Not familiar w it but many other famous people lik
Post# of 8059
Posted On: 11/28/2013 3:31:27 PM
Not familiar w it but many other famous people like Solzheitson (sp?), who escaped totalitarian regimes, have warned America that America was heading down the same path- and they say its obvious the totalitarian route produces nothing but a wrecked society, so they ask why would America follow the same path after already observing what that path has done to the other countries.
But the answer cannot really be given because the answer-that warfare is not limited to the physical battlefront, is politicaly incorrect -who put the foxes in charge of the henhouse and the nonmiltary warfare and all discussion-disenfranchising those who dont agree with the puppetmaster- good peoples apathy and unwilingness to fight the battle.
read Jim Harrisons post about the Sept 2013 executive order which allows the President to declare martial law without congressional oversight- just 1 step from disbanding congress permanently-and Jim travails against that even though he is a new ager and very leftist.
Oppenheimer allegedly received ca $8400 of "CWRN" stock improperly, so Oppenheimer admits to no wrong doing, pays a fine, and continues in business.
Longs-who had nothing to do w that over 4.5 years ago, have our stock effectively taken hostage,confiscated until freeze is lifted-
makes no logical sense-the non fungible (improper) stock has already been in the market for over 4 years,so no reason to freeze stock now, not to mention illegal naked shorts are regularly issued by brokers and mm's in thousands of stocks w apparent impunity,(see the article I reposted from rocket) which leads to the charge dtc etc are selectively doing these things for political reasons.
It has not even been shown CWRN was responsible or had done anything wrong -co's which need to issue stock because they dont yet have net income are destroyed by these dtc etc actions without a receivership-which cannot be obtained because there is no due process fact finding.
yet holding our stock hostage is even worse, for there is no question we are innocent 3rd party purchasers
Oppenheimer allegedly did not follow proper procedure in ensuring 2.1 milion shares it received in 2009 were free trading.
So what does that have to do w CWRN????
It has not been shown CWRN did anything wrong.
Oppen was apparently suppose to have doc that would allow stock to be free trading.
But IF IF IF CWRN ever issued restrictive stock, CWRN reportedly did not issue a letter to the holder allowing it to be free trading-which if true means CWRN did not do anything wrong-
dtc sec go after co's that issue such docs on the basis of attorney opinion letters (stating that the stock issuance complies w exemptions) when sec or dtc often disagrees w such attorney opinion letters.
But since CWRN issued no such letters CWRN cannot be held at fault for such letters, and such letters are what usually get co's in trouble when they supply such-
has DTC even alleged CWRN did something wrong-would have to reread the notice.
Even when co's issue such attorney opinion letters,that doesnt mean the co's are trying to do anything wrong- the co's are merely relying on such attorney letters- and CWRN reportedly issued no such letters,so it issued no improper letters.
but dtc apparently assumes all these co's are at fault by association,as if dtc had done no investigation as to whether CWRN improperly supplied any doc that contributed to the broker allegedly improperly receiving restricted stock. In fact the dtc 's notice implies CWRN etc did not issue such improper docs because other info when the broker was fined indicates the broker did not have proper procedures to ensure stock had proper documentation to be free trading.
So the extreme illogic of it all leads to the conclusion those in charge of dtc are either under the influence of pcp,or selectively choosing stocks to target based on political orders or simply applying a dictatorial mindset that everybody is guilty so proof of co guilt and due process are unnecessary (or a combination).
Which violates the constitution,which does not allow anybody to be judge jury and executioner,requires due process ,innocent until proven guilty,notification at the beginning of any action-not after sentencing, and allows charged parties to view and contest the evidence and do their own fact finding as part of an impartial process to determine the facts -dtc has done none of these things.
other than a restrictive legend on the stock cert what is to alert a holder that such stock is not free trading?, except brokers are suppose to know the rules and understand what doc is required to make stock free trading-brokers fault.
Does anybody have a pic of a restricted cert to show how obvious or not obvious such legends are- dont want to look up exhibit re Emilys cert given to Geo again.
So again the stock may not have even ever been issued by CWRN but possibly by Casino Airlinks out of Boca Raton,the broker office where the stock was received.
The SEC had just dropped all charges against CWRN after going thru everything all accounts transfer agents everything and finding no wrongdoing by CWRN-we posted the judges order dismissing the SEC case on all counts.
So as with otc and the earlier chill it makes no sense,which usually means its politically motivated non sense.
But the answer cannot really be given because the answer-that warfare is not limited to the physical battlefront, is politicaly incorrect -who put the foxes in charge of the henhouse and the nonmiltary warfare and all discussion-disenfranchising those who dont agree with the puppetmaster- good peoples apathy and unwilingness to fight the battle.
read Jim Harrisons post about the Sept 2013 executive order which allows the President to declare martial law without congressional oversight- just 1 step from disbanding congress permanently-and Jim travails against that even though he is a new ager and very leftist.
Oppenheimer allegedly received ca $8400 of "CWRN" stock improperly, so Oppenheimer admits to no wrong doing, pays a fine, and continues in business.
Longs-who had nothing to do w that over 4.5 years ago, have our stock effectively taken hostage,confiscated until freeze is lifted-
makes no logical sense-the non fungible (improper) stock has already been in the market for over 4 years,so no reason to freeze stock now, not to mention illegal naked shorts are regularly issued by brokers and mm's in thousands of stocks w apparent impunity,(see the article I reposted from rocket) which leads to the charge dtc etc are selectively doing these things for political reasons.
It has not even been shown CWRN was responsible or had done anything wrong -co's which need to issue stock because they dont yet have net income are destroyed by these dtc etc actions without a receivership-which cannot be obtained because there is no due process fact finding.
yet holding our stock hostage is even worse, for there is no question we are innocent 3rd party purchasers
Oppenheimer allegedly did not follow proper procedure in ensuring 2.1 milion shares it received in 2009 were free trading.
So what does that have to do w CWRN????
It has not been shown CWRN did anything wrong.
Oppen was apparently suppose to have doc that would allow stock to be free trading.
But IF IF IF CWRN ever issued restrictive stock, CWRN reportedly did not issue a letter to the holder allowing it to be free trading-which if true means CWRN did not do anything wrong-
dtc sec go after co's that issue such docs on the basis of attorney opinion letters (stating that the stock issuance complies w exemptions) when sec or dtc often disagrees w such attorney opinion letters.
But since CWRN issued no such letters CWRN cannot be held at fault for such letters, and such letters are what usually get co's in trouble when they supply such-
has DTC even alleged CWRN did something wrong-would have to reread the notice.
Even when co's issue such attorney opinion letters,that doesnt mean the co's are trying to do anything wrong- the co's are merely relying on such attorney letters- and CWRN reportedly issued no such letters,so it issued no improper letters.
but dtc apparently assumes all these co's are at fault by association,as if dtc had done no investigation as to whether CWRN improperly supplied any doc that contributed to the broker allegedly improperly receiving restricted stock. In fact the dtc 's notice implies CWRN etc did not issue such improper docs because other info when the broker was fined indicates the broker did not have proper procedures to ensure stock had proper documentation to be free trading.
So the extreme illogic of it all leads to the conclusion those in charge of dtc are either under the influence of pcp,or selectively choosing stocks to target based on political orders or simply applying a dictatorial mindset that everybody is guilty so proof of co guilt and due process are unnecessary (or a combination).
Which violates the constitution,which does not allow anybody to be judge jury and executioner,requires due process ,innocent until proven guilty,notification at the beginning of any action-not after sentencing, and allows charged parties to view and contest the evidence and do their own fact finding as part of an impartial process to determine the facts -dtc has done none of these things.
other than a restrictive legend on the stock cert what is to alert a holder that such stock is not free trading?, except brokers are suppose to know the rules and understand what doc is required to make stock free trading-brokers fault.
Does anybody have a pic of a restricted cert to show how obvious or not obvious such legends are- dont want to look up exhibit re Emilys cert given to Geo again.
So again the stock may not have even ever been issued by CWRN but possibly by Casino Airlinks out of Boca Raton,the broker office where the stock was received.
The SEC had just dropped all charges against CWRN after going thru everything all accounts transfer agents everything and finding no wrongdoing by CWRN-we posted the judges order dismissing the SEC case on all counts.
So as with otc and the earlier chill it makes no sense,which usually means its politically motivated non sense.
(0)
(0)