But then truth redirected away from their planned disinfo is why they censor, so to get around that problem, I decided to post my comments with this article over here on this blog and go even further, as I usually do with censorship, than I was going to do in the first place. These Khazars can hardly wait to complete their world domination agenda, so they can silence truth tellers for good.
So this vatic note will have much more proof and information than the comments section on Veterans Today would have had if they had just let me post my comments. Almost every VN: on here was censored at Veterans today because this below was blatant Protocols in play along with the early Zionists celebrated use of Anti-semitism to stop any and all criticism of pagan worshipping Khazars, Israel and her leaders, along with their mafia corrupt agenda.
Because of the increased activity in attacking our blogs, I am putting this up now before I am finished with it and will finish it later since it is 4 am in the morning and I am tired. lol Check back later for the proof about Anti-semitism was stated in the protocols and articles written by early Zionists to be USED TO CONTROL the opposition through slurs and using the dispora Jews as cover for these khazars criminal activity and anyone making the connection to the khazars would be manipulated by calling them anti-semites. Since they are not Jews either by DNA or by religion (they are practicing satanists), it then becomes obvious why they are doing it. "BY DECEPTION WE WILL CONDUCT WAR" and they have against us. No doubt about it.
9/11 Widow & Lawyer sanctioned by Corrupt Zionist Judge
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/18/911-widow-lawyer-sanctioned-for-protesting-judges-zionist-connections/
by Jim Fetzer, Veterans Today
By Martin Hill - LibertyFight.com
Ellen with Louis prior to 9/11
The case, Ransmeier v. UAL Corporation, et al., was heard in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. “We conclude that Appellant and her attorney’s conduct in prosecuting this appeal was frivolous and offensive,” the court proclaimed, “and therefore warrants the imposition of sanctions.”
Our October 2012 run-down ‘9/11 Widow Faces Sanctions For Objecting To Judges Israeli Ties‘ was dubbed an “excellent article” by the Ellen Mariani Legal Defense Fund and explains how the 9/11 widow and her lawyer were threatened with sanctions for “deeply troubling personal slurs” against U.S. District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein. [Editor's note: It is republished below.]
The court’s decison filed Wednesday chides Leichty for making “personal slurs against Judge Hellerstein and his family” and alleges “In fact, on closer observation, Leichty’s real argument is that Judge Hellerstein cannot be impartial because he is Jewish.”
The court also sanctioned Mariani, one of the few 911 survivors who had the nerve to refused to be paid off. They noted that Mariani “is a veteran of federal court litigation” and that she signed a motion which included “some of the most offensive allegations against Judge Hellerstein.” The court concluded therefore that “Mariani, too, is therefore jointly responsible with her attorney for the double costs imposed by this Order.”
As we previously reported, Mariani’s April 19, 2012 brief noted in part that “Judge Hellerstein and his wife Mildred are known to be active supporters of Israeli causes, and it is implausible that Judge Hellerstein would not at least be on inquiry notice of the affiliations of his son’s law firm and the connections of his son’s clients to Israeli and Israeli-linked defendants in a case before him, particularly in a case of the magnitude of the 911 case.” It continued “It is not plausible that Judge Hellerstein, a highly-educated and connected supporter of Israeli causes, was unaware of the connections of his son’s law firm.”
Ironically, in their May 15th decision, the court in the Mariani case repeatedly referred to Gallop v. Cheney, another case in which a 9/11 victim sued the government, only to have her case thrown out and financial sanctions imposed. [See Bush court dismisses 9/11 suit against Bush officials, orders sanctions, globalresearch.ca.]
The court closed the decision noting that they were actually being easy on the two, once again referring to the April Gallop case: “Although we have authority to impose additional sanctions in the form of fines or attorney’s fees on Mariani and Attorney Leichty, see Gallop III, 660 F.3d at 586, we decline to do so at this time. We trust that this relatively public reprimand will suffice to prevent similar transgressions in the future.”
Below are some of the highlights (or rather lowlights) of the courts excoriating admonitions of the Plaintiff and Counsel who ‘dared’ to question the integrity of a public servant. The entire PDF of the ruling can be see here. (VN: if this is so wrong then how come its part of the legal system to challenge a judges right to sit on a case where he has a conflict of interest?)
Our other concern with Mariani’s second appeal was the disturbing manner in which she and her counsel prosecuted it. We noted, in particular, the ‘discreditable tone’ of her filings. Ransmeier, 486 F. App’x at 893.
We also wrote that her briefs featured ‘an escalating series of ad hominem attacks on opposing counsel and bombastic challenges to the integrity of the district court,’ id., which culminated with the particularly offensive Motion to Supplement the Record to introduce ‘newly-discovered evidence’ of the district court’s alleged partiality. Id.
This purported ‘evidence’ consisted of little more than a series of offensive insinuations, unmistakably anti-Semitic, (VN: See protocols of the elders of Zion and writings of early Zionists about using Anti-semitism to manipulate the goyim and the system.)about Judge Hellerstein, his family members, their professional work and some of their personal charitable activities.
We therefore ordered Mariani and her counsel to show cause why they should not be sanctioned in the amount of double costs.”"…we also impose sanctions where the conduct of the sanctioned litigant or attorney evinces bad faith or an egregious disrespect for the Court or judicial process. We recently sanctioned attorneys who ‘repeatedly and in bad faith accused the Court of bias, malice, and general impropriety.’ Gallop v. Cheney (Gallop III), 660 F.3d 580, 584 (2d Cir. 2011) (per curiam),…”
"These technical deficiencies, however, pale alongside the ludicrous arguments Leichty makes in support of the Motion. Leichty’s main argument is, in sum, that Judge Hellerstein is partial to defendants and must recuse himself because his adult son, an attorney, at one point was employed by a law firm in Israel that at some time represented two companies that might have an indirect connection to some of this case’s defendants. He also makes reference to certain religiously-oriented philanthropic activities of the family, which he says evince partiality.”
“…This leads us to the question of why the Motion was brought. Leichty’s behavior belies the possibility that he was motivated by a belief that the Motion would be successful. Rather than making good-faith legal arguments, his Motion seems to us to be nothing more than a vehicle for making personal slurs against Judge Hellerstein and his family.
In fact, on closer observation, Leichty’s real argument is that Judge Hellerstein cannot be impartial because he is Jewish. The papers filed in support of the Motion reflect anti-Semitism in a raw and ugly form. (VN: Now, if the judge is Khazar and they treat themselves as a nation without borders, and if they are not practicing dispora Jews, yet call themselves "Jews", and since 9-11 was done by the khazar Israeli's, as evidenced by the Dual Israeli Citizen Chertoff, head of Homeland Security's, writing in the Patriot Act, immunity for Israeli for anything she may have done on 9-11, and they have a history of murdering Americans for a political agenda as happened to the USS Liberty, then there is a conflict of interest under the "reasonable man theory". Given such evidence What would a "reasonable man think"!
For a private citizen to make such spurious and offensive suggestions is bad enough. For an attorney admitted to this Court to make them in court pleadings is unpardonable. We note, of course, that no law or court may prevent Leichty from believing what he chooses to believe.
In most contexts, he may also say the things he says. What he is not allowed to do, however, is to let his misguided views cloud his judgment regarding what arguments may properly be made to this Court. In other words, we do not sanction him here for harboring anti-Semitic views.
Rather, we impose sanctions against him because he allowed those views to prompt him to submit frivolous and grossly insulting arguments to this Court. See Gallop III, 660 F.3d at 585-86 (sanctioning an attorney who allowed ‘his emotional reaction . . . to further undermine his legal judgment and interfere with his duty to provide thoughtful and reasoned advice to his client’). (VN: what this says is he is being sanctioned for speaking truth to power and that is why the early Zionists and the protocols have recommended nurturing and using the term "anti-semitism" to manipulate and control the genuine flow of truthful information when it harms the Zionists agenda. Their words, not mine)
To deter Leichty from acting similarly in the future, and to warn other lawyers about the consequences of similarly egregious behavior, we impose sanctions on Attorney Leichty in the form of double the costs incurred by Ransmeier in responding to the Motion…” (VN: Now what does it mean to "say" that the sanctions are being used "TO DETER..."? It means the sanctions are being used to "CONTROL" the lawyers speech in the future and as a warning to other lawyers never to speak the truth or it will cost them. That is exactly what the protocols and early Zionists said they would do using the term Anti-semitism as a weapon against those that they cannot control, thus hiding truth through threats and fear.)
‘The rule that the sins of the lawyer are visited on the client does not apply in the context of sanctions,’ and we therefore must ‘specify conduct of the client herself that is bad enough to subject her to sanctions.’ Gallop III, 660 F.3d at 584….Mariani, however, is a veteran of federal court litigation, and she affirmatively admits that she ‘worked closely’ with Attorney Leichty in preparing the Motion to Supplement the Record. Decl. of Ellen Mariani in Support of Motion at 1. Indeed, it is the declaration filed under her name, and signed with her signature, that includes some of the most offensive allegations against Judge Hellerstein. Mariani, too, is therefore jointly responsible with her attorney for the double costs imposed by this Order.
III. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Appellant Ellen Mariani and her attorney Bruce Leichty are SANCTIONED in the amount of double the costs incurred by Ransmeier in responding to the Motion. They shall be jointly and severally liable for the amount, which shall be paid within sixty days of entry of this order. Although we have authority to impose additional sanctions in the form of fines or attorney’s fees on Mariani and Attorney Leichty, see Gallop III, 660 F.3d at 586, we decline to do so at this time. We trust that this relatively public reprimand will suffice to prevent similar transgressions in the future.
9/11 Widow Faces Sanctions For Objecting To Judges Israeli Ties
9/11 widow threatened with sanctions for “deeply troubling personal slurs” regarding judges ties to IsraelBy Martin Hill
LibertyFight.comOctober 21, 2012
Ellen Mariani is relentless. Facing a lengthy labyrinth of complex and expensive legal hurdles, she is the only 9/11 widow who has refused to settle her case and is seeking to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Mariani, whose husband Neil was killed in the 9/11 attacks, has also been threatened with legal sanctions for daring to file motions outlining the impartiality of the federal judge’s Israeli connection in her case. After mentioning a serious “conflict of interest” on the part of Judge Alvin Hellerstein of the United States District Court Southern District of New York, Mariani faced a strong rebuke.
Mariani, along with her lawyer Bruce Leichty, were threatened with sanctions “in the form of double costs, for which Mariani and Leichty would be jointly and severally liable” and were condemned for “ad hominem attacks”, “bombastic challenges to the integrity of the district court” and “deeply troubling personal slurs”.
Mariani’s April 19, 2012 brief noted, in part that “Judge Hellerstein and his wife Mildred are known to be active supporters of Israeli causes, and it is implausible that Judge Hellerstein would not at least be on inquiry notice of the affiliations of his son’s law firm and the connections of his son’s clients to Israeli and Israeli-linked defendants in a case before him, particularly in a case of the magnitude of the 911 case.” It continued “It is not plausible that Judge Hellerstein, a highly-educated and connected supporter of Israeli causes, was unaware of the connections of his son’s law firm.”
Outlining some general facts of the case, the brief also stated “Federal Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein has presided over all of the proceedings arising out of the terrorist acts that beset the United States of America on September 11, 2001, including but not limited to the crashing of United Airlines Flight 175 into the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City, leading to the death of Appellant’s husband Louis Neil Mariani.
The effect of Judge Hellerstein’s supervision and rulings has been that no trial has been held on any wrongful death or survivorship claim arising from any of the 9/11 plane crashes… Consistent with pressure exerted by Judge Hellerstein at numerous points, settlements have been sought and approved as to all claims made to date, and Mariani believes that her claim and the claim of her deceased husband’s Estate–settlement of which was fashioned over her objection–are the only 9/11 claims not yet the subject of binding resolution by final nonappealable order.”
On June 26, 2012, the court responded by stating, in part, “their briefs feature an escalating series of ad hominem attacks on opposing counsel and bombastic challenges to the integrity of the district court. All this has continued on appeal, culminating with Mariani’s and Leichty’s defiant motion to supplement the record, which supposedly identifies “newly discovered” evidence of the district court’s partiality, but is in fact nothing more than a vehicle for asserting deeply troubling personal slurs against Judge Hellerstein and his family.”
In response to the court, Mariani’s lawyer had to explain why he and his client should not be sanctioned. On July 5, 2012, Leichty wrote in part,
“I have practiced law in California for over 22 years. During that time I have never been sanctioned by any court, whether in California or elsewhere, and no court or tribunal has ever held that I filed a frivolous paper of any kind. I was shocked to see that the Second Circuit was threatening to impose double costs on me and my client, Ellen Mariani, for our good faith litigation of her claims.
I was particularly shocked because Ellen has been through a lot–first she lost her husband in a national tragedy, and she has been pilloried for her insistence on finding out the truth of what happened on 9/11/2001, and she has had the misfortune of working with several disloyal or misguided attorneys, and she has had to subsist on Social Security and on the good graces of family.
Now her meritorious arguments are ignored and discredited. Ellen has depended on my legal analysis and I have always given her my honest and candid assistance based on what I believed to be her best interests, both financially and otherwise. I would not depart from strict adherence to the law to do so, and I have never done so, and I have never had an improper motivation in this case, nor to cause delay for any tactical reason or to make any pretextual claim.
There was no advantage for Ellen in pursuing this appeal unless it was victory. Ellen and I have both suffered financially through the long litigation of her claims without compensation. I have worked as Ellen Mariani’s attorney for almost five (5) years. I prepared this declaration working closely with her, and she has reviewed it prior to my signing it.
Ellen Mariani did not know what “law of the case” was until I explained it to her. Although I have come to see that she is a person of keen insight and intelligence, she has no formal legal training…” I do not know what the court is referring to when it talks about “ad hominem attacks” or slurs or attacks on the integrity of the District Court, but my claims about John Ransmeier’s connections and Charles Capace’s minimal contribution to the 9/11 litigation, and the failure of Ransmeier to have been prepared for trial, were all germane to the substance of Mrs. Mariani’s claims regarding intervention and impropriety of settlement, and were “necessarily personalized, ” and based on the record.”Mariani’s former lawyer John Ransmeier filed a brief in support of the sanctions, stating in part
(VN: wonder if this is the circling of the wagons by the khazars around protecting one of their own. No wonder nothing happened if this is an example of a lawyer who is suppose to be on the side of his client. Remember that name New Yorkers since he just proved he could and would turn on a client in heart beat for an agenda which is protecting their own, in their borderless country of Khazaria)
“The offensive and mean-spirited nature of the filing – particularly as it focused on Judge Hellerstein’s wife- was only underscored by its gratuitous nature and lack of relevance to the key issue in the present appeal…”
“Mrs. Mariani readily acknowledges her long-held belief that Judge Hellerstein had mismanaged the 9/11 litigation with a prejudice towards plaintiffs; that his colleague Sheila Birnbaum had placed improper pressure on plaintiffs to settle cases through a mediation process; and her concern about the effect of Judge Hellerstein’s known sympathies for the State of Israel, which benefitted from the events of 9/11… Against this background, and considering the absence of relevance to the core issues on appeal, this filing was nothing more than an effort to impugn the integrity of the trial court, and to assault the character of the trial court judge and his family. In fact, it seems inconceivable that Mr. Leichty did not consider and accept his exposure to sanctions in making this filing.”The website MarianiLawsuit.com, (also available at http://marianilawsuit.wordpress.com/) states “Ellen Mariani wants to take her appeal regarding 911 to the US Supreme Court but she needs our help.” According to the website, they have collected $3,491 in funds but need $7,509 more to reach their goal of $11,000.
Vincent Gillespie, Secretary-Treasurer of the Ellen Mariani Legal Defense Fund, issued a news release on September 17th which stated, in part
“Embattled widow Ellen Mariani wants to tell the U.S. Supreme Court that the $3.75 million settlement of her late husband’s 9/11 claims was tainted, and she has authorized a legal defense fund to allow her to carry on her decade-long fight, announced Mariani backers August 30 from Massachusetts. Mariani was the first person to sue airlines and airports for a 9/11 death–in Chicago federal court in early 2002.
She was also one of the earliest family members to speak publicly about her doubts about the official 9/11 story. None of the remains of her husband Louis Neil Mariani, booked as a passenger on United Air Lines Flight 175, were ever returned to her. (VN: according to the Northwoods papers, laying out this very scenario terrorist attack by our military back in 1961, those planes that were not really flown into the buildings, would be flown over the Atlantic and ditched with all passengers on board or to use a drone. Remember they have used these recommended highjacking planes and flew them into buildings with Barbara Olsen as one of the victims and we now know she is alive and the wife of Ted Olsen after she got plastic Surgery and a new Identity. That is probably what they did and thus there is no body to provide to the widow for closure)
According to the official 9/11 story, Arab hijackers flew her husband’s plane into the South Tower of the World Trade Center after slipping past airport security with box cutters–but Mariani doesn’t buy it. At one time Mariani was persuaded to sue George W. Bush and other government officials for complicity in the events of 9/11, but that case was promptly dismissed.
What remained to her–at least until late June 2012–was the chance to get evidence and accountability inside the official 9/11 wrongful death litigation that was assigned by Congress to a single federal court, the Southern District of New York, and a single judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein. No claim in that case ever reached trial, and Mariani’s is the last to be paid.”The website also links to a petititon that supporters can sign. Craig McKee’s September 21 article And then there was one: Supreme Court is the last hope for 9/11 widow Ellen Mariani gives more information about the case.
Dr. Kevin Barrett recently interviewed Vincent Gillespie about the case. The October 12th episode can be downloaded for free
.
Barret, who himself was forced out of the University of Wisconsin for speaking up about 9/11, wrote an article Mobbed-up US ‘justice’ system delivers 9/11 injustice, in which he outlined several 9/11 cases:
“Another traitor posing as a federal judge – a man whose chutzpah rivals that of Hellerstein and Silverstein combined – is Judge John Walker, a cousin of the two former Presidents Bush. Judge Walker refused to recuse himself from Pentagon victim April Gallop’s case alleging that George W. Bush and his neocon cabinet orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. When Gallop’s attorney William Veale pointed out the monumental conflict of interest, Walker and his two co-panelists had the chutzpah to issue punitive sanctions against Veale for “impugning the integrity of a federal judge”!Ironically, Judge Hellerstein’s son and his employer, the focus of the brief by Mariani, is tied to an Israeli company contracted to build remote controlled aircraft:
“Judge Hellerstein’s son, Joseph Z. Hellerstein… was known to have been employed by the law firm Amit, Pollak, Matalon and Company, based in Tel Aviv, Israel.”…
…Amit represents a defense aviation contractor who is a joint venturer (effectively a partner) with Boeing as of July 2010. Amit represents Aeronautics Defense Systems, an Israeli company which (according to its website) specializes in providing “comprehensive defense solutions [and has established itself as a primary global provider of security consulting services and defense applications,” including with clients such as the Israeli Air Force and United States Navy. In July 2010 the relationship of Aeronautics and Boeing was formalized when Amit’s client signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Boeing for marketing of the “Dominator DA42″ unmanned aerial vehicle, i.e. a plane that can be flown by remote control…
….For at least 10 years Amit and CAC have co-sponsored or been featured at annual European investment conferences under the name “Go4Europe” featuring such luminaries as Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and LCF Rothschild chairman Michel Cicurel… (VN: Oh, my gosh, the lawyer and his client were actually nice in what they said compared to what is emerging as the truth of the matter. This is almost worse than a conflict of interest)See also:
- 9-11 Judge Hellerstein “Slams” 9-11 Widow Ellen Mariani
- Is 9-11 Judge Hellerstein Working for Israel?
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
