Operation Piebald, Part 3: A Citizen-Led Grand Jury

Thus far, in Parts 1 and 2, I have proposed a way to deal with the criminal events of 9-11 and 8-8, by sketching a streamlined way to bring the miscreants to book. Namely, I suggested that we simply “declare” that both events used Directed Energy Weapons and that we blame the US government for doing it.

If I’m correct that the US did it, but the weapon was other than DEW (say, it was thermite), no problem — we will have caught our baddy. But if it was a party other than the US government, then my Operation Piebald isn’t worth a cracker, and we should drop this pursuit.

Really, though, I don’t see how it could be anyone other than the US government that hit the WTC and the town of Lahaina. Some other nations do possess the necessary weapons, notably Russia and China, both of whom are often made out to be our enemy. But why would they “oblige us” by helping us get more Middle East oil, or more poppies from Afghanistan, or more police-state legislation domestically?

Ah, I hear you say, because there is only One World Order and all the member nations are the puppets within it. OK, that is plausible. And some writers, such as Christopher Bollyn, make the case for Israel having done 9-11.  If Bollyn is correct, I would say it’s Israel in the role of World Government puppet that did it, to carry out some sort of constitutional Great Reset in America.

Come to think of it, several dual citizens of US and Israel signed a letter called PNAC, Project for a New American Century, back in 2000, saying we would need “a new Pearl Harbor.” They didn’t say we need a 15-minute city in Maui, though. And if they are dual, they are nevertheless American.  I myself am dual and I am nevertheless American.

Christofer Parson in his book, “DEW,” written a fortnight after the fire, points out that the drink manufacturer Mountain Dew came out with a flavor called Maui Blast, which he sees as predictive programming for 8-8. And there’s a slew of embedded clues about 9-11, such as in cartoons of The Simpsons.  I concede that there may be an amalgamation of globalist businesses who do not think in terms of government. (“Who needs government when you’ve got us?”), and if so, I am out in left field with this Piebald thing. We’d have to be arresting Mountain Dew, not Governor Green.

Let’s Get On with It

Enough of the cringing and apologizing. Back to work, Everybody! The remaining question is “How do we either get the paid law enforcement guys to do their job, re arresting the government, or how do we become the unpaid LE?”

You never see LE doing the job of calling government into line. I believe everyone has absorbed the idea that government has divine privilege. “Hands off.” Recently, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green tried to impeach Mayorkas, the head of Homeland Security, for allowing open borders. She couldn’t even get 51% of her colleague to vote Yes. And that was only an impeachment, not a criminal indictment, so let’s forget any LE action coming from within the US government.

Frankly, it’s down to me and thee.

In this Part 3, I propose a citizen-led grand jury.  In our colonial days there were no cops as such. And most of us were farmers. When the Mayflower arrived in Massachusetts in 1620, I assume it carried on deck the full cultural tradition of the passengers, including their religion (Christian) and their law (English law). The law included all of the common law, that is, the judge-made law built up over centuries, and all legislation enacted by British Parliament.

We were still ruled by the monarch until we said “See ya” in 1776. The community of Massachusetts had a grand jury both before and after 1776. It served as a check on crime and as a collection point for information about troubles. The grand jury is grand only in size — 23 men instead of the trial jury of 12. It got empaneled for a two-year stretch and elected a foreperson. (You know it was a foreman, but I’m modernizing.)

The main job of the grand jury, even today, is to decide if a suspect or a “person of interest” ought to be indicted and thus get tried for crime. But in the old days, the GJ would also report to the government about physical issues, such as a bridge that was in need of repair. I’m sure the members, the grand jurors, felt duty-bound to help society. And so they should!

A Special Grand Jury

I am now proposing that some Americans — at least 30, being 23 members and 7 substitutes — form a Special Grand Jury to deal with 9-11 and 8-8, using the outline I wrote up as “Operation Piebald.”  Granted, it is not super-duper perfect, but we will never get a super-duper perfect one. Better to have something than nothing. Letting our government kill us with DEWs is not a good idea, you will agree. And what are they planning next?

Do we need someone’s permission?  I say we need each other’s permission. At some point in the past, a rule (not a law) was written that places the responsibility for grand juries in the judicial branch, or in the executive branch under the Attorney General. That is arguably unconstitutional. In a dissent in the 1992 Williams case, Justice Antonin Scalia argued strongly that the government is not the boss of a grand jury. He opined:

“Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a “buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law….” [Emphasis added]. Wow.

In 2015, the Congressional Research Service – the CRS — wrote a report (number 95-1135) about the role of the federal grand jury. In the words of Charles Doyle summarizing the CRS’s report:

“The federal grand jury exists to investigate crimes against the United States and to secure the constitutional right of grand jury indictment. Its responsibilities require broad powers. [It is] an arm of the U.S. District Court which summons it, upon whose process it relies, and which will receive any indictments it returns.”

Who is right — Scalia, Doyle, or for that matter, Maxwell? Scalia’s most important observation, in his Williams dissent, is that nowhere in the Constitution do we see the grand jury assigned to any of the three branches; it stands alone. The other place in the parchment that mentions the people — besides “We the People” as the authors of the whole thing — is in Amendment Ten of the Bill of Rights which says:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Should Our Citizen-Led Grand Jury Be State or Federal?

Don’t let me proceed without saying that each state can, for its own courts, design procedure for grand juries.  Amazingly, in Connecticut in 1983, the state legislature passed a law to eliminate the grand jury. It did provide for something called an Investigative grand jury in cases of corruption, but guess who gets empaneled to it? — a judge, a judge referee, or a three-judge panel.

That brings us to the well-known law maxim: Nemo judex in sua causa — “No man can be a judge in his own case.” So the Connecticut legislature did the people no favors if it left the matter of a judge’s corruption in the hands of fellow judges.

And that is the heart of our problem in regard to the US government (apparently) using DEWs to harm its own people on 9-11 and 8-8.  There is no one to charge them.  And the media constantly rubs it in by showing how “politics” rather than justice will always win. (“Blah blah protected Blah Blah because Blah Blah is a member of the clan that opposed Blah Blah.”)  Nearly every American today assumes that there is no way to bring a criminal case against our leaders.

I say there is a way, and that it is not dramatic or unusual.  King Charles I in England got beheaded by his underlings in 1649, didn’t he? Although that was exceptionally dramatic, it has been standard fare in the US for people to get together and put a stop to tyranny.

That is, until the top dogs got sufficient coordination whereby everyone miraculously obeys them. But during this year, 2023, there has been at least some overturning of this, thanks to the deaths from Covid and the vax. Some Americans are at last saying “Punish Fauci,” or “Punish Bill Gates.” (People in Third World countries have been hanging Gates in effigy for years.)

I intend to forge ahead with a Special Grand Jury, per Operation Piebald, and will appreciate any comment as to the difference between it being a state or a federal thing. Even if we choose to have it ‘based’ in one state (say, New Hampshire, or California), the empaneled members will not all be residents of that state.

I hope to put out a recruitment letter to anyone anywhere. Maybe we can think of this grand jury as not being either federal or state but just “society.” Please see my 2023 book “Society Is the Authority.” (But it had to do with child trafficking, not DEWs.)

What’s So Special Here?

Readers may be thinking that a Special Grand Jury has no value, since its findings can’t proceed to a trial. I say we will cross that bridge when we come to it.  It is no problem for citizens to make arrests, as I will describe in Part 4.  But first I need to point out how my Special Grand Jury is “special” — that is, how it deviates from a standard grand jury.

For starters, I proclaimed that the method of destruction was by Directed Energy Weapons. For 9-11, this entailed my accepting Judy Wood’s theory of dustification.  For Lahaina, I have gleaned from many videos that it must have been DEW. Videos filmed by Eric West soon after the fire, and again on December 11, are among the best, showing close ups of tress and grass still in bloom while a car alongside them has melted. The sparing of any blue items is also diagnostic: the energy in a laser beam is reportedly unable to hit the color blue.

The Special Grand Jury that I hope to form will NOT be going over the 9/11 Commission’s report to debunk it. If you have a strict sense of a grand jury’s role in looking at all aspects of a case, you will not want to participate here. As stated in Part 1, simplicity is needed to streamline the cases of 9-11 and 8-8. If it barks like a dog, it is a dog. I expect the 23 grand jurors to say If it looks like DEW, it is DEW.

Not only does Operation Piebald deviate from the standard grand jury duty to examine all evidence, it advertises in advance its belief as to who is guilty. I claimed that “If DEWs were used, the guilty party must be one of the few owners of DEWs.” It wasn’t done by a bunch of drug dealers, was it? It couldn’t have been done by an arsonist who escaped from the mental hospital.

I specifically countered the 9-11 and 8-8 official stories as being physically impossible. I deduced that “Since the hijacked planes could not have furnished sufficient heat to destroy the WTC, and a natural fire in Maui could not melt the wheels of cars,” the US is lying to us.

This led me to deploy the maxim “Against the spoliator, everything can be PRESUMED.” I now re-emphasize this prosecutorial idea. A huge effort has been made by media and government to present wrong information to the public about 9-11 and 8-8. This makes the US the spoliator of evidence, against whom the entire crime can be laid.

Granted, this pre-judicial announcement of guilt deviates from standard grand jury behavior,

but recall that the word “presumed” does not put a man in jail. He must be given — and will be given — a chance to rebut the maxim’s presumption. Indeed, our Special Grand Jury can only go as far as indicting the suspects. An indictment, also called “a True Bill,” then gets handed over to government to hold a trial.

To get in touch with me, please email MaxwellMaryLLB@gmail.com.