Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Michael Harlieb Screws Everyone Again!

  1. #1
    crfceo is offline
    Banned
    crfceo's Avatar
    Joined: Apr 2008 Posts: 205

    Michael Harlieb Screws Everyone Again!

    I propose a class action suit against Mr. Hartlieb for the intentional financial harm he has caused all holders of sirius stock.

    http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/r...ent=6520035250

  2. #2
    zcurzan is offline
    Senior Member
    zcurzan's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 404
    I know that he stops in on these boards, so I am interested to hear his explanation for all of this.

    Hartleib:
    From your own admission it appears that the FCC has brushed off your comments. Are they simply ignoring you completely, or have they given you some sort of official communication saying that your allegation was being looked into, or that it is without merit?

    Don't you think if the redacted documents contained the information that you claim it does, the commission would be more accommodating to your requests? How is your request to view redacted and proprietary SIRI/XMSR information more legit than me walking into the FCC building off the street and saying "Hey that crap you blacked out. Show it to me, I think you're hiding something." Isn't that whole point of it being redacted? It's information you aren't and should not be privy to?
    Last edited by zcurzan; 07-24-2008 at 03:42 PM.

  3. #3
    tim wallick is offline
    Enthusiast
    tim wallick's Avatar
    Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 204
    as i recall they never gave him a answer one way or the other...other then telling him they coverted it into a complaint and forwarded it to the enforcement folks.

    heres the case number SAVC08-00790 CJC (ANx)

  4. #4
    SteveSirius is offline
    Enthusiast
    SteveSirius's Avatar
    Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 136
    This guy is a piece of work! All his letter does is accuse the FCC of improper supervision and cover-ups. Then he goes on to threaten the FCC by saying he will sue them. He asks Tate to "disclose the agency's failures" and "explain the lack of enforcement." That is like the old accusing question "So, when did you stop beating your wife?" He says he has been "advised that the FCC intends to downplay the failure of the companies' lack of compliance" (whatever that means!). I wonder who is "advisor" is?!? Perhaps it is his cousin at the grocery store. Why does he think anyone is supposed to get back to him just because he throws darts? I would assume a government agency would have the obligation to allow public comment, but would not have the obligation to respond to those comments. I'm just shaking my head at this guy!
    Last edited by SteveSirius; 07-24-2008 at 04:52 PM.

  5. #5
    tim wallick is offline
    Enthusiast
    tim wallick's Avatar
    Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 204
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveSirius View Post
    This guy is a piece of work! All his letter does is accuse the FCC of improper supervision and cover-ups. Then he goes on to threaten the FCC by saying he will sue them. He asks Tate to "disclose the agency's failures" and "explain the lack of enforcement." That is like the old accusing question "So, when did you stop beating your wife?" He says he has been "advised that the FCC intends to downplay the failure of the companies' lack of compliance" (whatever that means!). I wonder who is "advisor" is?!? Perhaps it is his cousin at the grocery store. Why does he think anyone is supposed to get back to him just because he throws darts? I would assume a government agency would have the obligation to allow public comment, but would not have the obligation to respond to those comments. I'm just shaking my head at this guy!
    fcc rules has some wording that seems to indicate they were required to inform him of the complaint outcome. and to make matters public when requested to do so.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •