I am repulsed by the content of this anti-semitic garbage. Why is this on this list? I thought this list was at least leftist. Jordana >From: "Yuriy Kirienko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: "The Grip \(E\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >CC: "CFC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "The Theries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Sons of Liberty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Grom" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Father's Manifesto" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christian Patriot" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "International Action Center" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Denman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "NCFC" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: The Grip - 55 (B) Kidnapping of Children by the American >Judiciary. Why and How it Works >Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:35:22 -0700 > >Gentlemen, > >About a year passed since I posted this article. I think it is the >time to repost it for the new subscribers to show the criminality >of the judicial system of the US and its genocidal policy towards >the White race, the White Man and the Father and Son. > >The place for the judicial bastards committing those crimes are >not on the bench but in the gas chamber for the crimes against >humanity that they routinely commit. > >Yuriy Kirienko > > > >The Grip - 55 (B) Kidnapping of Children by the American >Judiciary. Why and How it Works. > >by Yuriy Kirienko > >The text follows after the table of contents. > >TABLE OF CONTENTS >================= > >I. yk] Introduction. > >A-I. yk] Some of the Background. >B-I. yk] Usurpation of My Fatherhood Rights by the Judge >Roderick Duncan. > >1-BI. yk] Illegality of the Judicial Kidnapping. >2-BI. yk] Criminal Executive Decision. > >II. yk] Judicial and Executive Modes. > >A-II. yk] Corruption of the Judicial Procedure. >B-II. yk] Criminal as a Judicial Impersonator. >C-II. yk] Experts of the Court as False Witnesses. >D-II. yk] What Lawyers do in the Courts of Law? > >III. yk] Manipulations with Consciousness of the Victims. > >A-III. yk] Magic of the Judicial Show. >B-III. yk] Conflict Between the Two Contexts. > >1-BIII. yk] The False Context of the "Politically Correct." >2-BIII. yk] The Binding Power of the Context. >3-BIII. yk] Peculiarity of the Legal Contest Within the >False Context. > >C-III. yk] Hats the Attorneys Wear. > >1-CIII. yk] Context Determines the Color of the Hat. >2-CIII. yk] American Coca Cola and Cola Loca on the >Russian Easter. > >IV. yk] Human Intelligence and God. > >A-IV. yk] Nature of Proof. >B-IV. yk] Can You Prove that You are not a Camel? > >1-BIV. yk] Description is not a Proof. >2-BIV. yk] Self-evident Cannot be Proven. >3-BIV. yk] What Cannot Prove that You are not a >Camel? > >C-IV. yk] What You Can Prove Within the Context that >Claims You being a Camel. >D-IV. yk] A Jewish Created Context Enslaves Man, Aryan >and the White Father to the Jew. > >1-DIV. yk] Man, Aryan and White Father are always >Guilty. >2-DIV. yk] Resetting of the Initial Values by the >Politically Correct Context. > >a-2DIV. yk] Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad. >b-2DIV. yk] Are Two Legs Bad or are Two Legs >Better? >c-2DIV. yk] The Context Created by the Pig >determines Goodness or Badness of Two Legs. > >V. yk] Giving the Cart Blanch to the Judicial Will. > >A-V. yk] Judicial Decisions and the Penal Code. >B-V. yk] Whitewashing of the Crime. > >1-BV. yk] Handling of Evidence by the American Judge. >2-BV. yk] Judiciary Magic. >3-BV. yk] Hiding the Origin of Criminal Intent. >4-BV. yk] Blood Ties - Bonds, Whips and Carrots. > >a-4BV. yk] Power of the Blood Ties. >b-4BV. yk] Usage of Blood Ties by the Jews. > >C-V. yk] Two Crimes at the Same Time. > >VI. yk] Summary of the Family Court swindle: > >A-VI. yk] The burden of proof placed upon the Father. >B-VI. yk] Are You a Good Father? >C-VI. yk] Are You a Stupid Father? >D-VI. yk] Is Judge a Good Pimp? >E-VI. yk] Lawyer - a Legal Representative of the Judge. >F-VI. yk] Do not Endorse the Crime Against Yourself. > >VII. yk] Conclusion. > >A-VII. yk] Pimps Instead of Fathers in Gun Ownership. >B-VII. yk] The Rotten Deeds of the Rotten Mob. > >1-BVII. yk] The State Mob does not Represent Fathers. >2-BVII. yk] The State Mob Destroys Life in that Country. >3-BVII. yk] Judicial Monsters Turned the State Power >Against You. >4-BVII. yk] You can entrust Nothing to the Sate >Descretion. >5-BVII. yk] Jews Plan to do What they Already did in >Russia 1917. > >C-VII. yk] At Present Guns are Your Only Protection. > >======================================= > >KIDNAPPING OF MY CHILD. > >I. yk] Introduction. > >A-I. yk] Some of the Background. > >US Department of Justice > >Immigration and Naturalization Service > >Additional information on marital history of Yuriy E. Kirienko. > >This is an expanded version of the paper with the same title >written as an address to the White American Male - the most >downtrodden male in the history of the Aryan Civilization. > >1. Married to XXXXXXXX X. XXXXXXX, born citizen of the >USA, on XX-XX-78 in the State of Illinois. > >2. Divorced by Superior Court of California - case No.; >XXXXXX-X, on 5-31-1990. > >3. Child-son: XXXX XXXX XXXX born XXXX XX, 1980. >XXXX has dual citizenship. On November 25, 1980 the >General Consulate of the USSR in San Francisco issued to >XXXX a Birth Certificate No.: XXXXXX of the USSR upon >the written request of both parents. > >4. By the decision of the judge Roderick Duncan of the Su- >perior Court of California, County of Alameda the child was >kidnapped from his father on May 31, 1990. > >B-I. yk] Usurpation of My fatherhood Rights by the >Judge Roderick Duncan. > >1-BI. yk] Illegality of the Judicial Kidnapping. > >01.yk] The judgment regarding my son was a legalized act >of kidnapping for neither was it based on any factual evi- >dence nor was it made according to the Laws of California. >The decision of that judge either stemmed from conflict of his >personal values with mine or was determined by the needs >of the undeclared and illegal executive objectives. If his de- >cision was dictated by his personal values, his interpreta- >tions of what I told to my son are subjective and arbitrary and >as such are not valid in California. > >2-BI. yk] Criminal Executive Decision. > >02.yk] If his decision was determined by the undeclared ob- >jectives they aside of being criminal in itself (for what else >could be the reasons for keeping them undisclosed) they >change the mode of reasoning from the judicial to executive >thus making the decision also illegal. > >II. yk] Judicial and Executive Modes. > >03.yk] In the judicial mode, the judge transforms the set of >the facts of evidence into the decision of acting over them in >a certain manner. At that, he must strictly follow the pre- >scribed for that purpose set of instructions that are called >laws. In the judicial mode, the outcome of a trial is a function >of the initial evidence and before lawful arrival at the final >decision it cannot be known neither to the judge nor to the >officers of the court. In the executive mode, the process is >reversed and the executive proceeds from the desired out- >come to its necessary preconditions. > >04.yk] He orders his decision to execution after establishing >to the best of his abilities that at their expansion in time to- >wards the expected outcome all the intermediary events >would stay within the frame of the law. > >A-II. yk] Corruption of the Judicial Procedure. > >05.yk] The errors of the judicial procedure may be of the >three types. 1) Acceptance of appearances of things and >events into the facts of evidence. 2) Misinterpretation of pub- >lic policies and non-enforcement of the laws. 3) Switching >the mode of the proceedings from the judicial to executive. >The error of the third type is the most dangerous for it >streamlines the first two points into the battle plan towards >reaching illegally the criminal objective using the power of >the legitimate state. > >06.yk] Such judicial "error" is always deliberate and turns >every participant of the procedure into the willing or unwilling >accomplices of the crime. The judge himself acting in >such a mode is a judicial impersonator - a criminal, veil- >ing himself into the garments of the judicial procedure >and legalese to prevent disclosure of his true identity to >the victimized litigants and attending spectators. > >B-II. yk] Criminal as a Judicial Impersonator. > >07.yk] Lack of the causal-consequential connection with the >reality is the distinctive trait of the so run "judicial' procedure. >In such a procedure, with a set executive goal, the functions >of the thief in the judicial chair consist of deliberately commit- >ting himself and allowing others to contribute in the first two >errors. Functioning of the other, involved into such a ploy of- >ficers of the court, is reoriented to convincing of the victims >and the unsuspecting public that the judicial procedure is run >in full faith and that the reached executive goal is, indeed, a >judicial decision. > >08.yk] Under such conditions no facts of reality would be al- >lowed to matter to the extent as to alter the "judicial' decision >beyond the built in margin of error. Every trade has its tricks >and a "judicial" thief with his accomplices can victimize plain >public with impunity at no risk to themselves. There is no >more secure place for a criminal than the judicial chair in the >American court. As I believe H. Mencken put it in his "In De- >fense of Women": a judge is a student who gives grades to >himself. > >C-II. yk] Experts of the Court as False Witnesses. > >09.yk] The suite of the judge consists of such false wit- >nesses, as often are the experts of the court. They testify in >the name of some invisible entity to some often equally in- >visible and irreproducible effect. Among them, the social >workers and psychologists are the most prominent liars >since 99% of their testimonies in court is nothing but pseudo- >scientific rigmarole called upon to prove the "judge" right. >They are spokesmen for the idols as they were at the days >of the old. In those days, they existed under differently >sounding names such as soothsayers, necromancers, star- >gazers and other oracles and mouthpieces of the unknown. > >10.yk] However, it is doubtful that they could influence the >judicial procedure to any significant extent. In former days, >they were not allowed to testify and often were prosecuted >as charlatans and liars. Due to the advances of science in >the course of the last century people without special educa- >tion began to view everything called scientific with respect >and awe while everything described in a specialized and >non-understandable for them jargon - as scientific. For so >brainwashed people chanting of the sorcerers and shamans >acquires the same testimonial value once they do it in the >language the litigants do not understand. > >D-II. yk] What Lawyers do in the Courts of Law? > >11.yk] The suit of the judge also consists of lawyers em- >ployed by the court system under the pretext of knowing the >intricacies of the judicial procedure and pertinent laws. Sup- >posedly, that knowledge allows them to present to the judge >the truth of the matter with clarity and precision far beyond >and above such capacity of the litigants themselves. > >12.yk] Were that truth actually existing aside from the facts >of evidence the lawyers of the involved parties would have >sought to converge upon it. It would not have been, then, a >question of whose lawyer is better and fees higher. Were >that truth non-existent the lawyers would have nothing to >search for to present it to the judge. So, what than lawyers >do in the courthouse? > >III. yk] Manipulations with Consciousness >of the Victims. > >13.yk] One and the same glass may be half-full and half- >empty. Depending on the context the client chooses to view >it, the contents of the glass may appear for his conscious- >ness growing or diminishing. Creating the context in which >the client sees that glass the attorney invokes an illusory >sensation of gain or loss in his mind. > >14.yk] The purpose of manipulating consciousness of >the client is in compelling him to err in his judgment, >taking his loss for a gain. That error of judgment delib- >erately prompted by the attorney is configured to fit the >preconceived decision of the judge making his illegal >and criminal executive decision to appear judicial and >lawful. > >15.yk] Such manipulations with consciousness of a victim >lay at the foundation of the fraud commonly used in the judi- >cial practice of the USA. Producing a judicial fiction lawyers >and judges deliberately distort the information they bring into >the focus of the litigants' attention. The science fiction uses >false assumptions, hypothetical evidence and non-proven to >exist laws of nature stimulating the creativity of the consumer >for the purposes of entertainment. > >A-III. yk] Magic of the Judicial Show. > >16.yk] In contrast to the science fiction, the judicial fiction >uses the false facts, that have been illegally, deliberately and >criminally accepted into the evidence by the judge, and mis- >interprets the laws and public policy to reach the precon- >ceived by that judge executive objectives. It so affects the >human consciousness that instead of the criminal reality the >victim "sees" non-real images of justice that are existing only >in his consciousness. > >17.yk] Because those images do not originate in the con- >texts of the reality to which the litigants belong, they cannot >be debunked with the facts of that reality taken out of its con- >text. That is even if the lawyer would have agreed to bring >them to the attention of the judge and the judge would have >allowed the arguments that use them to be heard. Appear- >ance of the invulnerability of the judicial criminals stands on >the mismatch between the imaginary and real contexts. > >B-III. yk] Conflict Between the Two Contexts. > >1-BIII. yk] The False Context of the "Politically Cor- >rect." > >18.yk] The imaginary context is prompted up by the non- >imaginary, real but clandestine, criminal agenda. That con- >text is termed with an absurd label of the "Politically Correct." >Several professionals experienced in playing the con game >of that type do the job as do several thieves playing on one >hand the card games in the Russian trains. At the same time >the context stemming from the reality of the non-restricted >natural life is neither articulated nor presented in the court- >room at all. > >19.yk] Several people conceding to it or agreeing upon it >emotionally can maintain any context. A context can be cre- >ated and maintained also by a strong-willed individual >blessed with an unusual insight and capable of imprinting it >upon others thus opening their eyes towards the truth. A >regular litigant cannot do that. > >2-BIII. yk] The Binding Power of the Context. > >20.yk] A child learns the definition of the words by the con- >texts in which they are being used and by the emotions con- >veyed upon them by the adult talkers whom he trusts. That is >how the culture is being learnt. The falsely accused litigant >"learns" the new definition of words as it follows from the >imaginary context created for him by the attorneys. That con- >text is the policy to "win the case" and is also maintained by >other officers of the court playing their con game in their in- >dividual capacities. > >21.yk] A false context can be debunked only as a whole. >Every attempt to prove it wrong by using words defined by >another context leads to endless word-mincing, endless re- >definition of the words and endless descriptions of the self- >evident that logically does not converge to the sought for >truth. Attorneys have been creating the false contexts by >misrepresenting the reality for many decades in order to en- >slave fathers and bind them by the "moral obligations" to- >wards their enslavers - Jews, whores and their servants. >3-BIII. yk] Peculiarity of the Legal Contest Within the >False Context. > >22.yk] The context created by the attorneys is a sub- >context of the general context of the class of cases where >the moral guilt of the falsely accused is already built in. The >task of the judicial show of the Unite States is limited to the >policies of winning the cases by exacerbating or mitigating >the non-existent built in moral debt of all, mostly White fa- >thers, to maximize the profits in the long run. > >23.yk] The contexts created during those shows are in con- >tradiction to the context of the natural, not bound by the spi- >der-web of the restraining laws created by the legal swin- >dlers, free life. The conceptual definitions of the words that >follow from the context of the free life are not the same as >the definitions given to the same words by the legal criminals >in the context of the litigation. > >C-III. yk] Hats the Attorneys Wear. > >1-CIII. yk] Context Determines the Color of the Hat. > >24.yk] The colors of the hats that the American lawyers >dawn upon themselves before the trial do not change the na- >ture of their activity. Black or white hats remain purely the >decorations of the criminal legal clowns. They make the >scripts of their roles appear malevolent or benevolent for the >course of truth depicted in the show their play. Yet they still >retain their fictitious and therefore always malevolent charac- >ter outside its legal context for the truth defined by the real >life. > >2-CIII. yk] American Coca Cola and Cola Loca on the >Russian Easter. > >25.yk] On the Easter night in Russia of the 50s, they were >showing in all the movie theaters near you all night long a >Czechoslovakian movie called the "Lemonade Joe". It pic- >tured a 19th century American town with two bars located >across the street from one another. In the evil bar, the >whores danced Can-Can wearing the black skirts, garter >belts and stocking while in the virtuous bar all their three part >suits were white in color. The virtuous whores dressed in all >white treated customers with Coca Cola while the evil ones >dressed in all black served American cowboys with Cola >Loca brew that look and tasted just the same. > >IV. yk] Human Intelligence and God. > >26.yk] Advanced technology of the contemporary society >calls forth the people whose training in exact natural sci- >ences precludes pulling wool over their eyes. If you want to >make a rocket fly, you must know for sure that what you see >is real rather than imaginary. An effect is called true if it is >self-evident and could be reproduced at will of the experi- >menter anywhere on Earth under the same conditions at any >time. > >A-IV. yk] Nature of Proof. > >27.yk] To be self-evident means that the existence of the >object or the effect (an object differs from an effect merely in >that its causes are beyond the capacity of the experimenter >to discern and register and thus they remain unknown) could >be experienced directly. Their existence requires no further >proofs nor could principally be proven to exist by describing >known to exist nearest to them "true" points of reference for >"true" again means the self-evident. > >28.yk] Upon ascertaining its existence as to a fact it could >be used as a true point of reference for further reductions or >induction to other currently non-self-evident yet entities and >effects and could also be used for their description. > >29.yk] Description of the non-self-evident cannot prove its >existence unless it was conclusively proven that at least one >of the true reference points used in its description is an im- >mediate cause of that effect. The nature of a proof consists >of bringing such points to the forefront and is the opposite of >the process that merely describes it. The description alone, >and especially endlessly expanded description, hides the >needle of the "cause" in the stack of hay as does the cloud of >drones accompanying the warhead. > >B-IV. yk] Can You Prove that You are not a >Camel? > >1-BIV. yk] Description is not a Proof. > >30.yk] A description does not converge to truth and thus >not being a proof, no matter how long it may be, it is a proc- >ess without a determined end. In Russia in such circum- >stances, they say about the judiciary: "Try to prove to them >that you are not a camel." However, the proof converging to >truth is always finite and its brevity depends upon the fore- >sight and intellectual acuteness of the observer. The task of >refuting the self-evidently false is impossibility because it >proves itself false already. It means that there are no other >shorter passes to any other points of self-evident than itself. >2-BIV. yk] Self-evident Cannot be Proven. > >31.yk] It flags the breach in logic of assuming the hypothe- >sis of the self-evident being non-self-evident at the same >time. The black board is black because it is black. The black >board is not white because it is black. Self-evident cannot be >proven to be self-evident by negation of what it is not. It can- >not be proven by the endless repetition of the same descrip- >tion. The Black board is black because the black board is >black and because the black board is black does not add >anything to the fist statement of its self-evident blackness. > >3-BIV. yk] What Cannot Prove that You are not a >Camel? > >32.yk] That means that if the legal context claims you to be >a camel you cannot prove yourself not to be one by stating >that 1) you are not a duck, that you are not a dog, that you >are not a cat and you are not a camel because you do not >have two humps and hooves. You cannot prove yourself not >to be a camel 2) by stating endlessly that you are not a >camel, that you are not a camel and that you are not a >camel. You cannot prove yourself not to be a camel by 3) the >endless repetition of the description of the self-evident. That >is you cannot prove yourself not to be a camel by repeating >that you are a man, that you are a man, and that you are a >man. > >C-IV. yk] What You Can Prove Within the Context >that Claims You being a Camel. > >33.yk] When the context defines you as being a camel, >then within that context you can prove yourself only to be a >camel to a degree - more or less. You must debunk the >whole context as a fraud upon a court and draw a new con- >text in order to become yourself and to demonstrate - not to >prove - what is the self-evident. That new context should >identify the culprits and give them a new definition defining >also their new treatment and punishment for the fraud upon >the court. A Russian saying says: "A stuck wedge should be >knocked out with another wedge." The "Naturally Correct" >context defined by the real life should destroy the "Politically >Correct" context created by the Jewish thieves. > >D-IV. yk] A Jewish Created Context Enslaves >Man, Aryan and the White Father to the Jew. > >1-DIV. yk] Man, Aryan and White Father are always >Guilty. > >34.yk] The criminal clowns, passing themselves for the at- >torneys representing truth of that life, created the contexts in >which Man, Aryan, White Father are always morally guilty in >front of the rest of the colored humanity including Jews and >Women. That is the context in which the White Father owes >them all a moral debt that can be reimbursed only though his >life-long enslavement working to the best of his abilities. That >fraudulent proposition assumes that within that context a Fa- >ther can no longer talk from the name of authority and on >behalf of anyone any longer. > >2-DIV. yk] Resetting of the Initial Values by the Politi- >cally Correct Context. > >35.yk] That context also presumes that only the judicial >Pimp presiding in the court can talk in the name of truth, >God, Father's own children and his wife. And above all, that >context defines the Jew as the eternal sufferer of the injus- >tice for whom the whole world owes compensation through >self-debasement, self-enslavement and not resistance to the >Jewish lies, marauding, rape of the Aryan men and murder >of the innocent. Those who dare to resists that artificially >created criminal context are immediately assaulted by the >Jewish gang and their accomplices - Whores, Homosexuals >and Racial minorities, in whose name the same Jews usually >talk as well. > >a-2DIV. yk] Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad. > >36.yk] Jewish call them names colored by the context in >negative emotions and prosecute them for that color they >themselves created and painted them with. The inexperience >individuals, mostly the Christian Sheeple of the Western >brand, constitute the greatest majority of all falsely accused. >Sheeple of the "Beasts of England" from the "Animal Farm" >of Orwell also had an old song that they all knew: "Four legs >good, two legs bad." They kept repeating it when they >wanted to say something. > >b-2DIV. yk] Are Two Legs Bad or are Two Legs Better? > >37.yk] When the pig talking in their name changed the >ending they loved the new song even better and began re- >peating it with an equal gusto "Four legs good, two legs bet- >ter." Having to prove black being truly black and seeing no >way out of the frustration the sheeple resort to endless repe- >tition of what they see. They try to "trick" the judge into be- >lieving their words. They do not realize that "tricking" that >they call "convincing of the judge" cannot prove anything for >two reasons: > >c-2DIV. yk] The Context Created by the Pig determines >Goodness or Badness of Two Legs. > >38.yk] 1) What they say does not have its origin in the self- >evident objectively existing facts or logic of the proof. 2) It >stays beyond their comprehension that the false charges >against them do not stem from the misconceptions of the re- >ality or false interpretation of the truth by the presiding judge. >They stem from the free will of that judge. That his free will >that deliberately allows existence of the false context leading >to their enslavement through the false charges. > >V. yk] Giving the Cart Blanch to the Judi- >cial Will. > >39.yk] That fact that their "proof" has no logically deter- >mined end leaves the energy, the time and the expense in- >volved to the discretion of the judge. Since the ill-perceived >logic of such "proof" does not compel the judge to act, his >decisions are triggered by the considerations of his free will >rather than the law and the need to pursue the truth. The >judge can grant himself "being convinced" at any time at his >will when he feels that the conditions that he set for the ac- >cused have been fulfilled. > >A-V. yk] Judicial Decisions and the Penal Code. > >40.yk] The Penal Code defines fulfillment of the decisions >set as a precondition for relieving the distress imposed by >the judicial impersonator as an extortion of a ransom. That >ransom also includes the condition of acceptance of the >crimes under a false name. That by itself creates a special >case of the judicial extortion. Coercing the victim into accep- >tance of the false labels for the true names of the judiciary >deeds relieve the torment of their victims. Yet it also extorts >a statement from the victim that no crimes against his chil- >dren or himself have been committed. > >B-V. yk] Whitewashing of the Crime. > >41.yk] Such whitewashing of a crime allows the judiciary >the commission of the most horrible offenses with impunity. >It not only erases the records of the crime from the judicial >archives but it also blots it out from the victim's conscious- >ness thus wiping it out of his memory. > >1-BV. yk] Handling of Evidence by the American >Judge. > >42.yk] In the American court, the facts of evidence have no >independent of the whims of the judiciary existence. The evi- >dence is tailored and the laws "interpreted" to achieve unlaw- >fully the preconceived criminal executive objective passed >for the judicial decision. - Such a decision that has been >lawfully arrived at from the true facts of evidence by re- >fracting them through the pertinent laws unto the plane of ju- >dicial decisions. > >2-BV. yk] Judiciary Magic. > >43.yk] Dressing an executive decision in the judicial garb is >an effective means of hiding behind the impartiality and >blindness of Law both the spirit and the agents of the crimi- >nal agenda. Injustice of the pseudo-judicial executive deci- >sion sank into the judicial discretion in the production of evi- >dence and interpretation of the laws and public policies >makes it to disappear. That magic makes it reappear as >stemming from the controversy intrinsic to the issues rather >than from the illegal executive intent - intrinsic to the criminal >activity of the judiciary. > >3-BV. yk] Hiding the Origin of Criminal Intent. > >44.yk] Hiding the origin of the criminal intent by assigning it >to the causes independent of the will of the originator of the >crime lies at the foundation of all high-level criminal activity. >That is the reason why in the US courts the evidence is arti- >ficially generated by 1) the redefined by the "politically cor- >rect" contexts and 2) false testimony of the "experts" de- >clared from the authoritatively sounding names of the idols. >Crime is a rape of the creative will of its victim by the con- >sumptive will of its proponent by the definition. Identification >of the criminal will's true origin could turn the criminals into >the target of retaliation of its victim. > >4-BV. yk] Blood Ties - Bonds, Whips and Carrots. > >a-4BV. yk] Power of the Blood Ties. > >45.yk] Jews ban investigation of the ethnic origin of the >"Italian" and "Russian" mafia in America by the non-Jews >because that mafia is nearly entirely Jewish and is under >complete Jewish control. Such an investigation would have >revealed that truth and showed that the Jews are slurring >names of the Italians and Russians nations with their own >criminal activity. > >46.yk] Blood ties are the strongest factor influencing peo- >ple's behavior and will. In the old days the first child in each >family of the tribe was the child of a chieftain. The exchange >of the leaders between the Vanir and Aesir secured truth be- >tween the Gods. Intermarriages between the royal families >were the most powerful factors in the questions of war in >peace in Europe. > >b-4BV. yk] Usage of Blood Ties by the Jews. > >47.yk] Putting the Jewesses under every men of signifi- >cance in Germany and the Soviet Union allowed Jews to at- >tach themselves to the genetically degenerate fringes of the >upper class of Germany and Russia. That was instrumental >for the destruction of national power in both societies. Hos- >tage-taking by the Jews and Germans from the Russian >population or threats of the mass reprisal on the defenseless >civilians was instrumental for retaining of their power in Rus- >sia. Kidnapping of children from their fathers is the most >powerful factor in destruction of the White race and the en- >slavement of the White fathers to the Jews. > >C-V. yk] Two Crimes at the Same Time. > >48.yk] Consequently, it is the children who are removed in >the name "of their own best interests" from the fathers to >force them into compliance with the Jewish will that controls >the US courts. It is beyond the resolution of the victim's mind >to see two crimes in progress at same time when that hap- >pens. They are 1) acceptance by the judge of the false evi- >dence and 2) the whitewashing of the crime by forcing its >acceptance under the inappropriate fictitious name. > >VI. yk] Summary of the Family Court swin- >dle: > >A-VI. yk] The burden of proof placed upon the Fa- >ther. > >49.yk] The context that the Family Court imposes upon the >father requires the father to prove to the judge that "it is in >the best interests of his children" to be returned to their fa- >ther. It is assumed that he should be a "good" father in order >for the judge to make such a decision. The truth, however, is >that it is self-evident that children should be with their father. >That is only when it is proven that their father is "very very >bad" father that the children could be removed from him as >an exception from the rule. > >B-VI. yk] Are You a Good Father? > >50.yk] To be a "good" father means to be innocent from >the implied charge of being "not good enough." The inno- >cence cannot be proven because there is no such a thing as >the facts of innocence. There is no such a thing as "not-so- >good," "half-good," very good or an excellent father. There is >no definition of the "Best Interests of the Children" other than >how they are defined by their father. Their interests are to be >in the image of their father or better as he finds it fit accord- >ing to his values. Because that is self-evident it cannot be >proven but can only be described . or stated and enforced. > >C-VI. yk] Are You a Stupid Father? > >51.yk] A regular American father has no understanding of >the intricacies of the swindle played in the American Family >court. He complies with the judge's wishes. He endlessly de- >scribes that he is a good father, he is good father and he is a >good father without proving anything by those repetitions. He >also fulfils all the demands that the judge illegally places >upon him. When the judge is "convinced" that his conditions >are met, he may do what he has promised to the father and >allow him to see his children. > >D-VI. yk] Is Judge a Good Pimp? > >52.yk] The point, however, is that "convinced" pertains to >the judge's state of mind while the term "proved" pertains to >the logic of the contested truth. A victim erroneously thinks >that by "convincing" the judge he proves to the judge himself >being right. The significance of the swindle is in that the >judge may say that he is convinced at any time he pleases. - >The defendant's labor of "proof" has no bearing on that for >he only describes what is self-evident already and does not >prove anything at all. > >E-VI. yk] Lawyer - a Legal Representative of the >Judge. > >53.yk] Without being openly stated it nevertheless is clearly >implied that part of the "convincing" of the judge consists of >the victim's consent that no crime has been committed >against him. To make sure that the defendant succeeds in >"convincing" the judge quickly enough his lawyer explains to >his client how the courts "generally" view such cases. That >means that the victim would do whatever judge wants him to >without the judge saying it himself. > >F-VI. yk] Do not Endorse the Crime Against Your- >self. > >54.yk] The lawyer promoting the interests of the judges at >his clients expense misrepresents the client to the judge ac- >cording to the judicial wishes. The better he does the job the >higher is his pay and standing in the court. When the judge >becomes "convinced" that the father is broken in and is a >good slave he would return what was his own to the father >as a reward. He would return it under a different name. By its >acceptance the father endorses that crime by admitting that >it has never been committed. > >VII. yk] Conclusion. > >A-VII. yk] Pimps Instead of Fathers in Gun Own- >ership. > >"Senate bill requires firearm registration >Mandates universal gun licenses featuring photo, personal >info > >A bill introduced in the U.S. Senate would require all firearms >to be registered and mandate the creation of a record of sale >for virtually every firearm sold in the U.S."[ 1] > >B-VII. yk] The Rotten Deeds of the Rotten Mob. > >1-BVII. yk] The State Mob does not Represent Fa- >thers. > >55.yk] Gentlemen! The US states institutions including >Federal Government, Senate and Police during the last dec- >ades demonstrated more than convincingly that they do not >represent White fathers of the US. They are selfish faceless >mediocrity completely under the control of the Jewish mob >operating from behind the scene. > >2-BVII. yk] The State Mob Destroys Life in that Coun- >try. > >56.yk] They stole power from the people of that country and >conspire to kill off the White race by degrading and destroy- >ing their fathers and sons while turning their mothers into >whores. There is no harder crime of a larger magnitude than >that that has ever been attempted to be committed on that >earth against the humanity. > >3-BVII. yk] Judicial Monsters Turned the State Power >Against You. > >57.yk] That paper showed criminality of the judicial institu- >tion of the US to whom American people entrusted the ob- >servance of the law, protection of their fundamental inter- >ests, life of their children and their future. Your trust has >been betrayed and the judicial monsters turned the entrusted >to them power against you. > >4-BVII. yk] You can entrust Nothing to the Sate De- >scretion. > >58.yk] You can no longer entrust anything to their discretion >because not only they failed in every aspect of their respon- >sibilities but they directly seek your degradation and murder. >The guns at that point are the only protection that you have >against that subhuman slime. > >5-BVII. yk] Jews Plan to do What they Already did in >Russia 1917. > >59.yk] As they kidnap and destroy your children in their >own best interest they would confiscate your guns from any- >one who would resist their crimes. They would do it under >any pretext making it the part of the context of the "Politically >Correct." You must remember the mass slaughter that fol- >lowed when Jews confiscated guns in Russia in 1917. From >1917-1924 30 millions Russians were slaughtered. > >C-VII. yk] At Present Guns are Your Only Protec- >tion. > >60.yk] The fathers of your country gave you the right to >bear guns precisely for that purpose of resisting the scum >like they. You must deny them and their Jewish masters the >authority to make any decisions in that regard and refuse to >obey the laws of their making. At that period of history you >are devoid of any protection by the state. - Quite to the con- >trary the state became your deadliest enemy. Before you >can successfully reorganize into a new power representing >your interests your guns are the only protection that you >have that could hold the bastards in check. > >61.yk] Yuriy Kirienko > >=========================================== >Endnotes: > >[ 1] Jon E. Dougherty, SENATE BILL REQUIRES FIREARM >REGISTRATION S2525 FEINSTEIN, The Grip - Archibald >Bard [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Thu 9/14/00 10:09 AM > >Long Live Odin! The Aryan Christ of the Second Coming. > > > >http://i.am/grom > >That site can be viewed the best in Explorer. Russian resistence music with >simultaneous translation can be listened to only in Explorer. Due to memory >limitation I will keep on the site no more than three songs changing them >from time to time. > >Addresses: > >Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >List owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >URL to this page: http://www.egroups.com/group/grom > > > > >
July 26, 2004
Irwin and Zundel are two leading actors from the same team. If Irwin gave the air of legitimacy to the Jewish terror using the hottest subject of the fake Jewish Holocaust, so Zundel created the false issue of what the Germans did not do. In law proven can be only what the parties did and never what the parties did not for it can never be proven to a fact for lack of evidence by the definition.
The Zundel case could have had legitimacy if it were a charge of German participation in the criminal complicity with Jews against the Russians and Slavs. It was also a complicity with Anglo-Saxons, crossed-eyes, harelip, limping, hunchbacks, dwarfs and all whores but understanding of that is beyond the scope of Zundel's mental abilities. They are Western mitigating circumstances. There is nothing new under the moon. - During the Middle Ages in England the natural stupidity of women was used as an argument against the prosecution of the female witches. Their intent and attempts to defraud and kill were no longer prosecuted on the account of their female stupidity. False charges of the Jews against the Germans and the false charges of the Germans against the false charges of the Jews brought the false issues into the center of attention of the moralized Western public.
Tolstoy once said that the public opinion is the opinion of the women. It is quite true because whose else's opinion do you hear but of the whores, Jews and pederasts? They all are against the men - the creative fathers, and seek to alleviate the fathers' restriction on their destructive to the fathers' household activities. Because they are against the restriction of the fathers they falsely call themselves liberals while their own terror against the fathers once they get the power they call obedience to the law as stated by their claques dressed in the judicial cloaks.
The public opinion is not the opinion of the public as it was well understood back then when that nonsensical notion appeared in France. The public opinion is an opinion of the claques and of their masters who wield the real power. Public is too stupid to have an opinion in anything but their likings - that is in the taste for consumption that converges in essence to preferences in eating, shitting and fucking. The notion of the self-evident and of a common knowledge was not introduced during the Nuremberg trial. At that trial the veiling of self-evident by the false term of common knowledge, as the public opinion stated by the judiciary claques, took place and became the precedent in the phony trials.
Nobody but Irwins, Zundels and other revisionists of history (another term for its forgers) would appear on the Western scene. The history of Europe is also taken as a common knowledge though it has been fraud from the very beginning. It was the same massive forgery of the Westerners that they promote now as a revision of history. And as the naive scientist Fomenko and Nosovsky, who reconstructed the true history of Europe and the world, remarked, the West did not argue against the contradictions and obvious frauds in their compilation of history. - West just ignored it as they do it now though quite many Western scientists also saw the fraud and made many public statements about it. Jew would not want to talk about their crimes as women would not want to talk about their adulteries for in their talk they want to converge only on the false accusations of others as a matter of their convenience.
Fomenko and Nosovsky misunderstood the West thinking that the Westerners would ignore the truth in full faith being unable and fearing to withstand the criticism of the establishment that takes fraud for the common knowledge and evidence. They think that were the Westerners empowered in their search for truth with the complete system that backs it up by the whole context it would have changed Western stance. It would not happen because the ruling few of the Western society know what they are doing very well and they are not lost in false assumptions.
Zundel and Irwin created a theory that legitimized the union between the right and left wings of the Western morons, deceivers, dwarfs and women in one unity of Lie. Those liberals who love the Jews see in that pseudo-struggle the victory of the female beginning over the fathers. Those morons who believe in their greatness see in it the proof that Germans really fought the Jews and now are rising against the Jewish power again. In reality the two swindlers that robbed the bank pretend to be enemies on the basis of insulting one another in order to offset the truth of their crime from emerging by the noise of their false squabble.