The Tactic is to Bully, Harass and Financially Ruin Inventors in order to Steal Their Patent. Story after Story since the 80's of Foley & Lardner Bullying Inventors to take their patens, many have given up over the years and they see the Iviewit Stolen Patent Story and the Donald Stone Stolen Technology and they reach out and tell their stories. Many of whom gave up long ago because this Mega-Law Firm beat them down, took their invention and left them with no hope.
The Foley and Lardner story seems to be the same over and over, the Same "Patented" invention stealing scheme by a Foley and Lardner LLP Patent Attorney over and over. How does a Mega Law Firm Like Foley and Lardner get away with This Kind of Mass Patent Theft? Well the Inventors that the Foley and Lardner Patent Attorney represents do not have hundreds of millions of dollars and the Inventors that Foley and Lardner represent do not have Political Connections that Go all the way to The Supreme Courts, Connection in the USPTO Office and Connections in the Republican National Committee (RNC).
So if your going to hire Foley and Lardner to "Help You" patent your Invention, your Technology well Then Do so at your own risk. I am not asking you to believe me, I am simply telling the Victims stories and asking that you do your homework before you turn your invention over to Foley and Lardner, you may be sorry - you may never have rights to your invention and your life will certainly never be the same....
Also Check Out..
www.Iviewit.TV
www.DeniedPatent.com
www.MarylandCorruption.com
Crystal L. Cox
Truth Seeker...
Whistleblower
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Foley and Lardner a Motto of High Integrity. Have Foley and Lardner LLP Employees and Attorneys Read the Iviewit Story, the thousands of Documents..
"Foley & Lardner LLP is one of the nation's largest and most reputable law firms. " of Course this by Foley and Lardner themselves. Yet a Thinking person can see that from www.Iviewit.tv and the Thousands of Documents on that Stolen Patent Site, Foley and Lardner are Far from "Reputable" when it comes to Helping or Representing inventors on their patents.
Now I cannot speak for Foley and Lardner LLP on other Legal Issues, however it is pretty clear from the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case and from the Donald Stone Stolen Technology case at www.MarylandCorruption.com that Foley and Lardner are certainly not a "Reputable Law Firm" when it comes to assisting inventors in their Patent Rights.
We have also heard that Foley and Lardner have stolen other smaller inventions, and by smaller I mean from inventors not necessarily with million backing them, it is Reported that Foley and Lardner LLP have Stolen inventions over and over again.
Please Email your Foley and Lardner Stolen Patent Story to me Crystal@CrystalCox.com - I am an Investigative Journalist and my Intention is to Tell YOUR Story.
Email me your court case, documents,evidence, proof of your Stolen Technology and share your Stolen Patent Case with the World.
Now I cannot speak for Foley and Lardner LLP on other Legal Issues, however it is pretty clear from the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case and from the Donald Stone Stolen Technology case at www.MarylandCorruption.com that Foley and Lardner are certainly not a "Reputable Law Firm" when it comes to assisting inventors in their Patent Rights.
We have also heard that Foley and Lardner have stolen other smaller inventions, and by smaller I mean from inventors not necessarily with million backing them, it is Reported that Foley and Lardner LLP have Stolen inventions over and over again.
Please Email your Foley and Lardner Stolen Patent Story to me Crystal@CrystalCox.com - I am an Investigative Journalist and my Intention is to Tell YOUR Story.
Email me your court case, documents,evidence, proof of your Stolen Technology and share your Stolen Patent Case with the World.
Foley and Lardner and the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case
Crystal L. Cox
Whistleblower
Investigative Journalist..
Friday, January 29, 2010
Obama was Informed on the Criminal Who Were involved in the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Stolen Patent
Obama was informed of Foley And Lardner and IBM's role in the Trillion Dollar iviewit stolen patent case and yet in October of 2009 Obama put TWO iviewit stolen patent defendents in to clean up the patent house, the USTPO... are you kidding. So David Kappos formerly of IBM running the Show at the USPTO - and Sharon Barner who formerly was chair of Foley's intellectual property department from the firm's Chicago office... so Foley and Lardner is definately in the Stolen Patent Business, simply look at their record, and Obama puts a Foley and Lardner Attorney in at the USPTO, this really is a SERIOUS Conflict of Interest and bad for inventor's rights and patent holders EVERYWHERE.
Here is the Article I am Yammering about...
""Foley lawyer Barner to help restructure U.S. Patent office
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has hired a senior attorney from the Milwaukee-based law firm Foley & Lardner LLP to help restructure the agency.
Sharon Barner, who chairs Foley's intellectual property department from the firm's Chicago office, will become the deputy director of the patent office. Barner steps into the No. 2 role immediately under David Kappos, who previously oversaw IBM's patent portfolio. The Senate confirmed Kappos in August as the Obama administration's nominee as the agency's director.
"I have directed the USPTO to significantly reduce the time it takes to process patent applications," U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said in announcing Barner's appointment.
In a series of stories in August, the Journal Sentinel examined the problems that beset the agency, which lies at the heart of America's innovation economy. Although inventors have relied on the patent system to promote and protect new technologies, the agency has been unable to keep pace with the torrent and complexity of applications it receives.
As it has struggled to keep pace, the office in recent years added hurdles, delays and improper rejections that have handicapped start-ups and entrepreneurs. Locke has said the agency's performance impedes the nation's economic recovery.
The appointment of Barner is important for Foley, which touts its global patent and intellectual property division. Foley and Lardner has nearly 240 attorneys that specialize in patents and intellectual property, ranking the firm among the nation's top 10 patent litigation and patent procurement law firms.
In February, Foley hired Jon Dudas, who ran the patent office under former President George W. Bush and was the immediate predecessor to Kappos in the agency's top position.
In a telephone interview, Barner said she knows President Barack Obama personally, with ties that extend through much of his political career in Illinois. She said she helped him raise funds for an Illinois state senate race; worked on a voter registration effort; and had him speak several times at symposiums that she organized.
While Barner said she has not helped write patent applications, she is an experienced litigator of patent cases. She also helped Foley expand its intellectual property practice in Japan and China.
Over the past 10 years, Barner has been featured as a top intellectual property lawyer in The National Law Journal, Black Enterprise Magazine, Diversity and the Bar and IP Law & Business and was recognized in the Illinois Super Lawyers for her intellectual property litigation work.
Barner plans to "telecommute" and
work from Chicago without moving to Washington. ""
Link to Source of this post..
http://www.jsonline.com/business/63531222.html
Filmaker Nicholas Holthaus Says "What the Hell is Going on in Montana?" - a NEW Documentary on Corrupt Courts in Montana.
montana court corruption
a New Documentary on the Corruption in Montana
is Ready for you Buy.
a New Documentary on the Corruption in Montana
is Ready for you Buy.
This Feature Length Documentary Called "Beneath the Beauty" is a taste of the Kind of Corruption that Montanans face on a daily basis. Though this Film is mainly focused on Hamilton Montana, the issues are very real to all of us in Montana.
I am a fourth generation Montana Gal and I have seen this kind of Corruption, Ignoring of Victims Rights, Court Set Ups, the Code Blue, and outright attack on the Civil and Human Rights of Montana citizens all the way up to the Montana Supreme Court.
Buy this DVD and find out what is REALLY "Beneath the Beauty" in Northwest Montana and get a Glimpse into the kind of injustice and corruption we are up against where the Rule of Law Does Not seem to apply and Where Truth is No Defense.
Montana Corrupt C
www.BeneathTheBeauty.com
crystal cox montana
nicholas holthaus
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Corrupt MLS Data - in Which the Entire Real Estate Industry and Secondary Loan Market is Built on
People with Great Credit and Good Jobs are walking away from their Homes. WHY? well because they know they will never Sell it for what the Fake Real Estate Market SOLD it to them for. So these folks are letting the banks take the property back and they are renting places for half the price.
The Real Estate Industry is Broken and the Banks are Rewarded for their part in the Collapse and NAR - well no one seems to get the IMPORTANT role that "Realtors" MLS Data Place in the financial market - the Real Estate Industry is the FOUNDATION of the Banks, the Economy... and Allowing Prices to Rise Just to Get Deals Closed is Fraud on the Real Estate Consumer - and yet the Consumers are the ONES Losing everything - NAR is business as usual and the Lending Industry has NO Accountability to the Real Estate Consumers Losing Everything.
HELLO why are No Fingers Pointed at NAR ?
There is No Governing Entity that can HOLD the National Association of Realtors accountable for the Lies they Tell. The MLS, the National Association of Realtors created the False Real Estate Market with Corrupt, Un-Regulated MLS Data, this Data was used by lenders to give loans for Way More then property was WORTH, the Lenders knew it was happening and turned a blind EYE - oh well they get a bail out - the PUBLIC - you.. the REAL Estate Consumer Who Did not KNOW - well you get to Keep them in Business.
STOP the MLS Cartel,
STOP NAR from the lies they tell and the lack of accountability for Good Data that YOUR financial industry is built on. STOP NAR from not holding Realtors accountable for Fraud and LIES. HOLD the National Association of Realtors President, Assocition Board, Economist Accountable for their FLAT out LIES and Propaganda EVERYWHERE that Gives Consumers FALSE Confidence and Encouragement to Buy in a Market that was HUGELY over inflated by False MLS Data and Unscrupulous Lenders with the HELP of Mortgage Broker Lies and Pressure to Close a Deal with the Help of Appraisors and Realtors....
a Seriously Broken System - the Real EstateIndustry Needs a Total Make Over
Crystal L. Cox
Real Estate Broker Owner
Ten Lakes Realty
www.RealEstateIndustryWhistleblower.com
Crystal Cox Eureka
The Real Estate Industry is Broken and the Banks are Rewarded for their part in the Collapse and NAR - well no one seems to get the IMPORTANT role that "Realtors" MLS Data Place in the financial market - the Real Estate Industry is the FOUNDATION of the Banks, the Economy... and Allowing Prices to Rise Just to Get Deals Closed is Fraud on the Real Estate Consumer - and yet the Consumers are the ONES Losing everything - NAR is business as usual and the Lending Industry has NO Accountability to the Real Estate Consumers Losing Everything.
HELLO why are No Fingers Pointed at NAR ?
There is No Governing Entity that can HOLD the National Association of Realtors accountable for the Lies they Tell. The MLS, the National Association of Realtors created the False Real Estate Market with Corrupt, Un-Regulated MLS Data, this Data was used by lenders to give loans for Way More then property was WORTH, the Lenders knew it was happening and turned a blind EYE - oh well they get a bail out - the PUBLIC - you.. the REAL Estate Consumer Who Did not KNOW - well you get to Keep them in Business.
STOP the MLS Cartel,
STOP NAR from the lies they tell and the lack of accountability for Good Data that YOUR financial industry is built on. STOP NAR from not holding Realtors accountable for Fraud and LIES. HOLD the National Association of Realtors President, Assocition Board, Economist Accountable for their FLAT out LIES and Propaganda EVERYWHERE that Gives Consumers FALSE Confidence and Encouragement to Buy in a Market that was HUGELY over inflated by False MLS Data and Unscrupulous Lenders with the HELP of Mortgage Broker Lies and Pressure to Close a Deal with the Help of Appraisors and Realtors....
a Seriously Broken System - the Real EstateIndustry Needs a Total Make Over
Crystal L. Cox
Real Estate Broker Owner
Ten Lakes Realty
www.RealEstateIndustryWhistleblower.com
Crystal Cox Eureka
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Raymond Joao Opposition in STOLEN Iviewit Patent Case - Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se
Where is Raymond Joao's Counsel?
It seems that Raymond A. Joao is Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se. So who is Representing Raymond Anthony Joao on that AT&T Patent Infringement Lawsuits he has Launched?
It seems that Raymond A. Joao is Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se. So who is Representing Raymond Anthony Joao on that AT&T Patent Infringement Lawsuits he has Launched?
Was Raymond A. Joao's Counsel Removed ?
Raymond Joao seems to be his own lawyer, his own patent lawyer and a patent thief
Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se ?
Where is John Walter Fried Esq. and Fried and Epstein?
Click Here for Raymond Joao Opposition in Iviewit Case
Eliot Bernstein, Iviewit Patent Theft, iViewIt Technologies, Joao Opposition Iviewit, John Walter Fried Esq., Patent Attorney Corruption, Raymond A. Joao
Raymond A. Joao, Esq., Pro Se ?
Where is John Walter Fried Esq. and Fried and Epstein?
Click Here for Raymond Joao Opposition in Iviewit Case
Eliot Bernstein, Iviewit Patent Theft, iViewIt Technologies, Joao Opposition Iviewit, John Walter Fried Esq., Patent Attorney Corruption, Raymond A. Joao
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Time Warner - WBOL - Fraud Against Shareholders, Lies about Liability and NOT honoring Contracts, Why?
Why Did the SEC allow Warner Brothers to Split off Aol after they wre warned of a Trillion Dollar Liability that they would certainly be responsible for Some if not all the Damages?
So We have Bills that Show every Charge for the Entire Process of setting up and Supposedly Executing these Contracts such as the one Below.
2001 08 29 - Irell & Manella bill for AOL license agreement they drafted.
yet AOL was allowed to Split from WBOL, and Warner Bros. Is NOT being MADE to honor these Contracts, Why?
This is FRAUD against the Shareholders as AOL - Time Warner Inc. knew that this Major Liability was NOT accounted for on their Books. So why is Time Warner AOL still ignoring the Rights of the Iviewit Inventors, are they trying to hide assets... no matter how you look at it Time Warner - Time Warner, Warner Bros., WBOL,AOLTW, AOL, Time Warner Inc., Whatever name you have for them... they KNEW and did not share with shareholders a HUGE Debit on their Books.
There is Confidentiality Agreements, and So Much Evidence, All these Names and Players, Contracts, Bills and Still Warner Brothers acts like this Just Does NOT exist... hmmm...
There are BINDING term sheets from 2001 and Still WBOL ignores the rights of those they entered into contract with, WHY?
Warner Bros. Online Videos has NOT been honoring this Contract but using the Technology for around 8 Years now, and after Iviewit Sent them Disclosure of the Issue pending, they Split of AOL, and the SEC has no Issue with this?
Do Warner Brothers Shareholders have ANY issue with any of this ? I Guess they had better Start Considering it's Validity... any Time Now...
Click Here for Contracts and Information from 2001
that Seem to Have Slipped Warner Brothers Mind.
More Links to Research This Topic
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Book/index.htm
www.Iviewit.TV
www.DeniedPatent.com
AOL, Time Warner Inc, Iviewit, SEC Fraud, Andrew Y. Choung, IRELL and Manella LLP,WBOL, Warner Bros. Online, Stock Tips
So We have Bills that Show every Charge for the Entire Process of setting up and Supposedly Executing these Contracts such as the one Below.
2001 08 29 - Irell & Manella bill for AOL license agreement they drafted.
yet AOL was allowed to Split from WBOL, and Warner Bros. Is NOT being MADE to honor these Contracts, Why?
This is FRAUD against the Shareholders as AOL - Time Warner Inc. knew that this Major Liability was NOT accounted for on their Books. So why is Time Warner AOL still ignoring the Rights of the Iviewit Inventors, are they trying to hide assets... no matter how you look at it Time Warner - Time Warner, Warner Bros., WBOL,AOLTW, AOL, Time Warner Inc., Whatever name you have for them... they KNEW and did not share with shareholders a HUGE Debit on their Books.
There is Confidentiality Agreements, and So Much Evidence, All these Names and Players, Contracts, Bills and Still Warner Brothers acts like this Just Does NOT exist... hmmm...
There are BINDING term sheets from 2001 and Still WBOL ignores the rights of those they entered into contract with, WHY?
Warner Bros. Online Videos has NOT been honoring this Contract but using the Technology for around 8 Years now, and after Iviewit Sent them Disclosure of the Issue pending, they Split of AOL, and the SEC has no Issue with this?
Do Warner Brothers Shareholders have ANY issue with any of this ? I Guess they had better Start Considering it's Validity... any Time Now...
Click Here for Contracts and Information from 2001
that Seem to Have Slipped Warner Brothers Mind.
More Links to Research This Topic
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Book/index.htm
www.Iviewit.TV
www.DeniedPatent.com
AOL, Time Warner Inc, Iviewit, SEC Fraud, Andrew Y. Choung, IRELL and Manella LLP,WBOL, Warner Bros. Online, Stock Tips
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Catherine Bleish - Educate - Activate - Liberate. The Liberty Movement. Consitutional Rights
Catherine Bleish
Freedom Fighter
End The Fed
Constitutional Rights
Educate - Activate - Liberate
www.LibertyRestorationProject.org
"Hi there! My name is Catherine and I contribute a significant amount of my free time to supporting this amazing organization!
I became aware of the liberty movement in the spring of 2007 but did not dive in head first until the end of that year. The past year and a half has been a whirlwind of rallys, conventions, education, successes, lessons learned and great community.
It was indeed the good Dr. (Ron Paul) who helped me realize that Republicans are not necessarily “bad” and it was his supporters who showed me the beauty and necessity of liberty. While I do consider myself a Jeffersonian Republican (hippie), I firmly beleive that we must stop dividing ourselves by party and united ourselves as Americans!
To give you an idea of the ways in which I participate in the liberty movement "
Catherine Bleish
Catherine Bleish's Blog is at
www.DontTreadOnCat.com
Some of the Issues Cat Talks About...
Food Sovereignty
"'" Food Sovereignty is the idea that all people should have access to a dependable and nutritious supply of nourishment close to where they live.
This is the foundation on which a healthy and productive society is formed. Today we suffer from a corporate controlled food industry with ties to the military-industrial complex. Small family farms cannot compete with the government-subsidized mega-corporations who have industrialized the very things which give us life. The struggle for Food Sovereignty is the struggle to return to community self-reliance and cooperation.
Catherine Bleish
Real I.D.
We believe that the Real I.D. act of 2005 violates the sovereignty of the states by imposing mandatory national identification. We believe that a National I.D. violates the Fourth Amendment by infringing on Americans’ right to privacy, and Americans’ property rights.
Catherine Bleish
Real I.D.
We believe that the Real I.D. act of 2005 violates the sovereignty of the states by imposing mandatory national identification. We believe that a National I.D. violates the Fourth Amendment by infringing on Americans’ right to privacy, and Americans’ property rights.
We believe State Legislatures should reject any connection with the Real I.D. Act. State Legislatures should reject this invasion of state sovereignty by the Department of Homeland Security, an unelected executive department. We believe individual states have adequate power to identify and credential their own citizens.
Catherine Bleish
Smart Port/NAFTA Superhighway
The citizens of Kansas City and Western Missouri have not been provided information about the KC Smartport plans and the North American Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO: also known as NAFTA Superhighway), nor have our representatives been a part of the process.
Smart Port/NAFTA Superhighway
The citizens of Kansas City and Western Missouri have not been provided information about the KC Smartport plans and the North American Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO: also known as NAFTA Superhighway), nor have our representatives been a part of the process.
We believe that the taking of land for the advantage of US and foreign corporations is a direct attack on our liberties and sovereignty. We believe that this large highway, rail and pipeline system will not only be a scar on our land in appearance and pollution, but will increase crime, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration to our city.
All land, currently leased to Mexico and considered Mexican soil in Missouri, should immediately be returned to the people. All plans for the NASCO Superhighway, and the plans to make Kansas City the entrance into the United States for freight, need to be produced for the public and be open to discussion and debate.
Catherine Bleish
U.S. War Policy
Only Congress has the Constitutional legal power to declare war. We agree with our first President, George Washington, that our foreign policy should seek peaceful commerce with all nations and entangling alliances with none.
U.S. War Policy
Only Congress has the Constitutional legal power to declare war. We agree with our first President, George Washington, that our foreign policy should seek peaceful commerce with all nations and entangling alliances with none.
As such, we advocate bringing home the men and women serving in the Afghan and Iraqi conflicts as rapidly as safely possible.
Catherine Bleish
Intrusive Legislation
(Patriot Acts, Military Commissions Act, Homegrown Terrorism Act, New Born Children Save Lives Act, Real ID Act, NAIS, etc…)
(Patriot Acts, Military Commissions Act, Homegrown Terrorism Act, New Born Children Save Lives Act, Real ID Act, NAIS, etc…)
ANY legislation that violates the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is an assault against the civil liberties of Americans and cannot be tolerated in a nation that purports to uphold the Natural Rights of its citizens. For example, the Patriot Act 1 & 2 violate the First Amendment by allowing government agencies to demand that Librarians turn over the booklists and internet records of their patrons without a warrant, and then making it illegal for those library personnel to inform their patrons of the illegal searches.
These acts violate the Fourth Amendment by allowing government agencies to conduct secret illegal searches of homes and property without probable cause and collecting computer files and reading lists, video and magazine collections.
Some of these acts also violate the Constitution by allowing indefinite imprisonment of persons without a lawyer. The accused also may not have the right to face their accuser.
This denial of individuals’ access to courts leaves them in a condition where all due process rights are suspended.
Catherine Bleish
Presidential Executive Orders
We oppose the power of the President to issue executive orders that have the force of law. We see this as a violation of the separation of powers that potentially allows the Executive to unilaterally “legislate” to the detriment of and without regard to the wishes of the citizenry. Under the Constitution, only Congress may make law, and any Congress that allows these executive orders to go forward unchallenged is unlawfully abdicating their authority, directly in contrast to the important checks and balances put in place by the founders.
Presidential Executive Orders
We oppose the power of the President to issue executive orders that have the force of law. We see this as a violation of the separation of powers that potentially allows the Executive to unilaterally “legislate” to the detriment of and without regard to the wishes of the citizenry. Under the Constitution, only Congress may make law, and any Congress that allows these executive orders to go forward unchallenged is unlawfully abdicating their authority, directly in contrast to the important checks and balances put in place by the founders.
Catherine Bleish
Right to Keep and Bear Arms – Second Amendment
We believe that the Second Amendment should be strictly enforced, and that all laws that are in conflict with the Second Amendment should be repealed immediately and all persons held, charged, convicted, and incarcerated under these unjust laws should be freed.
Right to Keep and Bear Arms – Second Amendment
We believe that the Second Amendment should be strictly enforced, and that all laws that are in conflict with the Second Amendment should be repealed immediately and all persons held, charged, convicted, and incarcerated under these unjust laws should be freed.
To be punished for injuring or menacing someone is one thing, but to be jailed or incarcerated based on merely owning or possessing the wrong type of firearm promotes a hostility towards gun ownership that erodes this vital guarantee of personal liberty and security.
No longer should any free American citizen be restricted in any way from keeping arms and ammunition of their choosing. We advocate full enforcement of laws that hold violent criminals accountable for their actions.
No longer should any free American citizen be restricted in any way from keeping arms and ammunition of their choosing. We advocate full enforcement of laws that hold violent criminals accountable for their actions.
No federal entity, including FEMA, has the authority to confiscate guns even in a “state of emergency”. In fact, a state of emergency is precisely the time when personal firearms are most important.
Catherine Bleish
Federalism
The United States was conceived as a unified group of independent political “laboratories.” Various states were free to attempt varying and innovative solutions to social and economic problems. This fosters and accelerates growth, and made the Republic one of the most dynamic and competitive political bodies in history. The expansion of federal power has crippled this machine for innovation to the detriment of our great nation.
Federalism
The United States was conceived as a unified group of independent political “laboratories.” Various states were free to attempt varying and innovative solutions to social and economic problems. This fosters and accelerates growth, and made the Republic one of the most dynamic and competitive political bodies in history. The expansion of federal power has crippled this machine for innovation to the detriment of our great nation.
Catherine Bleish
WAR ON DRUGS
We believe the “War on Drugs” is an unnecessary intervention by the Federal Government, the same as any other ill-conceived and undeclared war. We believe that drug addiction is a medical issue and should be treated as such. Whereas the Constitution delegates to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting, piracies, and offenses against the laws of nations and treaties, we resolve that all Federal laws concerning drugs are void and any regulation or criminal law in regards to drugs are delegated to the several States.
WAR ON DRUGS
We believe the “War on Drugs” is an unnecessary intervention by the Federal Government, the same as any other ill-conceived and undeclared war. We believe that drug addiction is a medical issue and should be treated as such. Whereas the Constitution delegates to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting, piracies, and offenses against the laws of nations and treaties, we resolve that all Federal laws concerning drugs are void and any regulation or criminal law in regards to drugs are delegated to the several States.
Since the power to regulate, legalize or criminalize drugs falls to the States, the Drug Enforcement Agency of the Federal Government should be disbanded.
The prisons are full of nonviolent people convicted of Federal drug crimes. Nonviolent drug users and sellers should be released and, if needed, obtain treatment for their addictions. "'
Catherine Bleish
Friday, January 15, 2010
Christine C. Anderson - New York Whistleblower Speaking Out Against "Well Connected Attorneys" and "Preferential Treatment"
"John Lovett, the lawyer for the fired lawyer, Christine C. Anderson, told the six-member jury that his client had been fired in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment rights in complaining to court officials that well-connected attorneys received preferential treatment and that the committee had "whitewashed" certain cases. "
http://www.judicialaccountability.org/articles/lawyersuesforwhitewash.htm
Christine C. Anderson, Thomas J. Cahill,
" Christine C. Anderson contended that her June 2007 firing was in retaliation for complaints she made to her superiors at the disciplinary committee that at least nine cases had been handled too leniently because the lawyers being investigated were politically connected or were represented by attorneys who had previously worked for the committee (NYLJ, Oct. 30, 2007)."
http://www.onbeingablacklawyer.com/?m=200904
Christine C. Anderson, Thomas J. Cahill,
Documents on Court Case
http://www.frankbrady.org/TammanyHall/Documents.html
Thomas J. Cahill
Anderson v. The State of New York
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080616%20Anderson%20Docket%20with%20Eliot%20as%20Plaintiff.pdf
Christine C. Anderson
"Former First Department Disciplinary Committee Attorney Christine Anderson's $10 Million Lawsuit Proceeds Against Corrupt Discipline CommitteeIn allowing Anderson to proceed with her retaliation claim, New York District Judge Shira Scheindlin found that her contention that the committee had "whitewashed" as many as nine cases touched upon a subject of public concern and was protected under the First Amendment. Can New York State residents now hope to see the start of an end to the NYS corrupt courts that harm, neglect, and harass the innocent?"
http://www.parentadvocates.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=article&articleID=7560
Thomas J. Cahill
"A former staff attorney at the First Department Disciplinary Committee has filed a federal
lawsuit charging she was fired in June in retaliation for complaining that her superiors had
engaged in a "pattern and practice of whitewashing and routinely dismissing complaints against certain select attorneys."
Christine C. Anderson, who had worked for six years at the disciplinary committee, seeks $10 million in damages, claiming retaliation for the exercise of her First Amendment rights and
discrimination because she is of Jamaican origin and black."
http://www.legal-disclosure.com/documents/grievanceLawsuit.pdf
Christine C. Anderson, Thomas J. Cahill
http://www.judicialaccountability.org/articles/lawyersuesforwhitewash.htm
Christine C. Anderson, Thomas J. Cahill,
" Christine C. Anderson contended that her June 2007 firing was in retaliation for complaints she made to her superiors at the disciplinary committee that at least nine cases had been handled too leniently because the lawyers being investigated were politically connected or were represented by attorneys who had previously worked for the committee (NYLJ, Oct. 30, 2007)."
http://www.onbeingablacklawyer.com/?m=200904
Christine C. Anderson, Thomas J. Cahill,
Documents on Court Case
http://www.frankbrady.org/TammanyHall/Documents.html
Thomas J. Cahill
Anderson v. The State of New York
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080616%20Anderson%20Docket%20with%20Eliot%20as%20Plaintiff.pdf
Christine C. Anderson
"Former First Department Disciplinary Committee Attorney Christine Anderson's $10 Million Lawsuit Proceeds Against Corrupt Discipline CommitteeIn allowing Anderson to proceed with her retaliation claim, New York District Judge Shira Scheindlin found that her contention that the committee had "whitewashed" as many as nine cases touched upon a subject of public concern and was protected under the First Amendment. Can New York State residents now hope to see the start of an end to the NYS corrupt courts that harm, neglect, and harass the innocent?"
http://www.parentadvocates.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=article&articleID=7560
Thomas J. Cahill
"A former staff attorney at the First Department Disciplinary Committee has filed a federal
lawsuit charging she was fired in June in retaliation for complaining that her superiors had
engaged in a "pattern and practice of whitewashing and routinely dismissing complaints against certain select attorneys."
Christine C. Anderson, who had worked for six years at the disciplinary committee, seeks $10 million in damages, claiming retaliation for the exercise of her First Amendment rights and
discrimination because she is of Jamaican origin and black."
http://www.legal-disclosure.com/documents/grievanceLawsuit.pdf
Christine C. Anderson, Thomas J. Cahill
Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin Ruling ...
"' Whatever the new media version of "EXTRA! EXTRA!" READ ALL ABOUT IT!" might be, imagine me doing it.
Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin, famously of the Zubulake decisions that were the crucible of modern e-discovery practice, has done it again. In the course of an 87-page opinion and order, Her Honor invokes the only line anyone ever remembers from George Santayana and sanctions 13 plaintiffs for negligence and gross negligence in connection with their--ahem--'lackluster' preservation of and search for ESI.
The Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan, et al. v. Banc of America Securities, LLC, et al., U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, January 10, 2010)
It's a decison that will ruffle feathers in high places. E.g., Her Honor observes: "[T]he admitted failure to preserve some records or search at all for others...leads inexorably to the conclusion that relevant records have been lost or destroyed." (at 35).
Also, while Judge Scheindlin isn't the first to state that the failure to issue a written legal hold notice is "gross negligence," she seems to afford no quarter to effectuating a defensible hold any other way. It appears a face-to-face meeting, phone call, voice mail or course of dealing won't suffice to deflect a determination of gross negligence.
Too, that written hold notice had better be a strong, unambiguous directive to find, preserve and collect, coupled with close supervision of the effort. Total reliance on an employee to search and select won't cut it in Judge Scheindlin's court.
The decision puts a nail in the coffin of custodial-delegated holds and persuades me that, at least in the SDNY, no nabob should delegate preservation and search to minions, and certainly no lawyer should leave search to clients alone.
The opinion prompts further resignation to keep everything--especially all e-mail--and cease rotating tapes ahould someone so much as whisper the word "lawsuit."
Make no mistake: the plaintiffs were no models of probity and diligence. But, reading the particulars of their misconduct, I was struck less by the gravity of their negligence than by how unremarkable their sleepy, sloppy conduct sounded.
Granted, they brought the suit and were duty bound to make production, but think about it: These folks had already lost $550 million to botched investments.
Can't you imagine how thrilled they must have been to devote more time and money to answering discovery requests from the folks that (allegedly) flushed their fortunes away?
They say the rich are different. But not when it comes to e-discovery. They botch it, too! "'
Link to Source and Lots More ..
http://www.eddupdate.com/2010/01/zubulake-revisted.html
Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin, famously of the Zubulake decisions that were the crucible of modern e-discovery practice, has done it again. In the course of an 87-page opinion and order, Her Honor invokes the only line anyone ever remembers from George Santayana and sanctions 13 plaintiffs for negligence and gross negligence in connection with their--ahem--'lackluster' preservation of and search for ESI.
The Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan, et al. v. Banc of America Securities, LLC, et al., U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, January 10, 2010)
It's a decison that will ruffle feathers in high places. E.g., Her Honor observes: "[T]he admitted failure to preserve some records or search at all for others...leads inexorably to the conclusion that relevant records have been lost or destroyed." (at 35).
Also, while Judge Scheindlin isn't the first to state that the failure to issue a written legal hold notice is "gross negligence," she seems to afford no quarter to effectuating a defensible hold any other way. It appears a face-to-face meeting, phone call, voice mail or course of dealing won't suffice to deflect a determination of gross negligence.
Too, that written hold notice had better be a strong, unambiguous directive to find, preserve and collect, coupled with close supervision of the effort. Total reliance on an employee to search and select won't cut it in Judge Scheindlin's court.
The decision puts a nail in the coffin of custodial-delegated holds and persuades me that, at least in the SDNY, no nabob should delegate preservation and search to minions, and certainly no lawyer should leave search to clients alone.
The opinion prompts further resignation to keep everything--especially all e-mail--and cease rotating tapes ahould someone so much as whisper the word "lawsuit."
Make no mistake: the plaintiffs were no models of probity and diligence. But, reading the particulars of their misconduct, I was struck less by the gravity of their negligence than by how unremarkable their sleepy, sloppy conduct sounded.
Granted, they brought the suit and were duty bound to make production, but think about it: These folks had already lost $550 million to botched investments.
Can't you imagine how thrilled they must have been to devote more time and money to answering discovery requests from the folks that (allegedly) flushed their fortunes away?
They say the rich are different. But not when it comes to e-discovery. They botch it, too! "'
Link to Source and Lots More ..
http://www.eddupdate.com/2010/01/zubulake-revisted.html
Curing Cancer: The Discoveries & Suppression of Royal Raymond Rife
"" I first heard about Royal Rife somewhere in the mid 1990s from a radio show hosted at the time by Jeff Rense called "The End of the Line". He was interviewing Gary Wade or perhaps Barry Lynes, I can't remember, but the information about Rife was mind blowing to say the least. Here we had a man, Royal Rife, who PROVED beyond all doubt and speculation that cancer -any type of cancer-was 100% CURABLE.
He accomplished this miraculous feat by exposing cancer patients to 2 or 3 MINUTES of the electro-magnetic/scalar fields created by his Beam Ray device. In a showcase demonstration performed at the Scripps Institute in La Jolla California in 1934, he successfully cured 16 out of 16 terminal cancer patients that were declared "incurable and terminal" by a TEAM of cancer doctors which included the biggest names in cancer treatment at the time.
They literally scoured the country to find the most terminal cases possible to use in this test demonstration. What happened following that miraculous demonstration will be explained below.
The books by Barry Lynes cover the Rife story in greater detail. For the past 8 or 9 years, I've been addressing 98% of my health concerns with an electronic frequency generator normally used by electronic technicians for electronic testing purposes. It's called a 'function generator' and Hulda Clark explains its use in great detail in her books. Of course, the application of these various frequencies to address different pathogens or toxins is based squarely on Royal Rife's discoveries.
I'll soon post a series of articles explaining how to use a function generator at home-the same way I do- and free yourself of he worry, expense, and foolishness of depending of allopathic remedies to address disease or infective conditions...Ken Adachi]
By Jeff Rense
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/royalrifediscoveriesandsuppression09oct00.shtml
October 9, 2000
Curing Cancer: The Discoveries & Suppression of Royal Raymond Rife (Oct. 9, 2000)
http://www.rense.com/health/rife.htm
Royal Raymond Rife
by Jeff Rense
Imagine, for a moment, that you have spent more than two decades in painfully laborious research--that you have discovered an incredibly simple, electronic approach to curing literally every disease on the planet caused by viruses and bacteria. Indeed, it is a discovery that would end the pain and suffering of countless millions and change life on Earth forever. Certainly, the medical world would rush to embrace you with every imaginable accolade and financial reward imaginable. You would think so, wouldn't you?
Unfortunately, arguably the greatest medical genius in all recorded history suffered a fate literally the opposite of the foregoing logical scenario. In fact, the history of medicine is replete with stories of genius betrayed by backward thought and jealously, but most pathetically, by greed and money.
In the nineteenth century, Semmelweiss struggled mightily to convince surgeons that it was a good idea to sterilize their instruments and use sterile surgical procedures. Pasteur was ridiculed for years for his theory that germs could cause disease. Scores of other medical visionaries went through hell for simply challenging the medical status quo of the day, including such legends as Roentgen and his X-rays, Morton for promoting the 'absurd' idea of anaesthesia, Harvey for his theory of the circulation of blood, and many others in recent decades including: W.F. Koch, Revici, Burzynski, Naessens, Priore, Livingston-Wheeler, and Hoxsey.
Orthodox big-money medicine resents and seeks to neutralize and/or destroy those who challenge its beliefs. Often, the visionary who challenges it pays a heavy price for his 'heresy.'
So, you have just discovered a new therapy which can eradicate any microbial disease but, so far, you and your amazing cure aren't very popular. What do you do next? Well, certainly the research foundations and teaching institutions would welcome news of your astounding discovery. Won't they be thrilled to learn you have a cure for the very same diseases they are receiving hundreds of millions of dollars per year to investigate? Maybe not, if it means the end of the gravy train. These people have mortgages to pay and families to support. On second thought, forget the research foundations.
Perhaps you should take your discovery to the pharmaceutical industry; certainly it would be of great interest to those protectors of humanity, right? But remember, you have developed a universal cure which makes drugs obsolete, so the pharmaceutical industry just might be less than thrilled to hear about your work. In fact, the bigshots might even make it certain that your human disease-ending technology never sees the light of day, by preventing it from becoming licensed by the regulatory agencies.
Now, assuming your amazing cure is an electronic instrument, the only cost of using it is electricity. And it is absolutely harmless to patients, who can recover without losing their hair, the family home, and their life savings. So, with your technology, there is no longer any reason for people with cancer to pay over $300,000 per patient -- to become deathly ill from chemotherapy, radiation treatments, and surgery. It sounds like you won't find many friends and support among practicing oncologists, radiologists, and surgeons, doesn't it?
You might try the hospitals and big clinics. But how thrilled are they going to be about a therapy administered in any doctor's office; which reverses illness before the patient has to be hospitalized? Thanks to you, the staffs of these institutions will essentially be out of work. ""
Full Article and Source
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/royalrifediscoveriesandsuppression09oct00.shtml
Cancer Has Always BEEN Curable
How Long Will you Buy into the LIES... ?
He accomplished this miraculous feat by exposing cancer patients to 2 or 3 MINUTES of the electro-magnetic/scalar fields created by his Beam Ray device. In a showcase demonstration performed at the Scripps Institute in La Jolla California in 1934, he successfully cured 16 out of 16 terminal cancer patients that were declared "incurable and terminal" by a TEAM of cancer doctors which included the biggest names in cancer treatment at the time.
They literally scoured the country to find the most terminal cases possible to use in this test demonstration. What happened following that miraculous demonstration will be explained below.
The books by Barry Lynes cover the Rife story in greater detail. For the past 8 or 9 years, I've been addressing 98% of my health concerns with an electronic frequency generator normally used by electronic technicians for electronic testing purposes. It's called a 'function generator' and Hulda Clark explains its use in great detail in her books. Of course, the application of these various frequencies to address different pathogens or toxins is based squarely on Royal Rife's discoveries.
I'll soon post a series of articles explaining how to use a function generator at home-the same way I do- and free yourself of he worry, expense, and foolishness of depending of allopathic remedies to address disease or infective conditions...Ken Adachi]
By Jeff Rense
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/royalrifediscoveriesandsuppression09oct00.shtml
October 9, 2000
Curing Cancer: The Discoveries & Suppression of Royal Raymond Rife (Oct. 9, 2000)
http://www.rense.com/health/rife.htm
Royal Raymond Rife
by Jeff Rense
Imagine, for a moment, that you have spent more than two decades in painfully laborious research--that you have discovered an incredibly simple, electronic approach to curing literally every disease on the planet caused by viruses and bacteria. Indeed, it is a discovery that would end the pain and suffering of countless millions and change life on Earth forever. Certainly, the medical world would rush to embrace you with every imaginable accolade and financial reward imaginable. You would think so, wouldn't you?
Unfortunately, arguably the greatest medical genius in all recorded history suffered a fate literally the opposite of the foregoing logical scenario. In fact, the history of medicine is replete with stories of genius betrayed by backward thought and jealously, but most pathetically, by greed and money.
In the nineteenth century, Semmelweiss struggled mightily to convince surgeons that it was a good idea to sterilize their instruments and use sterile surgical procedures. Pasteur was ridiculed for years for his theory that germs could cause disease. Scores of other medical visionaries went through hell for simply challenging the medical status quo of the day, including such legends as Roentgen and his X-rays, Morton for promoting the 'absurd' idea of anaesthesia, Harvey for his theory of the circulation of blood, and many others in recent decades including: W.F. Koch, Revici, Burzynski, Naessens, Priore, Livingston-Wheeler, and Hoxsey.
Orthodox big-money medicine resents and seeks to neutralize and/or destroy those who challenge its beliefs. Often, the visionary who challenges it pays a heavy price for his 'heresy.'
So, you have just discovered a new therapy which can eradicate any microbial disease but, so far, you and your amazing cure aren't very popular. What do you do next? Well, certainly the research foundations and teaching institutions would welcome news of your astounding discovery. Won't they be thrilled to learn you have a cure for the very same diseases they are receiving hundreds of millions of dollars per year to investigate? Maybe not, if it means the end of the gravy train. These people have mortgages to pay and families to support. On second thought, forget the research foundations.
Perhaps you should take your discovery to the pharmaceutical industry; certainly it would be of great interest to those protectors of humanity, right? But remember, you have developed a universal cure which makes drugs obsolete, so the pharmaceutical industry just might be less than thrilled to hear about your work. In fact, the bigshots might even make it certain that your human disease-ending technology never sees the light of day, by preventing it from becoming licensed by the regulatory agencies.
Now, assuming your amazing cure is an electronic instrument, the only cost of using it is electricity. And it is absolutely harmless to patients, who can recover without losing their hair, the family home, and their life savings. So, with your technology, there is no longer any reason for people with cancer to pay over $300,000 per patient -- to become deathly ill from chemotherapy, radiation treatments, and surgery. It sounds like you won't find many friends and support among practicing oncologists, radiologists, and surgeons, doesn't it?
You might try the hospitals and big clinics. But how thrilled are they going to be about a therapy administered in any doctor's office; which reverses illness before the patient has to be hospitalized? Thanks to you, the staffs of these institutions will essentially be out of work. ""
Full Article and Source
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/royalrifediscoveriesandsuppression09oct00.shtml
Cancer Has Always BEEN Curable
How Long Will you Buy into the LIES... ?
"I am ashamed of how lacking in intellect American doctors are."
"" ... And we, ah, I met with the three top medical doctors in the State ah, government. They were unmoved by science. Every argument they threw up, I knocked down with science. They had opinion. And ah, so, we, then, we got a lot of media from it. We then came back and there were hearings, yesterday.
Ah, there were [NY] Senate Hearings on, with the State, on the swine flu vaccine. Now the whole morning and afternoon they had pro-vaccine people on, talking about how good it is and how it's gonna save lives. I was there from 9:30 yesterday morning and I got a chance to talk at 9 o'clock last night.
Twelve hours after sitting there all day long! And you can't leave because you lose your place in that rotation. I was number thirty-two. And the questions they were asking were just stupid, the panel.
In any case when I got up there ah, I said ah, 'Ladies and gentlemen, please do not personalize what I am about to say, or the energy I am sharing this with you. It's not about you, it's about this system.'
And then I let into 'em ah, using facts, facts upon the fact that there has never been a double-blind, placebo, randomized control study, long-term of any vaccine in history. There's never been a study on what happens when you have multiple vaccines in the body.
There's never been a study on pregnant women, children. Ah, and the four studies on senior citizens showed, zero efficacy, two percent efficacy, ah, five percent efficacy, and nine percent efficacy, which means that it's worthless for seniors.
But, putting a toxin in, I showed how the pharmaceutical industry has had to settle more, I gave them one hundred and thirty-two thousand, thousand legal judgments that the pharmaceutical industries have settled, including price fixing, hiding ah, the truth about dangerous drugs, killing forty-two thousand people with Vioxx [Rofecoxib] and hiding that information.
And yet, with all those lawsuits, with all that damage, it was merely the cost of doing business when they settled. Their stocks went back up and everybody was happy. And I said to the panel, 'only in America could you kill ter-, thirty-two thousand people and get a bonus.'
And then I went through the very companies we're trusting with our lives, ah, our developing fetus' lives, have been serial criminals. These are criminals. These are not decent, ethical, law-abiding people. These are people who are the most disgusting human vermin on the planet. They kill people. They maim people. They do it for a profit. They're unconscionably, ahm, ah, um, lacking in any sense of spiritual value.
And then I tied in the money they had made. I showed the percentage of markups. When one drug it went to Zanax, it went to 537,000% markup. It cost them two cents.
They sell it for $133.20. I said, 'so now, you're allowing a company, companies that have broken the law repeatedly, and my cases don't include cases where settlements that were not disclosed, because the vast majority of lawsuits they settle, you have to sign that you will not disclose the outcome ah, ah, of the settlement. So I only got the ones we could get an amount on. It was over a trillion dollars.
So, here are a group of people who are the worst scum on earth, who lie as a way of doing business, who cause injuries and death, and yet you trust them to ma-, make a healthy vaccine, er, a safe vaccine, an efficacious vaccine.
Then I went into the science. I was reporting from the Cochrane Group [ http://www.cochrane.org/ and http://aemg.cochrane.org/en/collaboration.html and http://www.cochrane.org/newslett/Skin_Oct_2003.pdf and http://www.cochrane.org/influenza/index.html ].
I gave them a one hundred page article, a scientific review of all the studies showing that vaccines are not safe and effective.
[ http://www.garynull.com/ ] And that was just on Swine flu and the seasonal flu. And I gave all the studies showing that there is danger. And then I gave the studies on thimerosal. And one of the doctors on the panel says, 'but thimerosal has been shown not to be dangerous.' And I said, 'yes. And who gave you that opinion?
Because I have science.
And I said, 'Anyone in this room, any doctor that would give lead into the body of a patient knowingly would be in jail!
Yet, you give something more toxic than lead, mercury, and you mandate that the person must put it in their body, including pregnant women ah, if they're health care workers in New York, and if not, they lose their job.'
I said, 'so you put a person on a plank.' And I said, 'It's unfair. What you are doing is cruel and unusual punishment.' And I said, 'You all will be held personally responsible in the court of public opinion if this goes south. And it will go south.' And I said, 'look at your studies. There are only safety studies.
If you actually paid attention to your own science shows that in the pregnancy study, any woman who gets a fever at a hundred or above will be excluded from the study.' I said, 'this is insane.' I said, 'if a woman gets the swi-, swine flu or regular seasonal flu vaccine and gets a fever of a hundred it means that the vaccine is causing a reaction, an immune reaction in her body.
So the very people that would give you an honest outcome in a study, you've excluded!
How dare you! I say, 'I challenge all of you, to stop abusing women!' Boy, they all, the women and men on that panel, you know, got all flustered.
And I said, 'yes, you are abusing women as you have throughout the entire history of medicine. You are allowing, ten million women every day, to take synthetic hormone replacement therapy when your studies show it increases heart attack, breast cancer, stroke, and ovarian cancer, and dementia, thirteen percent, minimal, adverse reactions.
That means you're putting one point three million American women, everyday, ah, to be sacrificed on the altar of medical hubris and greed.
I am ashamed of how lacking in intellect American doctors are.
I am ashamed of American medicine having the courage to stand up, actually be courageous for once in their God damned lives and do something that shows they care about something other than their safety, or their position, the ah, continuity of their lifestyle , and their place in the hierarchical order, like a bunch of strutting peacocks!
It's embarrassing.' I said, 'Now, I'll get a lobotomy and come on and debate any of these doctors.' I said, 'you've had doctors all day long. Why didn't you allow me to ask them a question?
Why aren't they here to challenge me on my questions and statements?' I said, I said, 'So you're just acting as a buffer. Let's be honest about it.
You would never have me up here if it weren't for the fact that by law, you're mandated to hold a public hearing. But where am I at?
In an empty room at nine o'clock at night after sitting here twelve hours listening to nothing but half truths non-stop. And remember this, an old Jewish saying, a half-truth is a full lie. And American medicine is nothing, if it is not filled with half truths. From mammograms being required every year from young girls, so they get cancer from the God damn things.'
I said, 'you are an embarrassment to society.'
And I said, 'I intend to be on your butt all the time on this.' I said, 'I have the resources, financial, legal, intellectual, in science, to challenge you in courts of law. Tomorrow, I'll be in U.S. Supreme Court or ah, I'll be in the [NY] State Supreme Court, ah, bringing lawsuits on behalf of nurses because someone has to protect the five hundred thousand public health workers in this state.
It sure is the dickens not going to be you all.' So I said, 'let us not pretend that anything said at this hearing is going to make any difference at all.' That was part of what I said yesterday.
So, tomorrow, today, I go down to the [NY] Supreme Court at 2 o'clock. Friday [10-16-09] there's another big rally out on Long Island, in New Jersey, where we'll be gathering in front of where the governor is lecturing, a former Goldman Sacks alumni top man.
And I'm bringing all the records of how many criminal acts they committed, how many lawsuits they settled when he was a top executive and would have known about it or should have known about it. And this just to show that we give credit to companies, to industries, to professions that they do not deserve.
And I had one of the doctors complain. And I said, 'sir, you show me a single meeting of any medical group in the United States, any medical group. Here are fourteen major medical groups and the, plus the supporting organizations.
Show me a listing of the magazines, the New England Journal of Medicine, Science Magazine, The Journal of the American Medical Association, ah, ah. Show me any article that shows that these individuals are so concerned about the iatrogenesis, the unnecessary death and injuries, that they actually chose to address it, and tried to prevent it, deal with it --- never, nothing, zero, zip, zero.
So once again, you as a physician, you sir, allowed 700,000 Americans to die last year and not a word out of any of your mouths. Shame on you! Shame on every God damn physician in America that doesn't open their mouth! Except to tell the patient, 'go home, take your Prozac, your Zanax, your, your chemotherapy. But where are you in defending the people who are going to be toe tagged with weeping friends and family because you thought you knew what you were doing and you did not.
What is needed in American medicine is humility, not arrogance, compassion, not indifference. So it's time we stood up to American doctors and got in their faces and said grow up you pricks! And I'm that guy that's not going to blink or back off. So, any doctor in this audience call me now and argue with me! Come on! Take me on! Alright? Call up, if you're a physician!
Let's have it out. Let's do a little intellectual rumbling. I'm sick and tired of seeing friends and family and Americans dying and injured because you refuse to acknowledge what you don't know! You talk about being angry? You're damn right I'm angry. You don't like it, screw yah! Come on the air and fight me!
That's it Roy. You got anything to say?
Then put out the number and let's hear what these people have to say to defend themselves and their profession, this 'holier than thou' art and trying so hard to protect the public. And I'll show them disease, damaged, deformed and infirm individuals. If they can't take credit for their mistakes, they should never take credit just for their victories and their successes. I think I've made myself clear. Do you need me to be any clearer? ""
Full Article and Source Click Below
http://larryh.newsvine.com/_news/2009/10/19/3399654-gary-null-live-october-14-2009
American Health Care Scam
The cancer conspiracy is led by the FDA-NCI-AMA-ACS hierarchy.
"" The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a government agnecy whose supposed job is to "protect" the public from dangerous drugs, foods, medicines, toxins, and medical procedures. In fact, the FDA is a gestapo-type organization only serving the interests of the major drug companies and medical establishment.
The various senior members of the FDA rotate lucrative positions on the boards of major drug companies and other key organizations. Members of the FDA have been found to have severe conflicts of interest, often owning stocks in the very companies they are supposed to to "monitoring, policing and controlling".
This is not some paranoid conspiracy delusion. This is exactly what they do. They protect the interests of the drug companies by 1) ensuring important drugs get swift approval despite dangers or ineffectiveness, and 2) monitor and act to eradicate threatening competition from alternative or "non-team player" individuals and organizations. ""
"People think the FDA is protecting them - it isn't. What the FDA is doing and what people think it's doing are as different as night and day." - Herbert L. Ley, Jr., M. D., former Commissioner of the FDA ..
"The hearings have revealed police state tactics . . . possibly perjured testimony to gain a conviction . . . intimidation and gross disregard for Constitutional Rights." - Senator Edward Long, U.S. Senate hearings on the FDA
The cancer conspiracy is led by the FDA-NCI-AMA-ACS hierarchy. The initials stand for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the American Medical Association (AMA), and the American Cancer Society (ACS).
The cancer conspiracy also includes the large pharmaceutical companies and key research centers such as the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City and selected university research labs.
The key personnel move in and out of official positions within these organizations, sit on common boards or investigation committees, and have both formal and informal networks.
When a researcher or alternative medicine advocate is identified as a threat to the power or even the official views put out by the ruling hierarchy, the maverick is placed on various published and unpublished blacklists. Funding is stopped, legal harassment often begins, public denunciation as a quack frequently follows, and if the outsider persists in offering or advocating a non sanctioned treatment, then rougher, clandestine methods can be employed.
It would take thousands of pages to describe various individuals who have fought the cancer conspiracy and how their threat to the ruling powers was neutralized. These pages can only summarize some of the more famous cases and facts which reveal how the cancer conspiracy functions, but those who wish to know more can pursue the details on their own, using the names and references offered here as a starting point. The people and procedures described in these pages are by no means inclusive, only the most notable or most promising.
The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) is the government police force which approves experimental studies for those it favors and hinders approval for those it dislikes.
It conducts semi-legal break-ins (constitutional procedures are often ignored), confiscates records so that critical documentation is often lost or at least unavailable for months and years, and at times has interfered with constitutional protections through conspiratorial relationships with private organizations who share the same suppressive goals.
New medical breakthroughs that threaten the sanctioned and financially lucrative treatments are ignored or "studied" for years. The FDA thus frequently subverts its legislated purpose which is to promote and protect the public health. Having lived in Washington, D.C., I know that the FDA is regarded by many astute civil servants as the federal agency with the lowest morale. A dark cloud of oppressive inertia, corruption and bureaucratic sloth pervades its corridors.
Dr. J. Richard Crout, test director at the FDA Bureau of Drugs beginning in 1971, described the agency's agony in Congressional testimony on April 19, 1976 as follows:
"There was open drunkenness by several employees which went on for months ... crippled by what some people called the worst personnel in government. There was intimidation internally by people . . . People, I'm talking about division directors and their staff, would engage in a kind of behavior that invited . . . insubordination - people tittering in comers, throwing spitballs; I am describing physicians, people who would . . . slouch down in a chair, not respond to questions, moan and groan with sweeping gestures, a kind of behavior I have not seen in any other institution as a grown man . . .
Prior to 1974, not one scientific officer in our place knew his work assignments, nor did any manager know the work assignment of the people under him."
In 1967, FDA stopped the use of an experimental cancer vaccine which was producing significant results.
It was developed by H. James Rand, inventor of the heart defibrillator. J. Ernest Ayre, an internationally recognized cancer specialist (co-developer of the PAP test) and Dr. Norbert Czajkowski of Detroit, Michigan assisted Rand. Treating only terminal cancer patients, the Rand vaccine produced objective improvement in 35% of 600 patients while another 30% demonstrated subjective improvement. "One 65 year old woman with spreading tumor" was "completely cured in 4 months."
Another woman with extensive breast cancer was cured in 6 months. The FDA stopped the vaccine's use in a federal court hearing where neither the cancer patients nor their doctors were allowed to testify. When U.S. Senator Stephen Young of Ohio protested, it was to no avail. Senator Young could get nowhere with FDA Commissioner James L. Goddard. Senator Young recalled:
"I could not move them. They would not even agree to a modification of the ruling (banning the Rand vaccine), which would at least allow the 100 (cancer) patients at Richmond Heights (Ohio) to complete their injections. The Justice Department was prepared to go along, but the FDA Commissioner, Dr. James Goddard, was adamant, even belligerent. It's wrong of the government to snatch away this hope when there is no evidence against its use offered in court. It's damnably wrong."
It is known that when FDA Commissioner Goddard's own wife had serious health problems and orthodox medicine could not help her, Goddard contacted alternative health practitioners who quietly healed his wife. But for the suffering victims of cancer who needed the Rand vaccine or some other nontraditional treatment, Goddard lowered the boom, using the federal courts to enforce his dictum. Such are the ways of the FDA.
Goddard's greatest disservice to the American people was his persecution of DMSO, a simple molecule which often brought miraculous pain relief and offered numerous possibilities for medical advancement in other areas, including cancer.
One respected science writer suggested that Goddard crushed DMSO research in order to gain increased police powers from Congress. The FDA has never admitted its errors regarding DMSO although the positive studies from qualified scientists number over a thousand while the FDA's criticisms have been shown to be almost completely based on lies or unsubstantiated rumors. Yet by the late 1980s, twenty years later, the FDA continues to imprison DMSO advocates.
The malignity of Goddard's arbitrary and conscienceless acts in 1966-1968 against reputable scientists, dedicated doctors and the public good is one of the darkest chapters of FDA history.
No one is sure of the real reasons why it happened and why it continues to be covered up twenty years later. It has been suggested that one or more drug companies sabotaged DMSO because it threatened so many of their profitable products. One drug company executive reportedly told the leading DMSO researcher:
"I don't care if it is the major drug of our century - and we all know it is - it isn't worth it to us."
Who had the power to keep such a miraculous drug off the shelves? Surely not just an FDA Commissioner flexing his muscle. Was it a combination of drug companies whose individual profits were threatened by the miracle drug's possibilities?
"(It is) not our (FDA) policy to jeopardize the financial interests of the pharmaceutical companies." - from testimony before Congress of Dr. Charles C. Edwards, at the time Commissioner of the FDA It has also been surmised that FDA Commissioner Goddard used DMSO in 1966 in an attempt to become the medical dictator of America. In the years that followed, FDA officials simply refused to expose the agency's "dirty laundry." Hence the on-going suppression of what many recognize as "the major drug of the century. " "
Full Article and More on FDA Suppression
http://www.sntp.net/fda/fda_lynes.htm
FDA Reign of Terror
The various senior members of the FDA rotate lucrative positions on the boards of major drug companies and other key organizations. Members of the FDA have been found to have severe conflicts of interest, often owning stocks in the very companies they are supposed to to "monitoring, policing and controlling".
This is not some paranoid conspiracy delusion. This is exactly what they do. They protect the interests of the drug companies by 1) ensuring important drugs get swift approval despite dangers or ineffectiveness, and 2) monitor and act to eradicate threatening competition from alternative or "non-team player" individuals and organizations. ""
"People think the FDA is protecting them - it isn't. What the FDA is doing and what people think it's doing are as different as night and day." - Herbert L. Ley, Jr., M. D., former Commissioner of the FDA ..
"The hearings have revealed police state tactics . . . possibly perjured testimony to gain a conviction . . . intimidation and gross disregard for Constitutional Rights." - Senator Edward Long, U.S. Senate hearings on the FDA
The cancer conspiracy is led by the FDA-NCI-AMA-ACS hierarchy. The initials stand for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the American Medical Association (AMA), and the American Cancer Society (ACS).
The cancer conspiracy also includes the large pharmaceutical companies and key research centers such as the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City and selected university research labs.
The key personnel move in and out of official positions within these organizations, sit on common boards or investigation committees, and have both formal and informal networks.
When a researcher or alternative medicine advocate is identified as a threat to the power or even the official views put out by the ruling hierarchy, the maverick is placed on various published and unpublished blacklists. Funding is stopped, legal harassment often begins, public denunciation as a quack frequently follows, and if the outsider persists in offering or advocating a non sanctioned treatment, then rougher, clandestine methods can be employed.
It would take thousands of pages to describe various individuals who have fought the cancer conspiracy and how their threat to the ruling powers was neutralized. These pages can only summarize some of the more famous cases and facts which reveal how the cancer conspiracy functions, but those who wish to know more can pursue the details on their own, using the names and references offered here as a starting point. The people and procedures described in these pages are by no means inclusive, only the most notable or most promising.
The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) is the government police force which approves experimental studies for those it favors and hinders approval for those it dislikes.
It conducts semi-legal break-ins (constitutional procedures are often ignored), confiscates records so that critical documentation is often lost or at least unavailable for months and years, and at times has interfered with constitutional protections through conspiratorial relationships with private organizations who share the same suppressive goals.
New medical breakthroughs that threaten the sanctioned and financially lucrative treatments are ignored or "studied" for years. The FDA thus frequently subverts its legislated purpose which is to promote and protect the public health. Having lived in Washington, D.C., I know that the FDA is regarded by many astute civil servants as the federal agency with the lowest morale. A dark cloud of oppressive inertia, corruption and bureaucratic sloth pervades its corridors.
Dr. J. Richard Crout, test director at the FDA Bureau of Drugs beginning in 1971, described the agency's agony in Congressional testimony on April 19, 1976 as follows:
"There was open drunkenness by several employees which went on for months ... crippled by what some people called the worst personnel in government. There was intimidation internally by people . . . People, I'm talking about division directors and their staff, would engage in a kind of behavior that invited . . . insubordination - people tittering in comers, throwing spitballs; I am describing physicians, people who would . . . slouch down in a chair, not respond to questions, moan and groan with sweeping gestures, a kind of behavior I have not seen in any other institution as a grown man . . .
Prior to 1974, not one scientific officer in our place knew his work assignments, nor did any manager know the work assignment of the people under him."
In 1967, FDA stopped the use of an experimental cancer vaccine which was producing significant results.
It was developed by H. James Rand, inventor of the heart defibrillator. J. Ernest Ayre, an internationally recognized cancer specialist (co-developer of the PAP test) and Dr. Norbert Czajkowski of Detroit, Michigan assisted Rand. Treating only terminal cancer patients, the Rand vaccine produced objective improvement in 35% of 600 patients while another 30% demonstrated subjective improvement. "One 65 year old woman with spreading tumor" was "completely cured in 4 months."
Another woman with extensive breast cancer was cured in 6 months. The FDA stopped the vaccine's use in a federal court hearing where neither the cancer patients nor their doctors were allowed to testify. When U.S. Senator Stephen Young of Ohio protested, it was to no avail. Senator Young could get nowhere with FDA Commissioner James L. Goddard. Senator Young recalled:
"I could not move them. They would not even agree to a modification of the ruling (banning the Rand vaccine), which would at least allow the 100 (cancer) patients at Richmond Heights (Ohio) to complete their injections. The Justice Department was prepared to go along, but the FDA Commissioner, Dr. James Goddard, was adamant, even belligerent. It's wrong of the government to snatch away this hope when there is no evidence against its use offered in court. It's damnably wrong."
It is known that when FDA Commissioner Goddard's own wife had serious health problems and orthodox medicine could not help her, Goddard contacted alternative health practitioners who quietly healed his wife. But for the suffering victims of cancer who needed the Rand vaccine or some other nontraditional treatment, Goddard lowered the boom, using the federal courts to enforce his dictum. Such are the ways of the FDA.
Goddard's greatest disservice to the American people was his persecution of DMSO, a simple molecule which often brought miraculous pain relief and offered numerous possibilities for medical advancement in other areas, including cancer.
One respected science writer suggested that Goddard crushed DMSO research in order to gain increased police powers from Congress. The FDA has never admitted its errors regarding DMSO although the positive studies from qualified scientists number over a thousand while the FDA's criticisms have been shown to be almost completely based on lies or unsubstantiated rumors. Yet by the late 1980s, twenty years later, the FDA continues to imprison DMSO advocates.
The malignity of Goddard's arbitrary and conscienceless acts in 1966-1968 against reputable scientists, dedicated doctors and the public good is one of the darkest chapters of FDA history.
No one is sure of the real reasons why it happened and why it continues to be covered up twenty years later. It has been suggested that one or more drug companies sabotaged DMSO because it threatened so many of their profitable products. One drug company executive reportedly told the leading DMSO researcher:
"I don't care if it is the major drug of our century - and we all know it is - it isn't worth it to us."
Who had the power to keep such a miraculous drug off the shelves? Surely not just an FDA Commissioner flexing his muscle. Was it a combination of drug companies whose individual profits were threatened by the miracle drug's possibilities?
"(It is) not our (FDA) policy to jeopardize the financial interests of the pharmaceutical companies." - from testimony before Congress of Dr. Charles C. Edwards, at the time Commissioner of the FDA It has also been surmised that FDA Commissioner Goddard used DMSO in 1966 in an attempt to become the medical dictator of America. In the years that followed, FDA officials simply refused to expose the agency's "dirty laundry." Hence the on-going suppression of what many recognize as "the major drug of the century. " "
Full Article and More on FDA Suppression
http://www.sntp.net/fda/fda_lynes.htm
FDA Reign of Terror
The Cancer Conspiracy - When Does We the People Say Enough is Enough?
Cancer Cures are NOT Secret - Just Illegal
How Long Do We the People Let the FDA Lie about Cancer Cures? I mean thousands upon Thousands have healed themselves of their Cancer and Yet the FDA still says there is No Cure and Jails People who Really are Selling Cures? the FDA has always been above the Law, Above Civil Rights and Can Just Bring Down Economic Terror or Torture at any time with No Due Process at all. And this in the Name of Helping you, of Protecting you and From What?
The FDA wants to Protect you from Herbal Quacks with Gentle Cures. And Why? Because they need to keep big Pharma in Business and you being Sick is their Business. It is Human Torment, Violates our Human Rights - our Civil Rights, They Lobby and make Big Money deals to Keep the Laws and Keep Known Cures - Cheap, Gentle Cures Illegal.
When you talk to friends and Neighbors, and you study centuries of information you see that even the Native Americans had Cancer, there have ALWAYS been Cancer Cures.
the FDA Gestapo Keeping you Down is Not What Is Truly a Free Country. They Keep you in Poisoned with So Called Cures that actually cause more sickness. However it is all worth it becaue you are the Commodity and if we can just keep moving them in and moving them out then we can keep Greedy Corporations in the Money.
The Information of Cancer Cover Ups, Lies About Known Cures, Lies About Cancer Salves - Hoxsey- and Essiac - They hide the Truth and Most people do as they say, which is to remove body parts and radiate.. to take poisons into your body and let them cut on you just to charge you money when you COULD cure your own Cancer without their NON-Proven Cures that actually simply torture you and then Kill you anyway.
When Will the Masses Wake Up and STOP letting the FDA tell them that some pill in a bottle is what they need to do when there are Cures, Known Cures and in Plenty that come right up out of the Earth as Nature Intended. They keep us in fear of Disease which keeps them in the Money and in Control of Us. When the Truth is there is a Cure for Everything and Most of it is not a hundred thousand dollar minimum.
Artery Plaque, Cancer, Arthritis... there is a Cure for all of It... but the FDA Lies to you and you Fear them. And with Good Reason as the FDA ruins businesses, ruins lives and STOPS companies from selling you cures and even Jails guys like Greg Canton. We don't want you to know that Cancer Salves Really Do work, so let's Jail the People selling it.
What Makes the United States God? Other Countries don't Jail Herbalists, there Cures - KNOWN herbal Cures are simply a Matter of Fact and not a Reason to Torture and Jail Citizens - why Does the US, the FDA get to Say there is no Cure for Cancer when Other Countries Know that to be a Flat Out Lie?
And This in the Name of We are a Free Society. Bull.
Stop the FDA Reign of Terror - File Criminal Charges against the FDA. I know the Department of Justice is not listening. But ya know what when will you STOP letting your loved ones be tortured while the FDA lies about Cures. You can Read, they say it is a Hoax, they tell you Natural does not work, well have you talked to the people that it has worked for?
It really is time for Real Health Care and STOP the War of big Drug Companies, the FDA who Protect and lies about them, insurance companies and all the Economic Disaster ... when really there are People who can help you heal, and do it gentle and Natural.
Time to Wake Up... Here are a few Links to Get you Started...
http://www.sntp.net/fda/fda_lynes.htm
http://www.GregCaton.com/
www.CancerSolutions.org
http://www.herbhealers.com/
http://www.cancer-coverup.com/
http://www.cancertutor.com/
http://www.gerson.org/
FDA Suppressing the TRUTH
the FDA can Say 1+1=5 But that does not make it TRUE. The FDA lies to you about Cures in the Name of Protecting the Corporate Elite, Time for a Class Action Lawsuit against the FDA, and To Charge the FDA with War Crimes. The FDA is at War with YOUR Body. You are their Stock Commidity and Until you Wake Up to the TRUTH you will continue to be.
FDA Suppressing the TRUTH
There are Tons of ways to Cure Cancer - and the FDA is LYING TO you... Read, Study, Lean, and Think for YourSelf... Knowledge is Power.
FDA Suppressing the TRUTH
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Trillion Dollar Fraud on the US Court System - Who Can STOP this Kind of Interconnected Corruption at the Highest Levels?
Conflicts of Interest, Fraud Against the US Government, Stolen Technology, Stolen Patents, United States Courts, US Patent Office, NYAG, Proskauer Rose, Judge Shira Scheindlin, Christine C. Anderson Whistleblower, Anti-Trust Violations, Iviewit Stolen Patent, Fraud on the Court, Shareholder Liability, New York State Liability, Trillion Dollar Accounting Error, New York Senate Judiciary and More... Read This...
Eliot Bernstein Patent Heiste
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf
Iviewit Stolen Patent,
Eliot Bernstein Patent Heiste
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf
Iviewit Stolen Patent,
Time Warner Inc. - AOL - Withholding information from Shareholders that they have a Right to Know.
How Come AOL and Time Warner Inc. Shareholders still do not seem to know about the Trillion Dollar, at least in part - and a VERY big part is a Liability on the that is NOT reported on the AOL Time Warner Books?
Here we have Confidentiality Agreements Violated, Technology Stolen from Inventors, No Compensation to The Inventors. Time Warner Inc., AOL - they know that this Shareholder Fraud is Pending and that at some point they will have to pay for the Technology they STOLE.
Does the SEC not Care about a Liability this HUGE... look at www.DeniedPatent.com or www.Iviewit.TV and you can see thousands of Documents of Proof.
Did the SEC have any advance Notice all all of this?
Well from the Above sites you can see that the SEC did indeed know about what was going on and now the damage is mounting and still Time Warner Inc. - AOL - NYSE: TWX - Time Warner Cable Inc. -Warner Bros. they have Seemingly not disclosed this Liability to their Shareholders, in fact are they not in some sort of " Time Warner Declares Spin-Off Dividend Of AOL Shares Time Warner Inc. and AOL Inc. announced the timing and details regarding the spin-off of AOL from Time" From TimeWarner.com ? So another words they are restructuring their Company to attempt to protect themselves from this Trillion Dollar Liability without telling the Shareholders of TWX that it even exists.
Is That Legal?
"" Time Warner Inc. - AOL Separation Information On December 9, 2009, Time Warner Inc. completed the spin-off of AOL Inc. "" From the Link Below
http://ir.timewarner.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=70972&p=irol-irhome
Time Warner was Given Notice from Iviewit of this Trillion Dollar Liability and they Separated AOL after this - Folks, there is a Whole Lot More that Time Warner Inc. is NOT telling YOU.
There is No way that Time Warner Inc. Can Ever DENY that they knew the Liability from the Iviewit Stolen Patent, P. Stephen Lamont told them, Eliot Bernstein Told them, People within their own Company told them... there is Evidence on top of Evidence to PROOF that Warner Bros. Hid this Liability information from their Shareholders and denied Rights to the Iviewit Inventors. The Question is How Long with the shareholders stand for this and how long with the SEC Ignore this HUGE Liability that is NOT accounted For?
Links for You to Visit
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090325%20SEC%20FAX%20Cover%20Page.pdf
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=205
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=209
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:FgCCwCxMZuwJ:iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2007%252008%252018%2520Cuomo%2520Letter%2520Final.doc+%22iviewit%22+%22Time+Warner%22&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:MviGXq-QONgJ:www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%252012%252015%2520Letter%2520to%2520Thomas%2520Cahill%2520Re%2520Krane%2520Conflict.pdf+site:www.iviewit.tv+Time+Warner&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/patent%20pool%20infringers.pdf?referer=www.clickfind.com.au
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Patents/Miscellaneous%20Patent%20Docs/2004%2003%2026%20Moatz%20letter%20to%20take%20time%20responding%20for%20complaint.pdf
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2011%2015%20SC%2004-1078%20IVIEWIT%20REBUTTAL%20TO%20FLORIDA%20BAR%20RESP(1).pdf
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2004%2021%20Director%20Officer%20Advisory%20Board%20and%20Professionals%20Letter%20of%20Liabilities%20email%20low.pdf
Letters of Liabilty
Here we have Confidentiality Agreements Violated, Technology Stolen from Inventors, No Compensation to The Inventors. Time Warner Inc., AOL - they know that this Shareholder Fraud is Pending and that at some point they will have to pay for the Technology they STOLE.
Does the SEC not Care about a Liability this HUGE... look at www.DeniedPatent.com or www.Iviewit.TV and you can see thousands of Documents of Proof.
Did the SEC have any advance Notice all all of this?
Well from the Above sites you can see that the SEC did indeed know about what was going on and now the damage is mounting and still Time Warner Inc. - AOL - NYSE: TWX - Time Warner Cable Inc. -Warner Bros. they have Seemingly not disclosed this Liability to their Shareholders, in fact are they not in some sort of " Time Warner Declares Spin-Off Dividend Of AOL Shares Time Warner Inc. and AOL Inc. announced the timing and details regarding the spin-off of AOL from Time" From TimeWarner.com ? So another words they are restructuring their Company to attempt to protect themselves from this Trillion Dollar Liability without telling the Shareholders of TWX that it even exists.
Is That Legal?
"" Time Warner Inc. - AOL Separation Information On December 9, 2009, Time Warner Inc. completed the spin-off of AOL Inc. "" From the Link Below
http://ir.timewarner.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=70972&p=irol-irhome
Time Warner was Given Notice from Iviewit of this Trillion Dollar Liability and they Separated AOL after this - Folks, there is a Whole Lot More that Time Warner Inc. is NOT telling YOU.
There is No way that Time Warner Inc. Can Ever DENY that they knew the Liability from the Iviewit Stolen Patent, P. Stephen Lamont told them, Eliot Bernstein Told them, People within their own Company told them... there is Evidence on top of Evidence to PROOF that Warner Bros. Hid this Liability information from their Shareholders and denied Rights to the Iviewit Inventors. The Question is How Long with the shareholders stand for this and how long with the SEC Ignore this HUGE Liability that is NOT accounted For?
Links for You to Visit
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090325%20SEC%20FAX%20Cover%20Page.pdf
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=205
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=209
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:FgCCwCxMZuwJ:iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2007%252008%252018%2520Cuomo%2520Letter%2520Final.doc+%22iviewit%22+%22Time+Warner%22&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:MviGXq-QONgJ:www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%252012%252015%2520Letter%2520to%2520Thomas%2520Cahill%2520Re%2520Krane%2520Conflict.pdf+site:www.iviewit.tv+Time+Warner&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/patent%20pool%20infringers.pdf?referer=www.clickfind.com.au
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Patents/Miscellaneous%20Patent%20Docs/2004%2003%2026%20Moatz%20letter%20to%20take%20time%20responding%20for%20complaint.pdf
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2011%2015%20SC%2004-1078%20IVIEWIT%20REBUTTAL%20TO%20FLORIDA%20BAR%20RESP(1).pdf
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2004%2021%20Director%20Officer%20Advisory%20Board%20and%20Professionals%20Letter%20of%20Liabilities%20email%20low.pdf
Letters of Liabilty
Public Office Corruption - Related to the Christine Anderson Whistleblower Case - Scheindlins' Failure to Report
Judge Scheindlin Finds "Systemic" Public Office Corruption in the Legally Related "Whistle Blower" Lawsuit - then Scheindlin Dismisses Eliot Bernsteins Complaints in a Seriously Flawed Dismissal and Failure to Remove and Report Misconduct and Conflict.
The Corruption in the New York Courts is Out of Control and there seems to Be No Way to STOP it - It is Time for We the People To Pay Attention to What is Going on.
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf
Read this Document Pertaining to the Iviewit Stolen Patent and the Relationship to the Corruption in the New York Courts.
The Corruption in the New York Courts is Out of Control and there seems to Be No Way to STOP it - It is Time for We the People To Pay Attention to What is Going on.
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf
Read this Document Pertaining to the Iviewit Stolen Patent and the Relationship to the Corruption in the New York Courts.
$$$$$$
April 2009 Decision and Order by Scheindlin, in the "Legally Related" lawsuit of Christine C. Anderson, Judge Shira Scheindlin formally judicially declared the validity of the Anderson Lawsuit as a "Whistleblower". Judge Scheindlin advancing the case on allegations of "Systemic" Public Office Corruption within the New York Supreme Court involving agencies directly implicated in Plaintiff-Appellant's case herein and directly involving the conduct of several major law firms names as Defendents...
Public Office Corruption at the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department and the New York Court Appellate Division First Departmnet - Departmental Disciplinary Committee is center stage in Judge Scheindlin's Decision advancing the Anderson Lawsuit Trial...
Click on the Document in this Post and read all these connections.. and then in January Scheindlin Dismisses iviewit as their Issues being MOOT and not based in Fact... the Corruption in the New York Court System is Blatantly Obvious and No One Seems to Be Looking at it.
Christine C. Anderson, Judge Shira Scheindlin
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf
Christine C. Anderson, Judge Shira Scheindlin
and Don't Forget to Check Out the January 2012 Smackdown - Dismissal - Talk about Double Standards - Conflicts of Interest - Corruption - Denying Due Process
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20100109%20US%20Court%20of%20Appeal%20Denial%20of%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20and%20Appeal.pdf
More on this Case at
www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV
Christine C. Anderson, Judge Shira Scheindlin
The Murder of Nancy Bergeson - Defend the TRUTH.
"" Daughter pleads for information in Bergeson homicide case
By Maxine Bernstein, The Oregonian
Bergeson, daughter of Nancy Bergeson, the federal public defender who was found strangled in her Southwest Portland home Nov. 24, appealed to the public to help Portland Police find her mother's killer at a news conference this morning.The daughter of an assistant federal public defender found strangled to death in her Portland home last week made an emotional plea today for information in her mother's case..
"She dedicated her life to the pursuit of justice, and I beg of you to do the same," said Jamie Bergeson, 23, who flew into Portland from Boston last week after getting notified of her mom's death.
Nancy Bergeson, 57, was found dead in the dining room of her home on Nov. 24. A girl who stopped by daily to walk Bergeson's golden retriever Bodie saw her through a front window and alerted a neighbor, who called police.
Portland police said they still don't know whether her death was tied to her work, committed by a stranger or someone she knew.
Crime Stoppers also is offering a $1,000 reward for information that can lead to an arrest.
Portland police were called to the home in the 4100 block of Southwest Hamilton Street about 3 p.m. that day. Patrol officers, a police forensic criminalist and a deputy medical examiner were sent to the scene.
The deputy medical examiner thought Bergeson's death was likely due to natural causes, and homicide detectives weren't called to the home to start investigating until an autopsy the next morning found Bergeson was strangled to death.
There was no sign of forced entry. Her front door was unlocked, which was not unusual for Bergeson.
Bergeson had just wrapped up her defense of a man in a tax-evasion conspiracy case just four days earlier after a three-week trial. The day before her body was discovered, the man Bergeson was defending in federal court was found guilty of preparing fraudulent tax returns.
Bergeson, who was born in Utah but grew up in Newport Beach, Calif., served 18 years with the federal public defender's office in Portland. Relatives said she had such a zest for life; she's been described as bold and passionate in whatever she pursued – whether it was her criminal defense work, love of animals, dragon boat races or friendships she cherished.
She had planned to fly to Boston to spend Thanksgiving with her 23-year-old daughter, Jamie. Instead, her daughter, who learned of her mother's death while still at work the night of Nov. 24, flew home to Portland.
Relatives said they didn't know of any intimate relationships Bergeson, who was divorced, had, or of any problems with her work clients. She would have turned 58 on Monday.
An FBI agent has been assigned to monitor developments in the investigation.
Live from the news conference:
10:32 a.m.: Jamie Bergeson has arrived at the news conference.
10:36 a.m.: Jamie Bergeson makes a brief statement pleading for help and then leaves. She spoke for less than a minute, with a quaking voice. She appeared on the edge of tears.
10:38 a.m.: Detective Paul Weatheroy is asking for the public's help. He aloso said the FBI has assigned an agent to monitor the investigation in case her death was related to her federal employment.
10:39 a.m.: Weatheroy says that no tip is too small. He has declined to discuss specifics about the case.
10:41 a.m.: Weatheroy says investigators do not know if the killer was someone she knew or a stranger. He says she lived alone at her house, where she was found.
10:42 a.m.: The Portland Police Bureau is taking the lead on the case, and "we're working on it day and night." Weatheroy said detectives plan to talk to all the victim's co-workers, review her past cases and talk to all her friends and associates.
10:44 a.m.: Police have not determined exactly when she was killed. "I know the community wants to know what happened to Nancy," Weatheroy said. "Her family wants to know what happened. We're in the early stages."
10:46 a.m.: Weatheroy spoke about the hours delay in recognizing the homicide and movement of the victim's body before homicide detectives were alerted. "Obviously that's not ideal," he said, but Weatheroy said he doesn't expect that to hurt the investigation.
10:47 a.m.: Weatheroy has finished his portion of the press conference and left the room. The press conference has ended.
Nancy Bergeson
Source:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/
2009/12/plea_made_for_help_in_bergeson.html
Nancy Bergeson
By Maxine Bernstein, The Oregonian
Bergeson, daughter of Nancy Bergeson, the federal public defender who was found strangled in her Southwest Portland home Nov. 24, appealed to the public to help Portland Police find her mother's killer at a news conference this morning.The daughter of an assistant federal public defender found strangled to death in her Portland home last week made an emotional plea today for information in her mother's case..
"She dedicated her life to the pursuit of justice, and I beg of you to do the same," said Jamie Bergeson, 23, who flew into Portland from Boston last week after getting notified of her mom's death.
Nancy Bergeson, 57, was found dead in the dining room of her home on Nov. 24. A girl who stopped by daily to walk Bergeson's golden retriever Bodie saw her through a front window and alerted a neighbor, who called police.
Portland police said they still don't know whether her death was tied to her work, committed by a stranger or someone she knew.
Crime Stoppers also is offering a $1,000 reward for information that can lead to an arrest.
Portland police were called to the home in the 4100 block of Southwest Hamilton Street about 3 p.m. that day. Patrol officers, a police forensic criminalist and a deputy medical examiner were sent to the scene.
The deputy medical examiner thought Bergeson's death was likely due to natural causes, and homicide detectives weren't called to the home to start investigating until an autopsy the next morning found Bergeson was strangled to death.
There was no sign of forced entry. Her front door was unlocked, which was not unusual for Bergeson.
Bergeson had just wrapped up her defense of a man in a tax-evasion conspiracy case just four days earlier after a three-week trial. The day before her body was discovered, the man Bergeson was defending in federal court was found guilty of preparing fraudulent tax returns.
Bergeson, who was born in Utah but grew up in Newport Beach, Calif., served 18 years with the federal public defender's office in Portland. Relatives said she had such a zest for life; she's been described as bold and passionate in whatever she pursued – whether it was her criminal defense work, love of animals, dragon boat races or friendships she cherished.
She had planned to fly to Boston to spend Thanksgiving with her 23-year-old daughter, Jamie. Instead, her daughter, who learned of her mother's death while still at work the night of Nov. 24, flew home to Portland.
Relatives said they didn't know of any intimate relationships Bergeson, who was divorced, had, or of any problems with her work clients. She would have turned 58 on Monday.
An FBI agent has been assigned to monitor developments in the investigation.
Live from the news conference:
10:32 a.m.: Jamie Bergeson has arrived at the news conference.
10:36 a.m.: Jamie Bergeson makes a brief statement pleading for help and then leaves. She spoke for less than a minute, with a quaking voice. She appeared on the edge of tears.
10:38 a.m.: Detective Paul Weatheroy is asking for the public's help. He aloso said the FBI has assigned an agent to monitor the investigation in case her death was related to her federal employment.
10:39 a.m.: Weatheroy says that no tip is too small. He has declined to discuss specifics about the case.
10:41 a.m.: Weatheroy says investigators do not know if the killer was someone she knew or a stranger. He says she lived alone at her house, where she was found.
10:42 a.m.: The Portland Police Bureau is taking the lead on the case, and "we're working on it day and night." Weatheroy said detectives plan to talk to all the victim's co-workers, review her past cases and talk to all her friends and associates.
10:44 a.m.: Police have not determined exactly when she was killed. "I know the community wants to know what happened to Nancy," Weatheroy said. "Her family wants to know what happened. We're in the early stages."
10:46 a.m.: Weatheroy spoke about the hours delay in recognizing the homicide and movement of the victim's body before homicide detectives were alerted. "Obviously that's not ideal," he said, but Weatheroy said he doesn't expect that to hurt the investigation.
10:47 a.m.: Weatheroy has finished his portion of the press conference and left the room. The press conference has ended.
Nancy Bergeson
Source:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/
2009/12/plea_made_for_help_in_bergeson.html
Nancy Bergeson
Intel Pays Dell Not To Launch AMD-Based Servers - Intel Corp. Is the King of Anti-Trust Violators, in My Opinion
"" 85. A 2003 internal Dell document explains the program rationale, funding methodology, and negotiated documentation, including the following highlights:
“The intent of the MCP program is to provide funding to Dell to combat the AMD threat in the marketplace since Dell is an Intel-only OEM for CPU’s”
“The MCP is negotiated on a quarterly basis.”
“There is not a formal ‘contract’ per se that documents all the terms and conditions of the MCP program for a quarter. Rather, the MCP terms and conditions are agreed upon via email and telephone communications, which are finalized in a spreadsheet that is agreed to by Dell and Intel for a particular quarter.” (Emphasis added).
86. As mentioned in the memo, throughout this period, top executives at both companies took care that the dealings between them were kept secret. Although billions of dollars in rebate payments flowed from Intel to Dell during the period 2002-2006, there was no formal documentation of the secret agreements which led to them.
3. Intel Conveyed Threats To Dell
87. Intel repeatedly made it clear to Dell that, if Dell wanted Intel’s support, Dell would have to direct its efforts against AMD. For example, in preparation for upcoming funding negotiations with Intel in 2002, a Dell executive, who regularly acted as an informal liaison between Dell and Intel, explained that Intel would not tolerate a Dell shift to AMD CPUs.
Specifically, this Dell executive wrote to Michael Dell and others: “If [Dell starts to use] AMD [CPUs], [Intel] would just give a [competitor] MOAP type dollars to match whatever we’re getting – they won’t sit around and let us transfer share to AMD…”
88. In emails and in testimony, the same Dell executive referred to this scenario – in which Intel cuts off some or all funding to Dell and shifts it to a Dell competitor – as a “double whammy.” In one instance, this executive wrote that Intel intended to use an upcoming Dell- Intel meeting to force Dell to discuss how Dell “plan[s] to drive” total market shift to Intel from AMD, and had a “perception that we’re [competing] against competitors seeking Intel CPUs, instead of marketing against AMD.”
Intel Repeatedly Renegotiates Its Payments
To Dell To Ensure “Monogamy”
89. Over the coming years, Intel and Dell fell into a pattern of negotiating the amount of Intel’s subsidies to Dell on a nearly continuous basis. These negotiations were tied to Intel’s aggressive efforts to prevent AMD from getting a toe-hold at Dell.
In each successive round of negotiations, the groundwork was usually laid by mid-level executives at both companies tasked with conveying messages and “positioning” to and from the other so that top executives at both firms would know what to expect when they met.
90. In advance of such a meeting, on June 24, 2002, Dell’s informal liaison reported back from conversations with Intel’s lead negotiator on what Dell’s then-COO Kevin Rollins, who was scheduled to meet with a top Intel executive, should expect at the meeting. Rollins was told by his subordinate that, “[w]ithout being blatant, [the Intel representative] will make it clear that Dell won’t get more MOAP if we do AMD. We’ll get less, and someone else will get ours.”
91. After the meeting, on July 9, 2002, Kevin Rollins reported to Michael Dell that the result of the meeting was that Intel was willing to increase payments to Dell and seemed
willing to do “whatever it takes” to keep Dell from purchasing from AMD.” Rollins wrote: “They got the message that we were very serious this time with our AMD assessment, and seem to want to do whatever it takes to persuade us not to go with [an AMD CPU] …. Initial word is that our MOAP should increase from the $70M this qtr to $100mm.”
. The “Boomerang” Episode
92. Dell periodically considered launching AMD-based products, notwithstanding
Intel’s fierce opposition. But its fear of Intel’s reaction, based on Intel’s explicit and implicit
threats, counseled strongly against any action. For example, in 2002, a Dell team explored a
potential switch to AMD for some of Dell’s CPU needs, in a project code-named “Boomerang”.
The study concluded, first, that “AMD offers a significant margin opportunity for [Dell’s]
Dimension and Inspiron” platforms, on account of price, cost and customer demand factors.
93. But the Boomerang study also identified Intel’s reaction as a “key question” in
the analysis and discussed the potential “opportunity cost” given Dell’s “[e]xclusive relationship
with Intel.” The study asked whether “MOAP [payments to Dell would] increase or decrease?
And over what time period – short term vs. long term?”
The Boomerang study attempted to quantify the projected margin benefit from adopting AMD, concluding that “[up] to 32% of MOAP program could be risked” before Intel’s retaliation, in the form of reduced MOAP, would outweigh the benefits of switching certain platforms to AMD CPUs.
94. The key Dell executive acting as informal liaison between the two companies
commented on the results of the “Boomerang” study.
He warned that the “worst-case downside” scenario is that Intel would “eliminate ~$250M of Dell meet-comp MOAP for some period,” and moreover, that “Intel [would] give this MOAP to competitors to ensure that Intel does not lose [market share] to a Dell AMD [system].”
The “net effect” would be that Dell would “not only lose ~$250 [million], we probably have to do incremental [discounting] on our Intel platforms against competitors who [would] now [be] subsidized with an extra $250M from Intel.”
95. A confirming contemporaneous internal Intel email from Intel’s Dell account representative to top Intel executives states that Dell must be made to understand two things: First, that Intel’s payments to Dell would decrease “if they have AMD in their arsenal.” Second, that Dell should be warned of the “possibility that [MCP] dollars that we’re (sic) applied to DELL could go somewhere else” if Dell starts to offer AMD-based products.
96. The message was apparently conveyed in fact. A Dell executive testified that, at the time of the Boomerang analysis, Intel had conveyed “the concept of their statement back that … as long as [Dell is] Intel only, our discount structure is what it is.” He added that he understood from Intel that, “[i]f there was a change in our Intel only [status], then our discount program would have to be revisited.”
97. Under these circumstances, Dell decided not to launch AMD-based products at
that time. A Dell executive who was responsible for the “analytics” and “cost assumptions” of
the Boomerang study testified to the Attorney General that concern about Intel’s reaction was a substantial part of that decision. ""
Starting on Page 33 of Source Below
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/media_center/2009/
nov/NYAG_v_Intel_COMPLAINT_FINAL.pdf
CEO Paul Otellini
More at www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV on the Evils of Intel...
www.CEOPaulOtellini.com
Intel Pays Dell, AMD, Anti-Trust Violations,
CEO Paul Otellini, Kevin Rollins, Michael Dell
“The intent of the MCP program is to provide funding to Dell to combat the AMD threat in the marketplace since Dell is an Intel-only OEM for CPU’s”
“The MCP is negotiated on a quarterly basis.”
“There is not a formal ‘contract’ per se that documents all the terms and conditions of the MCP program for a quarter. Rather, the MCP terms and conditions are agreed upon via email and telephone communications, which are finalized in a spreadsheet that is agreed to by Dell and Intel for a particular quarter.” (Emphasis added).
86. As mentioned in the memo, throughout this period, top executives at both companies took care that the dealings between them were kept secret. Although billions of dollars in rebate payments flowed from Intel to Dell during the period 2002-2006, there was no formal documentation of the secret agreements which led to them.
3. Intel Conveyed Threats To Dell
87. Intel repeatedly made it clear to Dell that, if Dell wanted Intel’s support, Dell would have to direct its efforts against AMD. For example, in preparation for upcoming funding negotiations with Intel in 2002, a Dell executive, who regularly acted as an informal liaison between Dell and Intel, explained that Intel would not tolerate a Dell shift to AMD CPUs.
Specifically, this Dell executive wrote to Michael Dell and others: “If [Dell starts to use] AMD [CPUs], [Intel] would just give a [competitor] MOAP type dollars to match whatever we’re getting – they won’t sit around and let us transfer share to AMD…”
88. In emails and in testimony, the same Dell executive referred to this scenario – in which Intel cuts off some or all funding to Dell and shifts it to a Dell competitor – as a “double whammy.” In one instance, this executive wrote that Intel intended to use an upcoming Dell- Intel meeting to force Dell to discuss how Dell “plan[s] to drive” total market shift to Intel from AMD, and had a “perception that we’re [competing] against competitors seeking Intel CPUs, instead of marketing against AMD.”
Intel Repeatedly Renegotiates Its Payments
To Dell To Ensure “Monogamy”
89. Over the coming years, Intel and Dell fell into a pattern of negotiating the amount of Intel’s subsidies to Dell on a nearly continuous basis. These negotiations were tied to Intel’s aggressive efforts to prevent AMD from getting a toe-hold at Dell.
In each successive round of negotiations, the groundwork was usually laid by mid-level executives at both companies tasked with conveying messages and “positioning” to and from the other so that top executives at both firms would know what to expect when they met.
90. In advance of such a meeting, on June 24, 2002, Dell’s informal liaison reported back from conversations with Intel’s lead negotiator on what Dell’s then-COO Kevin Rollins, who was scheduled to meet with a top Intel executive, should expect at the meeting. Rollins was told by his subordinate that, “[w]ithout being blatant, [the Intel representative] will make it clear that Dell won’t get more MOAP if we do AMD. We’ll get less, and someone else will get ours.”
91. After the meeting, on July 9, 2002, Kevin Rollins reported to Michael Dell that the result of the meeting was that Intel was willing to increase payments to Dell and seemed
willing to do “whatever it takes” to keep Dell from purchasing from AMD.” Rollins wrote: “They got the message that we were very serious this time with our AMD assessment, and seem to want to do whatever it takes to persuade us not to go with [an AMD CPU] …. Initial word is that our MOAP should increase from the $70M this qtr to $100mm.”
. The “Boomerang” Episode
92. Dell periodically considered launching AMD-based products, notwithstanding
Intel’s fierce opposition. But its fear of Intel’s reaction, based on Intel’s explicit and implicit
threats, counseled strongly against any action. For example, in 2002, a Dell team explored a
potential switch to AMD for some of Dell’s CPU needs, in a project code-named “Boomerang”.
The study concluded, first, that “AMD offers a significant margin opportunity for [Dell’s]
Dimension and Inspiron” platforms, on account of price, cost and customer demand factors.
93. But the Boomerang study also identified Intel’s reaction as a “key question” in
the analysis and discussed the potential “opportunity cost” given Dell’s “[e]xclusive relationship
with Intel.” The study asked whether “MOAP [payments to Dell would] increase or decrease?
And over what time period – short term vs. long term?”
The Boomerang study attempted to quantify the projected margin benefit from adopting AMD, concluding that “[up] to 32% of MOAP program could be risked” before Intel’s retaliation, in the form of reduced MOAP, would outweigh the benefits of switching certain platforms to AMD CPUs.
94. The key Dell executive acting as informal liaison between the two companies
commented on the results of the “Boomerang” study.
He warned that the “worst-case downside” scenario is that Intel would “eliminate ~$250M of Dell meet-comp MOAP for some period,” and moreover, that “Intel [would] give this MOAP to competitors to ensure that Intel does not lose [market share] to a Dell AMD [system].”
The “net effect” would be that Dell would “not only lose ~$250 [million], we probably have to do incremental [discounting] on our Intel platforms against competitors who [would] now [be] subsidized with an extra $250M from Intel.”
95. A confirming contemporaneous internal Intel email from Intel’s Dell account representative to top Intel executives states that Dell must be made to understand two things: First, that Intel’s payments to Dell would decrease “if they have AMD in their arsenal.” Second, that Dell should be warned of the “possibility that [MCP] dollars that we’re (sic) applied to DELL could go somewhere else” if Dell starts to offer AMD-based products.
96. The message was apparently conveyed in fact. A Dell executive testified that, at the time of the Boomerang analysis, Intel had conveyed “the concept of their statement back that … as long as [Dell is] Intel only, our discount structure is what it is.” He added that he understood from Intel that, “[i]f there was a change in our Intel only [status], then our discount program would have to be revisited.”
97. Under these circumstances, Dell decided not to launch AMD-based products at
that time. A Dell executive who was responsible for the “analytics” and “cost assumptions” of
the Boomerang study testified to the Attorney General that concern about Intel’s reaction was a substantial part of that decision. ""
Starting on Page 33 of Source Below
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/media_center/2009/
nov/NYAG_v_Intel_COMPLAINT_FINAL.pdf
CEO Paul Otellini
More at www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV on the Evils of Intel...
www.CEOPaulOtellini.com
Intel Pays Dell, AMD, Anti-Trust Violations,
CEO Paul Otellini, Kevin Rollins, Michael Dell
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
RSS Feed (xml)
