Posts Tagged ‘Bruder Schweigen’

The Life Of David Lane And The 14 Word Motto(THE BRUDERS SCHWEIGEN)

Sunday, February 19th, 2012

When speaking of the Bruders Schweigen we must first and foremost always think of Bob Mathews. Only his combination of charisma, purity, courage, determination and motivation could have melded together such a diverse and headstrong group of men. When raising an army of volunteers one cannot give orders. So Bob led by exactly that method, “leading.” He left a man of honor no choice. If on a Monday morning he said, “I’m going a’ Viking,” he was about to load up his equivalent of a longboat, a Chevrolet, and one had to follow. On September 22, 1983, Bob invited eight other men or a total of nine to join him for a meeting in a building on his property near Metaline Falls, Washington. Ten chairs sat in a circle, the extra holding a portrait of a German Leader. A White baby was placed in the circle and the nine vowed to secure a future for that White child. While some of those who attended that meeting, myself included, could well say, “had we not done so we would not now be spending our lives in prison under ridiculously long sentences of up to several lifetimes,” we could, also, perhaps say, “had we not met Bob we would not be fulfilling some duty or destiny on behalf of our race.” Bob said himself at that time that he guessed he would last a year. He was killed by the Federal devils fourteen months later.

The Bruders Schweigen was composed primarily of men who had no criminal background and such proved to be a problem, for they knew little about police tactics. Those who deny that the methods of the Bruders Schweigen are now the only recourse if we are to save our kind are either cowards or fools. Only our tactics are legitimate topics for criticism. If we had it to do over, we would stay in much smaller autonomous units making it impossible for the enemy to destroy the entire organization when one man broke. Other tactical errors cannot be discussed for reasons of security. Additionally, our people as a whole must learn the revolutionary mentality, including ruthlessness.

The exploits of the Bruders Schweigen have been detailed elsewhere with varying degrees of accuracy, so I will not relate them here except to say that the words of books and media permitted by the Zionist Occupation Governments of this or any Western country are slanted and contain untruths. Someday, if we win this struggle, the whole truth will be made known. Until then, learn to read between the lines of the enemy media and our own. I will, however, relate my experiences with the injustice system as it will be enlightening for others who may someday experience the perjury circuses which the ZOG calls trials.

I was captured on March 31, 1985 in North Carolina where I was planning further actions with individuals whose names must remain classified. The Federals immediately had me thrown in a pod of nearly all blacks in the Winston-Salem jail and announced that I was a racist. However, some members of the jail staff were members of a clandestine southern group who responded to certain of my signs learned as a member of the invisible empire. They made it plain that harm to me would not be wise on the part of my cell partners. When it was clear to the Federals that I was not going to cooperate I was transferred to a Federal prison in Alabama and then to Boise, Idaho. In Boise I was taken to a mock arraignment on charges I never heard of again. At this mock arraignment I was assigned a defense lawyer who was in fact a United States attorney, or formerly so. I hate to do this, but I would advise anyone in Federal custody to assume the lawyer assigned to him by the court is actually a Fed. In any case, the defense lawyers are in substance working for the Feds anyway, but some are less blatant. They are masters at making one believe they really do care about one’s fate. I am of the opinion that virtually all lawyers are vermin of the worst kind.

Not securing my cooperation in Boise, I was transferred to the King County jail in Seattle. While the rest of the Bruders were in Tacoma or Everett jails, I was kept isolated in the nut tier. Much of the time I was the only White. They ran crazy, screaming blacks in to yell at me twenty-four hours a day. They urinated in mop buckets of dirty water and threw them in my cell, then would not allow me out to clean up. By the time I was moved to Tacoma with the other Bruders several months later I was close to death. I suffered several heart attacks over the next few years, probably from stress. At the Seattle trial I was so sick that at times my coughing disrupted the perjury circus.

Even at that I presented my so-called defense lawyer with a defense that I believe would have easily cleared me of all charges if he had the integrity or courage to use it. This included the use of a large map of the United States that could be used in his closing argument to prove the perjury of two of the three witnesses providing relevant testimony against me. The Fed attorneys pulled him aside and lectured him, and then he refused to present my defense. One hundred percent of all relevant testimony against me was Government created perjury and at least two-thirds of it can be proved to be perjury by the trial transcripts. However, in a group trial, as is done by nefarious design, it is impossible to separate the defendants in the minds of the jury.

If your time in Federal court comes, it is imperative to know about the conspiracy laws. They are designed so there is no defense. The rules of evidence state that in conspiracy trials hearsay evidence in furtherance of the conspiracy is admissible, but hearsay not in furtherance of the conspiracy is not admissible. In other words, no defense is allowed. The way it works is this: The government blackmails, terrorizes or hires three degenerates to say you did it. Then under the rules of evidence the jury hears no other evidence. You may have told a hundred people you had nothing to do with the crime, as I did in the Berg killing, but that is not admissible. If you object, the judge will tell you that you will be chained and gagged or that you will watch your trial on TV from another room.

The trial itself is more carefully orchestrated than a Shakespeare play. All evidence and testimony are decided in advance and the judge will tolerate no surprises. If there is any indication that effective defense evidence is forthcoming, the judge will immediately send the jury to another room while the details of the screwing you are getting are smoothed out. In addition, the judge is a highly skilled actor appearing firm but fair when the jury is in the courtroom, and becoming a tyrannical dictator the moment they are gone.

The prosecutors have absolutely no shame in fabricating perjury and false evidence or in the methods employed to gain perjured testimony. Even the FBI experts from the crime lab will lie about voice prints, about fingerprints, about ballistics or whatever the prosecutor wants. Why should it surprise you that federal devils who will burn alive a church full of women and children while cheering for the “Real Texas Barbeque” will present false evidence in court? It is time you joined the real world. The Feds can create voices, handwriting, trick photos, perjury or invented evidence, and they do. If they want to get rid of you they will. You might use that knowledge to judge the veracity of some who claim the Feds are out to get them. If so, they would be got!

The second trial subjected me to not double, but triple jeopardy in violation of constitutional protections (in case any deluded reader still thinks the constitution means something). In Seattle I was tried under the Rico Act. The jury was told they must find the defendant guilty of two or more of the predicate acts. The government then carefully worded a bunch of charges. For example, the predicate acts may include: 1) He made a telephone call, 2) He purchased gas in Oregon. 3) He committed murder. The evidence is overwhelming that gas was purchased and a phone call made. So under the instructions of the judge the verdict is guilty. Then the judge sentences the defendant for the third predicate of murder. There simply is no defense. In Seattle I was charged with violating Alan Berg’s civil rights as part of Rico and given 20 years. I was, also, charged with conspiracy to violate his civil rights and given another 20 years running consecutively. Such is clearly double jeopardy.

Two years later I was charged and tried in Denver Federal Court with conspiracy to violate Berg’s civil rights, because he was a Jew and had a job. By the addition of the words “he was a Jew and had a job,” it now became a new offense and therefore was not double jeopardy, according to the Federals and the Court.

By changing the wording in an indictment, by changes of jurisdiction and other equally insane reasoning they justify trying a person virtually as many times as they like and never does it become double jeopardy. The Constitution does not exist in a Federal court.

Enhanced by Zemanta