Feedback to Pinterest Help Center

English: Red Pinterest logo

English: Red Pinterest logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Your email address *
Title *Kindly be aware Pinterest user interests infringed and embezzled to perverting the course of justice for several times

Dear Pinterest administrator:

Firstly, I am seeking for the reason why so frequently account denied entry. Today, again I could not register to my, also failed with the Twitter and Facebook entry method.

Second, kindly be aware of this Pinterest user account being illegally used to embezzle the victim user’s own green card and perverting the course of justice for several times. Last time, not long ago, on this August 26 the suspect with his parent were notified to be making a false testimony to the Federal Law Court at New York District which in video conference connecting to the New Taipei district court or Taipei district court with the suspect’s parent, seeking the account of the victim user in this National Central Library with public computer taking the user’s WordPress blog account combined with your user account for a false testimony on the identity theft case of green card and the suspect was probably with witness dying cases and murder cases committed to have the motive to embezzle this user account to make that false testimony.

For the reason that I did not pay any money to this Pinterest user account but as the victim user, only hereby notify the Pinterest company or local administrator at Taiwan with you, that you could be involved with the infringement to the user and perverting the court of justice in the USA federal law court and Taiwan local district courts.

Best regards,

David CK Chang, SSN057-86-4042, 121485303,
Oct 18, 2013,
National Central Library,
Taipei City

Help us categorize the issue *
We’ll get back to you right away with tips to solve the problem based on your selection.
* Login & Registration::Login help
First Name *David
Last Name *Chang
Pinterest Username *

Check the box if you’re a business:
Do you need help on your computer, phone or tablet? *
– Computer iPhone iPad Android
What browser do you use? *
– Internet Explorer Chrome Firefox Safari Other NA – using App


7 Things Edward Snowden Should Do in Russia

Kalmykia temple Russia(Comment by David, Aug 4) I read it from Taiwan’s newspaper, not from the medium carried message, that Vladimir Putin has a house located not very far from Taipei CKS International Airport. Maybe Edward Snowden could visit the small town near Taipei where Vladimir Putin’s house located with his asylum petition, or maybe he could just have some sight-seeing around.


A year is barely enough time to study a country as strange and enormous as Russia. So Edward Snowden, the American whistle-blower who was granted a year of asylum in Russia on July 31, will have to make good use of it if, as his lawyer claims, he wants to “study Russian culture” and travel its nine time zones. So far, there is no clear information on where he would be living or how far he’d actually be allowed to travel. But in case he’s able to take in some sights, TIME compiled a list of seven things he should definitely put on his calendar.

Visit the Duma: Considering the fan club Snowden has developed inside Russia’s parliament – one lawmaker has pledged to nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize – it would be rude not to swing by for a visit. In the gift shop on the…

View original post 1,179 more words

Remarks, “20130702 Letter to Control Yuan Ombudsman Mr Wang Chien-Shien”

English: Táiběi Zhōngzhèng District ZhōngShān ...

English: Táiběi Zhōngzhèng District ZhōngShān South Rd – QīngDăo East/West Rd Intersection Control Yuan (Taiwan) Side entrance Deutsch: Táiběi Stadtteil Zhōngzhèng Kreuzung zwischen ZhōngShān South Rd und QīngDăo East/West Rd Kontroll-Yuan (Taiwan) Seiteneingang (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Remarks, “20130702 Letter to Control Yuan Ombudsman Mr Wang Chien-Shien”

The libel trial against ROC Constitution Article 8th in New Taipei District Court to allege that defendant Mr David Chang was writing a Yahoo blog to disseminate in public that Mr Liao Cheng-Han and Ms Chiu Shu-Chen had an illegitimate daughter Ms Liao Yu-Wen was libel act to injure Mr Liao Cheng-Han’s good name, which allegation was conflicted with the truth and based on law court’s own lies to deny that the defendant was thirty years ago an underage witness summoned by the same district court of the rape case of Ms Chiu Shu-Chen against Mr Liao Cheng-Han, which raping was leading to the birth of Ms Liao Yu-Wen. The New Taipei District Court Prosecutors Office, the New Taipei District Court, the Taiwan High Court, and the Supreme Prosecutors Office all lied against the Criminal Procedural Code provision 158 to deny a legitimate evidence that the defendant Mr David Chang secured with his status of an underage witness summoned by the same law court thirty years ago.
…the justices was not act to be ignorant, but act to perform a miscarriage of justice with lying in the law court. Therefore, according to ROC Constitution Article 8th, submit impeachment of Judicial Yuan breaching discipline with lying in libel criminal court…


Perjury of a synthesized photo

[C] Café

[C] Café (Photo credit: anieto2k)

According to local information source, last November the US criminal investigating officials ever provided the picture of murder suspect mentioned on my November 6, 2012 essay “Patterns; Legal System Field Survey Report”, to the local police and law court authority for the inquiry purpose. The Taiwan famous computer company CEO and relative of the murder victim had one copy of that photo to review during the murder investigation, and I was as their neighbor to know it from the neighborhood community which they both lodged. The location of that photo was at a nearby internet cafe which the CEO’s young son were shot dead across the street. The timing of that photo taken was within 72 hours after the murder happened in last August. On the photo there were several foreigners with one or two Taiwanese shown chatting and laughing on it, one of the Taiwanese was said to be the district court prosecutor with central intelligent agent identity, the other was said to be one of my university classmates. As the information source revealed, the local police and court authority was submitting another synthesized picture with my face and figure appeared on the photo to answer the US official investigating query just before this whole year of baloney libel law suit without any necessary legal elements to consist the crime. That was kind of perjury to the US investigating officials, you know. That internet cafe at nearby was opened by a Council Member of Changhua County and relative of the 2008 March 24 executed victim of a miscarriage of justice from a 2004 libel case indicted and settled to jail. The internet cafe was transferred to nearby grocery store owner around the same timing, probably this April. Before the internet cafe was transferred from the county council member to the grocery owner there were coffee and beer provided at the bar in the internet cafe, and the photo was shot when the murder suspects from Kiwanis camp pulled the coffee table to the front door to have all of them chatting and laughing in the photo.

Actually, on October 29, 2012 my blue planner was taken within the New Taipei City Library, or simply in law that the planner was only forgotten by the privy myself in the library to be just lost. On that day in the New Taipei City Library there could be found several special agents in plain clothes hanging out in the computer facility room, apparently for the purpose of collecting information and related evidences. There were apparent energy harassment in addition to the computer network unstable problems upon the privy myself before the planner forgotten on the computer table. In my lost blue planner, there were detail records of the date and expense of my hang out to that nearby internet cafe where the murder suspects pictures were shooting. It was started from April 20 2012 when the Apollo Internet Cafe opposite to my house was closed in this April, well after the murder date which was supposed to happen in last August of 2011. That synthesized picture with my face and figure shown on it was supposed to be shot by the camera of the 85-degree C Cafe Coffee and Bread Shop nearby my house when I made a six months duration of monthly fixed amount consumption within their 85-degree C Cafe Coffee and Bread Shop just after 2008 May my patronized McDonald’s NO.79 outlet nearby my house was closed. The 85-degree C Cafe Coffee and Bread Shop which I had an oral quarrel in the National Central Library with their owners because I could not stand the energy harassment and also stopped making any consumption there after 2008 December.

Also according to the local information source that in addition to the district court prosecutor, there was a local judge involved the perjury but the local information source did not mention any apparent reason or motive that the judge would involve with this perjury of a synthesized picture which was sent to the US investigating officials for a murder investigation. Besides, the criminal police officer was supposed to be within the implication and arrested me in November 2004 from the McDonald’s and on December 29, 2011 arrested me from my house, without any justifiable reasons. The criminal police officer was in some kind of dispute out of the agent contact signing quota issue, quarreled with that prosecutor and my university classmate in 2002 within the neighboring community, but that university classmate was not the same one who appeared on the internet cafe photo mentioned by my November 6, 2012 essay “Patterns; Legal System Field Survey Report”. That criminal police officer was also a prosecutor since last year to pass a national government officer examination but without any case presided in the district court.

Later in 2002 the criminal police officer signed a contract from then Taipei City mayor to be an undercover agent to investigate the community where the criminal police officer quarreled with my classmate and the prosecutor because they both dropped him from the signing of the agent contract, in which community the USA FBI agents Ms Suzuki and Ms Chelsea in 2002 summer came to investigate the elementary pupil Kelly car accidental death case and thereafter some coerced sex cases happened and reported from the very community. The criminal police officer was ever heard to have complaint that the US central intelligence agent quota was occupied by the prosecutor and local NSB agent contract quota was occupied by my university classmate, and he was said to be jealous of me because these two high level agents were all mentioned as my classmates. He should be mistaken me to be having that kind of privilege to sign the high level agent contract in priority order just like my classmates signed their contracts, and therefore depriving his chance to sign the USA or local agent contract. Actually, I did not have any of that contract signed. That was ever since the day on August 2, 1996 I was with my F1-Visa status, I counselled with then USA First Lady Mrs Hillary R. Clinton in the New York City, that I should not sign the central intelligence agent contract but to take care of the civil rights case of my sister and my case as well as a civilian not in a military agent status. I thought that I had a tacit grant of nodding alike there in the New York City. But just in days after my grandmother died on August 9, 1996 at Taipei City in the hospital, the third party source informed me in the New York City that the USA first lady signed my classmate of that prosecutor because my classmate of that prosecutor in charge of a political fund was pending which was previously planning to donate several hundred million New Taiwan Dollars to the Democratic Party account, and probably she was also considering her father Mr Hugh Rodham’s death case on November 12, 1990 at Taipei Hospital would need somebody to follow up. It was not for the concerns of my sister or my civil rights case. Nevertheless, I never signed any agent contract to occupy the quota which that the criminal police officer complained to deprive his chance and envy of me to have that privilege.

My university classmate was mentioned in the fifth case of my November 6, 2012 essay “Patterns; Legal System Field Survey Report”, killed in the Thailand male singer and local female singer related disputes. That university classmate of mine was said to apply for signing a central intelligence agent contract and had himself under agency review to be in a recruit training status. The agent contract seemed to be rejected earlier in this year. My university classmate had a high school age daughter, was said to be missing from a false car accident and hospital mistreat since last connected in March this year. The first thing we have to make out is that whether one or two of the victims, the father and the daughter, are survived, or if both of the victims are all deceased. If the daughter was not dead, she probably was with her binding agent status to observe her father in his recruit status in the killing. If the victims are both alive, it is reasonable that they could be found in Shanghai, New York, California, or the other areas in Taiwan which their agency contracts would allow them to perform their missions in these places. If in these places could not find them, they were supposed to be vanished and deceased. We could find out that such criminal case was suited into a well-recognized pattern that in order to prevent the relative of the recruit to bother the military training too much, such criminal case would happen in an acceptable probability ratio and in a kind of natural occasion. That is the pattern we discovered in such a criminal case.

DB, November 17, 2012

Details of the waiver 1981 RAPC(Risk Agreement of Possessed Child)

Date: 100/01/28 @ 11:58
To: Judicial Yuan
Name: David CK Chang
Telephone: 89529809
TITLE: Details of the waiver 1981 RAPC(Risk Agreement of Possessed Child).
Content: Dear Chief Justice Mr Hao-Ming Rai:

The following legal complaint is describing the details of the waiver 1981 RAPC(Risk Agreement of Possessed Child) document mentioned by two complaint documents sent to Judicial Yuan earlier this month(2011 January). The waiver RAPC was about the rights give-in on a 10-year-old manipulated possessed child Mr David Chang, a forty-year-old citizen of now the New Taipei City Panchiao District jurisdiction. The two Judicial legal complaints were,100/01/23 @ 16:12, “The Original Document of Risk Agreement of the Possessed Child Which Mrs Wu Shru-chen Claimed Dr Ma Ying-jeou had in 1996 Civil Rights Case.” 100/01/25 @ 13:30, “The supporting evidence of the Waiver of legal liability, RAPC(Risk Agreement of Possessed Child), discussed by the Human Rights Council in 1996 New York City.” This waiver RAPC mentioned in these two complaint documents was signed by my sister Mei-ling Chang when she was nine years old on a Lego toy company selling exhibition at Taipei City with my mother Mrs Wu Ying-shing when she was thirty-six years old in 1981. The timing was 1981, after the rapprochement breached between the ROC(Taiwan) and the USA, and the anniversary of Mr Ma Ying-jeou went to Boston for his Harvard Law School study of the doctorate degree. In Taipei City of some toy brick educational exhibition occasion(Lego), the nine-year-old child Ms Mei-ling Chang guided by the toy product promoting salesperson to sign an agreement of the content, “Agreement to give up legal compensation for any risk happened in the process of the manipulated possessed child (on scene).” The educational exhibition salesperson emphasized that any child who plays through the tutoring process would enhance IQ significantly. My nine-year-old sister was frequently praised for smart, quickly had my name “Chao-kai Chang” instead of hers signed on the paper and jumped onto the toy brick pile(Lego) on scene playing for about ten minutes before she was pushed down the toy brick pile by senior twelve-year-old male children who came in the exhibition. My mother was standing around the toy brick pile(Lego) but seemed to casually read books displayed on another booth. There were foreigners looked like infant educational workers or teachers, came near my mother and the salesperson who was collecting the signed agreements(waiver RAPC), blaming and notifying my mother that how could she(let my sister) sign that kind of legal rights give-in on document, because that was equal to slavery contract. Some young female of exhibition workers seemed to be from the Women Association in Taipei City, remarked in an arid tone that although many parents on scene signed that slavery contract with Lego toy company, there still were a lot more Taipei citizens did not sign that waiver RAPC. No wonder they were country folks coming from suburban area Taipei County without savvy of any law concept. Those ‘country folks’ who signed the waiver RAPC(Risk Agreement of Possessed Child) in 1981 at a Lego exhibition were very few, perhaps six of numbers count, including the agreement signed by Mr Lien Sheng-wen(Lien, Sean) of that pushy twelve-year-old group coming in the exhibition during my sister playing Lego toy. Mr Sean Lien(Sheng-wen Lien, the son of former Vice President Lien Chan) signed a subsidy attached contract when he was an elementary school teenager with pay around NTD$5000 monthly. It was later confirmed by an investigating law court in Taiwan(1994 and 1996, along with USA Sergeant Eva Ivory death case investigating and the filed lawsuit of relatives of Taiwan death recruits, as notified at Panchiao, Taipei County) that contract was a commercial sponsored one of merit-based, which was leading Mr Sean Lien in 1996 to have a chance to be enrolled to the subsidy offering commercial sponsor related Ivy League educational institute in New York City, the Columbia University. The 1981 Lego company and contract collecting party on that waiver RAPC did not have any mention of the effective duration nor did they have any mention of effective area. That was a slavery agreement by law except only Mr Sean Lien had a subsidy of NTD$5000 monthly for certain years. However, there were many other parents in the exhibition refused to sign that agreement. During the Lego educational exhibition in 1981, I was only 10 years old and at home myself, reading the children newspaper Mandarin Daily News, newly subscribed in my name, Chao-kai Chang, delivered just for the first week. In August 1996, this waiver RAPC(copy of that original document) was used by Taipei authority and the American Reading Machine Membership Company(ARM-MC, Taiwan area), submitted through a Japanese of the United Nations worker as the purpose of paper-form evidence for a plea of not guilty to the USA Federal Court in New York City on the Sergeant Eva Ivory Taipei death case, with the United Nations Human Rights Council officials as the jury. My role was blurred 1996 in New York City with my international student status with the F1-Visa issued by City University of New York Baruch Business School of its I-20 form. I never had any substantial material rewards paid from that Lego exhibition waiver contract except that my sister who signed it at the age of nine years old played the Lego toy bricks for only 10 minutes on scene. The Lego educational toy company was merged by an American financial group after that Taipei city sale promotion exhibition with those controversial RAPC waiver contracts collected by the ARM-MC and government officials related parties.

This following paragraph provides details related to the legal environment of Taipei in 1983 when my nine-year-old sister Ms Mei-ling Chang, instead of me, signed my RAPC(Risk Agreement of Possessed Child) in Lego toy exhibition. Last year on September 23, 2010 on Yahoo! Kimo personal website, I posted an article: “The White Fang of Mr Jack London and the United Nations child abuse case”. There was a law case of Taipei District Court mentioned in my Yahoo! Kimo posted article to reveal such a legal environment of Taipei. That lawsuit was happened two years later after my RAPC, a.k.a. slavery status agreement, had been signed by my nine-year-old sister, when I was twelve years old. That was about a series of classic literature adapted for children with hardcover which my mother Mrs Wu Yu-shing check out from the Taipei County Hope Elementary School Library for me to read. That hardcover series of books was edited and translated or adapted for children by an alumna who was just graduated from Harvard University majored in literature. She was from the Chang-Hua County of Taiwan. This series of classic literature adapted by that Harvard alumna for children seemed to have some copyright disputes with the England original author. However, the law case was that my cousin Mr Chang Jia-ling who was Taipei County Short-long Elementary School pupil in the Chung-her city area, with his mother Mrs Lin(Liu) Ming-hui, and one relative of then Taipei County Administrative Chief Mr Lin Fong-cheng, came to Taipei District Court to sue that “Harvard Man(Woman)” of the Chang-hua County citizen conducted abuse by verbal threats to the young children when the book company did the auxiliary reading. Because the country folks had no savvy of law concepts, they finally lost the lawsuit but shared a reconciled compensation for humanity of amount NTD$100,000. That was a big deal of money at that moment. My father Mr Chang Cheng-chi who was graduated from Tatung College in Taipei City and employed by the National Enterprise Taiwan Power Company, he had a monthly salary only NTD$8,000, just jumped from a promotion with NTD$3,000 several months before. My aunt Mrs Lin(Liu) Ming-hui shared the total reconciled compensation NTD$100,000 offered by the Harvard alumni defendant with NTD$18,000. But the worst thing was that my aunt Mrs Lin(Liu) Ming-hui previously heard that some interests groups would harass those who filed a lawsuit. When my aunt with one relative of former Taipei County administrative chief Mr Lin Fong-cheng walked out of the Taipei District Court, one member of the attorney who defended the Harvardman’s case warned my aunt Mrs Lin(Liu) Ming-hui, saying that they were not suing a “Chang-hua County citizen” but were suing a “Harvard Man(Woman).” My aunt Mrs Lin(Liu) Ming-hui was afraid of revenge upon her young son Mr Chang Jia-ling, instead of writing down her son’s name she had my name “Mr Chao-kai Chang”, the name of eleven-year-old Hope Elementary School pupil, on the Taipei District Court law document as the only plaintiff who sued that Harvardman. The case finally settled with a reconciliation of NTD$100,000, but officially my aunt lost the lawsuit with my name. Up to this moment in 2011 when I am forty years old, I have never been officially informed by the Taipei District Court about this case which had my name on the law court document. Two years after that losing lawsuit settled with reconciliation compensation, when I was fourteen years old, my teeth were almost cut and destroyed by energy device to be filled in the Duke University twin brothers dental clinic around my home on Chunghsio Road of Panchiao City. This was recorded in the United Nations file as a child abuse case, filed by Ms Hillary Rodham of Yale University alumna in 1979 and continued through 1984, transferring to Ms Chen Chu of the National Cheng-chi University(NCCU) student. When I came to National Central Library in 2006, it was informed to me that this child abuse case with the infant teeth destroyed by energy device, was done by the young son of Mr Lin Fong-cheng who was in the United States of America in 1979 for higher education study. He signed a military contract in the USA, and was forced to commit suicide before the ethnics white young trooper of Arkansas ordered by his governor to commit suicide and died in Taiwan. Therefore such a law environment was something to bestow a curse upon the UN case of abused child, David Chang, that is me, until I was forty years old, affected by sort of governmental secret documents and the death chronically involved. That is why in spite I was graduated from university in 1993 I was still without a marriage, a job or a kid, no more than a slavery of lowest social status, pauper.

In the above paragraph mentioned my aunt Liu(Lin) and relative of the Taipei County Administration Chief Mr Lin Fong-Cheng, of de facto identity theft using my name “ChaoKai Chang” at Taipei District Court to sue a Harvardman of children books author, and that case settled with a reconciled humanity compensation NTD$100,000 but should be announced a defending success. In this Taipei District Court appealing case the sole plaintiff of my name “ChaoKai Chang” which appeared on the law court document, was a defeated case. But as the defending lawyers at session break on court made a warning to my aunt and relative of Mr Lin Fong-cheng, there were reasons to believe that the UN Case of abused child “Mr. ChaoKai Chang, a.k.a. Mr David Chang” was suffering a post law court revenge, with his teeth dented by energy device to cut and filled by the Ivy League Duke University dentist near his house. In the complaint letter sent to Judicial Yuan on October 21, 2010, titled “Ms. Chen Chu of the Democratic Progressive Party(DPP) had a false motive to proceed this civil rights case”, the contents mentioned about “…late President Mr Chiang Ching-Kuo, his English Secretary Mr. Ma Ying-Jeou ever through some channels to find my mother Mrs Wu Yu-Shing for filing a case against the American Reading Machine (ARM) company. Mr. Ma Ying-Jeou said that he had persuaded two grammar school teenagers in Taipei City to join the lawsuit against that American ARM company. Mr Ma Ying-Jeou said that he wanted my mother Mrs Wu Yu-Shing and me to join the lawsuit as the third partner represented in Taipei County. Mr. Ma Ying-Jeou said that he had confidence to win the lawsuit. As he mentioned the lawyer fees to commission him for filing the lawsuit, Mr. Ma Ying-Jeou told my parents that was around NTD$100,000 or NTD$200,000.” In those years messages contents notifying the plaintiff-would-be side, the teenager Mr David Chang, me, were through my mother Mrs Wu Yu-Shing from Hope Elementary School areas and also through my father Mr Chang Cheng-Chi from the National Enterprise of Taiwan Power Company. It was said that there were three lawyers including a National Taiwan University(NTU) Law School graduated lawyer came to my father’s office at the Taiwan Power Company at Taipei City, telling him that the chance to win the lawsuit was very low and Mr Ma Ying-Jeou even participated in the reading machine membership fees collecting and without Taiwan lawyer license. It was because the American Reading Machine(ARM) company had paid an amount of money of one million New Taiwan dollars through the company cashier Ms. Chen Chu, hired three lawyers to go to Taiwan Power Company and suggested my father to give up the lawsuit, therefore we did not pay that amount of commission money to Mr Ma Ying-Jeou to file the lawsuit. It was not because we could not afford the lawyer commission or unwilling to pay that commission. As I was communicated with the Harvard Business School Alumni in those years, probably Mr George Bush Jr. of the ARM company PR, saying that if the pupil of Mr President Chiang Ching-Kuo, i.e. Mr David Chang, had commissioned lawyer to sue the ARM company, he as the company PR would let Mr David win this case. Mr PR George Bush Jr. argued that it would be as well as an American interests to make pupil Mr David win such an amount of money and planning a schedule in his future to study in the USA, say, Harvard University and to be his junior. But lawsuit in court was not that easy as we were thinking when under persuading or lobbying outside the court. In those years the young Bush Jr. of Harvard alumni could be probably a scapegoat for his senior to undertake responsibility for the ARM company. The timing was coincident with moment of rapprochement breach between Taiwan and the USA. The late President Mr Chiang Ching-kuo observing that a lot of Taipei area school teenagers and their parents coming to the law court to sue the ARM company misdeeds, Mr Chiang only told the audience with such messages, “We cannot afford to make the Americans angry,” and “…but to sue the American company was your own business.” After these years, in 2011, today, simply eyeing such case of not paying lawyer fees to sue in the court, I had an article posted on personal website blog on December 8, 2010, “Ridiculous United Nations Human Rights Cases of Taipei,” translated to English on December 10, 2010. In the article I mentioned about the 43rd USA President Mr George W. Bush and the 42nd USA First Lady Mrs Hillary Clinton. In those days if this lawsuit case against the ARM company PR Mr George Bush Jr. which required lawyer fees of NTD$100,000 to NTD$200,000 paid to Mr Ma Ying-Jeou, only defeated or something, there would be a legal document as such remained in the law court of Taipei jurisdiction. For these several months after this article posted on my personal website, to certain degree be censored and controlled by this library software WEBSENSE, the privy cannot be denied to be the governmental controlled target. That is to say, as to the personal interests, for sure there would be damage and loss influenced by the case. For your reference, sir.

Best Regards,

David CK Chang,
Citizen of New Taipei City Panchiao District,
January 28, 2011,
National Central Library,
Taipei City

Translated by DB, June 9, 2011, National Central Library, Taipei City