Comes Now;
           the Constitutionally-Lawful & “DeJure” “United States of America”, by way of it’s “Joint-Tenants in the Sovereignty”, Charles Bruce, Stewart; John Kaminski; LeRoy Michael, Scheweitzer; Leonard Peltier; Peter Stern; & a constantly expanding end-page list of “Relator” DeJure Prosecuting Federal Government Officers & Conscience-Bound Class-Action Co-Plaintiffs, all more fully specified on our last pages here-in; & all of whom Compose the Natural/Organic Body-Politic of these Socially-Compacted DeJure, Constitutionally-Lawful “United States of America”.
          We do here-by Move this Court in the Name of & on Behalf of “We the People” - “Nation/State Ex Rel”; & in Christian/Israelite Loyal/Loving/Caring Relationship with the Common People in Loyal Stewardship of this Entire Planet Earth; & of Each of it’s Nations, Including Iraq & Israel.
          Here-by, “We” do Proceed as Co-Plaintiff’s: State-Ex-Rel, Rex, Propria-Persona & Sui-Juris; Vs: DeFacto U.S. Government Officers: President George W. Bush, Vice-President Richard (Dick) Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, CIA Director George J. Tenet, Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert Mueller, & John & Jane Does 1-100,000; & Including All Persons “Giving Aid or Comfort” to the “Enemies of the of the State” of this Constitutionally-Lawful & DeJure “United States of America”. Those are mostly People Acting As Federal Governmental Officers, & Includes Especially Many Persons Acting as Homeland Security Officers, Prison-Officers, DOJ Attorneys, FBI & CIA Agents, U.S. Marshals, & Federal Judges. And the through Franchise of the “Buck Act” & DeFacto Federal Government Funding & Policy Manipulations, this also includes Many Similar Persons Acting as DeFacto State, County & Local Government Officers, especially in New York State, the County in which the World Trade Towers previously existed, & New York City.

Jurisdiction of this Court:
          This court has jurisdiction to hear this matter, pursuant to the United States Constitution of 1789; under Article 3 Sections 2.1 & 2.2, which pertinent parts read as follows:
          “Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court ... . The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour ... .
          Section 2. [1] The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;_to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; _to all Cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; _to Controversies to which the United State shall be a Party;_to Controversies between two or more States;_between a State and Citizens of another State; _between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under the Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. [2] In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. ... [3] The trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury ... .
          Section 3. [1] Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or, in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

          The author of this complaint sincerely believes that the “US Code” provides for these Federal “State-Ex-Rel/Quo-Warranto” Forms of Criminal Complaint, but is un-sure as to the precise code section to cite. Co-Plaintiffs LeRoy Schweitzer & Peter Stern both know the US Code much better than do I, but because of their cutting-edge Activism at Lawfully using the US Code to promote Non-Violent Change towards Constitutionally-Lawful Federal Government, they have been Falsely Arrested as “Political Prisoners” of the DeFacto Executive Department of the US Government. This is just another portion of the on-going Crimes of the regimen here-in complained against. And so these good men are not easily available to help set forth these details here-in. The good civil judges before whom this complaint is presented, are here-by Moved to exercise their significant influence to enable such communications to be established between these complaining parties.
Firstly, the US Code surely provides some-where, a remedy similar to that State-Ex-Rel / Quo-Warranto Remedy provided in Oregon Revised Statutes, at ORS 30.501 - 30.610; which in part, reads as follows:
“ORS 30.510 Action for usurpation of office or franchise: An action at law may be maintained in the name of the state, upon the information of the district attorney, or upon the relation of a private party against the person offending, in the following cases:
(1) When any person usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises any public office, civil or military, or any franchise within this state, or any office in a corporation either public or private, created or formed by or under the authority of this state; or, (2) When any public officer, civil or military, does or suffers an act which, by the provisions of law, makes a forfeiture of the office of the public officer; or, (3) When any association or number of persons acts within this state, as a corporation, without being duly incorporated.”

And this authors research, indicates that most of the States in the Union have similar statutes, and that very probably all of them do so. Now surely, if the States have this significant power to allow the common people as “Joint-Tenants in the Sovereignty”, to mount such powerful actions as this against Lawlessly Usurping State Governmental Officers, then surely the Federal Government has a Statute, some-where within the US Code, to provide for a similar remedy.
From the profound writings of LeRoy Schweitzer, it does appear that “Title 28, Chapter 31, Section 528", may be the codified statute which is appropriate to invoke this “State-Ex-Rel / Quo-Warranto” action here. It reads a s follows:
“Disqualification of officers and employees of the Department of Justice: ‘The Attorney General shall promulgate rules and regulations which require the disqualification of any officer or employee of the Department of Justice, including a United States attorney or a member of such attorney's staff, from participation in a particular investigation or prosecution if such participation may result in a personal, financial, or political conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof. Such rules and regulations may provide that a willful violation of any provision thereof shall result in removal from office.’ ”.
This statute clearly removes all Department of Justice personnel form prosecuting this case. Department of Justice personnel are fashionably considered to be the Only people capable of bringing Criminal Complaints before Federal Courts.
Here-under, it logically follows that the field of candidates who are lawfully allowed to prosecute such cases are greatly expanded. This is precisely identical to the underlying “Intent” behind the multitude of “State-Ex-Rel” Statutes in almost every State in the Union, all similar to Oregon’s “ORS 30.510". I sincerely believe LeRoy Schweitzer & Peter Stern will agree with this analogy.

However, even if there is no US Code Statutory Authority for proceeding in this manner, which we doubt; the previously indicated authority of Article 3 of the United States Constitution, clearly empowers this court to hear “All Cases in Law”, & to exercise “Original Jurisdiction” to “Try the Case”.
So, unless the members of this court are prepared to argue that this court has been disenfranchised from its constitutional jurisdiction, & is only operating pursuant to a 14th amendment feigned-emergency executive war-powers defacto jurisdiction, or some other similar jurisdictional limiting disempowerment; then this court has full authority of Law to hear and decide this case.
So the only question remaining seems to be whether we complaining parties have the lawful authority to bring this case before this court.

We know that we have the lawful authority to bring these cases before the Oregon’s civil Supreme Court. We have entered into extensive communications with Oregon’s, civil Chief Justice “Wallace Carson”. He has strongly inferred & admitted by default that we have the right to bring these cases. We believe he likes us.
The transcripts are here: http://christiancommonlaw_gov.org/Oregon/IndexOregon.html
But Oregon’s civil Supreme Court rejected our State-Ex-Rel/Quo-Warranto Criminal Complaint, on behalf of Melissa, Wilbur, & Pamela Gaston, because of corruption there-in; and to be frank, we are apprehensive that such may be the case in this court also.
We have prayerfully contemplated upon what our next step should be after confronting a stone-wall of corruption in the supreme judicial tribunal of the land, and we sincerely believe that we have answers to that question which are both lawful and effective. We will be glad to discuss that process with you, if need be, & at the appropriate time.
But at this point we here-by inform you that we are not going to waste a lot of time making this complaint real pretty for you-all. No meticulous footnotes with mounds of case-law authority, no pretty numbers along the sides.
You know we have the authority to proceed in this manner, and we know it. It is only the minds and hearts of the common people who are confused about the matter. And so at this point, it does seem pragmatic to cite sufficient case-law & other authority, to make our position clear to the common disenfranchised working-class American, as follows:
"The revolution, or rather the Declaration of Independence, found the people already united .... From the crown of Great Britain, the sovereignty of their country passed to the people of it; ... . ... "We the people of the United States, do ordain and establish this constitution." Here we see the people acting as sovereigns of the whole country; and in the language of sovereignty, establishing a constitution by which it was their will, that the state governments should be bound, and to which constitutions should be made to conform...
It will be sufficient to observe briefly, that the sovereignties in Europe and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. That system considers the prince as the sovereign, and the people his subjects; it regards his person as the object of allegiance, and excludes the idea of his being on an equal footing with a subject, either in a court of justice or elsewhere. That system contemplates him as being the fountain of honor and authority; and from his grace and grant, derives all franchises, immunities and privileges; it is easy to perceive, that such a sovereign could not be amendable to a court of justice, or subjected to judicial control and actual constraint... The same feudal ideas run through all their jurisprudence, and constantly remind us of the distinction between the prince and the subject.
"No such ideas obtain here; at the revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects... and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow_citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty.
From the differences existing between feudal sovereignties and governments founded on compacts, it necessarily follows that their respective prerogatives must differ, Sovereignty is the right to govern; a nation or state sovereign is the person or persons in whom that resides.
In Europe, the sovereignty is generally ascribed to the prince; here it rests with the people; there the sovereign actually administers the government; here never in a single instance; our governors are the agents of the people; and at most stand in the same relation to their sovereign, in which the regents of Europe stand to their sovereigns. Their princes have personal powers, dignities and preeminence, our rulers have none but official; nor do they partake in the sovereignty otherwise, or in any other capacity, than as private citizens."
Chisholm Ex'r. v. Georgia; 2 Dall. {U.S.} 419, 1 L.Ed. 440, {U.S.Ga. 1793}.

See that phrase “Joint Tenants in the Sovereignty”? Thats Us. You know; “We the People” ? Yea. Thats us.
See the line that says “Our Governors are the Agents to the People”? Thats you. You know, “Public Servants”, under “Master/Servant Relationship”? Yea. Thats you.

There’s more, as follows: “And the Constitution itself is in every real sense a law - the “Lawmakers being the People themselves”, in whom under Our System All Political Power & Sovereignty primarily Resides, & through whom such Power & Sovereignty primarily Speaks.
It is by that law, and not otherwise, that the legislative, executive, and judicial agencies which it created exercise such political authority as they have been permitted to possess.
The Constitution speaks for itself in terms so plain that to misunderstand their import is not rationally possible.
“We the people of the United States,” it says, “do ordain and establish this Constitution ...”
Ordain and Establish ! These are definite words of enactment, and without more would stamp what follows with dignity and character of law.
The framers of the Constitution, however, were not content to let the matter rest here, but provided explicitly - “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ...”
The supremacy of the Constitution as law is thus declared without qualification.
That supremacy is absolute; the supremacy of a statute enacted by Congress is not absolute but conditioned upon its being made in pursuance to the Constitution. And a judicial tribunal, clothed by that instrument with complete judicial power, and, therefore, by the very nature of the power, required to ascertain and apply the law to the facts in every case or proceeding properly brought for adjudication, must apply the supreme law and reject the inferior statute whenever the two conflict.”
Carpenter v. Carter, 298 US 296, 1935

See how it states that “a judicial tribunal * * * (is) required to ascertain and apply the law to the facts in every case or proceeding properly brought for adjudication, * * *”? That is you. You are “Required” to “Ascertain and Apply the Law to the Facts” of this Criminal Treason Complaint, against those acting Officers of the Executive Department of the United States Government.
“We the People” gave you judges your franchise, or rather our “predecessors in interest” did; & they passed it on down to us modern members of our general American “body-politic”. Here-under, “We” have now come before you, by way of our “Relation” to the Federal State. And with all due respect, we are “Demanding” that you exercise your “Original Jurisdiction” to “Try” this case, at its inception, here.

A few more:
“State: A people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common-law habits and custom into one body politic, exercising, through the medium of an organized government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war and peace and of entering into international relations with other communities of the globe. United States v. Kusche, D.C.Cal., 56 F.Supp. 201, 207, 208. The organization of social life which exercises sovereign power on behalf of the people. Delaney v. Moraitis, C.C.A.Md., 136 F.2d 129, 130. In its largest sense, “state” is a body politic or a society of men. Beagle v Motor Vehicle Acc. Indemnification corp., 44 Misc.2d 636, 254 N.Y.S. 763, 765. * * * Term may refer to a body politic of a nation (e.g. United States) or to an individual governmental unit of such nation (e.g. California). * * *
The people of a state, in their collective capacity, considered as the party wronged by a criminal deed, the public, as in the title of a cause, “The State vs A.B.”
Term “state” as used in rules providing when a state may appeal in a criminal case is all inclusive and intended to include not only the state but its political subdivisions, counties and cities. Spokane County v. Gifford, 9 Wash.App. 541, 513 P.2d 301, 302. Federal Government is a “state” bound by all of provisions of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers. Enright v. U. S., D.C.N.Y., 437 F.Supp, 580 581.”
Black’s Law Dictionary 5th Edtn, 1979, West Pub. Co., St Paul Minn.

See? “We the People” Are “The State”. “We the People” Are the “Federal State”. See how it says: “Term may refer to ... United States ...” ? See how it says “Federal Government is a state” ? That means that “We” can proceed “State Ex Rel”, because of our “Relation” to the “Federal State”. You know how the Federal Government has a “Secretary of State” ? You know how Federal Statutes provide for defending against Federal “Enemies of the State” ? Yes. The Federal Government is lawfully recognizable as a “State”, at least for purposes of an “Action at Law”, such as this.

One more citation:
“This is an original proceeding by Quo Warranto (Oregon Constitution, Art 7 ss 2; ORS 30.510) challenging the right of the defendant James W. Crawford, a duly elected, qualified, and acting circuit judge of the state of Oregon for the fourth judicial district, to sit temporarily as a member of the Supreme Court of Oregon ... . ...
“... The question is an important and delicate one, because the decision will directly affect the problem of this court which gave rise to the enactment of the legislation involved. We cannot, however, take into account considerations of expediency in making our decision; our sole duty is to determine whether the statute squares with the Constitution and render judgement accordingly. ORS 30.510, in part provides:
‘An action at law may be maintained in the name of the state, upon the information of the district attorney, or upon the relation of a private party against the person offending, in the following cases: ‘(1) When any person usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises any public office, civil or military, or any franchise within this state, or any office in a corporation either public or private, created or formed by or under the authority of this state; or, ...’ (Italics Ours (the Or Sup Ct’s))’
This enactment is the statutory equivalent of the common-law writ of quo warranto, and an action commenced under it is generally referred to as a proceeding in quo warranto. ... It is the remedy or proceeding by which is determined the legality of a claim which a party asserts to the use or exercise of an office or franchise and ousts the holder from its enjoyment, if the claim is not well founded. 44 Am Jur 94, Quo Warranto ss 8; 44 Am Jur 100, Quo Warranto ss 22. In 74 CJS 197, Quo Warranto ss 4, the rule is stated thus:
‘In the absence of constitutional or statutory regulations providing otherwise, quo warranto proceedings are the only proper remedy in cases in which they are available. Thus quo warranto, or a proceeding in the nature thereof, is the sole and exclusive remedy and method by which varius matters may be tried and determined, as for example, the right and title to office, ... .’ (Italics Ours (Oregon Sprm Crt’s)) * * *
Having been appointed to sit as a member of this court pursuant to the provisions of ORS 2.060, defendant has become a defacto judge thereof; he acts under color of authority. Acts performed by him in that capacity are not invalid. A judge defacto is, to all intents and purposes, a judge dejure as to all persons except the state, and continues as such until he is properly ousted from office. He is not a usurper. His acts or his right to act, as a defacto judge, cannot be collaterally attacked. His title or right to the office can be determined only in quo warranto proceedings, brought by or in the name of the state. Here the attack is direct by quo warranto, and the question of the right of the defendant to sit as a member of this court is squarely presented. The color of authority (ORS 2.060) under which defendant assumes to act being unconstitutional and void, defendant is not entitled to occupy the position to which he was appointed by the Supreme Court. 30 Am Jur 806, Judges ss 102.”
State Ex Rel Madden V. Crawford (207 Or Mar. 56) (1956) 295 P.2d 174

The Oregon Statute clearly provides for the Common People of the State to proceed in this “State-Ex-Rel/Quo-Warranto” manner. The case precedent here clearly equates the two terms “State-Ex-Rel”, & “Quo-Warranto”. These are details of which we are sure that such learned folks as yourselves are fully aware. But this complaint is to be propagated amongst the general American population, and there are many who need these specific citations in order that they may solidly move forward with us.
This about completes our opening argument for this court to assume jurisdiction over what is obviously a very controversial and potentially significant complaint.

Here-under, We are moving forward.
We are not proceeding “Adversarially”. We are proceeding “Inquisitorially”. We are here before you, moving you to “Inquire”, as to whether or not the Accused Treasonous Conspirators in possession of the Executive Department of the Federal Government.
The underlying complaint here is of very significant proportions. This complaint presents evidence of a conspiracy to destroy America by corrupted executive department officers who have sold their souls to the devil. If we are wrong, we will apologize profusely, and suffer any such punishment as constitutional “Due Process of Law” so renders against us. If we are right, then it is imperative that this case be heard. And the fact that this complaint may makes some among you feel fidgety, is a frivolous concern, which will not be indulged. If any among you can-not handle the job, then you need to step down from your position on the bench of this court, and relinquish your seat to someone who can.
You took an “Oath of Office” to Protect & Defend the US Constitution. You follow “Due Process of Law” to render naturally conscionable justice, with regard to this case, or you will be named as defendants who are abusing your public office, for the explicit purpose of giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The Complaint:
The acting Executive Department personnel named as defendants in this complaint have Fabricated a meager amount of Evidence that Islamic hijackers were responsible for terrible tragedy of 9/11. They have supplemented their meager amount of fabricated evidence with massive amounts of hearsay, innuendo, aspersion or promises of evidence, but no real evidence. They did this for the explicit purpose of setting up a Conspiratorial ruse to conceal the identities of the real Treasonous culprits.
Acting President Bush insists continuously that his word be accepted as truth on numerous questions, even though time after time his statements have been revealed as blatant falsehoods. Yet he continues to repeat them, and the whorish corporate media continues to accept them. Neither the Bush administration nor any other element of law enforcement in the United States has issued a single solid piece of Evidence connecting the hijackers to the hijacked airplanes. The alleged hijackers have never been shown to appear on the airport security videos, & there are never any credit card records of their ticket purchases.
Defendant FBI Director Robert Mueller said very publicly to the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco that nothing on paper connected Arab terrorists to 9/11. Two and one-half years have passed. Executive Department first produced 19 names of their suspects with-in 72 hours of the disaster. There is a monumental mathematical inconsistency here. All that has happened since is mere vigilante hysteria, hypothetical scenarios trumpeted ad nauseum by America’’s “Babylonain-Whore” style press. Seven or eight of the names on that original list have been found living comfortably in other countries. Yet Defendant FBI Director Mueller has not made any attempt to correct the errors made on that original list. The evidence of this is available on the internet at:
http://members.fortunecity.com/911/September_eleven/hijackers_alive.htm ----and----
http://www.welfarestate.com/911/
After much hullabaloo about Colin Powell using phony information in his remarks to the United Nations about the reasons for war, the Bush Administration has not produced a single conclusive piece of Evidence to back up its claim that 9/11 was the work Osama bin Laden and other Islamic terrorists. Not a single piece!
There's a simple answer to this. It's because there In NO Evidence!
This is because those pseudo-Muslims have been publicly revealed to be so incompetent at piloting jerkwater training planes, that they had absolutely zero chance of flying sophisticated jetliners into anything narrower than the Grand Canyon, never mind executing tricky maneuvers with extraordinarily complicated machinery.
The unknown men who played the roles of the so-called Arab terrorist hijackers were really recruited by either American and/or Israeli intelligence services in a scheme set-up as a diversion to Inflame effectively mk-ultra mind-controlled Americans against the Islamic world. The purpose, at least in part, was to divert the world’’s attention from the Israeli genocide and dispossession of the Palestinians, by blaming the attacks on Muslims.
But that was only half the objective. The other half was to enable the Babylonian Whore Conspirators in & around the Bush Administration to fleece the American public with an endless array of no-bid contracts to enrich the conscienceless billionaires who are really driving the war machine.
The Bush Administration is using anything & everything for Public Relations in its efforts to authenticate its own evil agenda. If they had any concrete evidence against the hijackers, if they even possessed all their correct names, we would have heard about it by now. There would be an avalanche of TV shows about them from the Babylonian Whore Controlled Media.
After two and half years, with the whole world knowing that eight of the 19 names on the hijacker list are fraudulent, Defendant FBI Director Mueller has made No Attempt to substitute new names. This is because the identities of the hijackers were constructed with mostly stolen papers, for some of the patsies designed to take the heat. In any case, and whoever they were, there is no evidence they ever got on the planes. Instead we have one minor player convicted in Germany, & then the conviction was overturned, partly because the Bush Administration refused to help with the prosecution.
We have the so-called 20th hijacker and assorted other preposterous character actors languishing in jails on trumped up charges. We have security camera film at the Pentagon, which surely reveals that no jetliner hit that building, locked away in Defendant John Ashcroft's vault, & under the phony aegis of “National Security”. We have all the rubble of the World Trade Center, which surely would have revealed the use of nuclear explosives creating shattered beams in odd places, instantly carted away with no forensic investigation. We have transcripts, — but no recordings, — of these phony cellphone calls, some from people who may not have even existed.
And we have the famous standdown, in which America's air defenses suddenly evaporated, — the only time in our history this has happened.
We have Marvin Bush sitting suspiciously on the board of directors of the security company that had the contract for the Twin Towers.
We have Larry Silverstein, who conveniently leased and insured the towers shortly before the big hits, telling officials to "pull" a relatively intact tower, which then fell identically to the two structures that were struck by airplanes, creating the impression that that's the way all three came down.
We have billions of dollars of windfall profits made by savvy investors in the days before 9/11, and an FBI investigation that insists nothing was amiss with these spectacular deals. Of course, we don't get the details. Only "assurances" that the trades were not suspicious, despite patterns & results that were unprecedented in the entire history of financial trading.
We have reports from firemen of explosions at the base of the Twin Towers BEFORE they fell, and the seismographic evidence to back up these assertions.
We have leader after leader saying they didn't know such a thing could happen when the government had been studying the problem for ten years. It had held at least two major drills simulating such a possibility.
And we have a president sitting in a ghetto classroom in Florida, at possibly the most pivotal moment in American history, pretending to read a book that he was holding upside down.
Perhaps most tellingly of all, we have the tragic tale of John O’’Neill, rabidly honest FBI investigator, prevented from following his leads about Osama bin Laden because of the danger he would have discovered the links from Afghanistan back to CIA headquarters. Just review the way he was prevented from conducting his probe of the Cole bombing, and prevented by digging into other leads by the same guys, — namely insiders Louis Freeh and Thomas Picard, — who prevented significant reports from other FBI agents from seeing the light of day.
The supposedly impartial government panel investigating these matters is focusing on essentially trivial information. They are entirely incompetent to defend the Public Interests of the American People. They are either abysmally stupid, or bought and paid for co-coconspirators . This is especially true when they so routinely talk about the dastardly hijackers (without being able to name them) as if there is no question of their guilt. Talk about your misleading urban legends! This one is the champ.
We knew this commission was a set-up from the get-go. Recycled Watergate investigators. Part of the same bunch that has run the country and covered up everything for the past 30 years or more. Commissioner Thomas Kean declared at the outset of his hearings that Osama bin Laden was guilty. End of discussion. BAs soon as he made that statement, there was no way the hearings could be legitimate.
Asserting that genuine Arab hijackers did not carry out the attacks of 9/11 requires analysis of two concomitant categories: the history of American (and Israeli) involvement (and subterfuge) with Arab terrorists, and methods of remote control of aircraft, or other means of piloting the aircraft.
The remote control aspect continues to be a bone of contention among legitimate pilots, with some asserting only real pilots could have made such extemporaneous maneuvers and others insisting only remote control could have accomplished such a feat. An interesting new perspective on this debate can be found here: http://joevialls.altermedia.info/wtc/radiocontrol.html
A third natural area of study in this regard would be the intimate histories of those whom officials claim to be the hijackers, including putting the microscope on their behavior in the days and weeks before the tragedy.
Many researchers claim the name al-Qaeda was made up in middle 90s by a variety of American functionaries as an all-purpose villain which the Administration could blame as a convenient reason for its military adventurism. And a group of Israeli provocateurs was recently discovered trying to create their own faux version of al-Qaeda. How many more hints does the Supreme Jury of this Nation need? The absence of any relevant arrests or discovery of any clues to the hierarchy of this supposedly world-wide terror group, along with the other Evidence mentioned here-in; should be Sufficient Evidence of Conspiratorial Complicity to Issue the Arrest Warrants.
Al-Qaeda doesn’’t exist except for when they want it to, to blame for any sort of strategic terror they have created themselves for some political reason, like influencing the elections in Spain.
No American intelligence operatives have gone to these foreign countries to interview these named hijackers who turned out to be alive. This is because they knew the list was fiction in the first place, and the Arab-types who have been named as terror gurus are mostly their own employees, or people who have been set up by them.
It is a celebrated fact that Mohammed Atta and some of his friends were seen in nightclubs in the hours before 9/11, certainly a fact that argues against them being able to carry out their supposed missions because they were motivated by Islamic religious zeal. So their appearance in strip clubs blows the whole story that they were devout Muslims giving their lives to Allah. Devout Muslims don't drink, never mind cavort with strippers.
If we knew who the hijackers were, we'd know their names, wouldn't we? The Bush Administration has begun bombing other nations and murdering thousands of innocent people because they say that they know who the hijackers were, even though they apparently doesn't even know their names. It is an Act of Treason Against the American People that these Bush Administration Officers have approved of the murders of thousands of people because of Their Blatant Lie.
Many of the men who were fingered as 9/11 hijackers received preferential treatment from American immigration officials when it came to entering and leaving the U.S. on numerous occasions. Many of these same names reportedly trained at various U.S. military installations.
The result after two and a half years of work by America’s crack intelligence agencies, is simply to Lawlessly Arrest, Kidnap, & Murder Muslims through-out the world. Hundreds of innocent people have been unjustly imprisoned and tortured at Guantanamo Bay. All of them innocent, hapless dupes rounded up by way of Defendant Rumsfelds orders to implement a dragnet in Pakistan, after U.S. planes had (inadvertently or otherwise) allowed the Taliban fighters to escape with the Pakistani army from Afghanistan.
Two pathetic flunkies have been arrested and held without due process. One of them, the notoriously pathetic shoe bomber who was obviously a deranged personality and not a member of any terror network, was ceremoniously sentenced to life in prison.
Other than that, No al-Qaeda king-pins have been even named, never mind apprehended. No clue about how the 9/11 attacks were engineered has ever emerged. This is simply not consistent with being able to name all 19 hijackers the day after the attacks. It is a case of pretending you have all of the information instantly, and then pretending you could not find any information for the next two years. What a smell!
The list of 19 names was a Total Fabrication, and that the worldwide terror network called al-Qaeda is also a Total Fabrication, the incestuous brainchild of the CIA and the Mossad to be trotted out as an excuse for a whole string of terror attacks, — Madrid, Bali, Riyadh, Istanbul, etc., — that were really carried out by the Defendant Tenet’s CIA and the Mossad them-selves, cleverly involving designated patsies to give the operations a suitably foreign flavor.
Al-Qaeda does not exist except as a bogeyman invented by the Bush Administration to justify their evil agenda. There were no hijackers flying those planes on 9/11. And honest FBI agents have been Treasonously prevented from publicizing that fact. We Demand that Bush Administration Officers Appear before a Supreme Jury of this court, & Answer these Apocalyptic Charges of Conspiratorial Treason. Even Now, the high-tech mass murder by these Bush Administration Officers and assorted cohorts such as DeFacto Israel spreads around the world because of this Falsified Version of Events.
History will show, — and the public will soon realize, — that the Bush Administration Officers who are telling these Lies, not only Allowed 9/11 to happen, but Planned it, all for their own Treasonously Subversive Advantage. This is a Murderous & Treasonous Conspiracy by Power-Mad DeFacto Executive Officers to Institute Tyrannical Control over these United States of America & the Whole Planet. Every time any acting Federal Officer talks about the “Hijackers”, they are giving “Aid & Comfort tot he Enemy”, whether they know it or not.
Much more productive would be analyzing the tiny hole in the Pentagon, how the ejected material in the WTC photos prove there were unexplained explosions, or how those emotional cell-phone calls could not possibly have been made as Bush Administration flunkies have presented them.
The appointed 9/11 commissioners wont be talking about any of that, because they are incompetent at best, & co-conspiratorial at worst. We can tell, because they keep talking about the “Hijackers”.
There is another, more pressing reason for the filing of this Criminal Complaint. On Tuesday, April 20, and Wednesday, April 28, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on the power claimed by the acting President Bush to Summarily Designate Americans & others as "Enemy Combatants", & to have them Incarcerated by the Military, — For Ever, With-Out Charges, & With-Out Access to the Court System - Solely on His Say-So.
This is a critical moment in United States history. How the court rules on these cases will determine the type of country we will be living in. The “National Lawyers Guild”, and a multitude of their supporters, are out-raged over these Treasonously Subversive Activities. Their Efforts are listed here: http://www.nlg.org/eccases/ It is one thing to be faced with the serious possibility that all law enforcement and defense strategies in America in 2004 have become lies. It is quite another to incorporate those lies into the law itself, and that very well may happen soon, if the Treasonous Conspirators in the Bush Administration have their way with this court. ***

As a direct result of their Conspiracy to Murder the Occupants of the World Trade Center, & the Pentagon; these Bush Administration Officers are Lawlessly Administering Aggressive Force directly against American Citizens, mostly now of Arabic decent Muslim religion. They are administering Lawless & Aggressive Force against “We the People” of this Nation/State, these Rogue Officers have Defied the “Law”. They are “Outside” of the “Sphere” of the Law. They are “Outlaw”. Those who Break such Law have “Gone to War with the Community”. Authoritative citations affirm this in the following:
“... the evidence which comes to us from England and elsewhere invites us to think of a time when law was week, and its weakness was displayed by a ready recourse to outlawry. ... he who defied it was outside its sphere; he was an outlaw. He who breaks it has gone to war with the community; and the community goes to war with him. It is the right and duty of every man to pursue him, to ravage his land, to burn his house, to hunt him down like a wild beast and slay him; for a wild beast he is; not merely is he a friendless man, he is a wolf. History of English Law; Frederick Pollock & Frederic Maitland, (1899). Cambridge University Press, Volume 2, Pages 449 & 450.

This citation shows clearly that in times past, any lawbreaker was viewed as being at “War with the Community”. “Law” was a most serious & revered object, unlike seemingly today, at least in the circles of the Bush Administration . “Law” was then viewed as a Godly & Religious Concern, not to be routinely violated by Licentious Licence of Rogue Public-Officials; as seems now the common practice.
Here-under, is shown that “War with the Community” is attached to Lawbreakers. And while this most serious escalation of Judgement should be perhaps tempered concerning a hungry pick-pocket stealing money for a loaf of bread; yet when acting Federal Executive Department Officers are effectively Granted Licence by Judges to Murder & Kidnap For-Ever Members of Our Constitutional American Body-Politic; then hereunder “War against the Community” is an entirely appropriate use of the terminology within modern Jurisprudence.
These Complaining Parties Solemnly Affirm &/or Swear by Oath that the here-in named Bush Administration Officials have Knowingly & Willfully Conspired to Commit “Overt Acts” & to “Give Aid & Comfort” to Treasonous Conspirators who actually placed the Explosives in the World Trade Center Buildings, & the Pentagon; & Detonated them to Murder the Innocent American Inhabitants.
In accompaniment to such Lawless Violent Acts, they have also Obstructed the Ability of these Constitutionally-Lawful “United States of America” to Protect ourselves from these Sociological Parasites upon our Body-Politic. This constitutes the essential elements of a “Conspiracy” as recognizable under the US Code xxxxx.
If these Acts Complained of herein were the only known acts Complained of, such would not be so Socially Traumatic. However, the Acts complained of herein are in direct relation to the Sslaughter of the Branch Davidians & the Oklahoma-City Bombing. Thus they are bell-weather indicators that very many other Acts of Lawless Violence are being Routinely Committed against “We the People” of these United States of America. These Acts are being committed by these Violent Criminals by way of mere Color Of Lawful Authority. These Violent Criminal Conspirators commonly purport themselves to be & are thereby commonly conceived of as “Public Servants” & as “Public Officials”.

These Acts of Lawless Violence herein Complained Of are greatly similar to Racketeering & Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Actions, & they are herein Sworn to be Knowingly, Willfully, & Purposefully Orchestrated against “We the People”, in a “Pattern of ... Activity” manner similar to the Statutorily defined in the RICO Statutes.
This “Pattern of Activity” is herein Sworn to be similarly “Conspiratorial” in Nature, & yet this “Pattern” of Acts goes way beyond the mere economic focus of the RICO Statutes. What we see here is a “Pattern of Lawlessly Violent Activity”, which is much more detrimental to the Peace, Safety & Happiness of “We the People” who Constitute these “Body Politics” which are effectively known as these “United States of America” & her various States, Counties, & Cities.
Because of the extreme vulnerability of this Nation/State to “Lawlessly Violent Activity” being Conspiratorially Committed & Orchestrated by way of its entrusted Public Officers, the “Class A Felony” penalties, & the otherwise serious concerns associated with the RICO Statute, is in this case insufficient to adequately address this “Pattern of Lawlessly Violent Activity”, & here-under it does effectively amount to a “State of War” against “We the People” of this Nation/State. To “Reasonable People” concerned here-with, these acts in turn amount to what is recognizable as: “Treason”. We complaining parties are confident that at a “Supreme Jury” of such “Reasonable People” will Convict the here-in accused, forthwith.
Everyone Signatory here to & by accompanying or future supplementary documents affirming such, do hereby Swear, Subscribe, & Verify that he/she has come to the well founded knowledge that this above described “Pattern of Lawlessly Violent Activity” does actually exist with in these United States of America, & that it does amount to “Treason”. This is all as precisely defined within the above authoritative documents. Hereunder, this “Pattern of Lawlessly Violent Activity” is more effectively termed a “Pattern of Treasonous Activity”.

Everyone Signatory hereto does hereby Swear, Subscribe, & Verify that he/she has come to the well-founded knowledge that this “Pattern of Treasonous Activity” is actually being actively pursued by a Core “Nexus” of “Accomplices”, & that these Treasonous Acts are “Not Isolated Incidents”, & that they are “Interrelated by (the) Distinguishing Characteristics” of being all carried out by Persons Acting under Color of Lawful Authority of Constitutionally Lawful Public Offices as within this Constitutionally Created “United States of America”. Here-under, the accusors here-in Swear that the actors herein Accused of Treason have engaged in “at least two incidents” of said Treasonous Activity, & these Acts “Have the Same or Similar Intents, Results, Accomplices, Victims (&) Methods of Commission”.
Those Signatory hereto & the various Treasonous Acts incorporated by way of reference herein are constantly growing in number, as the Public is bring made aware that this “Class Action Treason Complaint” is being made available as Remedy so-as-to address these most grievous Wrongs on their behalf.

Quo Warranto: The writ of quo warranto is an ancient common law, prerogative writ and remedy. Indeed, it is one of the most ancient and important writs known to the common law. The ancient writ was in the nature of a writ of right for the king, against him who claimed or usurped any office, franchise, or liberty, to inquire by what authority he supported his claim, in order to determine the right, or in the case of nonuser, long neglect, misuse, or abuse of franchise, a writ commanding defendant to show by what warrant he exercised such franchise, never having had any grant of it, or having forfeited it by neglect or abuse.
... a quo warranto proceeding is of a public nature, and not a personal action, it being rather an inquisition which the sovereignty, by its courts, institutes to ascertain whether its prerogative rights have been invaded; ... . ... quo warranto is a direct, rather than a collateral, attack on the record or other matter assailed ... . ... Originally the information in the nature of quo warranto, which succeeded the ancient writ, was essentially a criminal prosecution instituted for the purpose of subjecting defendant to punishment by fine, as well as judgement of ouster ... Thus quo warranto, or a proceeding in the nature thereof, is the sole and exclusive remedy and method by which various matters may be tried and determined, as, for example, the right and title to office ... . Corpus Juris Secundum; West Publishing Company; Volume 74 Pages 174- 189.

Hereunder, it is shown that any effort to limit this “Action at Law” to merely those Remedies which are “Civil” in nature, is clearly in error. By reducing these Remedies to “Civil”, such Remedies are reduced to “Private”. This is as in Citizen to Citizen. The Interest of the “Nation/State” in it’s “Public” Capacity here-under, cannot be served by that “Private Party” which is specifically authorized under ORS 30.510. Such policy as this would surgically abort the “Quo Warranto” guts from the general -law process. This would be in direct violation of the clear wording of the multitudes of State States & case-law which has developed on the subject.
“Information in the Nature of Quo Warranto” is shown by CJS above to be “essentially a Criminal prosecution”. Hereunder, “Reasonable” People will see that this process does work to establish a Remedy whereby “Private Parties” can access Public “Criminal” Procedural Remedies. Such is in clear harmony with the “... All Power is Inherent in the People ...” general principle of American Constitutional Law.
***
End of Quotation from Memorandum.
***

STATE, government. ... This word ... (i)n its most enlarged sense, it signifies a self_sufficient body of persons united together in one community for the defence of their rights, and to do right and justice to foreigners. In this sense, the state means the whole people united into one body politic; (q. v.) and the state, and the people of the state, are equivalent expressions. ... (Law Dictionary; by John Bouvier; 1856)

As noted herein, the “Rights” of the People within the “Social-Compact” are to be secured by the Lawful “State”. Now look to definitions of the term “Right”, as follows:
“Right: As a Noun, and taken in the abstract sense, means justice, ethical correctness, or consonance with the rules of law or the principles of morals. In this signification it answers to one meaning of the Latin “jus”, and serves to indicate law in the abstract, considered as the foundation of all rights, or the complex of underlying moral principles which impart the character of justice to all positive law, or give it ethical content. ... And the primal rights pertaining to men ... existing prior to positive law. But leaving the abstract moral sphere and giving to the term a juristic content, a “right” is well defined as “a capacity residing in one man of controlling, with the assent & assistance of the state, the actions of others.” As an adjective, the term “right” means just, morally correct, constant with ethical principles or rules of positive law. It is the opposite of wrong, unjust, illegal. ... A legally enforceable claim of one person against another, that the other shall do a given act or not do a given act. That which one person ought to have or receive from another, it being with held from him, or not in his possession. In this sense, “right” has the force of “claim”, and is properly expressed by the Latin “jus”. ... Natural rights are those which grow out of the nature of man and depend upon personality, as distinguished from such as are created by law and depend upon civilized society; ... they are those which are plainly assured by natural law; ... those which, by fair deduction from the present physical, moral, social, and religious characteristics of man, he must be invested with, and which he ought to have realized for him in a jural society, in order to fulfill the ends to which his nature calls him.
(Blacks Law Dictionary, 5th Edition)

“Jurisprudence is specifically concerned only with such rights as are recognized by law and enforced by the power of the state. We may therefore define a “legal right” in what we shall hereafter see is the strictest sense of that term, as a capacity residing in one man of controlling, with the assent and assistance of the state, the actions of others. That which gives validity to a legal right is, in every case, the force which is lent to it by the state. Anything else may be the occasion, but not the cause of its obligatory character.” (William Casey Jones, Director of the School of Jurisprudence, University of California. Pg 121/199, Section 160; Footnotes; “Commentaries on the Laws of England”, by William Blackstone; Bancroft Whitney)

In both of these authoritative sources, we find that within Anglo-American Jurisprudence that the term “State” invokes a socially-compacted relationship where-under specific individual members are to be allowed the authority to “Control ... Others” ... by way of their “Relationship” with the “State”. Here-under, Logic Dictates that they will not be able to “Control” those “Others”, Unless they can also Control the “State”.
When a member of the “Social-Compact” is Directly Physically Injured, it is an injury to every-one. It is a “Breach of the Peace”, a Trespass, a Common-Law Crime; of “Malum in Se”, aka: “Wrong in It’s-Self”. We are all bound toghether in this Social-Compact to defend the Rights of each other against Physical Crimes against us. We call these “Public” Crimes, as opposed to “Private” or “Malum Prohibitum” which relies upon some Contract or Legal Nexus.
When World Trade Tower Occupants or Arab Americans, or others are Physically Harmed or Terrorized; Quo-Warranto/State-Ex-Rel Process specifically gives these “Private Persons” so afflicted withn this “Nation/State” this “Right” to “Control the ... State” so-as-to there-by: “Control ... the Actions of Others”. This specific wording referring to the ability of Particular Individuals to “Control ... Others”, by way of their “Control” over the “State”, is clearly set forth in both of the above citations.
The Complaining Parties here-in are “Joint Tenants in the Sovereignty” of this “Social Compact” known as the “State of Oregon”. Case law in support of this has already been presented above in Chisholm Ex'r. v. Georgia; 2 Dall. {U.S.} 419, 1 L.Ed. 440, {U.S.Ga. 1793}.
Each of “We the People” are these “Joint Tenants in the Sovereignty” of these “United States of America”. Each of us are “Joint Tenants” in the “Master” position of this Master/Servant Relationship. This is our “Relation” to these “United States of America”. This is Why each of “We the People” are all Lawfully Entitled to proceed with all of the authority & more than that which the Attorney General himself possesses.
The Attorney General, as well as the Judges touching upon this case, are all
“Public Servants”. These “Public Servants” have a partially Disabled “Relation” to the “United States of America”; where-under they are in the “Servant” position under traditionally recognizable “Master-Servant” Relationships. This is why they must proceed through Grand Juries before they can secure Criminal Indictments. This is known in Law as a “Legal Disability”.
Each of “We the People”, such as these Complaining Parties are under No such “Legal Disability. We may state “Criminal” Complaints Directly. Such is plain from Oregon’s Revised Statutes, at 133.007, 133.015, & 135.715.” ... & the equivalent in the Federal Codes.

General Constitutional Law commands that “... All Power is Inherent in the People ...”.

This last citation further strongly supports the above described concepts of allowing the people to bring Criminal Complaints Directly.

****************************

All of the documents from both sides are based on this same set of facts. In the attempts by those in support of xxx to Defend the “Public Interest” of the Constitutionally Lawful State from these Felony-Criminals, the many honorable People filing in support of & supplementary to the main Criminal Counter-Complaint have modeled their “Accusatory Instruments” upon that of xxxx.
Hereunder, & by their numbers; they do show large quantities of “Probable Cause” Evidence before this Court, that the Peace & Dignity of this “Nation/State” has actually been Criminally Violated by the hereby Accused Original Plaintiff & those acting there-with. Here-under, it is shown by this State that the Complaints by the Bush Administration for Despotic Abilities to Lawlessly Imprision American & Non-American People are being advanced for a Criminal Purpose, & that they are “Malicious Prosecution”, “Perjury”, “Abuse of Public Office”, “Official Misconduct” & are of no merit; & that all of these acts are “State & Public Justice Offences” as recognizable within the US Code & ORS Chapter 162.”

“Coercion” herein is clearly the equivalent of “Terrorism”. “Terrorism”, especially when directly accompanied by Acts of Violence as are so well documented herein, is the equivalent of Acts of War. Hereunder Ms Bergman & Ms Keller & the Rogue Violent Police Officers named herein are engaged in “Overt Acts of War” against “We the People” of this good “State of Oregon”.
Hereunder, & by way of the herein described Constitutions, Statutes & Codes, & by way of these “Overt Acts”, these ones are Guilty of “Treason”; & a Jury of Lawful & Reasonable People will so find when all of the evidence to this effect is so presented to them at said trial.
Sworn, Subscribed, & Verified.

The Constitutionally Lawful “State of Oregon”, by way of:

_________________________________________
Charles Bruce, Stewart
19164 Barrington Avenue
Sandy, Oregon Republic [97055]
(503) 668-3932