fg_admin
Forum Replies Created
-
CRIMINAL FRAUD! FRAUD!! FRAUD!!!
Here is the deposition video of just one loan processor who has fraudulently signed over 5,000 loan documents each and every DAY for years.
Yes, you read that right: over FIVE THOUSAND fraudulant loan documents per day for years.
Now multiply this one loan processor by a few hundreds of loan processors (i.e., or even thousands) and you'll have some sense of how much FRAUD Wall Street has perpetrated on the American People and stolen from the US economy with its intentional and massive, multi-year, top down directed mortgage securities fraud.
Video: http://www.realecont…m/page/671.html
Are you mad as hell yet? WHAT are you going to do about it?
-
FreedomFighter89
I looked at them, and I stand by my assessment. The files are bitmap files and they will be obviously look altered when printed on a color printer. They need to be edited in raster format from within Adobe Illustrator or they shouldn't be used at all. I see problems with them:
1. They are using words that are not in Title 8, so they leave undue discretion to a judge or bureaucrat to determine.
2. All undefined words on the form MUST be defined in an attachment. That is what the USA Passport Application does, and by doing that, it completely removes all judicial and administrative discretion or opportunity for presumption.
3. The statement on the ORIGINAL government form must be added:
Quote:False, fraudulent, and perjurious if not accompanied by the USA Passport Application Attachment, Form #06.007, 21 pages.”There is no other adequate way to prevent the problems above WITHOUT using the USA Passport Application Attachment. It should not be bypassed. Even if one uses the forms you presented, the USA Passport Application Attachment MUST at least be sent in separately to clarify every word on the attachment, even if it is not included with the original application. If it is sent in separately, it should be sent PRIOR to the submission of the passport application and sent with:
Certificate/Proof/Affidavit of Service, Form #01.002
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Form…ficateOfSvc.zip
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
The purpose of the attachment is to PRECISELY DEFINE all terms on the applicatoin so as to remove any and all discretion for a corrupt judge to expand or change their meaning. If he tries to change their meaning or invalidate the attachment or definitions, he in effect becomes liable for perjury, misprision of perjury, witness tampering, and obstruction of justice.
-
franklin:
Excellent suggestions. We agree wholeheartedly.
_________________________
FreedomFighter89:
As far as the forms presented, you are making MUCH more work than you need to:
1. You edited the forms in Photoshop, which is the WRONG program. Photoshop is only for bitmaps and your files are bitmaps and way too big, and the changes are perceptible by the clerk because of the graininess of the image.
2. The correct program to DIRECTLY edit PDF forms is Adobe Illustrator, which can directly edit PDF raster files.
3. If the form you wish to edit is password locked, then simply print it to a PDF printer OTHER than Acrobat, to produce an UNLOCKED raster PDF. Then open it is Illustrator and kick some butt with it.
On the subject of editing forms in general, I don't see what purpose is served by helping people circumvent the ONLY approved procedures and forms for getting a passport available through this site or our sister site. That's self-defeating. If you want to undermine what we are trying to do and even ask us for help doing it, then you don't belong here.
Franklin is absolutely correct.
-
EDITORIAL: Update on Eddie Kahn Situation. A letter from Eddie Kahn.
___________
This one came from a friend….it is about Eddie Kahn:
Dear folks,
It is with a sad heart that I tell you that “Inside the Beast Report” #17 (ITBR) will be the last one I will write. Not because there is no new information. There certainly is that. It is because there was an article written in the Orlando Sentinel about my recent conviction. In it they mentioned the fact that I was writing the ITBR and specifically said that Kookie was publishing it.
Based on past experience, they do that when, by hook or crook, they plan to try to shut it down. I don't want to give them any excuse to harass Kookie. I can see those dirty birds trying to claim that she is an active “protester” just because she publishes the ITBR.
Kookie and I have been married for 32 wonderful years. I have always thanked the Lord for those years and look forward to the next 32. I hope you have enjoyed the ITBR. More importantly, I hope you have gotten something out of it that will help you in the future.
Update on my trial: I was found guilty and sentenced to 20 years to be run consecutively with the 10 years imposed in the first trial. My research staff all got 10 years each. I am currently appealing the conviction. If any of you would like to write me, the mailing address is: Eddie Ray: Kahn, #18325-008, FCI La Tuna, P.O. Box 3000, Anthony, TX/NM 88021
God bless you all,
Eddie
-
Matt Weidner Blog has posted a new item, ''
FANNIE MAE/FREDDIE MAC DIASTER WILL COST BAJILLIONS
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2010/11/fannie-maefreddie-mac-diaster-will-cost-bajillions/
The Wall Street Journal today estimated that it will cost $685 billion to
overhaul Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The reality is no one has any idea how
much it will cost to try and bring some stability to the US mortgage and housing
markets because all the talking heads and “leaders” refuse to acknowledge […]
Service of Process Fraud- The Next Boot To Drop in FraudclosureGate
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2010/11/service-of-process-fraud-the-next-boot-to-drop-in-fraudclosuregate/
The press is starting to pick up on what will be an unavoidable and unresolvable
conflict in foreclosure cases….fraud in service of process.
Forget about Jeffrey Stephan and the other “technical” problems with foreclosure
files, because when you don't have good service of process, you don't have
jurisdiction and if you don't have jurisdiction any judgment […]
The Florida AG Will Continue Her Aggressive Pursuit of The Foreclosure Mills
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2010/11/the-florida-ag-will-continue-her-aggressive-pursuit-of-the-foreclosure-mills/
More revelations that continue to be revealed…..Great reporting from the Fort
Lauderdale Sun Sentinel, article here.
-
Both certificates indicate nationality:
1. The Certificate of nationality indicates nationality of the United States*.
2. The Certificate of non-citizen national status indicates not only nationality, but also that one is domiciled in either American Samoa or Swain's Island or a state of the Union, as we understand it.
-
If this doesn't chill you to the bone I don't know what will. This is only a small portion of the Doctor's speech on the Health Bill in Ann Arbor (Saline) Michigan, on Oct. 10, 2010.
He is a prominent surgeon who testified before a committee at the Capitol in Washington D.C. Please listen to his facts.
CLICK HERE: http://www.youtube.c…h?v=8HnkxIh62dQ
Local orthopedic surgeon Dr. David Janda laid out some of the problems of John Dingell's approach to taking care of seniors in this presentation Oct. 10 in Saline, Michigan. If you think Dingell's health care plan and associated legislation won't ration care, listen to this video. Hear what Dingell's colleagues said they will do to Dr. Janda if he insists on giving the best treatment available to his patients: They'll put him in jail.
-
More details on steele:
http://www.spokesman…s/edgar-steele/
Here are the recordings of Steele calling his wife from jail in which prosecutor say he intimidated his wife as witness:
http://www.spokesman…e-son-released/
Fairfax was hired by FBI to frame Steele, and he got a sweet deal. He could be out of jail in only 18 months while Steele could be in jail 30 years. Fairfax at least ought to get the same amount of time as Steele.
Quote:They pointed to voice impersonation software they say was used to fabricate recordings of Steele discussing the murder plot with Sagle man Larry Fairfax, who the FBI said wore a hidden recording device after telling investigators of Steele’s plan. -
Stone83,
Our policies and/or our Member Agreement requires due diligence on your part. Our forums and our personal participation in solving your problem is a LAST resort, not a FIRST resort. That means you should do all of the following BEFORE you post your question here:
1. Search our or sister website for pertinent materials on the subject of your problem BEFORE posting. Check:
1.1 FG Subject Index
http://famguardian.o…ubjectIndex.htm
1.2 FG Search Page
http://famguardian.o…ubjectIndex.htm
1.3 SEDM Situational Index, Form #07.001
http://sedm.org/Libe…ationalRefs.htm
1.4 SEDM Website Subject Index, Form #01.007
http://sedm.org/Sear…ubjectIndex.htm
1.5 SEDM Resource Index, Form #01.008
http://sedm.org/Form…ourcesIndex.pdf
1.6 SEDM Legal Research Course, Form #12.013-how to do legal research
http://sedm.org/Libe…galResearch.pdf
2. Download and read the materials and do your best to understand them.
3. Indicate in your question what you have read so far on the subject matter.
4. Indicate how to improve our EXISTING materials on the subject to make them better at addressing your specific concern.
5. Come up with the best proposed solution possible to your problem based on reading the materials available here.
6. Post the solution you propose WITH your question and ask for feedback on whether your proposed solution is the best solution.
7. Ask for input on things you missed.
8. List all of the books you have read so far and all the people or organizations you have contacted to try to resolve this problem, and their response.
You shouldn't just come here and use these forums as a dumping ground for problems that you haven't even begun to attempt to solve and have not expended any effort or research to solve. Sovereigns respect others and don't burden them unless it is absolutely necessary, and only after they have expended every possible effort to ensure that they don't burden or injure the EQUAL rights of others. That is what it means to be self-governing and self-supporting. All rights come from responsibilities, and the FIRST responsibility one has is never to injure their neighbor, and that responsibility is owed to God as one of the two Great Commandments.
The reason things are so screwed up is because laziness and irresponsibility has become the norm, and most Americans therefore must abuse their vote and thereby empower evil rulers who institutionalize government theft that subsidizes their idleness and irresponsibility. We don't need more of the same here.
We meet people half way, we don't play nanny or parent for them. We also don't reward them for being too lazy or irresponsible to try to solve their own problems before they burden others.
Quote:“The hand of the diligent will rule, But the lazy [or irresponsible] man will be put to forced [GOVERNMENT] labor. ”[Prov. 12:24, Bible, NKJV]
“Liberty Means Responsibility. That's why most men dread it.”
[George Bernard Shaw]
“Go to the ant, you sluggard! Consider her ways and be wise, which, having no captain, overseer or ruler, provides her supplies in the summer, and gathers her food in the harvest, how long will you slumber, O sluggard? When will you rise from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep–so shall your poverty come on you like a prowler, and your need like an armed man.”
[Prov. 6:11]
On the subject of tax withholding and reporting, for instance, you should read and learn all the following and try to apply them before posting your question:
1. Federal and State Tax Withholding Options for Private Employers, Form #09.001
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
2. Income Tax Withholding and Reporting, Form #12.004
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
When you don't do your homework, you waste valuable time of people here reviewing and regurgitating what you should have found and read on your own. This interferes with improving our materials and covering other areas such as litigation that people really need.
You can and will reap exactly what you sow. That's the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If you REALLY care AND you want others to care, you will do your homework before you post your question and indicate all the homework you have done in your question. If you don't care enough to at least do that, then why should anyone else care more than you do to help you?
We appreciate your participation in the ministry and/or the forums, but we need more people who pull their own weight. Those who want to REAP what they didn't sow ought to go back to their cage on the federal plantation. They don't belong here. Freedom and self-governance is not a spectator sport, and those who believe that it is are socialists.
So why don't you explain all the things you have SOWED in order to justify REAPING an answer so far.
-
The Quatloosers are doing the same thing as Bork.
http://www.quatloos….php?f=27&t=1558
Demosthenes, who is “J.J. McNab”, called Hansen a “fruitcake”. When you can’t logically refute the message, shoot the messenger and thereby admit that YOU are a fruitcake. A “fruitcake”, after all, is anyone who is illogical or irrational about their beliefs, which is exactly what one is who can’t defend their beliefs rationally with legally admissible evidence.
Quote:There’s a C.H. in Nevada who is politically active and supports Libertarian causes, and there is a C.H. in San Diego who runs the “Family Guardian” and “Sovereign Education and Defense Ministry” (SEDM) web sites, and has been enjoined.The first one might be a little nutty, but the second one is an absolute fruitcake.
C.H. does NOT run this or any other website that we are aware of. She doesn’t know what she is talking about. Furthermore, the judges order is void because he perjured the order. The nature of the criminal activities of the court are documented at:
http://famguardian.o…ling-060615.htm
You can learn more about McNab in section 2 of the following:
http://famguardian.o…Who/WhosWho.htm
-
Edgar Steele's explanation of his arrest in a letter from his jail cell
http://www.americanf…steele_230.html
He says he was framed and that the voice recordings are manufactured.
Steele says they mimiced his voice. Below is an example of software that does that:
http://www.download3…Trend-Make.html
Here is what the above mimic software says it can do:
Quote:AV Voice Changer Software Diamond and Gold, version 5.5 have preset voice samples of male/female politicians; male/female celebrities (Bush, Rice, Brad, Angela) which help user easily choose and talk in stars' voices just in a couple of mouse clicks. If users want to create more targeted voices from other people who are not in the list, they can record an audio stream or select any audio file they have in .wav format, then import in the Parody Maker module, and finally select it as a parody voice for imitating purpose. Users are also able to record a real voice in real-time via a microphone, save in .wav format and then mimic it. To have the best parody voice, which means to successfully talk in another's voice without being recognized, users have to move the cursor in the Parody Mixer panel up to 100% of the targeted voice.They even show you how to make a parody voice:
http://mp3-player.au…-tutorial09.htm
Here is another article on “voice theft”:
http://www.newscient…oice-theft.html
Quote:Computer program raises possibility of voice theft- 12:48 13 August 2001 by Will Knight
Scientists who have built a computer program capable of mimicking human voices are also developing watermarking technology to prevent the system from being misused.
The program, developed by a team at AT&T Laboratories in the US, convincingly mimics a particular voice by reconstructing its individual nuances and intonations from pre-recordings. The technology is far from perfect but its creators are wary that it could be misused in the future. The system is most likely to find its way into call centres, text-to-speech software and automated newswire reports.
Juergen Schroeter, a speech synthesis expert at AT&T, told New Scientist that the technology has plenty of commercial potential, but also admitted that he has security concerns.
“What happens later, if someone steals a voice, is a problem,” he says. “That's where watermarking comes in.”
Speech synthesis
There are still traces of unnatural, computerised tones, in the voices that have so far been generated by AT&T. Creating each new synthesized voice requires between 10 and 40 hours of studio recordings of the person speaking and a powerful computer to process all the data. Nevertheless, the experts who built the program believe that within a few years, it could create a perfect copy of someone's voice.
Schroeter says it will be possible to add information to an audio signal that would not be detected by the human ear but could be picked up by a special detector. This would enable another computer to detect when a voice has been generated artificially by this system, and when it is genuine.
Schroeter and fellow researchers are already designing such a system, but he says that voice mimicking technology is not yet advanced enough to require it. “We'll look at that when we're good enough,” he says.
Schroeter's vision is to one day build a system that would allow a person to make a copy of their own voice within minutes. “You could imagine a company chief executive donating their voice for the help desk,” he says.
AT&T has spun off a company, called Natural Voices, to market the voice copying system.
See also:
http://www.rense.com/general12/ld.htm
Here is what the above article says:
Quote:And although scientists say the technology is not yet good enough to perpetrate fraud, synthesized voices may eventually be capable of tricking people into thinking that they were getting phone calls from people they know. For now, technical limitations may temper any worries that a person's voice could be lifted without permission. To build the software that re-creates unique voices — which AT&T Labs is calling its “custom voice'' product — a person must first go to a studio where engineers record 10 hours to 40 hours of readings. Texts range from business news reports to nonsense babble. The recordings are then chopped into fragments of sounds and sorted into databases. When the software processes a text, it retrieves the sounds and re-assembles them to form new sentences. -
SOURCE: http://blacklistedne…00/5/5/Y/M.html
_________________
Age of Censorship and Internet Trade Wars
By Francis Anthony Govia – Activist Post
New U.S. legislation will impact every user of the Internet. The “Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act” would empower the U.S. Department of Justice to shut down, or block access to, websites found to be dedicated to infringing activities. The bill also contains provisions to block sites with domain names and Top-Level Domains (TLDs) that are maintained by overseas companies, which exist outside the U.S. legal jurisdiction and enforcement mechanism. The Justice Department would obtain court orders directing United States-based Internet Service Providers to stop resolving the IP addresses that allow customers in the United States to access the infringing websites. As a result, the sites will be inaccessible to U.S.-based Web users who do not use some sort of proxy service. The bill was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary last Monday; it is sponsored by Senators Hatch, Leahy, Klobuchar, Whitehouse, Schumer, Kohl, Specter, Durbin, Bayh, Voinovich, and Feinstein.
The legislation is expected to have strong support in Hollywood, labor unions and manufacturers, but in some circles — namely grassroots political organizations, alternative press, and Internet start-ups — the response has been lukewarm, and even questioning. They are concerned that the “other purposes” of the legislation include censorship and, if made law, will employ the Justice Department to police the Internet, eventually resulting in the disruption of the free flow of information and trade globally.
To some extent, their concerns are formed by experience. There have been examples of business censorship, and government legislation to curtail what is viewed on the Internet. Infowars reported recently that “London's St. Pancras International, one of the biggest transport hubs in the West,” implemented “stringent filters that block users of their Wi-Fi service from accessing even mildly political websites.” Sites like prisonplanet.com and thinkprogress.org were not available to customers in some areas. There are plans in Australia to promulgate legislation to institute a “mandatory, countrywide filtering system,” which supporters say is “designed to keep out child abuse content, but which blocks a much wider variety of content and topics.” And recently when media reported about an Iranian website with cartoons denying the Holocaust, some viewers in the U.S. discovered that access to the site was blocked.
Granted, there is recognition in Washington that the Internet is the new frontier for global enterprise, but some perceive that Washington still views the world through the lens of a bygone era. A critic of the bill told me that many nations, including the United States, legislate for businesses founded in a brick-and-mortar world; and attempts to regulate the Internet would be like turning back the clock.
“Nations will act independently and this will be detrimental to customers that use the Internet near and far,” advised the critic.
A similar sentiment was echoed by former Italian Prime Minister, Romano Prodi, in a speech at the Foreign Ministry Faculty of International Relations in Tehran. Mr. Prodi suggested that Italy within Europe must play a greater role in matters of global importance, and that may entail Europe's acting with greater independence of the United States. The message, though given on a different topic, is not one that instills confidence to those who see governments encroaching on their privacy, and would prefer unrestricted use, or less regulation, of the services for which they pay.
The U.S. legislation for infringement is written to tackle many concerns, and is certainly not archaic in regard to lawmakers' ambition to affect what goes on well beyond the scope of U.S. jurisdiction.
For infringing sites outside the United States, it provides for in rem action in the District of Columbia to prevent the importation into the United States of goods and services directed to U.S. residents. The effect of this “importation” must be that the owner or operator of the infringing site must harm intellectual property rights holders that are residents of the United States.
The Justice Department will be granted power to serve court orders upon the registry where the domain name registrar is not located in the United States, and upon receipt of such an order, the domain registry must suspend operations of, and lock, the domain name of the infringing site.
During the action intended to “lock the domain name,” a court may determine, at a minimum threshold, that an Internet site is not conducting business to residents in the United States if the Internet site “states that it is not intended, and has measures to prevent, infringing materials from being accessed in or delivered to the United States,” including other provisions in subsection (d)(2)(:cool:. The owner or operator of the “infringing site” shall also have recourse to petition the Justice Department to remove his domain name from an offending list, or petition the court to modify, suspend, or vacate the order in accordance with subsection (h)(1)(:cool:.
The bill has an immunity clause which protects any entity from a cause of action in U.S. courts or administration agency for any action reasonably calculated to comply with an action intended to prevent the infringing site from continuing to do business with U.S.-based customers, receive financial transactions, and other matters under subsection (e)(3).
The U.S. legislation does not appear to put the onus on any businesses, such as Internet Service Providers, to stop known infringement from occurring. This is an interesting stance. In February, an Australian ISP won a precedent-setting copyright infringement lawsuit (Down Under) against the Motion Picture Industry. The bill sponsors may be cognizant of this ruling.
Softpedia reported that 34 U.S. movie studios and broadcasters filed a lawsuit in Australia against iiNet after the ISP refused to send warning letters to its customers who illegally downloaded movies using BitTorrent. The Australian Justice, Dennis Cowdrey, ruled that while iiNet had knowledge of infringements occurring, and did not act to stop them, such findings do not necessitate a finding that the ISP authorized the infringing activities. Possibly, Hollywood supporters of the U.S. infringement legislation now agree with Cowdrey's ruling that to ask ISPs to police the Internet would “open them any number of legal claims for anything that might happen over their pipes,” and that would engender strong opposition to the legislation among ISPs in the United States. However, to take on the responsibility of policing the Internet may not seem a burden to Obama's Justice Department.
Certainly, Hollywood will welcome any new infringement legislation aimed at stemming the loss of royalties through piracy and copyright violation in the digital age. Infringers often meet efforts to protect intellectual property with resilient and thought-out action to thwart the law. As a law intern in Thailand I learned, for example, that illegal duplication facilities for CDs and DVDs existed in mobile transportation. Persons engaged in copyright violations avoided the ability of local enforcement to easily locate them and shut them down. It is a sure bet that those engaged in infringing activities overseas will find ways and new technology to evade laws promulgated by a foreign government (like the U.S.) that will have no jurisdiction over them.
The Obama Justice Department, which tapped Hollywood lawyers, may be charged to police Intellectual Property — an assignment to which attorneys for President George W. Bush were “strongly opposed.” The Republican President threatened to veto a previous version of the bill sponsored by the same Sens. Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter.
In correspondence to the Senators, attorneys for President Bush wrote that they “strongly opposed” expanding the powers of the Justice Department. Doing so, they said, could undermine the Department's prosecution of criminal cases and transform it into an office “serving as pro bono lawyers for private copyright holders.”
It is obvious during this era when citizens' rights are curtailed and infringed upon, with the bipartisan sponsorship of the bill and the composition of the current administration, that the infringement legislation has a better chance of becoming law. But will it open a Pandora's Box? Will it do exactly what critics suspect it is intended to do: censor more of the Internet, create bottlenecks that will allow governments to intrude on the flow of information and services around the world, and do possible damage to a wider spectrum of businesses (other than those it is intended to protect)?
Many of the dynamic economies that U.S. businesses now compete against were born out of things other than a free market; and other economies are driven, or manipulated by State controls, as is the case of China. Foreign nations may follow the U.S. lead in writing laws to regulate the Internet and address their concerns, but not with the results U.S. legislators necessarily hope to engender.
Through retaliation, or even pretext, governments may decide to regulate, or shut down legitimate Internet traffic and services to violate human rights, hinder trade, and to engage in industry espionage. We already have examples of these developments with China's efforts to regulate Google, and the recent firestorm when India and other nations, acting within their security concerns, decided to take action to regulate Blackberry and gain access to users' encrypted corporate e-mails and messages. The offices of Sen. Byron L Dorgan and Rep. Sander M. Levin of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China undertook a hearing in March to investigate if China's efforts to regulate the Internet contravene free trade and human rights. Delegates to the hearing cited that:
China's Internet users remain subject to the arbitrary dictates of state censorship. More than a dozen agencies are involved in implementing a host of laws, regulations, and other tools to try to keep information and ideas from the Chinese people . . .China's censorship practices and control of the Internet have had a terrible impact on human rights advocates. These include ordinary people who promote political freedoms or try to organize online . . . attempting to share information about ongoing government repression.Internet censorship and regulation in China have serious economic implications for many U.S. companies . . . [and] often run against basic international trade principles of nondiscrimination and maintaining a level playing field.To these charges, China responded that it laws regarding the Internet are not much different than those of the West, and that critics are applying a double standard.
Perhaps U.S. lawmakers have forgotten a cause it often champions: that respect for human rights, deregulation, and open trade are important to a dynamic and properly functioning global community. As ownership of patents, trademarks, and copyrights becomes a contested grey area, nations may block business occurring over the Internet through the guise of copyright infringement. Only the rich and powerful will have the resources to go through the legal hurdles at home and/or abroad to clear their domains of actions to lock them, and resume operations. Damage would be done to a business during the course of a legal action brought against it; its customers may simply believe that the domain ceases to exist, with transactions lost forever.
Small businesses could be shut out of that presumptuous dream of going global and becoming rich, while the elite, big businesses and powerful governments can dominate cyberspace. Many micro-states and individuals could be harmed, and educational pursuits stifled through this world of more legislation, regulation, and censorship.
Why should we be concerned about this future for the Internet?
Well, because the Internet is now everyone's classroom; and perhaps more-so it has become individuals' business personality. A properly set up website for a Mom-and-Pop enterprise can look as good as that of a billion dollar company's front-store. The ramifications of more regulation will result in the free and booming frontier of cyberspace, now functioning as the gold rush for enterprise, ceasing to exist.
The U.S. may find it useful to confer with trading partners in the North and the South, and come to an understanding that perhaps unilateral action is not the way to address concerns in regard to a frontier in which everyone has an interest. President George W. Bush may have gotten it right when his attorneys writing on his behalf to Sens. Leahy and Specter implied, when taken altogether, that U.S. law already provides owners of Intellectual Property with effective legal tools to protect their rights. It need not go in the direction proposed by the Senators.
No one wants Washington's efforts to backfire and force us to return to a world where we have to resort domestically to find the goods and services that we need, such as cheap medicine. Or, to have to wait on someone in a dusty library to find a book or paper we once could have accessed readily over the Internet. Or, in some far corner of the world men will cower in fear of infringing before they cite links as sources of information. A Big Brother that will censor access to the latest celebrity sex videos, or certain religious texts or even Osama bin Laden's latest rant (however misguided they may be). The result of this could be that owners of presumed “infringing sites” must raise ungodly sums of money to hire attorneys to clear their domain names, while good sites like WikiLeaks (which make governments accountable for their actions) are shut down or blocked here and abroad through a pretext; and Mom-and-Pop operating a start-up Internet business within the cornfields of America are locked out through action suggested by a smooth operator with deep pockets who knows how to play the system and use it against his competitor, blocking sites because somebody with power did not like the owner's point of view.
Francis Anthony Govia received a Bachelor's degree in International Relations at Boston University where he studied U.S. National Security and Foreign Policy with teachers who inspired him, such as General Fred F. Woerner (Ret.), Ambassador Stephen R. Lyne (Ret.), and Joseph Fewsmith. He received a law degree at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
-
Rampant Inflation In 2011? The Monetary Base Is Exploding, Commodity Prices Are Skyrocketing And The Fed Wants To Print Lots More Money
-
SOURCE: http://archive.mail-…cc9a19a.en.html
_____________________
From: “Edgar J. Steele” <steele@conspiracypenpal.com>
Date: September 17, 2010 11:50:41 AM PDT
Subject: Fundraising Campaign to support Edgar Steele's legal battle
Reply-To: Steele@ConspiracyPenPal.com
(Sent on behalf of Mrs. Steele by the Free Edgar Steele support team, website [HERE] )
September 17, 2010
Cyndi G. Steele
P.O. Box 1255
Sagle, ID 83860
Dear Friends of Edgar Steele:
Edgar J. Steele has been entrapped by a legal system that presumes his guilt in the face of false charges. Ed has been in jail and solitary confinement for three months in Spokane, WA because of false allegations that he masterminded a murder-for-hire plot to kill me and my mother. I have never believed that Ed was involved in such a plot! Ed has defended the politically incorrect for years; people who, were it not for him, never would have had representation. Those who oppose Ed hate the truth and have threatened to harm Ed, me and our family in the past. Clearly, he is a political prisoner of the USA and quite literally, he is fighting for his life. There is a growing number of people who are banding together to make it possible for Ed to have the defense he needs against bogus government charges. We are asking you to join us.
Here is the bottom line: without experts to prove that false government tape recordings are only imitations of Ed's speech patterns (using voice cloning technology), and without experts to present the truth about alleged explosives, Ed will be “sent to the gallows” for something he didn't do. We have an opportunity to prevent this great injustice. This is not the first time the government has made false criminal allegations against innocent people. Thus, it is our choice whether we want to be a part of the movement to stop this kind of government-sponsored insanity. Let me tell you, we sincerely need your help.
I humbly ask for your assistance, as I am financially strapped and unable to raise the amount of money necessary to provide a proper defense for my husband. Any financial gift you can make will go directly to the Ed Steele Defense Fund, to be placed in an attorney's trust account and to be used exclusively for Ed's defense. Contributions of $50.00 and $100.00 will be greatly appreciated as we try to make our goal of $250,000.00 needed to pay both attorney fees and the legal costs of this case. Time is critical as we need to have a new attorney on board soon who will work for Ed.
Edgar needs an attorney who is willing to challenge the FBI's conduct and show that the government is wrong. Edgar can't move forward without your help in funding his defense. Your kind financial assistance will help us to engage a qualified attorney (who has already been contacted) who believes in Ed's innocence and will work vigorously to protect Ed's rights and confront the government.
These are tough financial times. But, please give a moment to think about my husband, sitting in a jail cell, day after day, with no hope, not even able to help in his own defense. I can't visit him with him to give him hope or moral support, because the judge has entered a very unfair “no-contact” order.
Even the smallest donation will go a long way to help win this case and expose the corruption behind the false charges. It may even help others who also face false accusations by the government.
Please make your contribution check / money order payable to:
The Edgar Steele Defense Fund
P.O. Box 1255
Sagle, Idaho 83860
(Funds will be held in an attorney's trust account.) Or, go online and donate by credit card and through PayPal at:
[CLICK HERE FOR PAGE]
My sincerest and most heartfelt thanks for your time in considering this plea for help,
Cyndi G. Steele