You do that, Neil. Something tells me, though, that you won't have Bleakley Platt to represent you the next time.When I compile all the information I need in which I can kick the financial system in the ass and straighten it out then I will file. My main concern is Jurisdiction which is what the Judge also made mention of and clearly stated that he would throw the case out if we did not prove we have it. In order to do this I am going to expose the illegal banking system. Let them then tell me when the Federal Reserve Bank of NY is shown to be part and parcel to the theft. I will have the information to prove this...
We will be refilling and we will have new defendants most likely including the Federal Reserve Bank of NY and the US Treasury among them. We have plenty to include both and invoke jurisdiction.
notorial dissent wrote:And so, we come back to why did Bleakley Platt file this gobbler in the first place?
wserra wrote:I thought about emailing the partner who is attorney of record, but decided against it. I mean, what do you say - "Excuse me, sir, but why did you file that Rule-12-bait suit for an obvious nutcase who claims to have been defrauded of $145 billion with no conceivable pretense of jurisdiction?
notorial dissent wrote:I still want to know how Keenan conned Bleakley Platt into actually filing this farce, I mean were they just that bored that day that they didn't have anything better to do, or were they letting the interns vet their filings??? What??? I mean I can see some nutcase filing this pro se, but a real law firm????
I'd still also like to know how we go from some unknown parties stealing his billions of bearer bonds to it being the fault of the FED and so on? And sure he is going to come back and refile the suit with new defendants and new imaginary proof. Somehow I don't think it will get past Judge Furman again.
Gregg wrote:Oh, Webhick, darling, I have a present just for you in the works, when it's done I'll post you a picture.
The interns will love, and they won't have to pay for the initiation buzz hair cuts anymore!
wserra wrote:Their web site has the usual "look how great we are" page, listing their accounts of the firm's successes. Strange, I don't see one entitled "Bleakley Platt nonsuits itself in ridiculous case that we never should have filed."
Dr. Caligari wrote:http://divinecosmos.com/media/Keenan_complaint_11-23-2011_SDNY.pdf
Paragraph 2(h): Upon information and belief, in order to effectuate this process, the Notes were printed to appear as if they were not produced from official origin and bear obvious imperfections, therefore easily deniable. However, when proper procedures are followed, the number of the Note and other linking identic data allows ultimate authentication and verification through the Federal Reserve System screening process and the presenting of the Note under the immunity shield allows effective use.
Paragraph 66: Yet, approximately two days after the seizure, the United States Treasury claimed that the Federal Reserve Notes, which had been seized at Chiasso, were counterfeit based solely upon its viewing of pictures of the Notes over the Internet. Further, while confirmation of the DF Chiasso Instruments was still pending, on June 25, 2009, the New York Times reported on the story and included the statements of a United States Secret Service spokesman to the effect that the Secret Service had performed an inspection, as required by the Italian Judiciary, and found that the Instruments were fictitious and had never been issued by the Federal Reserve or the United States Treasury. Upon information and belief, the assertions that the FRNs seized at Chiasso are not genuine are inaccurate as will be determined through the verification process through the Federal Reserve System's black screen process.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest