Lester Chow is a FRAUD

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Han Mann

2023-02-03 01:37:56 UTC

You ask for money for waht you claim to be legitiment charitys. Show proof
(other then your little website) that you are legit. Post 3 references,
people who will back you up over the phone for people who want to send you
money. Just 3 people should be easy if what you say is true.

I am not a fraud. Normal people knowing this would wonder who are all of
these people damning me and for what reason. I certainly don't blame
anyone, if they thought this way about all of the malicious and damning
postings found in newsgroups against me.
I am a good guy and I usually never attack other people. I respect
other's posting and ideas. If I do not like someone's posting, I will
never say anything hurtful against him or her. If I do attack someone, it
is because that person had attacked me first...even then, there are many
times, when I will not say anything against another person, so as to keep
the peace.
--
Lester D. K. Chow and Associates, International Political Consultants
and Conflict Resolution Specialists. http://lchow.webvis.net/temp.html
Official representative for China's Imperial family, for those members
who reside abroad in the United States of America.

We have investigated thoroughly and can verify with absolute certainty that Lester Chow is in fact the true heir apparent. Xi Jinping himself acknowledges such, but yet refuses to abdicate control of China by the CCP.

Han Mann

2023-02-03 01:52:49 UTC

Permalink

Han Mann

2023-02-03 01:58:29 UTC

Permalink

I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.

Han Mann

2023-02-03 02:20:02 UTC

Permalink

Post by Han Mann

I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.

Who by the way is James Takayama? He obviously doesn't know Chow personally. Where is his evidence to support his aspersions? He claims to be on an outer island, but fails to specify. We can assume that if he is even a real man, he does not live on Oahu, where Chow lives. So, what's his real, agenda? His name is Japanese. Perhaps he has some Chinese heritage, but nevertheless, has had no personal dealings with Chow at all.

Han Mann

2023-02-03 02:37:45 UTC

Permalink

Post by Han Mann

I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.

After thorough investigation, evidence fully supports that Lester Chow is in fact the true heir apparent.
Xi Jinping himself does not deny this, yet still refuses to abdicate control of China by the CCP. As far
as can be determined, his imperial majesty does not seek charity for himself, rather offers his services
as a mediator of transnational and Chinese domestic concerns.

I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not
necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.

Who by the way is, James Takayama? His name is Japanese. Perhaps he has some Chinese heritage?
He obviously doesn't know Chow personally. Where is his evidence to support his aspersions? He claims
to be on an outer island, but fails to specify. He does not live on the same island as Chow, and makes
no assertion to have had any personal dealings with him at all. So, what's his real, agenda?

Han Mann

2023-02-03 02:45:24 UTC

Permalink

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

After thorough investigation, evidence fully supports that Lester Chow is in fact the true heir apparent.
Xi Jinping himself does not deny this, yet still refuses to abdicate control of China by the CCP. As far
as can be determined, his imperial majesty does not seek charity for himself, rather offers his services
as a mediator of transnational and Chinese domestic concerns.

I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not
necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.

Who by the way is, James Takayama? His name is Japanese. Perhaps he has some Chinese heritage?
He obviously doesn't know Chow personally. Where is his evidence to support his aspersions? He claims
to be on an outer island, but fails to specify. He does not live on the same island as Chow, and makes
no assertion to have had any personal dealings with him at all. So, what's his real, agenda?

Han Mann

2023-02-03 03:13:33 UTC

Permalink

After thorough investigation, evidence fully supports that Lester Chow is in fact the true heir apparent.
Xi Jinping himself does not deny this, yet still refuses to abdicate control of China by the CCP. As far
as can be determined, his imperial majesty does not seek charity for himself, rather offers his services
as representative of Royal Family members in the United States. Of which there no doubt are many.

I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not
necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.

Who by the way is, James Takayama? His name is Japanese. Perhaps he has some Chinese heritage?
He obviously doesn't know Chow personally. Where is his evidence to support his aspersions? He claims
to be on an outer island, but fails to specify. He does not live on the same island as Chow, and makes
no assertion to have had any personal dealings with him at all.

So, what is Takayama's hidden agenda?

Han Mann

2023-02-03 21:22:25 UTC

Permalink

Post by Han Mann

After thorough investigation, evidence fully supports that Lester Chow is in fact the true heir apparent.
Xi Jinping himself does not deny this, yet still refuses to abdicate control of China by the CCP. As far
as can be determined, his imperial majesty does not seek charity for himself, rather offers his services
as representative of Royal Family members in the United States. Of which there no doubt are many.
I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not
necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.
Who by the way is, James Takayama? His name is Japanese. Perhaps he has some Chinese heritage?
He obviously doesn't know Chow personally. Where is his evidence to support his aspersions? He claims
to be on an outer island, but fails to specify. He does not live on the same island as Chow, and makes
no assertion to have had any personal dealings with him at all.
So, what is Takayama's hidden agenda?

Op-Ed: Here’s how to reform the law that made the internet

MARK WEINSTEIN
FEB. 3, 2023

The case was brought by the family of a woman killed in a 2015 Islamic State terrorist attack in Paris. The plaintiffs claimed that YouTube — which is owned by Google — knowingly permitted hundreds of radicalizing videos to be posted, and further alleged that YouTube recommended ISIS videos to users. Google argued that it’s exempted in this case by Section 230 — the powerful 1996 legislation that shields web and social media companies from legal liability for content posted by users.

Google’s position was supported by a federal district court and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court taking the case signals justices’ interest in weighing in on the landmark law, which remains a vital piece of legislation to protect small and medium-sized companies without deep pockets or armies of lawyers to fend off countless lawsuits. It gives companies broad leeway to moderate their sites at their discretion without liability and, most importantly, it enables startups to challenge established companies in the free market.

[Continues...]
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-02-03/internet-supreme-court-case-google-section-230

Han Mann

2023-02-05 00:24:56 UTC

Permalink

Post by Han Mann

After thorough investigation, evidence fully supports that Lester Chow is in fact the true heir apparent.
Xi Jinping himself does not deny this, yet still refuses to abdicate control of China by the CCP. As far
as can be determined, his imperial majesty does not seek charity for himself, rather offers his services
as representative of Royal Family members in the United States. Of which there no doubt are many.
I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not
necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.
Who by the way is, James Takayama? His name is Japanese. Perhaps he has some Chinese heritage?
He obviously doesn't know Chow personally. Where is his evidence to support his aspersions? He claims
to be on an outer island, but fails to specify. He does not live on the same island as Chow, and makes
no assertion to have had any personal dealings with him at all.
So, what is Takayama's hidden agenda?

Op-Ed: Here’s how to reform the law that made the internet
MARK WEINSTEIN
FEB. 3, 2023
The case was brought by the family of a woman killed in a 2015 Islamic State terrorist attack in Paris. The plaintiffs claimed that YouTube — which is owned by Google — knowingly permitted hundreds of radicalizing videos to be posted, and further alleged that YouTube recommended ISIS videos to users. Google argued that it’s exempted in this case by Section 230 — the powerful 1996 legislation that shields web and social media companies from legal liability for content posted by users.
Google’s position was supported by a federal district court and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court taking the case signals justices’ interest in weighing in on the landmark law, which remains a vital piece of legislation to protect small and medium-sized companies without deep pockets or armies of lawyers to fend off countless lawsuits. It gives companies broad leeway to moderate their sites at their discretion without liability and, most importantly, it enables startups to challenge established companies in the free market.
[Continues...]
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-02-03/internet-supreme-court-case-google-section-230

Just ask the people in the ancestral village of Chow's family in China about his visit.
Even the police were respectful of his preaching preaching the Gospel.

Han Mann

2023-02-05 00:27:32 UTC

Permalink

Post by Han Mann

After thorough investigation, evidence fully supports that Lester Chow is in fact the true heir apparent.
Xi Jinping himself does not deny this, yet still refuses to abdicate control of China by the CCP. As far
as can be determined, his imperial majesty does not seek charity for himself, rather offers his services
as representative of Royal Family members in the United States. Of which there no doubt are many.
I would caution that simply because someone might be considered to be a public figure, that does not
necessarily mean that one can not be sued for slander and libel.
Who by the way is, James Takayama? His name is Japanese. Perhaps he has some Chinese heritage?
He obviously doesn't know Chow personally. Where is his evidence to support his aspersions? He claims
to be on an outer island, but fails to specify. He does not live on the same island as Chow, and makes
no assertion to have had any personal dealings with him at all.
So, what is Takayama's hidden agenda?

Op-Ed: Here’s how to reform the law that made the internet
MARK WEINSTEIN
FEB. 3, 2023
The case was brought by the family of a woman killed in a 2015 Islamic State terrorist attack in Paris. The plaintiffs claimed that YouTube — which is owned by Google — knowingly permitted hundreds of radicalizing videos to be posted, and further alleged that YouTube recommended ISIS videos to users. Google argued that it’s exempted in this case by Section 230 — the powerful 1996 legislation that shields web and social media companies from legal liability for content posted by users.
Google’s position was supported by a federal district court and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court taking the case signals justices’ interest in weighing in on the landmark law, which remains a vital piece of legislation to protect small and medium-sized companies without deep pockets or armies of lawyers to fend off countless lawsuits. It gives companies broad leeway to moderate their sites at their discretion without liability and, most importantly, it enables startups to challenge established companies in the free market.
[Continues...]
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-02-03/internet-supreme-court-case-google-section-230

Just ask the people in the ancestral village of Chow's family in China about his visit.
Even the police were respectful of his preaching the Gospel.