Hope he lets the US taxman know about all his profit from the sales.
This was sent in July. There would have been a response in 30 days. The Lawsuit group isn't being honest to their members.They have apparently submitted a FOIA request to the NOAA:
I wonder how they will handle what they actually get.
2:18 PM (10 hours ago)
Rob, I could get some of the responses I got from the Govt on my FOIA requests. I received two responses, where the Govt (Defense and NOAA) says that they have no information whatsoever on Chem trials or any of the spraying programs. I could have you post those letters.
- Joe will get those to us asap. He's really busy, but I know he'll make time for us next moment he gets. Give it a day or two.
LikeUnlike · · Follow postUnfollow post · 25 August at 09:24
Robert M Forgette
9/8/2012 Image of sky over my house in Corona, CA.
So let me get this straight... Is this the real problem here or is it me that's the problem? Seems a global effort to disburse this air crap far outweighs my involvement. When did I become so important? I'm just the guy trying to hold this nightmare together. Whatever....
By Robert M Forgette in WANTED: Aerial Sample of Chemtrails. Know a Pilot??
Robert M Forgette
All I do know is, without any sort of instruction manual on THE RIGHT WAY TO DO THIS... I've done my best. That's all that matters now. Peace! If anyone else thinks they can do this better, I'd gladly let them give it a whirl. You can c
ome in as the Hero, bust your ass and in the end... Find that you only get slandered for your efforts as well... Anyone? I'm at my whits end. Perhaps I'm missing the mark or simply am not qualified to do this? I'll be the first to tell you I have no idea what to do.... I just do what my heart tells me is the right thing is all. I rely on others to help guide this entire group (if I trust them). I'm no magician by any means. I'm tired f this and if someone else can get us to the final destination better than me, that's all I care about... The result. Matters little who's in charge as long as this proceeds with honesty and good faith.
Chemtrail Geoengineering Lawsuit UPDATE:
■I just found someone to take this in the direction which is needed. She will be addressing this group tomorrow and putting an end to all of this BS.
■There will be no more drama, distractions or allowances for people to slander here after she sets up.
■The administrative positions will be assigned to (3) people only Amie Lou, Kathryn O'Shannahan and myself and will remain that way until she feels the need to make further changes.
■Many of you know Amie Lou she'll now pick up where I'm leaving off.
■I believe she's way more qualified to handle this mess than I am.
■Changes begin now and her address to this group, laying out how this will run, will be made tomorrow at the latest.
■I've allowed myself to be put in a defense position and perhaps the one's doing it have outsmarted me. To those people... Good luck trying to undo this group once she steps in.
Targeting Geoengineering in the form of a Lawsuit, is like targeting a fly on an iceberg...
They claim that they cannot get people onboard because chemtrails are "just too big"?
Call me stupid, and maybe I'm not the only one, but I don't understand this simile:
As far as I know this is the first usage of "target a fly on an iceberg". Is is the oppossite of "fish in a barrel"?
Is it geoengineering or the lawsuit that is represented by the fly?
I don't get it. Could someone explain?
If that had been true, doctors worldwide (and greedy lawyers) would have worked up a lawsuit within days.
(emphasis is mine)Interesting read, I'd question even if they had evidence of elevated levels of Ba, Sr or Al, even though that question would be based on a small sampling of reviewed articles on the subject. It would seem their claims of these findings are based of citizen science that is often flawed unless directed by a trained professional.
Interesting read, I'd question even if they had evidence of elevated levels of Ba, Sr or Al, even though that question would be based on a small sampling of reviewed articles on the subject. It would seem their claims of these findings are based of citizen science that is often flawed unless directed by a trained professional.
We have no direct evidence so far, that I have seen to prove exactly who is spraying us, until we catch them with the chemicals dripping out of the tail pipes.
Al DiCiccio rationalising in a Youtube post. Those damn neutralising agents!
It looks like there are significant problems with this lawsuit.
1. They have no evidence.
2. Lacking evidence, the attorney is unable to develop a strategy for pursuing the case.
3. Even if the above two hurdles were crossed, six people will be needed to be responsible for legal costs incurred by the State of California when the case is found frivolous.
Bottom line seems to be that despite claims of a lawsuit in progress, nothing has been done at all, and likely nothing ever will be done, just as in all previous claims of lawsuits.
Law Offices of
Joseph H. Marman, Esq.
8421 Auburn Blvd., Suite 145
Attorney at Law Citrus Heights, CA 95610-0394 (916) 721-3324
E-mail: email@example.com Fax (916) 721-3633
Member: California Consumer Attorneys, Capitol City Trial Lawyers Association, Sacramento County Bar Assn., Placer County Bar Assn..
December 18, 2012
Hello fellow Chem Trial activists and potential plaintiffs in my lawsuit
Re: Chem Trail Lawsuit
I wanted to give an idea of what we are facing.
To clarify what I plan on doing. I have been an attorney for 25 years and I have my own law office. I have two staff people, and I am very busy with my regular paying clients, so the Chem Trail lawsuit has to take a backseat to when I have time to present it since I am not charging anything for my time in doing this. If we win the case and attorneys fees are awarded at the end of the suit, I will seek my hourly rate from the government.
I am not going to file a class action suit, since that is expensive to notify all potential members of the class. I intend to have 4-10 named plaintiffs, which will be easier for me to notify of the litigation events and processes. I intend to file a California state lawsuit against the government agencies responsible for protecting our health, which I believe so far are the California Air Resources Board and the California EPA. I will periodically notify the Facebook page once we get our case going. I am required to file a Government Claim first as an administrative requirement, and then the Claim is rejected and then we proceed to a lawsuit.
We cannot just file a suit without any direct evidence, and then hope to win because we are upset that the government is spraying us. We have no direct evidence so far, that I have seen to prove exactly who is spraying us, until we catch them with the chemicals dripping out of the tail pipes.
At this point all we do have for evidence is that the main 3 elements of barium, strontium and aluminum are being found in extreme amounts in our water, snow and perhaps blood. In my mind, we can only sue the government for failure to take the proper steps that they are mandated to do of investigating contaminants that may affect our health. Be aware also that there is a California Government Code § 818.2 that specifies that “A public entity is not liable for an injury caused by adopting or failing to adopt an enactment or by failing to enforce any law” This may be a big problem for us, and I need to research how to get around that law prior to filing any lawsuit.
Be advised that the losing party in lawsuits may have a judgment entered against them for the costs put forth in defending the case, which in this case would be the California government, so be advised that if we lose, you may be hit with being responsible to pay the State of California’s costs of defending the lawsuit. Be further advised that I need to get about 6 Claimants to list as claimants in the Government claim first, then those claims are typically automatically rejected by the government agencies, and then we have 6 months from that date to file our lawsuit.
Joseph H. Marman
But there has been no update that I could find since Dane's original May 16th article.hope to commence proceedings with the filing of what is termed a “60 day notice” within the coming month. This document is very complete, compelling, and will certainly make waves
Shaking head double face palm would do it if there was one. He better not be costing us Canadian taxpayers any $$$ for this ridiculous lawsuit.So, Her Royal Majesty the Queen of England is responsible for the spraying over Redding California that has affected Dane Wigington's solar panels and responsible for the endangerment of the Delta Smelt that all environmentalists I've read state the decline of Delta Smelt is due to redirecting the San Joaquin River Delta water? Mick, I'm trying to find an emoji choice that fits.
So they want $100,000 to proceed. That does not seem like it's going to happen.
The above legal step will permit the following to take place: depositions, legal research, motions to be filed, extra personnel like paralegals to be hired, plus court and attorneys’ fees that will need to be supported and bankrolled. Even though much of the work so far was done pro bono by the lawyers, the lawsuit cannot proceed further on a pro bono basis, as there are many legal and court costs involved that need to be met, so the public’s support is needed badly.
It’s estimated that depositions alone will cost tens of thousands of dollars. That legal process allows the plaintiffs to ‘dig’ for information from the 36 defendants plus get legal access to emails, letters, and all sorts of information the lawyers may want to find regarding weather geoengineering, formulations, etc.
It is estimated that $100,000.00 will be needed to proceed with the lawsuit and the next 60 days are crucial, so if you can help out with a financial donation in any amount, it would be greatly appreciated, and very well spent.
Please make your donation payable to Minnesota Natural Health Coalition (a 501c3 tax exempt educational non-profit organization), whose mission is to protect health and health freedoms.
You can be assured that all donations go directly to the legal defense fund.
So they want $100,000 to proceed. That does not seem like it's going to happen.