Says the moron who refers to the document he considers fake:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Haha you're as dumb as a shithouse rat.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

that is a good question :2 cents:

I guess that makes you the turd of a shithouse rat:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

of course that two different judges and multiple psychiatrists / psychologists found her mentally incompetent as well as multiple anecdotal reports from neighbors and co-workers means nothing except for more proof of the vastness of the conspiracy.

to be honest, for a women that might have taken a payment from an enemy during to time of war she was very very lucky how things turned out. a trial could have left her rotting in a hole for the rest of her life.

because they never mastered basic critical thinking skills, have no idea what sources are, what sources mean and how to check them.

basically self-educated types who never learned the basics of source checking and criticism. not many of them did any higher education i presume. they think just embracing the counterpoint of idea is being "critical."

Once again, if anyone is interested in reading the document which makes a good reference to the original video, don't waste your time with the trolls' posts...
just check it out for yourself-
http://electionfraudnews.com/News/sl...sideration.pdf



.

why don't you post the first judge's 36 page decision?

When are you gonna get it through your thick fucking skull that that document proves absolutely nothing other than this woman is batshit insane?

yes and learn they are arguing that she did meet bin laden which proves she was a government asset.

also that she has psychic powers but that is not sign she is crazy because the us government studied psychic phenomena at some point (the proof of that claim? there are google results for that search).

yes please check out this very sound legal argument.

Once again, if anyone is interested in reading the document which makes a good reference to the original video, don't waste your time with the trolls' posts...
just check it out for yourself-
http://electionfraudnews.com/News/sl...sideration.pdf



.

yes read it and learn how she met bin laden and has psychic powers.

:thumbsup

lol, yea. we started the war. If you believe that america created 9/11, then yea. Maybe we created the war. But since it didn't, its was the terrorists who started the war. You asshole. I drove past the buildings about 5 minutes before they were hit by the planes? Where were you? Moose hunting? Did you know anyone who was in the buildings who died? I did, Did you know police officers who were at the scene? I did. So don't go saying what Canada did. You didnt do shit. Canada does shit because the US says so. And if I am not mistaken, isnt Canada technically still partially commanded by the Queen of England?

Why can't you understand that its just a pdf. A draft of a motion that was NEVER filed with the court.

If it hasn't been filed with the court... and obviously an attorney isn't going to just let a draft of a motion intended to be filed float around the internet.. then where did it come from?

A prudent question would be: why are YOU trying to use it as proof of anything if it clearly isn't a legit document?

:2 cents:

there is no convincing conspiracy nuts.

not one shred of proof or evidence has been shown to say 9/11 was a conspiracy. Just hear-say and opinions.
did the u.s. use the disaster for their benefit? You bet, who the fuck wouldn't.

New "truther" videos come out all the time, and "non-truthers" will immediately and firmly call it bullshit. They could have bush on tape admitting to the whole thing and they'd still deny it.

At least keep an open mind about the damn thing. Something just isn't right no matter which way you look at it.

On the other hand, non-conspiracy nuts can't be convinced that conspiracies aren't all theories. At least tinfoil hats question things.

Why are you people bothering to argue with people that are so clearly disconnected from reality that nobody will ever take them seriously enough to have any impact on your life? Just let them believe what they want. It doesn't make one bit of difference.

Nobody is being mocked for questioning things. It's a good idea to question things. I myself question the official story of 9/11. At least some parts of it.

What's actually happening here is people are completely dismissing all the evidence that supports the official story and offering their own theories based on wild speculation and less than credible evidence. See the difference?

I think there is an equal need to remind ourselves that we are grounded in a reality governed by reason just as much as they have a need to convince themselves that their paranoid delusions are justified.

:2 cents:

Fair enough. :thumbsup

and who was in charge of the "official story"?

what would be the outcome if a criminal was in charge of his own investigation?

to be fair, if any resident gfy nutjob made an hour long video explaining his psychic skills and how they met bin laden I most likely wouldn't watch that either. this thread is a little embarrassing.

its simply hilarious how truthers with no critical abilities think others don't question things and they are somehow enlightened, pretty sure it's the feeling of being what they consider an enlightened being that allows them to bypass logic and be manipulated by crazy people.

An open mind is sadly what many people lack...

Once again, if anyone is interested in reading the document which makes a good reference to the original video, don't waste your time with the trolls' posts...
just check it out for yourself-
http://electionfraudnews.com/News/sl...sideration.pdf



.

Sound like my dad. :2 cents:

What exactly do you think that document proves? I am reading it, but I have to agree with those that suggest you do not know what you are looking at.

What you have is a Motion, otherwise known as a request to overturn a prior ruling that deemed the defendant as incompetent to assist in her own defense,

You have the argument in favor of the request as laid out by the defendant's attorney.

You also have a proposed order GRANTING the request. You do not have anything that suggests it was granted or the Plaintiff's argument against it, and what their side of the story was.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt as to whether or not it was actually filed since there is no stamp from the clerk of the court, but it may have been an e-Filing.

And you have apparently not read this thread so you do not understand what the argument is about.

Many are saying this woman is nuts, batshit crazy etc., and I am simply saying that according to testimony of doctors within that document that she is not.

So my question to you is, if you really did read the document can you see where doctors who observed her for long periods of time came to the conclusion that she was sane?

If you do not see that, then there is no point...


I am not going to re-quote those passages of testimony, they are already in this thread.


.

Because there are doctors that say she isn't mentally ill does not mean that she isn't and it is the court that makes that determination after hearing all of the testimony. In most...if not all...cases where "expert" testimony is used there are contradicting "experts"...and it is up to the court or jury...if it is a jury trial to determine which experts are correct. In this case the court decided based upon "expert" testimony that she was to mentally ill to stand trial.

I watched the video and did not have any knowledge of this woman when I watched the video and it became apparent to me that she is a nut case.

Yes because the defense lawyers found some experts to say she's not crazy the case is closed. Well except of course that she's been ruled to be bat shit crazy, there's tons of others that have had interactions with her over the course of her life that say she's bat shit crazy and watching her for about 2.3 seconds you can clearly see she's bat shit crazy. The icing on the cake is she claims she has psychic powers. Not an ounce of crazy there at all.

It's simply amazing what some people will believe.

Threads like this are very helpful in sorting the run of the mill leftist radicals from the actual mentally ill (it is often hard to tell the difference). Thanks to all participants.

Two doctors say they saw nothing. Again, where is the Plaintiff's response and the judge's ruling?

That's all I'm saying, two doctors (and at least one of those in sworn testimony) said she displayed no abnormal behavior.
Based upon that I believe it's possible she was/is of sound mind and body.

Watching the video she struck me as a bit high strung and excited, but hardly "nuts."

As for the plaintiff's response I haven't seen it, but I would like to see it as well.

As for the judges ruling, I believe he ruled her unfit to stand trial.

So forgetting about everything else... lets get this straight.

A known anti war activist and journalist gets charged under the Patriot Act for being an unregistered agent working for iraqi intelligence, for accepting assignments and carrying them out and for accepting $10,000 payment.

She was incarcerated pending trial but later released as she was deemed unfit to stand trial. (odd for a government conspiracy)

A SECOND court also reaffirmed that she was unfit to stand trial.

She was then NOT PROSECUTED because she was unfit to stand trial and the federal district court in New York ordered her to be set free.

YOU are apparently upset because the legal system worked and a lunatic was set free because she was too fucking insane to understand what was going on and defend herself and the court ruled it had no right to demand she take anti psychotic drugs to make her "fit for trial"

THEN you are posting a bogus motion purportedly prepared by her attorneys (which would have come after her initial incarceration) for the court to reconsider its ruling and declare her fit for trial so that she could then be prosecuted and convicted and imprisoned as a spy?

AND you still seem to be incapable of understanding that the PDF you keep referrencing is obviously fake and was never filed to begin with, otherwise it would be dated, accepted, stamped etc etc etc. and not just full of blank lines for dates, case numbers, signatures and so on.






wow.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

You're like a dog chasing it's own tail:1orglaugh
First you say the doc is bogus, then you reference the doc to argue against me, and now you are saying the doc is bogus again...incredible.

:1orglaugh Are you just a complete idiot? I gave you the case number moron, its in this thread and it's on the document. The doc was scanned prior to being signed/notarized. Big fucking deal.


So one more time, if anyone is interested in reading the document which makes a good reference to the original video, don't waste your time with the trolls' posts...
just check it out for yourself-
http://electionfraudnews.com/News/sl...sideration.pdf










.

For future reference, you might want to learn what being a troll actually is. For a start, it's not somebody that merely disagrees with you. :2 cents:

Let me play devils advocate here, sir.

She says she has psychic powers. The country's slogan is "In God We Trust" and we all take a day off to celebrate zombie jesus coming back to life. Who's crazier?

At least there is some scientific possibility that electronic signals in our brain could travel into another mind.... just sayin.

I am saying its an unfiled motion for the court to reverse its decision that she's unfit to stand trial. UNFILED. Until proven otherwise, its just a random pdf that someone created for people EXACTLY like you.

Not sure why you can't understand that a legal document purportedly prepared by her attorneys and then not filed with the court is not legit.

Why is it online? From where? Her attorneys circulated an unfiled motion to request that the court(s) reverse the decision that she's batshit crazy? That can't happen legally.

You have a document with zero evidence that its even real and you're touting it as evidence that she's innocent.

WHY?

Are you so naive about the legal system?

Her attorneys can't legally make this document available to the public before its filed with the court. It's a pdf of an unfiled legal document. You have NO IDEA where it even came from or if its legit. You don't seem to care... but then again, you're not exactly sane either.

Where is the filed motion that was accepted by the court?

Yeah... if anyone has an interest reading a document which isn't likely to be real, but desperately need "evidence" that the boogeyman is out there... they should read it.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Upon further investigation, yes it was filed. Look at the Proof of Service (aka CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, page 14/15).

But it proves nothing other than what the testimony of a couple of witnesses was.