[info] [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
Eugen Leitl
<eugen at leitl.org> on
Thu Jul 24 10:13:17 UTC 2008
----- Forwarded message from "R.A. Hettinga" <rah at shipwright.com> -----
From: "R.A. Hettinga" <rah at shipwright.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:28:00 -0400
To: cypherpunks at al-qaeda.net
Subject: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926)
Begin forwarded message:
>From: Adam Selene <dgc at lunacity.org>
>Date: July 21, 2008 4:26:12 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>
> This just went public @ http://blog.e-gold.com/
>
>
>
> A New Beginning <http://blog.e-gold.com/2008/07/a-new-beginning.html
>>
>
>November 2008 will mark the 12th anniversary of e-gold's debut as an
>alternative global payment system enabling Users - individuals or
>businesses - to receive payment in gold at extremely low cost and
>without risk of the sort of payment reversals that characterize all
>credit based systems.
>
>e-gold has been a pioneer in numerous areas and I am proud of its
>innovative accomplishments. Since 1996, the Internet has witnessed
>multiple online payment initiatives, several of them funded with
>$20-90 million of start-up capital, with distinguished founders and
>executive cadre, high profile brand name strategic allies, and
>favorable reception in the business press. But whereas Digicash,
>Cybercash, Beenz, Flooz, Peppercoin and a host of others each was
>promoted as the next big thing, all of them combined cumulatively
>[in their original incarnations - some have been restructured into
>other business models] executed less transaction volume than e-gold
>did in a typical single quarter.
>
>But this note is not about success. It is about e-gold's failure to
>date to emerge, its failure to transition from a marginal player for
>early adopters to a respected institution integrated into the global
>financial mainstream. I am talking about a vision that has not yet
>been realized and a determination to fix what needs to be improved.
>
>e-gold's failure to emerge so far is a result of many factors but
>the root causes were design flaws in the account creation and
>provisioning logic that led to the unfortunate consequence of
>vulnerability to criminal abuse. Criminal abuse of the e-gold
>system, in turn, led to a self-reinforcing negative reputation.
>
>Ultimately, criminal abuse of e-gold reached the point where the US
>Department of Justice intervened, bringing criminal charges against
>e-gold Ltd., Gold & Silver Reserve., Inc., (the Operator of e-gold
>and also of the online exchange service OmniPay), myself, and the
>other directors for violations of 18 USC 1960 [Operation of an
>unlicensed Money Transmitting Business] and 18 USC 1956 [Conspiracy
>to Commit Money Laundering]. The criminal case has been resolved.
>The resolution of the criminal case however provides for a second
>chance, an opportunity to address the flaws embedded in the e-gold
>system and to transform the "e-gold Operation" into the institutions
>I, the other directors, and our longsuffering employees and
>contractors have always envisioned, one that serves to advance the
>material welfare of mankind.
>
>In harmony with this transformation, we acknowledge that e-gold is
>indeed a Financial Institution or Agency as defined in US law and
>should be regulated as a Financial Institution. E-gold Ltd. has
>submitted an application to FinCEN to be registered as a Money
>Services Business and will be seeking licensure in all states that
>require it. Most importantly, working in conjunction with US
>government agencies, we will be exerting every effort to bring e-
>gold into compliance with US law and regulation as quickly as
>possible.
>
>I am going to briefly describe the systemic problems we are
>undertaking to rectify and a roadmap of where the system is heading.
>Going from where we are now to where we need to be is going to be a
>bumpy road, especially at first. Many legitimate e-gold Users have
>already suffered loss over the past year as the measures undertaken
>by the government to prevent dissipation of assets have severely
>impacted exchange markets with resulting illiquidity of a magnitude
>as to effectively make it impracticable to exchange e-gold for
>conventional money. There will be more disruption in the next few
>months but it will be temporary and will set the stage for powerful
>new features that enhance the usability and global reach of e-gold.
>If there is a silver lining, it is that the more illiquid e-gold has
>become, the more valuable it has become due to the (apparently
>ongoing) decline of the US dollar relative to gold and other non-
>financial assets.
>
>*e-gold User Agreement Changes*
>
>Before proceeding, however, let me make something clear that should
>have been made more emphatically clear long ago. Use of the e-gold
>system for criminal activity will not be tolerated. Memorializing
>this resolve, the following provisions are being added to the e-gold
>Account User Agreement <http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/e-g-agree.htm>:
>
>*2.3.* User agrees to not use e-gold in any manner that violates the
>laws of whatever jurisdiction to which the User is subject.
>
>*4.6.1.1.* If e-gold investigators reasonably suspect that the e-
>gold account of User is being used to launder the proceeds of crime
>or for any other criminal purpose, Issuer may freeze the e-gold
>account and any other e-gold accounts of User. Additionally, at the
>sole discretion of Issuer, User will be subject to damages and other
>penalties, including criminal prosecution where available and the
>notification of the general public of Users actions, at the sole
>discretion of Issuer.
>
>*Design flaws in legacy e-gold system*
>
>A systemic flaw in the e-gold design, present from the very
>beginning, made it vexingly difficult for e-gold to expel a User, in
>a truly effective way, for criminal abuse of the system. e-gold
>investigative staff might detect suspicious activity, block or
>freeze the offending account, and later discover the same
>perpetrator had created additional accounts.
>
>One element was logic that allowed an e-gold account full privileges
>from the moment of creation and only revoked those privileges in the
>event of suspicion that the account holder was seeking to mask their
>identity or actually engage in illicit activity.
>
>Compounding this weakness was an unrestricted ability for Users to
>create multiple accounts without any obligatory indicator that they
>were all under the control of one person.
>
>The next generation of the e-gold application will undertake to
>enforce a "one-human being/one e-gold User" rule. Instead of the
>existing logic where a User logs directly into an account, a User in
>the next generation system logs in as a User. Only validated Users
>are empowered with the ability to create multiple accounts.
>
>The advantage from the cybercrime-thwarting standpoint will be an
>ever-stronger ability to blacklist a person who has abused the e-
>gold system.
>
>e-gold is intensively working on this next generation User-based log-
>in system but it is likely to be another 6-9 months to deployment.
>Meanwhile, emergency surgery is required NOW.
>
>*Shock Therapy phase* [may it be brief!]
>
>*1)* Effective immediately, new e-gold account creation is suspended
>until a compliant interim solution for Customer Identification can
>be ensured.
>
>*2)* We are requesting that autoexchangers - even though the
>technical beauty of the autoexchanger concept is sublime cease
>supporting exchanges to or from e-gold for the time being. The
>problem with the autoexchanger concept is that although the
>autoexchangers themselves may be perfectly compliant with
>requirements [promulgated by Webmoney and e-gold] to automatically
>put tracking data in their memo fields, and despite the fact that
>Webmoney is also committed to aiding in the suppression of
>cybercrime, the fact is that a substantial proportion of the
>cybercriminals that abuse e-gold have evolved into a modus operandi
>that involves autoexchanging possible proceeds of crime into
>Webmoney, sometimes within minutes of receiving the value, thus
>making interdiction a matter of catch-up or closing the barn door
>after the horse is gone.
>
>*Looking Forward*
>
>We are confident that a regulated e-gold rebuilt to a more
>systematic specification will be less hospitable to criminals, and
>more attractive to mainstream business use without being less
>accessible to those disregarded by legacy payment systems.
>
>Please accept our apologies for the occasional turbulence you may
>experience on this journey. And, as always...
>
>Thank you for using e-gold.
>
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: Wavyhill <wavy at rayservers.net>
>Date: July 21, 2008 5:20:26 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>
>>especially at first. Many legitimate e-gold Users have already
>>suffered loss over the past year as the measures undertaken by the
>>government to prevent dissipation of assets have severely impacted
>>exchange markets
>
>Yeah, well, thanks very much for warning us they are on their way
>to becoming a gold-based version of paypal, and their asses are
>thereby
>saved. Great for them. Saved for what?
>But nary a word was said about my kilos stolen along with the 1mdc
>reserve egold accounts. How did /that/ figure into their /deal/ ?
>
>wavyhill
>
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: Adam Selene <dgc at lunacity.org>
>Date: July 21, 2008 8:06:43 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: [gsc] E-Gold Pleads Guilty to Money Laundering
>
>Appears "A New Beginning" was a sweetener from Doug to precede his
>Monday morning Plea Bargain the inevitable DOJ press release.
>
>https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/CourtSched.pl
>
>*Court Schedule: Monday, July 21, 2008
>
>*
>07-cr-109: USA v. E-GOLD, LTD. Judge Collyer 09:30AM Courtroom 2
>Plea Agreement Hearing
>07-cr-109: USA v. GOLD & SILVER RESERVE, INC. Judge Collyer
>09:30AM Courtroom 2 Plea Agreement Hearing
>07-cr-109: USA v. JACKSON Judge Collyer 09:30AM Courtroom 2
>Plea Agreement Hearing
>07-cr-109: USA v. DOWNEY Judge Collyer 09:30AM Courtroom 2
>Plea
>Agreement Hearing
>07-cr-109: USA v. JACKSON Judge Collyer 09:30AM Courtroom 2
>Plea Agreement Hearing
>
>
> Adam
>
>-----------------------------
>FOR IMMEDIATE
>RELEASE
>
>CRM
>
>MONDAY, JULY 21, 2008
>
>(202) 514-2007
>
>
>WWW.USDOJ.GOV
>
>TDD (202) 514-1888
>
>DIGITAL CURRENCY BUSINESS E-GOLD PLEADS GUILTY
>
>TO MONEY LAUNDERING AND ILLEGAL MONEY TRANSMITTING CHARGES
>
> WASHINGTON E-Gold Ltd. (E-Gold), an Internet-based digital
>currency business, and its three principal directors and owners,
>pleaded guilty to criminal charges relating to money laundering and
>the operation of an illegal money transmitting business, Acting
>Assistant Attorney General Matthew Friedrich for the Criminal
>Division and U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeffrey A.
>Taylor announced today.
>
> E-Gold and its corporate affiliate Gold & Silver Reserve
>Inc. each pleaded guilty to conspiracy to engage in money laundering
>and conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting
>business. The principal director of E-Gold and CEO of Gold & Silver
>Reserve Inc. (Gold & Silver Reserve), Dr. Douglas Jackson, 51, of
>Melbourne, Fla., pleaded guilty to conspiracy to engage in money
>laundering and operating an unlicensed money transmitting business.
>E-Golds other two senior directors, Barry Downey, 48, of Baltimore,
>and Reid Jackson, 45, of Melbourne, each pleaded guilty to felony
>violations of District of Columbia law relating to operating a money
>transmitting business without a license. E-Gold, Gold & Silver
>Reserve and the three company directors were charged in an
>indictment returned by a federal grand jury on April 24, 2007.
>
>At sentencing, E-Gold and Gold & Silver Reserve face a maximum fine
>of $3.7 million. Douglas Jackson faces a maximum prison sentence of
>20 years and a fine of $500,000 on the conspiracy to engage in money
>laundering charge, and a sentence of five years and a fine of
>$250,000 on the operation of an unlicensed money transmitting
>business charge. Downey and Reid Jackson each face a maximum of
>five years in prison and a fine of $25,000. Additionally, as part
>of the plea, E-Gold and Gold & Silver Reserve have agreed to
>forfeiture in the amount of $1.75 million in the form of a money
>judgment for which they are joint and severally liable. Sentencing
>for all defendants has been set for Nov. 20, 2008.
>
> In addition to the fines and prison sentences, each of the
>defendants agreed that E-Gold and Gold & Silver Reserve will move to
>fully comply with all applicable federal and state laws relating to
>operating as a licensed money transmitting business and the
>prevention of money laundering which includes registering as money
>service businesses. Also as part of the plea agreement, the
>businesses will create a comprehensive money laundering detection
>program that will require verified customer identification,
>suspicious activity reporting and regular supervision by the
>Internal Revenue Services (IRS) Bank Secrecy Act Division, to which
>the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network delegated authority
>according to federal regulations. E-Gold and Gold & Silver Reserve
>will hire a consultant to ensure their compliance with applicable
>law and hire an auditor to verify the companies claims that all
>transactions are fully backed by gold bullion.
>
> Under federal law and District of Columbia law, in addition
>to other jurisdictions, the E-Gold operation was required to be
>licensed and registered as a money transmitting business. However,
>according to information in plea materials, the E-Gold operation
>functioned as a money transmitting business without registering with
>the federal government and without a license in the District of
>Columbia. Because these businesses and individuals illegally failed
>to register and follow applicable regulations under federal and
>District of Columbia laws, the resulting lack of oversight and
>required procedures created an atmosphere where criminals could use
>e-gold, or digital currency, essentially anonymously to further
>their illegal activities.
>
> Specifically, according to information contained in plea
>materials, the E-Gold operation provided digital currency services
>over the Internet through two sites: www.e-gold.com and
>www.Omnipay.com
>. Several characteristics of the E-Gold operation made it
>attractive to users engaged in criminal activity, such as not
>requiring users to provide their true identity, or any specific
>identity. The E-Gold operation continued to allow accounts to be
>opened without verification of user identity, despite knowing that
>e-gold was being used for criminal activity, including child
>exploitation, investment scams, credit card fraud and identity
>theft. In addition, E-Gold assigned employees with no prior
>relevant experience to monitor hundreds of thousands of accounts for
>criminal activity. They also participated in designing a system
>that expressly encouraged users whose criminal activity had been
>discovered to transfer their criminal proceeds among other e-gold
>accounts. Unlike other Internet payment systems, the E-Gold
>operation did not include any statement in its user agreement
>prohibiting the use of e-gold for criminal activity.
>
>By failing to comply with money laundering laws and regulations,
>the E-Gold operation created an environment ripe for exploitation by
>criminals seeking anonymity in conducting online transactions, said
>Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew Friedrich. This case
>demonstrates that online payment systems must operate according to
>the applicable rules and regulations created to ensure lawful
>monetary transactions.
>
>The operations of E-Gold Ltd. and the other defendants undermined
>the laws designed to maintain the integrity of our financial system
>and created opportunities for criminal activity, said U.S. Attorney
>Taylor. Because of the successful prosecution of these defendants,
>digital currency providers everywhere are now on notice that they
>must comply with federal banking laws or they will be subject to
>prosecution.
>
>The Secret Service is pleased with the successful outcome of the E-
>gold investigation, said U.S. Secret Service Assistant Director for
>Investigations Michael Stenger. This case demonstrated that even
>the most sophisticated criminals cannot escape the combined
>resources of the Secret Service and our law enforcement partners.
>The Secret Service is committed to our mission of safeguarding the
>nations critical financial infrastructure and we will continue to
>pursue criminals seeking to use the Internet and new technologies to
>commit crimes.
>
>The case was investigated by the U.S. Secret Service, IRS Criminal
>Investigation and the FBI. The case was prosecuted by Assistant
>U.S. Attorney Jonathan Haray of the U.S. Attorneys Office for the
>District of Columbia, Senior Counsel Kimberly Kiefer Peretti of the
>Criminal Divisions Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section
>and Laurel Loomis Rimon, Deputy Chief of the Criminal Divisions
>Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, with assistance from
>the Criminal Divisions Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section.
>William Cowden of the U.S. Attorneys Office Asset Forfeiture Unit
>assisted with forfeiture issues involved in the case.
>
>###
>
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: Kevin Wilkerson <kbw at vertoro.com>
>Date: July 21, 2008 8:33:44 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>Wavyhill wrote:
>>But nary a word was said about my kilos stolen along with the 1mdc
>>reserve egold accounts. How did /that/ figure into their /deal/ ?
>
>As we know, that gold was already liquidated and wired to the feds.
>I see in the DOJ release that fines and jail time are pending, the
>exact amount of each to be determined by the judge, referencing the
>plea agreement of course.
>
>My bet is for no jail time, or a suspended sentence, and fines
>totaling approximately the amount already vacuumed up. What a
>coincidence!
>
>-Kevin
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: Adam Selene <dgc at lunacity.org>
>Date: July 21, 2008 8:43:32 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>Kevin Wilkerson wrote:
>>My bet is for .... fines totaling approximately the amount already
>>vacuumed up.
>
>The civil (not criminal) court case ultimately must have some
>resolution regarding requested asset forfeitures, including the
>frozen/liquidated accounts.
>
>The criminal case infers E-Gold will be an on-going business while
>the civil case had originally requested the forfeiture of absolutely
>all assets of E-Gold and *all their customers' gold*. I don't get
>how they can claim the latter.
>
>Pleading guilty doesn't exactly help the civil case, not sure the
>criminal plea bargain can help.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: "Bill St. Clair" <billstclair at gmail.com>
>Date: July 21, 2008 8:38:22 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Wavyhill <wavy at rayservers.net> wrote:
>
>>Yeah, well, thanks very much for warning us they are on their way
>>to becoming a gold-based version of paypal, and their asses are
>>thereby
>>saved. Great for them. Saved for what?
>
>GoldPal (TM)
>
>-Bill
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: Wavyhill <wavy at rayservers.net>
>Date: July 21, 2008 9:06:50 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>Kevin Wilkerson wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>My bet is for no jail time, or a suspended sentence, and fines
>>totaling approximately the amount already vacuumed up. What a
>>coincidence!
>
>That doesnt make sense either. (Most of) the gold stolen belonged
>not to
>egold,
>but to its customers. If you fine a bank for criminal activity, you
>dont
>take it
>from the depositors accounts. In order to justifiably keep assets
>taken from customer accounts, seems to me you have to convict
>them of something, or at least prove the assets are the proceeds of
>crime,
>even if you cant identify the offenders.
>
>No one has charged me, much less convicted me, of anything criminal.
>My savings are gone. My self-styled masters have it.
>Where is my justice?
>
>wavyhill
>
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: "George Hara" <georgegabrielhara at fastmail.fm>
>Date: July 22, 2008 1:56:16 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>Wavyhill,
>
>
>>the gold stolen belonged not to egold, but to its customers. If you
>>fine a bank for criminal activity, you dont take it from the
>>depositors accounts. In order to justifiably keep assets taken from
>>customer accounts, seems to me you have to convict them of
>>something, or at least prove the assets are the proceeds of crime,
>>even if you cant identify the offenders.
>
>Their logic must be quite simple: if you're anonymous, you're not a
>person, hence you don't exist.
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: JP May <jpm at interestingsoftware.com>
>Date: July 23, 2008 5:24:41 AM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold) - the reality
>
>>>*Looking Forward*
>>>
>>>We are confident that a regulated e-gold rebuilt to a more
>>>systematic specification will be less hospitable to criminals, and
>>>more attractive to mainstream business use without being less
>>>accessible to those disregarded by legacy payment systems.
>>>
>>>Please accept our apologies for the occasional turbulence you may
>>>experience on this journey. And, as always...
>>>
>>>Thank you for using e-gold.
>>
>>
>>Is it just me, or was anyone else looking for any sign from Douglas
>>(?) as to what will become of the e-gold users and their monies
>>that were stolen on April 24, 2007!
>>
>>Is it just me, or was this the first question that blasted forth
>>from your mouth after having read this piece! WHAT ABOUT THE E-
>>GOLD USERS THAT HAVE BEEN SCREWED AS A RESULT OF YOUR FAILING IN
>>YOUR FIDUCIARY DUTIES!
>
>
>Bill,
>
>The three egold guys are ABSOLUTE VICTIMS here.
>
>They have been bent over and raped with steel poles by human filth
>masquerading as a government.
>
>Law and order in the USA has decayed to a plain circus - an
>absolutely, outright kangaroo court fiasco.
>
>The legal system in, say, the USSR, was no more corrupt ....... just
>a system of rubber-stamps for literally all-powerful prosecutors and
>bureaucrats. Rubber stamps.
>
>That's EXACTLY what the USA "legal system" now amounts to.
>
>Because the government never loses a prosecution, and the government
>is all-powerful, prosecutors can very simply literally say "You will
>now do this _ _ _ and this _ _ _ or you will go to jail." Then, a
>Judge rubber-stamps the arrangement.
>
>That's all the USA is. That's IT. It's a rubber-stamp system where
>prosecutors and bureaucrats have TOTAL, COMPLETELY UNLIMITED power.
>
>Prosecutors tell you what you have to do, and a Judge rubber-stamps
>it. The deal is you do it or you do ten years in jail.
>
>You are completely wrong to blame the egold blokes in any way for
>anything.
>
>If you've lost the odd hundred thousand bucks worth of gold (or
>whatever, I don't know what your particular tally is, but many
>people on this list had that much stolen by the government) - big
>deal.
>
>The egold guys had MILLIONS stolen from them and are at risk of
>being thrown in the can for years by the system .... not to mention
>that their work of a decade of their life is crushed.
>
>Plus, out of all the exchangers, operators, "merchants," plain large
>users of egold, etc etc -- the three egold dudes were the ones
>picked by the human filth in the government, to suffer on behalf of
>all of us, to be an example.
>
>The only reason YOU or ANYONE on this list or that has ever had
>anything much to do with DGCs is not SITTING IN JAIL is because of a
>pure WHIM of the human filth in the various USA government offices.
>
>The only reason everyone ELSE is not being put through the ringer,
>is because the three egold dudes were put through the ringer.
>
>The USA government can put ANYONE - ANYONE - in jail any time they
>like, and that's absolutely the full extent of the situation.
>
>It is a rough situation Bill. To blame the egold guys is totally
>wrong, man.
>
>They are absolutely victims. Moreover, THEY were chosen as the
>"fall-guys" to go through the ringer when it could have been anyone.
>
>
>
>>
>>WHAT ABOUT US AND WHAT ABOUT OUR GOLD!
>>
>>Thanks, again, Adam, for the update.
>>
>>All the best.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>Bill Bochynski
>
>
>--
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: "ADMIN, GOLD COMPANIES" <goldcompanies at cox.net>
>Date: July 22, 2008 7:08:46 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>Adam Selene wrote:
>>Kevin Wilkerson wrote:
>>>My bet is for .... fines totaling approximately the amount already
>>>vacuumed up.
>>
>>The civil (not criminal) court case ultimately must have some
>>resolution regarding requested asset forfeitures, including the
>>frozen/liquidated accounts.
>>
>>The criminal case infers E-Gold will be an on-going business while
>>the civil case had originally requested the forfeiture of
>>absolutely all assets of E-Gold and *all their customers' gold*. I
>>don't get how they can claim the latter.
>>
>>Pleading guilty doesn't exactly help the civil case, not sure the
>>criminal plea bargain can help.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Here is another article on the events of yesterday, and frankly, the
>last sentence of the article really concerns me:
>
>"...Authorities said E-gold did not ask for account holders' true
>identity, *and company officials helped criminals distribute their
>money to other accounts if they were caught.*" (emphasis added).
>
>The total article is here:
>
>http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-07-22-money_N.htm
>
>
>Dean
>
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: YAlwaysWar at EarthLink.Net
>Date: July 23, 2008 1:55:15 AM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>Dear Adam:
>
>At 01:26 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>
>Thank you for the post, Adam!
>
>
><snip>
>
>
>>*Looking Forward*
>>
>>We are confident that a regulated e-gold rebuilt to a more
>>systematic specification will be less hospitable to criminals, and
>>more attractive to mainstream business use without being less
>>accessible to those disregarded by legacy payment systems.
>>
>>Please accept our apologies for the occasional turbulence you may
>>experience on this journey. And, as always...
>>
>>Thank you for using e-gold.
>
>
><snip>
>
>
>Is it just me, or was anyone else looking for any sign from Douglas
>(?) as to what will become of the e-gold users and their monies that
>were stolen on April 24, 2007!
>
>Is it just me, or was this the first question that blasted forth
>from your mouth after having read this piece! WHAT ABOUT THE E-GOLD
>USERS THAT HAVE BEEN SCREWED AS A RESULT OF YOUR FAILING IN YOUR
>FIDUCIARY DUTIES!
>
>WHAT ABOUT US AND WHAT ABOUT OUR GOLD!
>
>Thanks, again, Adam, for the update.
>
>All the best.
>
>Sincerely,
>Bill Bochynski
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: YAlwaysWar at EarthLink.Net
>Date: July 23, 2008 2:08:38 AM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>Dear Wavyhill:
>
>At 06:06 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>
>>No one has charged me, much less convicted me, of anything criminal.
>>My savings are gone. My self-styled masters have it.
>>Where is my justice?
>>
>>wavyhill
>
>
>Ditto!
>
>Thanks for saying so.
>
>All the best.
>
>Sincerely,
>Bill Bochynski
>
Begin forwarded message:
>From: "Jeffrey Lyon" <jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net>
>Date: July 22, 2008 3:28:32 PM GMT-04:00
>To: gold-silver-crypto at rayservers.com
>Subject: Re: [gsc] A New Beginning (E-Gold)
>
>My biggest concern is that exchangers and merchants will fall into the
>trap of being identified by e-gold as launders of their customer's
>funds and have their entire accounts seized accordingly.
>
>I'd be in favor of the e-Bullion model where the funds are basically
>considered cleared after a 24 hour hold.
>
>Jeff
>
>On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:56 PM, George Hara
><georgegabrielhara at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>Wavyhill,
>>
>>
>>>the gold stolen belonged not to egold, but to its customers. If
>>>you fine a bank for criminal activity, you dont take it from the
>>>depositors accounts. In order to justifiably keep assets taken
>>>from customer accounts, seems to me you have to convict them of
>>>something, or at least prove the assets are the proceeds of crime,
>>>even if you cant identify the offenders.
>>
>>Their logic must be quite simple: if you're anonymous, you're not a
>>person, hence you don't exist.
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Jeffrey Lyon, President
>Level III Information Systems Technician
>jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
>Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.
>
>Talk for 4h 45m from the U.S. to Latin America for $10.00:
>http://www.defensecalling.com
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
More information about the info
mailing list