Re: Virgil Griffith - Crypto Advocate and Educator Arrested at LAX from DPRK
Virgil Griffith v USG https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download
On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 05:19:47PM -0500, John Young wrote:
Virgil Griffith v USG
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download
One could say this is actually Virgil Griffith v. The Federal Reserve. 'Member the Fed muffas! Dunno why those who continue to hold their offer we can't refuse, have their panties in such a twist - the multi polar world is well on the way, 'tis only just begun. Making a martyr of Griffith can't possibly stem the tide at this stage of the game ... I keep wondering why Russia is so slow to pimp their DC funk - perhaps some magnanimous egalitarian attitude of "let's not front run too much and help the other multiple poles get footings and confidence" would be rational at least - no point being the firetrucking hero planting your new global flag whilst pretending multi polar, might get JFKed or WW3ed - better to actually see a few "competitor" nations get on their feet. This always notified itself too: except there be a market for your particular fiat (Fed, DC, etc) then it simply don't matter how many fiats you collect, you're gonna be limited in your spending ability to the little fish pond in which your fiats exist - so if you and your buddy roll out an incredibly funky DC fiat, but only the two of you use it (and perhaps your momma when she makes you a sanga), then who cares how many trillians you print? "A currency is only as valuable as the total market in which that currency is accepted." So if you don't pimp out your dollars, dinars, rubles or DCoins, your fiat ain't worth a rat's roasted arse. As the multi polar world gits going, at a certain tipping point a firetruckload of USD fiats are gonna "come home" and the USA is gonna be "Zimbabwe"d with some rather humorous hyperinflation. Possibly. With Iran and NK out of the NWO/ one world bank offing (why thank you, Putin, you did succeed where Saddam and Qaddhafi failed), and Macron just today ACKing the new multi polar reality Macron Tells NATO, Russia Must Come In From The Cold War https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/macron-tells-nato-russia-must-come-co... the fighting is now over bilateral relationships (contracts) and many competing digital fiats steadily being rolled out. The real question for the USA people is whether the Fed will iron fist another (this time much more national than global) fiat from hell, or whether a transition to a govt owned and controlled fiat greenback can occur without the instigator being JFKed. JFK evidently had insufficient support base. Try to be the Ulysses hero, and you fall on the sword of ego, or rather, a bullet, heart attack gun or death prick in a handshake. Stay tuned...
On Sunday, December 1, 2019, 05:22:16 PM PST, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote: On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 05:19:47PM -0500, John Young wrote:
Virgil Griffith v USG
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download
One could say this is actually Virgil Griffith v. The Federal Reserve. [snip] As you may recall, I previously looked at the indictment(s) of Julian Assange, and specifically for any indication that the statutes he allegedly violated had an indication of "extraterritoriality" included in those statutes. The Supreme Court has upheld the principle that non-extraterritoriality (statute not applicable to actions outside the US) is presumed unless the statute explicitly references the extraterritoriality of that statute. Here is the contents of 50 U.S.C. 1705: 50 U.S. Code § 1705.Penalties - U.S. Code - Notes prev | next(a)Unlawful acts It shall be unlawful for a person to violate, attempt to violate, conspire to violate, or cause a violation of any license, order, regulation, or prohibition issued under this chapter. (b)Civil penaltyA civil penalty may be imposed on any person who commits an unlawful act described in subsection (a) in an amount not to exceed the greater of—(1)$250,000; or(2)an amount that is twice the amount of the transaction that is the basis of the violation with respect to which the penalty is imposed.(c)Criminal penalty A person who willfully commits, willfully attempts to commit, or willfully conspires to commit, or aids or abets in the commission of, an unlawful act described in subsection (a) shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. (Pub. L. 95–223, title II, § 206, Dec. 28, 1977, 91 Stat. 1628; Pub. L. 102–393, title VI, § 629, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1773; Pub. L. 102–396, title IX, § 9155, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1943; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title XIV, § 1422, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2725; Pub. L. 109–177, title IV, § 402, Mar. 9, 2006, 120 Stat. 243; Pub. L. 110–96, § 2(a), Oct. 16, 2007, 121 Stat. 1011.) [end of quote] I cannot see any indication that the statute 50 U.S.C. 1705 is supposed to be extraterritorial: That is is intended, by the statute, to apply to actions taken outside the United States or its territories. But this is why I really want to read a lawyer's take on extraterritoriality. --------- And I did, again, a Google search for ' "julian assange" "extraterritorial", time limited since Sept 1, 2019: However, looking at 4 pages of search results, I do not find any indication that any articles have addressed the issue of extraterritorial application of US laws, However, the recent case of Sacoolas, the woman who drove and killed a British citizen, might "wake up" British Justice (presuming such still exists) and cause it to do 'turnabout is fair play' and refuse extradition of Julian Assange. If Sacoolas won't be extradited, or given an immunity waiver, the British might just decide to come down on the side of "no quid pro no quo". No tit for tat. Maybe. If we are lucky. Jim Bell
On 12/2/19, jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
I cannot see any indication that the statute 50 U.S.C. 1705 is supposed to be extraterritorial: That is is intended, by the statute, to apply to actions taken outside the United States or its territories. But this is why I really want to read a lawyer's take on extraterritoriality.
Maybe find some relavant context in some of these... https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=extraterritoriality
On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 07:12:31AM +0000, jim bell wrote:
On Sunday, December 1, 2019, 05:22:16 PM PST, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote: On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 05:19:47PM -0500, John Young wrote:
Virgil Griffith v USG
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download
One could say this is actually Virgil Griffith v. The Federal Reserve.
[snip] As you may recall, I previously looked at the indictment(s) of Julian Assange, and specifically for any indication that the statutes he allegedly violated had an indication of "extraterritoriality" included in those statutes. The Supreme Court has upheld the principle that non-extraterritoriality (statute not applicable to actions outside the US) is presumed unless the statute explicitly references the extraterritoriality of that statute. Here is the contents of 50 U.S.C. 1705:
50 U.S. Code § 1705.Penalties
- U.S. Code - Notes prev | next(a)Unlawful acts It shall be unlawful for a person to violate, attempt to violate, conspire to violate, or cause a violation of any license, order, regulation, or prohibition issued under this chapter. (b)Civil penaltyA civil penalty may be imposed on any person who commits an unlawful act described in subsection (a) in an amount not to exceed the greater of—(1)$250,000; or(2)an amount that is twice the amount of the transaction that is the basis of the violation with respect to which the penalty is imposed.(c)Criminal penalty A person who willfully commits, willfully attempts to commit, or willfully conspires to commit, or aids or abets in the commission of, an unlawful act described in subsection (a) shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.
(Pub. L. 95–223, title II, § 206, Dec. 28, 1977, 91 Stat. 1628; Pub. L. 102–393, title VI, § 629, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1773; Pub. L. 102–396, title IX, § 9155, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1943; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title XIV, § 1422, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2725; Pub. L. 109–177, title IV, § 402, Mar. 9, 2006, 120 Stat. 243; Pub. L. 110–96, § 2(a), Oct. 16, 2007, 121 Stat. 1011.)
[end of quote]
I cannot see any indication that the statute 50 U.S.C. 1705 is supposed to be extraterritorial: That is is intended, by the statute, to apply to actions taken outside the United States or its territories. But this is why I really want to read a lawyer's take on extraterritoriality. ---------
And I did, again, a Google search for ' "julian assange" "extraterritorial", time limited since Sept 1, 2019: However, looking at 4 pages of search results, I do not find any indication that any articles have addressed the issue of extraterritorial application of US laws, However, the recent case of Sacoolas, the woman who drove and killed a British citizen, might "wake up" British Justice (presuming such still exists) and cause it to do 'turnabout is fair play' and refuse extradition of Julian Assange. If Sacoolas won't be extradited, or given an immunity waiver, the British might just decide to come down on the side of "no quid pro no quo". No tit for tat. Maybe. If we are lucky. Jim Bell
Notwithstanding the ultimate outcome, at this stage "a message has been sent" to all dissidents, "alt" journalists, and leakers, that the empire will dish out its horrible consequences for actions which undermine the empire. A possible resolution of sorts could be financial compensation to Assange, which in NZ starts at $100K/yr, and in Aus starts at ~$1,000/day for extended stays https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi356 So 8 yrs * 365 * $1,000 ~= $3 million. And that's just the std base rate. Add in exemplary damages (due to e.g. the "sending a message", the total and utter power imbalance between Assange and the USA, etc) and 10s of millions is in order. The dignity of the West demands such compensation ultimately be paid to Julian Assange. Failure to fix this is the ongoing indictment of the evil infesting the West. Such failure is prima facie demonstration of the ultimate power in the West being "the swamp" or any other name you wish to give to this power, which on a completely random note, controls the US military. There is this one little troll tail which wags the USA dog. Creata mundi Создай свой мир Crea tu mundo Δημιουργήστε τον κόσμο σας Crea o teu mundo Erschaffe deine Welt اصنع عالمك Sortu zure mundua Crea el teu món 创造你的世界 Luo maailma Créez votre monde अपनी दुनिया बनाएं Búðu til þinn heim Készítsd el a világod Ciptakan dunia Anda Crea il tuo mondo あなたの世界を作成 당신의 세계를 창조하십시오 Создадете го вашиот свет Waihangahia to ao Lag din verden دنیای خود را ایجاد کنید Stwórz swój świat Crie o seu mundo ਆਪਣੀ ਦੁਨੀਆ ਬਣਾਓ Creează-ți lumea Створите свој свет Vytvorte si svet Skapa din värld สร้างโลกของคุณ Dünyanızı yaratın O'zingizning dunyoingizni yarating Tạo thế giới của bạn Fatu lou lalolagi Create your world
the empire will dish out its horrible consequences for actions which
Until you dish out better stronger faster change actions.
Virgil
The Virgil case hasn't even started, it could get very big.
The dignity of the West demands such compensation ultimately be paid to Julian Assange.
What dignity? The West (US primarily, UK and other lapdogs next) has none left, or cares. If the US etc had to compensate all the peoples it's immorally fucked over, jailed, thieved, tortured, and murdered in its history, it'd go bankrupt, doubly over what it already is, they don't even have enough trees to print all that paper money. You'd have to see what these countries have in reserve to pay out millions upon millions of civil suits, half to their own citizens. Now maybe if all the people in it's government were forced to sell their own birth certificates off to the highest bidder... :)
participants (4)
-
grarpamp -
jim bell -
John Young -
Zenaan Harkness