This is a mirror of post at http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/declaration.html
[ Note from Ray Songtree. I know someone whose brother was killed and brother had handled and back engineered UFO tech at NASA. Einhorn was set up to be smeared. Rather than murder him, the New World Order set him up with a heinous crime which he did not commit. This was meant to smear his anti-war activities and “left” leanings. However, he escaped for over 20 years. False claims of murder is common. 86 people died at WACO who were innocent and accused of crime. See Hillary section of Vol. 1, Lipstick and War Crimes. ]
Ira Einhorn’s Declaration: Evidence of being framed for murder
17 Apr 2000 [Side Note: For those who think that Einhorn’s defense claim is ridiculous, that he was framed for the murder of Holly Maddux to discredit him and the information he was propagating — including information about covert development of psychotronic and advanced electromagnetic weapons of mass destruction and the potential connection of the science behind them to covert “reverse engineering” of UFO technologies [ note from Ray Songtree. I know someone whose brother was killed and he had handled and back engineered UFO tech at NASA. Einhorn was set up to be smeared. Rather than murder him, the New World Order set him up with a heinous crime he did not commit.]by the US and other governments, you might want to visit the website of the organization with which is associated Col. Thomas Bearden whose understandings on these matters were apparently influential on Einhorn’s work in these areas in the 1970’s, and look at the evidence yourself regarding this overall thesis http://www.cseti.org]
The following document offers evidence that Ira Einhorn knew two months before the disappearance of Holly Maddux that he was in danger of being “set up” for something to discredit his work. It also offers evidence of conspiracy after the fact to deprive him of his constitutional rights.
IRA EINHORN, CHAMPAGNE-MOUTON, NOV 29, 1998:
— Alexis de Tocqueville: de la Democratie en Amerique
The laws of the French Republic are both able to be and ought to be different from those that rule the United States, and they certainly are, but the principles on which the American constitution reposes, those principles of order, of separation of powers, of liberty, truth, and sincere and deep respect for the law are indispensable for all Republics. They ought to be common to all, and wherein they are not the Republic will soon cease to exist.
Immediately below I quote an excerpt from a letter written to my lawyer Norris E. Gelman dated August 2, 1997, by an internationally known friend and scholar, Professor Stafford Beer*. This information was presented to the man who illegally used my notebooks to write a totally negative book about me, but he choose to ignore it; how much other information of this type did he choose to ignore and why?
This conversation quoted verbatim from Stafford’s letter took place in the summer of 1977 about two months before the murdered woman, Holly Maddux disappeared:[Stafford Beer]
“One day I looked up from my desk and saw that someone was approaching down the path. This was most unusual, because hardly anyone knew yet of my whereabouts, which I was keeping virtually secret, and the place is eight miles from the nearest village. I could hardly believe my eyes: it was Ira. But yes – he would have been one of the very few who would know my new address, because I wanted to keep up the flow of packages from Bell.
“Ira and I became locked in a fascinating discussion of very sensitive matters. They concerned monumentally important scientific discoveries, and their possible impact on human life and society. I have not to this day disclosed what Ira told me, and I do not know whether what he told me can be substantiated. I am sure that Ira believed what he said, and I could without difficulty accept that it might be the case (that is, ‘no alien life forms’). What followed is indelibly fixed in my mind, and I shall get as near as I can to the ipsissima verba:
“Ira: ‘I am making a special visit to you, and to a few other friends who have the knowledge to understand what I have found out, because my situation is dangerous.’
“Stafford: ‘I can believe it. Are you worried about your own government or ‘the competition?’
“Ira: ‘Your call.’
“Stafford: ‘Well, are you saying that you think you might be bumped off?’
“Ira : ‘The trouble is, that wouldn’t do. It would provoke a whole lot of investigation, and the truth might get out. No, I think that I have to be in some way discredited.’
“Stafford: ‘Aren’t you in some way discredited already? Plenty of people think you are a nut case. And plenty think you are immoral – a bad influence. That lot got Socrates after all.’
“Ira: ‘And the ideas survived. Just my point. No, it has to be a lot stronger to count.’
“Stafford: ‘Any Ideas?’
“Ira: ‘None. I don’t know what I need to protect myself against.’
“I can swear to this testimony. That’s exactly what happened. It made me apprehensive for my friend.” —[end of Stafford Beer quotes]
His apprehension became reality on the morning of March 28, 1979 when a slew of Philadelphia police armed with a search warrant entered my small apartment. When they left, they carried away evidence, a partially decayed body, that effectively ended my life, as a social activist. They also carried away, for no apparent reason, all of my papers, including 63 volumes of personal journals and all the information that I had been collecting and distributing for years on my international information network.
I have never seen any of this material again. I probably never will. The private diaries were later turned over, as mentioned above, to a journalist who quoted from them extensively and often out of context in a book that painted me in totally black terms as a murderer. This use of my private work is of course illegal, but my situation does not allow me to do anything about it. It is part of the pattern that has characterised all official action in my case. Action that continues to this day.
I am innocent of the murder with which I am charged and have proclaimed my innocence since day one; an action that seems to have been deeply disturbing to a large numbers of my friends who pressed me to make a deal and put the trauma behind us all.
The Philadelphia media barrage began on the day of my arrest, driving the 3 Mile Island nuclear accident (the largest in American history) out of the head lines. It continues to this day and has spread to nationwide publications and network TV. My wife Annika was chased about our little local village for 13 days by NBC whose prime team invaded our property, rang our bell for almost an hour and shouted hate filled questions at my wife.
Locals have been amazed at such behavior and speak of a witch hunt and refer to the times of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy.
After almost two years of pre-trial manoeuvring, which included much judicial misconduct: Foreshortening of Xeroxed pages so that the damaging pages of a now unnumbered report could be removed from the information due to us; information that included a public sighting of my former girl friend by three bank employees 6 months after I am supposed to have killed her; and most significantly, a failure to accept two lab reports, issued by the FBI and a nationally known laboratory, National Medical Services, which did all the work on the O.J. Simpson case; reports made at the instigation of the prosecution, which indicated that there was no blood or human protein in the supposed leakage from the body and that material found outside the trunk did not correspond to material found inside the trunk. This was a stiff blow to the prosecution’s contention about the murder; the response: The most prestigious local magazine published an article with blood on every page.
Such behavior was repeated no matter wherein I turned, and fearing the death penalty, I left Philadelphia for a life underground.
I am a social activist by nature and after five years in Eire [Ireland] I managed to reconstruct my life and re-begin government and public work, but as a result of discovery I was forced to leave.
During the next ten years, after much personal struggle and with the help of my wife Annika, I gave up the public part of my life and turned all my energy to study and writing. During that time I have written 4 novels and another book. At the time of my capture my 5th novel was in embryo.
“It has always been my view that the law is fair and impartial, favoring neither the prosecutor nor the defendant. But, today, the majority fosters injustice by holding that an accused who is absent without cause on his date of trial may be tried in absentia.”
——- Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Steven A. Zappala
During that period, in an unprecedented action, I was tried for murder IN ABSENTIA. My lawyer was forced, under judicial order, to participate in a trial that was a farce, for he had no money to conduct it and could call few witnesses in my defence. My life work was summed up by calling me “a bum who Xeroxed things”. At the conclusion of the trial I was gleefully sentenced to life in prison without chance of parole.
This decision became final in January of 1997, for no court would listen to the appeals filed by my lawyer.
On June 13, 1997 when I was arrested, I fully expected to be extradited, for I knew nothing of the European Code of Human Rights which is now an integral part of French law. After almost 6 months in prison I was freed by a courageous judge who gave the Philadelphia authorities every chance to offer me a second trial, but under Pennsylvania and United States law that is not possible.
The decision lead to an unseemly and unprofessional barrage of insults by the Philadelphia authorities, creating an environment in which the local papers could openly threaten me and the French judge with bodily harm and talk about kidnapping me.
But there was more to come. The Pennsylvania legislature passed the “EINHORN LAW” directed specifically at me. An unconstitutional law in many ways (laws directed at one person are not allowed in the American legal system), but in particular, a violation of a basic American constitutional principle known as the separation of powers which does not allow the legislature to interfere in final court decisions and is one of the most jealously guarded of American constitutional principles, but as my original lawyer Norris Gelman has written to me:
“I am certain the DA knows all this (REFERENCE TO THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL NATURE OF THE LAW) and does not care. Our law is that anything goes in getting one back into the country who has fled and cannot be extradited. Kidnapping is fine and has been approved by the Supreme Court. Lying would be fine too and this statute is just another such instance.”
Below you will find excerpts from the “discussion” which surrounded passage of the “Einhorn Law.”
I am quoting from the LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL of the PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
1. Mr. O’Brien: “That is very specific to this case, and as I have said, if the legislation presents a problem in the future, we can remedy it by another action of this General Assembly.”
2. Mr. O’Brien: “…the defendant Ira Einhorn, would be tried under existing statutes today – the gentleman is correct – and that would be entirely within the discretion of the prosecutor, and the ultimate sentence would be a subject of the trial court, and if the death penalty were imposed, that would be by the jury.”
I am also providing an excerpt from the case that demonstrates the unconstitutional nature of the law, in a very clear and unequivocal manner.
July 1850: Pennsylvania Supreme Court, De Chastellux vs Fairchild:
“The power to order a new trial is JUDICIAL. The legislature does not possess judicial power, and they have not the right to direct that a new trial be granted.”
The situation is further exacerbated by a $50,000,000 civil suit. A suit that requires my presence in court: An impossibility in my case. The fact that the case was opened years too late, and on the basis of my being extradited, are legal niceties that don’t exist for me, for I have no way to defend myself at a distance.
A red thread in my life has been social activism. After my arrest, I tried to continue this work in Eire, but soon realised that it was too dangerous to continue. After much struggle, I turned my energy to writing novels, the last being a philosophical novel about the holocaust and repressed memory.
It is now becoming increasingly evident that I may be prevented from publishing my book by the legal judgments lodged against me.
Let me close with a quote from the Philadelphia District Attorney Lynn Abrahams. It is a quote with reference to Les Misérables and will have particular resonance to the French reader. It aptly sums up the way I have been treated:
“Like Inspector Javert I will pursue Ira Einhorn relentlessly until the ends of the earth.”
IRA EINHORN, CHAMPAGNE-MOUTON, NOV 29, 1998
*Professor Stafford Beer is an internationally known expert in Cybernetics/operations research whose BRAIN OF THE FIRM is a classic in the field. He is the author of many other books, has held many professorships, including a post as Adjunct Professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He has as won many international awards, been President of many of the professional societies concerned with his work and was responsible for the computerization of the entire economy of Chili for Allende during the 60’s – a unique experiment that the Pinochet takeover ended. He is also trained in Yoga, reads Sanscrit, Latin, Greek, and a number of modern languages; a real polymath. He has published poetry and had art exhibits. He has a large entry in Who’s Who.
For information on Einhorn’s legal situation and issues:
November 27, 1999, “Facts for Openers”, by Ira Einhorn
DECLARATION of evidence Einhorn was set up and framed for murder:
Review of NBC movie on Einhorn, “Hunt for the Unicorn Killer”
Continuing selection of newspaper articles on Einhorn/Unicorn case
Continuing selection of commnents on Einhorn/Unicorn case & issues
“An Agenda for Peace”, Einhorn’s Global Peace Walk 2000 support letter