DomRev – Domain Names

Want to know who invented school?

Well, if you want to dig through all this info., it’s fine by me.
There are many answers to the question, "Who invented school?", but no one really knows. See, school did spread first in Greece, but no one specifically thought of it FIRST. Many have thought of school, but we do not know who EMBRACED it. For example, if the pencil wasn’t invented, and you thought of this invention, SOMEONE else must have thought of it, too. so that’s why most people don’t bother embracing such. But no one is really sure who invented school >*!FIRST!*<. But many have invented school. Someone must have embraced it before the government. But the person/people who made it a law that kids have to go to school is the GOVERNMENT, as you may have guessed, they have ruined many other things. Some information from different sources are supplied here: (If you do not wish to dig into some info, please skip all of the paragraphs in quotation.) (the Seljuks introduced the Madrassa, a proper school built independently from the mosque. They were also the first to make the Madrassa system a public domain under the control of the caliph.
As a profession, teaching has very high levels of Work-Related Stress (WRS)[2] which are listed as amongst the highest of any profession in some countries, such as the United Kingdom. The degree of this problem is becoming increasingly recognized and support systems are being put into place.Teacher education is increasingly recognizing the need for new entrants to the profession to be aware of and trained to overcome the challenges that they will face on the ‘mental health’ front. Schools and their teachers have always been under pressure — for instance, pressure to cover the curriculum, to perform well in comparison to other schools, and to avoid the stigma of being "soft" or "spoiling" toward students. Forms of discipline, such as control over when students will and will not speak, and normalized behavior, such as raising one’s hand to speak, are imposed in the name of greater efficiency. Practitioners of critical pedagogy point out that such disciplinary measures have no positive effect on student learning; indeed, some would argue that disciplinary practices actually detract from learning since they undermine students’ individual dignity and sense of self-worth, the latter occupying a more primary role in students’ hierarchy of needs.It was an Italian in 1843, by the name of Vinnie Scholars, and was named after him. 100 years ago you’d be saying "bye Mom, I’m off to scholars" but with time it gradually got changed to school. I hope this helps.School was invented in 1653 by Joseph Lariviere from France.
School was invented long ago by the Clergy
Rich folk used to send their kids to Seminary school to learn
In the US in 1660 the Clergy mandated that all kids over 8 go to school in the NE Unfortunately, we don’t know which culture’s school came first – many of them developed around the same time.
Past that, it’s just been new takes on an old concept.
Kids attended school until either their parents needed them to get a job to help support the family, or until they (and their teachers) became frustrated enough to quit.
Then compulsory (all kids have to go) attendance started, along with the child labor laws; the law decided all kids should attend school until the age of 16, and should not be forced to work to support their families.
This law was developed based on the idea that EDUCATION IS A RIGHT! Education is an important element in being able to fully pursue happiness as adults.
It placed the individual’s rights above the family’s needs.
Would you rather still be in the late 1800’s, working 14 hours per day in a factory without enough food to eat, just to help your parent(s) pay the rent and buy what little food they could?
Child labor laws and compulsory education protect children from hardships you can’t even (obviously) imagine.
Well, I don’t know exactly who invented public school, but Horace Mann lengthened the school year to about 9 months. The Equal education law pretty much is why kids have to go to school.
Thanks alot, Mr. Mann.
"Compulsory education is education which is required by the government."
Benjamin franklin invented the public school system, as for truancy or mandatory attendance this might have been established according to the individual states, and their needs. for example farming states requirements for attendance would be different then in NY.
Horace Mann created the first board of education so it’s his fault mostly
For Western Civilization – meaning Europeans and Americans – Compulsory education was thought by the rulers of Prussia to be a task of the state. In 1763 Frederick II ("Frederick the Great" of Prussia) made schooling compulsory for all children between the ages of 5 and 13.
In Austria, mandatory primary education was introduced by Empress Maria Theresa of Austria in 1774.
In Britain, compulsory state supported education for kids 5 to 10 was mandated
Well, if you want to dig through all this info., it’s fine by me.
There are many answers to the question, "Who invented school?", but no one really knows. See, school did spread first in Greece, but no one specifically thought of it FIRST. Many have thought of school, but we do not know who EMBRACED it. For example, if the pencil wasn’t invented, and you thought of this invention, SOMEONE else must have thought of it, too. so that’s why most people don’t bother embracing such. But no one is really sure who invented school >*!FIRST!*<. But many have invented school. Someone must have embraced it before the government. But the person/people who made it a law that kids have to go to school is the GOVERNMENT, as you may have guessed, they have ruined many other things.
Oh and by the way,
If you still don’t believe me and want to check it out-
Don’t use wikipedia. It’s unreliable. Once at school I changed something on wikipedia without a wiki account and without hacking and it saved there

I am pretty sure it was Pothagoras like in the thagoreum tyreum(sorry for spelling) or some other greek dude

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

What is The Vatican policy against the Orthodox Church?

GIANTS ACT like giants, hence their undertakings are on a gigantic scale. Years are reckoned by decades, decades by centuries. Geographical areas are made to embrace nations or even continents, while the histories of institutions and of races are seen in perspectives not easily comprehended. Because of this, their actions, being in harmony with their extraordinary magnitude, will escape the notice of individuals unable to size up the vast historical panoramas which, although clearly scrutinizable by retinas of gigantic forms, yet are partly blurred and often wholly invisible to others.
The Catholic Church, the greatest surviving giant in the world, is a colossus with no peer in antiquity, experience and above all, in her determination to dominate the human race. To reach such a goal, she will suffer no rivals, tolerate no competitors, put up with no enemies.
Giants who, like her, were found roaming in the deep valley of history, she fought with bloody claws and a ruthlessness to shame the Attillas, the Genghis Khans and all the other scourgers of civilization. Many she led to their destruction; others she subjugated for good; some were annihilated, but some resisted and escaped all her guiles. More than one survived, and even fought relentless battles that echoed with sanguinary echoes in the corridors of the centuries and that are still being fought as ferociously as in olden times, now, in the very midst of the twentieth century.
Vatican diplomacy is the oldest diplomacy in the world. Most of those it fought were either shrunk to nothing by time or blotted out by history, and to modern ears all its multifarious intrigues would sound as hollow and as unreal as they have become strangely unrelated to the ever-bewildering events of our day.
Yet not all the ancient foes of the Vatican have been reduced to mere landmarks of the past. Some have bridged bygone centuries to the present, and one of them, the most formidable of all, the Orthodox Church, a peer to Catholicism in antiquity, is as much a reality in our time as is the Vatican itself.
The antagonism of these two ancient colossi has produced the longest diplomatic war in the history of man, which is still being fought as fiercely, as ruthlessly and as unscrupulously as ever. Catholic intrigues against Orthodoxy, since its inception, are uncountable. They fill the annals of the first millennium; and from the beginning of the second, when in 1054 the Orthodox Patriarch, Michael Cerulanius, brought about the final breach between the Eastern and Western Churches, until the fall of Constantinople, they remained paramount in the history of medieval Europe.
The goal of this thousand-year war is simple: the destruction or subjugation of the Orthodox Church or its voluntary or forcible integration into the Catholic Church. The unscrupulousness of Vatican diplomacy to reach this objective, prior to and after the fall of Byzantium, is hardly matched by parallel exertions in history, its most blatant intrigues of the period being veritable masterpieces of diplomatic cunning and double-dealing. Councils, religious compromises, political bargaining, secret negotiations with Orthodox patriarchs, pacts with the Byzantine emperors – everything and every device was used at one time or another to put Orthodoxy in fetters. We can mention the pact struck with the last Orthodox emperor of Constantinople, who, to obtain a promise of help in the defense of the Orthodox capital against the gathering Mohammedan armies, pledged to the Vatican the mass conversion of the Orthodox Church.
From the smashing of the Orthodox Church’s political pillar, the Byzantine empire, in 1453, to the crumbling of its political successor, the Russian Czarist Empire, in 1917, the Vatican-Orthodox relations were characterized by a period of comparative diplomatic lull. This was due to historical factors, the most outstanding of which was that, in the course of the centuries, the center of Orthodoxy had shifted en masse from the Near East to the West, where its former missionary lands became its new home – namely, to Holy Russia. There the Orthodox Church struck deep roots. More than that: as Rome had been the first Rome, Constantinople had been the "second Rome," so now Moscow became the "third Rome." Moscow, Philothey said in the fifteenth century, was the natural successor of Constantinople. Now that Constantinople had fallen, the only Orthodox empire left in the world was the Russian. The Russian nation alone, therefore, henceforward became the true repository of the Orthodox faith. The idea of an Orthodox empire became the Russian’s paramount idea. Church and State were integrated, linked by a common messianic purpose. Having found such fertile soil, soon the Orthodox Church regained its old vigor and splendor. As of old, committing its ancient mistake, it identified itself as intimately with the Russian empire as it had previously done with the Byzantine. From about 1721, when Peter the Great, after his Spiritual Regulation, made the Orthodox Church a branch of Czarism, until the Bolshevik Revolution, Caesaro-popism made her invincible against the machinations of the Vatican and almost impregnable to its attack on the religious, diplomatic and political fronts. Her immense strength, however, was her fatal weakness, as the fall of Czarism would automatically entail the fall of the Orthodox Church – which, in fact, occurred in 1917.
From then onward the machinations of Vatican diplomacy were resumed with renewed vigor wherever Orthodoxy existed – in the Balkans, in Russia, in Northeast Europe, and, indeed, even in the Near East.
Catholic instruments used to hamper, undermine, boycott and subjugate the Orthodox Church have been extremely varied, ranging from converted White Russians to Turkish officers, beginning and ending with diplomatic or political intrigues of all kinds, as can easily be imagined.
A typical case occurred after the First World War, when the fortunes of war put the fate of Constantinople in the balance. Immediately following the outbreak of hostilities, Lloyd George, Zaharoff and Premier Venezelos of Greece, signed an agreement by which the Greeks were to get the former Orthodox capital, This provoked a storm of protest from various quarters. The strongest, however, did not come from any Western State, but from the Vatican. The British government, with whom the final decision rested, became the particular target of Papal displeasure. Constantinople should never be ceded to the Orthodox Church, was the Vatican’s request. This was tactfully ignored. Thereupon, Catholic diplomacy having looked elsewhere for support, soon found an unexpected ally in an unexpected quarter, a Turkish officer by the name of Kemal, who in no time dispelled Rome’s anxiety by a brilliant victory at Smyrna. Kemal’s victory precluded any possibility of Greece getting the ancient Orthodox capital.
Kemal Ataturk was not slow to perceive that identification of the interests of the young Turkey and of the Vatican could be mutually beneficial, and a tacit but real alliance was unofficially agreed upon. The fruits that it bore were various. They ranged from the heavy punishment and even death of any Turkish soldier found harming Armenian Christians, to the granting of special privileges to the Catholic Church in Turkish territory. But in the eyes of Rome, its paramount result was that the Orthodox Church had been prevented from returning to its ancient seat.
As long as an independent Turkish nation existed, Constantinople, by remaining incorporated in it, would never pass to her, The new Turkish republic, therefore, must survive and prosper. Following this strategy, the curious spectacle of the Vatican supporting a Moslem nation ruled by an atheist dictator became a discreet feature of Catholic diplomacy. Kemal Pasha, in gratitude for the unofficial pressure exerted in his favor by Catholic diplomacy in many European quarters, maintained a tacit understanding with the Vatican throughout his tenure of office; an alliance, this, which, although almost unnoticed, yet more than once stultified various conflicting interests in the Middle East.
Kemal Ataturk, who had been the instrument of "a great victory for the Pope," as the Osservatore Romano triumphantly put it, commenting upon Kemal’s military victory at Smyrna, a decade or so later became the instrument of a second, which symbolically was even more significant.
The center of the Orthodox Church since the foundation of the Byzantine Empire of Constantine the Great in A.D, 324 has been the great Church of St. Sophia, which for over a millennium had come to symbolize Orthodoxy perhaps even more than St. Peter’s in Rome symbolizes the Mother Church of Catholicism, From St. Sophia the Orthodox Patriarchs ruled almost like Popes of the East, until the fall of Constantinople. After the fall, notwithstanding the shifting of the center of Orthodoxy, St. Sophia continued to be the greatest symbol of Orthodoxy: a link bridging her past with the present, and her present with a future when St. Sophia would become once more the Mother Church of all Orthodox the world over.
Such a dream, however, was soon to be shattered, at least for a comparatively short period, when in 1935 Kemal, in one of his boldest steps to modernize Turkey, converted St. Sophia into a museum of Romano-Byzantine-Christian and Ottoman-Muslim art. The humiliation of the center of Orthodoxy could not have been more bitter.
A thing worthy of notice is that, prior to Ataturk’s decision, the Vatican was informally consulted about any possible objections to St. Sophia’s transformation. The Vatican, which thunders so promptly whenever a nation threatens to secularize Catholic schools or churches, not only did not object, but actually tacitly approved and even encouraged Kemal in his scheme.
It was thus that, when finally the muezzin, having climbed the minarets of St. Sophia, called in echoing accents to the faithful for the last time and the great building became officially a museum, whereas in the East the Moslems exculpated themselves to Allah for the sacrilege and the Orthodox world heard of the change with a heavy heart, at the Vatican there were smiles. Enigmatic, it is true, but very clear to those who understood the secret code of diplomacy.
If the first upheaval created by the First World War had enabled the Vatican to score a significant victory against the Orthodox Church, that same world had unexpectedly opened up a tremendous vista of conquests for Catholic diplomacy by causing the simultaneous thunderous fall of two great empires which until then had partially dominated both the East and the West alike – i.e. the Turkish and the Russian empires. This meant not only the tumbling of two massive political units, but also – and for the Vatican this had an even more significant meaning – the tumbling of the caliphate as the supreme bead of Islam, and of the czar as the supreme head of the Orthodox Church.
The downfall of czarism, in addition to being a political event of the first magnitude, spelled the disintegration of the power of the Orthodox Church, centered in the person of the czar.
The centralization of political-religions power, by binding both, meant that the downfall of one would spell the downfall of the other. This is precisely what occurred. The Russian Revolution consequently, by sweeping away czarism, swept away also the established Orthodox Church. The latter fell, not only because of her ties with the civil power, but also owing to the intrinsic dead weight which she had grown within herself. The Orthodox Church, in fact, had become a formidable reactionary power in her own right, whose economic tentacles spread to every nook and cranny of Holy Russia, controlling with an iron grip the minds and bodies of its inhabitants. She had over 80,000 churches and chapels and an army of 120,000 priests, supplemented by thousands of monasteries and convents, inhabited by another 100,000 monks and nuns. She controlled enormous wealth in land and buildings, owning 20,000,000 acres of the richest land and, at the time of the outbreak of the revolution, a bank balance of eight billion rubles and an income of about 500,000,000 rubles a year.
Her influence was truly enormous and was at the service of the czar, whose absolutism was further advocated by priests who took to politics. Without mentioning the monk Rasputin, the clergy sent to Parliament were of the most reactionary kind. The Third Duma saw forty-five priests, none of whom belonged to the liberal party; the next Duma had forty-eight, forty of whom represented the most reactionary movements. Whenever there were elections, the Orthodox Church supported the czar and preached against any social or political reform.
The Bolshevik Revolution, when it came, swept away this formidable tool of reaction as ruthlessly as it did czarism. The immense church property was nationalized, schools were requisitioned, the clergy were brought to political impotence: in short, the separation of Church and State was made a reality, and the Orthodox Church, despoiled of her magnificence, was reduced overnight to the naked poverty of early Christendom.
All these portents were followed with sinister fascination by the Roman Curia. When, therefore, in 1917 the Bolsheviks took over, at the Vatican, incredible as it may seem, there was jubilation. If the Bolsheviks were a terrible menace, they were also a blessing in disguise. Had they not pulled down the Orthodox Church, Rome’s seemingly immovable rival? Had they not become the instruments for her approaching total disintegration?
The Russian Revolution had thus opened for the Vatican an immense field for Catholic conquest. A bold policy might result in what Catholicism had attempted in vain for over one thousand years: the reunion of the Orthodox Church, via a mass conversion of the Russians, in addition to the spiritual incorporation of Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, the Polish Orthodox Ukrainians and all the other different Orthodox groups in Eastern Europe – in fact, practically the whole Orthodox world. Orthodox resistance against the soviets found no sympathy whatsoever in Rome. On the contrary, it was welcomed in the hope that, by defying the new atheistic government, the Church would be given a mortal blow and would be wiped out for good.
It was while waiting for the Orthodox Church to receive the last blow that would finally bury her, and while the whole of Europe kept repeating, "This Lenin cannot last" – and by Lenin was meant Bolshevik Russia – that the Vatican unobtrusively made the first moves directed at attaining simultaneously its two main goals: acceleration of the stab in the back for what it believed to be an already moribund Orthodox Church, and its grandiose scheme for the mass conversion to Catholicism of the Orthodox millions.
Count Sforza, a leading figure in the Italian Foreign Office was approached by Pope Benedict XV, via one of the Popes most intimate confidants, and, under the seal of secrecy, was asked whether he would facilitate the entry of a number of Catholic priests into Russia. "Seeing my surprise," Count Sforza afterward related:

Monti (the Pope’s confidant) explained, and it was evident that he was repeating the very words of the Pope: "His Holiness thinks that even these crimes and this blood will one day be of service if it is going to be possible, when the wave of irreligion has passed, to attempt a Catholic evangelization in Russia. Orthodoxy no longer has any deep rooted life; its end as the official religion offers possibilities which would never have existed so long as a Czar, Protector of the Church, continued to reign."1
On receiving a favorable reply, on the orders of Benedict XV, "young priests began desperately studying Russian and the history of the Orthodox Church."1 Catholics with Russian experience and Catholic Russians overnight became top counsellors, chief among these being a Russian diplomat who, besides having become converted to Catholicism, had been ordained a Catholic priest: Alexander Evreinow, who was often consulted by the leading figures of the Vatican Secretariat of State.
From Rome, Vatican activities spread toward Russia itself. Negotiations between Rome and Moscow continued with varying fortune, the Bolsheviks being seemingly bent on pursuing crafty tactics. Yet at the Vatican the hopes that its patient efforts would eventually be rewarded by the conversion of "a country of 90,000,000 people to the true religion" remained very bright. "The moment has arrived propitious for rapprochement" (between the Vatican and Moscow),
–wrote the Osservatore Romano, "inasmuch as the iron circle of Caesaro-popism, which hermetically closed Russian religious life to all Roman influences, has been broken."
At this point one question might come to the fore, in view of subsequent events. Surely Vatican diplomacy could not possibly trust the promises of the Bolsheviks? And, if so, why did it go on negotiating? The answer is simple, the transactions were useful as preparatory ground for the eventual grand-scale conversion of Russia after Bolshevik Russia had collapsed.
For the key to Vatican diplomacy, then as now, was just this. It must be remembered that at that period expeditionary forces were being dispatched by various Western countries to kill the revolution; indeed, that Catholic Poland had invaded Russian territory, and that anti-Bolshevik armies, encouraged, sponsored and supported by the West, were roaming inside and outside Bolshevik Russia, in attempts to bring about its early downfall. The Chancelleries of Europe were buzzing with plans and counter-plans of all kinds to bring nearer the blessed day.
The Vatican, consequently, based its moves on a possibility which at this period was practically a certainty for diplomatic Europe" Actual political conditions [inside Russia] form a grave obstacle; but this obstacle," pontificated again the Osservatore Romano, "has a temporary character."
The climax of the Vatican-Bolshevik negotiations was reached in 1922, when the Conference of Genoa offered the most incredible spectacle of the Bolshevik Foreign Minister, Chicherin, and the Pope’s representative, the Archbishop of Genoa, toasting one another in public. Vatican diplomacy thought it had scored a triumph, or, at least, was about to score one. Chicherin’s "concessions," however, were but an amplification of the basic soviet rule that, as the separation of Church and State was an accomplished fact, there was the amplest scope for any Church zealous of proselytizing. The Vatican, whose scheme remained immense, interpreted this as favorable to itself, and plans for the "Catholicizing of Russia" were put forward. These, however, soon incurred great difficulties, owing to the delaying soviet tactics.
But what gave Vatican diplomacy a shock, and its understanding with the soviets a matter of urgency, was that the Bolsheviks, giving a literal interpretation to their constitution, had applied religious freedom with equal impartiality to various Protestant bodies, which had meanwhile made soundings for the Protestant evangelization of the Russians. This was not all. Atheistic and anti-religious organizations of all kinds were also flourishing everywhere, sponsored by the State itself. But, still worse, the moribund Orthodox Church, instead of resignedly giving up the ghost, was still alive – indeed, was giving alarming signs of recovering.
The incursion of the Protestants into what the Vatican had envisaged as its exclusive field, but, above all, the ominous recovery of the Orthodox Church, convinced it that time was pressing. Vagueness had to be replaced by concrete action, to force the hand of the soviets.
The Vatican changed its tactics. The phase of patient, secretive negotiations was over. That of the diplomatic mailed fist was initiated. This consisted of indirect pressure, via Catholic friendly or allied nations, upon whomsoever Vatican diplomacy decided to attack.
A Papal messenger arrived at the Genoa Conference. He bore a missive whose content was simple. It asked the powers not to sign any treaty whatsoever with Bolshevik Russia unless "freedom to practice any religion" was guaranteed. Freedom, the Vatican explained to the soviet representative at this juncture, meant complete freedom "for the Catholic Church." With regard to the other Christian denominations (Protestant and Orthodox), the Vatican would not object to any "restrictive" measures that the soviets might take against their exertions. Previous to this, the Vatican had made sure of the support of some of the countries participating in the Conference by discreetly "briefing" Catholic and anti-communist representatives assembled there.
The Vatican’s efforts ended in nothing, the Genoa Conference having failed.
In 1927 the last semi-direct attempts at agreement between the Vatican and Moscow took place. The Vatican declared its dissatisfaction with "the soviet proposals," and relations with Moscow were broken off for good.
Something of paramount importance which, more than anything else, made the Vatican adopt another diplomatic policy had meanwhile occurred.
The Orthodox Church, although still stunned by the 1917 blow, had rapidly adapted herself to the changed situation. The separation of Church and State, which the Vatican had reckoned would kill her, had turned out to be a more invigorating factor than her former identification with the government which had caused her downfall. Orthodoxy, in fact, had begun to reorganize itself, and in the religious domain had already almost recovered its former strength.
In these conditions, the original grandiose scheme of the Vatican had become obsolete. The policy of conversion was therefore discarded and a new one adopted. This rested upon the forcible overthrow of soviet Russia via military attack.
The original plan, based upon the formula that the soviet regime was of a "temporary character," was re-adopted. The various Foreign Offices of the world were still conceiving different schemes for the overthrow of the Bolsheviks. Had these succeeded, the Catholic Church would have penetrated Russia in their wake.
It became increasingly evident, however, that to base a whole strategy upon this kind of "intervention" was to pursue an increasingly unrealistic policy. And within a few years, although the plan was once more discreetly dropped, it was nonetheless promptly replaced by another, no less grandiose: the total mobilization of the West against soviet Russia, to be carried out, no longer by direct military intervention, but by an ideological and emotional anti-Bolshevik crusade, preparatory to an eventual physical attack.
The scheme soon became a reality, thanks to the timely growth of a most sinister political portent: fascism, whose fundamental policy was war against communism. The Vatican, which had already concluded an alliance with its original founder, supported similar movements everywhere it could, with a view of converting the whole of Europe into a monolithic anti-Bolshevik bloc. Its ultimate objective: a military invasion of Russia.
By 1930-31 the West had already been "emotionally roused to war against godless Russia." Only three years afterward, Hitler, having gone into power, began to voice his ambition of acquiring the Ukraine; three more years, and the Anti-Comintem Pact was signed between Nazi Germany and Japan (1936). Russia was being swiftly enclosed in an iron ring, from the West and from the East. Two more years, and the first surrender of Europe to Hitler was made at Munich (1938), when the four powers – two fascist dictatorships, Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, on the one side, and two democracies, England and France, on the other – tried to settle the fate of Europe by sacrificing Czechoslovakia at the altar of appeasement. It was the Vatican which, during this crisis, specifically asked the British Premier, Chamberlain, to exclude Russia from the Conference. This at a time when Great Britain was seeking a pact with Russia, to strengthen her bargaining weight against Hitler. The exclusion proved fatal. Hitler emerged wholly victorious, and the Second World War was made inevitable.
In the following year Hitler occupied the whole of Czechoslovakia. During the Finnish War in 1939, Great Britain and France, with the Vatican in the background, instigated the expulsion of soviet Russia from the League of Nations, and, in close cooperation with the Vatican, mobilized world opinion against her, speaking of this campaign as a crusade.
Two years later the Vatican’s grand strategy bore its fruit. Hitler, backed by the might of a nazified European continent, attacked soviet Russia. The grandiose vistas dreamed of at the fall of the czar were dreamed of once more, to the chanting of hallelujahs in St. Peter’s. The Institute Pro Russia, in Rome, which had been languishing for so long, now pulsated with feverish activity,2 and Catholics were urged to renew their devotions to Our Lady of Fatima. Yes, the promise of the Virgin, so curiously in harmony with the Vatican’s grand scheme, at long last was coming true.
Within a few months, the Nazi armies had reached the outskirts of Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad. Soviet Russia was about to be destroyed.
The Nazi armies and the Catholic legions fighting by their side, after their initial triumph, were hammered back. And ultimately, to the horror of the Vatican, it was the Russians who entered Berlin and not Hitler who entered Moscow.
Vatican diplomacy had received yet another resounding defeat. But even before this had been completed, with its typical suppleness it had already launched yet another anti-Bolshevik, anti-Orthodox grand scheme, in cooperation with a new partner, which was even more powerful than its former Nazi ally – i.e. the United States of America. The new campaign had been launched while the guns of the Second World War were still echoing in the battlefields of both
Europe and Asia, and the people of the world were looking forward with a prayer in their hearts to an era of tranquility and peace,
As, after the First World War, Vatican diplomacy operated simultaneously a many-branched anti-soviet strategy, so, after the Second, it launched another, no less formidable than the first.
The ultimate objective being the same, fundamentally its policy remained the same. In addition to its new main partners, playing the role of Nazi Germany vis-a-vis soviet Russia, new tactical moves directed at implementing it were carefully studied and carried out. These, although seemingly disconnected, in reality were closely knit into an inter-continental pattern embracing the whole world.
The principal tactical features of this new strategy took the form of: (a) mobilization of the Catholics of the Near East; (b) mobilization of the Orthodox Church outside Russia; (c) mobilization of Islam; and (d) general intensification and speeding up of the ideological and military mobilization of the West.
These four types of political machination were carried out almost simultaneously, with a technique which was greatly different from that used after the First World War, when the Vatican, having failed to carry on its intrigues against the Orthodox Church inside Russia, had shifted its operations against her outside Russia – that is to say, in the Balkans.
After the Second World War the Vatican began to mobilize all Catholics in the Near and Middle East.
It was thus that, as the various Balkan countries became sealed to Catholic diplomacy, the Vatican became increasingly active outside the Balkans – e.g. with the Chaldean Catholics, mainly centered in Iraq; the Maronites in Lebanon; the Copt-Catholics in Egypt; the Melkites, or Greek Catholics, and others to be found in practically all these territories, as well as in Syria, Trans-Jordan and Palestine.
Simultaneously with this, it approached the Orthodox Church outside the communist world with a view to inducing it to side with the Vatican, or, at least, with the Vatican’s political allies in their anti-Russian, anti-communist wars.
Unofficial negotiations were initiated, but, owing mainly to Orthodoxy’s deep-rooted suspicion of the Vatican, these yielded very little result. Indeed, it looked as though they would prevent any real rapprochement altogether.
Vatican diplomacy waited for a while and then resorted to a master move. It sent to the Middle East, no longer Catholic diplomats, but the envoy of the two most powerful men in the West: Mr. Myron Taylor, the representative of the President of the U.S.A., and simultaneously, on this particular mission, representative of the Pope vis-a-vis the Orthodox leaders whom he went to meet.
It was thus that, at the beginning of February, 1949, when the cold war against Russia was at its height Myron Taylor arrived in Istanbul, where, in his dual capacity, he met the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagorar.
Mr. Taylor put forward concrete plans for the cooperation of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, in the face of the "communist threat to religion," at the same time trying to ascertain the "true" current status of the Orthodox churches in communist-dominated countries, and the ways in which communism might be using these churches to strengthen its position in Eastern Europe and in Near East areas. Having discussed such matters, both with the Orthodox leaders and with the Apostolic delegate in Turkey, Myron Taylor, to make his argument for Orthodox cooperation more convincing, stated in no doubtful terms that the "cooperation" of Orthodoxy was not only wished for by the Vatican but was "wanted" by the U.S.A. The whole point of the Vatican’s choice of Myron Taylor, the representative of the American President, to meet the Eastern Orthodox leaders, was to lay emphasis precisely on this.
It was the trump card of Vatican diplomacy, so well screened behind the American envoy. For it must be remembered that Greece, where the Orthodox Church was at its strongest, had been saved by America from becoming a communist country only a short while before. Following the end of the Second World War, a bloody civil war between Right and Left devastated Greece for several years. Great Britain poured in troops to reinforce the anti-communist faction. The left, however, owing chiefly to the support of the population, was near to winning, and the U.S.A. had to intervene.
Military and financial aid was rushed to the country. The left was defeated. Extreme right-wing forces were installed in power. Throughout the civil war and the British and American intervention, the Orthodox Church played a paramount role. Indeed, at one time the Greek Orthodox Patriarch became head of the Greek government.
The Orthodox Church, having identified itself with the right and with the American interventionists, consequently had the support of the Greek government, sponsored by the U.S.A. Withdrawal of American protection would have meant the fall of the right-wing Greek government, in which case the fate of the Greek Orthodox Church would have been precisely a repetition in miniature of the fate of the Russian Orthodox Church on the fall of the czar.
The dispatch of the American envoy as the Vatican’s representative, with his emphasis on the American desire to see the cooperation of the Orthodox Church, was political blackmail of the first order which the Vatican had accomplished by using political, non-Catholic pressure.
Precisely one year later the mission bore its first real fruit. In February, 1950, His Beatitude the Patriarch Cristoforos of Alexandria arrived in Athens to prepare with Archbishop Spiridon, head of the Orthodox Church in Greece, for an event of the greatest significance: the summoning of a Pan-Orthodox Synod.
The new Synod, once translated into less directly theological terms, meant a political council of the Orthodox churches to keep step with the anti-communist war of their protector, the U.S.A.
The Orthodox Church within the communist region countered soon afterward, when Patriarch Alexei of Moscow "extended" the Russian Church’s jurisdiction to include Hungary (March, 1950).
This was followed by a counter-blow from the Russian Orthodox Church in the United States, which announced that it had officially broken all ties with the Orthodox Church of Moscow. Metropolitan Bishop Krimowicz, of Springfleld, Mass., was appointed Patriarch of the Orthodox Church in the United States, and Metropolitan Bishop Jaroshevich Patriarch of the Orthodox Church in foreign countries (October, 1950). In December, 1951, Metropolitan Leonty, the Orthodox Church’s U.S. Primate, and the Bishops of Alaska and San Francisco, invested a one-time officer of the czarist army as the first Orthodox Bishop of Washington. 3
Moves and counter-moves followed one another in quick succession in the years that followed, until the bridges were totally burnt on either side.
The Orthodox Church had been split asunder, one part, the larger, in soviet Russia, the center of the communist world, the other in the U.S.A., the center of Western capitalism.
Division means weakness. The Vatican had maneuvered its opponent where it had planned to maneuver it, in readiness for reducing further its unity and thus bringing nearer its ultimate downfall.
Simultaneously with these moves, Vatican diplomacy was busy setting in motion one of the greatest religious-political forces in the world, Islam. Islam, the historic enemy of Christianity, had always loomed large in Vatican diplomacy’s plans against the Orthodox Church.
Cautious unofficial exchanges between the Vatican and various Arab countries, particularly the most influential Islamic country in the Middle East, Egypt, were begun in the years that followed the Second World War. These bore exceptional results. In 1946 an Arab delegation, composed of Christians and Moslems, paid an official visit to the Pope, and in 1947 the Moslem East made its first official approach to the Vatican. Egypt exchanged representatives with the Pope, and sent to Rome a Minister Plenipotentiary. Other Moslem countries – e.g. Syria, Lebanon, Iran – followed Egypt’s example, and soon even those Moslem lands which had not yet officially exchanged diplomats were unofficially in close touch with Rome.
The Vatican’s mobilization of the Islamic world culminated in 1950, when the Egyptian Foreign Minister, Salah ed Din, disclosed that Egypt and the Vatican had been conducting secret negotiations and had agreed upon the establishment of a "united Roman Catholic-Moslem front against communism." 4
The following year, Azzam Pasha, Secretary-General of the Arab League, went to Rome for a whole week, where he saw the Pope and other Vatican dignitaries: "The time has come for us to collaborate loyally, both as a nation and a religious entity, in the rebirth of a common patrimony," he declared, speaking on Radio Rome, "and in . . . the creation of a united front between Islam and Christianity against communism." 5
The foundations of a Catholic-Islamic partnership had been skillfully laid by Vatican diplomacy. From then onward, particularly during 1951-52, and in spite of many vicissitudes, it continued to be solidified, to the present day. Islam is a potentially formidable religious-political unit. Whoever succeeds in exerting even a partial influence upon it will wield a power capable of provoking political and social repercussions in many strategically important parts of the world. From Spanish and French Morocco to Egypt, Persia, Pakistan, Indonesia, indeed, to within the very soviet Union itself, housing 25,000,000 Moslems, as well as within communist China, housing another 50,000,000.
The potentialities of the Moslem world as a formidable anticommunist, anti-Russian, religious-political instrument, did not escape the attention of another anti-communist power, the U.S.A. The American mobilization of the Islamic countries had been initiated by Roosevelt himself, who, just before his death (1945), had envisaged meeting Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia, King Farouk of Egypt and others, for the amalgamation of the Near and Middle East into the framework of American global foreign policy.
Since then, Vatican-American interests ran ever closer, until, within a few brief years, they were transformed into a veritable Vatican American alliance. The material might of the U.S.A. and the spiritual power of the Catholic Church, by mobilizing the religious influence of Islam and the political energies of the Arab world, had encircled soviet Russia in a religious-political iron ring, the precursor of a military one.
It’s objective: for the U.S.A., the destruction of a mighty ideological and economic.enemy; for the Catholic Church, the destruction, not only of communism, but of soviet Russia, the new protector of her religious rival, the Orthodox Church.
In bygone centuries the Vatican schemed stubbornly and tirelessly with the Turkish Empire, with the Austrian Empire, with Moslem, Buddhist and other potentates, to bring about the downfall of czarist Russia, so as to weaken the Orthodox Church.
In the twentieth century it schemed with equal pertinacity with the Europe which arose after the First World War, with fascism and nazism before and during the Second, in order, by causing the downfall of soviet Russia, to paralyze a regenerated Orthodoxy.
After the Second World War it continued in its relentless scheming with the U.S.A., with a "dollarized" Europe, with the Arab nations and other Asiatic countries, to annihilate the U.S.S.R., in order, once again, to subjugate its Orthodox rival.
Following the changed political world habitat, the Vatican renewed its attempts by wooing the Orthodox Church with plans of "Dialogues," initiated by Pope John XXIII – a policy of blandishment instead of the old one of intrigues. The new policy soon yielded unusual dividends. Relics were returned, e.g. the skull of St. Andrew,
which had rested in St. Peter’s, Rome, since 1462, sent back in 1964 by Pope Paul VI, to its original place, Patras, following the request by the Orthodox Metropolitan of Patras to Pope John XXIII the previous year.
Cordial relations with the traditionally morose orthodoxy were established. With the result that even the world’s largest orthodox body, the Patriarchate of Moscow, finally agreed to convoke a Pan Orthodox Conference to discuss "a dialogue" on equal terms with Rome.
This was preceded by an unique meeting: that of Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople with Pope Paul VI in Jerusalem (January 1964), followed in 1965 by the elevation of several Cardinals of the oriental churches in communion with Rome.
That same year the 14 orthodox churches participating in the Pan-Orthodox Conference at Rhodes sent a delegation to Rome, to establish the first formal contact with the Vatican since one of the last Union attempts in 1439.
The "dialogue" continued after the Second Vatican Council was over. And, although formal progress was made, the profound rivalry between the two Churches remained. The Orthodox Church’s main basic fear of ultimate absorption by Rome being still the major obstacle bedeviling their relationship.
Catholic scheming, it should never be forgotten, has for its ultimate objective, not only the annihilation of an ideological enemy, represented by soviet Russia, but also the annihilation of a religious foe, which the Catholic Church is more determined than ever to reduce to total subjugation and, indeed, to wipe from the face of the earth: the ever-resurgent Orthodox Church, the millenarian enemy she has sworn either wholly to absorb or wholly to demolish and destroy.

This is a fine example of Eastern espeicaly Russian paranoia.
Which is not with out reason. first the Cursaders broke their oaths of vaseldome to Ceaser Alexis Comenius and apointed latin Bishops in the patriarchates. Some thing they were not supposed to do. Next the 4th crusade when Constantinople was sacked..then there was the invation of Russia by the Teutonic order. Now we fast forward to modern times your economy is bad you have evangelical bible thumpers attacking the Church…a war in Checnia saw the US go to war with Serbia
to allow Albania steal Serbia’s spiritual heart land of Kosovo.
The envolvement in various election it is easy to see why you feal the world is trying to isolate and cut you off. This peice did answer one question why is Constnatinople not the Capitol of Modern Greece?

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

What is the colonized mindset?

The colonised mindset: The enemy within the African communities. SendMeYourNews
Jul 23, 2006 07:12 PDT

=+=
Get on TheBlackList:
http://www.topica.com/lists/TheBlackList
"Men who are in earnest are not afraid of
consequences", Marcus Garvey.
=+=

—– Original Message —–
From: Cheryl Sanchez mailto:sanchez-@hotmail.com
To: sendmey-@earthlink.net
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 8:48 AM

The colonised mindset: The enemy within the African communities.

The writer is going to put forward an argument that unless the
slave/colonial mindset is recognised as the active enemy, within the African
communities world-wide, attempts to understand the social and economic
problems will be useless. This mindset has been affecting the
individual/family /organisations/community and nations alike. From an early
age, adults have been referring to people as having "being colonial or slave
minded" in a most benign way. It as if having this mindset is like having a
flue. You treat the symptoms and eventually, it should go away, if the
immune system is acute and alert. In reality, it is the most virulent
psychological condition prevalent amongst African communities. The damage is
too enormous to consider in this essay. It has and is still destroying from
individuals to revolutions to states eg Patrice Lumumba-Congo, Thomas
Sankara-Bukina Faso, Walter Rodney-Guyana, Cabral, Malcolm X and Bantu S
Biko to name a few. When foreign money, the lust for power and the colonial
mindset met-destruction is sure to follow. Mineral rich DRC remains the most
tragic example today. Also Angola before the timely death of Savimbi, "
Washington’s kept man". Failure to confront and systematically deal with
this enemy is equivalent to failure to live and or thrive.

HISTORY

The disastrous effects of slavery and colonialism on the physical aspect of
the Africans in the Americas, the Caribbean and on mainland Africa have been
well documented by a host of European and African-American historians
including Basil D Davidson, Walter Rodney and Professor Jeffries. Few
writers have focused on the debilitating effects of the mindset on the
emotions and the psychology as Carter G Woodson( 1875-1950)was probably a
pioneer when he addressed this condition in his book – The Mis-Education of
the Negro. Later, Dr Na’im Akbar painstakingly outlined the psychological
effects in his book- Chains and Images of psychological slavery. Professor
Joy Leary recently attempted to put the psychological trauma concept in the
public domain during a recent lecture tour in London but, few Africans
wanted to even contemplate this concept as an explanation for some of their
behaviour towards each other.
It is of paramount importance to understand the disastrous reality of the
sate accurately described by Woodson and take action to treat it.
"When you control a man’s thinking you do not have to worry about his
actions. You do not have to tell him not to stand there or go yonder. He or
she will find his "proper place" and will stay in it. You do not need to
send him to the back door. He will go without being told. In fact, if there
is no back door, he will cut one for his special benefit. His education
makes it necessary". Woodson showed a lot of foresight in his early
detection of the destructive side of the slave/colonial mindset. It is a
pity that, most Pastors and self-appointed "community" leaders do not
recommend this book to the many families who come through their doors. They
do not even bothered with a plan of action to treat this mindset.

Examples

This mindset certainly has a blindfolding effect eg African girls aspiring
to be like their "blonde Barbie dolls". African men dream of marrying "a
Barbie doll" type of woman as soon as they arrive in Europe and or
UK/USA/Canada, so as not to have "too black" children. Michael Jackson’s
obsession with his costly body- altering project. It also causes US
Africans/Afrikans to focus on the body, material gadgets, short cuts. The
physical environment of the homes is often out of balance with the people
who inhabit the space. Their homes always have a blonde type Jesus on the
walls but no other famous Africans like Bantu Biko, Thomas Sankara etc. The
African educationalist and parents both on the mainland, Caribbean and the
Americas have avoided including or making the early and middle years
curricula more relevant to our developmental needs. This opportunity to
change our course of history is missed again and again.

At organisational level, colonise minded but the super qualified committee
members are often afraid to put decolonisation strategy and or
Pan-Africanism into the constitution of their organisation. This also
affects the type of name or identity they take on. Eg the NAACP-The National
Association for the Advancement of "Coloured" people. One would have thought
that aparthedist South-Africa racial policies would have caused this
organisation to re-think it’s chosen but, they not change from NAACP to
NAAAP. One could only guess when you start your organisation with white
liberals/ or jews in leadership roles, the de-colonisation agenda never
became a priority for this organisation. The OAS/AU is no different. It has
been in existence for over 50 years and still cannot bring itself to be
known as a Pan-Africanist organisation thus, it remains a toothless
nationalistic organisation.

Even when organisations put Pan-Africanism at the forefront eg PAC in
South-African, the de-colonisation process and project, which is necessary
for health and longevity of the organisation is not a priority either. Well
meaning or naïve activists continue to take a gamble by hoping against hope
that, a few committed and reliable people could suddenly change 400 years of
psychological damage facing the African worldwide. Things could have been
different if, the PAC was able to capture the interest and support of the
majority of the 24 million native South-Africans and their rands, to keep
the movement financially buoyant and turn it into a political powerful force
in South-African society.

The mindset nutures self-hating , self- destruction and confidence lowering
. This is evident in the practice of self- harming through bleaching the
skin, straigthening the hair and looking to Europe and European institutions
as saviours. It also makes killing each other almost acceptable. The eminent
African-American Bobby E Wright (1984) explained in his book "we have never
been trained to kill Europeans" but, we seem to be able kill each other
(black on black) violence instinctively. It also makes us have a warped and
unrealistic view of our reality. It may cause some, like Dr Kenneth B Clarke
to say," race is irrelevant". Even African-America Dr Alvin Poussant, who
used his qualification avoid addressing the current colonisation condition.
He used his stint in Ebony Magazine to deal with the a few middles class
anxieties. What a shame!

The Slave/Colonial mindset-the Trojan Horse

The Europeans understand how important the psychological warfare project is
to their continued hold on Africa, which is why they got their missionaries
to influences chiefs and other leaders in Africa, to send their young
children to their missionary schools. At these missionary/faith-based
schools, young children were indoctrinated on a grand scale. These young
children come from cultures where, almost all adults are feared and or
certainly not questioned, made the work of the European teachers easier.
This is why it should not alarm us or surprise us that, Mobutu, Savimbi and
their cronies behaved in the way they did to their own people and their own
resources. The mindset, the lust for power and foreign money-from the USA
mainly kept them destroying their respective countries, in the name of
capitalism and the other G6 powers.

The USA officials who paid Savimbi through Mobutu millions and millions of
American tax-payers money to literally destroy a revolution and 2 countries,
have never been brought to justice. If both of these colonial minded
individuals did not die, they would be still destroying the country and
squandering their resources for self-aggrandisement, with Washington’s
approval. The foreign powers/handlers knew millions of people were being
tortured, kill, maimed, punished and starved of food and other life
necessities, in their interest. Whilst all this was happening in full view
of other Africans, many of them in the Caribbean and continued going to the
states" to make it". Meanwhile Africans affected by these individuals and
American money and foreign policy, eventually started heading for the UK and
the USA seeking "refuge".

It should not surprise us at the way the Europeans view certain individuals.
The American state had to get rid of Malcolm X by any means necessary. The
Belgian/USA/UK governments saw Patrice Lumumba as an uncompromising
character when it came to his understanding of independence. France could
not stomach an independent minded Thomas Sankara who wanted to transform
Bukina Faso in the interest of it’s people. The apartheid South-Africa did
not dare allow Bantu Stephen Biko to live-he was too clear about his
position and his understanding of the social/economic/political situation.
He wanted all or nothing. Walter Rodney exposed the hypocrisy of Europe’s
role in Africa-it became a real annoyance in European academic circles. The
under-development was the strategy and the means to achieving this outcome
was to nurture their own "loyal Africans". Off course the "loyal Africans"
are another name for the colonial minded.

Rich men and women often have their "kept women" Well, so to rich Europe has
their "kept men". France has Francoise Compoare of Bukina Faso. The USA has
theirs in the form of Paul Kagame. Spain/USA has Obiang Nguema of Equatorial
Guinea- Africa third largest producer of oil. Shell and the UK and other oil
companies operating in Nigeria have been keeping the Hausa dominated army
and government since 1970. The CIA/USA/France had army man Hissen Habre- a
man who was less than friendly to USA’s imagined enemy Gadaffi. Chadian
named him, "Africa’s Pinochet". USA supported the Duvalier family for 30
years and off course Savimbi in Angola. See William Blum(2001) Rogue State.
Chapter 17.
The Consequences

If African thinkers and educationalists alike continue to neglect the
content of early and middle years curricula, they would be fighting a losing
battle against the slave/colonial mindset, capitalism, fashion and
mass-media. The same way, one cannot expect to put new wine in an old
wineskin so to, one cannot expect the slave/colonial minded to suddenly
change his or her learnt behaviour. This behaviour has been around for the
last 350 years. It might have started as, a means of coping in strange and
often hostile societies in the Caribbean and America in the late 17th
century. Joy Leary would argue African communities must admit the existence
of post traumatic syndrome before, the treatment could be sought. No
admission means that, this major debilitating psychological condition would
linger and fester away.

Off course when a few like, Thiongo’o(1938-) changed his behaviour in his
adulthood, by going back to his Gikuyu name and writing in his own language
rather than English only, is inspirational to rest who remain in this
regressive state of mind. He used his book-Decolonising the mind: the
politics of language in African literature(1986) as a platform to encourage
African challenged about their attitude towards Africa and or NJAC. Ngugi wa
writers to write in their own language to make their books more meaningful
to Africans on the continent. It is not only about writing in one’s own
language although, that is a positive start. It is about having a core
teaching curricula that could be used world-wide. Even if people write in
their own indigenous language but continue to see Europe as the solution to
their problems-the colonised mind remains untouched. The writer applauds the
work of Haki Madibuti and Dr Karenga and Molefi Asante. The African need
more people like the above, if we are to be taken seriously.

Why are members of NJAC( National Joint Action committee) and their 36 year
old organisation in Trinidad, still viewed as not worthy of support from the
majority of African-Trinidadians? The slave/colonial mindset, which makes
people ridicule members for re-claiming their African heritage via taking on
African names. One can often hear African-Trinidadians and other Africans
born abroad saying in a most offensive voice, "I am not African" when asked
about their identity. Thai is the colonial mindset expressing their
ignorance.

What do we begin?

The logical place for decolonisation to begin is in the home, with parents
taking the lead. The early years 0-11 is the crucial time to inculcate the
Afrocentric values. It means that, we have to be prepared to build our own
nurseries and create our own culturally inclusive and sensitive curricula.
The parents must be re-educated. It is almost pointless waiting until a
child becomes an adult, when he may or may not be exposed to Pan-Africanism.
All the research available would agree that, the pre-natal and early years
are the most important educating years. Ideally, the decolonisation ideals
should be embedded in the early years curricula, The Community leaders and
families should make attempts to discuss post trauma syndrome and it’s
effects openly and proactively put into place some short term and long term
remedies.

3 African American writers who wrote the The Black Parenting Book did not
pursue the de-colonisation project in their book either. There are 17
chapters in this book yet, Pan-Africanism and or the issue of the
slave/colonial mindset were not addressed in a very active way. There
chapters on Family Traditions and Spirituality without making mention of the
importance of Kwanzaa. There was a chapter on " Black and Proud" not African
and proud. There should have a chapter on how and why Africans came to self
hate and hate all things African. Where did it all begin? The book tackled
particular parenting approach, which was used by African American parents
but, they did not attempt to give the psychological or economic reasons why
most African parents worldwide use the authoritarian model rather than the
authoritative model.

Authoritarian- powerful, assertive/aggressive (verbally or physically adult
leads or makes all the decisions, which are imposed on child. May be highly
critical. Parents may be likely to use shouting and hitting. Parents may
even talk about "I want you to fear me".
Authoritative- Parents use reciprocity and a democratic style, which allows
child to lead but establishes safe limits and boundaries. Parents are likely
to use encouragement, provide choices and highlight consequences and
positive feedback and use time-out and put penalities in place, as part of
their disciplining package.

It might have been helpful to explain why some African parents use the
former than the latter? It would have been more useful to write the book in
some African languages and use a work -book with exercises to involve all
members of the family. This book could be described as the product of a well
meaning qualified but, obviously apolitical professionals. The writers
tackled all the symptoms but never ventured near the core causes. They
missed an opportunity to focus on the link between the type of the society,
which produces such parents focusing on a post-colonial/slave/capitalist,
racist society such as the USA.

Conclusion.

The Decolonisation project and treating post trauma syndrome are as
necessary to Africans, as oxygen and water are to humankind existence.
Neither can be avoided any longer due to it being "too sensitive" an issue.
The message to all the Pan-Africanists/Humanist individuals, families and
organisations , which are always short of committed, reliable and discipline
foot soldiers is this, put some of your efforts and money into the 0-11
years olds and an African Parenting project, based on an Afrocentric model
and treatment for psychological trauma and other self-harming behaviour. If
any individual/family or organisation is interested ion the guture well
being of Africans- the aforementioned approaches are vital. Otherwise, a
plethora of colonial minded and dishonest Pastors from diverse Christian
sects, the mass-media, fashion, cars and short term attractions and whatever
other European cultural left-overs would grab the minds of the majority of
Africans.

The slave/colonial mind is dangerous to Pan-Africanist and African humanist
alike. Those African "kept men" or Europe’s trojan horses will continue the
pauperization policies of a very rich continent. They will repeat policies
and slogans without even analysing them. They will like the major obstacle
to progress, changes, self-empowerment and unification of African peoples.
Instead of enabling and building capacities and re-skilling people, they
will disable, de-skill and pauperize people. The colonial minded knows
nothing else. The Europeans using their white skins as authority continue to
pamper and encourage their "kept men" to the detriment of the majority of
Africans, who continue to suffer and to be killed with the weapons made in
the USA/UK/Israel and other European countries.

References:

Akbar Na’im(1992) Chain and Images of psychological slavery- Winston-Derek,
Nashville, TN
Blumm W (2003) Rogue State: Chapter 17. Zed Books London UK
Brittain V (1998) Death and Dignity: Angola’s Civil War. Chapter 2. Pluto
Books. London UK
Woodson C.G (1937) The Mis-education of the negro. Africa World Press NJ USA
Wright B.E (1984) The psychopathic racial personality and other essays.
Third World Press Chicago, Ilinois USA

I think I lost interest.

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

FREELOTTO?is it TRUE or LIE?PLEASE HELP & THANKS!?

OFFICIAL RULES OF FREELOTTO

NO PURCHASE OR ONLINE ACCESS FEE NECESSARY TO PLAY

1. HOW TO PLAY:
Register at http://www.freelotto.com. You must provide your first and last name, your e-mail address and your postal address. You may from time to time be required to provide additional information. You are responsible for updating your information should there be a change. You can do so by editing your player profile on our website. You are responsible for claiming any prizes that you may win as further described below. The receipt of emails from FreeLotto is required for your participation in and to claim prizes in FreeLotto games. You will be notified during game play if the email address you submitted will enable you to claim your prizes. If your email address does not meet these requirements, you will be given an opportunity to submit an alternate email address. Some internet service providers such as Yahoo and Hotmail.com provide free e-mail services. Some companies provide free internet access and may also be available at your public library.

Each day a certain number of ads or questions will be posted at the game site that will remain on the site all or part of that day. To submit your entries for the daily contests, choose your numbers for each of the FreeLotto® games you are eligible to enter each day and choose a sponsor to visit by clicking on its banner ad, or answer a multiple choice question. You may submit one entry for each game available to you on a given day. You may also increase the number of banner ads available to you by answering questions regarding your buying preferences. Your answers will determine if some advertisers who seek to selectively advertise their products will display their ads to you. (Example: if you indicate an interest in fishing, fishing related ads may appear on your FreeLotto® game page). You may enter once from each ad or question but you are limited to one entry per FreeLotto game per day.)

2. Players have the opportunity to play the 6 consecutive FreeLotto® games consisting of FreeLotto, FreeLotto Win A Car, FreeLotto Pay Off your Mortgage, FreeLotto FastCash, FreeLotto $100,000 GiveAway and FreeLotto SuperBucks each day. (The FreeLotto® game sequence consists of 6 games which must be played in consecutive order). Players must play each game they are offered in succession to be eligible to play the subsequent game and must enter all of the first 5 games they are offered to be eligible to play FreeLotto SuperBucks. The 5 games that follow Classic FreeLotto® are FreeLotto Win A Car, FreeLotto Pay Off your Mortgage, FreeLotto FastCash, FreeLotto $100,000 GiveAway and FreeLotto SuperBucks. From time to time the FreeLotto games may be offered individually or out of sequence. In such instances all other provisions of the FreeLotto Game Rules apply.

3. How to Play FreeLotto Games:
a. Classic FreeLotto
1. To enter the daily Classic FreeLotto® sweepstakes, you will need to pick 6 different numbers between 1 and 54, with no duplicates. This can be done by one of three methods: (a) pick 6 unique numbers; (b) allow the computer to pick the numbers (referred to as a "Quick Pick"); or (c) designate and save 6 numbers as "Favorites" which can be automatically selected instead of selecting unique numbers each time you enter; or (d) click on “Hot Numbers” which allows the computer to pick your numbers based on the most common drawn winning numbers.

Each day, six (6) Classic FreeLotto winning numbers between one 1 and 54 will be selected at random via a random ball drop lottery machine at around 5:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time). These numbers will be matched against all entries received between 3:00:01 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) the previous day and 3:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) that day. The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website.

2. Classic FreeLotto Prize: If an entry identically matches each of the 6 winning numbers that appear on FreeLotto the ball drop, that entry will be awarded the Grand Prize, pending eligibility verification and the administration of a skill-testing question (referenced below) if the entrant is from Canada. Second prizes will be awarded for matching 5 of the 6 numbers drawn, third prizes shall be awarded for matching 4 of the 6 numbers drawn, and fourth prizes shall be awarded for matching 3 of the 6 numbers drawn. The FreeLotto daily results email is the sole notification of any prize winnings and prize winners must claim any prize by following the instructions within the FreeLotto daily results email. Classic FreeLotto® GRAND PRIZE: One Million ($1,000,000.00) US Dollars, paid out as an annuity of $40,000.00 per year for 25 years. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the Grand Prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries. Cash prizes for multiple Grand Prize winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the Prize by the number of winning entries, which will be paid out over 25 years. SECOND PRIZE: $300.00. Maximum cumulative dollar amount awarded for any drawing for the 2nd prize in the FreeLotto game is $250,000.00. Therefore, if there are more than eight hundred thirty three (833) 2nd Prize winners in any FreeLotto drawing, then those 2nd Prize winners for that drawing will be awarded an amount equal to dividing $250,000 by the number of 2nd Prize winners. (Example: if there are 1,000 2nd prize winners, each 2nd Prize winner would receive $250.00 ($250,000/1,000 = $250.00)). ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY. THIRD PRIZE: $5.00 to each winner. FOURTH PRIZE: $1.00 to each winner. The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website http://www.freelotto.com. Odds of winning: Classic FreeLotto® Game: Grand Prize – 1:25,827,165; Second Prize – 1:89,677.66; Third prize – 1:1,526.43; Fourth Prize – 1:74.66.

b. FreeLotto Win A Car
1. To enter, play the daily FreeLotto® game. Once you play FreeLotto®, you become eligible to play FreeLotto Win A Car. FreeLotto Win A Car is played the same way as FreeLotto®, but you need to select 6 out of 42 numbers correctly with no duplicates (rather than 6 out of 54 numbers in FreeLotto®). This can be done in one of three ways: (a) pick 6 unique numbers; (b) allow the computer to pick the numbers (referred to as "Quick Pick"); or (c) designate and save 6 numbers as "Favorites" which can be automatically selected instead of selecting unique numbers each time you enter.

2. Each day, 6 Win A Car winning numbers between one 1 and 42 will be selected at random via a random ball drop lottery machine at around 5:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time). These numbers will be matched against all entries received between 3:00:01 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) the previous day and 3:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) that day. The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website

3. Win A Car Prize: If an entry identically matches each of the 6 winning numbers that appear on the FreeLotto Win A Car ball drop, that entry will be awarded the Win A Car Prize, pending eligibility verification. There are no secondary prizes for FreeLotto Win A Car. If there is only one winner, the winner will win a luxury car with a retail value of up to $50,000 USD before taxes. or have the opportunity to choose the cash value of the prize, which is $40,000 USD. Once the car selected has been paid for, the cash over and above the value of the prize is forfeited. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, Win A Car Prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries. Odds of winning:1:5,245,786.
ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

C. FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage
1. To enter, play the Classic FreeLotto® game and then FreeLotto Win A Car. Once you play both, you become eligible to play FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage. FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage is played the same way as FreeLotto®, but you need to select 6 out of 47 numbers correctly with no duplicates (rather than 6 out of 54 numbers in Classic FreeLotto®). This can be done in one of three ways: (a) pick 6 unique numbers; (b) allow the computer to pick the numbers (referred to as "Quick Picks"); or (c) designate and save 6 numbers as "Favorites" which can be automatically selected instead of selecting unique numbers each time you enter.

2. Each day, 6 Pay Off Your Mortgage winning numbers between one 1 and 47 will be selected at random via a random ball drop lottery machine at around 5:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) . These numbers will be matched against all entries received between 3:00:01 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) the previous day and 3:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) that day. The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website

3. Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage Prize: If an entry identically matches each of the 6 winning numbers that appear on the FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage ball drop, that entry will be awarded the Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage Prize, pending eligibility verification. There are no secondary prizes for FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage. If there is only one winner, the winner will win $100,000.00 USD If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, $100,000 will be divided evenly among the correct entries. Cash prizes for Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage will be paid out as an annuity of $20,000.00 per year for 5 years. Cash prizes for multiple winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the Prize by the number of winning entries, which will be paid out over 5 years. Odds of winning:1:10,737,573.
ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

D. FreeLotto FastCash
1. To enter, play the daily Classic FreeLotto® game. Once you have played Classic FreeLotto®, FreeLotto Win A Car, and FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage you become eligible to play FreeLotto FastCash. FreeLotto FastCash is played the same way as FreeLotto®, but you need to select 6 out of 33 numbers correctly with no duplicates (rather than 6 out of 54 numbers in FreeLotto®). This can be done in one of three ways: (a) pick 6 unique numbers; (b) allow the computer to pick the numbers (referred to as "Quick Pick"); or (c) designate and save 6 numbers as "Favorites" which can be automatically selected instead of selecting unique numbers each time you enter.

2. Each day, 6 FastCash winning numbers between one 1 and 33 will be selected at random via a random ball drop lottery machine 5:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) . These numbers will be matched against all entries received between 3:00:01 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) the previous day and 3:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) that day. The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website

3. FastCash Prize: If an entry identically matches each of the 6 winning numbers that appear on the FreeLotto FastCash ball drop, that entry will be awarded the FastCash Prize, pending eligibility verification. There is one daily prize — $10,000.00 USD. There are no secondary prizes for FreeLotto FastCash. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the FastCash prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries. The FastCash prize will be paid in a lump sum. Odds of winning: 1:1,107,568.
ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

E. FreeLotto $100,000.00 GiveAway
1. To enter, play the daily Classic FreeLotto® game. Once you played FreeLotto®, FreeLotto Win A Car, FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage, and FreeLotto FastCash, you become eligible to play FreeLotto $100,000.00 GiveAway. FreeLotto $100,000.00 GiveAway is played the same way as FreeLotto®, but you need to select 6 out of 47 numbers correctly with no duplicates (rather than 6 out of 54 numbers in FreeLotto®). This can be done in one of three ways: (a)pick 6 unique numbers; (b) allow the computer to pick the numbers (referred to as "Quick Picks"); or (c) designate and save 6 numbers as "Favorites" which can be automatically selected instead of selecting unique numbers each time you enter.

2. Each day, 6 $100,000 GiveAway winning numbers between one 1 and 47 will be selected at random via a random ball drop lottery machine at around 5:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) . These numbers will be matched against all entries received between 3:00:01 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) the previous day and 3:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) that day. The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website

3. $100,000.00 GiveAway Prize: If an entry identically matches each of the 6 winning numbers that appear on the FreeLotto $100,000.00 GiveAway ball drop, that entry will be awarded the $100,000.00 GiveAway Prize, pending eligibility verification. There is one daily prize — $100,000.00 USD. There are no secondary prizes for FreeLotto $100,000.00 GiveAway. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the $100,000.00 GiveAway prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries. The $100,000.00 GiveAway prize will paid out as an annuity of $20,000.00 per year for 5 years. Cash prizes for multiple winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the Prize by the number of winning entries, which will be paid out over 5 years. Odds of winning: 1: 10,737,573.

F. FreeLotto SuperBucks
1. To enter, play the daily Classic FreeLotto® game. Once you have played FreeLotto®, FreeLotto Win A Car, FreeLotto Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage, FreeLotto FastCash, and FreeLotto $100,000.00 GiveAway, you become eligible to play FreeLotto SuperBucks. FreeLotto SuperBucks is played the same way as FreeLotto®, but you need to select 7 out of 50 numbers correctly with no duplicates (rather than 6 out of 54 numbers in FreeLotto®). This can be done in one of three ways: (a)pick 6 unique numbers; (b) allow the computer to pick the numbers (referred to as "Quick Picks"); or (c) designate and save 6 numbers as "Favorites" which can be automatically selected instead of selecting unique numbers each time you enter.

2. Each day, 7 SuperBucks winning numbers between one 1 and 50 will be selected at random via a random ball drop lottery machine at around 5:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) . These numbers will be matched against all entries received between 3:00:01 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) the previous day and 3:00 PM Eastern Time (New York Time) that day. The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website.

3. FreeLotto SuperBucks Prize: There is one daily prize — $10,000,000.00. If an entry identically matches each of the 7 winning numbers that appear on the FreeLotto SuperBucks ball drop, that entry will be awarded the $10,000,000.00 Prize Annuity, pending eligibility verification. There are no secondary prizes for FreeLotto SuperBucks. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the FreeLotto SuperBucks prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries. The Grand Prize will be paid out as an annuity over 41 years. Annual payments of $100,000.00 USD will be paid out for 40 years and a final balloon payment of $6,000,000.00 USD will be made in the 41st year. There are no secondary prizes for FreeLotto SuperBucks. Cash prizes for multiple winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the $100,000 annuity by the number of winning entries, which will be paid out over 41 years, with a final balloon payment equal to dividing the $6,000,000.00 USD by the number of winning entries. Odds of winning: – 1:99,884,400.

4. You may enter once from each ad but you are limited to one FreeLotto, one Win A Car, one Pay Off Your Mortgage, one FastCash and one SuperBucks entry per day. Your entry and your numbers picked will be assigned a unique Transaction Serial Number (TSN), which will be confirmed by e-mail and which you must keep in order to claim any prize. You must provide your Transaction Serial Number (TSN), in order to claim your prize as further described in Rule 5. You are responsible for checking your FreeLotto results email to see if you have won a prize in the FreeLotto games. This information is also available, for your convenience, on the website. You will need to follow the instructions within the FreeLotto results email to claim any prize that you may have won. If you are a Prize winner you must respond with your entry TSN and your name as per the instructions of your FreeLotto results email. The TSN and name must match the information in our database before a prize will be awarded. In the event of a dispute, the information in our database will govern. Entries will be deemed made by the person whose name was given in the registration process. Entries must be made before 3:00 PM Eastern Time (New York) on a given day to be eligible for that day’s drawing. All entries made after 3:00 PM Eastern Time will be entered into the following day’s drawing.

5. Claiming Prizes
The FreeLotto daily results email is the sole notification of any prize winnings. The receipt of emails from FreeLotto is required for your participation in and to claim prizes in FreeLotto games. Players must check their FreeLotto daily results email to determine if they are a prize winner and then must follow the prize claim instructions within the email to claim their prize. Failure to claim the prize within 30 days of win date shall result in forfeiture. Any prize unclaimed for 30 days of win date shall be deemed null and void and shall be forfeited. Players must forward their FreeLotto results email to FreeLotto at PrizeClaim@freelotto.com evidencing that they have won either a FreeLotto Grand prize, ($1,000,000.00), a FreeLotto 2nd Prize ($300), a FreeLotto 3rd Prize ($5.00), a FreeLotto 4th Prize ($1.00), a Win A Car Jackpot Prize ($50,000.00), a Pay Off Your Mortgage jackpot Prize ($100,000.00), a FastCash Jackpot Prize ($10,000.00), a $100,000 GiveAway Jackpot Prize ($100,000.00) or a SuperBucks jackpot Prize ($10,000,000.00). The subject line of this email must only contain your FreeLotto Confirmation number (Transaction Serial Number- "TSN"). The TSN is displayed after each game played on the website and is also located in your FreeLotto Confirmation email. The body of the email must also include your first name, last name, address, phone number and date of birth. Send this to PrizeClaim@freelotto.com Failure to provide the TSN, or failure to claim the prize within 30 days of win date shall result in forfeiture. The TSN must match the FreeLotto Confirmation Number in our database for the date that the prize was awarded and must also match the player information. Once a prize claim has been verified and this information has been matched, all prize winners will receive additional instructions by mail. The instructions will require Grand Prize winners and 2nd prize FreeLotto winners to sign and notarize an Affidavit of Eligibility and Liability/Publicity Release and return it to PlasmaNet Inc., within seven (7) days following the date of the attempted mail notification. Grand Prize and 2nd prize winners must provide picture proof of identification to the sponsor, which may include a driver’s license, passport, a voting card or similar government issued photo identification, which must exactly match the information provided in your FreeLotto registration. Non-compliance within this time period shall result in prize forfeiture. The instructions received by email for 3rd prize and 4th prize FreeLotto winners will offer the winners to either click on the link in the email to donate their winnings or receive a check for such amount. If neither link within the email is clicked, a check for prize winnings will automatically be sent to the winner.
Prior to being declared a winner of any prize, a Canadian resident will be required to correctly answer, without assistance of any kind, whether mechanical or otherwise, a mathematical skill-testing question to be administered by email. If the Canadian resident does not claim their prize or cannot be contacted and the skill- test administered within 7 business days of the drawing date, the prize shall be forfeited. Failure to correctly answer the skill test question shall result in prize forfeiture.

The winning numbers will be posted after the drawing on the FreeLotto® website http://www.freelotto.com.

6. ELIGIBILITY:
FreeLotto® and the FreeLotto Games are offered in the United States of America and Canada, except as set forth below, and are subject to special rules for players outside the USA and Canada (see # 16). You must be at least 18 years or older to play. You must be a registered FreeLotto member and subscribed to the FreeLotto emails to be eligible to play and win FreeLotto. This promotion is void in State of New York, State of Florida, Puerto Rico, Province of Quebec, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Sudan, and Afghanistan, and any countries that are included on the United States of America Department of State "Trading with the Enemies Countries" list, may also be null and void. As of July 13, 2007, this promotion is also void in Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Korea Democratic People’s Republic of, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Morocco, Nepal, Niger, and Nigeria. Void where prohibited. Principals and employees of PlasmaNet Inc., and its respective parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, and immediate family members of each are not eligible (immediate family consists of husband, wife, mother, father, sister, brother or children).

7. No other prizes will be awarded. No substitution or transfer of prizes is allowed including transfers made by reason of law or upon death of the prizewinner. Taxes are the responsibility of winners. Non U.S. residents may be subject to U.S. withholding tax.

8. GENERAL CONDITIONS:
Entrants agree to abide by the terms of these Official Rules which are final on all matters pertaining to FreeLotto®. By using this site, you agree to the FreeLotto Rules and the terms of use. If you not agree to these rules and terms of use, please do not use our sites. We reserve the right, at our discretion, to change, modify, add, or remove portions of these Rules and terms of use at any time. Your continued use of the PlasmaNet sites or your continued acceptance of our email following the posting of changes to these Rules and terms of use will signify your acceptance of these changes. Please check this page frequently for any changes. FreeLotto® is governed by the laws of the State of New York and the laws of United States.

9. FAST (FreeLotto Automatic Subscription Ticket) Subscribers:
FreeLotto members are eligible to sign up for the FreeLotto Automatic Subscription Ticket (FAST) service, which is a service whereby your numbers will automatically be played for all six FreeLotto games (Classic FreeLotto, FreeLotto Win A Car, FreeLotto Pay Off Your Mortgage, FreeLotto FastCash, FreeLotto $100,000 GiveAway and FreeLotto SuperBucks) each day for the duration of your FAST subscription. FAST members will automatically be informed when they have won a prize. For any Grand Prizes won in Classic FreeLotto, FreeLotto Win A Car, FreeLotto Pay Off Your Mortgage, FreeLotto FastCash, FreeLotto $100,000 GiveAway and FreeLotto SuperBucks, or 2nd Prize in FreeLotto, PlasmaNet Inc., will automatically send the FreeLotto FAST subscriber a winners notification package by mail with instructions on how to claim their winning. The instructions will require Grand Prize winners and 2nd prize FreeLotto winners to sign and notarize an Affidavit of Eligibility and Liability/Publicity Release and return it to PlasmaNet Inc., within seven (7) days following the date of the attempted mail notification. Grand Prize and 2nd prize winners must provide picture proof of identification to the sponsor, which may include a driver’s license, passport, a voting card or similar government issued photo identification. 3rd and 4th place prize winners will automatically receive a $5.00 check (3rd place prize) or $1.00 check (4th place prize) for their prize winnings ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FREELOTTO® GAME RULES APPLY

10. FAST PRIZE DOUBLER SUBSCRIBERS
FAST members are eligible to sign up for the FreeLotto Automatic Subscription Ticket (FAST) Prize Doubler subscription, whereby FAST Prize Doubler subscribers numbers will automatically be played for all six FreeLotto games (Classic FreeLotto, FreeLotto Win A Car, FreeLotto Pay Off Your Mortgage, FreeLotto FastCash, FreeLotto $100,000 GiveAway and FreeLotto SuperBucks) each day for the duration of your FAST Prize Doubler subscription, whereby any prize winnings will be doubled during their subscription. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FREELOTTO® GAME RULES APPLY

FAST Prize Doubler subscriber Classic FreeLotto® GRAND PRIZE: One Million ($1,000,000.00) Dollars times 2 ($1,000,000.00 x 2 = $2,000,000.00), paid out as an annuity of $80,000.00 per year for 25 years. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the Grand Prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries, and then the Prize Doubler prize winnings will be multiplied by two. Cash prizes for multiple Grand Prize winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the Prize by the number of winning entries, which will be paid out over 25 years. SECOND PRIZE: $300.00 x 2 = $600 to each winner. THIRD PRIZE: $5.00 x 2 = $10.00 to each winner. FOURTH PRIZE: $1.00 x 2 = $2.00 to each winner. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FREELOTTO® GAME RULES APPLY

FAST Prize Doubler subscriber Win A Car Prize: If there is only one FreeLotto Win A car winner who is a subscriber to the FAST Prize Doubler program, the FAST Prize Doubler subscriber will be awarded 2 luxury cars or have the opportunity to choose the cash value of the prize, which is $40,000 x 2 = $80,000.00 USD. (Approximate Retail Value: up to US$50,000 x 2 = $100,000.00). Once the car selected has been paid for, the cash over and above the value of the prize is forfeited. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the Win A Car Prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries and then the Prize Doubler prize winnings will be multiplied by two. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

FAST Prize Doubler subscriber Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage Prize: If there is only one Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage winner who is subscribed to the FAST Prize Doubler program, the FAST Prize Doubler subscriber be awarded $100,000.00 x 2 = $200,000.00 If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, $100,000 will be divided evenly among the correct entries and then the Prize Doubler prize winnings will be multiplied by two. Cash prizes for Pay-Off-Your-Mortgage will be paid out as an annuity $40,000.00 ($20,000.00 x 2) per year for 5 years. Cash prizes for multiple winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the Prize by the number of winning entries, which will be paid out over 5 years. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

FAST Prize Doubler subscriber FastCash Prize: If there is only one FastCash winner who is subscribed to the FAST Prize Doubler program, the FAST Prize Doubler subscriber will be awarded $10,000.00 x 2 = $20,000.00. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the FastCash prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries and then the Prize Doubler prize winnings will be multiplied by two. The FastCash prize will be paid in a lump sum. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

FAST Prize Doubler subscriber $100,000.00 GiveAway Prize: : If there is only one $100,000.00 GiveAway Prize winner who is subscribed to the FAST Prize Doubler program, the FAST prize Doubler subscriber will be awarded $100,000.00 x 2 = $200,000.00 If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, $100,000 will be divided evenly among the correct entries and then the Prize Doubler prize winnings will be multiplied by two. Cash prizes for $100,000.00 GiveAway Prize will be paid out as an annuity of $40,000.00 ($20,000.00 x 2) per year for 5 years. Cash prizes for multiple winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the Prize by the number of winning entries, which will be paid out over 5 years. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

FAST Prize Doubler subscriber FreeLotto SuperBucks Prize: If there is only one FreeLotto SuperBucks winner who is subscriber to the FAST Prize Doubler program, the FAST Prize Doubler subscriber will be awarded $20,000,000.00 ($10,000,000.00 x 2) Prize Annuity, pending eligibility verification. If more than one entry contains all of the winning numbers, the FreeLotto SuperBucks prize will be divided evenly among the correct entries and then the Prize Doubler prize winnings will be multiplied by two. The Grand Prize will be paid out as an annuity over 41 years. Annual payments of $200,000.00 USD will be paid out for 40 years and a final balloon payment of $12,000,000.00 USD will be made in the 41st year for FAST Prize Doubler FreeLotto SuperBucks winners. Cash prizes for multiple winning entries will be paid out as an annuity based upon dividing the Prize by the number of winning entries. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FreeLotto® GAME RULES APPLY

FAST subscribers may submit entries at no charge in the FAST Prize Doubler program by sending a self-addressed stamped envelope to PlasmaNet Inc., PO Box 4562, Grand Central Station, New York, NY 10163, along with your name, address, city, state, zip code, email address, F.A.S.T. Subscription ID and referencing " FAST Prize Doubler Program." PlasmaNet Inc. will then send you, by mail, an authorization code and instructions to activate your Prize Doubler program. Once you have activated your authorization code, your Prize Doubler program will begin on your next 30-day F.A.S.T. renewal period. All authorization code requests must be completely hand written. No mechanically addressed envelopes will be accepted. If your F.A.S.T. subscription is cancelled prior to the activation of the authorization code, your authorization code will become inactive and invalid. One authorization code will subscribe you to the F.A.S.T. Prize Doubler program for 30 days. One authorization code per self-addressed stamped envelope and up to 1 self-addressed stamped envelopes per person per 30 days. Residents of the State of Vermont may omit return postage.

11. Return of any FreeLotto Results Email or Prize Claim Email instructions as undeliverable may result in disqualification. Any prize winnings which remain unclaimed after 30 days, including uncashed checks, shall be deemed forfeited. Winners further grant to PlasmaNet, Inc. and sponsors the right, but not the obligation, to use and publish their proper name and home state online and in print, or any other media, in connection with FreeLotto®. Acceptance of any prize constitutes permission for PlasmaNet, Inc. and sponsors and their advertising and promotional agencies to use winner’s name and likenesses for advertising and promotional purposes without additional compensation unless prohibited by law. By entering, participants release and hold harmless PlasmaNet, Inc. and Sponsors, their respective parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, directors, officers, employees, and agents from any and all liability for any injuries, loss or damage of any kind arising from or in connection with the Contest or any prize won. Other restrictions, conditions, and limitations may apply. Return of any FreeLotto Results Email or Prize Claim Email instructions as undeliverable which includes, but is not limited to, blocking of FreeLotto emails to players email address by players email service provider (ESP), failure of ESP to deliver email from FreeLotto, incorrect email address, and unrecognizable domain, may result in disqualification.

12. CONDUCT:
By entering FreeLotto®, you agree to be bound by these Official Rules, which shall be final and binding in all respects. The Official Rules will be posted at the FreeLotto® site throughout the contest. PlasmaNet, Inc. reserves the right at its sole discretion to disqualify any individual it finds to be tampering with the entry process or the operation of the game or website; to be acting in violation of the Official Rules; or to be acting in an unsportsmanlike or disruptive manner, or with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any other person. PlasmaNet Inc. reserves the right to audit all winners at the time of major prize winnings and if the winner has more than 1 entry per any given game for any given day, PlasmaNet Inc. has the right to revoke the prize. CAUTION: ANY ATTEMPT BY A CONTESTANT AND/OR ANY OTHER INDIVIDUAL TO DELIBERATELY DAMAGE ANY WEBSITE AND/OR UNDERMINE THE LEGITIMATE OPERATION OF THE GAME IS A VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAWS AND SHOULD SUCH AN ATTEMPT BE MADE, PLASMANET, INC., AND FREELOTTO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SEEK DAMAGES FROM ANY SUCH INDIVIDUAL TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW.

13. No responsibility is assumed by PlasmaNet, Inc. or sponsors for lost, late, misdirected entries or for any computer, online, telephone or technical malfunctions that may occur. All entries become the property of PlasmaNet, Inc. and sponsors and will not be returned to entrant.

14. Winners further grant to PlasmaNet, Inc. and sponsors the right, but not the obligation, to use and publish their proper name and home state online and in print, or any other media, in connection with FreeLotto. Acceptance of any prize constitutes permission for PlasmaNet, Inc. and sponsors and their advertising and promotional agencies to use winner’s name and likenesses for advertising and promotional purposes without additional compensation unless prohibited by law. By entering, participants release and hold harmless PlasmaNet, Inc. and sponsors, their respective parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, directors, officers, employees, and agents from any and all liability for any injuries, loss or damage of any kind arising from or in connection with the Contest or any prize won. Other restrictions, conditions, and limitations may apply.

15. LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY:
PlasmaNet, Inc., FreeLotto® and sponsors are not responsible for any incorrect and/or inaccurate information, whether caused by website users and/or by any of the equipment and/or programming associated with and/or utilized in any contest or by any technical or human error which may occur in the processing of submissions in FreeLotto®, confirmations of FreeBetsTM and Results e-mails from FreeLotto® or any other e-mails from FreeLotto®. PlasmaNet, Inc. and Sponsors assume no responsibility for any error, omission, interruption, deletion, defect, delay in operation or transmission, communications line failure, theft and/or destruction and/or unauthorized access to, and/or alteration of entries. PlasmaNet, Inc. and Sponsors are not responsible for any problems and/or technical malfunction of any telephone network or lines, computer on-line-systems, servers or providers, computer equipment, software, failure of email and/or players on account of technical problems and/or traffic congestion on the Internet and/or at any website or combination thereof, including injury or damage to participants or to any other person’s computer related to and/or resulting from participating or downloading materials in this contest. If, for any reason, the contest is not capable of running as planned, including infection by computer virus, bugs, tampering, unauthorized intervention, fraud, technical failures, and/or any other causes beyond the control of PlasmaNet, Inc. and Sponsors which corrupt or affect the administration, security, fairness, integrity and/or proper conduct of this contest, PlasmaNet, Inc. and Sponsors reserve the right at their sole discretion to cancel, terminate, modify and/or suspend the contest.

PlasmaNet makes no representations or warranties of any nature whatsoever with respect to any product or service advertised in any promotion, sweepstakes or other contest presented by PlasmaNet Inc. Any liability for claims or damages with respect thereto shall be the sole responsibility of the advertiser.

16. FOR INTERNATIONAL PLAYERS:
International Players outside the United States and Canada may submit entries at no charge by sending a self-addressed envelope to PlasmaNet Inc. c/o FreeLotto.com INT. PO Box 4562, Grand Central Station New York, NY 10163, along with your Username, name, address, city, state, zip code, and email address. PlasmaNet Inc. will then send you, by mail, an authorization code, along with instructions on how to submit your entries at no charge. All authorization code requests must be completely hand written. No mechanically addressed envelopes will be accepted. Each authorization code is good for access to the FreeLotto.com website for a 30 day term where you can submit your entries at no charge. One authorization code per self addressed envelope per person per 30 days. All prize winners will be required to claim their prize as per the instructions within their FreeLotto results email

17. No responsibility is assumed by PlasmaNet, Inc. or sponsors for lost, late, misdirected entries or for any computer, online, telephone or technical malfunctions that may occur. All entries become the property of PlasmaNet, Inc. and sponsors and will not be returned to entrant.

18. WINNER’S LIST:
The names of major prize winners (at least $300.00) may be obtained 14 days after the drawing for a specific contest by sending a request including your name, postal address and e-mail address to answers@freelotto.com

ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE FREELOTTO® GAME RULES APPLY
I think this is a scam,so be careful & stay away from this website.NO free……………………………

I agree with the first comment, too much to read.

Looks like a variation of the pop ups that promise a prize for completing a survey. The problem is, the odds of winning are not worth the amount of time it takes to complete the surveys.

These sites make money by referring you to web sites that pay for each visit. You have to click on an awful lot of websites for them to make enough to give away.

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

Why is it that…?

Can someone tell me why white Americans are so concerned with how black Americans talk to/treat each other("N" word)? I don’t understand how they are concerned now that they are not directly responsible. Our cultue and language was completely destroyed…leaving us to start over with whatever scraps we could get. Relatively, we are one of the youngest cultures on Earth. Why do other cultures think they have a say so on how we develop? We are here because we were brought here. Our distant relatives come here to make money and go home. Our home has been lost and our names forgotten. Is there no freedom for us still? We can’t even create our own language while foreigners bring theirs over with no problem? They even make most of their profit in OUR domain(which is poverty)! This is allowed by our government and it’s "heard" supporters. Native Americans are even paid reparations through their reservations and certain immunities. They gave us NOTHING! You want to take that too?
JHMHSI…what other race cannot trace their ancestry BEYOND the U.S.? Good thing we’re dark so it’s at least a little obvious.Language? Gone. I can only go back about 4 generations. It’s hard to understand what you don’t feel.

Ur Young so I’ll spare u the diatribes. All cultures talk to each other in a certain way . Other cultures just have enuff respect to not publicize it. Ive been with Italians and Jews and arabs and they use slurs when amongst each other also.. ITS TRUE!

as far as reparations this is how you can get it but it’ll take hella research and you have to keep ur mouth shut if you get it. You have to trace ur ancestors to slavery, find out who owned them and trace it to some corporation thats in existence today. Then you have to prove that ur ancestor was enslaved by individuals that established or help establish that company through slavery.

it has been done, but again but if it ever happens you can’t run to CNN with the news cuz you’ll get squat.. good luck and you’ll be an old man if you ever get it that far so start now!

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

Wikileaks’ first amendment?

A US court has tried to shut down a controversial website that allows whistle-blowers to post corporate and government documents anonymously, but the court has no jurisdiction to do so.

The site, known as Wikileaks.org, has been taken offline in the US due to a court order from the District Court in San Francisco. However, the site remains online in other countries, including Belgium and Germany.

The order came after a Swiss bank, Julius Baer, earlier this month filed a complaint against the site and San Mateo, California-based Dynadot, Wikileaks’ domain-name registry, for posting several hundred of the bank’s documents.

Some of those documents allegedly reveal that Julius Baer was involved in offshore money laundering and tax evasion in the Cayman Islands for customers in several countries, including the US.

The court ordered that "Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting records for the wikileaks.org domain name," according to court documents. It also said that Dynadot should prevent the domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org site or any other website or server other than a blank park page until further notice
The controversy actually centers around banks accounts that show the US laundering drug money.

The 9th circuit there in California has Judges that are real nut cases. Most of them should be removed, but it hasn’t happen and probably want.
The case will end up in the supreme court and will be dismissed.

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

Realistically, What is the difference is a Socialist Republic and the platform of the Democratic Party?

Their views seem to be pretty close to identical. 1) Redistribution of wealth. 2) Promotion of a secular society. 3) Government regulation of everything. 4) Denial of personal property, i.e. the Government owns everything (Examples: Death Tax, Imminent Domain) 5) Government Control of Media and Free exchange of ideas (Fairness Doctrine) 6) Denial of people to defend themselves from the Government (repealing the 2nd Amendment). These are just a few of the similarities that I have found. Also let us not forget that the DNC is not going to listen to the peoples vote from Florida and Michigan and they may forgo the popular election all together and name their nominee via super delegates. If I am wrong then I am willing to listen to intelligent responses. Although I am sure that I will get a large amount of rants from Socialist that hate to be called what they truly are.

Nada..

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

What constitutes as safe information to give out to verify your identity?

I signed up for a yahoo account over 10 years ago, as an 8th grade student. It has a credit card info on file and a domain name. But, I can’t remember the password to renew it. They are increasing the domain pricing to $34.95 (from $1.95). I’ve tried faxing and emailing them my information several times this past month. I’m not getting through to them. I’m suspicious that I’m somehow not getting to the right department, although I am contacting through Yahoo help. Am I being phished?

I have sent them a copy of my California ID and DMV card. My social security info, photo id, and all the information requested below. Since I can’t remember the secret answer or question, they are requesting that I send the last 8 digits of my credit card. I don’t want to change my credit card since I’d have to change a bunch of other accounts. But, it doesn’t seem safe to me for them to have all that information.

This is the email they keep sending to me:

In order to assist you with the account in question, we ask that you
provide the answers to all of the questions below. Yahoo! keeps
detailed records of the information you provided during the registration
of your account.

For security reasons, we require an exact match otherwise we will be
unable to assist you with your account. For this, there are no
exceptions. Please fax or send via regular postal mail the information
listed below. (We apologize for the detailed request, but in order to
provide proper security for our member accounts, these steps are
necessary)

Please send us all of the following:

* Your name

* An email address where we can contact you — at this time we are only
able to reply via email.

* Copy of a state/government issued photo ID (please copy on the
lightest setting of your copier).

* Yahoo! ID

* Permission for Yahoo! to enter your account

* Birthdate on the account

* The answer to your Security Question. (if applicable) The correct
Secret Answer is required; even with faxed information.

* ZIP code and country

* Your alternate email address

Please fax the information to:

(503) 844-2399
Attn: CC Account Security Team

That is too much information that you are giving them. Find out first if this is yahoo. Could be someone trying to rob your identity.

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty gives certain privileges only to Mexican Nationals…So Amnesty only for Mexicans y/n

To best explain the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and its many connotations, the United States’ concept of “Manifest Destiny” should be covered first. Manifest Destiny was the belief of English-speaking Americans that God had ordained them to take and hold the lands from the Mississippi River to the coast of the Pacific Ocean, much of which was claimed and occupied by Mexicans and Indians. The United States’ people believed its means of fulfilling this destiny were justified, a Machiavellian concept (“the end justifies the means”).

The US found its opportunity to use this concept to obtain a large portion of Mexico when Texas gained independence in 1836. Though Texas had agreed not to annex itself to the United States in exchange for its independence, it did so in 1845. However, at the time of annexation, the southern border of Texas had still not been specified. US President Polk took the position that recognized the Rio Grande as the southern border. In what was later to be considered a deliberate provocation by the United States to begin a conflict with Mexico, US troops entered the area between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande (land believed to belong to the US through annexation). The conflict that occurred between the US military and Mexican military was considered an act of war by the US, even though Mexico had not confirmed whether or not the Rio Grande was the southern border of the Texas territory.

After many unsuccessful peace negotiations (open and secret) and after many military skirmishes, the US military gained occupation of Mexico City in August 1847. It was then that the final peace negotiations began in what would become the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The treaty demanded a large section of Mexico’s northern territory, with the Rio Grande as the southern border (for to accept the Nueces would be admitting guilt for starting the war). It was signed and sent to Mexico and the United States’ senates to be ratified on February 2, 1848.

In the United States, President Polk only conceded to accept it and send it on to the Senate for ratification after coming to the conclusion that continuing the war would not acquire for the United States a treaty that was any better. However, he recommended to Congress that an amended one be ratified and sent to Mexico for approval, one that did not contain Article X, which guaranteed property rights for Mexicans and Indians living in the ceded territory being. His main reason for this recommendation was that questions over the validity of land grants in Texas would come up on whether or not the treaty would apply to Texas since they had acquired their independence prior to the treaty.

Many factions within Congress were against ratifying the treaty, but for different reasons. The Whig party believed that the treaty would increase the southern states’ power by legalizing slavery within the new territory. Some were opposed because they were “morally against the war.” Others didn’t want it because they were Polk’s rivals, and some like Sam Houston wanted more territory than the treaty claimed. The treaty suffered few changes otherwise due to “each faction’s opposition to the proposals of the others.” The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, without Article X and with changes made to Article IX, passed the Senate and was ratified on March 10, 1848.

In Mexico, a letter of explanation by US Secretary of State James Buchanan followed the amended treaty. His letter included reasons why Article X was stricken and why Article IX was reworded. According to the letter, Article X was deleted because Buchanan firmly believed the US Constitution’s promise to protect a person’s property would be upheld regardless of whether or not the article was included in the treaty. As for Article IX, Buchanan explained that it had been revised as a “result of the Senate’s wish not to violate precedents established in treaties negotiated with France and Spain.” Also, a document known as the Protocol of Querétaro was presented to the Mexican Congress prior to the treaty’s ratification that explained the United States’ reasons for changing the original treaty. It said that the changes to Article IX “did not intend to diminish in any way” the rights that would be given to Mexican citizens becoming US citizens, and that the deletion of Article X “did not intend in any way to annul grants of land made by Mexico in the ceded territories.” However, the protocol’s interpretation of the treaty was never considered by the US government to be obligatory, meaning it had “no legal force.”

Mexico’s handling of the issues that surrounded the ratification of such a treaty went more along the lines of survival. Many factions in Mexico’s political system were against the treaty. One liberal by the name of Manuel Crescencio Rejón argued that the treaty would mean Mexico’s “economic subordination” and that since it had been signed before Congress could discuss this option, the treaty went against the Mexican Constitution. Another against the treaty was José María Cuevas, who spoke about his opposition to the Chamber of Deputies. Some did favor the treaty because it stopped the US from taking more territory and costing Mexico more military funding. One such person was one of the original commissioners, Bernardo Couto, who called the treaty one of “recovery rather than one of alienation.” In a later book about the war, one author called the treaty merely the confirmation that the US had taken land which had little value and was hard to defend. Mexico deemed it wise to choose the “lesser of two evils” and ratified the treaty on May 19, 1848.

It wasn’t long until the United States began a series of treaty violations, which for the most part went unresolved, and some which still are unresolved today. The Land Act of 1851 established a Board of Land Commissioners which required that land-owners “present evidence supporting title within two years, or their property would pass into the public domain.” According to the protocol (earlier noted to be of “no legal force” according to the US government), the property rights of Mexican landowners would be protected. In the fine print, though, the deletion of Article X made it hard for landowners with “imperfect” titles to complete the processes of land confirmation, whether it was via Mexican law or United States law.

Another violation of the treaty was the Foreign Miners’ Tax Law that inadvertently discriminated against those Mexicans who should have been exempted from the tax because of the treaty’s provisions for US citizenship. “Since there was a legal distinction between the Mexicans who had migrated to California after 1848 and those who were there before the gold rush,” outcry over the tax law being enforced on Mexican-Americans could not be justified.

It was violations such as these that inspired the Chicano movement in the 1960s, the same era as the Civil Rights movement. The movement sought to “redefine” the position of Mexican-Americans. To help with that cause, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was used to point out abuses to their human rights, such as the right to property denied those who were kept from completing their land titles, and such as the right to the full enjoyment of US citizenship which was indicated as forthcoming in Article IX of the treaty. Though the movement did not do well at obtaining help from the US government to restore land to Mexican-Americans, a recent move to take the case of the Mexican-American and the Native-American to international courts by the IITC has begun to meet with increasing success.

Since the signing of the treaty, a policy of arbitration has existed between Mexico and the United States, though the US does use it mostly when to its own advantage. However, this policy, the intertwining of the two cultures due to the Mexican influence in the US Southwest, and advances in both countries’ sense of human rights and diplomacy is slowly warming the friendship of the neighboring nations.
Mexican Cultures represent the roots of the US South West.

I am proud of it.

We also recieved Immigrants from the East Coast.!

Have you ever read the treaty? You should. It is shorter than your post. The property rights were for existing Mexican citizens who would be living in now American territories. As in, Mario has this house or that rancho, when this becomes the US, he gets to keep that house or that rancho. It was not ‘all Mexicans anywhere in the country may at any future time come to own property,’ just so you know.

Posted in Domain Names and US Government

What’s the best way to deal with a cease and desist letter from a large corporation?

I own a few small internet stores. A couple of them have registered trade marks in their domains.

Here is an example of what happened. To protect the names of the corporation and myself I will use the term BigCorp in the place of the actual company’s name. I make it clear on our stores’ websites that we are not BigCorp and that we are not affiliated with BigCorp. We just sell stuff that works with other items that BigCorp Sells.

Let’s say I own a store on a domain called BigCorpStuffForSale.com

I then get a Cease and Desist letter from BigCorp who wants the following:
Do the following and respond in two weeks to this agreement:

You agree to
1. Cease use of all trademarks and logos
2. Cease making and or selling all items that bear or incorperate our trademarks and logos
3. Transfer all domain names that include the name BigCorp to BigCorp.
4. represent and warrant to BigCorp that the domains we found you using are the only ones that infringe on our name.
5. by no later than (two weeks) un-register all trade names with the name BigCorp with all government offices you registered them with.
6. represent and warrant the following information:
a. tell us how many unauthorized items you sold while using our trademarks and logos
b.Tell us gross revenue made on unauthorized item sales
c. Tell us how long you have been selling unauthorized items
d. Tell us who bought the unauthorized items and what they bought
e. Tell us who made the unauthorized items.
7. Pay us 25% of gross sales of unauthorized products or $25,000. (Whichever is greater)

You also agree that not following this agreement will cause irreparable harm to BigCorp and that you will be entitled to entry of both a
preliminary and permanent injunction against you. You also agree to pay all costs incurred to enforce this agreement.

You also agree not to do this again.

Fortunately, I do not sell unauthorized items. I just sell items under a domain name that include BigCorp in the name and has their logo on the page. My plan is to do the following, please tell me if this seems OK:

1. Shutdown all stores that use BigCorp in the domain name.
2. Xfer the domain names to BigCorp.
3. Stop using their logos from now on.
4. I do not plan on signing any agreement.
5. I do not plan on giving them any more information.

Be careful- Even if BigCorp doesn’t make the items, it is possible that they still infringe on their patents – an example would be phone chargers that may use a proprietary plug to connect to the phone.

You were using their name to sell things they don’t make, so it may be worth having a lawyer contact the lawyer who sent the letter, just to find out exactly what it was they objected to; the items you were selling, or the domain name you were selling them under. It’s cheaper than shelling out 25k!

Good luck.

Posted in Domain Names and US Government