Bringing truth to the people of Kent
Muad'Dib made the break-through film 7/7 Ripple Effect (now updated with the extended version) (1) which calls into question the official account of events surrounding the London tube-train and bus bombings of July 7 2005.
Because Muad'Dib's film was an Internet hit and became so popular all over the world; and has been translated into Spanish, Italian, German and other European languages; the government became afraid of the film, because it is so persuasive, and anybody with an open mind who watches it will know that it is the truth and that is really what happened. All the content used in Muad'Dib's film is sourced from the MSM (main-stream media). Nothing is fabricated and mostly BBC footage is used to actually prove that the government story does not add-up and is a pack of lies.
The government became desperate to do something about it to counteract the ripple effects created by Muad'Dib's film. The government, being desperate, arrested three friends of the 4 accused of the 7/7 bombings and were put on trial. These three young men could not possibly be guilty of helping the alleged four men, with doing something that they did not do in the first place.
Making His film and knowing that these three men were innocent, He sent copies of His film to the court where these three men were being put on trial - Kingston Crown court in London. The dvd's were sent as an 'amicus curiae brief' which means a friend of the court. Under English law anyone who is not a party to a trial, but has what they consider to be relevant information, can send it to the court. It is then up to the court to view the evidence and to consider whether it is relevant to the trial. If they consider it to be relevant, they can bring it to the attention of the jury, and if they decide that it is not relevant, then they just ignore it.
The legal proceedings against Muad'Dib were concerned with trying to prove that Muad'Dib was seeking to pervert the course of justice by sending his dvd to the court. Muad'Dib being fully aware of how evil these people are and after sending the dvd's in May 2008, he expected that there would be a 50/50 chance of the authorities coming after Him. He maintains that He had to do what He did because those young men could have spent 20 or 30 years in prison for something they could not possibly have done. His film had all the evidence to prove that they were innocent, so He had to send the film to the court.
On the 10th of February 2009 the Garda Siocana, which is the Irish version of the police went to His flat, arrested Him and took Him to Dublin. THEY searched His apartment and took all his computers, printer and dvd burners etc. He was now in their custody and appealed against extradition to the UK which went on for about 20 months and eventually He was extradited to the UK. For doing the right thing He was made to spend 157 days in prison awaiting His trial and two years three months and two days under semi-house-arrest with curfue and having to sign at the police station three times a week.
When asked, what was it like in prison His response was: “Oh it was lots of fun” and then laughs. He had no complaints about the prison staff or anybody on that side of things. “They are just doing their job” as He said and it's not their fault that He was in prison; that being the fault of the government.
His trial went very well and His barrister asked Him all the right questions so that He was able to present all of the information about 9/11, 7/7 and the train bombings in Madrid, which were also done by the same people for a similar reason. He also managed to mention about the NWO (New World Order) and the Illuminati who are the top level of free-masonry and head of the NWO.
Muad'Dib's argument was in two parts. The first part was that Elizabeth was knowingly and willingly with malice aforethought crowned on a fake coronation stone in 1953 all of which He can prove in minute detail. She has broken her coronation oath which is a contract with the British people, and she has broken it thousands of times. The very first time she broke her coronation oath, then the contract with the British people was broken. That means she was no longer the monarch lawfully with immediate effect. So she has been masquerading as the rightful monarch for the last 60 years. The judge in his decision said that the stone is only a ceremonial artifact and that it did not matter legally and so she was the queen and so he had jurisdiction to put Muad'Dib on trial, which he did the next day. The Judge never mentioned the second part of Muad'Dib's argument and challenge(2), which was breach of contract with the British people; because he absolutely knew that he could not argue against it. This breach is that she has broken her coronation oath and the Law, God's Law, because she is a Judah monarch and a direct descendant of King David from Biblical times. She therefore falls under the Law, as laid out in Deuteronomy.
The signing of the Lisbon Treaty and the handing over of the British sovereignty to Europe rankles with a large swathe of the British public. The Queen is complicit in this matter, because by putting her name to it and allowing it to happen; she is a party to allowing it. Her actions put her in breach of contract with the British people. She has broken her coronation oath and she has broken the Law numerous times and proves herself to be a traitor to the British people and a war criminal.
At her coronation* she swore to maintain the Laws of GOD to the utmost of her power, using the Sovereign King James Bible and kissing it, and she has not done that. She has in-fact broken God's Laws repeatedly, thousands and thousands of times, including signing our sovereignty over to the EU. Which now means that the EU court is superior to any court in Britain and our laws are now dictated to us by Europe.
Elizabeth is the head of Parliament, she has the power and royal prerogative to dismiss the prime-minister and the parliament, so who is the boss, the prime-minister or the Queen? The prime-minister can not dismiss the Queen, but the Queen can dismiss the prime-minister. That tells you who is really in charge.
Also, the British armed forces cannot go to war without her consent and so she is just as guilty as Tony phony Bliar and George Bush of committing war-crimes and crimes against humanity.
In this case it was not possible for the judge to be neutral because in the judge's oath that he had to swear to become a judge, he swore allegiance to Elizabeth. So he could not possibly act as an impartial broker in Muad'Dib's challenge to her jurisdiction, because not only was Muad'Dib challenging Elizabeth's jurisdiction but the judge's jurisdiction too, because the judge's jurisdiction comes from Elizabeth. So if she has no jurisdiction then the judge would also have none. It is a legal maxim that no man can judge in his own cause or in a cause to which he is a party. So it was impossible for him to be impartial and therefore he had no jurisdiction to make that decision in the first place.
Muad'Dib asked for it to go in front of a jury to decide the jurisdiction and the sovereignty, because only a jury could be impartial, if anyone could be, and the judge denied Muad'Dib that right, which means he committed treason that day.
Through the trial the court staff were very supportive of Muad'Dib and said that there was no way that, that jury can find Him guilty. They were all very happy when Muad'Dib was found not guilty, and all came over to congratulate Muad'Dib. He personally thanked each juror after the case, and possibly for the first time ever the jury received a standing ovation after the verdict was presented.
The Judge was hand picked for the job, and tried at every opportunity to stitch up the case in the favour of the prosecutor. In his summing up he perverted the meaning/definition of the word pervert, which was used in the charge against Muad'Dib, which was attempting to pervert the course of justice contrary to common law. It is known that the word pervert means to divert something from its rightful course. The judge told the jury that the word pervert meant to influence, in any way positively or negatively. He emphasized that to the jury three times in his summing up, trying to convince the jury that they had to find Muad'Dib guilty, without actually instructing them to find Him guilty.
The fact is that this was a show-trial designed to discredit Muad'Dib's film 7/7 Ripple Effect and punish Him for making it. The court room was full and many people were outside showing their support for Muad'Dib. Muad'Dib was very grateful to all the people who took time off work and made the effort to support Him, which He said was very “heartening”.
When the for-woman of the jury came out and was asked if they had reached a verdict, she said yes. Then beaming with a big smile she announced NOT GUILTY, and made it quite clear that she was very very pleased to be able to give that verdict.
Add a Comment