“ Your honor, this is the sixth occasion that I have appeared in court since being illegally arrested and incarcerated on Aug 15, 2009. On each of these occasions I have explained to the court what it already knows, which is that this case has nothing to do with disorderly conduct, criminal trespass, interference with health care services , or with any other Orwellian euphemism the state chooses to employ in order to disguise its own criminal interest and behavior; for the court also knows that the sole purpose of the Aug 15 arrest and my subsequent captivity in this case has been to protect the extermination of – if I may speak scientifically –living human beings, because killing them has been chosen as the means to address the problems they are perceived to present. Doubtless the court is also aware that the preceding hundred years of human history has increasingly found such mass murder to be a preferred means of addressing perceived difficulties, of which the Turkish slaughter of Armenians, the Soviet of Ukrainians, the more recent Hutu massacres of Tutsi in Rawanda, and of course the Nazi assault on gypsies and others, especially Jews, during world war two, are but the more infamous examples. And now in the United States, and much of the West, the slaughter is directed against unborn humanity, despite that in my lifetime, the unborn enjoyed social and legal protection in all fifty American states, as they did in the Western world for more than a millennium and a half – and still do in the Islamic world – until first Communism, then Nazism, and now their spiritual progeny, launched mass murder against these children comparable to, and in fact worse than even these other groups of targeted humanity just mentioned for the court’s record. And just as in these other examples, what the state protects at the Extermination Center on Bleecker St. – as it does elsewhere – are crimes against humanity of the kind that were condemned at Nuremberg after world war two. Accordingly, if the issue in the courtroom today is law, then the court has but one option, the only legal option it has had from the moment of my illegal arrest, which is to dismiss each and all of the charges and order my immediate release. If the court instead chooses to continue its mockery of law, and of humanity, by refusing to order the release, then I can only recommend it follow the logic of its mockery by ordering my execution along with all those whose extermination it holds me in order to see accomplished. If the court finds that I am not small enough for the current vogues of slaughter, then I recommend it impose the maximum sentence it can to uphold both its mockery and transparent crimes. In that case, however, you shall have to forgive me for refusing to participate further in the charade. If in fact the court is interested in law, allow me to ask the only pertinent question in this case – which is, your honor, do you order all charges dismissed as well as my immediate release ? “
- The judge’s reply was : “ Not yet.”
AS OF TODAY, SEPT 20, 2009, JOHN DOE M9 OF THE ORDER OF MERCY AT GETHSEMANE CONTINUES TO BE INCARCERATED FOR PEACEFULLY AND NONVIOLENTLY RESCUING INNOCENT UNBORN BABIES SCHEDULED FOR SLAUGHTER AT THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD ABORTION MILL ON BLEECKER ST IN DOWNTOWN MANHATTAN, NEW YORK CITY ON AUGUST 15, 2009. HE HAS BEEN HAULED BEFORE THE COURT ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. TO DATE HE HAS REFUSED TO GIVE AUTHORITIES HIS NAME, ADDRESS AND FINGERPRINTS AND HAS ABSOLUTELY DECLINED TO, IN ANY WAY, LEGITIMIZE THE MOCKERY OF LAW WHICH WAS HIS ARREST AND INCARCERATION. HERE FOLLOW SOME INTERESTING REMARKS ADDRESSED TO MR. DOE, IN THE COURSE OF THE COURT PROCEEDINGS, BY THE JUDGE WHO HAPPENS TO BE BLACK, ROMAN CATHOLIC AND FEMALE.
“… Slavery at one time was a law and that didn’t make it right. “ “… I agree with your philosophy on a lot of things. “ “… I’m talking to you compassionately as a judge and a woman and a person of color. “ “… let me fingerprint you, release you. And fight your cause. “ “… I think you have a good heart and a legitimate purpose in mind. “ “… I understand your principles. But you’ve been in for quite a long time. It’s time for me to release you.” “… I’m a Catholic as well…so I know where you’re coming from, and, again, my thoughts aren’t any different. “
Did she say: "let me fingerprint you...and fight your cause." ? Or did she mean YOU fight your cause?
Posted by: nancy | September 24, 2009 at 03:28 PM
She meant YOU fight your cause.
Posted by: SWEAT | October 09, 2009 at 02:34 AM
IT IS hard to look at the Capitol in Washington, DC, without a frisson of excitement
Posted by: Chanel Handbags | February 14, 2011 at 08:25 PM