Subject: Occupation Threshold Met – Tribunal Jurisdiction Live
Authority: LOWM § 11.3 + Hague Art. 42 + GC IV Art. 6 + Customary 365-Day Rule
Occupation = Effective Control (LOWM § 11.3.2)
"Occupation exists when a belligerent actually exercises authority over enemy territory."
→ Biden admin has issued 600+ executive orders and controlled DoD, Treasury, borders, and elections for 1,385 days.
365-Day Customary Trigger
- GC IV Art. 6: Full Convention applies 1 year after general close of military operations.
- ICTY Naletilić ¶ 217: "Occupation consolidated after ~12 months of effective control."
- DoD LOWM § 11.3 n.27 cites UK/CAN manuals: 12-month demarcation.
→ 20 Jan 2022 = legal birthday of the occupation threshold.
What Changed on Day 366 (Legal Framework)
a. GC IV full spectrum (arts 47-78) → protected persons = American citizens under occupation law.
b. LOWM § 18.11 → military commissions gain exclusive jurisdiction under LOAC.
c. 10 USC § 822 → Art. III courts lose competence over acts committed under occupation.
Critical Public Record Evidence
Executive Order 14062 – Signed January 26, 2022 (87 FR 4763)
- Title: "2022 Amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States"
- Date: 371 days after inauguration (within 6 days of 365-day threshold)
- Content: Amended Parts II and IV of the Manual for Courts-Martial
- Significance: First time in U.S. history a president has amended military tribunal rules at the one-year mark of administration
Tribunal Checklist – Legal Requirements
✓ 365+ days effective control
✓ Acts under color of occupation law (executive orders, mandates)
✓ Amendment of military tribunal procedures on Day 371
One-Paragraph Killer Holding
"On 20 Jan 2022 the United States crossed the customary 12-month threshold under LOWM § 11.3. On 26 Jan 2022 (Day 371), Executive Order 14062 amended the Manual for Courts-Martial. Under occupation doctrine, every executive act since this date may be subject to military commission jurisdiction rather than Article III courts. The timing of EO 14062 presents a question requiring judicial examination."
Legal Questions Requiring Discovery
-
Why was EO 14062 signed on Day 371, immediately following the 365-day occupation threshold?
-
What legal framework was consulted in determining this timing?
-
Was LOWM § 11.3 or LOAC applicability discussed in internal legal memoranda?
-
What is the current jurisdictional status of military commissions versus Article III courts?
This document constitutes legally sufficient basis for:
- Discovery motion
- Judicial notice request
- LOAC applicability arguments
- Tribunal jurisdiction questions
Federal Register Citation: 87 FR 4763
Legal Authority: LOWM § 11.3, GC IV Art. 6, 10 USC § 822, Hague Art. 42
This is the kind of stuff that I come here every day for. ThankQ Pede!
🫡🥲
🫡
to complement OP’s important post on the Law of War, just in case some anons have friends & family who don’t yet know how the Law of War applies)
Under Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter, it is the effects of an attack, not the type of weapons that determine whether armed force has been made by foreign actors. So whether electronic warfare (voting machines), or illicit drugs (cartels + migrant invasion & human trafficking + gangs to kill Americas) were utilized, this can = an attack.
AI: “If an action by one state [foreign power(s)] causes, or is intended to cause death, injury, or physical destruction comparable to kinetic weapons, it can be treated as an armed attack or an act of war, even if it is electronic or digital,” (skip to the end for legal reference / authority & link, Tallinn Manual)
my thoughts:
Black Hats view: the migrant invasion including human traffickers + trafficked women & children + illicit drug smugglers (armed cartels) under the auspices / complicity of pResident Byden do not constitute an international armed conflict and occupation by one state (country, foreign power) against the USA. —-> in their view, The Hague Regulations & Geneva Conventions do not apply, there is no armed conflict, Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) is not applicable —> no Law of War Manual in effect. Also, there was no 2020 election steal via voting machines electronic manipulation.
White Hats view: in the 2020 election voting machines were set up to rig the election for pResident Byden. China & Venezuela were behind this. These are foreign powers & their rigging —> coup against the USA, foreign interference in the presidential election = an unlawful replacement of Pres. Trump. ____ pResident Byden whether installed & acting as president in collusion with or as a beneficiary issue: a) was a foreign power in control and occupying or b) had an invasion occurred & the civilian authorities were doing nothing but facilitating the ongoing attack?
It is as foreign powers invaded the USA and captured Pres. Trump = an severe injury, an act of war = electronic warfare resulted in a severe injury
Subsequent human trafficking, COVID 19 biowarfare, drug cartels invasion = a continuation of the foreign attack —> resulted in millions of deaths, trillions in economic losses, fully colluded by the Shadow Government of the Deep State ( Democratic and RINO Republicans, especially members of the House & Senate supported propaganda-wise by big tech corporations, banking & investment institutions, politically by the Council on Foreign Relations & the City of London / MI6 British establishment)
the globalists goal is to destroy the Constitution Republic and kill off as many Americans as possible. As such, the Dems & RINOS had full reason to know of 1) the 2020 election steal via electronic warfare / attack, 2) Coronavirus biowarfare, 3) cartels & . human trafficking = colluding with foreign powers = effectually pResident Byden = subservient power to the Constitution *a) above is met (foreign occupation via control under Byden existed ____ b) 3 paragraphs up also = what happened
Legal resource, legal authority on the electronic warfare issue
link seems to be broken:
https://ilmc.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/p_ilmc/Bilder/Bewerbung/Case_2/Michael_N.Schmitt-Tallinn_Manual_2.0_on_the_International_Law_Applicable_to_Cyber_Operations-Cambridge_University_Press__2017.pdf (this might load really slow)
this requires “signing in” https://www.academia.edu/74844551/Tallinn_Manual_2_0_on_the_International_Law_Applicable_to_Cyber_Operations
Outstanding!
thanks, your post called for the research, and then you made a challenging post / comment in the General Chat! “The Law of War theory doesn't hold legally.”
great grok vs gpt battle, so legally, there are supposed to be public notices. Politically, such notices could not be done as the fight we are in is against an alliance of globalists from without (British establishment, and foreign traffickers/cartels) + the enemies from within who included Radcliffe DNI & too much of Congress____ With Radcliffe and too many executive branch key players = Black Hats, official declarations of foreign interference (the legalities) could not have been made —> so Law of War officially could not have been met.
I thinkPres. Trump has led us with White Hats through the storm, like GW & Continental Army members crossing the Delaware. There were distress signals of flags with the stars blackened out at one point, Melania’s blockchain dress Jan. 20, 2021.
Some anons say White Hats have been in control at some level, and we had to go through the Byden years. Black Hats had enough power to do the Coronavirus biowarfare, yet some of the Byden “administration” years was showing off what clowns (harmful ones) they were.
It will be interesting if weever get to know more of the details.
can a symbols = the equivalent of declarations showing that the legal standard to show Law of War rules are in effect or are being followed? I don’t know the answer. The grok vs. gpt challenge you did in the gen. chat set forth the legalities. https://greatawakening.win/p/1ARK0RChyn/general-chat-for-wed-nov-05/
Great information, now we have to see it put in gear to where these treasonous people get rounded up, charged, and tried!
PLS TLDR not everyone has every mil acronym committed to memory...
GLOSSARY FOR THE PATRIOT: LOWM = Law of War Manual (Pentagon's war rulebook) § 11.3 = Section 11.3 (the occupation chapter) GC IV = Geneva Convention IV (international rules for occupied territories) Art. 6 = Article 6 (says full protections kick in after 1 year) LOAC = Law of Armed Conflict (war laws) ICTY = International Criminal Tribunal (war crimes court) 10 USC § 822 = Federal law defining military court jurisdiction Art. III Courts = Regular civilian federal courts Military Commissions = Military tribunals (like Gitmo trials) EO 14062 = Executive Order 14062 (Biden's tribunal rule update) MCM = Manual for Courts-Martial (tribunal procedures handbook) UCMJ = Uniform Code of Military Justice (military legal code) 365-Day Rule = After 1 year of occupation, military tribunals gain full authority ULTRA-SHORT SUMMARY: Foreign powers (China, etc.) stole 2020 election = act of war under international law. After 365 days of enemy occupation (Jan 20, 2022), military tribunals gain jurisdiction. Six days later, Biden signs EO 14062 updating tribunal procedures. That timing = legal activation of war crimes prosecution authority. No public arrests yet because you build the case first, prosecute later. Military is the only way. 🇺🇸
lol. Thank you. I actually mean that its quite helpful !