Follow us!

    Re: Suddenly Acquired AADD,:FF

    Posted by v on 7/14/04

    On 7/13/04, DD wrote:
    > Funny. Unfortunately, all the stress and toxins have already given me that sans the suddenly acquired part. Hmm. Gradually acquired attention deficit disorder from too much bs for too long. Hard to believe we all agree on something. I can give you another topic to think about. En banc. Theoretically, judges can decide en banc to reopen or rehear a case. Any idea where I can find case law on this and understand the process.DD

    Hard to find good answers these days any more! try here, then continue. go to USC title VIII.general provisions > rule 35. I believe these are some case laws. good luck!

    On 7/13/04, ff wrote: >> Hey Mary,>> I started reading the Deutsche post and suddenly acquired Suddenly > Acquired Adult Attention Defecit Disorder - you know, S-A-A-A-D-D. > Could you, DD or someone spare me from this affliction and tell me > what all of that says? I guess I got burned out studying the > isolation of burnt cookie matter and interaction with coated coookware > as an alternative cause of disease mimicking severe allergic reaction > to Mary's mold of the garden variety.>> ff>> >> On 7/13/04, mary wrote: >> Wow... I'm completely freaked out. What, they give crack heads in >> germany computers for something to do?>>>> Mary>>>> On 7/12/04, Dr. Stefen Lanka PhD wrote: >>> Science, Medicine and Human Rights, >>> Germany>>> Wissenschaft, Medizin und Menschenrechte e.V.>>>>>>>>>>>> Officially registered humanitarian organisation>>> >>> President: >>> Karl Krafeld, Albrechtstr. 17, D-44137 Dortmund>>>>>> Vice-President: >>> Dr. Stefan Lanka, Ludwig-Pfaustr.1b, D-70176 Stuttgart>>>>>> T 0711 2220601>>> F 0711 2220600>>> M 0171 3281070>>> e >>> >>> To the OHCHR-UNOG>>> The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson>>>>>> The United Nations Centre for Human Rights, United Nations Office >>> at Geneva>>> 8-14 Avenue de la Paix >>> 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland >>> >>> To all Heads of Government and all Heads of State>>> To all NGOs>>> >>> Legal proceedings against the "Deutscher Bundestag", the >> Parliament >>> of the Federal Republic of Germany: Because of the intentional >>> continuation of acts of killing and manslaughter (§ 220a StGB >>> Germany) by the German Parliament.>>> >>> During the last six years proofs have been collected for the >>> following actions that have taken place inside Germany: The State >>> intentionally is using non-valid tests to persuade healthy persons >>> to take a deadly long-term medication. The persons, being healthy >>> before being tested die during the long-term-medication. The >> German >>> Parliament, since years intentionally is securing that this crime >>> continues.>>> >>> Course of Events on January 15th 2001 at the District Court >>> (Landgericht) of Dortmund:>>>>>> Judge Hackmann announced the statement of >>> the "Bundesgesundheitsbehörde", the Federal German Health >>> Authorities, which says that in connection with AIDS there has >>> never been isolated a virus (Dr. Marcus, Robert-Koch-Institute >>> (RKI) Berlin). The judge figured out that the German Bundestag had >>> been backing the lie of the Federal Health Authorities (RKI, Dr. >>> Marcus, 9.3.95) about a successful isolation of a virus in >>> connection with AIDS in the course of a petition (Art. 17, >>> Constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany, Pet. 5-13-15-2002 >>> 010526).>>>>>> The trial was based on actions of the defendant which were caused >>> by the misleading statement made by the RKI (Dr. Marcus) on the >> 9th >>> March 1995, that there were photographs of the isolated HI-virus >>> inside the publications of Montagnier (1983) and Gallo (1984). The >>> judge proved the untruthfulness of this statement using Dr. >> Marcus' >>> statement itself. The court imposed a suspended sentence of 8 >>> months of jail because of attempted coercion of the authorities to >>> adhere and act according to law and order.>>>>>> Pictures of "Isolated Viruses" Debunked>>>>>> The >>> Viral Fraud>>>>>> The document of the German Bundestag DS 12/8591 holds proof that >>> the Bundestag had already known in 1994 that neither Montagnier >>> (1983) nor Gallo (1984) had isolated any virus in connection with >>> AIDS. Based on this the Bundestag safeguarded the persistent lie >> of >>> the AIDS information campaign (RKI) from 9th March 1995 about the >>> successful isolation of a virus in connection with AIDS. As a >>> consequence of non-tolerating this lie and because of non->>> tolerating the deadly consequences of this lie, the trial took >>> place on 15th January 2001.>>>>>>>>> It is impossible – as far as laboratory conditions are concerned – >>> to develop a valid Virus-antibody-test, if the virus has not been >>> isolated before. Every layman understands that an individual proof >>> for an infection with a virus is impossible, if the existence of >>> the virus has never been generally proven. This knowledge of the >>> German health authorities, that the tests are not validated, can >> be >>> proven via the authorities' documents themselves. The error >>> concerning the test's validity is spread and supported by the >>> authorities – against better knowledge.>>>>>>>>> With two more petitions the Bundestag safeguarded the default of >>> the responsible authorities, not to carry out the law (§63 AMG, >>> Stufenplan II), to do studies and observations to protect persons >>> taking the AIDS-Medicine, the chemotherapy AZT (Pet. 5-13-15-2002->>> 058744 and Pet. 5-13-15-212-023567a).>>>>>>>>> The health authorities and the Bundestag know that there will be >> no >>> test method to prove an HIV-Infection, as long as HIV has not been >>> isolated. And there is no doubt that AZT – as well as the HIV->>> medications in general – are deadly themselves when used as long->>> term-medication.>>> In the course of the proceedings of the petitions the Bundestag >>> created an apparent peace of law – by means of deliberately >>> untruthful statements. President of the German Parliament Wolfgang >>> Thierse regards untruthful behaviour of this kind (as shown by the >>> Bundestag) as being justified by the Bundesverfassungsgericht >>> (Federal Constitutional Court). A videotape documenting an >>> interview (28th June 1995) shows that his predecessor in office, >>> Prof. Rita Süssmuth did know, that there had never been any proofs >>> for a virus in connection with AIDS and that there are no proofs >>> for the claims of infectivitiy.>>> >>> Still pending in the Bundestag is the petition Pet. 2-14-15-212->>> 02608. It is lodging a complaint against the legal authorities, >>> which stayed passive after getting the attention of the proofs for >>> these act of killings. Enclosed with the complaint were so many >>> proofs, which had made it necessary for the Bundestag to take >>> actions right after perusal, to stop the continuation of these >> acts >>> of killings by the state. Within the last six months every single >>> member of the German Bundestag was informed six times via mail >>> about these acts of killing by the state.>>>>>>>>> The intention of the German Bundestag to safeguard killings by the >>> state after gaining insight into the facts must be regarded as >>> proven, especially because of the fact that several petitions were >>> rejected by means of untruthful statements. The German Bundestag >>> and every individual member of the Bundestag intentionally >>> safeguards acts of killings by the state by deliberately >> misleading >>> the public. Healthy people are intentionally lead into a deadly >>> medication via tests with invalid results - and then die.>>>>>>>>> The criminal law of the BRD and especially § 220a StGB (Genocide) >>> protects citizens from act of killings organised by a state which >>> is deliberately misleading the public. It also protects the >>> citizens binding the legal authorities to take actions after >>> perusal. The prosecuting attorneys attended the trial on 15th >>> January 2001 at the Landgericht Dortmund and learned about the >>> facts – in front of the public. Their passivity afterwards serves >>> as a further proof for their further intention in this matter. (LG >>> Dortmund, Ns 70 Js 878/99 14(XVII) K 11/00)>>>>>> Karl Krafeld und Dr. Stefan Lanka, Dortmund und Stuttgart, den >>> 14.3.2001>>>>>> Dr. Stefan Lanka, virologist and molecular biologist, is >rbr

    Posts on this thread, including this one

  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.