Author Topic: Blogger lawsuits originate at BCCI/Ptech/Iran-Contra Narco Banksters  (Read 27657 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated

A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.[1]

The typical SLAPP plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff's goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate. A SLAPP is often preceded by a legal threat. The difficulty, of course, is that plaintiffs do not present themselves to the Court admitting that their intent is to censor, intimidate or silence their critics. Hence, the difficulty in drafting SLAPP legislation, and in applying it, is to craft an approach which affords an early termination to invalid abusive suits, without denying a legitimate day in court to valid good faith claims.


The acronym was coined in the 1980s by University of Denver professors Penelope Canan and George W. Pring. The term was originally defined as "a lawsuit involving communications made to influence a governmental action or outcome, which resulted in a civil complaint or counterclaim filed against nongovernment individuals or organizations on a substantive issue of some public interest or social significance."[2] It has since been defined more broadly in one state (California) to include suits about speech on any public issue.[3]

The original conceptualization proffered by Canan and Pring emphasized the Right to petition as protected in the United States under the US Constitution's specific protection in the First Amendment's fifth clause. It is still definitional: SLAPPs refer to civil lawsuits filed against those who have communicated to government officialdom (in its entire constitutional apparatus). The Right to Petition [granted by Edgar the Peaceful, 10 Century] precedes the Magna Carta in terms significance in the development of democratic institutions. It claims that democracy cannot work if there are, or if interest groups can erect, barriers between the governed and the governing.

According to New York Supreme Court Judge J. Nicholas Colabella, "Short of a gun to the head, a greater threat to First Amendment expression can scarcely be imagined." A number of jurisdictions have made such suits illegal, provided that the appropriate standards of journalistic responsibility have been met by the critic.

Jurisdictional variations


One of the first cases in Canada to deal with a SLAPP was Fraser v. Saanich (see [1999] B.C.J. No. 3100 (B.C. S.C.)) (QL), where the British Columbia Supreme Court struck out the claim of a hospital director against the District of Saanich, holding that it was a meritless action designed to silence or intimidate the residents who were opposed to the plaintiff’s plan to redevelop the hospital facilities.

The first case to discuss and apply the Protection of Public Participation Act (PPPA) was Home Equity Development v. Crow, (see [2002] B.C.J. No. 1805 (B.C. S.C.)) (QL). The defendants' application to dismiss the action against them was dismissed. The defendants failed to meet the burden of proof required by the PPPA, that the plaintiffs had no reasonable prospect of success. Many felt that the plaintiffs did not bring their action for an improper purpose, and the suit did not inhibit the defendants in their public criticism of the particular project.

In Ontario, the decision in Daishowa v. Friends of the Lubicon (see [1996] O.J. No. 3855 Ont. Ct. Gen. Div.)) (QL) was also instructive on SLAPPs. A motion brought by the corporate plaintiff Daishowa to impose conditions on the defendant Friends of the Lubicon Indian Band that they would not represent Daishowa’s action as a SLAPP was dismissed.

Some political libel and forum shopping incidents, both common in Canada, have been called SLAPP suits, because such suits load defendants with costs of responding in unfamiliar jurisdictions or at times (typically elections) when they're extremely busy and short of funds. Both types of suits are almost unique to Canada, so there is little concern nor examination of whether political subject matter or remote forums are a clear indicator of SLAPP.

Following the decision in Fraser v. Saanich, the Protection of Public Participation Act went into effect in British Columbia in April, 2001. It was repealed in August, 2001.

Québec's Justice Minister, Jacques Dupuis, has proposed an anti-SLAPP bill on June 13, 2008.[4]. The bill was adopted by the National Assembly of Quebec on June 3, 2009. As of now, Quebec's amended Code of Civil Procedure is the only anti-SLAPP mechanism in force in Canada.

United States

California has a unique variant of anti SLAPP legislation which has led a significant volume of SLAPP litigation in that state. A search for reported cases on SLAPP litigation in 2009 found 1,386 cases for the State of California alone. The rest of the states combined had about 341, of which Massachusetts accounted for 176, raising the question whether California's SLAPP statute is accomplishing its primary objective of reducing costly litigation. See | Navellier v. Sletten, 52 P.3d 703 (Cal. 2002) (dissenting opinion). The U.S. state of California enacted Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16 in 1992, a statute intended to frustrate SLAPPs by providing a quick and inexpensive defense. It provides for a special motion that a defendant can file at the outset of a lawsuit to strike a complaint when it arises from conduct that falls within the rights of petition or free speech. The statute expressly applies to any writing or speech made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law, but there is no requirement that the writing or speech be promulgated directly to the official body. It also applies to speech in a public forum about an issue of public interest and to any other petition or speech conduct about an issue of public interest.

To win an anti-SLAPP motion, the defendant must first show that the lawsuit is based on constitutionally protected activity. Then, the burden shifts to the plaintiff, to affirmatively present evidence to show that they have a reasonable probability of prevailing on the action. The filing of an anti-SLAPP motion stays all discovery. This feature acts to greatly reduce the cost of litigation to the anti-SLAPP defendant, and can make beating the motion extremely difficult for the plaintiff, because they effectively must prove their case without the benefit of discovery.

If the special motion is denied, the order denying the motion is immediately appealable. Defendants prevailing on an anti-SLAPP motion (including any subsequent appeal) are entitled to a mandatory award of reasonable attorney’s fees. After an anti-SLAPP motion has been filed, a plaintiff cannot escape this mandatory fee award by amending its complaint. More than 300 published court opinions have interpreted and applied California's anti-SLAPP law.

California's Code of Civil Procedure § 425.17 corrects what the Legislature found to be abuse[5] of the anti-SLAPP statute (CCP § 425.16). Signed into law on September 6, 2003, this statute prohibits anti-SLAPP motions in response to certain public interest lawsuits and class actions, and actions that arise from commercial statements or conduct.[6] Section 425.18, signed into law on October 6, 2005, was enacted to facilitate SLAPP victims in recovering their damages through a SLAPPback (malicious prosecution action) against the SLAPP filers and their attorneys after the underlying SLAPP has been dismissed.

At least 26 other states and one territory have also enacted statutory protections against SLAPPs. These are Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, and Washington. In Colorado and West Virginia, the courts have adopted protections against SLAPPs. These laws vary dramatically in scope and level of protection, and the remaining states lack protections.

There is no federal anti-SLAPP law. The extent to which state laws apply in federal courts is unclear, and the Circuit courts have reached different conclusions. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has allowed California litigants to use their state's special motion in federal district courts located in California, in cases where the court is hearing at least one California state law claim through the doctrine of supplemental jurisdiction. [2] However, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has held that the Massachusetts anti-SLAPP law, as a mere matter of procedure, does not apply in federal courts.[7]

It has been argued that the lack of uniform protection against SLAPPs has encouraged forum shopping, proponents of federal legislation have argued that the uncertainty about one's level of protection has likely magnified the chill of SLAPPs.

In December 2009, Rep. Steve Cohen introduced the Citizen Participation Act, H.R. 4364, in the U.S. House. This marks the first time the Congress has considered federal anti-SLAPP legislation (though the Congress is currently considering the closely related issue of libel tourism.) Like many state anti-SLAPP laws, H.R. 4364 would allow the defendant of a SLAPP to have the suit quickly dismissed and to recover fees and costs.

Balancing the Right of Access to the Courts

The SLAPP penalty stands as a barrier to access to the Courts by providing an early penalty to claimants who seek judicial redress. In recent years, the courts in some states have recognized that enforcement of SLAPP legislation must recognize and balance the constitutional rights of both litigants. It has been said:

Since the Magna Carta, the world has recognized the importance of justice in a free society. “To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.” (Magna Carta, 1215.) This nation’s founding fathers knew people would never consent to be governed and surrender their right to decide disputes by force, unless government offered a just forum for resolving those disputes. Coucher & Kelly, The Social Contract from Hobbes to Rawls (1994).

The right to bring grievances to the courts, in good faith, is protected by state and federal constitutions in a variety of ways. In most states, the right to trial by jury in civil cases is recognized. The right to cross examine witnesses is fundamental to our judicial system. Moreover, the first amendment protects the right to petition the judiciary for grievances. The “right to petition extends to all departments of the Government. The right of access to the courts is indeed but one aspect of the right of petition.” California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508, 510 (1972) Because “the right to petition is ‘among the most precious of the liberties safeguarded by the Bill of Rights,’ ... the right of access to the courts shares this ‘preferred place’ in our hierarchy of constitutional freedoms and values. Harrison v. Springdale Water & Sewer Comm., 780 F.2d 1422, 1427 (8th Cir. 1986).” This balancing question is resolved differently in different states, often with substantial difficulty. See Denton v. Browns Mill Development Co, 561 S.E.2d 431 (Ga. 2002) and Browns Mill Development Co v. Denton, 543 S.E.2d 65 (Ga. App. 2000); EarthResources, LLC v. Morgan County, 638 S.E.2d 325 (Ga App. 2006); Alves v. Hometown Newspapers, Inc, 857 A.2d 743 (R.I.,2004) .

In Palazzo v. Ives, 944 A.2d 144 (R.I. 2008) the Court wrote:

By the nature of their subject matter, anti-SLAPP statutes require meticulous drafting. On the one hand, it is desirable to seek to shield citizens from improper intimidation when exercising their constitutional right to be heard with respect to issues of public concern. On the other hand, it is important that such statutes be limited in scope lest the constitutional right of access to the courts (whether by private figures, public figures, or public officials) be improperly thwarted. There is a genuine double-edged challenge to those who legislate in this area.

The most challenging balancing problem arises in application to SLAPP claims which do not sound in tort. The common law and constitutional law has developed in the United States to create a high substantive burden to tort and tort-like claims which seek redress for public speech, especially public speech which addresses matters of public concern. The common law in many states requires the pleader to state accurately the content of libelous words. Constitutional law has provided substantive protection which bars recovery against a first amendment defense except upon clear and convincing evidence that there has been deliberate or reckless falsehood. For this reason, ferreting out the bad faith SLAPP claim at an early stage of litigation should be accomplished with relative ease. Extension of the SLAPP penalties to factually complex cases, where the substantive standard of proof at common law is lower presents special challenges.

Notable SLAPPs

In February 2005 the European Court of Human Rights found that Helen Steel and David Morris did not receive a fair trial while defending a libel action brought by McDonald's in the United Kingdom. In what became known as the McLibel case, the two had been found guilty in 1994 of libelling the company in a leaflet. The court ruled that, because legal aid is not available to libel defendants, their right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated. They were awarded £24,000 damages, plus costs.

United States
Barbra Streisand, as plaintiff, lost a SLAPP motion after she sued an aerial photographer involved in the California Coastal Records Project. Streisand v. Adelman et al., in California Superior Court; Case SC077257 [8][9] See Streisand effect

Nationally syndicated talk radio host Tom Martino prevailed in an anti-SLAPP motion after he was sued for libel by a watercraft retailer. The case received national attention for its suggestion that no one reasonably expects objective facts from a typical talk show host.[10][11] Gardner v. Martino

Kim Shewalter and other neighborhood activists, as defendants, won an anti-SLAPP motion against apartment building owners. The owners had filed a SLAPP suit because of the defendants' protest activities.
Coltrain v. Shewalter

Barry King and another Internet poster, as defendants, won an anti-SLAPP motion against corporate plaintiffs based on critical posts on an Internet financial message board. Global Telemedia v. Does
Kathi Mills won an anti-SLAPP motion against the Atlanta Humane Society, Atlanta Humane Society v. Mills, in Gwinnett County (Georgia) Superior Court; case 01-A-13269-1 [12]

Karen Winner, the author of "Divorced From Justice," published in 1996 by ReganBooks/Harper Collins, is recognized as "[the] catalyst for the changes that we adopted," said Leo Milonas, a retired justice with the Appellate Division of the New York state courts who chaired a special commission that recommended the changes adopted by Chief Judge Judith Kaye.[13] But in 1999, Winner, along with a psychologist/whistleblower, and several citizens were SLAPPed for criticizing the guardian ad litem system and a former judge in South Carolina. Winner's report, "Findings on Judicial Practices & Court-appointed Personnel In The Family Courts In Dorchester, Charleston & Berkeley Counties, South Carolina" and citizen demonstrations led to the very first laws in South Carolina to establish minimum standards and licensing requirements for guardians ad litem — who represent the interests of children in court cases.[14] The retaliatory SLAPPs have been dragging on for nearly 10 years, with judgments totaling more than $11 million against the co-defendants collectively. Reflecting the retaliatory nature of these suits, at least one of the co-defendants is still waiting to find out from the judges, which particular statements if any he made were actually false.[15]

From 1981 to 1986, Pacific Legal Foundation and San Luis Obispo filed a suit attempting to obtain the mailing list of the Abalone Alliance to get the group to pay for the police costs of the largest anti-nuclear civil-disobedience act in U.S. history at the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Pacific Legal Foundation lost at every court level and withdrew the suit the day before it was due to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. San Luis Obispo County v. Abalone Alliance

In March 2009, MagicJack (company who promotes a USB VOIP device) filed a defamation suit against Boing Boing for exposing their unfair and deceptive business tactics regarding their EULA, visitor counter, and 30 day trial period. This was dismissed as a SLAPP by a California judge in late 2009. In the resulting ruling, MagicJack was made responsible for most of Boing Boing's legal cost. MagicJack Legal Documents
In the case Comins vs. VanVoorhis a Florida man named Christopher Comins filed a defamation suit against a University of Florida grad student after the student blogged about a video of Comins repeatedly shooting someone's pet dogs. This was cited as an example of a SLAPP suit by the radio show "On the Media". [16]


Jackson Stephens
Last Updated: December 05, 2008

Jackson Stephens exemplified the requisites for an unstoppable self-made billionaire. Visionary, charismatic, and intrepid pathfinder for those in power seeking, like himself, greater wealth and influence as sole moral imperatives.

He reached the status of global-power broker nearly a half century before his death in 2005 at the age of 83. His impact, however lives on, in the government insider firms run by his son Warren, and in weakened US security from the covert deals he arranged between US Presidents and foreign despots.

As head of the largest investment bank off Wall Street, he increased the personal wealth of three eagerly compromised Presidents, in exchange for nuclear and information control technologies.

From a small farm in Little Rock, Arkansas, Stephens joined his brother’s investment company in 1947, after graduating the Naval Academy with classmates Jimmy Carter and future CIA Director Stansfield Turner.

Successful ventures in energy, finance and media parlayed into mega scores, when he arranged the underwriting of Wal-Mart in 1970, then funded Tyson Food’s takeover of Holly Farms.

Along the way he covered his bets, as a financial problem solver for national politicians of both parties.
In the ‘80s, he was Arkansas Governor Clinton’s go-to fundraiser. In return, Stephens’ firm handle 70% of all Arkansas public-works bond issues.

He teamed up with China-born billionaire Mochtar Riady, who, along with his son James, would later be convicted of secretly funding Bill Clinton’s presidential campaigns with $ millions from the Chinese government.

During those same years, equal opportunist Stephens also arranged Mideast bankers’ multi $million bailouts for George W. Bush’s failing oil ventures.

Stephens’ firm, Systematics, secured a US beach-head for the infamous Bank of Commerce and Credit International. Before its $20 billion collapse in 1991, BCCI laundered money for dictators, terrorists, drug lords and illicit operations of intelligence agencies, including the CIA (most notably the Iran-Contra guns/cash/drugs transactions).

The effort started in the late ‘70s. Stephens brought Bert Lance, President Jimmy Carter’s soon indicted former budget director, together with BCCI principals including Agha Hasan Abedi, Ghaith Pharoan and Khalid Mahfouz (all later criminally charged as well). After 9/11, they and many of their Arabian banking colleagues were directly linked to, or themselves named Specifically Designated Global Terror financiers

After years of complex scheming to circumvent regulatory hurdles, Stephens’ and Lance’s labors paid off. BCCI gained entry into the US banking system and its safeguard systems, through clandestine control of Financial General Bankshares (FGB), a major DC-based banking institution.

At the same time, the BCCI tycoons bought Lance’s interest in FGB subsidiary National Bank of Georgia, from which he had loaned himself and Jimmy Carter several $million. BCCI set up “consultant “ contracts and new terms for the loans’ repayment, along with millions more donated to Carter’s chosen charities.

Stephens’ BCCI incursion, and his other ventures were represented by Hillary Clinton and her Arkansas law firm partners Vince Foster (later White House Counsel before death by reported suicide), and Webster Hubbell (later #3 in the US Justice Department before serving 20 months on multiple fraud convictions).
While Clinton was Arkansas Governor, Stephens’ billionaire buddies, the Riadys, bonded with Bill and Hillary through their global conglomerate (and Chinese government partner), the Lippo Group. James Riady moved to Little Rock to be closer to his new friends.

In 1983, the Riadys launched their first business venture in Arkansas: The Lippo Finance & Investment Inc. The following year, Lippo ,and everyone’s friend Jackson Stephens partnered to buy control of Arkansas’ Worthen Bank Corp. In 1991, a $2.5 million Worthen loan (never repaid), would rescue Clinton’s Presidential campaign.
Hillary and her law partners naturally handled Worthen, and other China-partnered Lippo matters as well.
In 1985, Worthen Bank was indicted for extending several million dollars' worth of illegal, preferential loans to companies owned by the Riadys and Stephens.

A fire of “unknown causes” broke out in the bank at 3am, destroying all the records sought by the prosecutors. Worthen and another Lippo-China bank were given “cease and desist” orders from making such “dangerous loans” in the future. The criminal case was settled, and the loans to Stephens and the Riadys were never repaid.
In 1987, Stephens’ ecumenical spirit helped arrange a $25 million bailout of George W. Bush’s floundering oil venture, Harken Energy, through his very same BCCI buddies, in partnership with the Union Bank of Switzerland.

Stephens gave $100,000 to the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980, another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee in 1990, and was a Bush Ranger (minimum $200, 000) for Bush in 2000 and 2004.
But through the first half of the ‘90s, Stephens, and his China-tied Lippo partners’ favorite recipient was Bill Clinton. Stephens was Clinton’s 2nd biggest contributor over his political career.

Toward the end of his first term, over fierce Congressional and Defense Department objections, Clinton ended major restrictions against military technology transfers to China. The US-China trade imbalance grew enormously, and Chinese nuclear weapon espionage, as documented in Congressional reports, grew rampant.

This while Clinton’s re-election campaign received $ millions, which were later traced back to foreign sources, mainly China.

In 1993, Clinton appointed Lippo Sr.VP John Huang as Assistant Deputy Secretary of the US Commerce Department. With only a perfunctory background check, Huang was given Top Security clearance, actually approved five months before he took office. Congressional probes later revealed that while installed at Commerce, Assistant Deputy Secretary Huang spent most afternoons at Stephens’ corporate offices, and was in constant contact with the Lippo Group, as well as with Chinese government officials.

Stephens’ Systematics, meanwhile, reportedly utilized a cutting edge computer program named PROMIS, secretly equipped with “back door control” ability, in IT management contracts with banks across the country.  Systematics merged with telecom giant Alltel just before Clinton’s Presidency. Stephens data mining company, Acxiom, continued rolling in “sensitive” government contracts through the Clinton and George W administrations.  Acxiom was the aggregator of US citizens’ private information for the Bush Defense Department’s Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, headed by John Poindexter, convicted of conspiracy in the ‘80s Iran/Contra scheme. In a 2005 government contract, Acxiom, along with Alltel/Systematics’ major vendor Qsent, and Choicepoint (which falsely disqualified tens of thousands of Florida Democrats in the 2000 Presidential election), merged extensive private information about 100 million US citizens. They illegally gave the data to the TSA, which then transferred it to IBM. The TSA explained it all as an unfortunate series of mistakes.

*** Note – In 1997, IBM joined with a small new firm named Ptech, to create the “Unified Modeling Language”  UML as the common parlance for integrated software coding.

Ptech, though known by FBI Bin Laden Unit Chief (later whistleblower) Robert Wright to be headed by a major Al Qaeda financier, and funded by Stephens’ former BCCI colleagues, was placed in charge of software management at every critical US Government agency- Defense, State, Justice, Energy, Transportation, the White House itself.

Ptech and a quasi government entity named MITRE, utilized PROMIS software to create the FAA’s National Airspace System, in control of operations on 911.

Stephens’ Acxiom Board of Directors reflected his cultivated Democratic Party dealings. The Board included former Clinton Chief of Staff “Mack” McClarty, former NATO Commander(and one time Democratic candidate) Wesley Clark and former Lippo Sr Exec Stephen Patterson.

When the Democrats gained control of Congress in 2006, both Alltel and Acxiom joined in formation to unfurl their primary team colors.

Within the same week in ‘07, each was acquired by TPG/Newbridge Capital, co-chaired by US Senator Diane Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum.

Senator Feinstein (D-Ca) is in perfect position to be of service. She is Chair of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security, and member of the Appropriations Subcommittees for Defense and Intelligence.

The awful legacy of Jackson Stephens’ spectral empire, now controlled by his son Warren, seems secure.

Alltel, Axicom deals:
Bush campaign contributions:
Connections to Clinton, Huang, Riady:
Riady, Clinton, Bush, BCCI:< /a>
Political contributions, Harken:
H arken, BCCI:
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline jimd3100

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,457
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2010, 03:06:38 am »
Stephens gave $100,000 to the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980, another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee in 1990, and was a Bush Ranger (minimum $200, 000) for Bush in 2000 and 2004.
But through the first half of the ‘90s, Stephens, and his China-tied Lippo partners’ favorite recipient was Bill Clinton. Stephens was Clinton’s 2nd biggest contributor over his political career.

Isn't it nice to see that not everyone is stuck in the left/right false paradigm?  :o
Beliefs Always Trump Truth and Perception Always Trumps Reality

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2010, 05:48:22 am »
Blast from the past...

For Immediate Release
July 15, 2009   
United States Attorney's Office
District of Massachusetts
Contact: (617) 748-3100

Former Ptech Officer Arrested for SBA Loan Fraud

Indictment Unsealed Charges Former Ptech President with Dealing in Assets of Specially Designated Global Terrorist

BOSTON—A former resident of Somerville, Mass. who has been living in South Korea was arrested today after arriving at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York.

An indictment, originally returned on March 1, 2007, was unsealed today charging Buford George Peterson and Oussama Abdul Ziade, both former officers of Ptech, Inc., a computer software company that was principally located in Quincy, Mass., with making false statements to the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) in connection with a loan application in the amount of $650,000 for Ptech submitted under a program offered to assist small businesses economically harmed by the attacks of September 11, 2001. The indictment charges Peterson and Ziade with falsely representing the identities of Ptech’s major shareholders in this loan application to conceal the ownership interest in Ptech held by a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, Yassin Kadi aka Yassin Al-Kadi aka Yassin Al-Qadi aka Yassin Qadi (Kadi) through Sarmany Limited, a company Kadi owned and controlled. Ziade served as Ptech’s President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of its Board of Directors from February 1994 to 2003 while Peterson served as Ptech’s Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer from February 2001 to August 2002.

Acting U.S. Attorney Michael K. Loucks; Bruce M. Foucart, Special Agent in Charge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement - Office of Investigations in Boston; Warren T. Bamford, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation - Boston Field Office; and Susan Dukes, Special Agent in Charge of the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation - Boston Field Office, announced today that a seven-count indictment, originally returned on March 1, 2007, was unsealed charging Peterson and Ziade with making false statements to the SBA in Ptech’s loan application in January 2002 when they falsely represented the identity of the major stockholders of Ptech (those owning 20 percent or more of stock) by omitting in Ptech’s stock ownership table any reference to Sarmany Limited, a company owned and controlled by Kadi. The indictment also charges Ziade with engaging in transactions involving, and dealing in, the property of Kadi, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, and making false statements to law enforcement during the investigation of Ptech.

According to the indictment, beginning in or about 1994 and continuing until or about 2001, Kadi, a Saudi Arabian national, invested approximately $10 million dollars in Ptech through companies he owned, controlled or in which he held a beneficial interest. On Oct. 12, 2001, pursuant to Executive Order 13224, entitled “Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Persons who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism,” which was issued in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States government designated Kadi as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. As a result, any transaction involving, or dealing in, any interest in any property, direct or indirect, held by Kadi, and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, was prohibited.

As of Oct. 12, 2001, the date of Kadi’s designation, Kadi owned and controlled a large percentage of Ptech common shares. The indictment alleges that “Kadi held that interest in the names of [foreign] entities he owned and controlled or in which he held a beneficial interest...  At the time of his designation, Ziade knew that Kadi held an interest in Ptech stock issued in the names of Kadi’s entities.” According to the indictment, “on or about Nov. 29, 2001, Ziade drafted a capitalization table identifying Kadi as the owner of approximately 9.9 million dollars worth of Ptech common shares, which had been issued by Ptech in the names of Kadi’s entities.” The indictment further alleges that Ziade “engaged in transactions designed in whole or in part to conceal the source and ownership of Ptech's assets and common stock.”    

If convicted on these charges, Peterson faces up to 30 years in prison, to be followed by five years of supervised release and a $1 million fine.

Also unsealed today was a criminal complaint issued on July 27, 2005 charging Ziade with attempting to engage in transactions involving, and dealing in, the property of Kadi, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist; knowingly making false statements to the SBA in a loan application submitted on behalf of Ptech; and making false statements to law enforcement. Ziade, a Lebanese national, has been living outside of the country since 2005.

If arrested and convicted of the charges in the indictment, Ziade also faces up to 30 years in prison, to be followed by five years supervised release and a $1 million fine.  

The case was jointly investigated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation. The Medford Police Department, Massachusetts State Police, U.S. Secret Service, Office of Foreign Asset Control of the U.S. Department of Treasury, and U.S. Small Business Administration also provided assistance in the investigation. It is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys B. Stephanie Siegmann and Jeffrey Auerhahn of Loucks’ Anti-Terrorism and National Security Unit.

The details contained in the indictment are allegations. The defendants are presumed to be innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Feds: Former Quincy execs hid ties to man on terror list
By Associated Press Wednesday, July 15, 2009 - Added 1h ago  

Federal authorities have accused two former executives of a Massachusetts software company of concealing financial ties to a man on the government’s terrorism list. The Quincy office of PTech, Inc., was raided by federal agents in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. [ Indictments were unsealed Wednesday against PTech’s former chief executive, Oussama Ziade, and former chief financial officer Buford George Peterson. They are accused of trying to conceal in a loan application an approximately $10 million financial interest in the company held by Yassin Kadi (KAH’-dee). Kadi is a Saudi Arabian on the Treasury Department’s list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists. The U.S. Attorney’s office says Peterson was arrested Wednesday after arriving at New York’s Kennedy Airport. It wasn’t known if he has an attorney. Prosecutors said Ziade is living overseas. [Yeah in the House of Saud!]

Recent cyberattacks provide pretext for sweeping new Internet snooping powers by the government
By James Corbett Online Journal Guest Writer Jul 13, 2009, 00:24

On Friday, July 3, while most Americans were preparing for a weekend of fireworks and hot dogs, the Obama administration had an ominous message: they are going ahead with a Bush-era plan to allow the NSA even more power to invade, intercept and analyze the data of anyone visiting a government website, ostensibly to help prevent a major cyberattack.

The timing of the announcement -- the day before a long holiday weekend -- seemed unusual, but less than 24 hours later just such an attack began to unfold on a series of websites in America and South Korea, including those of the White House, Pentagon, New York Stock Exchange, Treasury Department, Secret Service and Washington Post, amongst others.

The attack itself turns out to have been fairly innocuous -- a run of the mill DDOS (distributed denial of service) attack that did not even employ the latest malware, but you wouldn’t know that from reading the sensational reporting in the controlled corporate media. The VOA reports that the ‘Internet attackers’ have struck again. US State Department under cyberattack for fourth day blares a headline from the AFP.

Blame for the attack is now falling on North Korea, but what North Korea has to gain by taking down The Washington Post’s website is anybody’s guess (perhaps Kim Jong-il was giving his own pronouncement on the recent revelation that the Post was selling access to high-level politicians to lobbyists for $250,000 a pop). The big winner in this attack, it seems, is the federal government, which has been preparing to unveil an Internet surveillance spy grid for years, but has virtually no mandate to do so from a public that has become tired of invasive government snooping.

Various government stooges have been trying to drum up support for their Orwellian police state fantasy for years by warning of the coming ‘cybergeddon’ at the hands of ‘cyber terrorists.’ In 2003, former National Security Agency (NSA) Director Mike McConnell was going on international fear mongering trips, warning of attacks “equivalent to the attack on the World Trade Center in New York” unless a new agency were created to deal with the threat. The ‘cyber 9-11’ meme has carried on ever since, with hysterical coverage of Chinese cyber warriors and teenage hackers, attempting to rally the public into supporting a new front in the War on Terror: cyberspace.

Of course, exactly as was the case of 9/11, which was used as a pretext for introducing and passing (before anyone had time to read it) the voluminous, labyrinthine, constitution-destroying USAPATRIOT Act, so too will the ‘cyber 911’ be used to justify an iPATRIOT Act that will destroy any vestige of legal red tape preventing the government from tracking, tracing and controlling every movement of every citizen in cyberspace forever.

That this legislation exists and is, in fact, merely waiting for a large cyberterrorist incident to justify rushing it into law was actually admitted last year by former Counter Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke to Lawrence Lessig. “I was having dinner with Richard Clarke and I asked him if there is an equivalent [to the USAPATRIOT Act],” Lessig recounted to a technology conference in California last year. “Is there an i-PATRIOT Act just sitting waiting for some substantial event as an excuse to radically change the way the Internet works. He said, ‘Of course there is.’”

The three prongs of the attack on Internet freedom and privacy come from the military, the NSA and the Executive/Legislative branches of government. In 2003, the military labeled the Internet itself an enemy weapons system and ever since then there has been growing momentum behind various military, intelligence and governmental schemes to track and trace all movements of all Internet users, American or foreign. Last year, the Air Force attempted to establish its own cyber command, resulting in military turf wars that spawned last month a new U.S. Cyber Command and the further militarization of cyberspace. The military has even threatened a military response against any would-be hackers of government systems (unless you are North Korean, evidently).

At the same time, the NSA is jockeying to launch a new system dubbed Einstein that would see all telecoms route data traveling to or from government networks through an NSA monitoring box. This is on top of existing programs like Pinwale and Stellar Wind, which have already given them legal access to secretly spy on billions of communications records. Now Mike McConnell is back on the fear mongering trail telling anyone who will listen that if the NSA doesn’t have the authority to examine everyone’s search history, private emails and file transfers, then there will be a (you guessed it) “cyber 9/11.”

The third prong of the attack comes from America’s own elected representatives. Even back in 2007 the powerful think tank known as the Center for Strategic and International Studies was already preparing for the coming Obama presidency, convening a yearlong panel that issued a report called Securing Cyberspace for the 44th Presidency, which contained the following chilling passage under the heading Regulate cyberspace: “Voluntary action is not enough. The United States must assess and prioritize risks and set minimum standards for securing cyberspace in order to ensure that the delivery of critical services in cyberspace continues if the United States is attacked.”

Now, Jay Rockefeller is attempting to do just that with a bill that would kick start this process of setting ‘minimum standards’ for cybersecurity over to an advisory panel filled with globalists, corporate chieftains and hand-picked academics. Rockefeller tried to drum up his own support for the bill by reaching new heights of hysterical fear mongering over the Net, even going so far as to say the Internet should never have existed. Obama is getting in on the act as well, threatening to pick a new ‘cyber czar’ who is conspicuous for having taken every opportunity during his time in Congress to vote for the expansion of NSA spying programs and authorities.

The entire cyberterror hysteria seems to have reached a peak in the last month, with the announcement of U.S. Cyber Command, the impending vote on Rockefeller’s bill and the naming of Obama’s cyber czar expected to occur in the near future.

Up until last week, there has only been one problem: there has been no clear mandate for any of this hysterical rush toward increased government snooping and regulation on the Internet. The American public is becoming disgusted with Obama’s continuation of the NSA spying program and has been unwilling to get behind giving up their online liberties in exchange for protection from the threat of teenage hackers and Russian spambots. The former head of the National Cybersecurity Center resigned this March citing “threats to the democratic process from the NSA’s attempts to dominate all governmental cybersecurity efforts. Wired even ran a story detailing how the U.S. Cyber Command is an agency without a purpose, function or mission that has been trying to find a reason for existing.

Now along comes a relatively unsophisticated DDOS attack from what may or may not be North Korea (there is no proof for the origin of the attack other than the government’s say-so) and suddenly it all seems justified: the creation of new branches of the military to deal with cyberwarfare and even create sophisticated new cyberweapons for destroying hackers and rogue governments; the NSA programs to track and trace all searches, file transfers and communications of seemingly everyone on the planet; Rockefeller’s legislation to appoint big business and globalists to advise on mandatory communications regulations. It seems that Obama and the NSA have more to gain from these attacks than do the North Koreans.

Of course, the capability (and presumably the intention) to monitor every electronic communication passing through the United States in real time has long existed. What we are seeing now is the revelation of long-established policies and technologies to a public that may have rejected them before. The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) of 1994 already mandated that every communications device in the country be accessible by law enforcement, and it has now been mainstream news for years that the FBI can (and has) dialed into cellphones to listen in on any conversations taking place within reach of the microphone . . . even if the power is turned off. In 2006, an AT&T whistleblower revealed an NSA spy room directly in the data hub monitoring every email, every phone call and every fax traveling through that hub. In 2008, it was admitted that part of the NSA’s efforts to catch Al-CIAda included agents passing around particularly humorous phone sex conversations between US military overseas and their wives back home.

No, the capability of spying on all communications of all Americans is not being developed now; that has already happened. Right now we are witnessing the implementation of the phase in which the capability to track and trace all communications are being introduced to the public and justified on the grounds of national security. Expect to see an increasing number of media-hyped “cyberattack” stories before the cyber 9/11 makes the iPATRIOT Act a reality.

Of course, it should be obvious by now that those in charge of multi-billion dollar agencies are in positions to directly materially benefit from just such large, stunning cyberattacks, opening the door to the false-flag mentality by which attacks are to be welcomed for their transformative nature. Certainly the NSA is not building a $1.6 billion data center to sit on their hands waiting for an attack, nor are the governments of the UK, Canada, Ireland and many other countries suddenly considering draconian new e-spying legislation for the fun of it.

For those who are interested in how a false-flag cyber terrorist attack could be generated, the PTech story remains a crucial piece of the puzzle. The technology exists for those in the know to commit sophisticated, convincing and devastating attacks through the government’s own cyber infrastructure. The only question is who has the means, motive and opportunity to use it.

James Corbett publishes the Corbett


Go to the original link, James hyperlinks every single assertion!  Nice article James!!!!!

FBI’s role in 9/11 investigation needs investigation

"The project included incident investigation, law enforcement, military aviation systems, highly sensitive information, especially if you wanted to exploit the FAA’s current capabilities and holes… to jam or slow down U.S. military response to a domestic hijacking, for example.” Just the portion of the story above the waterline and already public record is shocking enough: Briefly, Saudi “money man” Yasin al-Qadi, named by the Bush Administration as a financial backer of the al-Qaeda terrorist network, had funded a software start-up in Boston named Ptech, reported the Boston Globe over a year ago.  Al-Qadi, a Saudi businessman whose US assets were frozen after the Sept. 11 attacks amid allegations that he has funded terrorist groups, is from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where he also headed the Saudi-based Muwafaq (Blessed Relief) Foundation. Treasury officials allege the “charity” is an al-Qaeda front used to funnel millions of dollars to the terrorist organization, and Al-Qadi was named a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the United States on October 12, 2001. A US Treasury Department statement stated that "Muwafaq is an Al-Qaeda front that receives funding from wealthy Saudi businessmen"
"Somebody musta paid Osama for the heroin."

But it’s the unreported story that has the potential to lead to the explosive charge that the FBI’s role in the 9/11 investigation itself needs investigation. Ptech’s customers included sensitive government and intelligence agencies such as the FBI and the Air Force. “But until last fall,” the GLOBE reported on Jan. 22, 2003, “few seemed aware an early financial backer of Ptech was Yasin al-Qadi, a Saudi businessman named as a suspected terrorist financier by the Bush Administration in October 2001.” Reports of ineptitude at FBI headquarters have already surfaced in numerous places: in Phoenix, Chicago, and Minneapolis, for example. What makes reports of the Boston FBI’s bungled investigation into Ptech different is the unmistakably dark suggestion that this poor performance may have been intentional. Why would the Boston FBI do such a thing? Maybe because they were shielding a money laundering vehicle, goes the allegation, that was created back in the 1980's as part of the CIA’s program of arming the Afghan mujahedeen.

Can you say BCCI?

The tale begins almost right after the 9/11 attack, when, in October of 2001, handful of ex-Ptech employees alerted the FBI to evidence indicating that the firm had Saudi terror connections.

Saudi terrorists, Saudi money, and JP Morgan Chase

Almost a year later the Boston FBI had still done nothing about it. They had, in fact, shut down their cursory investigation and taken no action.  Thus Ptech was still operating at the highest levels of American society in the Spring of 2002,  when the firm showed up hustling business at the door of Wall Street’s JP Morgan Chase. The question is “why?” On its surface, the answer appears to be “money.” Lots and lots of Saudi money. Indira Singh, who later became a whistleblower, was an unwitting eyewitness to the “train wreck.”   “I invited Ptech to come down and give a presentation and a customized demo to JP Morgan Chase,” states Singh, who was a consultant to the bank on “risk architecture,” an arcane software specialty which calculates enterprise risk. In one of the story’s many ironic twists, Singh was at the time designing a system to help JP Morgan Chase detect terrorist money laundering.

When Ptech showed up, Singh quickly realized that she was witnessing her worst fears about compromised security come true.  “Within half an hour on the premises, I knew something was up,” she says. “They had almost immediately raised about six of my red flags, to the point where I walked over to my desk and picked up the phone, and began making phone calls.”

She talked with a respected industry figure who had once worked at Ptech. “He was shocked to learn that I had invited Ptech on the premises. He told me the company belonged to Yasin Qadi.” In the course of what would otherwise have been just another day at the bank, Indira Singh made the amazing discovery that the firm in front of her at the moment was owned by Saudis, including Yasin Qadi, with suspected as well as proven ties to the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attack.  All this left her feeling more than a little surprised.
'Chief Thug' at J.P. Morgan Chase

Moreover, she learned, Yasin Al-Qadi had been fingered by the Bush Administration in October 2001, over six months before.  So how was it that Ptech was still making presentations to top American companies six months later?  The industry source Singh had consulted on Ptech had more bad news than just Yasin Qadi. “There were several people at Ptech who were targets of Operation Greenquest, a Dept of Treasury terrorism investigation,” she told us, “and that the company’s funding vehicle, BMI, was also under investigation. The list just went on and on and on. It was a spider’s web of connections.”  When Singh flew to Washington D.C. to meet some of the ex-Ptech employees to verify their allegations, she received another shock. “I met with five extraordinarily scared people. These people were scared for their lives, and for their families. Some were about to leave the country. They told me, ‘Indira, you don’t know who you’re dealing with.’ Sadly, when she told us what happened next, it came as no surprise:  When Singh alerted authorities, and her employer, what she encountered was the inexplicable wrath of a top Wall Street Bank, as well as an official wall of silence at the FBI.

“I took everything I had at that point back to my boss at JP Morgan Chase,” she states. “He didn’t want to deal with it. So I called his boss,  because at this point I realized I was sitting on dynamite.” “The various heads of the security functions at the bank set up an interview with me, and it quickly  escalated to the bank’s General Auditor, who introduced himself to me as JP Morgan Chase’s ‘chief thug.’”

We didn’t know banks like JP Morgan had thugs, we said. “He introduced himself as the General Auditor,” said Singh, “but he said, for the real purposes of what he does at JP Morgan Chase, I am the ‘chief thug.’” “He basically told me to keep my mouth shut and look the other way, and enjoy a wonderful life here at JP Morgan, and if I didn’t I was out.” Alerting the bosses at one of America’s largest banks to a terror threat had certainly produced a strange result. Singh had entered a hall of mirrors, especially after she discovered that the terrorist threat was real.

A 'problem' with the Boston FBI

“By that time, I had already talked with my boss’s boss, to whom I had originally gone,” she says. “He told me, it was all true. He said, ‘everything you laid out on the table was true.’” When attempts to intimidate her into silence failed, she became another American hero speaking out despite the consequences, which will be described in a future report. After talking to the Boston FBI, Singh said she had been ''shocked'' and ''frustrated'' to learn that the FBI had not alerted any of the government agencies using Ptech software that there were questions about the company's ties to suspected terrorist fund-raisers.  The story is just the latest in a series of embarrassments for the Boston FBI office, including the scandal over the agency's coddling of murderous organized crime informants, which led to an until-now inexplicable threat by President Bush to use “executive privilege” to cloak details about the Boston FBI from Congressional investigators.

Still, when we first heard whistleblower Indira Singh tell her story it sounded so incredible that we would have found it unbelievable…except that we had already encountered stories like it in Venice, of witnesses bullied and intimidated by authorities into silence. For example, the FBI was all over tenants at the Sandpiper Apartments across the street from the Venice Airport, to keep them from talking about Mohamed Atta’s two-month long ‘shack-up’ with an American girlfriend named Amanda Keller. In addition to warning Keller not to talk, a warning she took so seriously she left town and disappeared from view, FBI agents bullied and intimidated apartment residents who remembered the pair, and even the apartment manager of the complex, Charles Grapentine, an ex-marine, who told us grimly, "They called me a liar, and told me to keep my mouth shut. Nobody likes to hear that: that they didn't see something they know they saw.”

Atta and Amanda’s next door neighbor, a 50-year old housewife named Stephanie Frederickson, confirmed the apartment manager’s remarks. "The question they asked was always the same," she told us. "You aren’t saying anything to anybody, are you?" Now, it seems that FBI agents in Boston were engaged in equally-dubious behavior. Mistakes, malfeasance, and even missed opportunities to avert the Sept 11 attack… There’s been a regular drumbeat of depressing news about the FBI.

Singh told us that disgruntled Boston FBI agents told her privately that their hands were tied on Ptech, because, they said, “Saudis have been given a free pass for 9/11.” “And that,” says Singh, “is when I began to get really scared.”

• There's something different about the FBI's Boston office.
• What does the Ptech story have to do with a two-year inquiry of the House Government Reform Committee?
• Hint: the committee’s final report said this about the Boston FBI: “Their conduct must be considered one of the greatest failures in the history of federal law enforcement." • Dark hints about why the Boston FBI’s seeming “incompetence” may have been intentional.

Live Free or Die Hard, PTECH, Next 9/11 the writing is on the walls


Live Free or Die Hard 2: Ptech/CVE.MITRE.ORG/DHS/Horizons/EA/IT Governance/USAID

PTECH Fullfills OMG Request for OODA Loop generation functionality.

PROMIS/Ptech/Choicepoint/Infragard/DIEBOLD=World ID/Carbon Tax/IPv6

Ptech used in Desert Storm - Future Combat Systems - Global Dictatorship

Ultra - rare mass data dump of Ptech related news articles

Ptech CONFIRMED-Booz Allen, *False Flag Warning* to usher in Internet2/GIG

PROMIS/Ptech makes compartmentalization obsolete. Key to total tyranny & C2

Avian Flu-Criticial Infrastructure, False Flag wargame-Ptech Lab in charge of CS

New World Order told Singh that her sources on Ptech "SHOULD BE KILLED"

Most Startling 9/11 Evidence(Ptech, Oklahoma, Saudis, etc)

Guardium-Israeli MOSSAD-Ptech, BAH Black Ops Cyber Conference in 48 hour

WTF? Ptech was contracted w/ Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Facility | DOE

"We helped carry out 9/11, now we have control of India's airspace with Ptech"

Legitimizing Unconstitutionality - DMV gets Ptech AI facial recognition software


Holy shit..Ptech runs the FAA when the air traffic controllers are not!

WTF? Who (or What) controlled this plane? PTECH still controls FAA!

TRON, Master Control Program, Ptech, Agile, and C.A.E.S.E.R.

Live Free or Die Hard, PTECH, Next 9/11 the writing is on the walls

CAESAR III, Temper, Pythia, Data Fusion Ptech AI wargame C2 process modeling

Indira Singh, Ptech, Bohemian Gove, Octopus, Babylon, 9/11, Enron


NRO Declassified/NIMA - Ptech/DHS terrorist Amit Yoran-In-Q-Tel

IBM-from Nazi Deathcamp computers to Ptech/GIG RBAC Prison Infrastructure
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2010, 06:14:08 am »

Acxiom is a global interactive marketing services company that uses consumer data, analytics, information technology, data integration, and consulting solutions to help companies conduct direct marketing programs. Acxiom’s interactive capabilities allow marketers to have direct interaction and response with consumers, and these services include direct-mail, e-mail, mobile advertising, display advertising, social media, and Web-site personalization.[1] It has been described as "one of the biggest companies you've never heard of."[2]

In addition to collecting detailed information about people, the company helps marketers anticipate the future needs of consumers, according to the documentary "The Persuaders." As the world's largest processor of consumer data,[3] Acxiom has identified 70 types of consumers with its segmentation product PersonicX.

Acxiom is first and foremost a multi-channel marketing-services company powered by data. Forrester Research, the technology research company, considers Acxiom “a technology powerhouse” with deep industry expertise across a multitude of industries. Acxiom has traditionally been known for helping many of the world's largest financial services companies conduct direct marketing campaigns, but now more than 75 percent of its revenue is derived from non-financial services clients. Today, Acxiom is a $1.38 billion-a-year company, representing more than 12 percent of the direct-marketing-services sector’s $11 billion in estimated annual sales.


Founded as Demographics in 1969 by Charles D. Ward in Conway, Arkansas, Acxiom is headquartered in Little Rock, Arkansas.[10]

The company has additional U.S. offices in Chicago, Illinois; New York, New York; Foster City, California; and Nashville, Tennessee. International offices are located in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Australia, and China. Services are also available to companies in scores of other countries.[1]

In early 2004, Acxiom acquired part of Claritas, a major European data provider.[11]

In 2005, Acxiom acquired Digital Impact and integrated its digital and online services into its business.

In early 2006, EMC Corporation acquired Acxiom’s information grid software in a $30 million deal.[12]

On May 16, 2007, Acxiom agreed to be bought by leading investment firms Silver Lake Partners and ValueAct Capital in an all-cash deal valued at $3 billion, including the assumption of about $756 million of debt.[13] However on October 1, 2007, a press release announced that the takeover agreement was to be terminated and Charles Morgan would retire as Acxiom’s Company Leader upon the selection of a successor.

On January 17, 2008, Acxiom named John Meyer (from Alcatel-Lucent) as new CEO and President, effective February 4, 2008.[14]

On July 11, 2008, Acxiom acquired ChoicePoint's database marketing solutions division, adding seven clients from industries including banking, insurance, and media.[15]

On October 9, 2008, Acxiom announced it had entered into a long-term exclusive contract with XSellNet[1] to deliver and manage the distribution of real-time customer data and analytics to the retail auto dealer industry throughout the United States. The collaboration is co-branded as X12 powered by Acxiom.


In 2003, the Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a complaint before the Federal Trade Commission against Acxiom and JetBlue Airways, alleging the companies provided consumer information to Torch Concepts, a company hired by the United States Army "to determine how information from public and private records might be analyzed to help defend military bases from attack by terrorists and other adversaries."[16]

According to the complaint, Acxiom's activities constituted unfair and deceptive trade practices, as "Acxiom has publicly represented its belief that individuals should have notice about how information about them is used and have choices about that dissemination, and has stated that it does not permit clients to make non-public information available to individuals," and Acxiom proceeded to sell information to Torch Concepts without obtaining consent, an ability to opt-out, or furnishing notice to the affected consumers.

The FTC took no action against Acxiom, which had responded that it had followed its privacy principles and was not deceptive in its business practices. "Torch Concepts was acting under contract to the Department of Defense in their efforts to research ways to improve military base security," a company spokesman said. "Our policy clearly states that we 'provide information products which include financial information, Social Security number and other related information where permitted by law,' and that this information is 'provided to government agencies for the purposes of verifying information, employment screening and assisting law enforcement.'"[17]

In 2005 Acxiom was a nominee for the Big Brother Awards for Worst Corporate Invader for a tradition of data brokering.[18]

Security Breaches

In 2003, over 1.6 billion customer records were stolen during the transmission of information to and from Acxiom's clients; the information included names, addresses, and email addresses. Acxiom's firewall was not breached, and no databases were accessed by the hackers.[19] Prosecutors described the 2006 case against the hacker accused of stealing the data as the "largest ever invasion and theft of personal data" ever tried.[20] The stolen data only came to light during an investigation of a separate data theft incident.[21]

Based on their investigation, prosecutors said there was no risk of identity theft or harm to individuals based on the breaches. They also praised Acxiom for being aggressive in pursuing the hackers and cooperating with authorities. "The positive outcome of this investigation is testament to the strong partnerships we have established with our counterparts at the headquarters and field offices of various organizations, from the FBI and Department of Justice to the Internal Revenue Service and U.S. Attorneys' Office in Little Rock," said K.C. Crowley, Special Agent in Charge of Secret Service's Little Rock Field Office. "Furthermore, I commend Acxiom Corporation for their cooperation and responsible approach to the situation. Acxiom's quick response in contacting federal investigators after determining there had been a network intrusion should serve as a model for others in similar circumstances."[22] The two primary hackers were sentenced to lengthy prison terms.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Blogger lawsuits originate at BCCI/Ptech/Iran-Contra Narco Banksters
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2010, 08:32:31 am »

The Case of The Fairness Opinions and the Bankster-Drug Cartels' Multi Billion Dollar Conflicts of Interest...

Stephens Media

The company was formerly called Donrey Media Group, which was founded by Arkansas media mogul Donald W. Reynolds and based in Fort Smith, Arkansas. Reynolds died in 1993. The company was then sold to the Stephens family of Arkansas, best known for their investment banking business Stephens Inc. in Little Rock.

Stephens Inc.
Stephens Inc. headquarters in downtown Little Rock. Stephens Inc. is a full service, privately owned investment bank based in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Stephens Inc. was founded in 1933 by W.R. Witt Stephens. His brother, Jackson T. Stephens joined the firm in 1946 and served as Chairman of the Board and CEO of Stephens Inc. from 1956 to 1986. Since 1986 Warren Stephens, Jack's son, has served as CEO of Stephens Inc. In 1970, Stephens Inc. (along with Wall Street firm White Weld & Co.) brought Wal-Mart public in an IPO. [Clinton/Wal-Mart/Mena, Arkansas]

Quick facts
Employs over 700 people.
Has 24 offices worldwide.
Since the beginning of 1999, has led or co-managed 50 public offerings, raising over $13.2 billion, and delivered 38 fairness opinions.
Over the last 5 years, has advised clients on over 120 merger and acquisition transactions with aggregate transaction value in excess of $43 billion dollars.
The CEO is Warren Stephens.
Financier of Dickey-Stephens Park, which plays home to the Arkansas Travelers baseball team.

Fairness opinion

A fairness opinion is a professional evaluation by an investment bank or other third party as to whether the terms of a merger, acquisition, buyback, spin-off, or going private are fair.[1] It is rendered for a fee.[2][3]


Controversy in financial and management circles surrounds the question of the objectivity of fairness opinions, as one aspect of the duty of care in the fairness of a transaction. A potential exists for a conflict of interest when an entity rendering an opinion may benefit from the transaction either directly or indirectly[4]. Directors and officers of the companies also may have an interest in the outcome of the proposed transaction[5]. In response, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (then the National Association of Securities Dealers) issued its Rule 2290 to require disclosure by its members to minimize abuses[6]; this was approved in 2007 by the Securities and Exchange Commission[7].

Equity and fairness

Stockholder lawsuits are in the courts[8]. The Delaware Court of Chancery has required sufficient disclosures to “provide a balanced, truthful account of all matters”[9] and said “When a document ventures into certain subjects, it must do so in a manner that is materially complete and unbiased by the omission of material facts.”[10] In a Memorandum Opinion in the CheckFree/Fiserv merger Chancellor Chandler underlined that the earlier In re Pure Resources Court had established the proper frame of analysis for disclosure of financial data: “[S ]tockholders are entitled to a fair summary of the substantive work performed by the investment bankers upon whose advice the recommendations of their board as to how to vote on a merger or tender rely.”[11] According to the certification hypothesis fairness opinions may also serve the interest of the shareholders by mitigating informational asymmetries in corporate transactions. [12] First empirical evidence of fairness opinions in Europe indicates their relevance for shareholders [13].

Fairness Opinions are billion dollar mechanisms for some of the largest bank mergers ever. If people found out the conflicts of interest in these "Fairness Opinions", the house of cards may come tumbling down.

Stevens, Inc. and the glaring conflict of interest

"Worthen Banking Corp. was sold to Boatmen's Bancshares Inc. of St. Louis in 1995 for $535 million. Members of the Stephens family owned 22 percent of Worthen at the time of the sale, and acquired shares in Boatmen's. In addition, the investment bank Stephens Inc. retained the right to handle the trades  
Submitted by fedup   2007-12-15 00:29:15

(and to collect commissions) for Worthen Investments, which was folded into Boatman's Investment Services, Boatman's securities subsidiary. (All other securities trades at Boatman's Investment Services are handled by Pershing Inc. of New Jersey.) (4)

10/10/96 "Currently, Boatman's Bancshares Inc. is being acquired for around $9 billion by NationsBank Corp. of Charlotte, N.C. This merger will make NationsBank the fourth largest U.S. banking franchise. The investment bank Stephens Inc. was brought in to give a "fairness opinion" on behalf of NationsBank Corp. shareholders, even though the Stephens family, through their Boatmen's stock holdings, stand to make more than $200 million on the acquisition. Also standing to gain on stock holdings is Curt Bradbury, the chief operating officer at Stephens Inc., and also the former chief executive of Worthen Bank. Stephens Inc. represented NationsBank in the merger negotiations, while Goldman Sachs represented Boatmen's. NationsBank has its own discount brokerage service, NationsBank Discount Brokerage Inc., which clears its trades through Stephens Inc. Stephens Inc. is trying to acquire all of NationsBank's brokerage business after the merger of Boatmen's and NationsBank is complete. If so, that would make Stephens Inc. the largest clearing firm for banks in the U.S. (4)

Subsequently, NationsBank was acquired by BankAmerica [Alamo-Girl]

"It turns out that he [John Huang] maintained an office across the street from his Commerce Department office. He used that office to send and receive packages and faxes without the knowledge of his Commerce employers…. That office was maintained by none other than the Arkansas-based Stephens Inc., a partner of Lippo in the Arkansas WorthenBank, where John Huang had once served as a vice president. The secretary testifying about John Huang's clandestine visits to the office was one Paula Green, a former aide to Rep. Beryl Anthony, the brother-in-law of the late Vince Foster. Beryl Anthony, as a member of the Washington law office of Winston Strawn, represented Stephens' software company Systematics, which was also represented by Vince Foster, Hillary Clinton and Joe Giroirin litigation with First American Bank in Washington over an attempted takeover by BCCI. It was revealed last week that none other than John Huang traveled to China to negotiate on behalf of Lippo with the Chinese government over debts owed to Chinese depositors by the failed BCCI…." (5)

One appointment in particular that should be setting off alarm bells right now is that of White House aide Vanessa Weaver, nominated by the White House for the five-member board of the Export-Import Bank. Ms. Weaver's rushed confirmation hearing takes place this afternoon before Senator Phil Gramm's Banking Committee. An article in yesterday's Investor's Business Daily noted that before Ms. Weaver replaced fellow Arkansan Patsy Thomasson as deputy personnel director at the White House in 1997, she was a senior adviser on personnel. The Thompson hearings on the 1996 campaign scandals established that in 1994 and 1995 she made at least 23 White House calls to John Huang while he worked at a sensitive Commerce Department job for 16 months. Incidentally, John Huang, long of the Lippo Group, qualifies as another typically weird appointment..... Mr. Huang has said he and Ms. Weaver are "good friends." That may stem in part from his friendship with her father Vernon, who for 15 years was head of the Washington office of the Arkansas-based Stephens Inc. financial empire. The two men were sufficiently close that Mr. Huang used a Stephens suite at the Willard Hotel as a "satellite office," even though it was only 150 yards from the Commerce Department. Mr. Huang would use the office to pick up overnight packages, make phone calls and fax materials, often shortly after receiving classified briefings. Mr. Weaver's secretary has testified before the Senate that her boss gave her orders to conceal the arrangement with Mr. Huang. Mr. Weaver made at least 27 calls to Mr. Huang during his stint at Commerce. An Arkansas native, Mr. Weaver was later appointed by President Clinton as ambassador to the European Union in Brussels. A congressman well versed in the details of the Huang case told us the timing and pace of the Weaver family's contacts with him were "highly suspicious" and may have involved campaign fundraising.. . (39)

This could be a banking/Mena shakedown of speech. That may be why they are going after marijuana/gun sites too (they stand in the way of the Banking-Drug cartels). You got BoA, Boatman, Bradbury, Nations, Goldman, Clinton, Huang, Weaver, Foster, BCCI, etc.

What really happened to Vince Foster
1 hr 12 min - Sep 11, 2006 -    (2 ratings)

Vince Foster

Allan J. Favish U.S. Supreme Court Press Conference on Vincent Foster

25 min - May 28, 2007 -    (2 ratings)
public release of photographs of Vincent Foster's body taken in Fort Marcy Park.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton cites her experience as a compelling reason voters should make her president, but nearly 2 million pages of documents covering her White House years are locked up in a building here, obscuring a large swath of her record as first lady. Clinton's calendars, appointment logs and memos are stored at her husband's presidential library, in the custody of federal archivists who do not expect them to be released until after the 2008 presidential election. ...

[E]ven in the healthcare documents, at least 1,000 pages involving her work has been censored by archives staff because they include confidential advice and must be kept secret under a federal law called the Presidential Records Act. Political consultants said that if Hillary Clinton's records were made public, rivals would mine them for scraps of information that might rattle her campaign. ...Asked how long it might be before Hillary Clinton's records are released, the library's chief archivist said it could take years. ...Other records kept from public view include a 1993 memo to the first lady entitled "positioning ourselves on healthcare," and another from that year called "public portrayal of the Medicare program."

The Clinton Criminal Page

Ruby Ridge Hearing-Director Freeh's Opening StatementAlthough I was not FBI Director when the Ruby Ridge crisis occurred, I am sincerely .... Larry Potts was one of the twelve FBI employees included in my ... - 34k - Cached - Similar pages

The Ruby Ridge ProsecutionsConsider Larry Potts, the Washington FBI headquarters man in charge of Ruby Ridge. The prosecutors investigated Larry Potts for approving the dramatic ... - 16k - Cached - Similar pages

potts canned over ruby ridge... To: Subject: Potts Canned over Ruby Ridge WASHINGTON ... Louis Freeh Friday removed Larry Potts from the law enforcement agency's ... - 3k - Cached - Similar pages

Remember Ruby Ridge"Ruby Ridge" used to refer to a geographical location in the state of Idaho, ... And when Larry Potts was finally forced into retirement, FBI officials flew ... - 33k - Cached - Similar pages

Timothy Lynch on Ruby Ridge on National Review OnlineBut the Ruby Ridge episode should not be soon forgotten. ... And when Larry Potts was finally forced into retirement, FBI officials flew into Washington ... - 37k - Cached - Similar pages

#337: 08-15-97 - Evidence from Investigation of 1992 Ruby Ridge ...After substantial further investigation, the Ruby Ridge criminal ... Administrative Sanctions This decision means that FBI personnel, including Larry Potts, ... - 19k - Cached - Similar pages

All about Randy Weaver and Ruby Ridge, by David LohrNonetheless, Larry Potts, assistant director of the FBI's criminal division, informed Eugene Glenn, special agent-in-charge and Ruby Ridge field commander, ... - 54k - Cached - Similar pages

CNN - New charges filed in Ruby Ridge shootout - August 21, 1997... to press criminal charges against Larry Potts, once the FBI's No. ... FBI senior officials won't be charged in Ruby Ridge siege - August 15, 1997 ... - 12k - Cached - Similar pages

The Disintegration of the FBIIncredibly, in the face of Potts' shoddy behavior at both Ruby Ridge and Waco, ... who were at Ruby Ridge fingered former FBI Deputy Director Larry Potts, ... - 39k - Cached - Similar pages

#337: 08-15-97 - Evidence from Investigation of 1992 Ruby Ridge ...The Incidents at Ruby Ridge On August 21, 1992, Deputy United States Marshal .... leave are as follows: * With regard to Larry Potts and Danny Coulson, ... - 32k - Cached - Similar pages

Terry Nichols - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaTerry Nichols contends a high-ranking FBI official (Larry Potts, also involved in Waco & Ruby Ridge crises) directed Timothy McVeigh in the plot to blow up ... - 36k - Cached - Similar pages | Nichols says bombing was FBI opIt was later that, in a fit of rage, McVeigh mentioned Potts' name, Nichols wrote. ... "But if Terry Nichols is beginning to reveal some of the information ...,1249,660197443,00.html - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

WorldNetDaily: 'Multiple accomplices' ID'd by Terry NicholsThat official was none other than Larry Potts, the one time deputy director ... As McVeigh told it, Terry Nichols showed up at his Kansas storage facility ... - 40k - Cached - Similar pages :: By J.M. Berger :: Terry Nichols Alleges FBI ...Terry Nichols alleged in an affidavit filed Feb. 16 that Deputy FBI Director Larry Potts was involved in plotting the Oklahaoma City Bombing along with ... - 34k - Cached - Similar pages

New OKC Revelations Spotlight FBI Involvement In BombingNew claims by Oklahoma City Bombing conspirator Terry Nichols that ... In another report, the Deseret Morning News named the FBI agent at Larry Potts, ... - 46k - Cached - Similar pages

Nichols Fingers FBI Agent Directing McVeigh in OKC Bombing By NameA newspaper reported the name of the FBI agent fingered by Terry Nichols as having ... the Deseret Morning News identified the individual as Larry Potts, ... - 34k - Cached - Similar pages

Was OKC Bomber Timothy McVeigh Working for the FBI? | The New AmericanTerry Nichols is not a terribly credible witness: he's a mass murderer and ... Larry Potts was the FBI official who approved the illegal "license to kill" ... - 13k - Cached - Similar pages

Patrick Briley -- FBI Hall of ShameConvicted Oklahoma City (OKC) bombing conspirator Terry Nichols has alleged that former high level FBI official Larry Potts gave instructions to Timothy ... - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

Nichols says bombing was FBI opPotts retired from the FBI under intense pressure and criticism for the cover-up of ... "I need to caution people to remember that Terry Nichols is a mass ... bombing_nichols_says_bombing_was_fbi_op.htm - 27k - Cached - Similar pages

Veterans for 9/11 Truth News Features: 2/18/07 - 2/25/07Fwd: Terry Nichols Fingers FBI Agent Directing McVeigh in OKC Bombing ... the Deseret Morning News identified the individual as Larry Potts, ... - 74k - Cached - Similar pages

Branch Davidians News - The New York Times - Narrowed by 'POTTS ...POTTS, LARRY A in Branch Davidians returned ... a tear-gas operation proposed for gradually ending the siege near Waco, Tex., ...,%20LARRY%20A&field=per&match=exact - 47k - Cached - Similar pages

Branch Davidians News - The New York Times - Narrowed by 'FEDERAL ...For years, Larry A. Potts toiled quietly at the headquarters of the Federal ... One was the raid two years ago on the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, ... - 61k - Cached - Similar pages

potts canned over ruby ridge... Louis Freeh Friday removed Larry Potts from the law enforcement agency's ... The Waco incident was not mentioned by Freeh in announcing Potts' transfer. ... - 3k - Cached - Similar pages

The Ruby Ridge ProsecutionsConsider Larry Potts, the Washington FBI headquarters man in charge of Ruby Ridge. ... The non-prosecution of Larry Potts is based on a disputed fact: it ... - 16k - Cached - Similar pages

Waco and the Boomerang EffectRuby Ridge and Waco had the same players, including Larry Potts, who was instrumental in decision-making during both incidents, and who has been suspended ... - 21k - Cached - Similar pages

Patrick Briley -- FBI Hall of ShameHowever, people should also be skeptical of Larry Potts because of Potts' questionable role at the Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho sieges by the FBI. ... - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

Was OKC Bomber Timothy McVeigh Working for the FBI? | The New AmericanLarry Potts was the FBI official who approved the illegal "license to kill" ... revealed Potts' illegal activities in the Ruby Ridge and Waco operations. ... - 13k - Cached - Similar pages

Louis Freeh - FBI Director 1993-2001Larry Potts - Ruby Ridge, Waco Montana Freemen Richard Jewell - Atlanta Olympic bombing Robert P. Hanssen Timothy McVeigh - Oklahoma City bombing ... - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

frontline: waco - the inside story: Chronology | PBSLarry POTTS at FBI headquarters in Washington and JAMAR in Waco are in command. Negotiations continue, and over the course of the day, 10 children are sent ... - 19k - Cached - Similar pages

Report to the Deputy Attorney General on the Events at Waco, Texas ...When the Waco standoff began on February 28, Mr. Gerson was still the Acting ... with Deputy Director Floyd Clarke and Assistant Director Larry Potts (Chief ... - 10k - Cached - Similar pages


Look at the f**ked up illuminati logos at this Black Ops Clinton Security Firm that loves to KILL WHISTLEBLOWERS</b>

More on Larry and IGI:
Larry Potts, former head of the Criminal Division at FBI during ...Today, Judicial Watch took the deposition of Larry Potts, former head of the ... to identify who IGI is investigating, including Judge Starr, Larry Klayman, ... - 4k - Cached - Similar pages

Judicial Watch - Because no one is above the law!Larry Potts, former head of the Criminal Division at FBI during Filegate, ... to identify who IGI is investigating, including Judge Starr, Larry Klayman, ... - 15k - Cached - Similar pages

Story: Oracle Admits Hiring Investigators who Sought Trash of Pro ...IGI's Executive Vice President is Larry Potts, a former high ranking official in the Federal Bureau of Investigation who left the FBI following ... - 11k - Cached - Similar pages

The FBI Hall of ShameLarry Potts - He received a letter of censure for failure to provide proper oversight with ... (according to a deposition of IGI director Terry Lenzner). ... - 17k - Cached - Similar pages

Media Monitor - Clinton Leaves Another Legacy - July 18, 2000The name of the firm is Investigative Group International, IGI, headed by Terry Lenzner. The firm also includes Larry Potts, the former Director of the ... - 15k - Cached - Similar pages

Internet Security News: [ISN] Microsoft, Watergate and Industrial ...Larry Potts, former deputy director at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is IGI's chief operating officer. Sitting on a special board of advisers created ... - 11k - Cached - Similar pages

NEOHAPSIS - Peace of Mind Through Integrity and Insighthas been employed by lawyers for President Clinton. Larry Potts, former deputy director at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is IGI's chief ... - 12k - Cached - Similar pages

CLINTON'S ROGUES GALLERY:Because of the relationship between IGI and the President, the President filed a motion to prevent the deposition of Larry Potts in order to protect ... - 58k - Cached - Similar pages

DSL Research: Waco-Hole in the Bunker and Fireball (4th Thread ...Former FBI official Larry Potts (of Ruby Ridge fame), who's now an IGI executive...." Freeper FrogMom 1/28/00 ".... Don't know if this will do you any good ... - 293k - Cached - Similar pages Special Report: Clinton AccusedFormer IGI employees said Larry Potts, a former FBI deputy director who resigned after criticism over his role in the deadly shootout at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, ... - Similar pages

All the President's P.I.sSeveral ex-IGI agents work in the Clinton administration, and in 1994 the State ... Wackenhut is one of the nation's biggest private security firms, ... - 40k - Cached - Similar pages

All Resources Search ResultsGender: Male Birth: 02 APR 1885 Clinton, Henry, Missouri ... IGI/Germany - 1. •, IGI/North America - 7. •, U.S. Social Security Death Index - 17 ... - 41k - Cached - Similar pages

All Resources Search ResultsGender: M Birth/Christening: 16 Nov 1882 Clinton, Clinton, Ia .... IGI/Norway - 1. •, U.S. Social Security Death Index - 2 ... - 57k - Cached - Similar pages

Internet Security News: [ISN] Microsoft, Watergate and Industrial ...Sitting on a special board of advisers created by IGI is George Vradenburg, ... Previous message: InfoSec News: "[ISN] Old security models inadequate for ... - 11k - Cached - Similar pages

Internet Security News: [ISN] Dumpster Diving - No firewall helpsdirt on nemeses of President Clinton at the behest of his lawyers. ... someone such as IGI to see what they dig up. (Make sure you retain ... - 10k - Cached - Similar pages

Security may tail PM till take-off point-Delhi-Cities-The Times of ...Security agencies are learnt to have asked IGI Airport to make this possible ... Sources said that when Bill Clinton came as US President some years back, ... - 50k - Cached - Similar pages Special Report: Clinton AccusedFormer IGI employees include: Brooke Shearer, senior adviser at the Interior Department; Anne Luzzatto, spokeswoman for the National Security Council; ... - Similar pages

DeWitt Public Library Local HistorySocial Security Death Index Online database of US deaths. · FamilySearch Online IGI database from the LDS (Morman) Church ... - 60k - Cached - Similar pages

ACM News ServiceOracle said in its public statement that IGI discovered that these groups ... this budget would not provide any of the $50 million Clinton proposed to give ... - 27k - Cached - Similar pages

CLINTON'S ROGUES GALLERY:Worse, The Times says Bill Clinton's national security advisor, ...... Cody Shearer worked as a subcontractor for IGI on at least one case, Milton says. ... - 278k - Cached - Similar pages
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline jofortruth

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,061
Don't believe me. Look it up yourself!

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: Blogger lawsuits originate at BCCI/Ptech/Iran-Contra Narco Banksters
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2010, 12:20:08 pm »
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Femacamper

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,398
Re: Blogger lawsuits originate at BCCI/Ptech/Iran-Contra Narco Banksters
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2010, 11:24:56 pm »

This is what I think of Ptech.

Mark of the beast, anyone?


  • Guest
Re: Blogger lawsuits originate at BCCI/Ptech/Iran-Contra Narco Banksters
« Reply #9 on: August 04, 2010, 11:30:01 pm »

Mark of the beast, anyone?

Clear as day. :)