Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 33

[JosephSHaas]

The new Inquisition: sign it, or else!

"" Crooked Cop "

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuaQ92O1ndY&NR=1

of 2:19 minutes   18,008 

[JosephSHaas]

"Miami Police Shot Protester, then laugh about it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G63FEamhpA0&NR=1

of: 2:35 minutes   1,769,822 views

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"They" don't like what you wrote on the sign about Totalitarianism = a polity or organized society having one specific form of government, and in this case: t. based  on: (1) monolithic unity AND (2)  authoritarianism. Or in other words like a monolith (or a large block of stone): massive and uniform AND characterized by or favoring ABSOLUTE OBEDIENCE TO AUTHORITY*! or else!

* authority = the right** AND power to command, enforce laws, exact obedience, determine, influence, or judge.

** In an Art. IV, Sec. 4, U.S. Constitutional Republican form of government, the authorities (or government officials) do NOT have this "right", but ONLY those privileges that "we" the people grant*** to them.

*** As in RSA Ch. 123:1 we in N.H. did grant or offer jurisdictional authority to the Feds for their U.S. Codes to be controllable OVER us, but ONLY upon their acceptance of such by filing their 40USC255 papers with our N.H. Office of Secretary of State that they have yet to do from 1-8-17 U.S., and so all State-Federal relations that result in imprisonment withOUT this Art. 12-N.H. pro-tection is a theft of liberty to that inhabitant withOUT his or her approval, since our legislative body of the General Court did offer same, but that it was conditional, upon a certain event of filing the papers first BEFORE the fact that ANY person can be "filed" or imprisoned WHEREever based upon a violation of a U.S. Code never approved! This is RSA Ch. 633:3 False Imprisonment,  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/633/633-3.htm "A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if he knowingly confines another unlawfully, as defined in RSA 633:2, ****so as to interfere substantially with his physical movement."  and so to charge those with such for this criminal act when they KNOW that there be no such paper filing!

****  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/633/633-2.htm "II. The meaning of ""confines another unlawfully'', as used in this section and RSA 633:3, includes but is not limited to confinement accomplished by force, threat or deception...."

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090812/NEWS01/908120369

entitled: "John Paul: Where are your papers?"

of:

"So WHEN was the vote on this Public Hearing? On: _______________ and WHERE are the Minutes?

http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/how_to_committe_hrg.htm of: " It takes several months, or even years, for a hearing to be published."

See: http://www.senate.gov/general/search/search_cfm.cfm?q=Kacavas&x=14&y=8&site=default_collection&num=10&filter=0

for:  (1)  http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=3942
of:

"UPDATED AGENDA

Senate Judiciary Committee
Senate Dirksen Office Building Room 226
June 25, 2009 at 12:00 p.m.

I. Nominations

B. Todd Jones, to be United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota

John P. Kacavas, to be United States Attorney for the District of New Hampshire"

and (2) Shaheen's Statement in support of May 15, 2009 at: http://shaheen.senate.gov/news/press/release/?id=4b39bbab-952a-44b6-bd2f-17b0e01fea76 of: "...I have no doubt John will work tirelessly to fulfill the RESPONSIBILITIES* of this post...." (emphasis ADDed).

* Thus the duty or course of action required by one's position is to the contract that compels THE obligation: "to FOLLOW a certain course of action" (emphasis ADDed, because to follow is to go after, as in to obey or comply WITH / not against/  the ACT of binding oneself by a LEGAL tie, being the constraining power of the law, and thus the obligation of NOT to work withIN this office UNTIL the office be legal! and that is only AFTER the federal filing by 40USC255 to N.H. R.S.A. 123:1 because UNTIL this is done, there can be no other laws, like the U.S. Codes controllable OVER the inhabitants of this state UNLESS they individually consent to the same!)

Thus in addition to: " Obama must sign the appointment for IT to be official. " (emphasis ADDed for "it", that should be a "he", in that he: John Paul Kacavas is not AN official or "one who holds an office or position" there UNTIL there is authorization of the grant of authority having been completed in that like they say: It Takes Two to Tango, and in this case the offer AND acceptance.  So for the micro or man to accept the macro office offered by The President is one thing, but WHERE is the authorization or sanction, i.e. the "approval" by the 40USC255 acceptance? It has YET to be filed in the proper place! Officialism from which the word official is derived is defined as: "Rigid adherence to official regulations, forms, and procedures." as in the procedure or "A series of steps or course of action".  The step #1 being of for that N.H. RSA Chapter 123:1 federal agent to file the papers for which this office can legally hold this official; otherwise a "sanction" WILL be applied as "A penalty intended to enforce compliance or conformity." A Ninth Amendment Bill for $x,xxx.xx per day of illegal operation until there be not merely a compliance, or yielding to this claim or demand, but of conformity as in action in correspondence with current law!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBC27Xem-EU "

[keith in RI]

07/27/2009 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge George Z. Singal: TELEPHONE CONFERENCE as to Edward Brown, Elaine Brown held on 7/27/2009. ORAL Order: With respect to Defendants Motions # 176 and # 177, The government shall file, ex parte and in camera, within 2 weeks of today an affidavit with the information requested on the record at the conference regarding the confidential informant in the case. By agreement of the defendants, there shall be no replies filed on the motions #176 and # 177. SO ORDERED by Judge George Z. Singal (Govt Atty: Arnold Huftalen, Terry Ollila) (Defts Atty: Bjorn Lange, Mike Iacopino) (Maine Court Reporter: Lori Dunbar)(Total Hearing Time: 40 mins) (cmp) Modified on 8/3/2009 to add: Court Reporter. (dae). (Entered: 07/27/2009)

08/10/2009 188 RESPONSE (Ex Parte and In Camera) by USA as to Edward Brown, Elaine Brown re oral order from Telephone Conference. (dae) (Entered: 08/10/2009)

08/11/2009 189 SEALED ORDER re 188 USA's Response as to Edward Brown, Elaine Brown. So Ordered by Judge George Z. Singal. (dae) (Entered: 08/11/2009)

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a copy and paste of my latest e-mail to the powers-that-be in Dover, N.H.:

"
RE: (91-A)Tax Bill to GSA owners of the Dover P.O.
From:    Joseph S. Haas (josephshaas at hotmail.com)
Sent:    Thu 8/13/09 1:58 PM
To:    c.vermette at dover.nh.gov
Cc:    a.krans at ci.dover.nh.us; County Strafford (jmiccolo at co.strafford.nh.us)
Bcc:    _____________________________________________________________
To: City Attorney Allan B. Krans
Dover, New Hampshire 03820

http://www.ci.dover.nh.us/forms/Public%20Info%20Request%20Form.pdf from http://www.ci.dover.nh.us/

603: 516-6520

Dear Attorney Krans:

--Hopefully my request to Cindy for a copy of this bill to the Feds by either Mr. Will Corcoran or Mr. Dan Lynch has been forwarded to you by her for your legal counsel to them to sell me a copy next Thursday afternoon on my next visit to your city, or tell me WHY this is NOT being done, because if there be no legal excuse nor "prompt" bill, I WILL seek to criminally prosecute WHOever is supposed to be doing this job, as already explained, thus the seriousness of my request, as these Feds (and your three County Commissioners there) are arogant bastards who think that they are above the law!  The law of there being no 40USC255 federal filing to our N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution, and so my attacking the civil first in 123:2 before dealing with a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for my friend Ed Brown there who is being held by RSA Ch. 633:3 False Imprisonment since he never waived his Art. 12-N.H. right NOT to be controllable by goons like these Three Commissioners who think that they can have some County-Fed contract with some woman in Washington over-ride the law! Disgusting! And to deal with their criminal actions later!

Yours truly, - - Joe Haas

cc: The Three Big County Crooks (by way of e-mail to their receptionist).

From: josephshaas at hotmail.com
To: c.vermette at dover.nh.gov
Subject: Tax Bill to GSA owners of the Dover P.O.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:34:35 -0400

To: Cindy Vermette

Dear Cindy:

--This is to follow-up my telephone call to you earlier today as I was writing this e-mail letter that you're only getting a portion of, being the footnote #2 as I have copied and pasted, as follows:


"footnote #2: The Finance Director's full name is Daniel R. Lynch,
http://www.ci.dover.nh.us/finhome.htm and his phone # is 516-6030 but that he is at a Seminar in Concord today, and THE Assessor who works for him is: Mr. Will Corcoran, but that he is currently in a meeting, so said Claire, the Clerk there at c.vermette at dover.nh.gov to get a copy and paste of this footnote but not the main body of this e-mail since after I read the "riot act" so-called to her of RSA Ch. 643:1 for "Official Oppression" of somebody there NOT doing their job of sending out this tax bill to the GSA/ General Services Administration landlord of this federal Post Office as ONLY the RSA Ch. 123:1 land is exempt from property taxes, NOT the building, she thought it was in RSA Ch. 72:23 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/V/72/72-23.htm but when I did search for federal, u.s., or "United" for "States" it is NOT in there, and so to please have WHOever send out the tax bill to them Art. 14 "prompt"ly, like by tomorrow, since the City Attorney has had this to try to find any other statute since my first meeting with him and e-mails of both back to Wed., July 22nd of last month, and it now three (3) weeks later!!! and still NOTHING done about this!!! The CRIME being of to harm the Dover taxpayers (me included as a part owner, by stock of two such companies doing business in this City) by putting this $financial burden upon them when there is this FAILure to do a duty inherent in the office involved! For which I WILL privately prosecute, IF the Police Chief will NOT, as getting e-mails too, but withOUT even an acknowledgement thereof! that I find disgustingly arrogant, with that "nose up in the air" expression as was stated by some City Councilors at last night's meeting in regards to the School Committee. "

--Would you please have WHOever there "prompt"ly send out this tax bill to the Feds, or give me an excuse in writing of WHY this has not been done, by Thursday of next week, August 20th @ 1:35 p.m. for withIN the five (5) business days per the RSA Ch 91-A Right to know WHY this is not being done. Or in other words for a copy of this bill.

Thank you, - - - - - - - - - Joe  / Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone), e-mail: JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com "

[JosephSHaas]

Here's what happened at the Wed., July 22, 2009 Dover, N.H. City Council Meeting, which Minutes were approved last night (Wed., Aug. 12th), but that are still listed as being "DRAFT" only, that they are not:

https://online.ci.dover.nh.us/energie/doverSearch2.php?cab=Public_Meetings&index=public_body&autosearch=City%20Council

"6. CITIZEN'S FORUM

Citizens are invited to speak on any issue pertaining to the business of the City of Dover.  Statements shall be limited to five minutes.

Councilor Scott made a motion to suspend the Council rules to have a non-resident guest speak for three minutes. seconded by Councilor Callaghan.
Roll Call Vote: 4/5; Failed. Councilors Callaghan, Cheney, Scott, and Weston voted in favor.

Harvey J. Lynch, 26B Lincoln Street: He said the Council was being unfair to the gentleman who came to speak to the Council...."

Note: Business owners who are not residents may speak too.

[JosephSHaas]

Here's another copy and paste:

"
An FYI about Obama's Treasury in "The Concord Monitor".?
From:    Joseph S. Haas (josephshaas at hotmail.com)
Sent:    Fri 8/14/09 1:00 PM
To:    s.mccusker at dover.nh.gov
Cc:    Dick Marple (armlaw at hotmail.com); r.carrier at dover.nh.gov; c.cheney at dover.nh.gov; d.dede at dover.nh.gov; s.myers at dover.nh.gov; d.trefethen at dover.nh.gov; k.weston at dover.nh.gov; editor at dovercitynews.net; mike.brown at mail.house.gov; olga.clough at mail.house.gov; d.lynch at dover.nh.gov; a.colarusso at dover.nh.gov; lmodica at fosters.com; County Strafford (jmiccolo at co.strafford.nh.us); a.krans at dover.nh.gov

F.Y.I. Here are some details of what I did just write to you about a few minutes ago. -- Joe

RE:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090814/NEWS03/908140352/1013

entitled: "Obama's Treasury ought to supply the right money to these banks!"

of:

"It's time for the banks (both: state and federally chartered ones; plus of the stock and mutual varieties too) to fight back:

Demand to see those gold deposits by Audit not of the Fed* (as in the Federal Reserve System), but of the U.S. Treasury, who is supposed to take in this gold bullion by Section 16 of The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, see: http://www.frbdiscountwindow.org/federalreserveact.html and paragraph #15 therein, because:

Because the Private Fed* does buy these Federal Reserve Notes of ANY and ALL $ denominations from $1.00 (George Washington) to $100 (Ben Franklin) from the Bureau of Engraving & Printing for only about 6-cents each x 32 notes per sheet = $1.92/sheet.

The paper (or actually cotton), made at The Crane Paper Company, in Dalton, MAss.

It is only when the notes are "monetized" does the Fed* deposit so much gold per pallet of those denominated notes, or do they? We are NOT supposed to have "fiat" paper money.

When was the last Audit of the U.S. Treasury of this exchange? Isn't the gold bullion there to sell for when the "dollar", defined as so many grains of silver, is not enough to supply the demand?  And who of our elected officials as officers, not employees, by 29USC630 really claim such?

The Coinage Act of 1792 is still the law.  When the price of silver went to more than what the dollar coin was value at, did the government re-define the dollar?  No! By the Coinage Act of 1965 the commerce dollars did not replace the constitutional coins, but were and are minted to go "together" or con-current with them, being the actual word used by LBJ to Congress that year.

So when dealing with government, Art. I, Sec. 10 of the U.S. Constitution is still in force, but that one may waive their right, but canNOT have their rights stolen from them!

Section 20 of this Act of 1792, as annotated in our N.H. Art. 97 requires that all government offices be kept and had in conformity to this regulation, but have they?  Where is the money?  Why isn't "Law Enforcement" doing its job to uphold the law?! Chapter 28 Laws of New Hampshire of 1794, in Vol. 6 @ page 155.

Yes you can offer "legal tender" or sandwich coins of debased metal TO the government, but that before they are entered onto the books and when they owe you money, they SHALL make nothing but gold AND silver coin a tender or offer in payment of their debt FROM them to you.  The you being to include our public servants who FAIL to accept their paychecks in such quality of coin and so in effect having abandoned their RSA Ch. 92:2 oaths of office to comply with the law. They need to be replaced forthwith with people of honor: those who will not be the "outlaws", but to be in harmony with the law: all laws!"

[KBCraig]

Firefox plug-in allows free access to PACER documents:

http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=18880

[keith in RI]

Firefox plug-in allows free access to PACER documents:

http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=18880

too bad this wasnt available BEFORE i paid for and downloaded about 1000 bucks worth of docs from the browns and supporters trials.......... they could have all been free now! i cant seem to find anything about this program that would allow you to add documents you have previously downloaded to the free library. it only saves the ones you download (or someone else thats logged in) while logged into pacer AFTER this program is installed....... still a good tool though.

[KBCraig]

Keith, I don't know enough about PACER to know if you can re-access documents you previously purchased (which would let Recap load them).

I understand that Recap is concerned about fraudulent and/or modified documents making it into their public archive and compromising their integrity. That's why you can't upload documents you've already purchased; it would be just as easy to upload "documents" that are fakes. That's why they only directly access PACER to copy new docs to their public archive.

If anyone didn't catch it, "Recap" is "PACER" backwards, which goes with their motto of "Taking PACER back".

[JosephSHaas]

Firefox plug-in allows free access to PACER documents:

http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=18880

Here's a copy and paste:

JosephSHaas
Troublemaker
*****
Karma: 1035
Posts: 2185
View Profile WWW Email Personal Message (Online)
   
   
Re: Free access to PACER (federal court documents)
« Reply #2 on: Today at 09:45 AM »
   
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Modify messageModify Remove messageRemove Split TopicSplit Topic
Quote from: KBCraig on Yesterday at 05:33 PM
...
https://www.recapthelaw.org/

Thanks K.B.C. To get to there later.

For now and for Jason Gerhard #20229-045 @ The FCI Fairton, P.O. Box 420, Fairton, N.H. 08320 is his latest 3-page "MOTION FOR REPLACEMENT OF COURT APPOINTED COUNSEL" there?

The reason being that "I have tried to call attorney Glickman's office numerous times, emailed him and written letters requesting transcripts...that have NEVER been sent to me as of the date on this motion" (emphasis ADDed, of Aug. 10th '09 postmarked to me 8/12 and delivered just two days later= yesterday, Fri., Aug.14th, and by the Ellen Sullivan, Esq. letter of Aug. 4 '09 referring to this "First Circuit Appeal No. 08-2056" and Attorney PAUL M. GLICKMAN e-mail: pgm at glickmanturley dot com for: G.T. GLICKMAN TURLEY, LLP, 250 Summer Street, Boston, MA 02210, TEL. 617.399.7770 http://www.glickmanturley.com "the brief is now due on August 18, 2009."

I REPEAT: "the brief is now due on August 18"th = next Tuesday = in only two more business days!! What a "lazy" bastard! NOT to even send the transcripts to his client, whose "boss"? Ellen has to write of trying to get "a continuance" granted for "mid October" = another two months!?  WHEN did his office get these transcripts? and WHY wasn't a copy sent to Jason?

I heard than Danny got his, and I've asked Bill to ask Danny if he'd please send me a copy of that "side bar" of all the attorneys with Singal right after Sven tried to present a copy of the Art. 49-N.H. Constitution chain-of-command for when the governor does FAIL in his Art. 51 duty for which he "shall" be "responsible for" NOT making the Feds finally accept by 40USC255 our N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 offer from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution* per the 1943 Adams case of the U.S. Supreme Court to Reno while on the Witness Stand when he answered Kinsella that he did NOTHING to try to resolve this issue peaceably, which reply by Reno was correct in the direct** as he DID sign the Petition with Ed & Elaine, Bernie, Randy Weaver, and other(s), including myself on June 20, 2007 that I personally delivered to the governor's receptionist on the next day, June 21st @ 4:29 o'clock p.m. and that David Ridley did question the governor about this later, and Lynch's reply was that Ed was not even on his "radar unit".

So to continue because of Attorney "sloppiness" or "strategy" to get it continued so as to incorporate my RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 State Board of Claims complaint #2009-013 filed Oct. 15, 2008 hearing AGAINST the Gov. John H. Lynch (of Hopkinton) on Sept. ___, 2009 in Concord, N.H. for him to pay me this $5,000 for his wrongs in not enforcing the law! that IF he did, then there might have been a different result, like for him to tell the Feds to "back off" of approaching, let alone kidnapping our Art. 12-N.H. "inhabitants" Ed & Elaine Brown on Oct. 4, 2007 since no U.S. Code as an other law shall be controllable over us withOUT the full "consent" (by offer and acceptance, as like in the saying: "it takes two to tango") of EITHER our "legislative body" = The N.H. General Court or Legislature; OR the individual.

What Sven was trying to do was to get this document of evidence into an Exhibit #___ to be weighed by the jury, since although Reno did NOT "directly"** do any peaceful actions to try to resolve this with ANY of the Feds, he DID do so "indirectly" by my presentation of this document to the governor who was and still is our "public servant" who was supposed to serve the question for the Feds to answer.

And so this militant action by the Feds from the word: militate meaning FORCE as evidence to be offset by THIS evidence of their WRONG as having NO jurisdictional authority over ANY of the inhabitants here, and that IN-cludes those brought to here, as those "Removal Hearings" in Missouri for Jason, Texas for Reno, New York for Danny, and Vermont for Bob, were in-complete, as their attorneys were ineffective as NOT to put this 40USC255 into the equation.

* Danny still "harping" about this U.S. District Court somehow being an "equity court" where "Constitutional Rights do not apply" re: THE AMERICAN'S BULLETIN of Jan./Feb.2008 that he sent me a copy of on Aug. 10th re: http://urbansurvival.com but that it is not "Constitutional Rights" but of rights as guaranteed BY the Constitution and with their reference to "a tax court" that he thinks is THIS court!? No! Danny, that is a separate court, of actually some administrative executive internal court that you go to by contract IF you choose to waive your rights.  I've known about this for decades and have NEVER set foot in any of these Star Chamber-like places where the burden of proof is reverse in like a show-cause hearing WHY you do not owe the tax and canNOT base it upon any rights. Now WHY would anybody EVER go to there!? It's not a "court" but a con! These Art. III, Sec. 1, U.S. "inferior Courts" of Congress must comply with the law of set-up, BEFORE they do send off its victims to be corrected in these F.C.I.'s.  They must be corrected first! And if not done by themselves, then to have the President Pardon or Commute all victims therein, after a Reprieve.

Yours truly, - - Joe

P.S. Bill: As I told you months ago: Gary B. has the other "documents" Danny wants, so to contact him for an address for where to send them to you. A cc: of this by copy and paste to the both of you.  Danny is "very" upset that these are not already in your possession! re: his letter to me of Aug. 7th, postmarked 12 Aug. that I did just receive in yesterday's mail: Fri., Aug. 14th so notified the day AFTER he was  to call me on Thu. 8/13 @ 11:30 AM "to get answers" that YOU should have given to him months ago!!! as my envelopes to him have been returned by the facility as NEVER delivered to Danny."

[Russell Kanning]

9000 posts

[JosephSHaas]

Firefox plug-in allows free access to PACER documents:

http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=18880

Here's a copy and past of an e-mail about this:


"Firefox Plug-In Frees Court Records, Threatens Judiciary Profits - PACER, Etc.?
From: _______________________
Sent:    Sat 8/15/09 2:04 PM
To:    ____________________
Note: there are hyperlinks in the original url text, so you need to go to the link below.

_______

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/08/firefox-plug-in-frees-court-records-threatens-judiciary-profits

From Wired Magazine's THREAT LEVEL - Privacy, Crime and Security Online Section

Firefox Plug-In Frees Court Records, Threatens Judiciary Profits

By Ryan Singel   August 14, 2009  |  2:07 pm  |  Categories: The Courts

Access to the nation's federal law proceedings just got a public interest hack, thanks to programmers from Princeton, Harvard and the Internet Archive, who released a Firefox plug-in designed to make millions of pages of legal documents free.

Free as in beer and free as in speech.

The Problem: Federal courts use an archaic, document-tracking system known as PACER as their official repository for complaints, court motions, case scheduling and decisions. The system design resembles a DMV computer system, circa 1988 — and lacks even the most basic functionality, such as notifications when a case gets a new filing. But what's worse is that PACER charges 8 cents per page (capped at $2.40 per doc) and even charges for searches — an embarrassing limitation on public access to information, especially when the documents are copyright-free.

The Solution: RECAP, a Firefox-only plugin, that rides along as one usually uses PACER — but it automatically checks if the document you want is already in its own database. The plug-in's tagline, 'Turning PACER around,' alludes to the fact that its name comes from spelling PACER backwards. RECAP's database is being seeded with millions of bankruptcy and Federal District Court documents, which have been donated, bought or gotten for free by open-government advocate Carl Malamud and fellow travelers such as Justia.

And if the document you request isn't already in the public archive, then RECAP adds the ones you purchase to the public repository.

The plug-in was released by Princeton's Center for Information Technology Policy, coded by Harlan Yu and Tim Lee, under the direction of noted computer science professor Ed Felten.

That's a pretty good hack, but it's still just a stop-gap measure until the federal courts figure out that in the age of the internet, charging citizens to search and read public documents should be a federal crime.

Using it should not cause journalists, lawyers or law students (PACER's main customers) any legal trouble. After all, court documents are never copyrightable.

But you never know how the justice system might react. Last fall, the federal court system shut down a pilot program that offered free PACER access at a few libraries around the country after it figured out that Malamud and hacker Aaron Swartz took them at their word and started downloading court decisions by the gigabyte.

That got Malamud 20 percent of the fed's court filings and an interrogation by FBI agents earlier this year.

Hopefully RECAP will get a friendlier reception from the U.S. Federal Court System."

[JosephSHaas]

9000 posts

                                                                



                                           


                                                     
                                                     

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090816/REPOSITORY/908160353&template=single

entitled: "Buck "The System"! It's corrupt, and needs to be fixed, now!"

of:  "Thanks Keith, and especially for: " "We had issues - the war in Vietnam,...."

I was only 16 back then, a sophomore in High School, and got a Lottery Number for the Draft, right in the middle of the 365+1 and so didn't have to go shooting bullets at an enemy I had never met, as ordered by politicians who were over-the-hill to defend Free Enterprise as against the creeping effects of Communism we were told to stop the spread at ANY cost!

It was a protest against such crap, to which the music of the times was to question authority, as in that Judy Collins song of: "Both Sides Now" http://www.lyricsfreak.com/j/joni+mitchell/both+sides+now_20075289.html with video over at: "Judy Collins - Both Sides Now-1968" = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CavaVZI_xDc&feature=related of 3:16 minutes  55,721 views, with the highlight on the word "illusions", because:

Because as I just noticed in tomorrow's paper today [ an "Early Edition" (;-) ] of The FREE! "Coffee News(R)" http://www.coffeenewsusa.com Vol. 1, No. 10, August 17, 2009 @ page 1 of 2, check out this "Quoteable Quotes" of: "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. - Stephen Hawking".  Or in other words: what a lot of public servant/ officers or officials think that they are mere 29USC630 employees when, in fact, they are above that but don't know it!  They are in their own illusion of what is far from the truth! Of an "erroneous" perception or concept; as in a mis-conception, with un-fortunate consequences to those who are the victims of this like ONE STEP BEYOND the mis- to a mal-icious situation, and so needing a "correction" but like a child, or student to a teacher who REFUSES to be taught the truth, because to live the lie is what they want*, and leads me over to another quote from Samual Adams (1722-1803):

http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/95sep/adams.html of: "If ye love wealth* greater than liberty, the tranquility* of servitude*
greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us
in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down
and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon
you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBC27Xem-EU " [ 4:58 min.   23,647 x ]