|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
SHADES OF HITLER IN THE USA. |
Current rating: 0 |
by Viktor.
(No verified email address) |
20 May 2002
Modified: 11:16:10 PM |
|
http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2001/08/31/dmca_a... |
SHADES OF HITLER IN THE USA.
by Victor. 5:23pm Sat May 18 '02 (Modified on 11:32pm Sun May 19 '02)
BREAKING NEWS.
by VICTOR. 6:38pm Sun May 5 '02 (Modified on 3:00am Sat May 18 '02) article#2474
BREAKING NEWS.
SHADES OF HITLER IN THE USA.
No free speech for animal rights Web sites
by Katharine Mieszkowski 6:57pm Sun May 5 '02 article#797
EnviroLink Network, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit Internet service provider, took offline two Web sites belonging to the animal-rights activist group Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. The action came in response to a letter sent to the ISP earlier in the week by Huntingdon Life Sciences, a British medical research firm.
By Katharine Mieszkowski
Aug. 31, 2001 | On Thursday, EnviroLink Network, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit Internet service provider, took offline two Web sites belonging to the animal-rights activist group Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. The action came in response to a letter sent to the ISP earlier in the week by Huntingdon Life Sciences, a British medical research firm. Citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), Huntingdon accused the activists of violating its copyright. Although no charges have yet been filed, under the terms of the DMCA, Envirolink was forced to remove the sites to avoid potential legal liability.
"It's very clear that Huntingdon Life Sciences just wants to shut them up," says Josh Knauer, the founder of Envirolink, which provides free Web hosting to nonprofits. The animal-rights group's U.S. site has been replaced with a single page explaining the conflict, while the main site redirects to another ISP, allowing it to remain up for the moment. A notice on the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty Web site taunts: "If you read this HLS realize that you will never shut us up and we are as determined to destroy you now as we were in November 1999 when this campaign began and destroy you we will." Calls to legal counsel for Huntingdon Life Sciences were not returned.
Huntingdon's response is hardly the first legal skirmish between Huntingdon and its critics; most recently, the company brought suit against Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty and other animal-rights groups last April using racketeering law to fight the activist's allegedly radical tactics, including "violence, intimidation and harassment"; the law suit is still pending.
For several years, animal-rights activists have protested Huntingdon Life Sciences, using tactics that include targeting individual investors and companies that do business with the research lab, such as the Bank of New York. One avenue of that pressure to divest has been through Web sites such as BankofNYkills.com.
Earlier this month, the Bank of New York notified EnviroLink that it believed that the site violated its copyrights. EnviroLink took down the site. "Under the DMCA, a corporation contacts an ISP to let them know that a site that they host is violating their copyright," explains Knauer. "To protect ourselves from threat of lawsuit, we have to shut down the Web site, whether we think the claim is valid or not."
If the client whose Web site has been shut down provides a counter-notification swearing under penalty of perjury that it believes the site not to be a copyright violation, then the site can be reinstated by the ISP, such as Envirolink, but not before 10 working days and no later than 14 working days have passed. In the case of BankofNYkills.com, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty has not yet sent a counter-notification. The site remains down.
Now, apparently, in the wake of the Bank of New York's successful action, Huntingdon Life Sciences has followed the same course, sending Envirolink a similar notification about the two Web sites removed today. According to EnviroLink, Huntingdon's request did not specify individual documents on the sites that allegedly violated their copyright, but objected to the two sites in their entirety. Bill Strazza, an attorney in Union City, N.J., representing Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, sees the use of the DMCA to preemptively shut down the sites as an infringement on free speech: "On simple notification they're (the ISP) compelled to take a site down or risk liability. It puts hosts in a very difficult position which could ultimately have a chilling effect on free speech."
The 10-day window after the host receives a counter-notification before the site goes back up is particularly troubling; why couldn't the ISP simply restore the site right away and let the two parties work out the issue in court? "There is still a 10 day stomping on the Constitution after a simple notification," says Strazza.
One reason for the window is that it gives the complainant time to get a legal case together, if the choice is made to pursue legal action, explains Jonathan Zittrain, co-director at the Beckman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School. "It's a ridiculous balancing act. It's clearly Congress trying to strike a compromise: Once the cat is out of the bag on the Internet, it's all over, on the other hand, this idea that prior restraint of speech [is OK] because someone sent a letter sounds pretty bad."
EnviroLink chose to cut off service for the two Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty sites rather than risk liability for leaving them up. A costly lawsuit could jeopardize the Web sites for 500 other organizations that Envirolink hosts for free, according to Knauer.
To Knauer, the host caught in the middle, the DMCA is a major threat, not to his organization, but to the nonprofits it serves: "The DMCA is the next major assault on nonprofit organizations, specifically those with few resources. Can they defend themselves and how well can they defend themselves? We have to make a stance in some way for free speech."
Late Thursday afternoon, the conflict took a new turn; on the single remaining page of the SHACUSA Web site, the activists posted a call-to-arms to their supporters, urging them to contact Huntingdon's attorney Michael Socarras, via phone and e-mail. The call to action was apparently heeded: During the afternoon, Socarras' voicemail box was full, and he didn't return calls requesting comment about the dispute left with his assistant. Shortly afterwards, EnviroLink received a letter from the attorney accusing the site of using the ISP to initiate "a campaign of personal harassment and invasion of privacy directed against me" and requesting "that you immediately take all necessary steps to end that misuse of your hosting services."
Knauer said the ISP saw no reason to heed the request: "We see no legal precedent that would compel us to take action at this time," adding, "It's clear that Huntingdon Life Sciences is not going to be happy until SHAC is completely silenced."
http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2001/08/31/dmca_a...
by Viktor. 5:23pm Sat May 18 '02 (Modified on 11:32pm Sun May 19 '02)
BREAKING NEWS.
by Viktor. 6:38pm Sun May 5 '02 (Modified on 3:00am Sat May 18 '02) article#2474
BREAKING NEWS.
SHADES OF HITLER IN THE USA.
No free speech for animal rights Web sites
by Katharine Mieszkowski 6:57pm Sun May 5 '02 article#797
EnviroLink Network, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit Internet service provider, took offline two Web sites belonging to the animal-rights activist group Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. The action came in response to a letter sent to the ISP earlier in the week by Huntingdon Life Sciences, a British medical research firm.
By Katharine Mieszkowski
Aug. 31, 2001 | On Thursday, EnviroLink Network, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit Internet service provider, took offline two Web sites belonging to the animal-rights activist group Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. The action came in response to a letter sent to the ISP earlier in the week by Huntingdon Life Sciences, a British medical research firm. Citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), Huntingdon accused the activists of violating its copyright. Although no charges have yet been filed, under the terms of the DMCA, Envirolink was forced to remove the sites to avoid potential legal liability.
"It's very clear that Huntingdon Life Sciences just wants to shut them up," says Josh Knauer, the founder of Envirolink, which provides free Web hosting to nonprofits. The animal-rights group's U.S. site has been replaced with a single page explaining the conflict, while the main site redirects to another ISP, allowing it to remain up for the moment. A notice on the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty Web site taunts: "If you read this HLS realize that you will never shut us up and we are as determined to destroy you now as we were in November 1999 when this campaign began and destroy you we will." Calls to legal counsel for Huntingdon Life Sciences were not returned.
Huntingdon's response is hardly the first legal skirmish between Huntingdon and its critics; most recently, the company brought suit against Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty and other animal-rights groups last April using racketeering law to fight the activist's allegedly radical tactics, including "violence, intimidation and harassment"; the law suit is still pending.
For several years, animal-rights activists have protested Huntingdon Life Sciences, using tactics that include targeting individual investors and companies that do business with the research lab, such as the Bank of New York. One avenue of that pressure to divest has been through Web sites such as BankofNYkills.com.
Earlier this month, the Bank of New York notified EnviroLink that it believed that the site violated its copyrights. EnviroLink took down the site. "Under the DMCA, a corporation contacts an ISP to let them know that a site that they host is violating their copyright," explains Knauer. "To protect ourselves from threat of lawsuit, we have to shut down the Web site, whether we think the claim is valid or not."
If the client whose Web site has been shut down provides a counter-notification swearing under penalty of perjury that it believes the site not to be a copyright violation, then the site can be reinstated by the ISP, such as Envirolink, but not before 10 working days and no later than 14 working days have passed. In the case of BankofNYkills.com, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty has not yet sent a counter-notification. The site remains down.
Now, apparently, in the wake of the Bank of New York's successful action, Huntingdon Life Sciences has followed the same course, sending Envirolink a similar notification about the two Web sites removed today. According to EnviroLink, Huntingdon's request did not specify individual documents on the sites that allegedly violated their copyright, but objected to the two sites in their entirety. Bill Strazza, an attorney in Union City, N.J., representing Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, sees the use of the DMCA to preemptively shut down the sites as an infringement on free speech: "On simple notification they're (the ISP) compelled to take a site down or risk liability. It puts hosts in a very difficult position which could ultimately have a chilling effect on free speech."
The 10-day window after the host receives a counter-notification before the site goes back up is particularly troubling; why couldn't the ISP simply restore the site right away and let the two parties work out the issue in court? "There is still a 10 day stomping on the Constitution after a simple notification," says Strazza.
One reason for the window is that it gives the complainant time to get a legal case together, if the choice is made to pursue legal action, explains Jonathan Zittrain, co-director at the Beckman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School. "It's a ridiculous balancing act. It's clearly Congress trying to strike a compromise: Once the cat is out of the bag on the Internet, it's all over, on the other hand, this idea that prior restraint of speech [is OK] because someone sent a letter sounds pretty bad."
EnviroLink chose to cut off service for the two Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty sites rather than risk liability for leaving them up. A costly lawsuit could jeopardize the Web sites for 500 other organizations that Envirolink hosts for free, according to Knauer.
To Knauer, the host caught in the middle, the DMCA is a major threat, not to his organization, but to the nonprofits it serves: "The DMCA is the next major assault on nonprofit organizations, specifically those with few resources. Can they defend themselves and how well can they defend themselves? We have to make a stance in some way for free speech."
Late Thursday afternoon, the conflict took a new turn; on the single remaining page of the SHACUSA Web site, the activists posted a call-to-arms to their supporters, urging them to contact Huntingdon's attorney Michael Socarras, via phone and e-mail. The call to action was apparently heeded: During the afternoon, Socarras' voicemail box was full, and he didn't return calls requesting comment about the dispute left with his assistant.
Shortly afterwards, EnviroLink received a letter from the attorney accusing the site of using the ISP to initiate "a campaign of personal harassment and invasion of privacy directed against me" and requesting "that you immediately take all necessary steps to end that misuse of your hosting services."
Knauer said the ISP saw no reason to heed the request: "We see no legal precedent that would compel us to take action at this time," adding, "It's clear that Huntingdon Life Sciences is not going to be happy until SHAC is completely silenced."
http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2001/08/31/dmca_a...
|
Related stories on this site:
The fowls have come home to roost in NZ.
Shot down on the street.
A World First.
|
Comments
|
Battered Woman Syndrome, And Swindlers. |
by Jules.
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
20 May 2002
|
Battered Woman Syndrome, And Swindlers.
by Yoder. 5:38pm Sat May 18 '02
Another victim of Battered Woman Syndrome
by Justice 12:09pm Sat May 4 '02 (Modified on 11:01am Mon May 6 '02) article#763
Alice Whyte testified that her husband beat her, shot her dog in front of her, and had forced her to have sex with him while he was having sex with a man. Yet she has been jailed for 18 years. No woman should ever be imprisoned. Free her now!
18 years' jail for arsenic lunches in Australia.
By WAYNE HOWELL, Supreme Court reporter
04 may 02
The wickedness of a woman who poisoned her husband with arsenic over 15 months knew no bounds, a Supreme Court judge said yesterday. Justice Bill Gillard said Lorraine Alice Whyte's heartlessness had turned her husband's life into a living hell.
She regularly laced husband Leonard Moss's work lunches with doses of arsenic from about September, 1982, until the 38-year-old's excruciating death in January 1984, the
Judge said.
Whyte, now 53, sobbed in the dock of the Supreme Court in Bendigo as she was sentenced to a minimum term of 18 years' jail. Saying her culpability in her callous crime was of the highest order, Justice Gillard set a maximum term of 22 years.
Whyte, of the Loddon Valley Highway, Bendigo, was found guilty by a jury of murder.
The judge yesterday lambasted Melbourne's Austin Hospital for misplacing a report on Mr Moss in August 1983, which revealed high levels of arsenic in his body.
He said the report only surfaced in January 1984, too late to save Mr Moss. "This gross negligence played into your hands," the judge told the sobbing prisoner.
"It allowed your callous, heartless actions to go unchecked and undetected."
The judge said Mr Moss's frequent bouts of painful illnesses, which included symptoms such as sweating, his face turning blue, his tongue hanging out, confusion, rashes and painful cramps, had doctors stumped.
"The doctors were mystified but you knew. You were torturing him to death," Justice Gillard said. The judge rejected Whyte's claims that her husband beat her, shot her dog in front of her, and had forced her to have sex with him while he was having sex with a man.
He noted that Whyte had refused to be cross-examined on any of these claims and that her three children denied them.
The judge said Mr Moss had been a good father and a friendly colleague at his meatworks job.
Justice Gillard said even if Whyte's claims of abuse were true they happened long before she started poisoning Mr Moss. The judge also noted that she continued to "bombard" her husband with arsenic even after he became helpless and wheelchair-bound.
"Your wickedness showed no bounds," Justice Gillard said.
He said that at the end of Mr Moss's life his wife appeared to be caring for him full-time.
"You were nursing him but you were not nursing him to health, but to certain death," Justice Gillard said. "You had no compassion. You were heartless, you were hell-bent
on killing him."
The judge said that in the end Whyte had been feeding her husband every week more than 20 times the amount of arsenic that occurs naturally in humans.
He said she did not even stop when a couple of Mr Moss's work mates became violently ill after eating some of his arsenic-laced lunches. He said one of these colleagues had been forced out of work for months after being poisoned.
Justice Gillard noted it was almost 18 years since Whyte committed her crime and that she had suffered rejection by her children. He said however, there was little evidence of remorse as she had maintained her innocence even after confessing her crime to one of her daughters two years ago.
He said she only made the confession because she thought she could no longer be prosecuted. "How wrong you were," Justice Gillard told her.
news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,425...
+
what?
by joe 1:43pm Sat May 4 '02 (Modified on 7:17am Sun May 5 '02) comment#764
No woman should ever be imprisoned. what? women are equally able of committing horrendous crimes. Stop posting corporate news here. If we want to read the Murdoch press, we know where to get it.
Womenfs crimes are often the result of sustained abuse
by aint i a woman 6:26pm Sat May 4 '02 comment#766
Most women in Australian gaols are victims, not criminals. Most of them have been sexually abused as children (most often by male caregivers - the worst possible betrayal of trust), many are victims of domestic rape. Many have seen their children abused, their pets killed, their relatives threatened. Many have drug problems as a result and are in gaol by virtue of these drug problems.
When a woman retaliates under these conditions, it is not a 'heinous crime' or an act of aggression, but a last desperate attempt to get their lives back. yes, they ought to be counselled, the might have to got to gaol. however, lack of remorse is an indication of the detachment that one is forced to have towards one's own life (and hence the lives of others) because of ongoing physical and psychological abuse.
You can only imagine what it is like to have suffered sustained oppression unless it has happened to you. This is less likely if you are a man. Privilege is invisible to those who have it.
Husband was a meatworker
by Australian feminists for animal rights 6:39pm Sat May 4 '02 comment#767
Meatworkers, men who work in factory farms, in abattoirs and hunters all have a recognised increased tendency to abusing their wives and children than the general male population (1/4 of which have been abusers at some time).
Killing animals and dealing with their corpses predisposes one to becoming detached from ones feelings of compassion towards other beings. This is well documented.
http://crosswinds.net/~afar/index.html
+
TRUE NEWS.
by Victor. 6:43pm Sat May 4 '02 comment#768
BATTERED WOMEN. Battered woman should not take it, grab a butcherfs knife, and slit their fucking throats. I know the case of a 94-year-old woman who was assaulted by her son and this matter only became known with the addendum being the reasons for the will. An accountant Maurice Gordon Teague who had a copy of the will and worked alledged swindles on the land subdivision embezzled about $800,000.00 from the estate.
Some matters have a steamrolling effect. A part of the problem comes from mothers whom mollycoddle their sons. When they get married the woman say, eWe will change them.f In fact, like hell. Marry me and make my life sheer hell. The Australian male has very little class. Judges usually come from persons who could not make it in private practise and one of them is known as an ass-bandit in Sydney. The present case of Alessandra Gabriel's son I respectively suggest is a classic example. Unfortunately, decisions of the courts and what is termed the real world are miles apart.
+
Yes, but...
by Joe 8:00pm Sat May 4 '02 comment#769
That is fine, but over-generalization like 'no woman belongs in jail' and 'the Australian male has little class' silence many victims of violence and obscure the true causes of violence. I am an Australian male who has experienced undeserved domestic violence at the hands of a (feminist identifying) woman. I am a vegetarian, if it makes a difference. I am also pro-feminist, and non-violent.
This bullshit does not address the exponential rise in unprovoked female initiated violence that has come about in the last 30 years. Unprovoked violence is unacceptable regardless of the gender of abuser.
Which is not to deny the masses of women in jail without reason? This is just a bad example using faulty logic.
+
Right...
by joe 8:05pm Sat May 4 '02 comment#770
"One of them is known as an ass-bandit"
Sorry vice, didn't realise you were a homophobe. Wouldnft have bothered to address your comment if Ifd realised.
stats?
by inquirer 8:32am Sun May 5 '02 comment#776
Where do you get you figures from Joe???
For Joe.
by Victor. 9:11am Sun May 5 '02 comment#778
http://boston.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=6150&group=
A few resources
by Joe 1:17pm Sun May 5 '02 comment#783
Unfortunately, female violence is one that the left has failed to address. if we don't the right will use it against us...
http://www.salon.com/feb97/news/news2970227.html
http://www.abusedmen.com/brochure.html
Quote from above:
*According to the largest published survey of U.S. couples, two million men a year are severely assaulted by their female mates. That's a man kicked, bitten, hit with a fist or object, beaten up, and had a knife gun or other deadly weapon used or threatened to be used against them every 15.7 seconds! -National Family Violence Survey, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. A similar Canadian survey shows 270,000 male victims of severe domestic violence a year-University of Calgary, Dept. of Sociology. Surveys also show that gay men also experience domestic violence at a rate similar to that of heterosexual couples.
(a9) 2001, Stop Abuse For Everyone.
http://www.safe4all.org/
Stop Abuse for Everyone is a non-profit organization that provides advocacy, information, and support for men and women who are the victims and perpetrators of domestic violence. We set up and advocate for services for everyone, regardless of what type of person they are, with the vision of a world of powerful, supportive relationships, free of violence. SAFE concentrates on services for underserved groups, such as straight men, gay men, lesbian women, elderly victims, and so on, because few services exist for these groups.
another perspective:
http://www.wiretapmag.org/stories/Hobbs030900.html
The point I am trying to make is that violence is endemic at all levels of society. Men initiate a lot of it, but the invisibility of violence against men, by men and women serves to obscures the causes and creation of cycles of violence.
Women are assaulted by intimate partners TEN times more than men are are
by inquirer 1:49pm Sun May 5 '02 comment#787
Hmmm. another survey (over 4 yrs in the US) indicates a different picture.
"Average annual number of single-offender violent victimizations, 1987-91
Sex of victim
Victim-offender
Relationship Female Male
Intimate 572,032 48,983
Other relative 117,201 75,587
Acquaintance 796,067 1,268,506
Stranger 71,114 1,182,307
Source: BJS, Violence Against Women: A National
Crime Victimization Survey Report, 1994
...In over 90% of the violence by intimates recorded
in the NCVS from 1987-91, the victim was female."
http://www.silcom.com/~paladin/madv/stats.html
This indicates that women being assaulted by men they know or otherwise is over TEN TIMES that of women attacking men. The figures flip when it comes to street aggression or fights with acquaintances.
IN Australia "The Women's Safety Survey, conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in 1996 surveyed approximately 6,300 Australian women about their experience of actual or threatened physical and sexual violence.
2.6 million Women (or 38% of the adult female population) had experienced one or more incidents of physical or sexual violence since the age of 15. 1.2 million Had experienced sexual violence and 2.2 million experienced physical violence? For the majority of women (2.5 million women) the violence was perpetrated by a man. ghttp://home.vicnet.net.au/~dvirc/Statistics.htm
Sure women retaliate, maybe they occasionally start it. however, the fact is most men are bigger and stronger than most women are. no prizes for guessing who is going to win in this situation. I am sorry if you had a bad time Joe, but that does not justify belittling a very big social problem: male violence against women.
+
Yeah, I know...
by Joe 7:58pm Sun May 5 '02 comment#803
I am not trying to belittle the problem. Ifm saying that painting the problem as a solely male on female interaction oversimplifies the situation, silences lesbian, gay and straight male victims of violence and provides no facility for fixing the situation. Violence is a cycle and must be addressed on all levels. Violence against men must stop as well, otherwise the cycle continues.
+
by Victor. NZ, A COUNTRY OF GRUBBY QUEERS. 11:01am Mon May 6 '02 comment#813
Police watch on popular nudist beach.
02.05.2002
Police will begin patrolling a popular Bay of Plenty nudist beach after complaints about the behaviour of gay men in the sand dunes. A 42-year-old man will appear in the Tauranga District Court today charged with committing an indecent act in a public place after police visited Papamoa Beach on Tuesday.
About six other men were also seen "acting furtively" near a public walkway but would not face charges. Detective Senior Sergeant Karl Wright St-Clair said the northwestern end of the beach was a well-known nudist area which police and locals did not have a problem with.
"But it's quite obvious these guys are not just going down there to sunbathe in the nude," he said. "I think what's happened now is that it's a bit of a cruising area for gays." Papamoa residents had made complaints in recent weeks that prompted police dressed in beach clothes to check the area.
Papamoa resident and co-owner of Tauranga's Chroma zones Cruise Club for gay men, Grant Marx, said the area had been a popular "pick-up" beach for over 30 years.
"It used to be quite secluded. No-one really worried about it but now all the houses have been built around it and families have started to go down there, it's become a hot topic."
Mr Marx said around 15 to 20 gay men visited the beach on an average day but pointed out that numerous heterosexual couples had sex there also. Extra police patrols were a good idea as long as gay men who were minding their own business or just talking to friends were not targeted, Mr Marx said.
+
RE: ATM SWINDLERS IN NEW ZEALAND.'
by Victor. 10:13am Sun May 5 '02 (Modified on 10:27am Sun May 5 '02)
Make easy money today.
ATM swindle warning may be just another urban myth.
03 May 2002
By MARTIN KAY
Urban myth or devilishly clever swindle? Banking authorities are puzzled by an e-mail that warns of an ATM swindle that leaves customers at risk of having their accounts cleaned out.
According to the chain e-mail, which has been sent to hundreds of computers this week, thieves place a clear, rigid, plastic sleeve inside ATM card slots using a piece of trickery dubbed "the Lebanese loop".
When a customer puts a card into the slot, the machine is unable to read the magnetic strip and, according to the e-mail, it keeps asking the customer to key in a pin number.
While this happens, one of the thieves stands behind the customer, and observes the number. Eventually, the customer gives up and walks off, thinking their card has been swallowed by the machine, and the thieves "loop" out the plastic sleeve complete with the card and clean out the victim's account.
The e-mail claims the swindle has been pulled many times in Taupo, and the warning 'has the sanction of the police'. Taupo Senior Sergeant Andy Warne said he had heard of the scam, but not in Taupo, and he had neither seen nor okayed the e-mail.
He said he had heard that the swindle had popped up in Hamilton and Auckland, but police national headquarters representative Jon Neilson said he was not aware of it happening in New Zealand. He referred The Dominion to an Internet site specialising in urban myths, which says the claims in the e-mail are suspect but still possible.
However, banking ombudsman Liz Brown said that despite first hearing of the alleged swindle 18 months ago, she had never been able to verify it.
"I've never been able to ascertain whether this actually happens or whether it's urban myth."
COMMENT: LIZ BROWN IS JUST AN "ASS-HOLE" STUCK IN A NEW ZEALAND BACKWATER.
A TRICKSTER ON THE GOLD COAST IN AUSTRALIA HAS PICKED UP A LEAST AUD 80 THOUSAND. HE STOOD AT THE ATM. A WOMAN WENT TO USE HER CARD TO FIND IT WOULD NOT WORK. THE MALE STANDING BEHIND HER OFFERED TO HELP.
HE OBTAINED HER PIN NUMBER AND SUGGESTED TO [HER], GO TO THE BANK TO REPORT IT. HE THEN REMOVES THE CONTRAPTION HE HAD PLACED IN THE ATM SLOT ALONG WITH THE CARD. IN THE MEAN TIME, BEFORE THE LOST CARD BEEN REPORTED HE SWINDLED AUD 12 THOUSAND FROM HER BANK ACCOUNT.
IF ONE ONLY HAS A LIMIT OF SAY 1000 PER DAY THEIR LOSS IS NOT SO GREAT.
Ms LIZ BROWN, HAVE YOU OBTAINED A PHOTO COPY OF THE A.S.B BANK REPLACEMENT BANK CHEQUE FOR THE SUM OF 23,540.09 DRAWN AT PAPANUI IN CHRISTCHURCH IN NEW ZEALAND BY MAURICE GORDON TEAGUE Accountant of 135 Haywards Road CLARKVILLE KAIAPOI.
Friday, 3 May 2002 8:51:13 PM
Observation: IF YOU WISH TO LEARN HOW TO WORK THE BANK CHEQUE SWINDLES CONTACT Ms Liz Brown at help (at) bankombudsman.org.nz Maurice or Maude Teague phone +64-3-327-8477 fax +64-3-327-8612 or at Mail Box 120 Kaiapoi or Simon Charles Clay at email (at) laneneave.co.nz
|
|
Why the Fascination With Nazi Themes in Comparisons? |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
20 May 2002
|
I'm unsure what the exact relationship is of Hitler to any of the above. I'm uncertain why the one story is a comment to the other.
Isn't it bad enough that Bush is in charge? Isn't it bad enough that Huntingdon Anumal Health can do what they do? Isn't it bad enough that some men are such evil, vile creatures (along with the occassional woman)?
Relating everything to Hitler degrades the present day suffering of many. Those who are suffering today could care less about comparisons to a historical Hitler. It certainly doesn't ease any of their pain.
Certainly, one could make equally valid comparisons for wanton cruelty to the Guatemalan Army massacres in the Highlands, My Lai, Cambodia, and Rwanda. But trying to somehow fit one atrocity into the place of another takes away from the unique sufferings of each one. |
|
Attempted bribery |
by Jules
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
20 May 2002
|
comment#2538
MAURICE TEAGUE B. Com
Accountant
P O Box 120, Kaiapoi 8252
Phone (03) 327 8477
Fax (03) 327 8612
Email: link (at) xtra.co.nz not in use.
Mr Jack Cowley
Dimensions Colour Copy Centre
Bush Inn Centre
Riccarton Road
CHRISTCHURCH
Dear Sir,
The reasons for my visit to your shop this morning were two fold.
Firstly...I am aware of highly defamatory material about myself eminating from your business and where your fax number is quoted as the source. The person using your services is a Mr (V J H W) who has already been held accountable for his actions by way of a judgement in my favour and others for defamation. It is my understanding that notwithstanding your statement that you are not aware of the contents of the faxes you send, they are in these circumstances a breach of the Telecommunications Act. If as you stated in our conversation this morning you are still receiving instructions from Mr (W) and relaying them, and you persist in sending these messages I will take appropriate action.
Secondly... By Mr (Ws) own admission he has been sending you letters which contain damaging statements and serious accusations concerning myself. It was because of this action that I and others were awarded the full amount claimed in the proceedings for defamation taken against Mr. (W) Although I realise that you cannot control letters and or faxes being sent to you,
I consider you should encourage Mr (W) not to send you any more, and if he does, and I find that you are forwarding these letters on to others or disseminating the information yourself, I will take appropriate action against you. If you are in any doubts as to your responsibility regarding these matters you should consult a solicitor.
Yours faithfully.
Singed M G Teague.
25/11/99
+
Sunday 1st April 2002. To M G Teague.
[ Observations:
A "compulsive liar" writes the above letter, 'Secondly... By Mr (Ws) own admission he has been sending you letters which contain damaging statements and serious accusations concerning myself. The only faxes to arrive at Dimensions Copy Shop with respect were from 333, then manager of the Emu Motel, after your threatening visit. In fact, you left your business card. Your defamation judgement swindle was held in chambers. A highly unusual course of court action. Teague you even out- smarted the news media, therefore ass-hole reporters. The Judge will be named. Teague we have not corrected your poor English and misspelling, the same with Jack Cowey.]
Teague you initially you paid the Beatrice May Estate a figure close to $80 thousand dollars to do with the subdivision, and would not accept any receipts. You over came your first gscamf by writing various amounts in to the Heads of Agreement. (V) Should have walked with the $80 thousand. Later on, you formed Clarkville Developments Ltd, Further on Clarkville Finance Limited. You and Maude kept it quite until you arrived at a shipping port with the intention of (V) signing your altered Heads of Agreement, just minutes before the ship was to sail.
The purpose of Clarkville Finance Ltd was to shift money from Clarkville Developments Ltd. In your case Teague, was to gstealh a greater sum of money than the Heads of Agreement provided for. Understand you Teague said the law allowed me to do it, is still a swindle.(V) Phoned Simon Clay from Perth was informed, That Teague had gone behind his back with a different Heads of Agreement.f
You admit same in your ANZ Bank Kaiapoi fax to the P&O Canberra. (V) Spotted you on the wharf and asked the purser to stop you. The Heads of Agreement document was nothing more than a document to swindle. Teague and Simon Clay wrote in that (V) had received an ex amount of dollars from Clarkville Finance Limited, which was formed months later after the $80 thousand, was paid out. You Teague refused to make payment by cheque and would only use the direct payment method. (V) had no idea from where Teagues payments came from.
Simon Clay, email (at) laneneave.co.nz [WOULD NOT RECCOMEND] lawyer should have demanded proof from Teague that payments in fact were made from their account in Clarkville Finance Limited. Understand you Teague, made an abusive phone call to Simon Clay describing him eas a nigger in the wood pile for waking (V) up to what you were up to.f Simon Clay keeps this call quite until the Heads of Agreement was signed. Teague you will remember No. 10 Pentre Terrace, Cashmere. Teague during 1962 you drew up an option to purchase for your client, which was faulty at law.
You were doing legal work as an accountant. Of the three persons leaving the Supreme Court after loosing the appeal. Two wanted to finish you off that day, one is still about.
During 1996, a police person was talking to (V) father. After looking over his daughters fence, his comment. (V) must have done well out of the sub-division as he has had two world trips. Some person or persons in this gutter type Government organization had been monitoring him. A stupid airline investigator in Canada said we have a record of you entering the states on several occasions but not of leaving. Answered takes at least ten years to catch your own spies. How many have died due to them.
District Court Judge No. one, who struck out the Estate claim as being vexatious and malicious, No Court notice of hearing, were delivered to the proper address. This Judge should start packing his bags. District Court Judge No. two, who granted Maurice Gordon Teague and whoever others a defamation judgement in chambers, without the proper notice served on the defendant, is a very unusual course of court action. This judge should start packing his bags. The High Court Master [] who denied (V) appeal is out there.
Vicky A Walsh criminal lawyer pappril (at) cyberxpress.co.nz I [WOULD NOT RECCOMEND] for legal work... Her client was going for a Jury trial and Walsh was trying to set him up along another avenue.
+
Dimensions
COLOUR COPY CENTRE
At the Bush Inn Centre
Ph/Fax 343 3375, Ph: 343 3374
Saturday, 4th December 1999
MG Teague
PO Box 120
Kaiapoi
Fax (3) 327 8612
Dear Sir
I am in receipt of your fax subsequent to your visit on 25th November.
While you were telling me how you had won $400,000 in a defamation case against Mr (H W), you were holding a document, which you did not show me, but I assume was the specific document, which offended you.
I would be interested to know why you consider this document emanated from gdimensionsh as I did not recognise it although as I said, we do not inspect every document, which passes through our hands. If the above document is where you obtained the spelling of my name then your fax proves that it did not emanate from gdimensionsh as my name is misspelled and no one here would have made that mistake.
All photocopies, scans, calendars, Jigsaw puzzles, printed gTh shirts, Binding, Laminating, C.V.fs, references, letters and faxes are treated as confidential as you will realise, as when you attempted to obtain information from us and found we would not discuss customer information with you.
Mr (H W) deals with us on a variety of matters. Unfortunately I donft recognise the letters in which gMr. (W) admits he has sent (me) contain(ing) damaging statements and serious statements and serious accusations, may be you would wish to send me copies so I can see them. I must tell you that he has made it a habit to have some documents typed in one place and sent from another, especially as businesses like ours can be extremely busy on a short time basis, and therefore unable to spend long times with one customer.
I would like to point out that all faxes sent from here have our name and local number in a banner across the top of each page and that if this does not appear then it did not emanate from dimensions. We do not hide these from time to time unlike some firms we have come across.
You stated on the 25th November that you had not contacted me previously, yet someone who identified themselves as Maurice Teague, Public Accountant, who wanted me to divulge information about our dealings with Mr (V W), phoned about 8 to 10 weeks ago and asked me to with an answer to a question, but when I phoned back a few minutes later I got a message to phone your brother, Ivan. I also had a call about 5 weeks ago from someone who wouldnt identify himself who wanted me to divulge information about Mr (V W) and made about the same statement about the Telecommunication act as you did in the shop on Thursday 25th November 1999, and in your fax of that day.
It seems to me that you should make an attempt to mediate with Mr. (W) in order to resolve this matter instead of harassing me as you did on 25th November, bringing an unnamed witness with you and asking, before you identified yourself, if you could have a private conversation (obviously with your unnamed witness present) at a time when we were very busy. I can see no reason why we should refuse to do any work for a particular customer in case it may in the future offend another person. If we were to follow this request, any text used in any situation may offend, on a T Shirt or a mug or any other product we may make.
I suggest that you are attempting to interfere with my business and to have me operate in contravention of the Privacy Act.I will not discuss this matter further and I will not divulge private information to anyone. As I said above you should take these matters up with Mr. (W) so they are resolved.
Yours sincerely,
J E Cowey
[ Observations:
The Teaguefs were there to make an ass-hole of you Cowey.
The privacy act means leave this shop now or will call shop security. Unnamed witness was Maud Teague. (V) Would not have personally sent faxes to you Teague. Remember Teague eis he tall, scruffy hair, ware a cap, and drive cars rego numbers given out. A woman over 70 sends a fax from Moods to Teague. With in 2 minutes Teague here if I receive any more faxes I will issue a writ for 100 Thousand dollars. The person who picked up Teagues call was Mr. Moody in Christchurch. No doubt, his fax banner was showing. Several photocopy businesspersons drop their fax numbers to avoid abuse after sending accounts for off the street customers.]
The District Court staff unable to type? Why two Timings on the Harassment list. There is no such word in the English language. Try Harass or to Harass. Who is Brenda Bexter or Baxter on the list. On the list Michael Timings James O'Neill Maurice Gordon Teague Maude linklater Teague Gordon Dollimore Julie Newton[IRD-IRS]
Saturday, 18 May 2002
Typed by a snitcher Friday, 17 May 2002. 18:46:51
+
Attempted bribery by Maude and Maurice Teague.
Part Fax 18/12/99 14:38 New Zealand time.
Highway Lodge Christchurch New Zealand. Page 01
To: Victor from Alan & Dorrie.
First Fax. On A/c of people, knowing your car is here. Have even offered us money for INFO that we won't supply, Alan & Dorrie.
Second fax. Victor, Lady rang wanting to know what room you were in. Told her not staying here and that your car had disappeared last night.
A note sent to Teague, he has a reputation around the town for working shady deals and Christchurch is full of crooked accountants. Information from a chartered accountant now out of this business. The sole reason for the Teagues visit to the Highway. Looking around the city for this accountant. Teagues mind, Cowan is an accountant and has a guesthouse maybe (V) stayed there.
Who else but Maude Teague would have made the sniffing phone call? BACKGROUND, MAURICE & MAUDE TEAGUE ARRIVED AT THE HIGHWAY GUEST LODGE, PAPANUI ROAD IN CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND, AND OFFERED THE COWANfS AN UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF MONEY TO REPORT TO TEAGUE IF (H W) STAYED AGAIN. IF THE COWANS DID NOT BELIEVE TEAGUE, JUST PHONE HIS LAWYER MICHAEL TIMINGS AT lawyers (at) barkerassociates.co.nz AND HE WOULD CONFIRM THE TEAGUES OFFER AS VALID.
The Teagues hoped the Cowanfs would say, What figure do you have in mind as all three are accountants. Complaints of Attempted bribery lodged with the Corrupt Police at Kaiapoi ignored. Victor told the file could not be found. Ten pages lost. If Maurice Teague in fact feared for his life, why did he appear at the Highway Lodge in the first place? In addition, the Edgeware shops Motels on numerous occasions moreover, ready to return to the Highway Lodge. Following (H W) along the South Eyre Road on one occasion. Teague may have been out to pick a fight, to have him arrested. No point in buying in to that as Maude would be alive to spend the money. Your photo Michael Timings, and the part, you were prepared to play in the attempted bribery will bring you down.
The police even took (H W) to court on a Saturday morning [with out any chance to consult with legal counsel] just to let two JP read your doctors bringing up your food report to have it in the system just for you Teague. No Judge, No Jury, No Appeal, No Deal for You lot. It does not matter how many persons you surround your self with, or how many precautions you personally take, what goes around always comes around. Monday 15th April 2002-04-16
Typed by Gary V Piercy
|
|
A STALKER. MAURICE TEAGUE. |
by Leo Sayer.
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
20 May 2002
|
A STALKER. MAURICE GORDON TEAGUE. The three faxes are now in one, censored to protect the innocent.
Faxes were transmitted to Dimensions Copy Centre.
+
Proprietor Fax Transmission
Date: 6/9/1999
Time: 12:00noon
Message: V, Ring urgent have just had M. Teague here.
Julie.
Fax Transmission
Date: 6/9/1999
Time: 1:55pm
Message: At about 11:50am on the 6/9/99 a man came to the reception desk. He did not say who he was. He started asking questions about Mr W. I asked who he was. He then gave me his business card. I said I did not want to get involved. He inferred that if I did not answer his questions I could be in trouble.
He asked if Mr W was still here, did he have a car, was he on his own, when did he leave (he wrote down 1 week), what unit was he in and what was his mood when he left.
He spoke of a court case on Monday and that he was leaving early on Monday for Christchurch. He also said he knew of Mr W's PO Box and that he was going to the post office to talk to them. I said he still has the box.
Fax Transmission
Date: 11/9/1999
Time: 8:30pm
Message: V, at about 5:45pm I received a phone call asking for V. When asked who was calling, he said, It is an old friend. I said V was not here. He then said H W. He said he was in a bus and saw you walking along the road near the motel. I asked his name and phone number. If he should arrive I would pass the message on. He would not give me those details. I said, 'He does not stay here all the time and does not book in ahead of arrival.'
I believe the man on the phone was Mr M G Teague who came to the motel on the 6/9/1999.
At 8pm on the 11/9/1999 I rang his phone in NZ and got a recorded message to confirm it was Mr Teague.
If I receive any more calls or visits from Mr M G Teague I will seek legal advice.
Julie (Manager) Red Motel Queensland Australia.
+
Observations: Common knowledge that due to confidentiality requirements, Motel employees are not at liberty to give out names of guests or numbers of guests in rooms out to the general public. Mr Teague was enquiring as to the room number etc, of V W.
Mr Maurice Teague never spotted H W walking in the vicinity of the above Motel. Why would a Motel manager take any interest in who was walking near the Motel? Maude Teague was not present at Maurice Teagues visit to the motel. She was present at a photocopy business when Mr M G Teague enquired, Did they send faxes for a Mr H W. The answer was that they didnt know a H W. Teague then enquired, 'Do you know a V' The staff said, 'Yes.'
Teague passed on the message, 'Tell him to stay in Australia because if he comes back to New Zealand the officials are waiting for him.' I allege Maurice Gordon Teague is a police [nark informer]. Obvious no fax ID bar or Teagues questions were unnecessary. What sort of mood was he in when he left. In addition, old police trick. What did he say about me? Teague working on his harassment and fear for his life swindle at that stage.
Leo Sayer.
6/26/2001.
Why would "conman" Maurice Teague lie about seeing V W. Think about this angle? If Maurice G Teague was taken out. Maude Teague would say Maurice saw V W near the motel. Better check on my late husbands phone calls. Cunning before and after death, if it had accrued at that time. Maurice Teague carries a phone, not shown on his business card.
An ex nurse at the Indy car racing said 'if any person needs a test it be Maurice Teague.' A proper mental test. 'Some one should get him.' This woman was on the receiving end, of a nasty letter from M G Teague some twenty years ago. Some do not forget.
Leo Sayer. Tuesday, 21 May 2002 |
|
