This is Treason, violating knowingly the US Supreme Court Ruling on the 1st Amendment by singling out through legislation a person or group for limitation of general availability by class, creation of a sub-class of U.S. Citizen, and knowing fraud in publication of prior censorship models under new codewords as was seen in the alt, binary, and warez newsgroup censorship of the 1990s. Certain U.S. States also have Constitutional Amendments against this limitation of Free Speech by denial of service through knowing means based on content and suppression of report (Title 18 USC Sec 1519 and 1513e) which would make denial of requests to data by any mechanism from a willing requesting party to a provider a Federal felony act. The chart CP80 shows is incorrect, in that it presumes the ICANN and US DoD have authority over the backbone traffic and use of the Internet. While Interstate law does apply and jurisdiction over criminal activity does apply, the OWNERSHIP and RIGHT OF USE including method of use are private in nature to the commercial carriers and independent server hosts - all of whom have the right to use ANY PORT They wish for ANY SERVICE and are protected from censorship by virtue of the unity of common ports for common (vital, commercial, business) traffic such as 80 and 443 (HTTP and HTTPS). This debate is old (as TCP/IP) and this face only shows the tragic low, gross incompetence, and criminal unamerican nature of charity contributions by firms participating with CP80.org to promote this awful concept on the American People. The CDA2 was STRUCK DOWN and the Internet Deemed APPROPRIATE FOR AUDIENCES OF THE AGE OF MAJORITY in the Supreme Court (18+ in most states of the Union). This operation is therefor in knowing conflict with the Supreme Court decision, operating to undermine the United States Constitution, and such an act overt treason of the worst sort. Yes, porn can be bad. So can politics, religion, and diet pill spam. But the cult of the child excuse will not and shall never justify the open act of sedition or treason against the United States or its highest court, nor legislation proposed or passed circumvent those protections (Article 6, US Constitution) or rights of any single State (Article 4 Section 2). 15,000 dead, and all they can do is concern themselves with pornography? 3.5Million animals euthanized annually in the USA, and they want to double the cost of Internet maintenance prior to legislating against industries based on cultural, religious, and sexual taboos? Monsters. Child-like hate-mongers. One and all.

I should mention my theory on references, which is to get in writing all resume files and promise to terminate the employee on any fraud. Then, if we ever have issue with the employee we call the references and verify. It isn't relevant unless we turn up fraud and we take all referenes with a grain of salt (refs are easily faked, esp at interview time). But later, they make great excuses to deal explicitely with nasty bad hires - granting leverage that often generates good hires without all the nasty 'firing' after the first 90 days. HR officers of companies cannot be trusted to be honest and accurate in this day and age, with only 4-6 years of education and no leadership experience at most centers, they are little more than cattle rustling pr reps for the non-union shops. But a fake reference is gold on the chopping block. Then you can talk blackmail, albiet constructive retention oriented make-a-man-out-of-you (sings) sort of incentive to shape up. When I can't find a fake line in a resume in today's market, then I worry.

No employee gets hired without competence in Federal Law at our place ($300/hr). Any business that does this (blackmail) isn't legitimate for long, either. Of that I can attest (pointing to the dead body of FirstUSA among other calls). 20 years of self-employment and $800 million in pending litigation, I think I'll last. The lesson is - do this, and go to Hell. Tolerate this - and go to Hell with them. Remember - Criminal convictions or acquitals do not block civil damages (see OJ for debreifing on that one). True, it's scary, but having had someone kidnap and conceal my only child while taking out my full name as a dot-com, well... you have to put your foot down somewhere and say "ENOUGH". Otherwise, there's no point in trusting anyone (in big business). Between Peter Norton and Steve Wozniack, I can say there are a few blokes you can trust face to face. And failing that, well, the war stories are worth something in the end too (see Enron, MCI, Nortel, and Sprint for details on those). The wise manager fires the incompetent criminal and hires the kid who knows the law. Because in them, there is less risk (if you know the risks, really and truly). Not my fault most MBAs skip that semester.

The following is not legal advice - just my personal experience and some ideas: 1. Do not take this lightly. It is criminal conduct covered under Pub Law 107-204, 116 Stat, Sec 745 (Sarbanes-Oxley Act) and relevant to Title 18 USC Sec 1519 and 1513(e). Specifically, unlawful forced employment beyond the specified time is Title 18 USC Sec 1201 (read it). 2. Further, threat to carry out an action pursuant to your condition is Title 18 USC Sec 875 related conditional interference in future employment violating Title 18 USC Sec 1951. I know this because I'm filing on such a matter presently, pursuant death threats against myself and my family related kidnapping of my child without court order and false trial spanning 7 years with no lawful action of State and Federal officials. 3. You need the content of this threat in writing if that is the case, for criminal evidence, and should bring it to the attention of HR as a criminal complaint which you intend to file - as well as request with reasonable cause for an immediate letter from the company supporting your conduct and any review or documents regarding your person be provided immediately for such action. Denial of such evidence is cause for further Federal charges (all files relating an employee are the property of that employee, and must be provided and disclosed on demand of the employee). Failure to do so, in regard to a supporting supoena (which would be your next step) would be Title 18 USC Sec 1509 (Obstruction of Justice), so they should be very serious in their consideration of such denial or any alteration of documents after the fact. Failure to do so may result in corporate criminal charges applying to the Director or CEO of the firm who did deny or did refuse willfully to execute such request on demand (SOX). 4. Under public law, no person shall accuse another of a crime. This is up to a grand jury - which the U.S. Attorneys office or FBI (referring the matter to the US Attorney) will carry out. However, such a threat is a direct threat to life, property, and welfare - and as such may be responded to publicly and in association with the name of the firm, the officer, and the parties in the complaint, in addition to relevant legal citation of laws - before the media in case of public threat or publication or disclosure of libel (false information) or other means of duress against the victim of such initial threat. This matter covered in NY Libel law and the right to defense before public scrutiny pertaining self-defense. In my child's abduction at 81 days of age, I was publicly libeled and my full name taken out as a dot com address by the abductors from 2002-2004. Because law enforcement did not accept the seriousness of this and death threats published online in 2002 and assaults related in 2002 and 2003, my case was refused equal enforcement of criminal law (14th Amendment) over civil judgment ordered 'without right to face the accuser in court' or their counsel (plaintiff did not appear twice, defendant was denied access to the court room in subsequent and final hearing, and mistrial complaint ignored or denied despite 24 hours notice of hearing due interception of summons). The net result, 7 years of child concealment and $108,000 in damages on top of $900,000 in lost income, has led to a pending $400M lawsuit and 14 Federal Criminal counts under submission by our office on Title 18 USC Sec 872, 875, 1201 (The Lindberg Act), 1202, 1204, 1509, 1513(e), 1519, and 1951 (The Hobbs Act). In class action, the State of Texas plead Sovereign Immunity to avoid hearing the case, and then the Federal class action was dismissed denying the existence or reality of any legitimate complaint without investigation or interview or access of witnesses to the court. What you are encountering is a very criminal act, and should be recognized as such - as well as prosecuted. It is extortion in the most clear-cut sense, Interstate and International by nature of threat and job market, and can potentially ruin your chances at employment in the present corporate environment (see: Dun and Bradstreet - blacklisting of disgruntled employees a/k/a EPA/IRS regulations whistleblowers). All employers and workers should be aware that such threats and activities are serious, can cause millions of Dollars in damages, and are in my professional opinion (20 years, CEO) on par with treason in this economic crisis.