Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Torture and Suffering

Dear ones, those who share in Christ’s suffering, you are blessed. Like all of you I shy away from and recoil to pain and suffering. The greatest part of the pain is the perplexity. All the foundations of what you understood about God are shaken. This is scary but in the end when these foundations are reset with greater revelation they form a promotion. Some of you can’t see the promotion at the moment and think your valley will be the end of you. This is not true. Blessed men go through their valleys of weeping. I have a life seasoned by these valleys and know this truth; revelation will come that makes sense of all the suffering. For me this time has arrived. I can say from this place it was all worth it. July will be a very revelatory time. Sense will continue to increase. My prayer for you is that you persevere to that time. Our souls are tempted by all its weakness during these hard times but we have them precisely for that reason. God in love does not let us rest in our weakness but strengthens us. Take comfort in His love and lean not on your own understanding. He will heal the pain, end the suffering, and promote you into a higher spiritual relationship.

Now you have it good. The wicked on the other hand don’t suffer as you they are tortured. They cannot get over $3,000 or forgive themselves if duped. They must condemn others for they can find no redemptive purpose in their torture. Gloom, misery, and despair is all they know. Their knowledge of good and evil is evil at best. All their judgments are harsh for they only know harsh. The God they imagine is a hater who never liberates them from their torture. Grace and love is unknown to them so it can never be offered from them. Even in your suffering you can thank God you are not a tortured soul.

11 comments:

mogel said...

"A central tenet of our republic-a characteristic that separates us from totalitarian regimes throughout the world—is that the government and private citizens resolve disputes on an equal playing field in the courts. When citizens face the government in the federal courts, the job of the judge is to apply the law, not bolster the government's case." Beaty v. United States, 1991.CO6.42163 32; 937 F.2d 288 (6th Cir. 1991).

peanut gallery said...

Mogel,
Thanks for the input, but you missed the point of my question. You seemed to have taken a defensive stand with regard to my question relating to the process. I am an advocate of what the guys are doing.
So let me recap. In October of 2005 my property went into foreclosure (not because of Dorean, but due to other circumstances)
My credit report shows the foreclosure by the primary mortgage holder (Chase)The second mortgage(Countrywide) shows no foreclosure or default, but shows that it is current. That is what seems strange to me. Do you think that it has anything to do with the process?
Thanks

mogel said...

"The second mortgage(Countrywide) shows no foreclosure or default, but shows that it is current."
_________________________________
That does seem odd. Does the 2nd mortgage show "paid off"? If it did, then maybe you could think it was attributable to the process. It might just be a reporting error or glitch by Countrywide. If you called up Countrywide on the phone & asked them to send you a payment history for the last 12 months, maybe you can get a better feel for what their in house records say. The lenders in house records often don't match the credit bureau's records, so it's not so unusual.

For a few months, a couple years ago, my mortgage showed paid off & it shot my credit score up about 70 points, but that status didn't last long.

mogel said...

Justice7777777:

You have contintually believed that the testimony of damaged clients or government witnesses will bring down the Dorean Group's fate to a life imprisonment. You wanted a sign or a witness that Kurt & Scott have been right about anything from the beginning.

Here is the sign that you were wrong from the very beginning about everything. It hasn't happened yet, but soon enough will. The sign is that Kurt long ago predicted a "political solution" rather than a "judicial solution" to all of these problems & issues that you see. This settlement will not be decided by a trial, or by a jury, or controlled by a Judge, but by agents from powers "behind the scenes" higher up in power. When that happens & probably not too distant in the future, you will know that the Dorean Group was right all along & their system was legitimate. When these agents (representatives to the Bank & Finance committee, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, the Treasury), agree in writing and acknowledge the legitimacy of the process due to being afraid to open up "Pandoras Box" by a full blown trial, a financially settlement will happen. Already events to bring this blessed event to a conclusion are already in the works. The settlement conference on July 30, 2007 has started the ball rolling and the ball is going in the right direction for a change.

It has also been said that "there will be a private perception of the success of the process and a public perception which is totally contradictory". With the conviction of two Brokers and the bad press, you already have the public perception that the process was a scam, which will not change, but the private perception will come to pass soon enough when clients will know they made the right decision to become a part of all of this when a "behind the scenes" settlement happens & clients know this by their financial windfall. When this happens, Kurt will be right when he said the Judge & prosecution will be the last to know that the criminal case has been dropped & he prophesied this event long before it was even realistic to see.

habakkuk said...

Mogel...I believe this is true and is happening as we speak.

justice7777777 said...

mogel said...
Justice7777777:

With the conviction of two Brokers and the bad press...

This is a perfect example of how off base and the fact of you distorting the truth.

Name the "two Brokers" that have been convicted?

FACT: There is only one conviction at this stage, but yet your inability to learn the detail of law is once again apparent.

southernbornandbred said...

I believe the two he is speaking of are Dewey and Farrel.

mogel said...

Justice said: "There is only one conviction at this stage, but yet your inability to learn the detail of law is once again apparent."
__________________________________
Let's go to the Law Dictionary to settle the matter. Convict: "one who has been determined by the court to be guilty of the crime charged; ALSO, so to determine such guilt. As ordinary used, [the term] carries with it the idea that the person of whom it is spoken IS GUILTY of a crime of such infamous character as to be punishable by imprisonment.... and therefore is to be taken prima facie as importing guilt of such crime and imprisonment in consequence." ONE IS CONVICTED UPON A VALID PLEA OF GUILTY OR a verdict of guilty and judgment of conviction entered thereupon."


One wonders why anyone would plead to a guilty verdict if one is not guilty of a crime. One also wonders why one would plead to a conviction of one felony count if one thinks he won't be convicted & punished accordingly. So you believe that the other Broker (Farrel) won't get any jail time or pay no fines whatsoever based upon his guilty plea agreement? Isn't that very unlikely & against the agreement terms? Didn't Farrel in essence convict himself by agreement? So if someone admits guilt by a signed agreement this ISN'T a conviction or a victory for the prosecution in your viewpoint?

I believe the legal definition says otherwise & includes other scenarios other than the court formally sentening someone.

True the court hasn't sentenced or convicted him, but Farrel is still convicted by his agreement. Now if you want to argue the validity of that agreement, that is another issue.

Justice, as expected, I think you are wrong again.

mogel said...

If the Strawman theory has no legal meaning, why would James Larson, the U.S. Magistrate Judge involved in any settlement possibilities put his signature on this sentence of his:

"Any party who is NOT A NATURAL PERSON shall be represented by an individual NOT DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE EVENTS which give rise to the litgation but with full authority to negotiate a settlement."

Is this sentence also an admission by the Judge that Dale Scott Heineman and Kurt F. Johnson are not the same as DALE SCOTT HEINEMAN AND KURT F. JOHNSON, the entities on trial for felonies against the UNITED STATES?

Kurt & Scott maintain:

"Affiants have made clear they are not now, nor have ever been, the fictional defendants under oath having never been rebutted by the prosecution under oath, under the pains and penalty of perjury"

Where is Pauligirl to enlighten us? LOL

"Affiants are not directly involved in the events which gave rise to the litigation, but are possessed with full authority to negotiate a settlement."

Why a trial makes no legal sense:

"Affiants do not believe it lawful by the UNITED STATES to punish, defendants for the exposure of fraud under the public policy of good faith, fair dealing, honesty in fact, and full disclosure and how parties NOT SURETY can be held against their will without their consent to accomodation for crimes commercial without victims or damages."

Another good reason for a dismissal of the case now if not soon, is that only 53 counts are relevant since 15 of the bank fraud charges have been dropped upon a motion by proseuction granted on 4-24-2007 and since most of these counts have a MAXIMUM STATUTORY CLAIM of 1 million each for a maximum total of a 53 million dollar claim that has already been offered to be paid by the defendants exemption from the beginning in good faith.

In other words, the UNITED STATES alleges a claim, a bogus one at that, and a scenario is agreed to in order to satisfy that claim, how can a trial be mandated or justified or needed when public policy dictates a settlement under the rules of fair play and full disclosure and honor. Since alleged damages are met and agreed to in honor, there is no longer a controversy, hence, no more need for a trial.

I like this part of Kurt's offer:

"THE UNITED STATES will cease from trespassing upon the contracts of the defendants. The UNITEED STATES will make it clear that none of the public filings attached to the business activities of the Dorean Group or the defendants are bogus that they were sound, honest, and consistent with the facts presented. This allows for remedy towards damages... That the UNITED STATES reverse the sanctions in the civil actions and dismiss the case making it quietly disappear."

mogel said...

"There is only one conviction at this stage, but yet your inability to learn the detail of law is once again apparent."
_________________________________

Justice, you have been shown wrong again, simply by the "detailed" weight of your own conviction. LOL

You're kind of like Nemo too, you really can't sincerely believe half of the things you've written, do you?

Or are these issues the only things apparently transparent to me? LOL

mogel said...

Just an Ass seriously asked: Name the "two Brokers" that have been convicted?
_________________________________

Ok, Regis, how about Dewey Tobias and Mr. Rodney Austin as my final answer? LOL
Rebut that!

From the Mortgage Fraud website: "Rodney Austin, Tega Cay, South Carolina was given a 10-year suspended sentence and placed on two years probation after pleading guilty to obtaining a signature or property with a value of more than $5,000 under false pretenses. Charges against his wife, Deborah Austin, Tega Cay, South Carolina, were dropped. Austin WAS CHARGED in connection with his role as a broker for the Dorean Group. According to an article in the Fort Mill Times, the Austins allegedly set up trusts linked to Dorean on three different properties in Tega Cay, South Carolina but were only charged in connection with one of the properties. Both defendants also reportedly agreed to testify against Dale Scott Heineman and Kurt Johnson."