With thanks to Emile Zola, this will be a regular contribution of mine to this forum.

                            

                                                       J'accuse
                                                 (I accuse you!)

Jerome Cochran, General Counsel and Executive Vice Chancellor of the University of Pittsburgh:

1)  I accuse you of ether instigating the bomb threats at the University of Pittsburgh, or  of using the bomb threats to seize power that was not rightfully yours.

2) I accuse you of common law treason against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by usurping powers that were given to Board of Trustees by the Pennsylvania legislature. 

3) I accuse you of using the bomb threats to cover your completely illegal scraping of a non-discrimination policy that was signed by the Chancellor on behalf of the Board of Trustees in 2008.

4) I accuse you of caring nothing about Pitt students and of refusing to provide them with proper security.

5) I accuse you of undermining democratic governance at Pitt by rejecting the Anti-Discrimination Policy Committee recommendations on an appropriate policy for rest room use at the University and instead creating an ad hoc committee to start fresh.

6) I accuse you of using your friendship with U.S. Attorney David J. Hickton to begin a true witch hunt against my partner Seamus Samuel Padrig Johnston and myself and further of persuading Hickton to prevent us from testifying before the Federal grand jury as you knew these accusations would come out. 

7) I accuse you of using the FBI and Joint Terrorism Task-force officers to harass and humiliate Seamus and myself and deny us our Constitutionally guaranteed rights.  

8) I accuse you of conspiracy to commit the acts listed above.

9) I accuse you of ordering that the charges levelled against Seamus be raised to misdemeanors from summary offences so that University of Pittsburgh became the first college in American history to file misdemeanor charges against a student.  

10)  I accuse you of pressuring both the judges and prosecutors of Cambria County to act as holy inquisitors instead of secular public officials.

11 ) I accused you of high treason against the United States of America in that you deliberately diverted resources from investigating actual terrorism to investigating us and that by undermining the United States Constitution you have adhered to the enemies of the United States during time of war, i.e. while our brave men and women are in harm's way in Afghanistan, an errand designed by fools not a fools errand. 

12) I accuse you of being a coward. Do not attack Seamus; attack me. Pock on someone your own size. I will send this message by email to you and to hundreds, including the press and private citizens who will hang copies on public bulletin boards. You are an attorney at law, sue me for libel. Sue me, or forever be damned as a traitor, a criminal, a liar and and a coward !

 Dr. Katherine-Anne McCloskey-Ross

 "J' accuse!" or "I accuse you!"  was a famous open letter by French writer Emile Zola to the president of France exposing the conspiracy against Colonel Alfred Dreyfus  As might be expected Dreyfus primary accuser was in fact the culprit.   As there will likely to be 50 or more of these "J'accuse pieces they should be locatable in one place Realising everybody may not be familiar with the "Dreyfus Affair" and  Emile Zola's  daring letter which is likely the most moving Op-ed piece ever written, please see this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%27accuse and  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreyfus_affair

I highly recommend the following two films : "I Accuse!" United Kingdom, 1958 with José Ferrer as colonel Dreyfus I saw this movie on the late show when I was about 11 and it made aware of both injustice down Dreyfus and magnificent writings  of Emile Zola's. Prisoner of Honor ; USA, 1991, was directed by Ken Russell, always a recommendation as far as I am concerned. It focuses on the efforts of Colonel Picquart to have the sentence of Alfred Dreyfus overturned. Colonel Picquart was played  Richard Dreyfus, who maintains that he and Alfred Dreyfus are related. 

Statement of Equality Pennsylvania on the University of Pittsburgh’s

Non-Discrimination Policy for the Transgender Community and the Need for Calm

Harrisburg – Over the past several weeks, Equality Pennsylvania has been very carefully monitoring and watching the situation surrounding the University of Pittsburgh’s non-discrimination policy and how it impacts the transgender community.  We have spoken with quite a few people on what is happening, and among them we have discussed ways to find solutions.
Equality Pennsylvania recognizes that this is serious and sensitive and we have tried to take our time to fully understand all aspects of what is happening.  We believe firmly that the groundwork and willingness is there to find a workable policy on bath and locker room usage for the transgender community.  That remains our hope and we stand ready to be of help in whatever way that works.
Today we publicly call on the Administration of the University, the University Senate, the Staff Association Council, students, staff and faculty to work with each other as well as the transgender community to create a comprehensive transgender policy consistent with the school’s stated non-discrimination policy.  Equality Pennsylvania will do what is necessary to speed along this process.
Like many people, we were also deeply troubled by the announcement that a transgender couple was being questioned as part of a larger investigation into a series of bomb-threats currently plaguing the University.  Obviously, we are carefully watching the treatment that they receive and hope firmly that they are found to be innocent and that their status as transgender will not be used in any way to deny them fair consideration. This would be awful to say the least.
In light of both events developing simultaneously, Equality Pennsylvania also calls for calm, respect and a clear commitment to making sure that both the policy and the investigation are handled separately and that one does not damage or hurt the prospects of the other.  In truth, they are two separate situations and we ask that they be treated as such.  We also ask the University to move forward to find a sensible policy on non-discrimination AND we respectfully urge police investigators to stick to the facts of the case and pursue an investigation that is fair and careful.  Thoughtful people can carry out both tasks. This is our hope and our demand.

In The Court Of Common Pleas of Cambria County, Pennsylvania,
Criminal Division 

Commonwealth                                                                              No. S. A.  0007-2012                                                                                      0007-2012
                                                                                                       Summary Appeal Katherine Anne  Katherine Anne McCloskey ,                               
nee, Gabriel  McCloskey Ross

To Hon. Norman a Krumenacher III 

Comes now Katherine Anne McCloskey-Ross, pro per, pro se to argue as follows:

1) So many discrepancies were found between the testimony recorded at District Judge Varner's Court and The Court of Common Pleas sitting at Johnstown that the defendant requests a new trial.  

2)  One simple example should suffice. Before you Sgt. Martin testified that  I said I "came to raise the devil" but at District Judge level he testified just as earnestly that " He ( sic ) said he didn't come to raise the devil"                     

3) If were the only change of testimony it would be of little consequence, but their are dozens of changes which will be on the USB stick submitted to the Court along with the video.

4) All prosecution witnesses testified that the defendant's head was not deliberately shoved by Cheif Grady and Sargent Martin into the door, but at 5:56 of the video submitted as evidence, it is plain this untrue.

5) The defendant does not want to charge Chief Grady and Sgt. Martin with perjury and ADA Bernstein with subornation of perjury and prefers a new trial were these individuals can re-evaluate what they said.

6) After 7 days the defendant will assume the Court prefers criminal charges to a new trail.

Respectfully Submitted,  subject to penalties for unsworn falsification

Dr. Katherine Anne McCloskey-Ross   

Notice Of Fraud Upon A Fededral Court By Assistant US Attroney

In the United States Third Circuit Court, Western District
of Pennsylvania

Notice of Fraud on the Court and Motion to Recuse U.S. District Judge
Nora Barry Fischer
Comes now Dr. Katherine Anne McClosey, Ph.D, pro se, pro per to aver
as follows.

1) The U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if
an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the
judge's impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a
detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is
unlikely, the judge must be disqualified." [Emphasis added]. Liteky v.
U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994).

2) Rule 3B(7) of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct (MCJC)
provides generally that,except as authorized by law, judges may “neither initiate nor consider ex parte
or other communications ... Concerning a pending or impending proceeding.” (Canon 3A(4) of
the1972 Model Judicial Code (MJC)

3) The commentary on Cannon of 2 of Federal Judges code of ethics says
the following:
Canon 2A. An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds,
with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a
reasonable inquiry, would conclude that the judge’s honesty,
integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge
is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by
irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all
impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to
both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the
subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly
restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary
citizen. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts,
the prohibition is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to
conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned
in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include
violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this
Code.

4) Cannon 3, part four : (4) A judge should accord to every person
who has a legal interest in a proceeding, and that person’s lawyer,
the full right to be heard according to law. Except as set out below,
a judge should not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte
communications or consider other communications concerning a pending
or impending matter that are made outside the presence of the parties
or their lawyers. If a judge receives an unauthorized ex parte
communication bearing on the substance of a matter, the judge should
promptly notify the parties of the subject matter of the communication
and allow the parties an opportunity to respond, if requested.
5) § 76.15 Ex parte communications.]
(a) Generally. The Judge shall not consult with any party, attorney or
person (except persons in the office of the Judge) on any legal or
factual issue unless upon notice and opportunity for all parties to
participate. No party or attorney representing a party shall
communicate in any instance with the Judge on any matter at issue in a
case, unless notice and opportunity has been afforded for the other
party to participate. This provision does not prohibit a party or
attorney from inquiring about the status of a case or asking questions
concerning administrative functions or procedures.
(b) Sanctions. A party or participant who makes a prohibited ex parte
communication, or who encourages or solicits another to make any such
communication, may be subject to any appropriate sanctions. An
attorney who makes a prohibited ex parte communication, or who
encourages or solicits another to make any such communication, may be
subject to sanctions, including, but not limited to, exclusion from
the proceedings.

5) Here is what the Associated Press reported On April 18, 2012.:
{U.S. Attorney} Ms. Picking eventually led two agents, the couple and
five reporters first to U.S. District Judge David S. Cercone's suite,
and then to the hallway outside of Judge Fischer's courtroom...
.Judge Fischer eventually held separate hearings for Mr. Johnston and
Ms. McCloskey.
Prosecutors with expertise in white-collar crime and national security
passed in and out of the closed courtroom.

6) Clearly Attorney Picking first venue shopped and then had her staff
engage in ex parte communication with Judge Fischer.

7) This constitutes a crime on Attorney Picking's part and judicial
misconduct by Judge Fischer and makes Judge Fischer's recusal
mandatory.

8) Having obtained Form AO91, it is my intention to charge Ms. Picking
with 18 USC § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law, although
I have no idea to whom to submit it, as the prosecutor is the accused.
8) The Court is welcome to convene a hearing and have the five
reporters: Richard Lord ( Pittsburgh Post Gazette) Jennifer Preston
(The New York Times) Harold Hayes (KDKA,TV news) Alan Jennings( WPXI
TV news) and Bob Mayo (WTAE,TV news)

9) While laid up with a back injury on Friday, I called the Allegheny
County District Attorney's office, the City of Pittsburgh Police, the
Campus Police of University of Pittsburgh, the U.S.Attorney's office,
and Pittsburgh office of the FBI requesting a time to give them an
interview. Only the FBI did not refuse outright. The FBI did return
my call but could not set up a second interview as yet.

10) There is no one who believes I have done anything criminal except
the person(s) who affirmed the secret affidavit of probable cause and
I cannot learn his, her or their names.

11) This is purely harassment to suit the University of Pittsburgh's
General Counsel Jerome Cochran

12) Special Agent Kenneth R. Buford told me I could give my finger
prints and hand writing exemplars at the Johnstown FBI office.

13) When I tried to arrange that with the U.S. Attorney's office they
hung up on me.

14) I do not own and automobile or have a driver's license because a
neck injury sustained playing soccer for the University of Pittsburgh
at Johnstown in 1977 makes it unsafe for me to drive.

15) I cannot afford 2 round trips to Pittsburgh by train and four
nights in motel in one month.
16) At my own demand I am scheduled to give evidence before the grand
jury on May 22nd.

17) As fraud upon the court vacates all previous orders of that court,
I request that the judge who replaces Judge Fisher order a hearing
for U.S. Attorney's Picking my show cause if any she has as to why
she should not be held in contempt.

18) I request a grand jury be convened to investigate the actions of
the U.S. Attorney's office and its relationship with the University of
Pittsburgh to determine what laws may have been broken.

19) Judge Fischer is immune from both criminal prosecution and civil
suit. However, the U.S. Attorney's office and the FBI are not so
lucky.

I affirm that the information given above is true, correct and
complete to the best of my knowledge information and belief and that a
copy has been severed on the U.S. Attorney's office by first class
mail.

Who Is The SDUSA

Rick D'Loss told the New York Times that he spoke for the Social Democrat USA. This is likely true. It has less than 5 dues paying members. Rick is deliberately confabulated his own SDUSA with the SD,USA which was founded in 1972. The original website is mirrored here : http://www.socialdemocratsusa.org/oldsite/index.html

Our group is hardly a mass movement with 27 members. We remain standing despite even the FBI.

I would rather let the SDUSA folks speak for themselves.




Rick D'Loss January  8 , 2010

Comrades,


There is no record that a Convention ever took place.  There is no record of our Constitution being approved.  There is no record of any resolutions being passed.  There is no record of the inspiring speech that was made to us by Ernie Erber.  So, unfortunately, all the flowery talk of our Constitution is vaporous.  There is no record of the officers being elected, and there is no record of the Director being appointed, there is no record of Johnstown being selected as the site of the national office.  After the convention was concluded, the officers asked regularly and repeatedly, when would the National Office post a convention report on our website?  As you can see by looking at our site even now (eight months later), it never happened.  While this was certainly frustrating, it was nothing compared to our shock when the very first convention summary was seen in an email from Gabe to David McReynolds!  Folks, we have been trying to get our act together for the past 12 months.  Unfortunately, it is no more together now than it was last January.

And what about our Constitution?  Will it force people to cooperate?  Will the Constitution force people to communicate in a civil manner?  Will it force comrades to behave like comrades?  When we have to point to the Constitution, or call the law, isn't it a sign that we've already failed?  If there is a lack of democracy, will a constitution fix it?  Words on paper are simply that, words on paper.  What matters is how people behave.  People have to have an earnest interest in working together to solve problems.  And Social Democrats need to be social.  Members whose only interest is creating factions, continually fomenting conflicts, throwing rocks at each other, really should go join the CP, because Communists live to fight.  Here in the SDUSA we should be demonstrating how socialism works, not how it fails to work.

Gabe says that the officers cannot overturn the constitution (that we don't have).  He says we can't overturn rulings by the NEC.  I ask you the members, "can you name the NEC members?"  No you can not, because we don't actually have an NEC.  What we have are the officers, an Executive Director, a chairman of the youth group, and the occasional member who wants to join in the deliberations.  That's it.  That's who is running your SDUSA.  We are the NEC.  And I would expect that you want this group to make decisions in the best interest of the members.

Gabe says that we officers have disdain for democracy.  But the SDUSA NEC voted August 30, 2009, to give Craig Miller responsibility for maintenance of the SDUSA web site.  The vote was 4 to 1.  Gabe cannot claim ignorance of this, as he was strongly opposed to this motion and was the lone dissenting vote.  As a fierce proponent of democracy, what should the lone dissenter do?  He should accept the will of the group and assist in implementing the change.  That was 4 and a half months ago, and you all know where we are with the website controversy.

The officers have stated what actions we believe are needed to move forward.  More words on paper will not make any difference.

In peace and solidarity,
Rick




So according to Rick, he realise two months after his dues lapsed that what group needed were real officers and he would appoint them from among a group of people whose dues had also lapsed. Those who continued to pay dues had no say in the matter.

Then Rick accuses someone, I guess me, of not allowing Rabbi Craig Miller, a non-member complete access to the SD,USA-SP,USA website. Yet at Rabbi Miller's site onto he has downloaded large portions of the original site.

Of all caumny these people have spread, this is my favourite.

 The first of which is that in December of 2009 a schism occurred within the Social Democrats USA and Gabe Ross the executive director of the SD USA was fired from his position by the organization’s  full National Executive Committee. The division that occurred between the NEC and its executive director was due to an increasing tendency by Mr Ross to use methods  of slander and the demonization of   board members who disagreed with him over often minor political issues. That behavior when combined with Mr. Ross’s often deliberate refusals to implement NEC decisions and his unilateral expulsions of NEC members made his continuation in his post of Executive Director an impossibility. Unfortunately since Gabe Ross controlled the SD USA web site, the NEC leadership  had to develop an alternative web site called “Social Democracy for the 21th Century.” Unfortunately this new web site due at least partially from legal harassment from Mr. Ross  is still not up and running. Hopefully that will change soon. This does not  mean that most of the statements on social democratic political strategy, tactics and writings on the old Gabe Ross controlled site do not represent much of the thinking of the legitimate SD USA.

Glenn King, 2010


An organisation with 29 members had a schism? We are one person short of enough people to play a rugby match and we had a schism? People start and stop paying dues all the time. Every voluntary membership experiences the same thing. However, the real joke is that anyone was "fired". Seamus and I paid about half the bills.  So we were fired by not being allowed to pay the bills?

There three blogs that have been particularly viscous going after Seamus and myself.  First, there is the anti-transgender site GenderTrender. The second, is the openly neo-fascist Strom Front.org.  The Third and final group is Socialist Currents, Rick D'Loss' group. Rick even links to anti-transgender site GenderTrender.  If truly one is known by her enemies as much as by her friends, I feel very comfortable. I deliberately did not provide urls. Anyone who wants find any of these hate sites can do it without my help.

Rick D'Loss, Gutter Snipe

 

Many people have asked was I really thrown out of the Social Democrats, USA.  Was I fired, dismissed, or otherwise removed as director? 

Rick, D'Loss can write all manner of calumny about me. Unfortunately for him, I have the original emails. I have posted this on the Social Democrats USA ( Zionist/ Leninist) website 6 times and 6 times it has disappeared. If Rick is sure he is right, let's debate. I have suggested his home town, Carnegie, PA, where he is the president of city council, in Shul where he is president. Rick is a former Marine surely he can debate a Tranny with the battle terrain all to his advantage. Rick will say he has no time. How does he have time to attack me all over the web then? Please write to Rick at http://www.socialdemocrats.or and urge him to debate me. If he has no time to debate perhaps he would prefer shoe shopping. I really do not want to publish the emails that show Rick and his group of self elected officers were off their "meds" when they stopped paying dues and then expelled all 28 people who kept paying dues. In order to testify before various federal and state courts and grand juries I need my honour intact. So I will give Rick 10 days. then I start publishing the emails. 

Rick,

You now have more posts about me than anything else, like unions, the international monetary collapse etc. Now in 1989, I legally changed my name to Gabriel McCloskey Ross. You keep saying Gabe to keep people from finding what I wrote, like the principles that your rump caucus have plagiarised. Why not settle this as adults. I purpose an Oxford style debate at Congregation Ahavath Achim Shul where you are president. It is in the district you represent as one of three city council people. Most importantly it is your home town. I have only two stipulations. First, that as per the Oxford rules attendees divide at the end to illustrate who won in their opinion. Second, the entire debate is recorded on video and audio. Please pick a time and day. Let’s settle who is the real SD,USA or SDUSA as you phrased it.

Comradely,

Dr. Katherine Anne McCloskey

Seamus Johnston Comments On The Discrimination He Faces

Transgender student cited, arrest threatened

Seamus Johnston, 22, a transgendered student at University of Pittsburgh’s Johnstown campus received a second criminal citation on Monday, Nov. 21 for using men’s locker room facilities, following one issued Wednesday, Nov. 16.

Three campus security officers confronted Johnston outside the locker rooms. Assistant Chief of Campus Police, Eric Zangaglia, informed Johnston that he was being cited a second time because they did not have enough officers to arrest him. Johnston responded by telling Zangaglia that he did not intend to stop using the men’s locker room.

Campus Police Chief Kevin Grady was also present. He said to Johnston, “We have tried to be reasonable and courteous. . . if you continue, you will be arrested and taken into custody.”

Johnston uses the men’s locker room as part of a men’s weight training course in which he is enrolled. This is his second semester taking the course. Johnston was ordered by the university on Sept. 21 to cease using the men’s locker room, due to complaints received.

Johnston’s next class is Monday, Nov. 28. Coming on the heels of the UC Davis police action, Johnston has asked that PA state police be present to avoid violence by campus security.

On Oct. 19, Johnston sent a letter to Pitt-Johnstown President Jem Spectar and Vice-President of Student Affairs Jon Westcott notifying them of civil rights abridgements. He writes, “I must conclude that the University is acting under ‘color of law’ to commit official oppression and deny me my rights as outlined in. . . Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Pennsylvania Constitution. . . and the University of Pittsburgh’s nondiscrimination policy. . .

“the University has (stated) that it will cease its discrimination if. . . I produce an amended birth certificate. Obtaining an amended birth certificate is impossible for me and many other transsexual individuals.”

Students at Pitt-Johnstown are not required to provide proof of gender when enrolling. University procedure does allow for a denial of request for record change if the record is reviewed and believed to be correct.

Pres. Spectar responded Oct. 21, stating, “We desire to address this issue in a fashion that not only allays your concerns but those voiced by other students as well. I want to take this opportunity to emphasize that the University is committed to ensuring appropriate access to all its facilities by all students as required by law.”

In a follow-up letter on Oct. 24, Johnston informed Pres. Spectar of his intention to return the

men’s locker room that morning. He wrote, “you have no intention of complying with the laws. . . I am the victim of a crime, i.e. an on­going criminal conspiracy to deny me (my rights). . . Will you compound your crimes and your breaches of University regulation by attempting to use force to stop me?

“You want me to be happy with separate but equal facilities. You wish to segregate me. The answer is no.”

Between Oct. 24 and Nov. 14, Johnston used the men’s locker room a total of seven times, during which the university took no action.

On Nov. 15, The Advocate, official student newspaper of Pitt-Johnstown, published an article quoting Johnston as saying, “‘I will ask the U.S. Attorney, the Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania and The District Attorney of Cambria County to prepare charges that I may (file). I will prepare an affidavit of probable cause asking for (President Spectar’s) arrest and that of Registrar Marilyn Alberter, Director Theresa Horner, Vice President Jonathan Westcott and attorney Ted Fritz.’”

The next day, campus security approached Johnston informing him of university judicial proceedings being filed and of a criminal citation being issued.

The citations claim that Johnston is ‘female,’ despite being registered as ‘male’ in the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation database used by police departments.

Following the Nov. 21 incident, in a letter from the Office of Student Conduct and Conflict Resolution addressed to Ms. Seamus Johnston, the university states, “Effective immediately, you are issued a Interim Persona Non Grata which prohibits you from visiting Male Locker Rooms within Sports Center at Pitt-Johnstown.” The letter continues, “Failure to comply with this directive will result in action. . . which may include campus disciplinary charges and/or arrest for defiant trespass.”

In a separate letter, sent the same day, the university states, “This notice is being sent to you to make known that disciplinary charges have been filed against you regarding an incident that occurred on November 16, 2011 at Sports Center. . . As such, your presence is required. . . on November 23, 2011 at 10:00 AM.”

Johnston is Youth Secretary for the Young Peoples’ Socialist League and the Social Democrats, USA, and is a vocal member of the Occupy Johnstown movement.

Johnston said, “I am trying to follow in the tradition of Eugene Debs, Mother Jones, A Philip Randolph, David McReyonlds, Bayard Rustin, and thousands of Occupy protesters worldwide. They all went to jail to protest injustice. I am also willing.”

###