THE supposed rationale is to prevent co's from iss

THE supposed rationale is to prevent co's from issuing securities that have not been registered or are not exempt from registration- which is a little odd, since as rocket posted on the other board many days ago- my reply was removed by lieflub- the vast majority of securities cannot be traced to a lawful issuance in a market literally saturated w fraud-

the trouble  w the self professed fraud fighters on the other board is they cant differentiate between the co's that are truly scams and the cos that are politically targeted because 1 or more of thier prinicipals has refused to submit to the puppetmaster in a George Orwell world and thus those professed fraudfighters help perpetuate the fraud against innocent 3rd party longs who had nothing to do w any wrongdoing and against co' s that had nothing to do w wrongdoing -and some of those fraudfighters are shorting the stock w intent to defraud longs !!!

So the rationale is if dtc feels unauthorized securities have been issued they will impose a deposit chill -the trade for trade we've had since mar 2011 or a global lock if definite evidence restricted shares have been deposited or if the co doesnt resolve a trade for trade

CWRN has a complaint against Geo for 13 causes of action and 1 of CWRN's complaints is that Geo sold CWRN shares that were issued to Geo I believe in 2010  that were either restricted as per regs or as per agreement w CWRN and CWRN alleges Geo sold that restricted stock into the market back ca last Feb when as CWRN notes pps was ca .0265.

I've been wondering if thats what this is about -however, that was reportedly back last Feb or so when there was large trading volume and these things supposedly dont become a red flag until there is a large deposit of unregistered shares in a low volume stock-

if theres unregistered stock activity in dtc's opinion which in dtc's opinion suggests such stock has  been improperly issued  dtc restricts stock AFTER the cat is out of the bag-meaning any improper issuance of stock has already been sold by the improper party into the system -so the dtc action ends up hurting only innocent (a legal term) 3rd parties who had nothing to do w the improper issuance and impounding their property without due process -i..e -us longs.

I guess dtc hasnt figured that out yet or they dont care -which violates our due process rights-

so as we've noted once before, as per more normal principals of law, the sec under pressure has required dtc to begin following fair principals of jurisprudence to allow co's notice and a fair procedure to remove chills and locks-thus under such pressure dtc has issued a white paper which I've seen once before -forwarded to me by madflight-thanks madflight- which will allow some procedures to remove chills/locks -which should've been done long ago -are we living in the dark ages???

madflight go ahead and post the dtc white paper