Monday, December 7, 2009

09-12-07 Bed-in, levitation by meditation, Kozinski Frauds, Why Kozinkski must resign, computer validation, etc...

Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 18:44:47 -0800
To: "Bonnie Russell" "Sean Harrington"
From: joseph zernik
Subject: (1) Bed-in, (2) Levitation by meditation, (3) Kozinski Fraud, (4) Why Kozinski must immediately resign, (5) Civil, Constitutional, and Human Rights, (6) The US courts and US judiciary as central to the current Economic/Integrity Crisis, (7) Validation and/or Functional Logic Verification of US large computers systems
RE: (1) Bed-in, (2) Levitation by meditation, (3) Kozinski Fraud, (4) Why Kozinski must immediately resign, (5) Civil, Constitutional, and Human Rights, (6) The US courts and US judiciary as central to the current Economic/Integrity Crisis, (7) Validation and/or Functional Logic Verification of US large computers systems

Dear Attorney Russell:

Indeed, the 1969 Amsterdam Bed-in by John Lennon and Yoko Ono was a huge success.

See full size image
Bed-in by John and Yoko, Amsterdam, 1969

However, based on your previous communications I had no way to realize that the two of us shared this philosophy. Mistakenly, I assumed that you were most inclined to engage in a no-nonsense legal discussion, based on facts, law, reference to specific cases, etc. That was the reason I provided you such information - again - copied below.
Do you also subscribe to levitation by meditation? Ever since the 1967 Abbie Hoffman success in levitating the Pentagon I have considered myself a fan of that technique as well.

Abbie Hoffman's Levitation of the Pentagon - by meditation, 1967.

Following your initial constructive comments, your contribution to a focused discussion on the matters themselves was eagerly anticipated, in re: False Imprisonment of Attorney Richard Fine and Demand for the immediate resignation of Chief Judge Alex Kozinski for perpetrating a Kozinski Fraud from the bench.

Given Kozinski's high position, second only to the justices of the US Supreme Court, and the serious nature of the accusations, the matter was crucial in regards to representation of the US Courts as national tribunals that protected the Civil, Constitutional, and Human Rights of residents of this country in compliance with ratified International Law.

Moreover, the US courts and the US judiciary, through their conduct, were alleged in previous communications as central to the current Economic/Integrity Crisis, which crippled the US, and inflicted harm on both investors and workers world-wide. Such conduct amounted to a deliberate refusal to enforce the law on large financial institutions, particularly - regarding alleged criminality at Bank of America Corporation and prior to that - alleged criminality at Countrywide Financial Corporation. Such conduct also stood contrary to representation of the US as a good-faith party to the Basel Accords (1988/1996 and 2004) on Banking Supervision.

Key feature shared by all deficiencies listed above was claimed to be the evident failure of the US government to implement effective validation and/or functional logic verification, subject to public oversight and/or public accountability, of large computer systems that were implemented in recent decades in government agencies, including, but not limited to the courts and correctional facilities, and also in large financial institutions and public corporations. The manner in which such systems were implemented in courts across the US, both state and federal, was also claimed to have violated state and/or federal rulemaking enabling acts. The conduct of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts in re: PACER and CM/ECF was pointed out as requiring immediate scrutiny.

The favor of a response on the facts and/or on the law, as outlined in my December 6, 2009 message, copied below, would be greatly appreciated.

Joe Zernik


1) Prof Richard Posner, University of Chicago Law School - as a request for the initiation of corrective actions.
University of Chicago Law School[]

2) Law school faculty

4) Glenn A Fine, Inspector General, US Dept of Justice , as an addendum to complaint about wide-spread corruption of the justice system in Los Angeles County, and refusal of FBI and U.S. DOJ senior officers to accord Equal Protection, providing instead fraudulent responses to inquiries by U.S. Congress.

4) Other Inspector Generals
As an addendum to complaints about widespread corruption in Los Angeles County, and refusal of US government to enforce the law.

5) Mark J. Sullivan, Director, US Secret Service: As an addendum to request for investigation, pursuant to the US Secret Service mission statement and primary investigational jurisdiction - in safeguarding the integrity of the financial system - particularly - large computer systems.

6) NavanNaethem Pillay, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights
See full size image

7) Nout Wellink, Chair, Basel Accords Committee

II. The Usual


"This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society," said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared statement.
X-MSK: CML=3.501000
From: "Bonnie Russell"
Cc: joseph zernik
Subject: Re: Kozinski Fraud - and Kozinski Culture were the true problems
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 09:11:49 -0800
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3598
X-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;

Sean and others.
Again, please remove me from this list.

Or, who do I need to sleep with to get off this list?
Please advise. I'll send in a stand-in. Or, lie-in.


09-12-07 Request for assistance by Terry Nafisi - Clerk, US District Court, LA - in Wikipedia entry improvement

Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 18:23:18 -0800
To: Terry Nafisi
From: joseph zernik
Subject: Timely response requested within 10 days. Request for clarifications in re: NEFs, General Order 08-02

December 7, 2009

Terry Nafisi, Clerk of the Court
U.S. Court, Central District of California

The favor of a response within 10 days was requested.

Dear Clerk Nafisi:

I am writing to ask your help regarding a short text, which I composed for Wikipedia, titled: Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) (the URL is explicitly listed below):
  1. Since the matter pertains directly to the conduct of your office, I would be grateful for any correction of errors, or any other comments that you would be generously willing to provide.
  2. I heavily relied on my understanding of the records of the U.S. Court of the Central District of California. However, the figure, as you could see, was from another district, since I have never been able, to this date to gain access to any NEFs of the Central District of California. I wonder if you could help amend this obvious deficiency, and finally allow access to records that I have repeatedly requested. Alternatively - if you have any sample figure of a valid and effectual NEF that you would be willing to contribute for this article, it would be greatly appreciated, and also acknowledged.
  3. I would be grateful if you could either confirm or refute the validity and effect, or lack thereof, of General Order 08-02, a key record, and provide a reasonable explanation why such record was posted online by your office with no signature, and no name of its author, not to mention any evidence of authentication.
  4. I would be grateful if you could either confirm or refute the validity and effect, or lack thereof, of the "Unofficial Manual" for electronic filing at the Central District. Most other districts that I have inspected, had "official manuals". The Central District of California appeared unique in its lack of foundation for the operations of CM/ECF.
  5. I would be grateful if you could either confirm, or refute the suggestion that the denial of access to NEFs at the Central District of California, was not unique at all, but rather - the outcome of coordinated efforts initiated by Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

Joseph Zernik

Linked Records:
1) Wikipedia: Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

09-12-07 US Secret Service - Mission, contacts. etc

United States Secret Service
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Investigative Mission

The Secret Service was established as a law enforcement agency in 1865. While most people associate the Secret Service with presidential protection, its original mandate was to investigate the counterfeiting of U.S. currency, a mission the Secret Service is still mandated to carry out.

Today the agency's primary investigative mission is to safeguard the payment and financial systems of the United States. This has been historically accomplished through the enforcement of counterfeiting statutes to preserve the integrity of United States currency, coin and financial obligations.

Since 1984, the Secret Service's investigative responsibilities have expanded to include crimes that involve financial institution fraud, computer and telecommunications fraud, false identification documents, access device fraud, advance fee fraud, electronic funds transfers and money laundering as it relates to the agency's core violations.

To combat these crimes, the Secret Service has adopted a proactive approach that utilizes advanced technologies.



The vision of the United States Secret Service is to uphold the tradition of excellence in its investigative and protective mission through a dedicated, highly-trained, diverse, partner-oriented workforce that employs progressive technology and promotes professionalism.


The mission of the United States Secret Service is to safeguard the nation's financial infrastructure and payment systems to preserve the integrity of the economy, and to protect national leaders, visiting heads of state and government, designated sites and National Special Security Events.

U.S. Secret Service Strategic Plan (FY 2008 - FY 2013) (1.36M .pdf)

Click here to download Adobe Acrobat ReaderTo view these documents you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.0. If you do not already have the software, please follow this link to get the free download.

09-12-07 in re: Treasury Secretary Tim Geitherner and Wall Street.

Bo Cutter’s Indictment of the Finance Industry

By William K. Black|Dec 1, 2009, 1:43 PM|Author's Website

Bo Cutter has presented the best possible defense of Treasury Secretary Geithner.

Bo Cutter’s Indictment of the Finance Industry

One Comment

  1. Regardless of any assessment of Geithner as a person, and his performance as Treasury Secretary, the question that must be of interest is his ability to stem the hemorrhage, and effectively reduce the chances of catastrophic failure of the US financial system. Evidence suggests that the Obama administration failed so far to gain control of all government agencies. Some of the more critical - in law enforcement and banking regulation continue to conduct their business in a manner that is contrary to the interests of the people of the US, contrary to oaths of office of senior officers, and contrary to what would be considered rationale, sustainable policies. In short - recklessness still reigns high.

09-12-07 December 12, 2009 Arts for Human Rights Day!