21 Jul: Re: USCAAF Judges Ruling Re: EoP Amicus submission to USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA

* US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces Judges … Judge Denise Lind
» US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces Judges, Clerk of the Court, Joseph R Perlak, CCR, Mr. Shayana D. Kadilal, Amy Goodman, Glenn Greenwald, Kevin Goztola, Wikileaks, Julian Assange, Chase Madar, Captain Chad M. Fisher, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Gregg P. Leslie, Pfc Bradley Manning, David Coombs Esq, Chelsea Manning, Free Chelsea Manning, Judge Denise Lind.
* 21 Jul: Re: USCAAF Judges Ruling Re: EoP Amicus submission to USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: CCR v USA, EoP v Wikileaks, USA v BC Manning, EoP v Glenn GreenwaldEoP Ft Bragg: Mil Ethics Q. / EoP NWO SCO: EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP Academia, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Media / EoP v WiP NWO Neg.

*From: EoP MILED Clerk <eop.miled.clerk@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: Edit: Re: USCAAF Judges Ruling Re: EoP Amicus submission to USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA
To: “USCAAF Clerk of the Court: Joseph R Perlak” <uscaaf.home@armfor.uscourts.gov>
Cc: “Mr. Shayana D. Kadilal” <shanek@ccrjustice.org>, Amy Goodman <mail@democracynow.org>, Glenn Greenwald <glenn.greenwald@theintercept.com>, Kevin Goztola <kgosztola@hotmail.com>, Chase Madar <chasemadar@hotmail.com>, “Captain Chad M. Fisher” <Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil>, “Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press: Mr. Gregg P. Leslie” <gleslie@rcfp.org>, “Pfc Bradley Manning: David Coombs Esq” <coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com>, Judge Denise Lind <dlind@law.gwu.edu>
* From: EoP MILED Clerk <eop.miled.clerk@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 2:22 PM
Subject: Edit: Re: USCAAF Judges Ruling Re: EoP Amicus submission to USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA
To: “USCAAF Clerk of the Court: Joseph R Perlak” <uscaaf.home@armfor.uscourts.gov>
Cc: “Mr. Shayana D. Kadilal” <shanek@ccrjustice.org>, Amy Goodman <mail@democracynow.org>, Glenn Greenwald <glenn.greenwald@theintercept.com>, Kevin Goztola <kgosztola@hotmail.com>, Chase Madar <chasemadar@hotmail.com>, “Captain Chad M. Fisher” <Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil>, “Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press: Mr. Gregg P. Leslie” <gleslie@rcfp.org>, “Pfc Bradley Manning: David Coombs Esq” <coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com>, Judge Denise Lind <dlind@law.gwu.edu>
* From: EoP MILED Clerk <eop.miled.clerk@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: USCAAF Judges Ruling Re: EoP Amicus submission to USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA
To: “USCAAF Clerk of the Court: Joseph R Perlak” <uscaaf.home@armfor.uscourts.gov>
Cc: “Mr. Shayana D. Kadilal” <shanek@ccrjustice.org>, Amy Goodman <mail@democracynow.org>, Glenn Greenwald <glenn.greenwald@theintercept.com>, Kevin Goztola <dissenter@firedoglake.com>, Kevin Goztola <kgosztola@hotmail.com>, Chase Madar <chasemadar@hotmail.com>, “Captain Chad M. Fisher” <Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil>, “Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press: Mr. Gregg P. Leslie” <gleslie@rcfp.org>, “Pfc Bradley Manning: David Coombs Esq” <coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com>, Judge Denise Lind <dlind@law.gwu.edu>

US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces Judges
via Clerk of the Court: Joseph R Perlak (uscaaf.home@armfor.uscourts.gov)
CC: USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA:

CC: USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA:
CCR: Mr. Shayana D. Kadilal (shanek@ccrjustice.org); Amy Goodman (mail@democracynow.org); @democracynow; Glenn Greenwald (glenn.greenwald@theintercept.com); @ggreenwald; Kevin Goztola (dissenter@firedoglake.com); Kevin Goztola (kgosztola@hotmail.com); @kgosztola; Wikileaks: @wikileaks; Julian Assange: @JulianAssange; Chase Madar (chasemadar@hotmail.com); @ChaseMadar; US Gov: Captain Chad M. Fisher (Chad.m.fisher.mil@mail.mil); Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press: Mr. Gregg P. Leslie (gleslie@rcfp.org); Pfc Bradley Manning: David Coombs Esq (coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com); Chelsea Manning: @xychelsea; Free Chelsea Manning: @FreeChelseaNet; Judge Denise Lind (dlind@law.gwu.edu)

Re: USCAAF Judges Ruling Re: EoP Amicus submission to USCAAF: #12-8027/AR: CCR v USA

This is a summary transparency notice update related to Ecology of Peace vs Masonic War is Peace New World Order Negotiations [subsequently referred to as “EoP v WiP NWO Neg”] regarding the USCAAF judges ruling via letter from Clerk of the Court: William DeCicco [PDF], response to the Ecology of Peace Amicus submitted to the US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces, in case # 12-8027/AR: CCR v. U.S..

EoP Legal Submissions: Official State Responses:

Many EoP Legal Submissions to international and/or national courts, have been ignored with no response. If or where any court has responded, such response, and/or ruling is in the process of being documented at Official State Responses, which shall include the following summary related to the juridical decision making of USCAAF Judges in USCAAF: Case # 12-8027/AR: CCR v US.

Clerk/Registrar accepted EoP application into the court record they administratively clerked on, for juridical arbitration. The Judge/s – perhaps as a result of ego and/or ecological illiteracy [EoP Definition of Ego/Eco Literacy] – refused to allow the application to be submitted into court record proceedings, for official ruling response from the judges, and/or other parties, to enable court to make impartial truth-seeking evidentiary enquiry into EoP v WiP issues in dispute.
→ US: US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces: Judges: Case # 12-8027/AR: CCR v US.

If that summary interpretation of the USCAAF judges reasons for refusing to make an impartial truth-seeking evidentiary enquiry into the issues in dispute; is partially or entirely inaccurate; kindly let me know how or why it is inaccurate, and I shall be happy to make an impartial enquiry into your evidence in accordance with Eco/Ego literacy and EoP Radical Honoursty Information Quality Operations communication policy; and amend the aforementioned summary interpretation, and/or apologize in writing as appropriate.

EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations: Summary Overview: Whom Should the Military Kill?

Shut Down WiP Ponzi Profiteering of Resource Conflict Misery Economy: Strategic and Tactical Discussion: Whom Should the Military Kill:

Generally speaking, all EoP Legal Submission cases, involve EoP scientific and cultural law evidentiary recommendations to shut down the WiP Ponzi profiteering of resource conflict and misery economy, by ‘turning off the tap’ — i.e. the breeding / consumption above ecological carrying capacity limitscauses of resource conflict and war; by implementing an Ecology of Peace New World Order Social Contract that requires a) requires all citizens of all races, religions, nations, to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits; or be humanely eliminated from the planetary genepool; (b) nationalizes all property and provides all responsible freedom oath citizens a property ration to enable their shelter and survival self-sufficiency to enable the rebuilding of a relocalized sustainable future.

The ‘Whom Should the Military Kill’ military strategic and tactical discussions – following on from EoP US Army Ft Bragg – are different and similar; to (a) South Africa’s Ending Apartheid negotiations between the ANC and the National Party, held between Thabo Mbeki and Willie Esterhuize, as depicted in the movie: Endgame: Trailer, based on Robert Harvey’s book The Fall of Apartheid. The negotiations were brokered by Michael Young, a British businessman who worked for Consolidated Gold Fields, and held at Mells Park House, a country house near Frome in Somerset, then owned by Consolidated Gold Fields; and (b) the Nazi Party’s Wannsee Conference, chaired by Reinhard Tristan Eugen Heydrich, held in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee on 20 January 1942, the purpose of which was to clearly legally define ‘Who is and is not a Jew’, in order to formalize plans for the Final Solution to the Jewish Question—the deportation and genocide of all Jews in German-occupied Europe.

Similarities and Differences:

Ending ANC & National Party Racial Apartheid:
The ANC and NP’s negotiation goals were to end apartheid, however their ‘End Apartheid’ negotiations failed – due to reasons not yet clarified – to address, and/or negotiate the root causes of apartheid resource conflict violence; namely the ‘right to breed and consume with total disregard for ecological carrying capacity limits’ clauses of international law.

Ending EoP v WiP cultural apartheid, via EoP Truth & Reconciliation:
The EoP v WiP negotiations goals are to end economic, racial, religious, gender, academic, media, etc apartheid, via Ecology of Peace Truth and Reconciliation: i.e. by addressing the root causes of racial, religious, gender, academic, media, etc resource conflict violence; namely: the ‘right to breed and consume with total disregard for ecological carrying capacity limits’ clauses of international law; and taking responsibility to cooperate to implement Ecology of Peace intenational law.

Ecology of Peace legal and information negotiation recommendations, provide EoP scientific and cultural law advocacy on how and why to cooperate to shut down the WiP Ponzi profiteering of resource conflict and misery economy, by ‘turning off the tap’ — i.e. the breeding / consumption above ecological carrying capacity limitscauses of resource conflict and war; by implementing an Ecology of Peace New World Order Social Contract that (a) requires all citizens of all races, religions, nations, to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits; or be humanely eliminated from the planetary genepool; (b) nationalizes all property and provides all responsible freedom oath citizens a property ration to enable their shelter and survival self-sufficiency to enable the rebuilding of a relocalized low-tech organic agrarian sustainable future.

Wannsee: Jewish Question Final Solution: Secret:
The Nazi Party’s Wannsee Conference – documented in Conspiracy: Introduction and Wannsee Conference – chaired by Reinhard Tristan Eugen Heydrich, held in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee on 20 January 1942, to clearly legally define ‘Who is and is not a Jew’, in order to formalize plans for the Final Solution to the Jewish Question—the deportation and genocide of all Jews in German-occupied Europe; were held in secret, Jews and Germans only found out about the negotiations years after the war.

ANC & National Party: End Apartheid: Secret:
The ANC and National Party’s End Apartheid Negotiations were secret, South African’s of all races only found out about them after the National Party and ANC agreed that they had allegedly ended apartheid.

EoP v WiP: Whom Should the Military Kill?: Not Secret:
EoP culture’s Final Solution to the Scarcity Combatant Question EoP v WiP negotiations are public, published and available online: EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations. Ecology of Peace legal submissions to court/s are also available in the court record – for example: SA Constitutional Court: The Citizen v Robert McBride – where the Judges and/or any other party consented to them being submitted for consideration to the issues in dispute in the proceedings. They are consequently publicly available to any individual of any race, religion or culture, journalist, editor, lawyer, judge, whom has been informed of their existence, for them to read and incorporate into their personal and/or professional relating values; to discuss and share the information with their family or community; and/or if sincere about non-violent resolution to resource conflict; to do whatever they can to cooperate; to implement an EoP Intnl law social contract.

Wannsee: Jewish Question Final Solution: White Supremacy Law:
The Nazi Party’s ‘Final Solution to the Jewish Question’ Negotiations recommendations were based upon racial Aryan supremacist ideology.

EoP v WiP: Who Should Military Kill Q: Ecological Carrying Capacity Supremacy Law:
EoP culture’s negotiations – and EoP scientific and cultural law Truth and Reconciliation Military Tribunal recommendations regarding whom should be killed, how, by whom and when – are based upon scientific ecological carrying capacity principles; and submitted to Scarcity Combatant Respondents as part of legal proceedings, to inform them of the Scarcity Combatant War Criminal charges against them; and how and what they can do to take responsibility and make amends for their former breeding/consumption war scarcity combatant lifestyles, by cooperating to implement an EoP Intnl law social contract.

EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations purpose is to provide EoP Axis military officials with a clear legal definition of an Eco Innocent and Scarcity Combatant – whether Jew, European, African, American, South African, Christian, Muslim, Catholic, Buddhist, communist, capitalist, nationalist, liberal, conservative, lawyer, judge, psychologist, farmer, janitor, teacher, or unemployed — so that their soldiers, or any civilians they conscript into militia’s; are clear – if or when they consider EoP Axis Military Necessity Evacuation or some similar form of ‘Military Final Solution’ necessary; for example: if EoP Legal Truth and Reconciliation Commission Legal/Military Tribunals – as suggested in Citizen v R McBride and EoP v Nobel are obstructed or fail – as to whom should not be killed and whom should be killed.

Military Endorsing Ecological Overshoot is criminal – Maj. Gen. Dana J.H. Pittard, as Commander at Ft. Bliss, cut ‘criminal’ energy use, increased recycling, conserved water as a matter of security. – LA Times: At one Army base, a vision for a new shade of green.

The problem with direct action [anti-terror] raids is … you can kill or capture enemy leaders, set back their organization; but I those kinds of blows were never decisive. The problem is they give you the illusion of activity and the illusion of progress. They make you feel like you are doing something; and in reality terrorism, is a symptom of wider [resource conflict resulting from right to breed/consume above ecological carrying capacity limits international law clauses] problems; and so if you just go after the symptoms, over time; you’ll feel good about it. You can even point to your constituence or point to anybody, look at all we’re doing’; but the problem can actually be getting worse. If you’re just striking & you don’t go after the base problems; … you can find yourself lopsided. You learn you’ve only learnt how to wack, & we say its the wack a mole; & you can continue that indefinately. – [EoP Amended] Stan McChrystal; Foreign Affairs: Military Strategy.

“I am an an accidental environmentalist. .. There’s a direct relationship between energy and the military. The more energy consumed, the less effective you are militarily because you’re more vulnerable. .. Why should I be concerned about climate change? Climate change brings about global instability. That makes the world more vulnerable and it’s more likely that soldiers like myself will have to fight and die somewhere.” – Steven Anderson; Yes Magazine: The Real Reason the Military is Going Green.

The military has been concerned about oil dependence for decades. This isn’t some newly green military. When they do have to fight a war, they want to mitigate risks to their personnel & equipment. Eight presidents have declared addiction to foreign oil a threat to national security. That would mean anyone using foreign oil is aiding & abetting an enemy. Anyone, who doesn’t aggressively cut oil consumption to within domestic production is technically committing treason.” – Andrew Holland, senior fellow for energy and climate policy at the non-partisan American Security Project; Yes: The Real Reason the Military is Going Green.
» EoP NWO SCO: EoP Applicants; EoP NTE GMA: Cabinet.
» IG: 17-04-15_ecologicalovershootiscriminal.

A transcript of all EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations correspondence regarding the Revolution of Military Ethics: Whom Should the Military Kill Question; can be found at EoP FT Bragg: Military Ethics Question.

A copy of this correspondence shall be documented at EoP Legal Submissions and EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations.

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone, aka Andrea Muhrrteyn
PO Box 5042, George East, 6539, RSA
GMC 4643-13 & 2578-14 Pro Se Applicant
Former MILED Clerk & Acting Clerk

.

Notices via Twitter

Amy Goodman: @democracynow; Glenn Greenwald: @ggreenwald, Kevin Goztola: @kgosztola, Wikileaks: @wikileaks; Julian Assange: @JulianAssange; Chase Madar: @ChaseMadar, Chelsea Manning: @xychelsea; Free Chelsea Manning: @FreeChelseaNet

EoP MILED Clerk: 21 Jul 2017: 14:28 hrs: @democracynow @ggreenwald @kgosztola @wikileaks @JulianAssange @ChaseMadar @xychelsea @FreeChelseaNet EoP corr 4u at http://eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za/2017/07/21-jul-uscaaf-judges/

..