From: bill payne <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Message Hash: d0f01a06f3e3a37d906b114b07ecdf6431048995502c49819e04acbd1963a40f
Message ID: <35FEB8CA.78C4@nmol.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1998-09-15 06:11:21 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 14:11:21 +0800
From: bill payne <email@example.com> Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 14:11:21 +0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: CHRYSLER AWARD NOMINATION STATEMENT 9/15/98 12:30 PM Message-ID: <35FEB8CA.78C4@nmol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tuesday 9/15/98 12:39 PM e-mail Ms Vikki Hardy Chrysler Award for Innovative Design c/o Bozell Advertising 1000 Town Center, 15th Floor Southfield, MI 48075-1241 248 262 8643 email@example.com We are sending our submission by 1 e-mail 2 hardcopy 3 diskette with .htm and .txt files by priority certified mail. Best bill CHRYSLER AWARD NOMINATION STATEMENT 9/15/98 12:30 PM American forefathers drafted the Constitution and laws of our country shortly after having suffered injustice. Fresh in their minds were strategies used by their oppressors. Writers of the Constitution and laws anticipated ways to subvert our system. Therefore, our forefathers designed safeguards into our legal system to prevent future injustice. But these safeguards DON'T appear to be working today. Morales and Payne designed a strategy using the National Security Agency [NSA], Sandia National Laboratories, the US Federal Court System, and publication on Internet to illustrate how the US government has deteriorated. Arthur Morales WAS a supervisor at Sandia Labs in 1991. Morales and Manuel Garcia organized a class action lawsuit on behalf of Hispanics against Sandia. Sandia settled Morales' and Garcia's lawsuit. Department of Energy acknowledged from Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] requests that as of December 31, 1995 Morales cost Sandia $567,137 in legal fees. Sandia retaliated against Morales. Morales sued Sandia in New Mexico District Court. Morales lost. William Payne wrote a technical report describing 'deficiencies' NSA's cryptographic algorithms http://jya.com/da/whpda.htm. Sandia transferred Payne to break electronics locks for the Federal Bureau of Invesitgation [FBI]. Payne refused to do illegal work. http://www.jya.com/whp1.htm. Payne sued Sandia in Federal Court. Payne lost and court records were sealed. FBI agent Bernardo Perez led a class action lawsuit against the FBI for race discrimination against Hispanic FBI agents. http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/1995/w951482w.txt Perez won. Perez was assigned agent-in-charge of the FBI in Albuquerque for settlement. But Perez lost money. Morales and Payne learned that the FBI extorted an inexpensive from Perez by telling Perez that the FBI was GUARANTEED to win on appeal in Federal Circuit. With Perez' and others knowledge of circuit courts, Morales and Payne appealed their respective cases pro se to the Tenth Circuit. In Payne's case Sandia failed to submit its Brief of the Appellees on time. Then falsified its certificate of service when Payne filed to remand. In Morales' case Sandia submitted a deficient Brief of the Appellees which was returned but failed to serve Morales with its brief. Payne and Morales both won at the Tenth Circuit on technicalities. But judges awarded the wins to Sandia. All attempts by Morales and Payne to get copies of the docket for their respective Tenth Circuit cases failed. Therefore, Morales and Payne hatched a plan to get the dockets and expose government misconduct. Payne previously made FOIA requests to NSA for copies of messages and translations given to Iraq during the Iraq/Iran war, copies of Libyan messages intercepted by NSA, and NSA cryptographic algorithms Payne thought contained deficiencies. Morales and Payne sued NSA pro se for the documents. Lawsuit progress was broadcast on Internet through e-mail and http://www.aci.net/kalliste/speccoll.htm http://jya.com/whpfiles.htm And Payne wrote Black and White Test of Cryptographic Algorithms criticizing the US government's crypto contest. http://zolatimes.com. Morales and Payne FINALLY got copies of dockets from their respective cases from the Tenth Circuit using Internet as an innovative tool.