If Sam Sloan would provide a detailed explanation of why he was in jail,
lost his Securities license, and lost his Taxi Driver license, I would
seriously consider voting for him.

Those serious matters need to be cleared up beforehand, though.

THE SMEAR MERCHANT

Randy Bauer is the point man for this election.
His job is to defame Sam Sloan.

The mantra is that Sam is a convicted "felon,"
whereupon one does NOT mention the "crime" because
most people will understand that the crime was no
crime. Instead, one links a securities case that Sam
WON in the U.S. Supreme Court with the fact of his
being a convicted "felon."

The rhetorical lie here is that Mr. Bauer, our
man of government, figures most readers will conclude
that Sam was convicted of a securities violation. Not so.

Sam abducted his own daughter against a court
order in a case that would never have been a matter
for the government a couple of generations back. (How
ironic were Mr. Bauer ever in the same position, God
forbid.) As for the standards of a civilized country,
we will know when we have become a total
bureaucratized nightmare when the likes of Mr. Bauer
will be deciding when parents may see their children
and when they may not.

Mr. Bauer tells us in his sanctimonious way that
he would never vote for a convicted "felon." Hence
he will never vote for, say, GM Lev Alburt, who ran
afoul of a monstrous government by breaking Soviet law
when defecting.

Oh, wait, well no. Mr. Bauer would explain that
while he favors moving the government into the home,
he does not favor the laws under which former Soviet
citizens were convicted.

Mr. Bauer is our Orgburo man who is
currently currying favour obsequiously with the new
powers that be. He strings together disconnected
truths to create a false picture. And, to be sure, he
hopes that most of you don't realize how corrupt the
licensing system is for taxis in NYC. Sam is to be
congratulated for losing his license, not condemned.

Sam usually doesn't answer personal attacks.
When running for office, however, he is obliged to
respond to these smears by providing more details
about his problems in the past.

wrote:
Instead, one links a securities case that Sam
WON in the U.S. Supreme Court ...

It's a little more complicated than that. Sloan won ONCE, on a
procedural matter; but there were several violations that lead to his
ban from the securities industry.

More on Sam Sloan's career as a broker:

http://www.ishipress.com/sec1991.htm

Beginning in May 1970, Sloan was the sole proprietor and manager of
Samuel H. Sloan & Co. ("Sloan & Co."), a broker-dealer registered with
the SEC pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. ??
78o(b). In [*2] 1971, the SEC filed a complaint against Sloan and Sloan
& Co. seeking injunctive and other relief for alleged violations of
Sections 15(b)1, 15(c)(3) and 17(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C.
Sections 78o(b)(1), 78o(c)(3), and 78q(a), and Rules 17 C.F.R.
240.15b1-2, 15c3-1, 17a-3 and 17a-4 promulgated thereunder. On June 24,
1971, an order was entered on consent which preliminarily enjoined
Sloan and Sloan & Co. from further violations of the net capital and
bookkeeping requirements of the federal securities laws.

Thereafter, at trial, this Court found that Sloan & Co., under the
direction of Sloan, had violated provisions of the Exchange Act by
failing to properly maintain, keep current and preserve certain of its
books and records, and by effecting transactions in securities
otherwise than on a national securities exchange. The Court also found
that defendants, while engaged in unlawful acts, practices and courses
of business, had made use of the mails and means and instrumentalities
of interstate commerce, and effected the transactions otherwise than on
a national securities exchange. A number of the above mentioned
violations occurred after the Court's entry of the preliminary
injunction [*3] enjoining defendants from further violations. The Court
found that unless permanently enjoined, there was a likelihood that the
defendants would continue to engage in violations of the federal
securities laws. Accordingly, on January 14, 1974, a permanent
injunction was entered against defendants.

Sloan's appeal of the permanent injunction was dismissed because Sloan
was a fugitive when the appeal was scheduled to be heard. The Court of
Appeals in Sloan v. Sec, 535 F.2d 676, 677 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 429
U.S. 885 (1976), found that Sloan "apparently fled the jurisdiction to
escape sentencing for contempt of a preliminary injunction restraining
still further violations of SEC rules and requiring Sloan to permit SEC
examination of his books and records."

http://www.scripophily.net/canjavlimited.html

"This company [Canadian Javelin] was involved with distributing
misleading information, which ultimately led to a stock trading
suspension. This case was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court to decide on
the SECs authority in halting trading. This was a landmark securities
case, which has been continually referenced in subsequent security
cases. On November 29, 1973, apparently because Canadian Javelin
Limited had disseminated allegedly false and misleading press releases
concerning certain of its business activities, the Commission issued
the first of what was to become a series of summary 10-day suspension
orders continuously suspending trading in CJL common stock from that
date until January 26, 1975. App. 109. During this series of
suspensions respondent Sloan, who owned 13 shares of CJL stock and had
engaged in substantial purchases and short sales of shares of that
stock, filed a petition in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit challenging the orders on a variety of grounds."

wrote in message
oups.com...
THE SMEAR MERCHANT

Randy Bauer is the point man for this election.
His job is to defame Sam Sloan.

The mantra is that Sam is a convicted "felon,"



Randy Bauer is a convicted know-nothing jackass who's mission in life is
baseless self-promotion.
This moron has been cited on many occassions for overestimating his
position, telling blatant lies to smear his numerous and sundry enemies, and
making bad and ineffective decisions. I propose a lifetime ban from taking
anything this half-wit says with anything more than a grain of salt.

Jason Repa

Poor Liarry Parr. Here he comes to this forum trying to paint Sloan as the
victim by our excessive government and smear campaigns by his politcal enemies.

And then comes along the likes of The Historian, among others, who
present actual, irrefutable evidence demonstrating that Liarry wasn't telling
the whole truth. The guy just can't catch a break.

"The Historian" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
Instead, one links a securities case that Sam
WON in the U.S. Supreme Court ...

It's a little more complicated than that. Sloan won ONCE, on a
procedural matter; but there were several violations that lead to his
ban from the securities industry.

More on Sam Sloan's career as a broker:

http://www.ishipress.com/sec1991.htm

Beginning in May 1970, Sloan was the sole proprietor and manager of
Samuel H. Sloan & Co. ("Sloan & Co."), a broker-dealer registered with
the SEC pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. ??
78o(b). In [*2] 1971, the SEC filed a complaint against Sloan and Sloan
& Co. seeking injunctive and other relief for alleged violations of
Sections 15(b)1, 15(c)(3) and 17(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C.
Sections 78o(b)(1), 78o(c)(3), and 78q(a), and Rules 17 C.F.R.
240.15b1-2, 15c3-1, 17a-3 and 17a-4 promulgated thereunder. On June 24,
1971, an order was entered on consent which preliminarily enjoined
Sloan and Sloan & Co. from further violations of the net capital and
bookkeeping requirements of the federal securities laws.

Thereafter, at trial, this Court found that Sloan & Co., under the
direction of Sloan, had violated provisions of the Exchange Act by
failing to properly maintain, keep current and preserve certain of its
books and records, and by effecting transactions in securities
otherwise than on a national securities exchange. The Court also found
that defendants, while engaged in unlawful acts, practices and courses
of business, had made use of the mails and means and instrumentalities
of interstate commerce, and effected the transactions otherwise than on
a national securities exchange. A number of the above mentioned
violations occurred after the Court's entry of the preliminary
injunction [*3] enjoining defendants from further violations. The Court
found that unless permanently enjoined, there was a likelihood that the
defendants would continue to engage in violations of the federal
securities laws. Accordingly, on January 14, 1974, a permanent
injunction was entered against defendants.

Sloan's appeal of the permanent injunction was dismissed because Sloan
was a fugitive when the appeal was scheduled to be heard. The Court of
Appeals in Sloan v. Sec, 535 F.2d 676, 677 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 429
U.S. 885 (1976), found that Sloan "apparently fled the jurisdiction to
escape sentencing for contempt of a preliminary injunction restraining
still further violations of SEC rules and requiring Sloan to permit SEC
examination of his books and records."

http://www.scripophily.net/canjavlimited.html

"This company [Canadian Javelin] was involved with distributing
misleading information, which ultimately led to a stock trading
suspension. This case was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court to decide on
the SECs authority in halting trading. This was a landmark securities
case, which has been continually referenced in subsequent security
cases. On November 29, 1973, apparently because Canadian Javelin
Limited had disseminated allegedly false and misleading press releases
concerning certain of its business activities, the Commission issued
the first of what was to become a series of summary 10-day suspension
orders continuously suspending trading in CJL common stock from that
date until January 26, 1975. App. 109. During this series of
suspensions respondent Sloan, who owned 13 shares of CJL stock and had
engaged in substantial purchases and short sales of shares of that
stock, filed a petition in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit challenging the orders on a variety of grounds."

SAM'S '"FELONY"

Mr. John J:

You were lied to. Sam did not go to jail for
securities or licensing matters. He took his own
daughter against a court order. Period.

Randy Bauer tried the old ploy of stating that Sam
went to jail and was involved in a securities case.

THE TWO HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER.

Sam Sloan went to jail because he took his own
daughter against a court order. A political hack like
Randy Bauer calls that kidnapping. I call it an
affair of the heart. That is Sam's "criminality": an
act that would not have been under the purview of the
state a couple of generations back.

Sam took a securities case to the U.S. Supreme
Court and WON by 9-0. He is the last non-attorney to
argue successfully before the Court. He would have
had to prevail in a second case to recover his
license, which he had neither the money nor energy to
do. The bureaucrats lost in the courts but they won
out against the individual.

Sam can fill us in on the taxi license affair.

wrote:
SAM'S '"FELONY"

Mr. John J:

You were lied to. Sam did not go to jail for
securities or licensing matters. He took his own
daughter against a court order. Period.

Liarry, since you are an expert in this area, explain the "lie." Sam
Sloan is a convicted felon who served prison time and had his
securities license yanked.

In SloanParr land, every parent is allowed to take their children,
regardless of court order. It is called "an affair of the heart." I
wonder if every child taken by a parent, a parent, say, who has lived
in a homeless shelter and spent time in prison would feel the same as
our Liarry.


Randy Bauer tried the old ploy of stating that Sam
went to jail and was involved in a securities case.

Yes, those "old ploys" of stating facts are hard to accept in SloanParr
land.

THE TWO HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER.

THE TWO BOTH ARE FACTS.

Sam Sloan went to jail because he took his own
daughter against a court order. A political hack like
Randy Bauer calls that kidnapping. I call it an
affair of the heart. That is Sam's "criminality": an
act that would not have been under the purview of the
state a couple of generations back.

Parr has to resort to ploys, like claiming others are "hacks" because
he has no real answer to the fact that Sloan is a convicted felon who
served prison time. Mind you, lots of convicted felons escape prison
time. Sloan's "affiar of the heart" must have made a great impression
on a judge and/or jury.

Sam took a securities case to the U.S. Supreme
Court and WON by 9-0. He is the last non-attorney to
argue successfully before the Court. He would have
had to prevail in a second case to recover his
license, which he had neither the money nor energy to
do. The bureaucrats lost in the courts but they won
out against the individual.

As the Historian has already shown, the WIN had little impact on his
life and was really just a technicality. Bottom line, he lost his
securities license because of misconduct.

I ask again -- Liarry, how much money have you entrusted to your
securities whiz Sloan?

Randy Bauer

Sam and I happen to have a mutual friend whom I respect. He recently told me
that regarding the felony, Sam got a bum rap.

I am actually more concerned with what I read about the Securities
violations. Sam seemed to lack any good judgement back then and apparently
flaunted the law and continued violating a Federal Court order. That
concerns me.

I'm also disturbed that Sam still has a picture of 2 naked and apparently
underage girls on his web site. Poor judgement, once again.

We shall see.
wrote in message
oups.com...
SAM'S '"FELONY"

Mr. John J:

You were lied to. Sam did not go to jail for
securities or licensing matters. He took his own
daughter against a court order. Period.

Randy Bauer tried the old ploy of stating that Sam
went to jail and was involved in a securities case.

THE TWO HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER.

Sam Sloan went to jail because he took his own
daughter against a court order. A political hack like
Randy Bauer calls that kidnapping. I call it an
affair of the heart. That is Sam's "criminality": an
act that would not have been under the purview of the
state a couple of generations back.

Sam took a securities case to the U.S. Supreme
Court and WON by 9-0. He is the last non-attorney to
argue successfully before the Court. He would have
had to prevail in a second case to recover his
license, which he had neither the money nor energy to
do. The bureaucrats lost in the courts but they won
out against the individual.

Sam can fill us in on the taxi license affair.

Uzytkownik "Randy Bauer" napisal w wiadomosci
oups.com...

wrote:
SAM'S '"FELONY"

Mr. John J:

You were lied to. Sam did not go to jail for
securities or licensing matters. He took his own
daughter against a court order. Period.

Liarry, since you are an expert in this area, explain the "lie." Sam
Sloan is a convicted felon who served prison time and had his
securities license yanked.



Name-calling : another specialty of a member of the EB of the USCF.

I wonder how such an impertinent person like you could have been elected in
a civilized country to the EB ?

Jerzy wrote:
Uzytkownik "Randy Bauer" napisal w wiadomosci
oups.com...

wrote:
SAM'S '"FELONY"

Mr. John J:

You were lied to. Sam did not go to jail for
securities or licensing matters. He took his own
daughter against a court order. Period.

Liarry, since you are an expert in this area, explain the "lie." Sam
Sloan is a convicted felon who served prison time and had his
securities license yanked.



Name-calling : another specialty of a member of the EB of the USCF.

Try and keep up with the times. I am not on the EB. I am just stating
facts.

Now that you've lost your argument that this is all politics, why don't
you try and defend the convicted felon who has served jail time Sloan?

Randy Bauer