Prima Facie Requirement

17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE

The WAR That Brought DOWN

NAZI Germany’s “NEW ORDER:”

United States of America /

STATE Of Mississippi

vs.

Chickasaw Tribal Nation /

Utica International Embassy /

Vogel Denise Newsome

THE NAZIS',

WHITE SUPREMACISTS',

KU KLUX KLAN'S,

JEWS' and ZIONISTS' ...

QUESTS FOR

"GLOBAL"

WHITE SUPREMACY

Prima Facie Requirements:

1) An OBJECT

New Order (Nazism)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The New Order (German: Neuordnung), or the New Order of Europe (German: Neuordnung Europas), was the political order which Nazi Germany wanted to impose on the conquered areas under its dominion. The establishment of the New Order had already begun long before the start of World War II, but was publicly proclaimed by Adolf Hitler in 1941:

The year 1941 will be, I am convinced, the historical year of a great European New Order.^[1]

Among other things, it entailed the creation of a pan-German racial state structured according to Nazi ideology to ensure the supremacy of an Aryan-Nordic master race, massive territorial expansion into Central and Eastern Europe through its colonization with German settlers, the physical annihilation of . . . others considered to be "unworthy of life" and the extermination, expulsionor enslavement of most of the . . . peoples and others regarded as "racially inferior".^[2] Nazi Germany's desire for aggressive territorial expansionism was one of the most important causes of World War II.

Historians are still divided as to its ultimate goals, some believing that it was to be limited to Nazi German domination of Europe, while others maintain that it was a springboard for eventual world conquest and the establishment of a world government under German control. - -As of 02/13/19 this is an excerpt of an Article that may be found at the following LINK

:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Order_(Nazism) - Pursuant 17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR

2) PLAN(S) On How To Accomplish The Object:

National Security Council

Memorandum 46:

DIVIDE and CONQUER Missions

CLICK HERE TO Read More

CLICK HERE TO Read More

PROJECT 2025
USA's King Alfred Plan:
Code Name Rex 84

CONSPIRACIES To Carry Out
MASS Exterminations Of The
BLACK Indians...

World War III / World War 3 Hoax
CLICK HERE TO Read More

3) AGREEMENT(S) On How To Accomplish The Object:

United Nations Security Council Permanent Members

CLICK HERE TO Read More

United States vs. Valle, 301 F.R.D. 53 (2014)

[28][29][30][31]. . . “ ‘Whether the substantive crime itself is, or is likely to be, committed is irrelevant,’ ” United States v. Wallach, 935 F.2d 445, 470 (2d Cir.1991) (quoting United *82 States v. Rose, 590 F.2d 232, 235 (7th Cir.1978)), and “ ‘impossibility of success is not a defense.’ ” Hassan, 578 F.3d at 123 (quoting Jimenez Recio , 537 U.S. at 276, 123 S.Ct . 819). “ ‘[T]he crime of conspiracy is complete upon the agreement to violate the law, as implemented by one or more overt acts ..., and is not at all dependent upon the ultimate success or failure of the planned scheme.’ ” United States v. Trapilo , 130 F.3d 547, 552 n. 9 (2d Cir.1997) (quoting United States v. Everett, 692 F.2d 596, 600 (9th Cir.1982)). . .

[32][33][34][35]Moreover, a defendant may be convicted of conspiracy without having entered into a formal or express agreement. “ ‘[I]t is enough that the parties have a tacit understanding to carry out the prohibited conduct.’ ” United States v. Rubin, 844 F.2d 979, 984 (2d Cir.1988) (quoting United States v. Wardy, 777 F.2d 101, 107 (2d Cir.1985)).