OCR Text |
Show V WHY DOES TRUMAN CANNON GIVE HIS MILK AWAY FREE PAGE 7 Vol. 6 No. 35 25SERIW-- S Sail Lake City, Utah 84115 "DRAW August 28, 1975 THE DEFENDENT SITS AS THE JUDGE AND DISMISSES CASE AGAINST HIMSELF JUDGE RITTER , By John Patrick various situations have been involving nine American Gtizens who had the courage to file an identified in which experience Anti-Tru- st Suit against five teaches that the probability of Supreme Court Justices, all of the actual bias on the part of the judge Federal Judges in the Tenth or decision maker is too high to he tolerable. Grcuit, including Judge Ritter and constitutionally Judge Aldon J. Anderson, several AMONG THESE CASES ARE U.S. Attorneys, the Utah Bar THOSE IN WHICH THE ADJUAssociation and the American Bar DICATOR HAS A PECUNIARY INTEREST IN THE OUTAssociation. The hearing referred'to above COME AND IN WHICH HE was particularly distasteful to this HAD BEEN THE TARGET OF reporter because Judge Ritter was PERSONAL ABUSE OR CRITInamed as a defendant in the suit CISM FROM THE PARTY and refused to remove himself BEFORE HIM. Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 from the Bench in spite ofa motion and affidavit by the Plaintiffs that (1955) and Tummey vs. Ohio 273 he withdraw because of prejudice U.S. 510, 532 (1927) This argument, of course, is and bias. In other words Ritter On August 20, 1975 at 10:00 insisted on sitting as a Judge in his supported by the traditional AM this reporter had the own cause and was doing so in common law principal that one displeasure of witnessing one of the violation of a recent Supreme party to the action cannot sit as the most blatant travesties of justice Court decision that John F. .Judge. ever perpetrated upon the Grismore argued to the Court On Motion from the U.S. American public when Federal wherein the Attorney, Ramon M. Child, to Supreme Court said: District Judge Willis W. Ritter dismiss the suit Judse Ritter so Fair trial in a fair tribunal is a issued an order denying Americans basic of due ruled that the suit be dismissed and requirement access to the courts for redress of process.. ..Not only is a biased issued the following order. grievances. decision maker constitutionally This obvious misuse of IN THE UNITED STATES DISunacceptable but our system of law Judicial Power took place in Judge has always endeavored to prevent TRICT COURT FOR THE DISRitters courtroom in Salt Lake even the probability of TRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL Utah a DIVISION City. hearing unfairness.. ..In pursuit of this end. during JOHN F. GRISMORE, et al. Petitioners and Plaintiffs vs. WARREN E. BURGER, UTAH BAR ASSOCIATION, et al. Respondents and Defendants. ORDER Civil No. C-75-- 59 process, it is by the Court this 20th day of August, 1975 HEREBY ORDERED that defendants above Motion be, and it hereby is in all things, granted, to the following effect: . The Complaint herein in aH respects is dismissed with 1 Upon consideration of the federal defendants'- Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment, To Strike Certain Names From Pleadings and Motion for Injunction to restrain plaintiffs and persons acting in concert or participation with plaintiffs from instituting similar litigation, AND IT APPEARING to the Court that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted or over which this Court has jurisdiction, and that this action is frivolous, abusive and brought in bad faith; - AND IT FURTHER APPEARING to the Court that unless enjoined therefrom, plaintiffs and persons acting in concert or participation with plaintiffs will continue to institute and repetitive, oppressive vexatious litigation, and engage in further abuse of the judicial prejudice. 2. All naming or reference in the pleadings herein to the following persons who have not been served herein shall be stricken and expunged; (a) Any naming of or in the pleadings to the reference wives of any of the persons named as defendants; (b) Any naming of or reference in the pleadings to any of the following persons who have not been served herein: Pursuant to the Courts inherent powers and Title 28, 3. United States Code, Section 16t 5 1(a). the plaintiffs and all persons acting in concert or participation with plaintiffs be, and hereby are, and enjoined restrained, permanently and forever, from commencing any litigation or proceeding of any kind containing . Continued on page 6 SOVIETS BUILDING "FIRST STRIKE" NAVY FORCE By Paul Scott than U.S. defense officials had significant threat to present U.S. originally made public. maritime strategy. In addition to the tremendous Russia's Washington: What is of deep concern to build-unumber of naval p now unprecedented warships and nuclear Secretary Middendorf and other be a to submarines lot involved in the more ominous appears top naval officials is that the there definite' are program, signs present 482 ship Navy less than that the Soviets naval expansion is half the number of ships in the fleet UTAH INDEPENDENT being based on a first strike, of 1968 may soon be incapable of 57 Oakland Avenue concept. carrying out the NaVys role in Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 This is the latest warning supporting national strategy. Soeond Claes Postage sounded naval being by top This role consists of naval officials including Secretary of support for deterring the outbreak US City, Utah Navy J. William Middendorf, II, of war and other infringements on who is vigorously campaigning for U.S. interests; contributing to a U.S. naval fleet of 600 ships to international stability through the offset the new Russian threat to maintenance of a balance of our security. military power; and by In a little-noticand speech maintaining a conversations with private capability to respond to crisis members of Congress, Secretary ranging from a minor Middendorf has hinted at the new confrontation to global war. Russian danger, stating: NAVAL SOVIET In general Soviet warship STRATEBY - Because of the designs emphasize lightweight, Russians growing number of high maneuverability and great warships, the Kremlin's naval offensive firepower with little deployments vary radically in size,, apparent emphasis on reload and appear to be directed toward capability and perhaps relying on a developing the capability of first strike concept. U.S. designs -l concentrating the naval forces on the other hand stress endurance, necessary to achieve a particular survivability and habitability. goal for a limited period of time. . J From a naval point of view. This new strategy is one of the Tr Middendorf warns, the reasons why the Russians are now Secretary r; l t coincident reduction of the size of given the capability of being able to U.S. fleet to the lowest levels since put superior naval forces in such r; the mid-194and the impressive strategic areas of the world as the build-u- p of the Soviet Navy with its Indian Ocean and the M '"I g first strike concept poses a Mediterranean at any time. 8dt Pddat ed war-fighti- rr- . . . 4 4 0s ng In view of these strategic considerations, argues Secretary Middendorf, the growing Soviet naval threat poses a critical national security issue for the U.S. involving the size and structure of our own Navy. The Navys solution to this critical issue is a balanced objective force level of 600 active ships in the s. This fleet Navy by the would be built around 13 to 15 aircraft carriers and 190 to 220 surface combatant ships. To obtain this level the Navy must build an average of at least 35 new ships a year starting in 1976. That is a much larger ship building program than the Navy has been permitted to undertake in recent mid-1980- years. Since 1968 as a result of the Vietnam war and a reordering of fiscal priorities, the Navy has averaged only 13 new ships a year. Were this trend to continue, it would result in a Navy of substantially less than 450 ships by 1980. Last year a total of 23 new ships were approved by Congress. Whether funds for 35 new ships will be appropriated this year is still debatable, because of growing opposition in Congress to increased defense spending. Presently, the Navy maintains four to five continually deployed task groups and Marine Amphibious Units required to support this nations overseas national policy and commitments. With evaporating overseas base structure and regional uncertainties, the U.S. Navys forward deployment responsibilities are expected to increase in the rest of the 1970s. The big question is whether the Navy will have sufficient ships to meet these growing commitments. THE CARRIER DISPUTE -- Still undecided is whether the Navy will be permitted to continue to build those powerful 90,000 ton Nimitz-clas- s carriers or will be limited to the smaller ones. While top officials of the Navy convinced the super-carrieare are needed to carry out that military services mission. Defense James Schlesinger Secretary He is opposed to disagrees. building any more of the large carriers and wants the Navy to' concentrate on smaller ones. rs . Due to this top side opposition. Secretary Mideendorf lias approved a study for the construction of a new class of aircraft carriers that displace about two-thirthe tonnage of the Nimitz. Note. Soviet ballistic missile submarines now on patrol off both the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts of the U.S. arc now referred inside the Navy as the jaws" of Soviet powei; ds . |