Judge orders trial in allegedly missing Oklahoma City bombing video case 16 September A.D. 2013

Subj: Fwd: Judge orders trial in allegedly missing Oklahoma City bombing video case

16 September A.D. 2013

Remember the security videos confiscated by national law enforcement personnel for purposes of review of who did what regarding the Murrah Building bombing?

Remember Jesse Trentadue, whose brother Kenneth (Kenny) was murdered in the national prison system because he looked (exactly) like Richard Guthrie?

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/OKC_Trentadue.htm

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=171074.40

etc.

It seems that Jesse, an attorney living in Utah, is still very intent on exposing the murder of his brother, which murder is tied directly to the cover-up of the Murrah Building bombing.  (Actually, it goes even well beyond this.  See the P.S.)

There is to be a bench trial (District of Utah) regarding those still-undisclosed ("missing") security videos and the release of them to Trentadue for his study into the murder of his brother.

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2013/09/judge-orders-trial-in-allegedly-missing.html


From 21 March 2012:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865552630/FBI-explanation-of-missing-Oklahoma-City-bombing-tapes-not-credible-judge-says.html?pg=all


Regarding preserving evidence, there was an effort to preserve the Murrah Building, which is the "best evidence" of what caused its collapse, led by, if memory serves, attorney (and Sen.) DeCamp, author of "The Franklin Coverup," which exposes the child-porn activity involving the White House and possible child murder at Bohemian Grove.  As that effort developed, the reins of that suit were turned over to appointed defense counsel, e.g., for McVeigh, and next thing we know, the building is being destroyed.

Regarding preserving evidence, there was an effort by the survivors, via two of them as "representatives" of the group of survivors, to preserve the information that McVeigh had, which effort this author labels as The Terre Haute Litigation.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/okc_coverup.htm (search that page for "Taylor" to go right to the top of the list of links to the .pdf files that comprise the bulk of that Record)

It was The Terre Haute Litigation experience that permanently changed this author's career (life, etc.), given the learning from that effort that we are not dealing with a "constitutional" system.


The fbi claims that the confiscated security videos of the Murrah Building of 19 April 1995 are missing.  The judge is encouraging the fbi to look harder, and now the matter seems to be headed for trial.  This is a FOIA suit by Trentadue.

May the fbi be ordered to turn over the videos, and may the refusal to do so start putting fbi people, all the way to the top, past and present, in jail under contempt charges. (Civil contempt is remedied by performance of the act not being done, the not doing of which act is the reason for the contempt charge.)

Harmon L. Taylor
Legal Reality
Dallas, Texas

Subscribe / unsubscribe :  legal_reality@earthlink.net

P.S.  At http://drjudywood.com/ , under the heading "History Repeats," we start to recognize the direct connection between the Murrah Building bombing and S-11.  Before reading Dr. Wood's excellent book, this author used the term "vaporized" to describe one of the logical possibilities of what happened with the alleged "truck bomb," of which truck there was "no evidence" at the crime scene.  After reading her study and analysis, this author uses the term "dustified." 

It's the nature of our human condition for those who speak thoughts of reality to face ostracism, at the very least.  This author's interview for the (multi-award winning) documentary "A Noble Lie" was left on the cutting room floor, because this author dared to speak forthrightly about technology that is (well) beyond common experience, even to this day.  The options for why there's "no truck" at the Murrah Building crime scene are these: (1) there was never a truck there to begin with (which option is challenged by testimony that put a truck in that location just a few (as in less than five) minutes prior to the explosions; (2) it was driven away prior to the explosions; (3) it was somehow air-lifted out (whether before (during) or after the explosions; or (4) it was "dustified."

Thus, in response to the interview question, along this line, "What would the videos show?", this author said, to this effect, "Proof that the truck was vaporized."

(Would there be those awards if as much of the reality as known about the truck and the logical possibilities were included?  We'll likely never know.)

What do these logical options have to do with Trentadue's FOIA suit?  Those videos will prove "exactly" what happened.  If there was a truck there, and there's testimony putting a truck there, then it was driven away, air-lifted out, or "dustifed."  There are no other logical options.  The point here isn't so much to advance the reality, that the Murrah Building bombing was a test run of the technology used to destroy all seven of the WTC buildings during the S-11 events, as to demonstrate why those videos may never be seen, again, i.e., why that evidence, in the hands of the feds, would be destroyed.  It wouldn't matter whether those videos prove "dustification," or the truck's being driven away, or some form of air-lifting (which surely would have been seen by someone and regarding which there is zero hint or suggestion). What matters is that if any one of those options is proved, then the "government's" horrifically fabricated "one truck bomb" case theory goes flying out the windows.  The trials "had" to be relocated, because a panel comprised of citizens in that community, which community experienced two discrete explosionS, in real time, as it happened, would very likely not buy the "government's" fabricated cover-story of a single truck bomb; hence, all the demonizing of McVeigh so as to "compel" a transfer of venue (across the State lines -- the key procedural fact motivating The Terre Haute Litigation) so as to remove the trial from the community that knew better.   In other words, the "government" has already gone to a great deal of trouble to "sell" the "one truck bomb" cover story, and it's nothing for those involved with that mass murder and coverup to destroy the video that proves, regardless of which alternative it proves, that the cause of the destruction of that building was in no way a "truck bomb," especially if what is shown is the "dustification" of a truck. 

Of course, for there to be evidence of "dustification" in 1995 is for there to be all that much more proof that the muslims didn't do S-11 (either), which reality totally wipes out the S-11 cover-story, as well; hence, wipes out "the" reasons for military activity in Afghanistan, etc.

The wars in the middle east have everything to do with drugs, oil, and banking, and the banking aspect has everything to do with "choice of law."  We see the espionage movies that suggest that the banks have power because they control the debt created by war.  That's only part of the story.  To control the medium of exchange is to control the choice of law for every transaction involving that medium of exchange.  It's the choice of law that provides the mechanism of control, not the (mere) existence of debt, but the choice of law.  To control the medium of exchange is to control the choice of law of the entire marketplace, hence the entire population, especially where the mechanism of control is 100% "federal," as in "commercial," which is our present legal reality.

The point is that those Murrah Building bombing videos are "a million times" more "damaging" than the famed and fictional "Pelican Brief."

It's not that such information is necessarily completely lost; however, such information, if it still existed even as of 10 April 1995 (the day after the massacre), will be proof of Divine Intervention.

In short, we have this.  Those videos are extremely likely to be exculpatory evidence.  (As in, Duh?!  Why else would they not be turned over in the first place??!)  Clearly, that exculpatory evidence was never handed over to the defense at any time, not even at the time of The Terre Haute Litigation, which started and ended under the cover story of there being some 3,000+ pages of information not previously turned over to defense counsel.  That evidence is not even being handed over to Trentadue now, 18 years after the massacre.  The issue about these videos prove that this system's rush to judgment at the time was all just part of the plan, and we can just hope that this experience, of the fed's refusal to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence, forever alters all such legal defense efforts to such future matters such that no trial should be allowed to move forward without extremely strenuous objection to the prosecution's failure to deliver all possible exculpatory evidence.

The thing about a charge of "conspiracy" is that the participants in one part of the act or series of acts that constitute the criminal charge don't have to know any of the other conspirators or even of the acts of any of the other conspirators in order to be treated as "conspirators." Thus, on the one hand, it just flat out doesn't matter that McVeigh didn't have any idea at all that the Murrah Building, the location chosen for storing the investigation (by American law-enforcement personnel) into the (American) drug-trafficking activity involving Mena, Arkansas, thus, obviously, the Clintons (clearly internationalists instead of Americans), was to be a test subject for "dustification" technology.  McVeigh simply had to "deliver" the cover story, i.e., the truck, for the mass murder.  That's just to say that the fact that the damage to the building wasn't caused by any truck bomb wouldn't necessarily get McVeigh (or Nichols) off the hook for the conspiracy charge(s).  However, the fact that the "government's" cover story was a single "truck bomb," and the fact that such theory is preposterous on its face, is something that the advisory panel should have been able to weigh in their deliberations not only of innocence/guilt but also, if guilt is determined, what the punishment should be, whether punishment is to be determined by the court or the panel.  Where it was factually and technologically impossible for any "truck bomb" to have caused the demolition, thus the deaths, that's information, evidence, of an intervening or superseding cause to which any defense counsel would want the advisory panel and the court to have full access. Even more to the point, where there's proof of "dustification," then it screams from the page that McViegh (and Nichols) are not only patsies but also so far removed from the planning and carrying out of that massacre as to compel further investigation so as to get to the actual source of planning and motive for that massacre.

It will be an Act of God if those videos still exist, somewhere, anywhere.  Those videos are not even expected to be in the nsa's files!

That hardly means that someone from the fbi isn't about to get a life term, or a whole group of someones from the fbi, past and present, aren't about to get a life term, under a contempt theory for failure to produce the evidence that's not being produced (because, clearly, it's long since been destroyed).

May this nation stand with Jesse Trentadue in his truly-inspired commitment to expose the murderers of his brother (and, thus, as a direct result, also of Guthrie, who also was murdered while in custody).  It's an end of a ball of yarn that literally unravels all the way to S-11, thus even farther, i.e., to all this false-flag activity going on as we speak regarding Syria and Iran.  In other words, we're hardly talking about a mere set of security videos.  We're talking about evidence that has "a million times" more impact, in real time, than the fictional "Pelican Brief."

H.