It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gallop Appeal Decision

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Gallop appeal decision:

www.ca2.uscourts.gov...=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/i sysquery/0a963b9a-eabf-47dc-b80b-70a99b9ab9c0/1/hilite/

Any comments?

Summary, April Gallop's claim of conspiracies are so frivolous that the court has not only turned down her appeal but has also ordered her and her attorney's to pay twice court cost.




posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
outstanding..
I was wondering how this was going to turn out

will it change anything.. no..
but the truthers, like the birthers, are running out of ideas..



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper


Summary, April Gallop's claim of conspiracies are so frivolous that the court has not only turned down her appeal but has also ordered her and her attorney's to pay twice court cost.




I actually laughed out loud while reading the judges decisions on this:


As in United States v. Potamkin Cadillac Corp., 689 F.2d 379 (2d Cir. 1982), this appeal
was an unnecessary imposition “on the government which is forced to defend against the
appeal and on the taxpayers who must pay for that defense.” Id. at 382. Accordingly,
Gallop and her counsel are hereby ordered to show cause in writing within thirty days from
the date of entry of this order why they should not pay double costs and damages in the
amount of $15,000, for which they would be jointly and severally liable,
under Rule 38, 28
U.S.C. ' 1927, and the inherent power of this Court.


Looks like being a "delusional" truther costs you money!! 15K ...


Justice is served!



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   
They are basically saying that she offered no proof whatsoever, but if she mentions that the purpose of the conspiracy was to use the missing 2.3 trillion dollars towards international affairs, she was bound to mention in court at some time that 2.3 trillion dollars went missing from the pentagon 1 day before September 11 and to this day no court had made any type of ruling on where the money went or who was responsible for losing it. That by itself seems like adequate proof. The court document seems to imply that she offered nothing of the sort, which is probably not true. If she took the time to file the court case her and her attorney were bound to come up with some supporting facts. The fact that the court document seems to make her into a rambling conspiracy theorist with absolutely no facts to back it up seems like they are just dismissing her facts, which they did with this line from their own document:


After a de novo review, we have no hesitation in concluding that the District Court
correctly determined that the few conceivably “well-pleaded” facts in Gallop’s complaint are
frivolous.


Few conceivably well-pleaded facts = frivolous

No mention of what these well pleaded, oh wait, sorry, "well-pleaded" facts were, all you need to know is they were frivolous.

This court document sounds frivolous.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Six Sigma
 


If her claims were frivolous, then dismiss it and move on. The fact that she was forced to pay twice the court costs is an indication of prejudice against her which undoubtedly sheds the light of truth onto her side.

What they are basically saying is, because she tried to sue the government, and whenever you try and do that the government dismisses it as frivolous, then they have the right to double the court costs.

Keep laughing you hyenas, you're living in Nazi Germany and you think it's all fun and games. This is a government that does not allow itself to be sued. Good luck.
edit on 27-4-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Twice the court costs? Is that lawful? This looks like an attempt by the judicial system to make an example of her.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:15 PM
link   
That is one nasty judgment. It sounds like the government can do what ever they want with the courts clueless in how to respond and they want the whole 9/11 case wrapped up in a neat little pile. Considering how much nitpicking goes on here about it the debates can be endless. It is looking like it will be in the hands of the people if this is ever to get resolved.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


It had already been dismissed once "with prejudice". The twice court costs is imposed to inhibit annoying petitioners from wasting the time and money of the American taxpayer.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Guys, read the document posted. Then, educate yourself on what a vexatious litigant is.


Oh, and you 2006 truthers stuck in the time machine: There was not any "money" missing, and it was not brought up ONLY on sept. 10th.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 



No mention of what these well pleaded, oh wait, sorry, "well-pleaded" facts were, all you need to know is they were frivolous.


You have to read the District courts decision, that was the reference. This was a review of the decision in the District Court.

I may be wrong, but I think this is end of the line unless the Supreme Court decides, for whatever reason, to take up the case and also assumes that they will appeal to the USSC.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I will say, not to defend Cheney but to defend all people, that the burden of proof would fall onto Gallop to prove her assertion since she is sewing them. If she didn't have a stack of news papers in front of her and some video evidence of the attacks, and some expert testimony, then she went about this all wrong and I could not even imagine why she would do it in the first place. So I guess we'll just have to find the lower court's document and read that. But how many times does the government use undeniable proof when they write up a fee for one of its "tax payers" (oh yeah, notice how these holy tax payers, whom the government uses to justify their need to double court costs to protect "the tax payer" from frivolous lawsuits, yet these "tax payers" suddenly become criminals when they are divided up).

This may be the district court case:

www.centerfor911justice.org...=20Memo=20In=20Opposition=20to=20Mot=20to=20Dismiss.pdf
edit on 27-4-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 



It is looking like it will be in the hands of the people if this is ever to get resolved.


Its been in the "hands of the people" now for going on ten years. Three presidential elections, five congressional elections, countless local elections. Its been on the internet without pause. Whole governments have fallen around the world and yet on 9/11 truth - nothing. Maybe, just maybe, the people have decided.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Here is the facts to prove the assertions:


+ Defendant Cheney was the top government official present in Washington at the time of the attacks, the president himself being on a ‘photo-op’ junket to a 2nd grade classroom in Florida; and defendants Rumsfeld and Myers were the top commanders of the military, and particularly the U.S. Air Force; and of the Pentagon and its defenses. They had the highest-level duties of command, and of responsibility for the safety, welfare and protection of their subordinates, including plaintiffs.

+ The Air Force was alerted to the wayward planes in plenty of time to intercept all of them under normal procedures, as shown in published FAA records and elsewhere; but—despite a regular, weekly practice of launching fighter jets to check in-flight airline emergencies—the interceptors never showed up.

+ FAA Flight controllers put out alerts that Flight 77 was off course as much as 30-40 minutes before it supposedly crashed into the Pentagon, and defendant Cheney just now, in May 2009, publicly affirmed that, stationed in the presidential command bunker below the White House, he knew well in advance that it was headed back towards Washington, where it supposedly crashed at 9:38 (or possibly 9:32). The White House was evacuated, but no warning was given at the Pentagon, and no evacuation took place. Instead this powerfully defended building was hit, or blew up, or both, and plaintiffs were injured, and no official question has been raised as to why they were not warned.

+ Cheney, in the bunker around that same time, well before the Pentagon was hit, gave or re-affirmed some form of stand-down order, about which then-Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta testified before the 9/11 Commission; but the Commission, in furtherance of the cover-up, ignored his evidence. Instead, the Commission Report maintains that Cheney did not even reach the bunker until just before 10:00. Just last
month (May, 2009), however, in a public speech before the American Enterprise Institute, Cheney confirmed that he was in fact already in the bunker when word came that an unknown plane, possibly also hijacked (where Flight 77 was supposedly lost), was headed towards Washington. Although the exact time---as well as undoubted real-time radar awareness---is disputed, the military concedes it had knowledge, and an active “phone bridge” with FAA , well before 9:24 am., the “official” time notice about Flight 77 was supposedly given. He said he was there when the word was given, certainly by that time at least (though we would say he arrived earlier), and that he knew the third plane had turned around and was headed back towards the capital, at or before the time Secretary Mineta describes him giving an apparent stand-down order. Certainly he gave the lie to the Commission’s preposterous claims that the military didn’t know about Flight 77 until it hit the Pentagon, and that Cheney never reached the bunker until 9:58 am.

Mr. Mineta, also in May of this year, affirmed to plaintiff’s counsel, in person, that while he prefers to let the legal process play out before discussing it, he stands by the account he gave to the 9/11 Commission. See Appendix 4, 2nd Veale Affidavit, p.6.

+ The then-chief of U.S. Counter-terrorism operations, Richard Clarke, in the account in his book, “Against All Enemies”, published shortly before the Commission Report came out in 2004, said he convened a video ‘teleconference’ with the highest circle of officials, specifically including Rumsfeld and Myers---whom he saw on the screen at the conference center in the Pentagon---at or about ten minutes after nine; i.e, a few minutes after the second tower was hit. At that point there could be no doubt that the country was under attack; so, this of course is what one would expect—and maybe expect also that the defendants would be ‘freaking out’, so to speak, at the failure of the defense system, the no-show of the interceptors, even then, even with the plane Cheney mentioned headed back at them, 20 minutes before the Pentagon was hit at least.

But, nothing happened: the wires were not burned up, the hot pilots were not scrambled and vectored to the wayward plane headed towards Washington, D.C., and possibly flown by suicide bombers; and the Commanders apparently just sat around, or
made themselves scarce; and they have never been called to account, for the lethal failure of the defenses under their command.


www.centerfor911justice.org...=20Memo=20In=20Opposition=20to=20Mot=20to=20Dismiss.pdf

This seems to be a fairly critical account of events. They have Cheney at the head of command with enough time to intercept the planes, and testimony from Mineta at the scene verifying the events. All this and yet two courts have dismissed it as FRIVOLOUS. Can you say Gestapo?



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Actually, those are just more assertions. The military is always under the command of the commander-in-chief without regard to his or her location. Among other things.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by filosophia
 


Actually, those are just more assertions. The military is always under the command of the commander-in-chief without regard to his or her location. Among other things.


assertions backed up by documented facts. This just proves that the courts do not care about the truth, only about money, which they admit themselves when they say the government has a right to silence frivolous lawsuits because it protects "THE TAX PAYER" so the government (Cheney, Rummsfeldt, Bush) hide behind the tax payers while they rob the tax payers. When this case goes to the supreme court, if it does and is ruled in the same manner, Americans will know once and for all that the Judicial system is just as corrupted as any other. At that point it will be official: America will have no legitimate ground to ever say they uphold the rule of law.
edit on 27-4-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 



....and defendants Rumsfeld and Myers were the top commanders of the military, and particularly the U.S. Air Force; and of the Pentagon and its defenses.


Please provide the facts that back up this assertion. The President is the top commander of the military, unless you are aware of some constitutional amendment that abbreviated that authority when the CIC is in Florida.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophiaCan you say Gestapo?


Yes, but it's more appropriate to say typical truther lies and delusions.

That is a more appropriate description of your diatribe of crap mostly taken from Veal's Web Site. No wonder they lost the suit. It is exactly as initially rendered; frivolous and delusional. That why it was dismissed and that's exactly why they were sanctioned and now may have to pay double Court Costs. It was a correct and accurate decision and if it were not so pathetic, it would be hilarious.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma
Looks like being a "delusional" truther costs you money!! 15K ...



Looks like being a co-conspirator to cover up mass murder
will cost you your soul



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia


If her claims were frivolous, then dismiss it and move on.


flisophia.... they were.... and it was! Read the court documents! She and here idiotic truther attorney filed an appeal. They failed! If you open the PDF that was offered in the OP, you will understand why.




The fact that she was forced to pay twice the court costs is an indication of prejudice against her which undoubtedly sheds the light of truth onto her side.


She wasn't forced to pay twice....yet. She has 30 days to explain in writing why she shouldn't.


What they are basically saying is, because she tried to sue the government, and whenever you try and do that the government dismisses it as frivolous, then they have the right to double the court costs.


Her case was dismissed a year ago! She filed an appeal that was without merit.


Originally posted by filosophiaKeep laughing you hyenas, you're living in Nazi Germany and you think it's all fun and games. This is a government that does not allow itself to be sued. Good luck.


I live in Massachusetts actually. In a nice house 250 yards from the Atlantic Ocean. You, on the other hand live in a world clouded by delusion and paranoia.

Oh... it took me all of 30 seconds to find this regarding a "government that does not allow itself to be sued":


U.S. offers to pay Native Americans $1.4 billion for lost funds

Thousands of American Indians would receive as much as $1,000 each if they accept a proposed $1.4 billion to settle a class-action lawsuit over government mismanagement of tribal lands.


articles.cnn.com...:US
edit on 27-4-2011 by Six Sigma because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


"As the sentient world well recalls"

"the Complaint hypothesizes a fantastical alternative history to the widely accepted account"

The writing is pretty funny...

Everyone already knows that the official story is so true, that is doesn't matter what this crazy case is about...




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join