A
doctor jumped onstage during the screening of a controversial
anti-vaccine film to warn the audience they were putting the lives of
their children and others at risk.
"I've come here not to watch the film, but to continue my battle and my challenge for my people and, importantly, for our children," O'Sullivan said. "I come here with a lot of anger because I am adamantly opposed to this.
This idea of anti-immunization has killed children around the world and
actually will continue to kill children whose parents are put off
immunization because of misinformation — misinformation based on lies."
The Northland doctor, who was named New Zealander of the Year
in 2014 for his charitable work, took aim at anti-vaxxers — including
the filmmakers who explored the fraudulent claim that autism is linked
to immunizations — who have deceived parents and put children at risk.
"Fraudulent people for their own reasons have decided that they
would put forward false information that actually causes harm to
children," O'Sullivan said. "Your presence here will cause babies to
die."
Comment: Interesting use of words by Dr.
O'Sullivan, one has to wonder if he actually took the time to watch the
film before he decided to show up at the Vaxxed screening ranting about 'fraudulent people putting forward false information'.
Russell L. Blaylock, M.D. made an excellent assessment back in 2011
when he wrote the following regarding the vilification of Dr. Wakefield
and the evidence he was sharing with the public:
I find it ironic that the media, the British government, and leaders in
medical academia jumped on board attacking and destroying Dr. Andrew
Wakefield's reputation based on "fraud" charges related to a study he
conducted about the link between the measles vaccine and autism.
Abundant evidence has shown that these very same people destroy
the reputations of anyone producing evidence, no matter how well
researched and of the highest ethical standards, if it in any way
endangers this vaccine program. It is ironic that these
accusers speak of "blatant fraud," when virtually all of the vaccine
safety evidence they use abundantly is fraudulent by careful design.
To imply our society is at risk of millions of deaths should
vaccine rates drop is a blatant lie used to scare parents into
over-vaccinating their children.
The physician tried to discourage ticket holders from entering, and he said two audience members left after his warning.
Tricia Cheel, who organized the screening in Kaitaia, told News Now she was "flabbergasted" when O'Sullivan "invaded the stage."
"He was obviously enraged and he was pointing his fingers," she said.
"He ended up saying we would be responsible for the death of his
vulnerable children — very threatening behavior."
Cheel said doctors have been lied to about the safety of immunizations,
and she argued that physicians and parents had a right to decide for
themselves what they believe is safe.
"That to me was interfering with people's right to find out for
themselves," Cheel said. "I can understand if he hasn't seen the movie
he doesn't understand that a lot of what he's accepted as truth may be
based on false information."
O'Sullivan agreed he was angry, but he told News Now the filmmakers and event organizers presented a public health threat.
Comment: Who really presents the public health threat?
Dr. Wakefield: "The first thing is that you need to
stop the damage, and the second is you need to deal with the children
who have been injured, in other words, in whom the damage has already
been done. So there are two broad elements. Let's just take the first
element, and that is how you stop the injury in the first place. You
have to acknowledge it, and therefore you have to take the reins off
science being conducted in the public interest. You have to give honest
answers, and the CDC has now proven that they are absolutely incapable of doing that.
"So the vaccine safety responsibilities have to be removed completely —
not just from the CDC, but from Health and Human Services, which
oversees the CDC. There has to be put into place an independent agency,
that is able to give us honest answers about vaccine safety. The
second thing is there needs to be an absolute moratorium on the
introduction of new vaccines until this issue has been resolved.
"Number three, there can be no vaccine mandates. You cannot mandate something for which there is risk,
a big risk that has been fraudulently concealed by the very agency
responsible for assessing and reporting on those risks. So all laws that
seek to limit exemptions, or remove exemptions that are pending, or had
been passed, need to be dealt, done away with. Then you need to
start to treat vaccines just as you would pharmaceutical drugs, in
terms of the rigor with which they go through scientific trials. They
need to be subjected to long-term, double-blind, randomized, placebo
control trials — which, at the moment, they're not.
"They shouldn't be there, quite frankly, when these falsehoods of
misinformation will cause harm to the children they are actually there
to serve," O'Sullivan said. "These are people that are public servants,
and I think it's incompatible for them to have views on, are supporters
of this anti-immunization movement and work in these communities at the
same time."
The movie Vaxxed is controversial because the coverup of the
MMR vaccine connection to autism has far-reaching implications for the
very deep corruption in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) and the thousands of children who have suffered from a devastating
disease that could have been avoided. Discrediting this
information and keeping it from the public's attention is paramount for
the pharmaceutical companies that profit from vaccines.[2,3]
Vaxxed is not anti-science. Nor is it anti-vaccine. Instead
it presents unquestionable evidence of corruption and fraud that is
anti-CDC. The film endangers the professional credibility and integrity
of the nation's most powerful federal health agency as well as the
private vaccine industry's profits that the CDC protects. If it
were simply a visual screed of voices opposing mandatory vaccinations,
the documentary would have its burst of limited popularity and quickly
be forgotten as so many anti-vaccine films are. Vaxxed, on the
other hand, incriminates federal officials and scientists at the highest
levels, including former CDC Director Julie Gerberding, with the
intentional coverup and manipulation of the agency's own research data
to continue its public relations charade that vaccines under no
circumstances are associated with the US's increasing autism crisis in
our midst.
How are autism and cancer related? Two internationally known doctors may have lost their lives because they knew about the connection between these two diseases.
Dr. Jeffrey Bradstreet, MD, an alternative autism specialist, and Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez, MD, an alternative cancer specialist, saw the truth and were willing to step outside of the standard allopathic medical model for treating cancer and autism. They were pioneers in their respective fields and both recently died or perhaps were killed because of their successful treatments of sick, suffering and dying patients.
On June 19, 2015, Dr. Bradstreet reportedly shot himself in the chest after his offices were raided by U.S. FDA agents and State of Georgia law enforcement agents. Three days before his death, agents exercised a search warrant to gather information about the use of GcMAF with autistic patients in his clinic. Human GcMAF holds great promise in the treatment of various illnesses including cancer, autism, chronic fatigue and possibly Parkinson’s. Since 1990, 59 research papers have been published on GcMAF, 20 of these pertaining to the treatment of cancer; 46 of these papers can be accessed through the GcMAF website.
Dr. Bradstreet spoke at the 2015 AutismOne Conference in May of this
year. He spoke about GcMAF toward the end of his hour long presentation.
He made note of the fact that he had certain important announcements
about this therapy that would be released in the near future. Whatever
they were, he apparently didn’t live long enough to make them.
During his presentation, Dr. Bradstreet provided an introduction to
the therapies that were provided by his clinic, and provided an
explanation of how they help restore normal health to autistic children.
He specifically stated:
GcMAF products influence the endocannabinoid pathway.
GcMAF has been one of the most powerful tools that I have ever used for
autism. How many of you were GcMAF responders and thought it was
amazing? How many of you are really pissed off that it is no longer
available? I have a little announcement about that coming too.
Forensic issues in suicidal single gunshot injuries to the chest: an autopsy study.
This
study presents a case series of suicides carried out by self-inflicted
gunshot wounds to the chest -- a relatively uncommon means of suicide. The
retrospective autopsy study performed included all cases of single
suicidal gunshot injuries to the chest during a 20-year period and which
were committed by the use of a handgun. The sample included 67 deceased
persons that were an average of 44.4 ± 19.1 years old (range, 12-89
years; 58 men and 9 women). The most common region of the entrance wound
was the left side of the chest (54/67), followed by the sternum
(10/67), and the right side of the chest (3/67). For 9 subjects, the
range of fire could not be determined, as well as whether the shot went
through their clothing. In the remaining 58 subjects, only contact or
near-contact wounds were found. Of the 58, only 3 subjects had their
clothing removed between the chest wall and the muzzle. Three directions
of the internal bullet paths were those most frequently found: downward
right-to-left (27/67), downward left-to-right (20/67), and downward
parallel (10/67) (χ = 101.045, P = 0.000). Also, most bullet paths were
directed downward (57/67, χ = 32.970, P = 0.000). The most frequently
injured organ was the heart (47/67), and the immediate causes of death
were exsanguination (49/67), heart disruption (14/67), and tamponade
(4/67).
“That’s the deal . . ., that’s what I keep seeing again and again and again . . . where these senior people [at CDC] just do completely unethical, vile things and no one holds them accountable.”
— Dr. William Thompson to Dr. Brian Hooker in a recorded phone call, June 12, 2014
William Thompson, Ph.D., CDC eipidemiologist
It’s been almost a year since we first heard the name Dr. William
Thompson, a senior epidemiologist at the CDC, and “whistleblower” in the
same sentence. On August 27, 2014, Dr. Thompson released a shocking statement
via his attorneys, Morgan Verkamp, whistleblower specialists, admitting
that he and colleagues at the CDC “omitted statistically significant
information” from a 2004 Pediatrics study regarding the timing of the MMR vaccine and autism
which showed that African-American boys were much more likely to be
diagnosed with autism if they received the MMR “on time” (before 36
months) than matched controls. When trying to get this story out, as
mainstream media looked the other way, our community faced a tidal wave
of astroturfing on Facebook pages, Twitter and media sites. Bloggers and “shills” sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry
quickly moved to hijack and reframe this incredible story, branding it
with their favorite word: “debunked.” Their aim was to provide enough
obfuscation and distraction that the masses wouldn’t listen to us “anti-vaxers”
(Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says of anti-vaxers, “When you hear the term
‘anti-vaxers’ you should think ‘parents of disabled children.’”
Disclosure: I vaccinated all of my children, one is vaccine injured.)
And it worked. We have yet to see a mainstream media outlet seriously
consider Dr. Thomson’s allegations of fraud at the CDC.
But this story won’t go away, despite the best efforts of an
incredibly persistent, well-oiled and well-heeled propaganda machine.
Last August, we heard snippets of calls
(between Dr. Brian Hooker, a vaccine researcher and father of an
autistic child, and Dr. Thompson, author and co-author of three major
CDC studies that “exonerate” vaccines of any role in the epidemic of
autism. In his soon-to-be released book, Vaccine Whistleblower: Exposing Autism Research Fraud at the CDC, Kevin Barry Esq., himself the father of a child with autism and former president of Generation Rescue,
finally reveals the transcripts of four calls, the only ones recorded,
of the more than 30 that took place between Drs. Hooker and Thompson.
Brian Hooker, Ph.D.
November 2013, Dr. Thompson reached out to Dr. Hooker, whom he had
known from various interactions in the years 2002-2004. Dr. Thompson
had finally decided to “blow his whistle” by telling Dr. Hooker what he
knew about CDC corruption, saying, “I basically have stopped lying.”
He had hired one of the best whistleblower attorneys in the country,
and he was ready to take the heat for exposing the truth about vaccine
fraud at the CDC: “So I have to deal witha few months of hell if all this becomes public, um, no big deal. I’mnot having to deal with a child who is suffering day in and day out.”
The transcript calls took place from May 8 – July 28, 2014 and are
shocking to read, so shocking, in fact, that it’s almost hard to believe
what you are seeing: non-stop jaw-dropping testimony, which should, if
investigated thoroughly, change the course of history.
In his preface, Dr. Boyd E. Haley, a professor of chemistry who has
testified at past Institute of Medicine (IOM) meetings on Thimerosal
toxicity, urges every pediatrician in the country to read the
transcripts and encourages an immediate investigation by Congress,
supporting the assertion that vaccine safety warrants a thorough review
based on the claims of Dr. Thompson.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., co-author of Thimerosal, Let the Science Speak, wrote the eloquent foreword to the book. His tone has a sense of urgency and incredulity at the myriad conflict-of-interest and corruption issues in the vaccine safety industry,
in which the U.S. government is inextricably entangled, in particular
in relation to Thimerosal. He calls out the U.S. media silence and deems
the media complicit in this fraud due to its financial ties to the
pharmaceutical industry: “Reporters simply parrot the talking points of corrupt public health regulators and vaccine industry spokesmen.” Mr. Kennedy’s foreword is a scathing attack on the CDC and journalism in America and is a huge wake up call for the nation.
Barry’s introduction sets the scene with important background
information, explaining Dr. Hooker’s involvement in this scandal and the
extraordinary circumstances of how the events of August 2014 played
out. He then gives an executive summary of the main points of each call
which serves as a launchpad for what is to come. The following four
chapters reveal the transcripts in their entirety, without the author’s
narrative. The remaining chapters in the book contain Barry’s
interpretation of the magnitude of the information which Thompson has
revealed and urges the country’s leaders to push for a congressional
investigation of the ~100,000 pages of evidence that Thompson has handed
over to Rep. Bill Posey’s office. One of Posey’s staffers described the
documents as a “wildfire” that “could burn the CDC to its foundations.”
Though the recordings were legally done, Dr. Thompson did not know he
was being recorded; therefore, he speaks quite freely and is
uninhibited. He tells Dr. Hooker what he thinks about his superiors at
the CDC and other agency employees quite candidly, saying things like “People that have been my supervisors have broken laws.”
It is surely everyone’s worst nightmare to be exposed in this way, but
after reading the transcripts, I can understand Dr. Hooker’s intent in
recording their conversations. The core subject matter is too important
as our children’s lives are truly at stake.
On
the calls, Dr. Thompson tries to give Dr. Hooker as much information as
he can about the inner workings of the CDC so he can understand how the
CDC has managed to maintain this fraud for so long with impunity: “I want to be a resource. I want to be valuable to you. I want you to have someone in the system that can give you feedback.” We begin to see very quickly how the CDC has become a “cesspool of corruption,” as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. repeatedly describes it.
Dr. Thompson tries to guide Dr. Hooker in the best way to “fix this” –
meaning getting Thimerosal out of vaccines, primarily the flu vaccine.
He suggests that Dr. Hooker start a campaign away from autism as a side
effect, due to the radioactivity of the topic, and focus on tics. As the
book explains, in a 2001 IOM (closed door) Committee Meeting, it seemed already predetermined that autism would never be associated with vaccines in their findings: “. . . we are not ever going to come down that (autism) is a true side effect.” The IOM’s report released in 2004 essentially declaring that vaccines
do not cause autism (supporting the CDC position) and that funds should
be directed away from such research, was contemptible at best and
criminal at worst. The IOM
is a private entity, and their opinion influences government agency
policies and sways public perception. The IOM shutting the door on
further research and declaring the science settled will prove to future
historians to be a watershed moment in this crisis. As Dr. Hooker said
in relation to a different circumstance but is no less relevant here,
“What could be more anti-science than to exclude a line of scientific
enquiry?” Because of this diversion of research, Thompson states, “The
CDC has put the research ten years behind. Because the CDC has not been
transparent, we’ve missed ten years of research because the CDC is so
paralyzed right now by anything related to autism.”
Dr. Thompson advises Dr. Hooker to focus on a mantra regarding tics because, as he states,“I can say that pretty confidently, vaccines cause tics. We replicated that.” The replication study was “Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years.” He then suggests the “mantra” should switch to “. . . (and) tics are four times as common among kids with autism,” and“There is biologic plausibility right now, I really do believe there is, to say that Thimerosal causes autism-like features.” (emphasis added). You might want to read that line again.
Amazingly, “tics” is not listed as a table injury with
the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Thompson expresses his
incredulity at that because, as he says, the science is clear; the CDC
itself has replicated the finding with other studies. Incidentally, in
relation to Thimerosal, Dr. Thompson reveals that some rat studies
involving Thimerosal “showed that thimerosal (sic) had a differential effect on males and females” and that “they got to a certain level (of increasing the dose) and all the male rats died,” possibly explaining the “male effect,” the fact that autism occurs about four times more often in males than females.
But we may have a new effect – the “born-with-it” effect. Thompson says of the flu shot, “I don’t know why they still give it to pregnantwomen,
like that’s the last person I would give mercury to . . . I would never
give my wife a vaccine that I thought caused tics.” Dr. Thompson seems incredulous at this, and can only suggest the reason is “that
the drug companies think that if it is in at least that one vaccine
then no one could argue that it should be out of the other vaccines
outside of the US.” That’s a rather horrific possibility to be
sure, but another equally horrific possibility with more local
ramifications is that giving mercury to pregnant women would mask any
changes in autism rates that might occur due to mercury removal from
other childhood vaccines.
The all-important 2004 MMR study is discussed in great detail throughout the calls. Of this paper, Thompson says, “I was complicit, and Iwent
along with this, we did not report significant findings . . . I have
great shame now when I meet families with kids with autism because I
have been part of the problem.” This paper was the only study of
the three autism studies that Dr. Thompson co-authored that didn’t have
an external panel of consultants (Dr. Thompson: “Just so you understand this, we didn’t have an external review panel . . . for the MMR autism one.”),
which was how, Dr. Thompson claims, they were able to deviate from the
original analysis plan, which he retained copies of without anyone’s
knowledge.
The significant findings related to the “race effect,” which they
discussed at great length. Dr. Hooker discusses the statistical analyses
with regard to the race effect with Dr. Thompson so he can be sure that
what he was finding was accurate. Dr. Thompson confirmed that he and
his co-authors found a statistically significant increased risk of
autism for African-American boys who received the MMR on time. He says
that they had meetings to discuss this issue. Dr. Hooker asks Dr.
Thompson what was discussed, and he would only say, “There is a
specific quote about this very finding that will be etched in my head
for life. I’m not going to tell you it. . . . It was by one of the other
coauthors.”
Representative Bill Posey (R-FL)
In the end, they just decided to omit data by eliminating those who
did not have a Georgia birth certificate (presumably the poorest
children in the sample), even though it was a deviation from the study
plan. He alludes to the now infamous “garbage can meeting,” where the co-authors colluded to destroy federal documents relating to the study: “Literally
everyone else got rid of all their documents so the only documents that
exist right now from that study are mine . . . it was the five of us
behind closed doors for 2 years.”
Dr. Thompson also gives insight into media hype of outbreaks of measles in the U.S. and polio in third-world countries : “These drug companies and their promoters, they’re making such a big deal of these measles outbreaks. It’s like a never endingthing where the press loves to hype it and it scares people.”
Coincidentally, a few months later, that same media-hype scenario
played out after a measles outbreak that began at the California
Disneyland theme park. What ensued was an unrelenting media blitz about
the importance of vaccines, specifically the MMR. That campaign can be
directly tied to the hundreds of vaccine bills entered in state legislatures all over the country, recently resulting in California children losing their right to personal belief exemptions
to vaccinations in a new law which violates both international human
rights law as well as the First Amendment to the Constitution. More
recently, in New York State a bill was introduced,
unusually out of session, which proposes eliminating all religious
exemptions across the state, a state that is already among the most
vaccinated with a 99% vaccination rate per the CDC.
And all this because 117 people got a fever and a rash, most of whom
were adults, and many of whom were vaccinated! To this day, no source
for the outbreak has ever been established by the CDC. And, interestingly, the measles rate so far for 2015 is significantly lower
than 2014, and running about even with 2013. In a sane world, the
Thompson transcripts would serve to put a stop to all pending
legislation until further investigations can be conducted, due to the
severity of the risk to our children.
Dr. Thompson then brings Dr. Hooker’s attention to the SEED project, which he refers to as “Disneyland”
(of data), and how this data set contains the health records of some
1200 children, 800 of which are confirmed autistic, with complete
vaccination records, including prenatal vaccines and RhoGAM shots. This
data has yet to be released to the public for study. In fact, according
to Dr. Thompson, “it is under lock and key.” However, as Dr. Thompson says, “So
far there is about sixty proposals in, um, for people ready to do
studies. Not a single one of them looks at vaccines, not one!” He is clearly outraged by this when he recounts how he asked his colleagues “What
are you going to say when you have twelve hundred autism cases and a
bunch of controls and you never looked at vaccines and you have all
their vaccine records?” Dr. Thompson describes the SEED data as a “. . . gold mine. That’s the mother-load of mother-loads (sic). Because it doesn’t matter what Insel does.” He
is referring to the promise Thomas Insel, chairman of the Interagency
Autism Coordinating Committee, made to Rep. Bill Posey in a congressional hearing that took place on May 20, 2014,
that a study comparing health outcomes of vaccinated children with
those of unvaccinated children would be done. It has not been done.
Interestingly, according to Thompson, “The CDC was invited to testify [at that hearing] and they declined” and “. . . Coleen (Boyle) said that she would never go and testify again.”
The
discussion about SEED develops further into who should NOT get access
to the data, specifically Autism Speaks, according to Barry, due to
conflict of interests and their stated conviction that “vaccines do not
cause autism.” There is an entire chapter in the book dedicated to these
conflicts, which lays bare the incredible history of the organization
and why we should never again trust Autism Speaks with research grants
for autism-related studies. In fact, on the back cover of the book, an
email from Autism Speaks’ founder Bob Wright to an undisclosed person is
quoted as saying, “We all know that the child vaccine program has
significantly increased and that there are some children who will be
affected. Predicting who is the ongoing challenge for the CDC and the
FDA.”
The transcripts reveal so much malfeasance, corruption and misuse of
government resources, it’s hard to comprehend how it has remained hidden
for so long. Dr. Thompson talks about watering down discussions on
studies with “whitewashed comments.” He describes many instances of
breaking study protocols in a number of studies he worked on. He talks
scathingly about wanted fugitive and co-author of numerous autism studies, Poul Thorsen,
and his former CDC-employed girlfriend, indicating massive conflicts of
interest. He tells Dr. Hooker about possible Verstraeten study
anomalies regarding specialty clinics in the study, which led Thompson
to say, “My guess is they put that adjustment in there because they didn’t like what they were finding.”
He also describes the atmosphere in the agency at that time as related
to the overall influence of corporations in the federal government, “The federal government is hostile to anyone who says anything negative about any industry.”
On July 29, 2015, Congressman Bill Posey made a statement
in the House of Representatives, asking, begging, and imploring the
house leaders to call a congressional hearing to investigate the CDC for
alleged fraud. Dr. Thompson stated in the transcripts that he had sent
Rep. Posey 100,000 pages of documents. In his statement, Posey read a
statement from Dr. Thompson that says, “The co-authors scheduled a
meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four
co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room
and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had
thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. However,
because I assumed that it was illegal and would violate both FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] and DOJ [Department of Justice] requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office, and I retain all associated computer files.”
In these transcripts, we get a glimpse into Dr. Thompson as a person
for the first time since his name and “CDC fraud” became synonymous. He
and Dr. Hooker struck up a kind of awkward and unlikely friendship –
the guilt-ravaged CDC fraudster who was coming clean and the persecuted
autism researcher whose only agenda was vindication for his severely
autistic son. Dr. Thompson seemed terribly conflicted about what he knew
and what to do with it. It is clear that he was under an incredible
amount of stress and “lost it” a lot with his colleagues. He predicts
that the CDC will paint him as “crazy,” and that’s how they will dismiss
his claims. However, it may not matter in the long run what his
co-authors say to try and tarnish his credibility if Thompson’s
documents show that they did indeed commit fraud as employees of an
agency that is charged with safeguarding the health and safety of our
children. Rep. Posey’s office has those documents.
Every mother and father in America should be asking their local representatives (to take action, click here.
Note that you may edit the sample letter to express your personal
sentiments) to support Rep. Posey in calling for a congressional hearing
and demand those documents be released to the public. We must finally
know the truth from the gatekeepers of the federal vaccine safety
program at the CDC. Dr. Thompson has stated that there are still “more
questions than answers” with regard to vaccines and autism. This is
critical. Parents of vaccine-injured children deserve answers and, more
importantly, an apology for the suffering their children are enduring,
or have endured in death, while the purveyors of corruption sit high on
the trash heap of malfeasance that is the CDC.
To quote Bobby Kennedy Jr. at the NO ON SB277 rally in
Sacramento, California on April 8, 2015, “All of the barriers that are
meant to protect our children: the government, the lawyers, the
regulatory agencies and the press – the checks and balances in our
democratic system that are supposed to stand between corporate power and
our little children have been removed . . . and there’s only one
barrier left and that’s the parents. . . . And we need to keep them in
the equation.”
We still don’t know the outcome of the 2016 election, in which our
“democratic process” has produced two candidates widely despised by the
American people, but we do know the race’s biggest loser: reporters and
the profession of journalism, which has been reduced to surrogacy,
largely on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Before going further, let me state that my own politics are on the
left but I won’t be voting in this election. Both parties have
collaborated to rig the system so that’s it’s virtually impossible for
an independent candidate to compete given the financial and
institutional hurdles that have been put in place to block such a
possibility. We live in an oligarchy where democracy is virtually
meaningless; I’m not debasing myself by participating in this charade.
Oligarchy - a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes.
Several studies rank electoral integrity in the United States as the worst among Western democracies — for example, the one discussed here
— and this year’s campaign has made the United States an international
embarrassment. I’ve personally witnessed elections in Africa and Latin
America that had more legitimacy than the charade that will culminate
here next Tuesday. The idea of the United States lecturing foreign
countries about holding fair elections has long been dubious and is now
grotesque.
We have two unbelievably shitty candidates, neither of whom is fit to
lead the country.
Donald Trump is a reckless narcissist who, as his
debate performances indicated, cannot string together more than two
sentences, let alone articulate a coherent vision for the country’s
future. His remarks about women, Latinos and African-Americans are
reprehensible and, whether he believes his own statements or is merely
trying to stir up anger for his electoral benefit, have emboldened
people who hold retrograde and genuinely scary views.
Then there is Hillary Clinton, who has been in public life for
decades and who grows more and more unpopular upon exposure —and for
good reason. Whatever one thinks of the so-called “Servergate” scandal
—and I personally find it troubling that she put classified information
on a private server that was almost certainly obtained by foreign
intelligence services — she stonewalled and lied to the FBI during its
investigation, which has now been reopened. She and her family run a
foundation that aggressively solicited donations from corporations,
wealthy individuals and foreign governments that have interests before
the government, and in some cases Clinton, as secretary of state, took
actions that can only be seen as quid pro quo for big donors. These
facts alone should disqualify her from political life and make her the
legitimate target of criminal investigations.
After the FBI reopened its investigation, John Kass, a columnist for the Chicago Tribune, cogently wrote in an opinion piece titled “Democrats should ask Clinton to step aside”:
Think of a nation suffering a bad economy and
continuing chaos in the Middle East, and now also facing a criminal
investigation of a president. Add to that congressional investigations
and a public vision of Clinton as a Nixonian figure wandering the halls,
wringing her hands. The best thing would be for Democrats to ask her to
step down now. It would be the most responsible thing to do, if the
nation were more important to them than power. And the American news
media — fairly or not firmly identified in the public mind as Mrs. Clinton’s political action committee — should begin demanding it.
Don’t bet on the best happening. It appears there may be a few late
Democratic defectors but Clinton is surrounded by a core group of amoral
supporters who, like her and her husband, lie without remorse or shame
and with such conviction that it appears they don’t know the difference
between fact and fiction. The truth is utterly irrelevant to the Clinton
crowd, as are the issues. All that matters is winning — as seen in
their rigging of the DNC to ensure Hillary’s nomination — and their continued ability to exploit public office for private gain.
It’s even less likely that the media, especially major outlets and
Washington political reporters who have all but openly worked on
Clinton’s behalf, will rethink their roles. This election has exposed as
never before that there is indeed a media elite, bound together by
class and geography, that is utterly clueless about its own biases and
filters.
A vast number of journalists covering the presidential campaign
are economically privileged brats that seem blissfully unaware that for
most Americans, the economy is in recession and people are terrified. If you don’t understand that, you can’t understand Trump.
That an
addled, reckless, dangerous billionaire is the last electoral hope to
tens of millions of Americans may be a sad reflection of the complete
breakdown of our political system, but it doesn’t make Trump’s appeal to
a significant chunk of the electorate illegitimate nor does it make all
of his supporters irrational morons and racists, as one gathers from
news accounts and liberal pundits.
The destruction of the industrial heartland due to Democratic-driven
trade policies, shrinking salaries that force many Americans to work two
and three jobs to support their families, the staggering rise in health
care costs under Obamacare, widespread economic insecurity that has
fueled a national opioid epidemic, and Hillary’s trigger-happy views
are highly rational reasons for any voter to consider casting a ballot
for Trump. So, too, are fears that Clinton’s election would lead to an
entrenchment of institutionalized corruption and corporate political
power. (If Hillary wins and Chuck Schumer takes over as Senate Majority
Leader, Wall Street will get its every dream through Congress.)
There’s nothing secret about the media’s anti-Trump stance. A formal
declaration of war was launched on August 7, when Jim Rutenberg, the New
York Times media columnist, wrote a story
under the headline, “Trump Is Testing the Norms of Objectivity in
Journalism.”
Rutenberg wrote that journalists were in a terrible bind
trying to stay objective because Trump, among other things, “cozies up
to anti-American dictators,” has “put financial conditions on the United
States defense of NATO allies,” and that his foreign policy views
“break with decades-old …consensus.” Rutenberg made clear that he and other reporters viewed “a Trump
presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous,” which required
them to report on him with a particularly critical point of view. This,
he said, would make journalists “move closer than you’ve ever been to
being oppositional,” which would be “uncomfortable and uncharted
territory.”
There are so many things wrong with all this that it’s hard to know
where to start. Rutenberg’s comment about dictators was clearly a
reference to Vladimir Putin, who is an authoritarian leader who Trump,
to his shame, admires. However, Russia is not the world’s worst
dictatorship — and has been far more effective at fighting ISIS than the
Obama administration — and Hillary’s cordial relationship with the
Saudi regime, to cite just one example, seems far more dangerous. But
rethinking “the alliances that have guided our foreign policy for 60
years” — the alliances that have resulted in non-stop war since 9/11 and
the U.S.’s current involvement in seven overseas conflicts — is not an
acceptable position for a presidential candidate in Rutenberg’s view.
Furthermore, how is it that the media has derogated to itself the
right to decide what candidates deserve special scrutiny and what
policies are acceptable? In a democracy, that is supposed to be the
voters’ job.
And worst of all is Rutenberg’s statement about the role of
journalists. “All governments are run by liars and nothing they say
should be believed,” I.F. Stone once wrote.“Journalism is printing what
someone else does not want printed: everything else is public
relations,” said George Orwell. For those two self-evident reasons,
being “oppositional” is the only place political journalists should ever
be, no matter who is in power or who is campaigning.
But for Rutenberg and the New York Times being oppositional
is only “uncomfortable” when it comes to covering Hillary Clinton. It
didn’t seem uncomfortable at all when it came to running a story about
Trump’s taxes based on three pages of a decades-old tax return that was
sent anonymously or when it ran another story with the headline, “The
282 People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter: A
Complete List.”
All during the campaign we have watched Hillary Clinton rehearse
campaign themes and, almost as if by magic, the media amplifying those
themes in seeming lockstep. The hacked emails from Clinton campaign
chairman John Podesta have demonstrated that this was not mere
happenstance, but, at least in part, resulted from direct coordination
between the Clintonistas and the press.
Mark Leibovich of the Times magazine gave the Clinton campaign
significant input and review into a fawning profile of the candidate.
“Pleasure doing business!” campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri wrote
him at the conclusion of the process.
The Clintonistas had an equally pleasurable relationship with the
Times’s Maggie Haberman, who, it was said in one email, “We have had…
tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed.” Haberman
even apparently read Palmieri an entire story prior to publication “to
further assure me,” Palmieri wrote.
Ezra Klein, the boy wonder editor-in-chief of Vox, is considered to
be the campaign’s most reliable mouthpiece, as seen in a March 23, 2015
email in which Clintonistas were wondering which journalist it could
call upon to push out a campaign storyline they were then concocting. “I
think that person…is Ezra Klein,” wrote Palmieri. “And we can do it
with him today.”
In a July email, Neera Tanden, Hillary’s longtime friend, aide, and
attack puppet, strategized with Podesta about “recruiting brown and
women pundits” and pushing pro-Hillary media figures such as MSNBC’s
Joan Walsh and Klein’s colleague at Vox, Matthew Yglesias, to be even
more faithful stenographers. “They can be emboldened,” she wrote, as if
these two loyalist PR assets needed any further encouragement.
In the same email, Tanden wrote that when New York mayor Michael
Bloomberg was “having problems” with the Times he called publisher
Arthur Schulzburger [sic] to arrange a coffee to complain about the
newspaper’s reporting and that their chat “changed the coverage
moderately but also aired the issues in the newsroom so people were more
conscious of it.” Unfortunately, she added, “Arthur is a pretty big
wuss” so he wouldn’t do more to help out Bloomberg without additional
prodding. To get real results to change the Times’s coverage of the 2016
campaign, “Hillary would have to be the one to call” Sulzberger — a
rather astonishing remark that begs a million questions about the Times’
election reporting.
Wikileaks
revealed that Politico reporter Glenn Thrush, pictured here at July’s
Republican convention in Cleveland, sent an email to Hillary Clinton
campaign chairman John Podesta allowing him to review a story draft
before publication.
Politico reporter Glenn Thrush apologized to Podesta for writing a
story draft that he feared was too critical. “I have become a hack I
will send u the whole section that pertains to u,” he wrote. “Please
don’t share or tell anyone I did this Tell me if I fucked up anything.”
On bended knee would have been more dignified.
Trump’s threats to expand libel laws and to sue journalists are
genuinely scary, but Hillary displays similar contempt for journalists.
In September, she gave her first formal press conference in more than
nine months — virtually this entire presidential campaign.And as the
Podesta emails show, the Clintonistas happily work hand in glove with
pliant surrogates but operate in quite a different, and dishonest, way
with critics.
Which leads me to my own recent experience writing about the Clinton
Foundation’s abysmal programs in Colombia, where it has worked closely
with Frank Giustra, reportedly the foundation’s largest donor. Giustra, a
Canadian stock market manipulator who was known as the “Poison Dwarf”
because of his tiny stature — he’s a little north of 5 feet— and
tendency to make tons of money at the expense of small investors,
invested heavily in Colombia in oil, gold, and timber. He made a fortune while companies he was affiliated with ruthlessly exploited workers and reportedly raped and pillaged the environment.
The Clinton-Giustra partnership had been written about but no U.S.
journalists had traveled to Colombia to see what the Foundation has done
there. In fact, with few exceptions, the Clinton Foundation’s claims
about the good it has done overseas have been unexamined.
I spent 10 days in Colombia last May and spoke to unionists, workers,
environmentalists, Afro-Colombians and entrepreneurs — exactly the
people who the foundation brags about helping on its website— as well as
three left-leaning senators who champion the poor. They were
overwhelmingly negative, and in many cases disparaging, about the
Clinton Foundation and Giustra, who was deeply involved with an oil
company, Pacific Rubiales, that recently went spectacularly bankrupt and
which worked with the Army to smash a strike after workers revolted
over miserable pay and working conditions.
Bill Clinton had a friendly relationship with Pacific Rubiales too,
and in 2012 the two men golfed together at a charitable event for the
foundation sponsored by the oil company. Colombia’s president, whose
niece got a plush job as “Sustainability Manager” for Pacific Rubiales, golfed with Bill.
I had wanted to write the Colombia story for months but, as is often
the case in journalism today, couldn’t find a media outlet to pay for
the trip. A friend steered me to the American Media Institute (AMI), a
conservative non-profit, which funded the trip.
AMI arranged for the story to run in Politico, but it killed an early version. I then pitched it to Fusion, which ran it on
October 13.It immediately generated a furious reaction from the
Clinton camp, starting off with a series of tweets by Angel Urena, Bill
Clinton’s spokesman. Then the Foundation tried to get Fusion to take the
story off its website.
On October 14, Craig Minassian, a Clinton Foundation spokesman, sent a
14-page letter to Fusion, CC-ing foundation officials, Urena and Mark
Gunton of the Clinton-Giustra Enterprise Partnership. The first few
pages attacked me, citing past articles about the Clinton Foundation and
a series of “vulgar” tweets I’d posted about Hillary Clinton and her
supporters, including Clinton’s long-time surrogate Joe Conason, author
of Man of the World, a rapturous book about Bill Clinton’s post-presidency. (Conason is also former executive editor of the Observer.)
It also complained about factual errors and cited the funding from
AMI as being evidence that the story was a right wing plot.In fact, I
set up the trip with the help of fixer in Colombia, picked people to
interview, and there was no political intrusion into the story.
Ironically, a conservative non-profit paid for a piece that defended
unions, the poor, women, and Afro-Colombians.
Mostly the dossier contained unverifiable Clinton Foundation
propaganda and references to positive press stories about the
foundation, like one in pro-Hillary Vox titled “The key question on the
Clinton Foundation is whether it saved lives. The answer is clearly
yes.” A central component of the foundation’s attack — which Urena
played heavily on his Twitter feed —was that I had never attempted to
reach the Clinton Foundation or campaign for comment.
Furthermore, I had “misled” the Foundation in the past so “we have
every reason to be suspicious of his intentions and doubt he would give
our facts a fair hearing,” he wrote. “Other news organizations have
handled this material differently, always checking with us prior to
publication, giving us an opportunity to respond.” (Giving us the
opportunity to edit and approve, is what he should have written.) In the
end, Fusion updated the story and posted an editorial note saying that
it had not met its standards.
OK, let me acknowledge my mistakes and provide a little further
information. First off, the Fusion story did contain a number of errors.
My name is on the story so I have to take responsibility.
Fine. None of the mistakes was intentional and I spent endless hours
prior to publication trying to ensure everything was accurate. There is
nothing more embarrassing as a journalist than having to make
corrections. I screwed up. But I stand by the story’s on-the-ground
reporting from Colombia and the conclusions about the Clinton
Foundation’s meager results there.
Second, of course I’m biased against the Clinton Foundation and the
Clintons, on the basis of evidence and reporting. I’ve never bothered to
hide my feelings, in public, on social media, or in my articles,
because I believe that all reporters are biased and readers are smart
enough to know that, and that the pretense of objectivity is itself
dishonest. What makes a journalist honest is holding all sides to the
same standard of criticism, no matter what your own views.
I’m equally biased against Donald Trump and have written a number of
critical articles about him and described him in equally vulgar and
unflattering terms. The only reasons I haven’t written about Trump more
is that I had pitches about him turned down — including one about his
revolting comments about women, which I shopped around unsuccessfully
last spring during the GOP primaries — and because I believed (and still
do) that Hillary Clinton is likely to be elected president, which makes
her a bigger target.
Third, and most important, I repeatedly sought comment from the
Clinton Foundation.This may seem like a minor matter but the fact that
the foundation lied about that shows that it not only seeks out
well-trained pet reporters as surrogates, but keeps tabs on and actively
seeks to undermine its “enemies.”
In August, when the piece was at Politico, I sent a detailed email to
the foundation, to Hillary’s campaign and to the CGEP seeking comment.
There was nothing coy about it. I wrote, in part:
I’m currently writing a piece about the foundations’
activities in Colombia, where I recently spent 10 days, and interviewed
dozens of people…I truly want to hear your side of
this story, which thus far appears to be utterly appalling. While the
Foundation and presidential candidate Hilary Clinton have effusively and
repeatedly expressed their concerns for the poor and organized labor —
and in Colombia specifically mention a deep concern for Afro-Colombians —
I found no evidence of that on the ground.
Unionists, Afro-Colombians, elected officials and impoverished
people in the slums of Bogota and Cartagena are unanimous: the Clinton
Foundation…has played no role at all in helping Colombia’s poor or even worse, it has played a negative role.
I’ve tried unsuccessfully to get comment from you in the past
about other stories but wanted to reach out once again in the hopes that
you might be able to reply to some simple straightforward questions.
In fact, this was the fifth time in the past year that I wrote about
the foundation and it only replied once, prior to publication of the
first story. Furthermore, I sought comment at the Clinton Foundation in
Colombia and at several of its projects in Bogota and Cartagena, and no
one could talk to me or provide even minimal information. (For example,
why does the Clinton Foundation run a private equity fund out of its
Bogota office? What does that have to do with its charitable efforts?)
Should I have reached out to the foundation again after the story
moved to Fusion? Perhaps, but another reporter who had been working on
the Colombia story had attempted to get comment from the foundation and
received no reply. The foundation (and the Clinton campaign) was given
ample opportunity to reply and chose not to. I have a strong suspicion
that if Thrush or Klein or Haberman or one of its other pet journalists
had asked for comment they would have had no problem.
The 2016 election has exposed like nothing in modern times the
desperate need for political reform in this country. That two candidates
of such low stature are all we have is an indictment of the system, not
the poor voters who are stuck with such dismal choices.
But we also desperately need a better media, because in this election
Trump’s voters were not understood and issues he espoused were treated
as reckless even in cases where many Americans — in fact most — probably
agree with him.
Again, I find both of the major candidates repellent and would never
vote for either. Most of my friends and family are voting for Hillary
(in despair), and I respect that; I have no intention of losing
friendships over this election because of the way someone votes.
But you don’t have to be crazy to vote for Trump. The best reason I’ve seen was recently offered by Camille Paglia, who said,
“People want change and they’re sick of the establishment…[I]f Trump
wins it will be an amazing moment of change because it would destroy the
power structure of the Republican party, the power structure of the
Democratic party and destroy the power of the media.”
If she’s correct, that indeed would be the very best outcome of this sad, sad election.
Ken Silverstein is a Washington-based investigative reporter and editor of the site WashingtonBabylon.com. He has written for Harpers, the LA Times, and VICE.
On April 3, 2015, U.S.
District Judge Vernon Broderick said that Facebook and its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, must turn over documents and electronic correspondence to a defense lawyer whose client, Paul Ceglia, claims 50 percent ownership in the social media giant. U.S. District Judge Vernon Broderick ordered Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg to relinquish by April 6th documents that were requested by Ceglia's lawyer, Robert Ross Fogg.
Ceglia filed a civil lawsuit against Zuckerberg on June 30, 2010, three months after the movie, The Social Network, based on the founding of Facebook, opened in theaters (it opened on October 1, 2010), claiming that an April 23, 2003 contract (Document 415, Exhibit 2) between Ceglia and Zuckerberg gave Ceglia 50 percent ownership in "the face book" project, as well as an additional 1% ownership
of the project per day for every day that the project remained
uncompleted past a certain launch date. Ceglia says he originally paid Zuckerberg $1,000 by check and then an additional $1,000 in November 2003.
When the lawsuit and the purported contract came to light, Facebook dismissed the whole thing as a fabrication. Specifically, Facebook said the "StreetFax" part of the contract was
real but the rest had been doctored to include mention of "the face
book."
Zuckerberg acknowleges the April 23, 2003 contract
with Ceglia included writing program code for "StreetFax" but denies the contract included any mention of Facebook. He claims he
didn't come up with the idea for Facebook until months after he
responded to Ceglia's online help-wanted ad and signed a contract
agreeing to create some software for him.
In early August 2011, Facebook's lawyers claimed they unearthed the "original" contract
on Ceglia's parent's computer in the form of a TIFF file, with "page one"
of the image being different from "page one" of the contract on paper
that Ceglia submitted as the authentic contract signed on April 23,
2003. Two weeks later, on August 15, 2011, while Ceglia was in Ireland,
and a day before motions were scheduled to begin, Facebook's lawyers
submitted to the court the "StreetFax" contract.
The following is part of the court filing by Facebook's lawyers late on the night of August 15, 2011 as reported by The Evening Tribune:
“This Court should grant Defendants’
cross-motion to compel, deny Ceglia’s motion to compel, and award
Defendants all other relief, including attorneys’ fees, to which they
may be entitled.
“The court-ordered forensic testing has
uncovered the authentic contract between Mark Zuckerberg and StreetFax
that Ceglia attempted to conceal. This smoking-gun evidence confirms
what Defendants have said all along: the purported contract attached to
the complaint is an outright fabrication. The authentic contract —
which mentions only StreetFax and has nothing to do with Facebook — was
found embedded in the electronic data from 2004 on Ceglia’s computer.
See Aug. 15 Southwell Decl., Ex. A. This Court has now rejected
Ceglia’s desperate effort to suppress the authentic contract by
overruling his baseless confidentiality designations. Ceglia has no
explanation for his fraud on the Court and does not even attempt to
explain how his manufactured case can continue in the face of the
authentic contract.
“The forensic analysis also revealed that
Ceglia has been willfully concealing six USB or other removable storage
devices containing highly relevant documents such as “Zuckerberg
Contract page1.tif” and a folder entitled “Facebook Files.” Ceglia now
claims — incredibly and outrageously — that he is “unable to locate
these devices.”
Close-Up of a Faxed Version of the Ceglia "Work for Hire" Facebook Contract Signed by Zuckerberg on April 23, 2003
A Portion of Ceglia's "Work for Hire" Facebook Contract on the Left and the TIFF "StreetFax"Image That Facebook Claims to Have Unearthed on Ceglia's Parent's Hard Drive
Excerpt from the Declaration by Document Expert James A. Blanco That The Ceglia "Work for Hire" Facebook Contract is Authentic
The Ceglia Two-Page "Work for Hire" Facebook Contract Between Ceglia and Zuckerburg Signed on April 23, 2003 (Quality of the Hand-written Portion Has Diminished Due to Extensive Processing and Exposure to UV Light by Facebook Experts When Examining the Document for 18 Hours)
Sometime in 2011, DLA Piper, a global law firm with 4,200 lawyers in more than 30 countries, had signed on to represent Ceglia in his case against Facebook in Zuckerberg. DLA Piper said that they did hours of due diligence on Ceglia's Facebook suit before even taking it on.
Ceglia produced a string of emails with Zuckerberg that Ceglia validate his 50 percent ownership of
Facebook. About two months after Ceglia filed the emails with the court, DLA Piper withdrew from the case, saying: “We have withdrawn from the case
and no longer represent Paul Ceglia. Due to our attorney-client
privilege obligations, there will be no further comment.” Facebook claims the emails are fake. Click here for Business Insider's analysis of the contract and click here for the alleged e-mails between Ceglia and Zuckerberg.
Disregarding Ceglia's evidence authenticating the contract in his civil action against Zuckerberg, the U.S. government on October 25, 2012 criminally charged him for wire and mail fraud. The charges carry a maximum 40-year prison term. The government's complaint accuses Ceglia of altering the contract and inventing emails that didn't exist. According to a statement from the U.S. attorney's office
in New York City, Ceglia "doctored, fabricated, and destroyed evidence to support his
false claim."
U.S. Attorney for the
Southern District of New York, Preetinder "Preet" Bharara — who was
formerly with the law firm representing Zuckerberg and Facebook in these
civil appeals — defending the indictment on wire fraud, stating: “As alleged, by marching into federal court for a quick payday based on a
blatant forgery, Paul Ceglia has bought himself another day in federal
court for attempting a multi-billion dollar fraud against Facebook and
its CEO. Ceglia’s alleged conduct not only constitutes a
massive fraud attempt, but also an attempted corruption of our legal
system through the manufacture of false evidence. That is always
intolerable. Dressing up a fraud as a lawsuit does not immunize you from
prosecution.”
Randall C. Till, the Inspector-in-Charge of the New York Office of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) said: “When Mr. Ceglia allegedly decided to take advantage of Mark Zuckerberg
and Facebook, he underestimated the resolve of the Postal Inspection
Service to bring him to justice for illegal use of the U.S. Mail.”
Ceglia
has pleaded not guilty to the federal charges of fraud.
Facebook's lawyers claim Ceglia replaced the first page of the real contract he signed with
Zuckerberg with another page that was "doctored" to include Facebook
references. However, Ceglia had nine experts who declared that the contract is authentic, but this evidence was disregarded by the court. Also disregarded by the court was the testimony of an polygraph examiner certified in Polygraph Science (Forensic Psychophysiology), who is a full
member of the American Polygraph Association and American Association of
Police Polygraphists and who received a certification of specialized
training from the American Polygraph Association. The expert said the questions asked during the polygraph examination
were designed to determine whether Ceglia had forged or doctored the
contract. After conducting three polygraph exams of Ceglia on June 11, 2011, which paid particular attention to the authenticity of the "Work for Hire" Facebook Contract between Ceglia and Zuckerberg dated April 28, 2003, the examiner found conclusively that there was "no deception."
Ceglia claims that Zuckerberg hacked his parent's computer and planted
a fabricated TIFF image of the contract onto the hard drive, and also that Zuckerberg deleted e-mails between them two of them from his own computers. It
certainly seems probable that the founder of Facebook who hacked the
Harvard network as a teenager could do this. Not only is the pattern of
Zuckenberg's behavior consistent with all of this, it is also consistent
with the speculation that Zuckenberg or Facebook used law firm
connections to preemptively go after Ceglia, who was endeavoring in a
business which by definition would be at risk for working capital
problems, and doing so at a time when the economy was in a tailspin. If
you want to understand the behavior of someone like Zuckenberg, whose
alleged conduct while at Harvard included felony hacking and serious fraud against others, you need to think outside
the box. With the array of "services" available from large, greedy law firms in the U.S.,
does anyone with any experience in the real world think that it is
entirely possible that the accusation and prosecution of Ceglia over a
failing wood pellet business was possibly manipulated?
Below is a full email that Ceglia sent to ZDNet on August 16, 2011, with original spacing, spelling, and grammar errors left intact:
We
have known about this photoshopped "image" for some time and i
willingly handed it over to them, now they claim it is the original and
that there are other files I'm intentionally not handing over, when I
gave over their doctored page 1.. It's laughable... they make this stuff
up as they go along.
I believe based on the fact that Orin
Snyder argued almost exclusively for my parents computers, the location
where the so called "image" was discovered that either Orin Snyder is
clairvoyant and had a premonition that his "smoking gun" was on my
parents computer or he knew in advance that it was planted there.
Perhaps by Zuckerberg himself and perhaps by Orrick, the firm Eduardo
Savrin accused of conspiring with Zuckerberg to deprive him of his
shares during his case. If that is the case then they are subornating
perjury and conspiring along with Zuckerberg to protect the empire and
this time they are going to get caught. Eduardo Savrin, the bus is
rolling, just needs a little push from the sidelines.
It is
obvious that these major outlets continue to protect Mark and his "new
image". He is an admitted forgerer, he was forced to admit it under
oath, not because he feels compelled to tell the truth, like ever, but
because he carelessly wrote as his home adress on the document he was
forging an address that he didnt know about or move to until more than a
year after the document was supposedly written! A rational person would
think I need not say more, and that surely my arrest for mushrooms 14
years ago or the fact that I fell behind on wood pellet orders that have
long since paid back is irrelevant compared to the more daming and far
more on point evidence that Zuckerberg is an admitted forger and an
admitted hacker, yet a read of the major media outlets shows what most
people know already, that our "Free Press" slant the news to the big
boss's views. A luxury afforded the Billionaires of this world that
clearly have their own agendas. Perhaps calling them out like this will
force some two sided coverage of the story.
We've now waited
weeks past when we were due to get the 175 emails from Zuckerberg,
supposedly because they were afraid that I might use them, as if it was I
that needed additional support for my side of the case. Me, a guy that
has limited computer knowledge, they are concerned about, but the fact
that Mark has now had more than two weeks to do the very same thing...
having had all my emails to read so that he can make his sound like a
better narrative is ignored and I have to trust that he, the admitted
forger, isnt actively switching his emails around to counter mine??!!!
wierder and wierder.
Zuckerberg reminds me a great deal of the
great Edward J Smith, captain of the Titanic, ignorant of the conditions
surrounding him he arrogantly continues onward until the moment he hits
the iceberg. You've hit your Iceberg now bud so don't come to Ireland
again, this time crying to me that you have to protect your image.
History will record you as the only billionaire to have ever lost his empire to a Tiff image.
This
"image" they claim is the original is forged and we will prove it has
no authenticating properties what so ever. I would have expected more
from him and his henchmen.
You won't go public Mark, you won't
IPO, you won't pass go. I won't let you sell this company out from under
me not while I have the power to stop you.
We have conslusive
proof Mark is lying and we are searching for more, anyone with some
legal or technical expertise that would like to help us nail him down
for good is welcome to join in at PaulsCase.com
What I can tell
you is, before the testing it was Orin "King Kong" Snyder beating his
chest with "amateurish forgery" claims on the original paper contract,
now that they have tested it, suddenly we hear no more about that,
though you will be hearing a lot from us on it in the coming months.
Suddenly there are requests for a second round of ink testing, clearly
outside the court order for expedited discovery and I don't think it
takes much to conlude that they wouldnt need more ink if the first batch
they took showed a "real" smoking gun as they claimed it would.
Even
some of their experts have come under fire from their own colleagues
for the false or misleading testimony they gave. (see the linguistics
expert publicly outted by the president of the linguistics society)
Instead
they continue to make up their defense as they go along and now talk
about this "image" and since Mark has now officially claimed that is the
original then I'm happy to be the first to say- "Mark Zuckerberg has
admitted to Forgery and he has done it once again." this time though he
isnt just going to get away with it and buy himself out, you will face a
jury of our peers Mark, and your PR team won't be there to save you.
To adopt a line from the movie-
750 million dollars isnt cool Mark, you know what 's cool? 750 million users is cool...
Some unrelated opinions...
From
the Arab Spring to the riots of London last week, I see that social
networks are the peoples tools to not only talk about how bored we are
today, or to worry about everyone seeing that last photo we put up, but
also when users are oppressed somewhere and realize it, it obviously can
be used to overthrow tyranny and outmanuever the forces that protect
the establishment. It's become the peoples voice and a powerful tool to
unite the masses. It's a tool that deserves to stay in the hands and
control of the people.
I'm starting to have all sorts of opinions
as to what I'll do when I'm at the helm. Some might call it delusions
of self grandure, you can call me what you like but if Thomas Jefferson
was right and that- "all tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people
of good conscience to remain silent" then in good conscience when I'm at
the helm I won't let any government have the power to silence it's
citizens, especially during an uprising. Money has never been my
interest in this case, most of the lawyers for sure, but for me the
network is what is important, we have a lot of tyrants to rid ourselves
of in this world and a lot of inappropriate pictures to share with our
singular circle of friends but as Michael Franti says..we won't stop..
and I won't quit...
On March 26, 2013, in a court filing, U.S. Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio recommended that Facebook's motion to dismiss the lawsuit be granted,
pointing to "clear and convincing evidence" that the 2003 contract
between Ceglia and Zuckerberg is a "recently created fabrication." The judge said the contract in question between
Zuckerberg and Ceglia was a "fabrication" and that Ceglia "knows it." In a 155-page recommendation, Foschio said Ceglia's arguments largely
consisted of "self-defeating inconsistencies" that established the
"fraudulent nature" of his claims. The case (#14-1365), which was referred to Foschio by
U.S. District Judge Richard J. Arcara, on May 2, 2011, for
pretrial matters, went back to Arcara to decide whether to approve Foschio's recommendation for dismissal.
A year later, on March 25, 2014, U.S. District Judge Richard Arcara in Buffalo dismissed Ceglia's lawsuit against Zuckerberg and Facebook on the grounds that
the contract was a "fabrication" and there was spoliation of evidence. Additionally, a federal judge in Manhattan refused to dismiss the indictment charging Ceglia with mail and wire fraud. The
judge in a separate ruling dismissed a lawsuit by Ceglia
seeking to prevent Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara from
prosecuting him for the Facebook lawsuit.
Ceglia's lawyers, Joseph Alioto and Gil Messina, are appealing the judge's decision to dismiss his civil lawsuit against Zuckerberg and Facebook — the
lawsuit that ended up as the basis for the criminal charges. The following is an excerpt from the appeal.
The criminal prosecution was commenced while the Facebook Action was
pending and it was brought in a district distant from where the civil
case was being litigated. The criminal prosecution was instigated, it is
believed, by Zuckerberg and Facebook because of the incestuous
relationship between their attorneys and the U.S. Attorney for the
Southern District of New York, Preetinder "Preet" Bharara, who was
formerly with the law firm representing Zuckerberg and Facebook in these
civil appeals. At the time Ceglia was arrested, the
U.S. Attorney made extrajudicial comments stating, “Dressing up a fraud
as a lawsuit does not immunize you from prosecution.”
The extraordinary timing of the indictment of Mr. Ceglia — while the
Facebook Action was pending — was intended to chill his First Amendment
right to pursue the Facebook Action. In fact, the government alluded to
the fact that further court filings by Ceglia’s lawyers in the Facebook
Action could result in further charges being brought against him and his
lawyers.
The indictment, we submit, was also calculated to
prejudice (1) the Magistrate Judge, who would ultimately grant Facebook's and
Zuckerberg's Motion to Dismiss the Facebook Action as fraud on the
court, and (2) the District Judge, who accepted the Report and
Recommendation without addressing any of the substantial objections
raised by Ceglia.
The scheme did not succeed in deterring Ceglia from
proceeding with the Facebook Action, but it did succeed in causing his
lead counsel (Dean Boland) to move to be relieved
on October 30, 2012, because, as the
Magistrate Judge stated in his Order of March 20, 2013, the attorney was
said to "fear for his safety" and because of "threats... made against
him," (Facebook Action, Doc. 649, p. 9), even though the attorney
"states his continued belief that Plaintiff , in bringing and
prosecuting his action, has not committed fraud, a
factor which could justify withdrawal under N.Y. Rule 1.16(c)(2),(3)."
[Boland is among more than a half dozen lawyers and law firms to have
signed on and then withdrawn from Ceglia's 2010 lawsuit.]
The District Court in Buffalo denied Ceglia a meaningful discovery from
Facebook and Zuckerberg and denied Ceglia the opportunity to depose
Zuckerberg in both the Facebook and Holder Actions. Zuckerberg has never
denied under oath that the signature and initials on the original Work
for Hire Contract — or so-called Facebook Contract — are his. Instead,
the Magistrate Judge granted Zuckerberg's and Facebook's motion to
dismiss the Facebook Action as a fraud after considering only the
evidence most favorable to Facebook and Zuckerberg and Ceglia's rebuttal
evidence. However, Ceglia's evidence supporting the authenticity of the
Work for Hire Contract is so overwhelming that the Magistrate's
decision to consider the evidence most favorable to Facebook and
Zuckerberg is erroneous on its face.
Note: Ceglia's evidence that was disregarded by
the court, although the Magistrate and District Judge were required to
take it as true and view it in the light most favorable to Ceglia,
starts on page 8 of the document.
On or about March 6, 2015, with his May 4 trial for wire and mail fraud approaching,
Ceglia, 41, sliced off his GPS ankle monitor and affixed it to a
crudely built
contraption in his rural New York home "in order to give the
appearance that he was still present and moving within his home" (see
image below). [As part of Ceglia's $250,000 bail conditions, he was required to wear
a GPS electronic monitoring device around his ankle.]
Ceglia has been declared a fugitive. The U.S.
Marshals Service, which is offering a $5,000 reward for "information leading to the location and arrest" of Celgia, said he is believed to be traveling with his wife, his
two sons, and his dog since they also are
missing from their home in Wellsville, N.Y., 70 miles southeast of Buffalo.
Paul Ceglia's GPS anklet is hanging from the bottom of this
ceiling-based contraption designed to keep the monitoring device moving
and to make it appear as if he was at his rural New York home. Ceglia
and family have vanished. [Source]
Ceglia's apparent disappearance came 17 days after U.S.
District Judge Vernon Broderick approved subpoenas on February. 20, 2015, forcing
Zuckerberg and Facebook to divulge by March 15, 2015, all "contracts, agreements and
addendums" between Ceglia and Zuckerberg or their companies from January 1,
2003 to July 29, 2004. In addition, Zuckerberg is being forced
to release all electronic communications regarding agreements during
that same time frame. Facebook and Zuckerberg asked the judge to suspend until Ceglia is caught the order he issued earlier for them to promptly turn over to Ceglia's attorneys the requested documentation and communications.
On March 12, 2015, the New
York-based federal appeals court ordered Ceglia's lawyers to "show cause, on or
before March 20,
2015, as to why
the captioned civil appeals should not be dismissed on the grounds that a
fugitive from justice is not entitled to adjudication of his civil claims." Ceglia's attorneys, Alioto and Messina, say the appeal should go on
because it's Ceglia's constitutional right. "The extraordinary timing
of the indictment of Mr. Ceglia — while the
Facebook Action was pending — was intended to chill his First Amendment
right to pursue the Facebook action," they said.
During a March 24, 2015 hearing, Ceglia's father told U.S. District Judge Vernon Broderick that his son might have fled because he believes Facebook and Zuckerberg are
working together with prosecutors against him, jeopardizing his chance
for a fair trial:
Carmine Ceglia said his son found it "really upsetting" when he was told
lawyers hired by Facebook were working with prosecutors on the criminal
case against him. "We didn't feel like we were getting a fair shot," he said. "I've lost a lot of faith in our justice system." Of the U.S. Marshals Service, the father said: "They just think I know where he is, and I don't."
Back in August of 2011, Ceglia wrote in an email to a
Wellsville Daily Reporter:
“As you know Zuckerberg has seemingly stopped at nothing to try to
slander me during this case so far and part of that has been their use
of private investigators not just to investigate me, but far beyond that
to harass me and my family daily. From waking up to discover
people hiding in (a) back field with binoculars, to being followed
day-in and day-out by these guys, to coming home and finding a back
window open that I know I personally locked causes what I can only say
borders on paranoia and I refuse to let the bad guys win through
intimidation tactics.”
Judge Broderick told Ceglia's father that he would not allow a trial to proceed
unjustly. Broderick then revoked Ceglia's bail and entered a $250,000 judgment against Ceglia's parents and
brother. Broderick
said he might reduce the penalty if the family helps locate Ceglia.
Ceglia's
father Carmine said he did not know where his son was but expressed
sympathy for him, suggesting that Facebook's principal lawyer was unduly
influencing federal prosecutors. "I think he was afraid for his life that he wasn't going to get a fair shot," Carmine Ceglia said. Facebook's lawyer had no immediate comment. [Source]
Gil Messina, one of Ceglia's attorneyes, filed papers late on March 23, 2015 with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals,
where Ceglia is trying to have the criminal charges against him dismissed, saying
the charges were brought improperly to punish Ceglia for exercising his
First Amendment right to prove through a civil lawsuit that he has a 50 percent ownership stake in Facebook. The government's key witness for Ceglia's jury trial for fraud is Zuckerberg. Other than Zuckerberg, prosecutors' main evidence is the asserted real contract and a forensics analysis of the alleged fake contract that prompted a
federal judge to declare it was "a fabrication." However, Ceglia says Zuckerberg hacked or "planted"
a forged contract — the one prosecutors say is the original — onto Ceglia
family computers in a bid to protect Zuckerberg's own fortunes and to
undermine Ceglia's claims. It's a position federal prosecutors contend
is without "basis." [Source]
At the March 24, 2015 hearing, federal prosecutor Janis Echenberg said Ceglia may
soon be charged with defrauding investors in the civil lawsuit out of
$650,000 and also jumping bail. Gil
Messina, a lawyer for Ceglia, said after the hearing that he and other
lawyers were served on March 23, 2015, with grand jury subpoenas that appeared
connected to these new charges. The civil case is Ceglia v. Zuckerberg et al, U.S. District Court, Western District of New York, No. 10-00569. The criminal case is U.S. v. Ceglia, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No 12-cr-00876.
Back on October 19, 2014, Facebook filed a lawsuit in New York County Supreme Court against a handful of Ceglia's attorneys, claiming they “knew or should have known that the [initial] lawsuit was a fraud.” Included in the lawsuit is the law firm DLA Piper, which withdrew from the Ceglia case but not before telling the Wall Street Journal
in 2011 that they had “100 percent confidence that [Mr. Ceglia’s]
agreement is authentic.” In total, Facebook lists more than a dozen
defendants in the lawsuit.
“We said from the beginning that Paul Ceglia’s claim was a fraud and
that we would seek to hold those responsible accountable,” Facebook
General Counsel Colin Stretch said.
“DLA Piper and the other named law firms knew the case was based on
forged documents, yet they pursued it anyway, and they should be held to
account.” Facebook has never filed suit against Ceglia himself, and a company
spokesperson declined to comment on whether or not it plans to take
legal action against him directly. Facebook did not specify a monetary amount for damages in the
lawsuit, but is seeking payment for attorney fees and “damage to
reputation and harm to business interests” for the company. Of course,
Facebook doesn’t need money; the suit appears to be more about
payback than anything. [Source]
On December 4, 2014, one of Ceglia's attorneys being sued by Facebook, Paul Argentieri of Hornell, N.Y., told The Evening Tribune that he is demanding a trial by jury on behalf of the group of defendants who represented Ceglia. In a statement provided to the newspaper, Argentieri wrote:
"Plantiff Mark Elliot Zuckerberg is an individual with a well-documented
history as a liar, cheater and computer hacker who has repeatedly
betrayed the trust of friends and associates to his personal advantage
and to their disadvantage, particularly as relates to the founding and
development of Facebook and by corruptly invoking the power of the
federal government through the use of his political influence and
connections in an illegal effort to shut down and punish those who
oppose him." Argentieri said Zuckerberg could find himself in a no-win
situation, should he agree to the trial.
"We are ready, willing and able to fight and if he's insane enough to have a trial, we'll see him there," Argentieri told The Evening Tribune on December 3, 2014. Argentieri and his firm, Paul Argentieri & Associates,
were named as defendants in the lawsuit as well as former New York State
Attorney General Dennis C. Vacco and DLA Piper, a firm with more than
4,200 lawyers in over 30 countries.
"Zuckerberg
and his minions embody a particular form of evil that must be resisted
and defeated," Argentieri told The Evening Tribune on October 21, 2014. "This is a
fight I feel very comfortable in and have trained for a very long time
as a trial lawyer."
Argentieri's general denial to the New York State Supreme Court regarding a lawsuit
filed by Facebook and founder Mark Zuckerberg against several law firms
who defended Paul Ceglia in court pulled no punches. It also invoked the
case brought forth by Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and Divya Narendra in
2004 against Zuckerberg in which he was accused of stealing ideas and
source code from their ConnectU website, some of which was partially
dramatized in the 2010 film "The Social Network."
It
took four years for a settlement to be reached, but legal proceedings
are still ongoing regarding whether the Winklevoss twins and Narendra
should be owed more money.
"The lawsuit ...
resulted from Zuckerberg's deception and otherwise dishonest dealings
with the plaintiffs in that case," the denial reads. "Most of the
substantive proceedings in that case proceeded under cover of a
protective order, which has prevented most of the evidence against
Zuckerberg from becoming public."
Another aspect of the defendants' argument criticizes the
actions of U.S. Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio, who recommended the
dismissal of Ceglia's case against Facebook in March 2013. Foschio
made his decision based on what he believed to be fabrications on
several documents including a work-for-hire agreement between Ceglia and
Zuckerberg. The case would be dismissed a year later.
"Defendants
deny that the report and recommendation was proper because the
magistrate relied upon a fundamentally flawed standard of review by
considering only the evidence most favorable to Facebook and Zuckerberg
and Ceglia's rebuttal evidence, and the magistrate concluded the court
lacked subject matter jurisdiction," the denial reads.
Ceglia's
trial regarding a alleged forged document that entitled him to half of
Facebook was scheduled to begin in late November in U.S. District Court
with Zuckerberg expected to testify. The trial has since been postponed
to April after Ceglia hired a new lawyer. [Source]
Ceglia continues to be represented by Paul Argentieri, who has been with him since the beginning of this saga. Argentieri has also defended Ceglia against claims that he defrauded locals through a scheme to sell wood pellets.
An advocacy group claiming no affiliation to Paul Ceglia or his attorneysis allegingcollusion among law enforcement, politicians and the courts in what it claims is the “persecution” of the Wellsville man on criminal fraud charges. The criminal charges stem from Ceglia’s civil suit against Facebook and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, claiming partial ownership of Facebook.
Currently, a criminal trial is scheduled to start May 4 in federal court in the Southern District of New York.
The group, Friends of Paul Ceglia’s Constitutional Rights, compared the government’s and judges’ conduct to the fabrication of charges against innocent citizens by the former Soviet Union’s KGB.
“Mr. Ceglia’s current effort to protect himself and his family against this oppression is being met with sarcasm and derision from the Facebook PR machine — just like the Soviets gloated over their staged incarcerations,” Friends of Ceglia said in a press release this week. The release was e-mailed to The Spectator by a Paula Pratt on behalf of the advocacy group.
The advocacy group also criticized the media.
“Even though the government has not proven its case against Paul Ceglia, the mainstream media persists with pejorative descriptions like ‘scammer,’ ‘fraud suspect’ and ‘schemer,’”it said.Ceglia is alleged to have forged a contract between himself and Zuckerberg.
“Before the government can bring criminal charges against a citizen, it must have probable cause. In this case, the government was required to be relatively certain that Zuckerberg’s forgery charges against Paul Ceglia were more likely than not to be true. Logic says the government would have performed forensic analysis on the contract before bringing charges ... on Oct. 25, 2012,” Friends of Ceglia said. “Instead, the government pressed this case with no proof at all. In fact, it was not until March 11, 2015, that the government finally submitted the contract for forensic analysis at the United States Secret Service Office of Investigations, Forensic Services Division. “The lab concluded that on two of four criteria (toner and paper), the contract is likely genuine. And, on the other two criteria (age and ink), the lab was unable to give an opinion due to inability to test the materials.Nothing in the government’s own forensic tests support Zuckerberg’s complaint,” the group wrote. “Therefore, the government had no objective criteria to support probable cause.”
The U.S. Marshals Service has been looking for Ceglia, who apparently removed his GPS bracelet the weekend of March 7 and 8 and attached it to a contraption to make it seem as though he was still in his house. A $250,000 bail release agreement had been in place at the time Ceglia fled.
Ceglia attorney Robert Ross Fogg said last week, “Mr. Ceglia
is still at large and his, as well as his family’s, whereabouts are
still unknown.”
Fogg said the prosecution wants to change the date of the start of the trial.
“The government now seeks to hold the May 4, 2015 trial date and all pretrial matters at abeyance (that they be suspended) and while the criminal defense team would like the date to remain, the criminal defense team is cognizant of the procedural difficulties in maintaining the trial date at this late stage,” he said. “Therefore, the defense has agreed to hold the trial date and only certain pretrial matters at abeyance.”
As U.S. marshals continue their search for Paul Ceglia, a private advocacy group has come out in support of the Wellsville man before his criminal trial begins May 4.
The group, called “Friends of Paul Ceglia’s Constitutional Rights,” alleged in a press releasethat Facebook and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s attorneys (Gibson Dunn LLP and Orrick Harrington LLP), and U.S. Attorney Preet Bhararaare conspiring to deny Ceglia’s civil rights.
In addition,the release claims that Ceglia’s treatment “proves that the U.S. justice system is corrupted by corporate deep pockets.”
Friends of Paul Ceglia’s Constitutional Rights claim that Gibson Dunn LLP, one of the firms that have defended Facebook in court, played an active role in concealing 28 of Zuckerberg’s hard drives and emails from his time at Harvard, citing a 2009 case in which Facebook claimed the material was “lost” only for it to turn up two days later.
The release alleges that several judges in the federal system have ties to Facebook in one way or another, whether it be as a direct stockholder or with a firm that has worked with Zuckerberg and Facebook in the past.
For example, Ceglia’s case against Zuckerberg was dismissed in March of last year in U.S. District Court. The document alleges that Judge Richard J. Arcara didn’t allow Ceglia access to Zuckerberg’s 28 hard drives and emails and “failed to disclose his substantial financial holdings in Facebook interests.”
In addition, Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio — Arcara’s superior — made an unconstitutional argument in dismissing the case.
Later in the release, it is alleged that Arcara holds “substantial amounts of stock in Facebook and (Facebook’s) key stakeholders,” including: Fidelity, Jennison, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JPMorgan, BlackRock, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Credit Suisse, and Morgan Stanley.
The group claims that Bharara’s office carried “out an evident political hit job on Ceglia since Bharara has permitted his former firm, Gibson Dunn LLP, and two former U.S. Attorneys now working at Gibson Dunn LLP, Alexander Southwelland Orin Snyder, to enter the case and help the government press their case against Ceglia.”
In addition, Bharara is alleged to have filed criminal charges against Ceglia for allegedly forging a contract between himself and Zuckerberg. These charges stood after Zuckerberg admitted to a contract between himself and Ceglia, but doesn’t have the original copy of it.
Friends of Paul Ceglia’s Constitutional Rights also argues that the federal government — including the CIA — is biased against Ceglia due to its ties with Facebook.
The release points to the fact that the federal court system has blocked access to Zuckerberg’s hard drives in several cases, possibly due to an inconsistency in which Zuckerberg claimed to have developed the program in “one to two weeks” in January 2004. Instead, the group argues that Zuckerberg used code from The Eclipse Foundation, founded with “$40 million in IBM ‘donation’ funds,” in launching Facebook.
Jim Breyer, Facebook’s second largest inside investor, allegedly has a “close association” to the CIA through Gilman Louie, who was Breyer’s director at the National Venture Capital Association in 2004. Louie now works for In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s private venture capital arm.
It’s also claimed that several ties Facebook has made with companies and firms “taints any government proceeding” involving the social media giant, including Fidelity Ventures, Vanguard, Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers, Cloudera, T. Rowe Price, and Meritech Capital Partners.
In addition,Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. is said to hold a large amount of interest in Facebook and a “close relationship to Gibson Dunn LLP.”
“A widespread head-in-the-sand misconception among judges and attorneys is that judges are exempt from disclosing the portfolio stocks in their mutual funds,” the statement reads. “In other words, judges claim that even if their Fidelity mutual fund holds the largest amount of well-publicized Facebook stock of any mutual fund on the planet, they are permitted to hide this financial interest.”
The group then goes on to attack what’s called the “safe harbor” rule and notes that “it smacks of cronyism.”
In conclusion, Friends of Paul Ceglia’s Constitutional Rights claims that a fair trial for Ceglia is impossible at the moment due to blatant conflicts of interest.
“The U.S. courts are currently a caustic environment in which to find justice for Paul Ceglia in his battle with Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook,” the statement reads. “The judges are protecting their personal and crony financial interests at the expense of solemn constitutional rights.”
“Our interest is in ensuring that Mr. Ceglia is afforded his sacred constitutional right to fair and impartial tribunals — something he has been egregiously denied. We believe that if we do not vigorously defend Paul Ceglia’s constitutional rights now, the abuses will only grow until America becomes a full-fledged plutocracy and ceases to be a Republic.”
Ceglia’s criminal court case is set to begin May 4 and was spurred by what Foschio believed to be fabrications in documents Ceglia used in his civil case against Facebook.
However, he was found missing after removing his tracking
device over the weekend of March 7 and 8. A missing persons report on
his wife, Iasia, and two kids has been filed with state police.
U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick revoked Ceglia’s $250,000 bail — which had been modified — in court last week after it was clear Ceglia had fled.
U.S. Marshals and New York State Police searched the home of Ceglia’s parents, Carmine and Vera, last week. His parents had planned to go on vacation but scrapped plans once they heard of Ceglia’s disappearance.
Jim Breyer and Accel Partners LLP combined are Facebook’s second largest inside investor. On May 13, 2004, Breyer was appointed chairman of the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA). Just three months earlier, The Eclipse Foundation held its first national conference between February 2-5, 2004. Facebook launched during the conference on February 4, 2004. The Eclipse Foundation was started with $40 million in IBM―"donation" funds and included clients of Facebook’s attorney Fenwick & West LLP, including Borland and Red Hat. Ceglia has never been able to determine whether Zuckerberg used Eclipse code in his contract with Zuckerberg, or whether Zuckerberg was conspiring to defraud Ceglia, which now seems most likely.Fenwick & West LLP was Leader Technologies’ attorney at the time, and IBM was the client of Leader’s other attorney, Professor James P. Chandler.One of Breyer’s fellow NVCA in 2004 directors was Gilman Louie, In-Q-Tel (C.I.A.).The close association between Breyer and the C.I.A. taints any government involvement in a proceeding involving Breyer’s pet project—Facebook. [Source]
By 'Friends of Paul Ceglia', FBCoverUp.com
March 29, 2015
Thanks to Edward Snowden, Americans now know that the CIA and NSA
have spied on Americans citizens through Facebook since June 6, 2009
using a dubious FISA court judicial opinion. The CIA, through its
private venture capital business In-Q-Tel, invests in “big data”
projects with all of Facebook’s principal underwriters, investors and
partners, including:
James W. Breyer,
Accel Partners LLP,
The Eclipse Foundation,
IBM,
National Venture Capital Association,
Fidelity,
Vanguard,
T. Rowe Price,
Kleiner Perkins,
Cloudera,
Brookings Institution,
Meritech Capital Partners,
Gibson Dunn LLP,
Orrick Herrington LLP,
Fenwick &
West LLP,
James P. Chandler,
National Intel lectual Property Law Institute,
Goldman Sachs,
Bank of America,
JPMorgan,
Citigroup,
Wells Fargo,
Credit Suisse,
Barclarys,
Morgan Stanley,
Erskine Bowles,
Peter Thiel,
Reid Hoffman,
Sheryl Sandberg,
James Swartz and
Ping Li.
Therefore, the Government itself has a bias in the outcome of
U.S. v. Ceglia and cannot offer an impartial court.
NSA
Prism program taps into user data of Apple, Google, [Facebook] and
others. The Guardian;
See also Macaskill, E., Dance, G. (Nov. 1, 2013). NSA FILES: Decoded,
What the revelations mean to you. The Guardian
Judge
Vernon S. Broderick, also Harvard Law, replaced Carter earlier this
year after Carter removed himself inexplicably. Broderick was formerly a
partner with Weil Gotshal LLP who became embroiled in Leader v.
Facebook judicial scandal at the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. Weil
Gotshal’s disgraced partner, Edward R. Reines, was caught trading on his
friendship with Chief Judge Randall R. Rader to get legal engagements
at the Federal Circuit . Weil Gotshal had earlier made an appearance in
Leader v. Facebook where one of the panel judges, Judge Kimberly A.
Moore, failed to disclose her Facebook financial interests as well as
the fact that Weil Gotshal was her former client.
A
close collaborator with Reines at the Federal Circuit is Thomas G.
Hungar, Gibson Dunn LLP. Thomas G. Hungar was Facebook’s appeal attorney
in Leader v. Facebook who concealed the existence of the 28 Zuckerberg
hard drives and Harvard emails to the tribunal. Therefore, there is no
arm’s length relationship among Weil Gotshal LLP, Gibson Dunn LLP and
Facebook. Broderick’s Weil Gotshal LLP association taints these Facebook
proceedings.
The fact is, a certain group of American
judges are growing disproportionately rich on the strength of their
financial holdings in Facebook interests concealed inside colluding
mutual funds.
The common denominator among all the Government’s Harvard lawyers and
judges appears to be former Harvard Law professor, James P. Chandler.
Chandler works in the shadows as an organizer of ashadow government, powered by NSA, judicial, Harvard, banking and Silicon Valley crony control of information flow — Paul Ceglia’s claims threaten Chandler’s monstrous agenda.
It
is notoriously known in Washington D.C. that Chandler advises the White
House, C.I.A., NSA, the Justice Department and some members of
Congress, like Senator Harry Reid and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi on national security. Chandler also advised IBM and Obama’s eventual Patent Office director, David J. Kappos.
He also advised Eric Holder when he was Assistant Attorney General.
Chandler was evidently instrumental in IBM ’s $40 million “donation ” to
start The Eclipse Foundation on November 29, 2001.Eclipse
widely distributed the platform source code that caused the
uncharacteristically meteoric rise of social networking in early 2004. Zuckerberg was a pawn tasked to stall Paul Ceglia. Zuckerberg appears to have been a pawn in Chandler’s power play on behalf of IBM, the NSA and the C.I.A. (his clients).
Unbeknownst to
Paul Ceglia, his desire to build a Facebook at Harvard interfered with
the Chandler/IBM grand plan for The Eclipse Foundation. Zuckerberg
was likely tasked to stall Ceglia from getting a Facebook started at
Harvard before The Eclipse Foundation code was ready by
way of the theft of social networking source code from Columbus
innovator Leader Technologies ― Chandler’s and Fenwick & West
LLP’s client.
James P. Chandler, as
author of the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 and the Federal Trade
Secrets Act, was uniquely positioned to pursue this aggressive agenda
across the legal, technical and political spectra. At the founding of Eclipse, Chandler was a member of President Clinton’s National Infrastructure Assurance Council.
Corrupt
lawyers and judges stonewall review of Zuckerberg’s 28 hard drives and
Harvard emails, like they do with Benghazi, IRS and Fast &
Furious
One thing is certain,
a thorough review of Zuckerberg 2003-2004 information will definitively
settle the questions about Facebook’s origins — a story that has been
stonewalled as badly as the Benghazi, IRS and Fast & Furious
scandals. Same law firms, different subjects. No
judge in any lawsuit against Zuckerberg and Facebook has permitted a
proper review of Zuckerberg’s information from 2003-2004. This is because we believe the following evidence will emerge:
1. Ceglia’s contract is genuine. Paul Ceglia and Mark Zuckerberg did sign a valid Facebook contract. Ceglia thought it was to have programming done. Zuckerberg
knew his only job was to stall introduction of a Harvard Facebook until
his handlers were ready with the Leader Technologies source code. Zuckerberg also stalled the Winklevoss Twins and Aaron Greenspan similarly.
2. Zuckerberg used The Eclipse Foundation code stolen from Leader Technologies. Mark Zuckerberg misappropriated Leader Technologies’ social networking invention source code, provided through James P. Chandler, David J. Kappos, IBM, Mitch Kappor, Fenwick & West LLP and The Eclipse Foundation to start Facebook on February 4, 2004.
3. Larry Summers shilled for the 19-year old Zuckerberg at The Harvard Crimson. Lawrence
Summers, president of Harvard, arranged for Zuckerberg to get more
press coverage from September 2003 to June 2004 in The Harvard Crimson
than any world leader or news topic.
4. Chandler helps orchestrate the NSA surveillance agenda. Professor
James P. Chandler, III, helps drive the NSA, IBM and The Eclipse
Foundation legal, technical and political agenda in secret and
accountable to no one.
5. Pay Pal Mafia gave the NSA/C.I.A. the keys to the backdoor of our privacy as the quid pro quo. The Pay Pal Mafia bankrolled Zuckerberg to implement the commercial versions of Leader Technologies’ invention while the NSA and C. I.A. built backdoors into the code.
How many large law firms colluding with Facebook does it take to corrupt the American Republic?
The
judicial community has permitted Facebook’s gaggle of unscrupulous law
firms to stonewall discovery of the truth. For the record, those
Facebook attorneys include:
Gibson Dunn LLP
Cooley Godward LLP
Weil Gotshal LLP
Fenwick & West LLP
Orrick Herrington LLP
Perkins Coie LLP
Blank Rome LLP
White & Case LLP
Latham & Watkins LLP
Cravath Swaine LLP
Wily Rein LLP
How many large law firms colluding with Facebook does it take to spoil the American Republic?
Apparently, about eleven.
Paul Ceglia is innocent. The Government and Zuckerberg have committed willful fraud on the court.
"We believe that if we do not vigorously defend Paul Ceglia’s
constitutional rights now , the abuses will only grow until America becomes a
full - fledged plutocracy and ceases to be a Republic."
What people talk about when they talk about Facebook is maybe a kid in college had an idea and all of a sudden it became this big business, and the reality is it couldn’t be further from the truth…
THIS IS THE STORY OF WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
MARK ZUCKERBERG STEALS THE IDEA FACE-MASH
It all started when DAVID was logged in to the Harvard website (2003), where I was listening in to the conversations of the Harvard students. One of these students was Mark Zuckerberg, who was talking about Face Smash. He had just broken up with his girlfriend at the time, so I struck up a conversation with this Mark Zuckerberg. He was talking about creating a dating site. I thought this was a bit odd – a pie in the sky idea since he had just broken up with his girlfriend and he was slaging her off – calling her a bitch and a whore.
Dave talked to Mark about the idea, and suggested he call it Face Mash. He was intrigued with my suggestion and thought it was a good idea. Mark wanted to call it Face Smash, because he wanted to smash his ex in the face. I convinced him that Face Mash was a good idea and he agreed, but one week later he changed his mind and wanted to call it Face Smash. When I queried him about this he replied, ‘f…. off you c…- I’m calling it Face Smash’.
Two weeks after this conversation, he came up with the name Mashable, and when I asked him why he chose the word Mashable instead of Face Mash he said, ‘f,…off you bastard, Face Mash is not your idea’. So I re-posted the conversations we had two weeks earlier, and he had to apologize and said he was going with Mashable. I took this as a sign that he wanted to throw me off the scent and take the site for himself.
Dave found the character of Mark Zuckerberg to be deceptive and dishonest and ended conversing with Mark Zuckerberg because of his dishonesty and lack of integrity.
DAVID DUSTIN + CHRIS [HUGHES] THE ORIGIN OF FACEBOOK
After this, Dave started conversing with Dustin and Chris about an idea of mine called Facebook for an online service where students can post pictures and information on themselves and use it as a directory. And Eduardo Saverin was invited in to the idea facebook.
THE PLATFORM
So we needed a platform. Dave made contact with Paul Ceglia and was in discussion about a platform for my idea, the facebook, but Zuckerberg made contact to Paul Ceglia to steal the idea facebook. Paul Ceglia had no legal right to sell the the platform to Mark Zuckerberg, but Zuckerberg new what he was doing when he sign the contract. AND ON APRIL 2003 ZUCKERBERG sign the contract with PAUL CEGLIA to steal the idea facebook
CAMERON AND TAYLOR WINKLEVOSS
Dave found a site at Harvard called Harvard Connect (later, in 2004 changed to Harvard Connect To You), run by Cameron and Taylor Winklevoss. And Dave explained everything about Facebook and the dealings with Zuckerberg, Dustin and Chris, and how Dave believed that Zuckerberg was in the process of stealing David idea.
And Dave asked if the Winklevosses were interested in running Facebook on the Harvard site. DAVID found out later on that the Winklevoss contacted Mark Zuckerberg; the WINKLEVOSS new that Zuckerberg stole the idea facebook, and fb was not there idea or zuck; and zuckerberg sewed over the winklevoss.
The Winklevoss then contacted WAYNE CHANG and sold of the idea facebook. My god, how dumb can you get. All the Winklevoss had to do was go hire a team of programmers or learn to program on their own.
DIVYA NARENDRA contacted david and told david that the winklevoss contacted WAYNE CHANG and sold of the idea facebook without telling david. david contacted WAYNE CHANG about this and WAYNE CHANG contacted the WINKLEVOSS and they went into denial about DAVID and the
idea facebook.
you see FACEBOOK was david idea; so david sent copes of the EMAILS to WAYNE CHANG about the WINKLEVOSS and MARK ZUCKERBERG. The winklevoss had to ACKNOWLEDGE that the idea of facebook was david idea. WHEN DAVID SENT COPYS OF THE EMAILS to wayne chang.YOU got backstabbed.”!!? WAYNE CHANG.
A CORP was organized by THE WINKLEVOSS + EDUARDO SAVERIN + CHRIS + NARENDRA and DAVID to over throw MARK ZUCERBERG from facebook; The idea facebook was not zuckerberg IDEA; and the winklevoss did a double-cross and went with zuck. and zuckerberg fuck over the winklevvoss. And the winklevoss used the information to extort money out of zuckerberg by extortion. But the idea facebook was not the winklevoss idea and was not mark zuckerberg idea and you now it.
DUSTIN + CHRIS THE ORIGIN OF FACEBOOK
Dustin and Chris became co-founders of a stolen idea facebook; they new the idea facebook was stolen; and Saverin got duped out of facebook.
But the question is why chris doesn’t even mention eduardo. A lawsuit filed by Eduardo Saverin against Facebook and Zuckerberg was settled out of court. Though terms of the settlement were sealed, the company affirmed Saverin’s title as co-founder of Facebook. Saverin signed a non-disclosure contract after the settlement.WAS it a non-disclosure about the truth; tell the TRUTH EDUARDO SAVERIN
David contacted freedom to marry in order to contact chris; David new Chris was gay. David sent a copy of all the e-mail to freedom to marry and SEAN ELDRIDGE agreed to contact Chris.
2005 OR 2006 THE EMAILS about how zuckerberg stole facebook; sean eldridge knows the FULL story of how zuckerberg stole facebook. Michale McKibben said several years ago Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg ripped off the programming code his company developed; this is true. Zuck stole the
programming code and then stole the idea facebook. Zuckerberg got the code from McKibben who was going to Harvard.
THIS IS TRUE: ZUCKERBERG GOT THE CODE FOR STREET FAX FROM A FRIEND AT HARVARD and then used the code for the stolen idea facebook. The Winklevoss say that Zuckerberg stole there code FOR FACEBOOK. this is bull shit; and the idea facebook was not the winklevoss idea.
LISA SIMPSON GOT A COURT-ORDER TO SEE TWO video disk
Lisa Simpson was made a were of the fact that ZUCKERBERG had sign a contract to PAUL CEGLIA years ago and was a were that on a VIDEO DISK ZUCKERBERG openly admitted; saying that facebook was not his idea.
PAUL ARGENTIERI has a copy of this video disk and Tony Merchant LAW have a copy of this video disk too.
THE E-MAILS
David copy all the e-mails on to the Harvard crimson server !! at Harvard UVAaron. Greenspan says that while he was a student at Harvard, he came up with the idea for Facebook but you new the idea facebook was stolen and the settlement was to shut your mouth $$$$$$$$
It all started when DAVID was logged in to the Harvard website,
where I was listening in to the conversations of the Harvard students.
One of these students was Mark Zuckerberg who was talking about Face
Smash and he had just broken up with his girlfriend at the time, so I
struck up a conversation with this Mark Zuckerberg. He was talking about
creating a dating site. I thought this was a bit odd - a pie in the sky
idea since he had just broken up with his girlfriend and he was
slagging her off - calling her a bitch and a whore.
dave talked to Mark about the idea, and suggested he call it Face
Mash. He was intrigued with my suggestion and thought it was a good
idea. Mark wanted to call it Face Smash, because he wanted to smash his
ex in the face. I convinced him that Face Mash was a good idea and he
agreed, but one week later he changed his mind and wanted to call it
Face Smash. When I queried him about this he replied 'f.... off you
c...- I'm calling it Face Smash'. Two weeks after this conversation he
came up with the name Mashable and when I asked him why he chose the
word Mashable instead of Face Mash he said 'f,...off you bastard, Face
mash is not your idea'. So I re-posted the conversations we had two
weeks earlier and he had to apologize and said he was going with
Mashable. I took this as a sign that he wanted to throw me off the scent
and take the site for himself. dave found the character of Mark
Zuckerberg to be deceptive and dishonest and ended conversing with Mark
Zuckerberg because of his dishonesty and lack of integrity
DAVID DUSTIN + CHRIS THE ORIGIN OF FACEBOOK
After this dave started conversing with Dustin and Chris [Hughes] about an
idea of mine called Facebook for an online service where students can
post pictures and information on themselves and use it as a directory.
They were very intrigued by my idea and wanted to know more.
dave told them that in the beginning, it would be an online service
just for Harvard students, and then spreading through the other campuses
in America, joining them up together. The idea was to make it easy for
people to connect with other university students so they could get an
idea of what other campuses were like, and even eventually spreading
through the general public, giving them an idea of what was on offer at
the different campuses.
Dustin and Chris were very intrigued with my idea and said they
wanted to be on board. but zuck was there roommate and wanted to be on
board
zuckerberg was apologetic about face-mash but it was bull shit
dave talked extensively about my ideas of Facebook and went into
great detail of how to get it set up and started. They queried about the
finance of setting it up and I told them I was in contact with Tony
Robbins, who was interested by the idea and we were having discussions
regarding his financial backing of the project
THE PLATFORM
So we needed a platform
dave made contact with paul ceglia and was in discussion about a platform for my idea the facebook
but zuckerberg made contact to paul ceglia to steal the idea
facebook
'paul ceglia had no legal right to sell the the platform to
mark zuckerberg but zuckerberg new what he was doing when he sign the
contract
(paul ceglia had no legal right to sell the the platform to mark zuckerberg } the contract was to David not zuckerberg
EDUARDO
dave then found another contact at Harvard, called Eduardo Saverin
and invited him to join me in developing my idea, and also to find out
what was going on between Dustin, Chris and Mark.
eduardo offered
finance to get facebook up and running but zuckerberg spent the money on
him self
selfish prick zuck spent eduardo saverin money and spat in his
face
your best friend .this is the reason how eduardo got a invitation
into facebook
THEN david got e-mails from zuckerberg saying he was not interested
in the idea facebook
david then contacted dustinchris to find out
about this email i got from zuckerberg; they went into denial about
this. but later on got a email from chris saying they were not
interested in the idea facebook
CAMERON AND TAYLOR WINKLEVOSS
So dave found a site at Harvard called Harvard Connect (later, in
2004 changed to Harvard Connect To You) run by Cameron and Taylor
Winklevoss, and dave explained everything about Facebook and the
dealings with Zuckerberg, Dustin and Chris and how dave believed that
Zuckerberg was in the process of stealing david idea, and dave asked if
the Winklevosses were interested in running Facebook on the Harvard
site
They expressed enthusiasm in the offer and liked the idea of running
the site as they liked the concept of Facebook. They told me that they
were going to change their site name and redesign it at that time (to
Harvard Connect To You
The person they called in to help them
redesign their site was Mark Zuckerberg who then stole their
platform : I told them that zuckerberg was a crook
the winklevoss where
to dumb and dupe by zuckerberg
And what do the winklevoss remind me off;
its two building and the two buildings were the TWIN TOWERS you guys
talk about the truth like you own the truth but you do not and never
will
the winklevoss contacted summers at UV about zuckerberg but summers
new the full story of how zuckerberg stole facebook and it was david
idea
david then log a complaint to the FBI about this stolen fake connect 2u account with fake information and about mark zuckerberg
THE WINKLEVOSS BS
it did not take long for david to realize that the winklevoss were
not up to do the job
when cameron found out that david log a complaint
to the fbi on zuckerberg cameron sed that is not the way we do things
but tyler wonted to file a lawsuit on zuckerberg but cameron was the
dominant personality
and the hole idea facebook was on the verge of
collapse
david then got emails from the winklevoss saying they were
no longer interested in the idea facebook ( NOT A SURPRISE
DAVID found out later on that the winklevoss contacted WAYNE CHANG
and sold 50% of the idea facebook
my god how f..ing dumb can you get
.all the winklevoss had to do was go hire a team of programmers or learn
to program on their own.
and the idea facebook was a sound and solid
idea and the right skillful execution of the idea was all that was
needed
this was david skill.
CREATE A FAKE
zuckerberg then went on to create a FAKE CONNECT 2U account filled
with FAKE information from the stolen platform he stole from the
winklevoss
dave got a email from this FAKE CONNECT 2U account . but dave
new it was FAKE it was zuckerberg .
zuckerberg wanted more info and idea to steal so dave gave one idea
and it was to put a silver layer around the F word on facebook to see if
zuckerberg was going to steal this idea and yes he did
SO WHAT DID MARK ZUCKERBERG STEAL BY STEALTH
the idea facebook the name facebook the concept and the execution of facebook
david understands that zuckerberg has a mental personality disorder
but this is no excuse for being a asshole and a thief
zuckerberg you see zuck dustin and chris new that facebook was a billion dollar
idea but you stole the idea facebook. chris you may have step up about
being gay but you need to step up and tell the truth about how
zuckerberg stole facebook
MARK ZUCKERBERG GIRLFRIEND
yes zuckerberg got a girlfriend and no he did not get her from
GRAIGS-LIST. but he did break up with his girlfriend and look for love
on graigs-list or as zuckerberg put it looking for a new bitch. zuck did
not realize that you had to pay for the girls on graigs-list. zuck sad
what do you mean you have to pay you pay and if you are unlucky you
have to pay twice when you have go to the clinic; zuckerberg saw every
thing as a possession
some thing to take when he stole the idea facebook and his girlfriend;
zuckerberg social skills are that poor zuck can not pick up sand if he
was standing in the middle of a desert and had to go back to his old
girlfriend that is all he had; facemash and facebook was zuckerberg
quest to understand woman FAIL
zuckerberg do not use your girlfriend to polish your bull-shit it will not work and never will
THE SOCIAL NETWORK
friend-star it failed end of story : my-space was a good idea but failed to mash the idea with the changing social landscape
sean parker seam to think the only reason we won was because of the
gross incompetence of myspace systematically over a period of many years
my god sean parker f..ing grow up you do not have your finger on the pulse of social change that just your but-hole
AARON GREENSPAN
david then went to Aaron Greenspan who was running house systems at
Harvard and asked him (under an email non disclosure agreement) to run
Facebook on his site which he agreed to do.
aaron greenspan used the
(info) to extort financal money out of facebook and zuckerberg paid the
extortion money and dave call it extortion
Usee zuckerberg new aaron
greenspan new zuck had stolen the idea facebook .
I sent all the emails
copy to aaron greenspan:{ aaron sold him self off like a hooker standing
on a street corner }
and what was that quotation aaron
that quotation
you set me about honour and truth you now the same bullshit the
winklevoss are bullshiting on about
DAVID KIRKPATICK
david kirkpatrick was given all the emails and was made fully aware
of how zuckerberg stole facebook from david in the beginning
i gave
kirkpatrick 80% of the emails
kirkpatrick then ask if there was more
yes there is more but ask kirkpatrick that he must reveal the truth the
other 20% was email from paul ceglia to me
dave made contact with paul
ceglia and was in discussion about a platform for my idea the facebook
as for kirkpatrick you are a prick
kirkpatrick falls victim to the
bane of many business historians infatuation with the subject and the
money just a porn-star
BEN MEZRICK AND KIRKPATICK + EDUARDO
ben mezrick was given copes of the emails in and around 2004
dave
posted a copy of the emails to ben mezrick and to david kirkpatrick
as
for kirkpatrick your book is a joke and so are you : you are just a fence jumper david kirkpatrick and its chris that is
the gay one you dick
you sold yourself out you were given the full
story of how zuckerberg stole facebook; and sold out
in a email to eduardo i told him to get a lawyer zuckerberg was going to screw him over and told him to contact ben mezrick
eduardo told me he had a lawyer he can trust but zuckerberg and the
lawyer screwed him over;
david made contact to ben and ben mezrick got
80% of the emails about how zuck stole facebook and about the winklevoss
PAUL CEGLIA
And what are you going to do zuckerberg when paul ceglia wins
you
can call the contract a fake a counterfeit ; you cant can you zuckerberg
Yes you did sign a contract zuckerberg
In a email zuckerberg called paul ceglia a dum sucker
in 2003 i david posted a copy on to the internet and the roomer spread years ago that zuckerberg had sign the contract and yes the abc news room have a copy of the email
ZUCKERBERG OPTIONS
So zuckerberg what are your options
zuck i suppose you can tell the
truth
you see paul cegia had no legal right to sell you the platform
david was in contact to paul cealia about a platform suitable for
facebook but you wanted to steal facebook by stealth
and you will have
to tell your mother and farther and sisters how you stole the idea facebook
ZUCKERBERG TROJAN HORSE
You can't gift your way out of controversy zucerberg
Generosity is
not always well-received and what is your true nature
bill gates now
your true
nature
a trojan horse, africa will rise with out your money and
the money you gifted zuck is from a stolen idea;
BILL GATES do not bet
against DAVID ON THIS
the last time you bet against david you lost REMEMBER and you now the truth about mark zuckerberg
ORRICK
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living
together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a
legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
Sadly, most of the people don't wish to bite the hands that feeds them
The Securities and Exchange Commission says it has set aside about
$450 million for payments to outside whistleblowers whose information
results in successful ?? ..... SOME THING YOU WONT TO LOOK AT LISA
SIMPSON ,, and the best way to rob a bank is to own a bank
FINAL COMMENT
][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] THANK AMERICA THAT
THANK FOR NOTHING AMERICA
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][
Zuckerberg has already, on multiple occasions, demonstrated that he
didn't care nothing about the security and privacy and understand even
the fundamentals of computer system security;
this is way he stole the
idea facebook
but not from the winklevoss
but did sign a contract to
paul ceglia
zuckerberg
In a email zuckerberg called paul ceglia a dum sucker in 2003 i david posted a copy on to the internet and the
roomer spread years a go that zuckerberg had sign the contract ; and
zuckerberg only sign the contract to steal the idea facebook from david
and it was david who contacted the winklevoss about the idea facebook and paul ceglia is going to get 84% of facebook
The Securities and Exchange Commission says it has set aside about
$450 million for payments to outside whistleblowers whose information
results in successful : I THINK WIKILEAKS can do with some of this
whistle blowers money ; TIME to dropkick GS in the sacK
Tony Merchant may be contacted at 306-359-7777 . Jason Zushman can be contacted at 204-896-7777 .
david made contact to merchant law merchant law contact lisa simmson
& mark zuckerberg there are some interesting emails
if you contact
Tony Merchant you can get the email from him i left instruction to give
the emails to every one ask for them this was done years a go
dave posted a copy of the emails to ben mezrick and to david kirkpatrick
Excerpts from Document Expert James A. Blanco's Declaration That the Ceglia "Work for Hire" Facebook Contract is Authentic (Document 415)
The New World Order Plan is spiritually based: it is a conflict between God and His forces, on the one hand, and Satan and his demonic forces on the other side. Anyone who does not know Biblical doctrine about God and Satan, and who does not know Scriptural prophecy, cannot comprehend the nature of the struggle facing the world today. - David Bay, Cutting Edge Ministries
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. - Ephesians 6:12
Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. - Mark 13:12,13
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence... Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. - President John F. Kennedy, April 27, 1961
The book in which they are embodied was first published in the year 1897 by Philip Stepanov for private circulation among his intimate friends. The first time Nilus published them was in 1901 in a book called The Great Within the Small and reprinted in 1905. A copy of this is in the British Museum bearing the date of its reception, August 10, 1906. All copies that were known to exist in Russia were destroyed in the Kerensky regime, and under his successors the possession of a copy by anyone in Soviet land was a crime sufficient to ensure the owner's of being shot on sight. The fact is in itself sufficient proof of the genuineness of the Protocols. The Jewish journals, of course, say that they are a forgery, leaving it to be understood that Professor Nilus, who embodied them in a work of his own, had concocted them for his own purposes.
Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
in Cleveland, sent an email to Hillary Clinton
campaign chairman John Podesta allowing him to review a story draft
before publication.
