[Fwd: Amicus Brief to help keep religious wording out of Pledge]

Gregory Alan Bolcer gbolcer@endeavors.com
Fri, 14 Mar 2003 08:38:57 -0800


Dear Sirs,

I am writing to you to bring to your attention a gross
dereliction of duty of your customer service staff
at Global Crossing.

Why haven't you cancelled this account yet?  This is the 8th
documented violation of your terms of service.   You can refer
to the previous violations at:
http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2003-February/017858.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/fork@xent.com/msg06225.html
http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2002-December/016264.html

The Global Crossing terms of user are listed here:
http://www.globalcrossing.com/xml/global/gl_terms_of_use.xml

California AntiSpam laws passed in September 1998
require opt-out instructions and despite multiple
attempts to have the Global Crossing terms of service
enforced. The "OPT-OUT" instructions are not included
and multiple opt-out requests have not been honored.

Please contact me to explain why this 8th reported
incident hasn't been corrected.  Once again, the
level of your customer support in contradiction to
your stated terms of service apparently is broken.


Greg

-------- Original Message --------
From: - Fri Mar 14 08:10:36 2003
X-UIDL: AAg6UREAAAwgc7u6JANGLW0j1TtRaCxU
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Received: from smtp07.phx.gblx.net ([64.211.219.56]) by 
mail.endeavorstech.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329);	 Thu, 13 
Mar 2003 22:25:11 -0800
Received: (from daemon@localhost)	by smtp07.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) 
id XAA111114;	Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:24:57 -0700
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:24:57 -0700
Message-Id: <200303140624.XAA111114@smtp07.phx.gblx.net>
Received: from dup-200-64-206-193.prodigy.net.mx(200.64.206.193), 
claiming to be "prodigy" via SMTP by smtp07.phx.gblx.net, id 
smtpd0tDvaa; Thu Mar 13 23:24:44 2003
X-Sender: nolawyer@pop3.globalcrossing.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To:
From: nolawyer@globalcrossing.net (Bob Hirschfeld, JD)
Subject: Amicus Brief to help keep religious wording out of Pledge
Return-Path: nolawyer@globalcrossing.net
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Mar 2003 06:25:11.0601 (UTC) 
FILETIME=[777FB210:01C2E9F2]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.1 required=5.0 
tests=MISSING_HEADERS,MSG_ID_ADDED_BY_MTA_2,SPAM_PHRASE_02_03,	 
TO_EMPTY	version=2.45-cvs
X-Spam-Level: **

Amicus Brief to help keep religious wording out of the Pledge of Allegiance
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am researching, and preparing to draft and file a US Supreme Court Amicus
Curiae brief
supporting the correct 9th Circuit finding that "under God" added by
congressional
zealots in the 1950's is Unconstitutional as violating the Separation of 
Church
and State. The Amicus (Friend of the Court) brief will supplement any
response brief filed
in opposition to Attorney General Ashcroft's likely Petition for 
Certiorari, in
which Ashcroft would try to put "under God" back into the Pledge of 
Allegiance.

Mine is not an anti-religion effort, it is instead intended to return the
wording
to its rightful status as a civil patriotic pledge. Some truly religious
persons,
from a wide range of religions, and others for whom organized religion 
remains
distant, are supporting my efforts.

Two years ago, I filed two successive Petitions for Writ of Habeas 
Corpus in the
US Supreme Court, seeking to return the Cuban boy, Elian Gonzalez, to his
father.
The full court reviewed both Habeas Petitions, but did not act, because soon
after,
it was able to effectively ratify the lower Federal Court of Appeals
decision by simply
denying Certiorari.

Last year, I filed a Certiorari Petition for Carnell Smith, of Georgia, 
who has
proven by DNA testing that he is not the biological father of a girl he was
tricked into supporting. He sought to stop the wrongful support order and
obtain a reimbursement for $20,000 of wrongfully paid support.
That Petition, along with thousands of others, was denied Certiorari without
comment.

Hopefully the Flag Pledge case will suffer the same fate. However, my Amicus
project
will likely assist the Court in either denying Certiorari, or if review is
granted,
in finally affirming the lower court decision.

I am 62 years old. I learned, at age 3, during the Second World War, to
recite the original Pledge. I was in elementary school when the
religion-promoting unconstitutional Congressional wording was added. I have
continued
since that usurpation, to remain silent  when others mouth "under God".
I've recited the original wording perhaps 10,000 times in the past fifty 
years.

If you wish to donate to my effort, covering costs and expenses, there
is a web page where you may use your credit card:
http://www.nolawyer.com/pledge/pledge.html

Bob Hirschfeld, JD