16-11-2010, 03:10 PM
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 839
|
Ireland to Extradite 7/7 Ripple Effect Producer
15/11/2010 The Irish Supreme Court Rules to Extradite the Producer of the film "7/7 Ripple Effect" to the U.K. to face the possibility of Life in Prison for mailing DVDs of the film to a court 11/11/2010 Dublin—The Irish Supreme Court ruled today to uphold the extradition of Anthony John Hill, also known as Muad'Dib, for sending DVDs of the widely popular "7/7 Ripple Effect" to the jury foreman and judge, in c/o a British courthouse. The Irish Supreme Court's decision was to facilitate the British government's demand, through Westminster Magistrates Court, and an European Arrest Warrant, and surrender Mr. Hill to face charges for simply mailing DVDs of the "7/7 Ripple Effect” (with no letter) to the Kingston Crown Court, during the original trial of Waheed Ali, Sadeer Saleem and Mohammed Shakil. The British government had hoped to use the trial to lend credence to their "official story", which they failed to do when the 3 young men were found innocent. About 35 to 40 followers and supporters of Muad'Dib attended the extradition hearing at the Irish Supreme Court. The hearing was heard in a small courtroom known as the Hugh Kennedy room, rather than the primary Supreme Court room, probably to limit the publicity and room for supporters. The room was full, with about half a dozen supporters standing at the back. The following is an account of what took place in the Irish Supreme Court. It is not a verbatim account, and has been transcribed from rough notes taken by Richard D. Hall during the trial, and added to by others, so the quotations and statements are not word for word. Muad'Dib represented Himself in front of the panel of 3 Irish Supreme Court judges, and was immediately and rudely questioned by the presiding judge about His Written Submission. The presiding judge felt it necessary to question which aspects of Muad'Dib's Written Submission Muad'Dib would be presenting to the court, as if the other points would not be considered, even though the presiding judge claimed that everything was being considered. Muad'Dib opened by stating that it needed to be established that neither the Irish Supreme Court, nor any other court on this prison planet, has any jurisdiction over Him, and that the ONLY Law which applies was The Law given by Moses, at Sinai, in Horeb as stated in The Bible. He held up a copy of The Bible as He made this statement to the court and the judges. The presiding judge felt the need to then ask if that was the only point that Muad'Dib wished the court to consider or if He was planning on presenting any of the "legal" arguments from His Written Submission. The presiding judge presumably asked this question because Muad'Dib's Written Submission thoroughly covered all angles, using the Irish law and Constitution, the laws of the European Union, and also God's Law, which is recognized by the Irish Constitution and by British law as the Supreme Law, superseding all others. Muad'Dib informed the judges that one really precluded the other, because He was The Supreme Authority and that The Law expressly forbids men from making up man-made legislation, like the legislation that was being used against Him in this case. Muad'Dib then told the court who He really is, prompting His friends and followers to vocalize their support for Him. An officer of the court then quickly shouted at everyone to be quiet and extra security then entered the courtroom. Muad'Dib pointed out to the judges, that a statue of Moses resides on top of “this building” (the 4 Courts building in Dublin) and that Father and He had given Moses The Law and that it is The ONLY Law on this prison planet. Therefore all legal arguments, which are all based on fraudulent man-made legislation, are not lawful according to The Law, and this applied to the EU arrest warrant served, which had no authority. In an effort to skirt the issue of jurisdiction, the presiding judge then stated that Muad'Dib had made legal arguments in His Submission to the court and then asked Him “Does that mean you are not going to present legal arguments to the court?” with the same attitude as before. Muad'Dib paused to consider this, and stated the obvious, that the legal arguments were irrelevant and there was no point to it because the court had no jurisdiction over Him. The judges initially seemed baffled by this line and again asked, did that mean his legal arguments were not to be considered, proving that they had not read and studied His Written Submission. Further proof of this came when Muad'Dib asked the judges if he had watched the DVD, to which the presiding judge replied “No the court has not”. He went on to say “The court has been asked to consider a European arrest warrant. The court will not look at the DVD for the same reason that the judge in the previous hearing did not look at it." The presiding judge then stated "we are only interested in legal argument at this hearing". The previous lower court judge (Peart) had promised to watch the DVD and then broke his promise by refusing to do so (because he was ordered/threatened not to watch it?). Muad'Dib then replied to this “So, not lawful arguments, just legal arguments, which are legislation and are therefore unlawful”. After being asked previously by Muad'Dib, and refusing to answer which points of His Submission the court was going to consider, the presiding judge eventually yielded that the court was considering only 3 of the numerous "legal" points (including the fact that the surrender of the Appellant is prohibited under the EAWA 2003 on the five distinct grounds) made in Muad'Dib's Written Submission. Muad'Dib began the discussion of the "legal" points by stating that the law of crime by embracery is fraudulent and reminding the court that mankind cannot legislate. He said under embracery any submission is illegal, because it can prevent the truth getting into a court. Muad'Dib also pointed out that in the perversion of the course of justice there has to be dishonest intent, but again the presiding judge said that this hearing was not to consider evidence, but to consider the European arrest warrant. Muad'Dib's representation at the previous high court hearing was also discussed. Muad'Dib stated that His Barrister, Mr. Kelly did not follow his instructions and didn’t present His Argument that the extradition request was malicious and politically motivated at the previous trials. The judges completely ignored this fact, as evidenced in the court's decision. After about half an hour the 3 judges left the court to consider the case for about 20 minutes. About 1 minute before the judges returned to give their verdict, 5 Garda policy enforcers entered the court room. The presiding judge then summed up which took about 15 minutes. He first dismissed the claim that the court had no jurisdiction over Muad'Dib, quoting that their authority over Him comes from the constitution, but the presiding judge did say that the court understood Muad'Dib's Position on this, which is impossible. He then said that they considered 3 of the numerous legal points which Muad'Dib raised in His Submission, and that he would address the 3 legal points. The first was that the charge of perverting the course of justice was an infringement of His Freedom of expression under European law. The actual charge is “doing an act tending and intended to pervert the course of justice contrary to common law”, which the presiding judge never correctly stated, referring to the charge as "perverting the course of justice". The omission of the "intention" portion of the charge is critical, as there was obviously no intent on the part of Muad'Dib to do anything but PREVENT a miscarriage of justice, which is what prompted Him to send the DVDs. The presiding judge dismissed this stating that, while they recognize the importance of freedom of expression, it is not an absolute right and that it is "universally recognized" that restrictions have to be placed on it. He then used the example of newspaper editors writing prejudiced material while a trial is under way, that could result in the jury being discharged, which is ridiculous. The DVDs were sent IN THE CARE OF THE COURT. Newspaper articles do not use the courts as a filter for what they print during a trial. The court proceeded by rejecting the first of their three cherry-picked arguments from Muad'Dib's Written Submission under these false pretenses. The second argument considered was that there is no such offence in Ireland as perverting the course of justice. Please pay special attention to this, for this also proves what a miscarriage of justice this hearing really was. This Supreme Court judge made it sound like Muad'Dib had stated the opposite of what was actually written in His Submission. It was, in fact, the prosecutor (Minister) in the previous High Court trial, who had stated there was no such offence in Ireland as perverting the course of justice, as part of his argument that Muad'Dib should be extradited to face trial in the U.K, instead of being tried in Ireland for the same alleged offence. The judge (Peart J) in this previous High Court trial also did nothing to correct the prosecutor (Minister). Please read the following taken from Muad'Dib's Written Submission to the Irish Supreme Court:- 43. Peart J. erred in law by allowing the Minister to submit the statement that, from the learned judge’s legal-experience, he must have known was a lie; for which the Minister should be charged with committing perjury; and the learned judge also erred by then accepting that lie into the hearing. That false statement/lie being that there is no definition in Irish law of perverting the course of justice. Perverting the course of justice, as the Minister MUST know, is clearly defined in the Irish Criminal Justice Act, 1999, http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1999/...l#partvi-sec41 Section 41. – (1) Without prejudice to any provision made by any other enactment or rule of law, a person – who harms or threatens, menaces or in any other way intimidates or puts in fear another person who is assisting in the investigation by the Garda Siochána of an offence or is a witness or potential witness or a juror or potential juror in proceedings for an offence, or a member of his or her family, with the intention thereby of causing the investigation or the course of justice to be obstructed, perverted or interfered with, shall be guilty of an offence. 44. Peart J. erred in law by then allowing the Minister to build on that lie; that there is no definition in Irish law of perverting the course of justice; to introduce into the hearing, a different offence in English law, not Irish law: stating that we have to accept the English law, in an Irish court: that of attempting to influence a judge or jury. If it is a crime to attempt to influence a judge or jury, then every barrister and solicitor is guilty of that crime, in every case. 45. Peart J. erred in law by allowing the Minister to advance this argument when it is based on a lie and it is a different offence from that with which the Appellant is charged, and now the Minister is at it again having subsequently introduced embracery (from 1360AD) and contempt of court, that appear nowhere in the EAW that is the subject of this case, as is required by law. Who is he serving? http://mtrial.org/node/38 Muad'Dib even quotes the section from the Irish Criminal Justice Act, 1999, for their benefit. The Supreme Court judge went on to state that the law goes back 100 years (so why not try Muad'Dib in an Irish court for it?) and also stated that "it is a common law". The presiding judge delivered this ruling against Muad'Dib never realizing that he had actually misunderstood the point(?) and was ruling in favour of what Muad'Dib had actually presented in His Written Submission. And these were allegedly "learned" and "impartial" Supreme Court judges? The presiding judge also made a slip of the tongue when discussing the DVD by stating that it was "anticipated", which later he corrected to "intercepted". He went on to say that "any approach to a jury may amount to an attempt to pervert the course of justice". The court therefore stated their rejection of the second of their three cherry-picked arguments, never realizing (or did they?) that they AGAIN misunderstood the point and had actually agreed with Muad'Dib's argument here whilst ruling against Him. The third argument considered was that the crime was not committed in England. This was rejected on the grounds that the act of communication with the Jury took place in England, despite the fact that the DVDs were mailed from Ireland, AND despite the fact the alleged act of communication with the Jury never took place. They again used a far-fetched analogy, that it would be the same as if Muad'Dib had telephoned someone in England and asked them to do it, never taking into consideration that the DVDs were sent IN CARE OF THE COURT, for the court to forward as they saw fit, and that THE DVDs NEVER REACHED THE JURY. The court therefore rejected the third of their three cherry-picked arguments from Muad'Dib's Submission, again under false pretenses. And that is how the "learned" Irish Supreme Court judges orchestrated upholding the extradition request. Several chants from the supporters then began, "Traitors", "Injustice", "Cowards", "This is an outrage", "Shame", and "Look at the evidence, Servers of Satan”. Muad'Dib sat quietly on the bench for 3 or 4 minutes with a Garda policy enforcer standing over Him. He was not forced to his feet, the Garda policy enforcer could clearly see he was a very peaceful and elderly man. Muad'Dib's Followers tried to appeal to the Garda policy enforcer's common sense to reconsider what he was doing to no avail. Muad'Dib was taken to the local Garda station first and then transferred to Cloverhill, where He had previously spent 33 days incarcerated for this matter. There is presently no update on when He will be moved from Cloverhill to the U.K. and no court date there has been set. From what has transpired, it should be clear to anyone familiar with the case that there is absolutely NO justice in Ireland, nor was there ever an independent republic of Ireland. The Irish people are still subject to the fraudulent queen of England and the Irish judges and QC barristers are in fact traitors and nothing more than pawns carrying out their orders from the British crown. The British crown does not like being embarrassed, which is exactly what Muad'Dib/JAH has done with the "7/7 Ripple Effect" film, and why He is being made to suffer. The ludicrous nature of the charge against Muad'Dib/JAH should show everyone how desperate the British crown really is. It is ironic that at the same time Burma was releasing the political prisoner Aung San Suu Kyi; whom Prime Minister David Cameron has called an "inspiration"; the British "crown" was making further inroads towards turning Muad'Dib into a political prisoner right here in Britain, for sending a court DVDs of the "7/7 Ripple Effect". What the British government doesn't seem to know is that in extraditing Muad'Dib/JAH to the U.K., they will not only be increasing the popularity of the "7/7 Ripple Effect" film, they are bringing home THE evidence that Elizabeth II is a fraud. This injustice and how it unfolds should hopefully help focus people's attention on Muad'Dib/JAH and get the world to take notice of The Example that He has set, to bring the Truth, Justice, Freedom and Peace to this planet. Friends of Muad'Dib http://mtrial.org/ ----------------------------------- All who wish to help are welcome to join the forum - http://mtrial.org/forum |
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 04:14 PM
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,255
|
Shit is getting real. Ever get the feeling the lid is gonna blow off EVERYTHING? 9/11, 7/7, banking frauds, NWO...EVERYTHING?
Is this the plan, or is it just happening...fate? 
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 04:49 PM
|
#3 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Varies in quest for more Sooty
Posts: 12,319
|
Absolutely outrageous if this happens.
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 05:10 PM
|
#4 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Over the hill and round the bend
Posts: 12,338
|
This would bring further shame upon Ireland as if there is not enought already..
Free speech? |
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 05:16 PM
|
#5 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 5,592
|
Does he not want proper representation? I'd hate to see him in jail needlessly. More power to him if this is the way he wants to handle it but unfortunately there is a system in place that you have to play by.
I personally don't want to see an elederly man martyred. Ultimately he won't be in jail because of his film, he'll be in jail because he didn't defend himself. |
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 05:46 PM
|
#6 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: West Cork, Ireland
Posts: 18,048
|
Extradite someone for posting a DVD....ffs.
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 05:52 PM
|
#7 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Still trying to work that out
Posts: 4,981
|
Oh my god! How fucked up is that.
Thank you for telling me about this, I had no idea. Is there any way I can keep updated with this case because I want to attend the UK court he's been kidnapped to attend to show my support. OP you MUST let the freedomrebels and tpuc communities know about this story and the brithish constitution group and BBC5 (alternative BBC) because they all will rally his support here in the UK 100%. Heres the links to each website: The first two websites have very clever members who often turn up en-mass to court cases taking the freeman stance. www.tpuc.org www.freedomrebels.co.uk http://www.thebcgroup.org.uk http://news.bbc5.tv/
__________________
You can never know if quotes on the internet are genuine -Abraham Lincoln
------------------------------------------------------------------------ When a white army battles Indians and wins, it is called a great victory, but if they lose it is called a massacre. Chiksika/Cheeseekau |
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:01 PM
|
#8 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Still trying to work that out
Posts: 4,981
|
Quote:
I see what your saying but the position he has taken is the right one. Its the right of every human being that is being lied to and cheated by the courts. If he feels strongly in his soverign status then theres no way he will be able to suddenly accept to play along. I couldn't. Ultimatly, by keeping his freedom he will lose his freedom which just shows how fucked up and unfair the system is, so we need to support this guy as much as possible because the OP is right, he is just as much of a political prisoner as Aung San Suu Kyi was and this whole case proves the hypocracy of this country, Ireland and especially two face David Cameron.
__________________
You can never know if quotes on the internet are genuine -Abraham Lincoln
------------------------------------------------------------------------ When a white army battles Indians and wins, it is called a great victory, but if they lose it is called a massacre. Chiksika/Cheeseekau Last edited by rreeve; 16-11-2010 at 06:02 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:10 PM
|
#9 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Still trying to work that out
Posts: 4,981
|
Quote:
Plus! Imagine if you sent a copy of your 7/7 dvd to a court because you felt the information was relevant, it would be you in this guys shoes now. Its totally fucked up. Personally, because of reading this I'm in two minds to do the same by sending relevant information (maybe a DVD) to the court thats going to hear and try Muad'Dib. Maybe collate all the points of law he's made and turn that into a DVD. I'm sure his eventually jury would like to know the truth behind the illegal system they are serving. 
__________________
You can never know if quotes on the internet are genuine -Abraham Lincoln
------------------------------------------------------------------------ When a white army battles Indians and wins, it is called a great victory, but if they lose it is called a massacre. Chiksika/Cheeseekau |
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:28 PM
|
#10 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 839
|
Quote:
"Proper representation" (more like totally IMproper) is what forced Him to have to appeal to the Supreme Court in the first place. His representative at the former High Court trial refused to present Muad'Dib's arguments, and the judge refused to let Him speak and ultimately ruled against Him. As for the "system in place", that was thoroughly covered in His Written Submission (Irish law and Constitution, and EU law), so that if they refused to recognize (and go against their oath in so doing) the supremacy of God's Law, they would also be guilty of breaking the very laws they claim to believe in and uphold. You have to come to understand that man-made legislation is not something the legislators actually believe in. It is a method of control and for enacting their agendas and policies. Whenever man-made legislation actually protects the right of an individual to do what he did, as in the case of Muad'Dib, this legislation is ignored. Which is exactly what the Supreme Court judges did (cherry-picking only 3 of His many legal points), besides twisting them to mean the opposite, and/or producing ridiculous examples to (in)justify it, etc. Quote:
He gave them every possible legal argument (that they CLAIM to operate by), and also informed them that God's Law is the only one that counts, and It prohibits men from legislating. So either for one reason or the other, they should have denied the extradition. IF they were impartial. Which they are not. Remember that the judge in the previous trial at the High Court stated he would watch the film before delivering his verdict. And then he said he hadn't, so someone got to him during hearings. And the Supreme Court judges also refused to watch the film. For all they know, the DVDs could have contained a Disney movie. But OK, if He loses it's His fault. Not that the judges aren't interested in justice. Yeah... Last edited by danny fremen; 16-11-2010 at 06:35 PM. |
||
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:33 PM
|
#11 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 839
|
Quote:
Yes, please check http://mtrial.org and please join the forum - http://mtrial.org/forum . At the moment there's not much there because it's just been started up. It would be good to get members in who can share good ideas etc. Other than that, yes please spread the word to everyone, either through this press release or in your own words. Last edited by danny fremen; 16-11-2010 at 06:33 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:36 PM
|
#12 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 5,592
|
I absolutely agree with you to a degree...but when dealing with criminals you're simply gonna have to operate within their corrupt system. If he's making a moral stand, that's ok, more power to him, but if he actually wants to stay out of prison, everyone chipping in for some representation to "play the game" and simply argue that what he did was not what he's charged for, then IMO he has a better chance. Because he is quite clearly innocent. But going in there and talking about God and certain concepts that are not ordinarily dealt with (whether right or wrong) isn't gonna help him. They clearly don't even understand what he's on about.
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:47 PM
|
#13 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Still trying to work that out
Posts: 4,981
|
Talking about the '7/7 ripple effect' DVD I find absolutly astonishing that people still believe the offical version of events for this and 9/11 IF ONLY for the very simple fact that both had almost identical mock attacks going on at the same time as the real event.
on 7/7 a mock drill was being carried out that was almost identical to the real event. on 9/11 a mock drill was being carried out that was almost identical to the real event. Forget all the other overwhelming evidence, what more do you need that these two simple facts to prove they were both inside jobs being carried out by our own governments. The REASON for the mock drills are obvious, its so the staff/civil servants who are controlling things behind the scenes think they are carrying out the mock attack but actually they are helping to carry out the real one. This is what I believe anyway but another reason could be to HIDE traces of the goverernments REAL plots amongst the mock drills paperwork and logistics.
__________________
You can never know if quotes on the internet are genuine -Abraham Lincoln
------------------------------------------------------------------------ When a white army battles Indians and wins, it is called a great victory, but if they lose it is called a massacre. Chiksika/Cheeseekau |
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:50 PM
|
#14 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 839
|
Quote:
It is NOT His aim to purposefully get thrown in jail. But neither is it His aim to get out of that by NOT speaking the whole truth, and defending Himself as is right and proper, according to what He believes. If He did that He would not be a freeman even if He wasn't in prison. Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 06:55 PM
|
#15 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Still trying to work that out
Posts: 4,981
|
Quote:
But isn't that why we have precedent's all the time in law? I honestly see what your saying but I strongly believe a man should ALWAYS stand up for what he believes regardless of consequences because any injustices against this belief will only ever serve to strengthen it in the long run. If he just played along and gave up his stance he would basically be saying his beliefs are not important. However unlikely it may be, all he can do is hope for a precedent.
__________________
You can never know if quotes on the internet are genuine -Abraham Lincoln
------------------------------------------------------------------------ When a white army battles Indians and wins, it is called a great victory, but if they lose it is called a massacre. Chiksika/Cheeseekau |
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2010, 07:00 PM
|
#16 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Still trying to work that out
Posts: 4,981
|
HA HA HA
Check out the header graphic of Visor Consultants, the disaster recovery company who was managing the mock drill almost identical to the real events on 7/7.  Says it all for me. I'd LOVE to know what that final piece could be? 
__________________
You can never know if quotes on the internet are genuine -Abraham Lincoln
------------------------------------------------------------------------ When a white army battles Indians and wins, it is called a great victory, but if they lose it is called a massacre. Chiksika/Cheeseekau |
|
|
|
|
11-12-2010, 10:21 PM
|
#17 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: British Isles
Posts: 284
|
Just watched his documentary, and I have to say it's overwhelming. He provides a motive, evidence to substantiate a government plot and his extradition adds to the fact that he's exposed the truth.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...5263359807776# I cannot stress how important this video is.
__________________
There once was a family called Rothschild They'll finance both sides of the war It'll cause death and destruction And population reduction Yet still people don't know the score... Osama bin Laden = Emmanuel Goldstein |
|
|
|
|
11-12-2010, 10:24 PM
|
#18 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,087
|
Hows about we break him out of jail? In custody for trying to show truth in a world where liars are king. This situation cannot stand
|
|
|
|
|
11-12-2010, 10:28 PM
|
#19 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 17,087
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-12-2010, 10:35 PM
|
#20 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: West Cork, Ireland
Posts: 18,048
|
Quote:
This really pi**es me off
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
|
|
