ordered the deportation of all illegal aliens in order to make jobs available to American citizens that desperately needed work.
B) Harry Truman deported over two million Illegal's after WWII to create jobs for returning veterans.
C) And then again in 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower deported 13 million Mexican nationals! The program was called 'Operation 'Wetback' so that American WWII and Korean veterans had a better chance at jobs. It took 2 years, but they deported them! Now, if they could deport the illegal back then, they can sure do it today!! If you have doubts about the accuracy of this information, enter Operation Wetback into your favorite search engine and confirm it for yourself. Reminder: Don't forget to pay your taxes. ………… illegal aliens are depending on you!
Verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback
Verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States
SO --- WHY is our government hesitating to do this again?