Paranoia or Reality you read and make up your own mind...................... National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (Introduced in House)
HR 645 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 645
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 22, 2009
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `National Emergency Centers Establishment Act'.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure--
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be--
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
This Act does not affect--
(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or
(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the following definitions apply:
(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `closed military installation' means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:
(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.
(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.
(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.
(2) EMERGENCY- The term `emergency' has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term `major disaster' has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `military installation' has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
Saturday, January 31, 2009
We really need to step up our efforts to fight this mobocracy (sent by reader Pat)
Mobocracy (ochlocracy) is born in America, courtesy of Obama.
"From a tactical standpoint, this is smart politics," [Republican strategist Joshua Trevino] said. "Whether it's good for America is another matter.*
It's illegal for thePrez to do this, so its being run through DNC offices.
Obama retools campaign machine
Election website to be used for grass-roots activism to promote legislative agenda
--Agence France-Presse
* http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.d7b54a5a981117a8ef0affbdcabdad87.1d1&show_article=1&catnum=0
Obama retools campaign machine
Jan 30 10:26 AM US/Eastern
Three days before setting foot in the White House, Barack Obama flipped a switch and set in motion what may prove to be one of the boldest political moves of his presidency.
Rather than turning over his Web-powered campaign machine to the Democratic Party or disbanding it, Obama began retooling it as a grass roots activist group to work alongside the White House in promoting his legislative agenda.
In a YouTube video, as well as an email to the 13 million supporters on his mailing list, the president-elect announced the transformation of "Obama for America" into a new organization, 'Organizing for America.'
"You've built the largest grass roots movement in history," Obama told his backers. "And the movement you've built is too important to stop growing now."
Both Democrats and Republicans have been forced to stand up and take notice of the political gambit, which analysts say has the potential to reap enormous rewards but is not without risk or controversy.
David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, has stressed that Organizing for America is not aimed at twisting the arms of members of Congress but meant to keep activists engaged on issues such as health care, energy and the economy.
"This has obviously never been undertaken before so it's going to be a little trial and error," he added.
Simon Rosenberg, president of NDN, a progressive think tank here, likened Organizing for America to former president Bill Clinton's attempt to build a grass roots pressure group on health care reform but agreed that "there really hasn't ever been anything like it before."
"Barack is not like any other candidate," he said. "He comes to Washington with more supporters and more modern tools than anyone in history. Barack is going to reinvent the presidency the way he reinvented the campaign."
Plouffe's assurances that Organizing for America will not engage in congressional arm-twisting do not have everyone convinced.
"Republicans are scared that he's going to turn this thing on in legislative battles, something like health care" said Soren Dayton, a former staffer on the campaign of Republican presidential candidate John McCain.
"They've got a 13-million-person list," Dayton said. "They can crash the Capitol Hill phone system anytime they want.
"Deploying it in 2010 is another scary thing for Republicans," he said of the mid-term congressional elections.
Erick Erickson, editor of popular right-of-center blog RedState.com, said Democrats who get in the way of Obama's agenda may actually be the ones with the most to fear.
"It looks like he's going to use this group to push his own party in his direction because it's not going to work (with Republicans)," Erickson said.
He said Organizing for America, which will work out of the offices of the Democratic National Committee, threatens to "blur" the "boundaries between the political and the presidential" and could "blow up in his face."
"There comes a downside if members of Congress feel like they are being bullied by the president through these means, at which point he may face a backlash within his own party," Erickson said.
He also wondered how much even the most hardcore Obama supporters have left to contribute after a grueling primary and presidential campaign. "They run the substantial risk of burning these people out over time," he said.
For Republican strategist Joshua Trevino, a co-founder of RedState.com, "Organizing for America is quite explicitly the continuation of the Obama campaign apparatus.
"Though cloaked in the rhetoric of volunteerism and community service, it is nothing more than an attempt to maintain, organize, and direct pressure groups as needed by the Democrats at the local levels," he said.
"From a tactical standpoint, this is smart politics," he said. "Whether it's good for America is another matter. Community volunteerism and service are not traditionally partisan activities in the United States."
Garrett Graff, who worked for Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean in 2004, said there is definitely a re-election campaign aspect to Organizing for America even if its "scale, scope and ambition" are "up in the air."
"When you go back and look at politics 50 years from now the 2008 race will be the dividing line between pre-Internet and post-Internet politics," said Graff, who teaches digital politics at Georgetown University.
"You can no longer just turn it off the day after the election the way that we are used to in presidential campaigns," he said.
"Obama's already built a fundraising machine that is unparalled," Graff added. "If he can double it by 2012 there's not going to be a single person in America who can catch him.
"Does anyone think there's a Republican out there who can raise a billion dollars to run against a sitting president of the United States?"
"From a tactical standpoint, this is smart politics," [Republican strategist Joshua Trevino] said. "Whether it's good for America is another matter.*
It's illegal for thePrez to do this, so its being run through DNC offices.
Obama retools campaign machine
Election website to be used for grass-roots activism to promote legislative agenda
--Agence France-Presse
* http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.d7b54a5a981117a8ef0affbdcabdad87.1d1&show_article=1&catnum=0
Obama retools campaign machine
Jan 30 10:26 AM US/Eastern
Three days before setting foot in the White House, Barack Obama flipped a switch and set in motion what may prove to be one of the boldest political moves of his presidency.
Rather than turning over his Web-powered campaign machine to the Democratic Party or disbanding it, Obama began retooling it as a grass roots activist group to work alongside the White House in promoting his legislative agenda.
In a YouTube video, as well as an email to the 13 million supporters on his mailing list, the president-elect announced the transformation of "Obama for America" into a new organization, 'Organizing for America.'
"You've built the largest grass roots movement in history," Obama told his backers. "And the movement you've built is too important to stop growing now."
Both Democrats and Republicans have been forced to stand up and take notice of the political gambit, which analysts say has the potential to reap enormous rewards but is not without risk or controversy.
David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, has stressed that Organizing for America is not aimed at twisting the arms of members of Congress but meant to keep activists engaged on issues such as health care, energy and the economy.
"This has obviously never been undertaken before so it's going to be a little trial and error," he added.
Simon Rosenberg, president of NDN, a progressive think tank here, likened Organizing for America to former president Bill Clinton's attempt to build a grass roots pressure group on health care reform but agreed that "there really hasn't ever been anything like it before."
"Barack is not like any other candidate," he said. "He comes to Washington with more supporters and more modern tools than anyone in history. Barack is going to reinvent the presidency the way he reinvented the campaign."
Plouffe's assurances that Organizing for America will not engage in congressional arm-twisting do not have everyone convinced.
"Republicans are scared that he's going to turn this thing on in legislative battles, something like health care" said Soren Dayton, a former staffer on the campaign of Republican presidential candidate John McCain.
"They've got a 13-million-person list," Dayton said. "They can crash the Capitol Hill phone system anytime they want.
"Deploying it in 2010 is another scary thing for Republicans," he said of the mid-term congressional elections.
Erick Erickson, editor of popular right-of-center blog RedState.com, said Democrats who get in the way of Obama's agenda may actually be the ones with the most to fear.
"It looks like he's going to use this group to push his own party in his direction because it's not going to work (with Republicans)," Erickson said.
He said Organizing for America, which will work out of the offices of the Democratic National Committee, threatens to "blur" the "boundaries between the political and the presidential" and could "blow up in his face."
"There comes a downside if members of Congress feel like they are being bullied by the president through these means, at which point he may face a backlash within his own party," Erickson said.
He also wondered how much even the most hardcore Obama supporters have left to contribute after a grueling primary and presidential campaign. "They run the substantial risk of burning these people out over time," he said.
For Republican strategist Joshua Trevino, a co-founder of RedState.com, "Organizing for America is quite explicitly the continuation of the Obama campaign apparatus.
"Though cloaked in the rhetoric of volunteerism and community service, it is nothing more than an attempt to maintain, organize, and direct pressure groups as needed by the Democrats at the local levels," he said.
"From a tactical standpoint, this is smart politics," he said. "Whether it's good for America is another matter. Community volunteerism and service are not traditionally partisan activities in the United States."
Garrett Graff, who worked for Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean in 2004, said there is definitely a re-election campaign aspect to Organizing for America even if its "scale, scope and ambition" are "up in the air."
"When you go back and look at politics 50 years from now the 2008 race will be the dividing line between pre-Internet and post-Internet politics," said Graff, who teaches digital politics at Georgetown University.
"You can no longer just turn it off the day after the election the way that we are used to in presidential campaigns," he said.
"Obama's already built a fundraising machine that is unparalled," Graff added. "If he can double it by 2012 there's not going to be a single person in America who can catch him.
"Does anyone think there's a Republican out there who can raise a billion dollars to run against a sitting president of the United States?"
More on the man that raised his hand
According to another reader Dennis Kucinich of OH sat to the right of this man, that raised his hand. Can smbd call Dennis Kucinich and ask if he remembers, who sat to his left at this joint meeting and if the man raised his hand and tried to speak up.
Update on the congressman that raised his hand
I was told that more then one person raised their hands, but Cheney never called on them. I got this message below, that one of them might be Steven C LaTourette of Ohio. I hope patriots from Ohio can call his office on Monday and verify and schedule a meeting.
I don’t know who this is, but the minute I saw it, I thought of Steven C. LaTourette. He is a Representative from Ohio .
I don’t know who this is, but the minute I saw it, I thought of Steven C. LaTourette. He is a Representative from Ohio .
Proposal, written by Mrk Stewart
"The Proposal"
When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers must find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well.
Wall street, and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of "tough decision", and his board of directors gives him a big bonus.
Our government should not be immune from similar risks.
Therefore:
Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members.
Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State).
Then, reduce their staff by 25%.
Accomplish this over the next 8 years
(two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting.
Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:
$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.)
$97,175,000 for elimination of their staff. (estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)
$240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.
$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr)
The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country!
We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing.
Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)
Note:
Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, we have 3 senators that have not been doing their jobs for the past 18+ months (on the campaign trail) and still they all have been accepting full pay. These facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.
Summary of opportunity:
$ 44,108,400 reduction of congress members.
$282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.
$150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.
$59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.
$37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.
$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.
$8,073,383,400 per year, estimated total savings. (that's 8-BILLION just to start!)
Big business does these types of cuts all the time.
If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers could save a bundle.
Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.
IF you are happy with how Congress spends our taxes, delete this message. Otherwise, then I assume you know what to do.
When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers must find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well.
Wall street, and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of "tough decision", and his board of directors gives him a big bonus.
Our government should not be immune from similar risks.
Therefore:
Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members.
Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State).
Then, reduce their staff by 25%.
Accomplish this over the next 8 years
(two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting.
Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:
$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.)
$97,175,000 for elimination of their staff. (estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)
$240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.
$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr)
The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country!
We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing.
Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)
Note:
Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, we have 3 senators that have not been doing their jobs for the past 18+ months (on the campaign trail) and still they all have been accepting full pay. These facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.
Summary of opportunity:
$ 44,108,400 reduction of congress members.
$282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.
$150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.
$59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.
$37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.
$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.
$8,073,383,400 per year, estimated total savings. (that's 8-BILLION just to start!)
Big business does these types of cuts all the time.
If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers could save a bundle.
Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.
IF you are happy with how Congress spends our taxes, delete this message. Otherwise, then I assume you know what to do.
Who is This Man???
.jpg)
Look at the man in the picture above. The one on the left who is raising his hand! It appears that he is trying to get the attention of the chairperson at the January 8, 2009 Joint Congressional Session.
If you can identify this person, send an email to Orly as soon as possible. (Dr_Taitz@yahoo.com)
Your computer will not be damaged
Several people have written, that when they type drorly.blogspot.com they get a response from google, telling them that if they go to this page, they might be damaging their computer. Trust me, the only thing that will be damaged, is Obama's house of cards, everyone will soon see that he is damaged goods, has a damaged credibility, his transparency claims were greatly damaged, his standing with decent Americans are more then damaged, they are being demolished by the articles and posts from the readers on this blog. Feel free to add a few other ideas and empty slogans that will be damaged.
Premoderation of comments
We have decided to try pre-moderating comments. This means that your comment will not appear on the blog until it has been approved by a moderator, until further notice.
False rumors
Two days ago at a National conference call, after I hang up to do other things, as I was told, Phil Berg stated to some 50 people on the call that Alan Keyes no longer works with me. This is not true and as a matter of fact I recently got an e-mail from Dr.Keyes, stating that he was inspired by my determination and passion for the Constitution of this country and he will start a blog of his own and asked to link to my blog. I have recently sent over 20 subpoenas to numerous governmental agencies to gather information in regards to Alan Keyes legal action and I have filed a petition for a writ of Mandamus in Federal Court in the Central district of CA. You can verify the dockets in both Ca Superior Court in Sacramento and in the Federal District court in Central California.
In re. to other matters.
Judge Carnes in TX has granted a pro hac vice, allowing me to represent Jody Brockhausen in TX.
If you look at the docket of the Supreme Court of the US, you will see that it states the Application for the stay was filed pending filing of the writ of Certiorari, and I have stated that I will file that writ.
Aside from 4 cases mentioned above, I have about 50 consent forms from the servicemen, however I wasn't rushing to file, as I wanted to see a response from Obama's lead attorney Robert Bauer, whom I personally call Der. Gebbels machine, I wanted to see his motion to dismiss Phil Berg's (Hollister) and Mario Apuzzo's (Kerchner) cases, I wanted to see the arguments. A definition of insanity, is when you are doing the same thing over and over again and expect different results. No sense of filling exactly the same case. I hope that those cases are not dismissed, but what Bauer is saying among other things, is that the plaintiffs are retired military and therefor a chance of them being called to active duty pursuant Obama's orders is highly hypothetical, and in order to show standing, you need to show an actual controversy. A judge cannot give an advisory opinion for hypothetical situations. Due to the above, I am reworking my military case. I feel it is better to take a bit more time and be better prepared, then go with guns blazing and be shot out of the court.
Now, it is possible to be shot out of the court with any case, if the whole system is corrupt and if nobody in the government is doing his job or if the government is there to subdue us for some New World order and take away our civil rights instead of upholding them. Due to that reason, I am planning the Defend Our Freedoms Convention in Dallas TX, so we can all unite and form resistance to Obama fraud machine. You saw the post from Lynn, saying that it is not easy to get hotel accommodations for a large group of people, so please respond to her ASAP. We need a tentative response, so we'll know how many people are coming.
It is also important, that all of you schedule appointments with your Senators and Representatives and US attorney's offices and provide information about this massive fraud. All the links are on the Defend our Freedoms page. Ask if those officials would like to attend the Convention. Keep in mind, elected officials are more at ease to act, if they see resistance from the citizens and if they see an active investigation by the FBI.
Lastly, a comment in regards to Nanci Pelosi's jet, that costs us, the taxpayers reported 5 mln a year in gasoline and maintenance. Her response was, that it is needed for her security and smaller jet was taking too much time for refueling and stops. I think, she should've given the real reason, that her broom is out of commission and she needed a new mode of transportation...
Have a good weekend :-)
Orly
In re. to other matters.
Judge Carnes in TX has granted a pro hac vice, allowing me to represent Jody Brockhausen in TX.
If you look at the docket of the Supreme Court of the US, you will see that it states the Application for the stay was filed pending filing of the writ of Certiorari, and I have stated that I will file that writ.
Aside from 4 cases mentioned above, I have about 50 consent forms from the servicemen, however I wasn't rushing to file, as I wanted to see a response from Obama's lead attorney Robert Bauer, whom I personally call Der. Gebbels machine, I wanted to see his motion to dismiss Phil Berg's (Hollister) and Mario Apuzzo's (Kerchner) cases, I wanted to see the arguments. A definition of insanity, is when you are doing the same thing over and over again and expect different results. No sense of filling exactly the same case. I hope that those cases are not dismissed, but what Bauer is saying among other things, is that the plaintiffs are retired military and therefor a chance of them being called to active duty pursuant Obama's orders is highly hypothetical, and in order to show standing, you need to show an actual controversy. A judge cannot give an advisory opinion for hypothetical situations. Due to the above, I am reworking my military case. I feel it is better to take a bit more time and be better prepared, then go with guns blazing and be shot out of the court.
Now, it is possible to be shot out of the court with any case, if the whole system is corrupt and if nobody in the government is doing his job or if the government is there to subdue us for some New World order and take away our civil rights instead of upholding them. Due to that reason, I am planning the Defend Our Freedoms Convention in Dallas TX, so we can all unite and form resistance to Obama fraud machine. You saw the post from Lynn, saying that it is not easy to get hotel accommodations for a large group of people, so please respond to her ASAP. We need a tentative response, so we'll know how many people are coming.
It is also important, that all of you schedule appointments with your Senators and Representatives and US attorney's offices and provide information about this massive fraud. All the links are on the Defend our Freedoms page. Ask if those officials would like to attend the Convention. Keep in mind, elected officials are more at ease to act, if they see resistance from the citizens and if they see an active investigation by the FBI.
Lastly, a comment in regards to Nanci Pelosi's jet, that costs us, the taxpayers reported 5 mln a year in gasoline and maintenance. Her response was, that it is needed for her security and smaller jet was taking too much time for refueling and stops. I think, she should've given the real reason, that her broom is out of commission and she needed a new mode of transportation...
Have a good weekend :-)
Orly
An article from Australia
Obama, Oaths of Allegiance, the UCMJ, Unlawful Orders, Joe the Private, and a Call to Protect the Republic
Written by Zach Jones
Throughout the history of America, there have been those special individuals of courage and principle who have answered the call to protect the Republic. I believe in these extraordinary times, the call to protect the Republic is being sounded again. In over 30 courts throughout these United States, lawsuits have been trying to be heard on the merits of the primary allegation that Barack Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirements to serve as President because he is not a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States.
To date, the call to protect the Republic has been primarily sounded by concerned lawyers and those they represent. The Plaintiffs in these actions are as diverse as is America. They represent different political ideologies, races, ethic backgrounds, religious backgrounds and regions. However, the courts have thus far been silent, relying on technical legal arguments to prevent the airing of citizens’ concerns in the public square. Normally in America, these Plaintiffs would have had strong allies in the American Media. However, in these extraordinary times the media have thrown in their lot with Obama and the extreme wing of the Democratic Party. (The reasons for the media abandoning the profession of journalism are a bit complicated and should the subject of another article.)
Nevertheless, these attorneys and Plaintiffs have not been the only ones demanding the government make certain that America’s Constitution has been complied with. There are thousands of supporters across America giving voice to these concerns. In fact, World Net Daily has had a petition drive ongoing and to date, over 226,000 people have signed. The American citizens who are bringing these lawsuits, signing petitions, and searching for alternatives to the main stream media are mostly ordinary Americans, with ordinary families, who are extremely concerned that our Constitution has been violated and undermined.
Most of these ordinary Americans have been relying solely on the courts to protect the Republic and are extremely frustrated that the courts are thwarting the basic, simple, common sense resolutions of this vital issue. One such ordinary American is Lt Col. David A. Earl-Graef, who recently expressed his concerns and disappointment with the courts in an open letter to Chief Justice John Roberts. The only thing these citizens and Lt Col. Earl-Graef are asking is that Barack Obama answer the allegations and establish with his long form Hawaiian birth certificate that he is a “Natural Born Citizen”. To date, this has not been done. It is important to note that instead of simply providing proof, Obama has resisted this request with legal teams and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The circumstance that a person might be serving as President of the United States who is not a “Natural Born Citizen” creates a Constitutional crisis of enormous proportion in that every legislative act such a person signs and every “order” he or she gives is invalid and “unlawful”.
This last word “unlawful” is of the utmost importance and gives rise to questions of individual responsibility, criminal liability and morality on the battlefield. It is well established that when an “order” is given to an individual soldier, such an order (in effect) comes through the entire chain of command. Consider that:
…Authority is the legitimate power of leaders to direct soldiers or to take action within the scope of their position. Military authority begins with the Constitution, which divides it between Congress and the President. The President, as commander in chief, commands the armed forces, including the Army. The authority from the Commander-in-Chief extends through the chain of command, with the assistance of the NCO support channel, to the squad, section or team leader who then directs and supervises the actions of individual soldiers. When you say, “PFC Lee, you and PFC Johnson start filling sandbags; SPC Garcia and SPC Smith will provide security from that hill,” you are turning into action the orders of the entire chain of command.…
It is also well established that individual soldier have a legal and moral obligation NOT to follow “unlawful orders”.
…509. Defense of Superior Orders … b. In considering the question whether a superior order constitutes a valid defense, the court shall take into consideration the fact that obedience to lawful military orders is the duty of every member of the armed forces; that the latter cannot be expected, in conditions of war discipline, to weigh scrupulously the legal merits of the orders received; that certain rules of warfare may be controversial; or that an act otherwise amounting to a war crime may be done in obedience to orders conceived as a measure of reprisal. At the same time it must be borne in mind that members of the armed forces are bound to obey only lawful orders (e. g., UCMJ, Art. 92)….
So the question becomes, when does an individual soldier, Joe the Private, have sufficient reason to know or believe that an order flowing down the “chain of command” from the Office of the President constitutes an “unlawful order”?
Does it happen when an individual member of the military comes across reports on the internet of more than 30 lawsuits challenging the eligibility of the current occupant of the Oval Office?
Does it happen when superior Officers such as Lt Col. Earl-Graef start raising their heart felt concerns?
Does it matter that the main stream media may be deliberately ignoring the issue for their own purposes?
What should the individual soldier do if he or she in their heart of hearts believes the President of the United States is a fraud and cannot issue any “lawful order”?
This is the extremely difficult and perilous judgment call that every young military man or woman who is trying to do what they believe is right could be facing! Facing the possibility of jail and losing career or following one’s convictions, it doesn’t get much tougher than that.
It is very troubling that Obama shows no consideration for the position he puts the members of our military in by his refusal to provide any credible evidence demonstrating his status as a “Natural Born Citizen”.
So what’s our serviceman or woman to do?
Almost everyone involved in this issue has sworn an oath to defend the Constitution and may also have additional ethical obligations. The lawyers who are representing the Plaintiffs in these actions are bound by their rules of ethics to not bring “frivolous actions”. The Judges have also sworn oaths to defend the Constitution. Obama has sworn in election forms that he is eligible to run for the Office of President. And the individual soldier has also sworn his or her own oath to defend the Constitution:
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
The enlisted service member’s oath provides explicitly that he or she “will obey the orders of the President of the United States”. Therefore, if Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as President, then Joe the Private is facing a huge conflict regarding his sworn allegiance. It is interesting to note that the oath that Officers swear to does not include the language that they will “obey the orders of the President”.
What a horrific situation Obama has created for our military men and women! The soldier has his or her oath to consider, his or her duty to follow “lawful orders”, his or her duty to NOT follow “unlawful orders”, and the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that could take a huge bite out of his or her liberty and career.
The intention of the each individual soldier is the key to him or her making any noise what so ever! Every soldier must be very careful because they are walking a tightrope with only sharks below. The soldier could be determined in a Court Martial to be fulfilling the obligations of their oaths or they could be found to be committing mutiny or sedition under the UCMJ!
The UCMJ provides:
…894. ART. 94. MUTINY OR SEDITION
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who--
(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;
(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition; …
There is however another important group of people (besides the civilian Judges) who, I believe, have the power to investigate and resolve Obama’s ineligibility issue. If just one person of this group has courage and conviction for the truth, he or she can remove the possibility that a another member of our armed forces, acting alone, would decide that they must as a matter of conscience refuse to obey an “Order” coming from Mr. Obama.
This group is made up of every person in the military chain of command that has the power to convene a “Court of Inquiry” under the Uniform Code of Military Justice!
The UCMJ provides for Courts of Inquiry as follows:
935. ART. 135. COURTS OF INQUIRY
(a) Courts of inquiry to investigate any matter may be convened by any person authorized to convene a general court-martial or by any other person designated by the Secretary concerned for that purpose, whether or not the persons involved have requested such an inquiry.
So who are these men and women of the military who have the power to convene a Court of Inquiry? “Any person authorized to convene a general courts-martial” can convene such an inquiry.
They are listed in the UCMJ:
822. ARTICLE 22. WHO MAY CONVENE GENERAL COURTS-MARTIAL
(a) General courts-martial may be convened by--
(1) the President of the United States;
(2) the Secretary of Defense;
(3) the commanding officer of a unified or specified combatant command;
(4) the Secretary concerned;
(5) the commanding officer of a Territorial Department, an Army Group, an Army, an Army Corps, a division, a separate brigade, or a corresponding unit of the Army or Marine Corps;
(6) the commander in chief of a fleet; the commanding officer of a naval station or larger activity of the Navy beyond the United States.
(7) the commanding officer of an air command, an air force, an air division, or a separate wing of the Air Force or Marine Corps;
(8) any other commanding officer designated by the Secretary concerned; or
(9) any other commanding officer in any of the armed forces when empowered by the President.
Therefore, in order to prevent the terrible consequences that could befall the individual Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine who in good faith refuses to follow an order that he or she believes to be an “unlawful order” given by Barack Obama, I urge those listed above to remove this burden from the shoulders of our military and investigate the allegations against Barack Obama to determine once and for all his eligibility to hold the Office of the Presidency. Again I say, Mr. Obama could easily do the right thing and demonstrate his eligibility by answering the allegations made against him!
Just a thought as to a possible starting point for a Court of Inquiry:
..883. ART. 83. FRAUDULENT ENLISTMENT, APPOINTMENT, OR SEPARATION
Any person who--
(1) procures his own enlistment or appointment in the armed forces by knowingly false representation or deliberate concealment as to his qualifications for the enlistment or appointment and receives pay or allowances thereunder…
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the status as Commander and Chief of the Military an appointment conferred upon the person who legitimately holds the Office of the Presidency?
If this does not suffice as legal justification to investigate Obama’s eligibility to hold the Office and/or issue lawful orders, I’m sure there are some brilliant JAG Officers who can provide much better legal arguments for a Court of Inquiry. (Maybe Article 134?)
In conclusion, and to eliminate any possible misunderstandings (CYA), it is solely my intention to follow the oath that I took when I joined the Navy as a 19 year old and to protect the Constitution of the United States of America. It is NOT my intention to express anything that could be remotely be interpreted as an “intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority”!
Further, I would like to request that everyone who is remotely concerned become more aware regarding the eligibility lawsuits that are ongoing such as Berg v Obama, Hollister v Barry Soetoro, Broe v Reed, Kerchner et al v. Obama and research this important issue. One thing is certain, the American media will not be telling the complete story about this issue anytime soon.
Hopefully, Dr. Orly Taitz will see this article and forward it to Lt Col. Earl-Graef.
Written by Zach Jones
Throughout the history of America, there have been those special individuals of courage and principle who have answered the call to protect the Republic. I believe in these extraordinary times, the call to protect the Republic is being sounded again. In over 30 courts throughout these United States, lawsuits have been trying to be heard on the merits of the primary allegation that Barack Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirements to serve as President because he is not a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States.
To date, the call to protect the Republic has been primarily sounded by concerned lawyers and those they represent. The Plaintiffs in these actions are as diverse as is America. They represent different political ideologies, races, ethic backgrounds, religious backgrounds and regions. However, the courts have thus far been silent, relying on technical legal arguments to prevent the airing of citizens’ concerns in the public square. Normally in America, these Plaintiffs would have had strong allies in the American Media. However, in these extraordinary times the media have thrown in their lot with Obama and the extreme wing of the Democratic Party. (The reasons for the media abandoning the profession of journalism are a bit complicated and should the subject of another article.)
Nevertheless, these attorneys and Plaintiffs have not been the only ones demanding the government make certain that America’s Constitution has been complied with. There are thousands of supporters across America giving voice to these concerns. In fact, World Net Daily has had a petition drive ongoing and to date, over 226,000 people have signed. The American citizens who are bringing these lawsuits, signing petitions, and searching for alternatives to the main stream media are mostly ordinary Americans, with ordinary families, who are extremely concerned that our Constitution has been violated and undermined.
Most of these ordinary Americans have been relying solely on the courts to protect the Republic and are extremely frustrated that the courts are thwarting the basic, simple, common sense resolutions of this vital issue. One such ordinary American is Lt Col. David A. Earl-Graef, who recently expressed his concerns and disappointment with the courts in an open letter to Chief Justice John Roberts. The only thing these citizens and Lt Col. Earl-Graef are asking is that Barack Obama answer the allegations and establish with his long form Hawaiian birth certificate that he is a “Natural Born Citizen”. To date, this has not been done. It is important to note that instead of simply providing proof, Obama has resisted this request with legal teams and hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The circumstance that a person might be serving as President of the United States who is not a “Natural Born Citizen” creates a Constitutional crisis of enormous proportion in that every legislative act such a person signs and every “order” he or she gives is invalid and “unlawful”.
This last word “unlawful” is of the utmost importance and gives rise to questions of individual responsibility, criminal liability and morality on the battlefield. It is well established that when an “order” is given to an individual soldier, such an order (in effect) comes through the entire chain of command. Consider that:
…Authority is the legitimate power of leaders to direct soldiers or to take action within the scope of their position. Military authority begins with the Constitution, which divides it between Congress and the President. The President, as commander in chief, commands the armed forces, including the Army. The authority from the Commander-in-Chief extends through the chain of command, with the assistance of the NCO support channel, to the squad, section or team leader who then directs and supervises the actions of individual soldiers. When you say, “PFC Lee, you and PFC Johnson start filling sandbags; SPC Garcia and SPC Smith will provide security from that hill,” you are turning into action the orders of the entire chain of command.…
It is also well established that individual soldier have a legal and moral obligation NOT to follow “unlawful orders”.
…509. Defense of Superior Orders … b. In considering the question whether a superior order constitutes a valid defense, the court shall take into consideration the fact that obedience to lawful military orders is the duty of every member of the armed forces; that the latter cannot be expected, in conditions of war discipline, to weigh scrupulously the legal merits of the orders received; that certain rules of warfare may be controversial; or that an act otherwise amounting to a war crime may be done in obedience to orders conceived as a measure of reprisal. At the same time it must be borne in mind that members of the armed forces are bound to obey only lawful orders (e. g., UCMJ, Art. 92)….
So the question becomes, when does an individual soldier, Joe the Private, have sufficient reason to know or believe that an order flowing down the “chain of command” from the Office of the President constitutes an “unlawful order”?
Does it happen when an individual member of the military comes across reports on the internet of more than 30 lawsuits challenging the eligibility of the current occupant of the Oval Office?
Does it happen when superior Officers such as Lt Col. Earl-Graef start raising their heart felt concerns?
Does it matter that the main stream media may be deliberately ignoring the issue for their own purposes?
What should the individual soldier do if he or she in their heart of hearts believes the President of the United States is a fraud and cannot issue any “lawful order”?
This is the extremely difficult and perilous judgment call that every young military man or woman who is trying to do what they believe is right could be facing! Facing the possibility of jail and losing career or following one’s convictions, it doesn’t get much tougher than that.
It is very troubling that Obama shows no consideration for the position he puts the members of our military in by his refusal to provide any credible evidence demonstrating his status as a “Natural Born Citizen”.
So what’s our serviceman or woman to do?
Almost everyone involved in this issue has sworn an oath to defend the Constitution and may also have additional ethical obligations. The lawyers who are representing the Plaintiffs in these actions are bound by their rules of ethics to not bring “frivolous actions”. The Judges have also sworn oaths to defend the Constitution. Obama has sworn in election forms that he is eligible to run for the Office of President. And the individual soldier has also sworn his or her own oath to defend the Constitution:
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
The enlisted service member’s oath provides explicitly that he or she “will obey the orders of the President of the United States”. Therefore, if Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as President, then Joe the Private is facing a huge conflict regarding his sworn allegiance. It is interesting to note that the oath that Officers swear to does not include the language that they will “obey the orders of the President”.
What a horrific situation Obama has created for our military men and women! The soldier has his or her oath to consider, his or her duty to follow “lawful orders”, his or her duty to NOT follow “unlawful orders”, and the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that could take a huge bite out of his or her liberty and career.
The intention of the each individual soldier is the key to him or her making any noise what so ever! Every soldier must be very careful because they are walking a tightrope with only sharks below. The soldier could be determined in a Court Martial to be fulfilling the obligations of their oaths or they could be found to be committing mutiny or sedition under the UCMJ!
The UCMJ provides:
…894. ART. 94. MUTINY OR SEDITION
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who--
(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;
(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition; …
There is however another important group of people (besides the civilian Judges) who, I believe, have the power to investigate and resolve Obama’s ineligibility issue. If just one person of this group has courage and conviction for the truth, he or she can remove the possibility that a another member of our armed forces, acting alone, would decide that they must as a matter of conscience refuse to obey an “Order” coming from Mr. Obama.
This group is made up of every person in the military chain of command that has the power to convene a “Court of Inquiry” under the Uniform Code of Military Justice!
The UCMJ provides for Courts of Inquiry as follows:
935. ART. 135. COURTS OF INQUIRY
(a) Courts of inquiry to investigate any matter may be convened by any person authorized to convene a general court-martial or by any other person designated by the Secretary concerned for that purpose, whether or not the persons involved have requested such an inquiry.
So who are these men and women of the military who have the power to convene a Court of Inquiry? “Any person authorized to convene a general courts-martial” can convene such an inquiry.
They are listed in the UCMJ:
822. ARTICLE 22. WHO MAY CONVENE GENERAL COURTS-MARTIAL
(a) General courts-martial may be convened by--
(1) the President of the United States;
(2) the Secretary of Defense;
(3) the commanding officer of a unified or specified combatant command;
(4) the Secretary concerned;
(5) the commanding officer of a Territorial Department, an Army Group, an Army, an Army Corps, a division, a separate brigade, or a corresponding unit of the Army or Marine Corps;
(6) the commander in chief of a fleet; the commanding officer of a naval station or larger activity of the Navy beyond the United States.
(7) the commanding officer of an air command, an air force, an air division, or a separate wing of the Air Force or Marine Corps;
(8) any other commanding officer designated by the Secretary concerned; or
(9) any other commanding officer in any of the armed forces when empowered by the President.
Therefore, in order to prevent the terrible consequences that could befall the individual Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine who in good faith refuses to follow an order that he or she believes to be an “unlawful order” given by Barack Obama, I urge those listed above to remove this burden from the shoulders of our military and investigate the allegations against Barack Obama to determine once and for all his eligibility to hold the Office of the Presidency. Again I say, Mr. Obama could easily do the right thing and demonstrate his eligibility by answering the allegations made against him!
Just a thought as to a possible starting point for a Court of Inquiry:
..883. ART. 83. FRAUDULENT ENLISTMENT, APPOINTMENT, OR SEPARATION
Any person who--
(1) procures his own enlistment or appointment in the armed forces by knowingly false representation or deliberate concealment as to his qualifications for the enlistment or appointment and receives pay or allowances thereunder…
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the status as Commander and Chief of the Military an appointment conferred upon the person who legitimately holds the Office of the Presidency?
If this does not suffice as legal justification to investigate Obama’s eligibility to hold the Office and/or issue lawful orders, I’m sure there are some brilliant JAG Officers who can provide much better legal arguments for a Court of Inquiry. (Maybe Article 134?)
In conclusion, and to eliminate any possible misunderstandings (CYA), it is solely my intention to follow the oath that I took when I joined the Navy as a 19 year old and to protect the Constitution of the United States of America. It is NOT my intention to express anything that could be remotely be interpreted as an “intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority”!
Further, I would like to request that everyone who is remotely concerned become more aware regarding the eligibility lawsuits that are ongoing such as Berg v Obama, Hollister v Barry Soetoro, Broe v Reed, Kerchner et al v. Obama and research this important issue. One thing is certain, the American media will not be telling the complete story about this issue anytime soon.
Hopefully, Dr. Orly Taitz will see this article and forward it to Lt Col. Earl-Graef.
Confirmation Video Needed
Does anyone have a full video of the confirmation hearing from January 8th, 2009?
I checked CSPAN Video Archives:
I can't seem to find a video record of the Joint Session for January 8th when the electoral votes were certified.
There has been suggestions that at least one person tried to object. Maybe more now. But the hearing may have been interupted by the outburst of applause. We would love to view this hearing again.
New Top Ten Quick Reference
Thank you very much Teresa!
New Top Ten Quick Reference:
http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html
Excellent Quick Reference Flyers:
http://www.scribd.com/people/view/4975153-sire
New Top Ten Quick Reference:
http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html
Excellent Quick Reference Flyers:
http://www.scribd.com/people/view/4975153-sire
Follow up on who was that Congressman that raised his hand to object Obama confirmation?
If you recall at Jan 8 confirmation hearing one man raised his hand to object. As Dick Cheney was about to call on him, our Ms. Cruella DeVille- aka Ms. Nanci Pelosi suddenly burst into applause to shut them up. Others followed in that stunt. We are trying to ascertain who is that man, that raised his hand. You see in the picture a tall, dark complexion man with the beard. I got this e-mail with info and picture of AL Green of TX. This man does look like him. Keep in mind, biography picture is an old one. I can't tell for sure, if it's Al Green or not. Can any patriots from Houston, TX contact his office, schedule an appointment with him and verify his stand on this issue. At any rate we need to schedule appointments with all the congressmen. A meeting with him will be more urgent I guess.
I am sure that your staff has already found this picture of Al Green. Would be best to have actual verification of that youtube video of the lone protester. http://www.house.gov/algreen/bio.shtml
I am sure that your staff has already found this picture of Al Green. Would be best to have actual verification of that youtube video of the lone protester. http://www.house.gov/algreen/bio.shtml
Oklahoma Rebellion by Walter Williams of Townhall.com
A MINORITY VIEW BY WALTER E. WILLIAMS
RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2008, AND THEREAFTER
Oklahoma Rebellion
One of the unappreciated casualties of the War of 1861, erroneously called a Civil War, was its contribution to the erosion of constitutional guarantees of state sovereignty. It settled the issue of secession, making it possible for the federal government to increasingly run roughshod over Ninth and 10th Amendment guarantees. A civil war, by the way, is a struggle where two or more parties try to take over the central government. Confederate President Jefferson Davis no more wanted to take over Washington, D.C., than George Washington wanted to take over London. Both wars are more properly described as wars of independence.
Oklahomans are trying to recover some of their lost state sovereignty by House Joint Resolution 1089, introduced by State Rep. Charles Key.
The resolution's language, in part, reads: "Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'; and Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and whereas, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and Whereas, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government. "Now, therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 2nd session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature: that the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States. That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."
Key's resolution passed in the Oklahoma House of Representatives with a 92 to 3 vote, but it reached a bottleneck in the Senate where it languished until adjournment. However, Key plans to reintroduce the measure when the legislature reconvenes.
Federal usurpation goes beyond anything the Constitution's framers would have imagined. James Madison, explaining the constitution, in Federalist Paper 45, said, "The powers delegated … to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, [such] as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. "The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people." Thomas Jefferson emphasized that the states are not "subordinate" to the national government, but rather the two are "coordinate departments of one simple and integral whole. "The one is the domestic, the other the foreign branch of the same government."
Both parties and all branches of the federal government have made a mockery of the checks and balances, separation of powers and the republican form of government envisioned by the founders. One of the more disgusting sights for me to is to watch a president, congressman or federal judge take an oath to uphold and defend the United States Constitution, when in reality they either hold constitutional principles in contempt or they are ignorant of those principles.
State efforts, such as Oklahoma's, create a glimmer of hope that one day Americans and their elected representatives will realize that the federal government is the creation of the states. A bit of rebellion by officials in other states will speed that process along.
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University
RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2008, AND THEREAFTER
Oklahoma Rebellion
One of the unappreciated casualties of the War of 1861, erroneously called a Civil War, was its contribution to the erosion of constitutional guarantees of state sovereignty. It settled the issue of secession, making it possible for the federal government to increasingly run roughshod over Ninth and 10th Amendment guarantees. A civil war, by the way, is a struggle where two or more parties try to take over the central government. Confederate President Jefferson Davis no more wanted to take over Washington, D.C., than George Washington wanted to take over London. Both wars are more properly described as wars of independence.
Oklahomans are trying to recover some of their lost state sovereignty by House Joint Resolution 1089, introduced by State Rep. Charles Key.
The resolution's language, in part, reads: "Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'; and Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and whereas, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and Whereas, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government. "Now, therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 2nd session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature: that the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States. That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."
Key's resolution passed in the Oklahoma House of Representatives with a 92 to 3 vote, but it reached a bottleneck in the Senate where it languished until adjournment. However, Key plans to reintroduce the measure when the legislature reconvenes.
Federal usurpation goes beyond anything the Constitution's framers would have imagined. James Madison, explaining the constitution, in Federalist Paper 45, said, "The powers delegated … to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, [such] as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. "The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people." Thomas Jefferson emphasized that the states are not "subordinate" to the national government, but rather the two are "coordinate departments of one simple and integral whole. "The one is the domestic, the other the foreign branch of the same government."
Both parties and all branches of the federal government have made a mockery of the checks and balances, separation of powers and the republican form of government envisioned by the founders. One of the more disgusting sights for me to is to watch a president, congressman or federal judge take an oath to uphold and defend the United States Constitution, when in reality they either hold constitutional principles in contempt or they are ignorant of those principles.
State efforts, such as Oklahoma's, create a glimmer of hope that one day Americans and their elected representatives will realize that the federal government is the creation of the states. A bit of rebellion by officials in other states will speed that process along.
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University
Friday, January 30, 2009
From Capitalist magazine
Obama is the Alien-In-Chief by secret design BECAUSE he is an avid fan of Global taxes. Taxes, might I add which will be TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. Last April 2008, Edward Cline of the CAPITALIST MAGAZINE (See; http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5152) wrote: "...Congress is proposing, in Barack Obama's Global Poverty Act (S.2433, based on H.R. 1302, passed by the House September 25, 2007), that Americans be delivered into a state of indentured servitude as laborers for the United Nations. Perhaps "indentured servitude" is too kind a term, for as horrendous a condition as it is, there is usually a time limit to such servitude. Slavery would be the more accurate term in this instance, for what Congress is considering is servitude by Americans in perpetuity, in exchange for nothing but the privilege of laboring to "save" the world without thanks or reward, of filling the alleged needs of others, of performing unlimited "community service" for the offense of merely existing
Please call and schedule meetings with clueless Senator Feinstein
Dear Mr. Ocon:
Thank you for writing regarding President Barack Obama's qualifications to be President. I appreciate hearing from you and I apologize for the delay in my response.
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution specifies the qualifications for this executive office. It states that no person except for a natural born American citizen is eligible to run for President of the United States. Also, the candidate must be at least thirty-five years of age and have resided in the United States for at least fourteen years.
President Obama meets these constitutional requirements. He was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961. According to the Fourteenth Amendment, all persons born in the United States are considered citizens of the United States. Under these criteria, President Obama, a 47-year old U.S. citizen, who has resided in the United States for longer than fourteen years, is eligible to be President.
Once again, thank you for writing. If you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841.
Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
Thank you for writing regarding President Barack Obama's qualifications to be President. I appreciate hearing from you and I apologize for the delay in my response.
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution specifies the qualifications for this executive office. It states that no person except for a natural born American citizen is eligible to run for President of the United States. Also, the candidate must be at least thirty-five years of age and have resided in the United States for at least fourteen years.
President Obama meets these constitutional requirements. He was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961. According to the Fourteenth Amendment, all persons born in the United States are considered citizens of the United States. Under these criteria, President Obama, a 47-year old U.S. citizen, who has resided in the United States for longer than fourteen years, is eligible to be President.
Once again, thank you for writing. If you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841.
Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
What a difference a week makes!
Prior to taking office Obama's approval rating was supposedly at 86%. Last Zogby poll show his approval now at 52%. His approval dropped more then by a third in one week- 34% drop in one week. Good going guys. A couple more weeks and we are done :-)
Orly
Orly
Update on Convention
I have a tentative o'k from State representatives from Oklahoma and Texas, that are known constitutionalists, to participate and be speakers. Definite answer will depend on the dates.
Info Needed - Defend Our Freedom Convention
As many of you know, Dr. Taitz is planning on having a Defend Our Freedom Convention in the DFW area of Texas. Dr. Taitz has asked me to be in charge of the planning of this convention.
Many hotels book major conferences many months in advance, which is making it difficult to find early dates of availability. It will greatly help knowing how many people are interested in attending this conference. I know many of you cannot make a decision until we find out all the costs for you. I am not asking for a commitment; however, I would like to know if you would attend, if your expense is kept to a minimum. As it is now, I cannot get them to confirm prices so I am getting a range from $100 per night to over $200 per night. Once I have this information, then I should be able to post by Monday hotel information.
Dr. Taitz is, at this time, wanting to have a Friday (for people to go to Federal Court Building as a group), Saturday, and Sunday. We are currently looking at dates in April and early May.
Please email me at freedomfinally@lycos.com and include one or more of the following.
checking which you can do.
Will you be able to attend ____1 day ____2 Days ____3 Days
Maybe will attend ____1 day ____2 Days ____3 Days
If you cannot attend every day, then which days?
Will attend: ____Friday ____Sat ____Sun
Maybe will attend ____Friday ____Sat ____Sun
If you cannot attend during the day on Friday, would you be attending our Friday evening reception?
Yes _____
Maybe _____
Do you:
_____ need a hotel room,
_____ want to share a hotel room with someone else,
_____ know someone locally with whom you can stay
Do you live in the DFW area?
If so, would you:
_____ be willing to have people stay with you
_____ be willing to volunteer to work at the registration desk
_____ pick up people at the airport
_____ do other things to help
If you received an email or saw a posting somewhere else about this and have already responded, please do not reply again to the areas on which you have already responded..
Would you be willing:
_____ to do some fund-raising
_____ donate for this event?
_____ sponsor or find a sponsor for the event
Thank you.
Many hotels book major conferences many months in advance, which is making it difficult to find early dates of availability. It will greatly help knowing how many people are interested in attending this conference. I know many of you cannot make a decision until we find out all the costs for you. I am not asking for a commitment; however, I would like to know if you would attend, if your expense is kept to a minimum. As it is now, I cannot get them to confirm prices so I am getting a range from $100 per night to over $200 per night. Once I have this information, then I should be able to post by Monday hotel information.
Dr. Taitz is, at this time, wanting to have a Friday (for people to go to Federal Court Building as a group), Saturday, and Sunday. We are currently looking at dates in April and early May.
Please email me at freedomfinally@lycos.com and include one or more of the following.
checking which you can do.
Will you be able to attend ____1 day ____2 Days ____3 Days
Maybe will attend ____1 day ____2 Days ____3 Days
If you cannot attend every day, then which days?
Will attend: ____Friday ____Sat ____Sun
Maybe will attend ____Friday ____Sat ____Sun
If you cannot attend during the day on Friday, would you be attending our Friday evening reception?
Yes _____
Maybe _____
Do you:
_____ need a hotel room,
_____ want to share a hotel room with someone else,
_____ know someone locally with whom you can stay
Do you live in the DFW area?
If so, would you:
_____ be willing to have people stay with you
_____ be willing to volunteer to work at the registration desk
_____ pick up people at the airport
_____ do other things to help
If you received an email or saw a posting somewhere else about this and have already responded, please do not reply again to the areas on which you have already responded..
Would you be willing:
_____ to do some fund-raising
_____ donate for this event?
_____ sponsor or find a sponsor for the event
Thank you.
Senator Alexander's office has forwarded Obama eligibility matter to the FBI
Sen. Alexander’s Office Refers Eligibility Request to FBI
Submitted by Phil on Fri, Jan 23, 200923 Comments
Justin Riggs, blogger at YourFellowCitizen.com, received the following information when contacting Sen. Lamar Alexander’s (R-TN) office regarding the President’s eligibility:
My anonymous source in Tennessee heard back from Lamar Alexander’s office earlier this week. A staff member was kind enough to forward his/her request for information on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, so hopefully we’ll have more to report in the not too distant future.
Submitted by Phil on Fri, Jan 23, 200923 Comments
Justin Riggs, blogger at YourFellowCitizen.com, received the following information when contacting Sen. Lamar Alexander’s (R-TN) office regarding the President’s eligibility:
My anonymous source in Tennessee heard back from Lamar Alexander’s office earlier this week. A staff member was kind enough to forward his/her request for information on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, so hopefully we’ll have more to report in the not too distant future.
How much is Obama paying to defend his ineligibility?
I was asked this question. How much is Obama paying to defend his ineligibility? Let's see. I saw in Justia 48 legal actions in Federal courts alone. In state courts there are probably many more cases, since people are more at ease filing in their local state circuit courts pro se. In my Keyes v Bowen case there are 4 attorneys representing Obama, 4 representing SOS Bowen and one representing electors-9 in all. There are two issues here:
1. of course he is spending a fortune. His CA attorneys are Beverly Hills firm (unless it's just a front) and DC Robert Bauer that has been around the block time and again. My guess they are charging $600 an hour. You do the math.
2. The States are spending a fortune. They are wasting our taxpayer's dollars to defend indefensible. I believe in each one of those cases the judges should've issued a Writ of Mandamus to obtain necessary eligibility documentation from a legitimate source, like the Health Dep of HI and State Dep., instead of allowing Robert Bauer and Obama a free ride claiming NoFactNoCheck.org political blog garbage as a reputable source. Why aren't the judges sanctioning them for even claiming that this stupid political unverified blog is a reputable source? Additionally, why are they allowing such a waste of taxpayer dollars, instead of getting the docs within an hour and getting over with it? What are they waiting for? For people's anger to reach the boiling point and a revolt to start? Is that the end game? I really don't know...
1. of course he is spending a fortune. His CA attorneys are Beverly Hills firm (unless it's just a front) and DC Robert Bauer that has been around the block time and again. My guess they are charging $600 an hour. You do the math.
2. The States are spending a fortune. They are wasting our taxpayer's dollars to defend indefensible. I believe in each one of those cases the judges should've issued a Writ of Mandamus to obtain necessary eligibility documentation from a legitimate source, like the Health Dep of HI and State Dep., instead of allowing Robert Bauer and Obama a free ride claiming NoFactNoCheck.org political blog garbage as a reputable source. Why aren't the judges sanctioning them for even claiming that this stupid political unverified blog is a reputable source? Additionally, why are they allowing such a waste of taxpayer dollars, instead of getting the docs within an hour and getting over with it? What are they waiting for? For people's anger to reach the boiling point and a revolt to start? Is that the end game? I really don't know...
Judicial Watch files a legal action against Hillary Clinton, from Devvy Kidd
Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit Challenging Hillary Clinton Appointment on Behalf of State Department Foreign Service Officer
Contact:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305
Washington, DC -- January 29, 2009
Hillary Clinton Constitutionally Ineligible to Serve as Secretary of State
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against newly sworn-in Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on behalf of U.S. Foreign Service Officer and State Department employee David C. Rodearmel, (Rodearmel v. Clinton, et al., (D. District of Columbia)). The lawsuit maintains that Mrs. Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as Secretary of State and that Mr. Rodearmel cannot be forced to serve under the former U.S. Senator, as it would violate the oath he took as a Foreign Service Officer in 1991 to "support and defend" and "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution of the United States.
Under the "Emoluments" or "Ineligibility" clause of the U.S. Constitution, no member of Congress can be appointed to a civilian position within the U.S. government if the "emoluments" of the position, such as the salary or benefits paid to whoever occupies the office, increased during the term for which the Senator or Representative was elected.
Specifically, article I, section 6 of the U.S. Constitution provides, "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time." The text of the provision is an absolute prohibition and does not allow for any exceptions.
According to Judicial Watch's lawsuit, the "emoluments" of the office of U.S. Secretary of State increased three times during Mrs. Clinton's most recent U.S. Senate term. That term, which began on January 4, 2007, does not expire until January 2013, regardless of Mrs. Clinton's recent resignation. The lawsuit notes that Congress attempted to evade this clear constitutional prohibition with a so-called "Saxbe fix" last month, reducing the Secretary of State's salary to the level in effect on January 1, 2007. This maneuver, first used in the Taft Administration, has been more frequently used in recent years by both parties, allowing notably Republican Senator William Saxbe to become U.S. Attorney General in 1973 and Democratic Senator Lloyd Bentsen to become Treasury Secretary in 1993. A similar "fix" has been enacted for Senator Ken Salazar to join the Obama Cabinet as Secretary of the Interior.
Judicial Watch's lawsuit, however, points out that the legislation "does not and cannot change the historical fact that the 'compensation and other emoluments' of the office of the U.S. Secretary of State increased during Defendant Clinton's tenure in the U.S. Senate . . . ." The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is required to give expedited consideration to the lawsuit.
"This historic legal challenge should remind politicians of both parties that the U.S. Constitution
is not to be trifled with," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Mrs. Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as the U.S. Secretary of State until at least 2013, when her second term in the U.S. Senate expires. We hope the courts will put a stop to these end runs around the Constitution and affirm the rule of law."
Contact:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305
Washington, DC -- January 29, 2009
Hillary Clinton Constitutionally Ineligible to Serve as Secretary of State
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against newly sworn-in Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on behalf of U.S. Foreign Service Officer and State Department employee David C. Rodearmel, (Rodearmel v. Clinton, et al., (D. District of Columbia)). The lawsuit maintains that Mrs. Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as Secretary of State and that Mr. Rodearmel cannot be forced to serve under the former U.S. Senator, as it would violate the oath he took as a Foreign Service Officer in 1991 to "support and defend" and "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution of the United States.
Under the "Emoluments" or "Ineligibility" clause of the U.S. Constitution, no member of Congress can be appointed to a civilian position within the U.S. government if the "emoluments" of the position, such as the salary or benefits paid to whoever occupies the office, increased during the term for which the Senator or Representative was elected.
Specifically, article I, section 6 of the U.S. Constitution provides, "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time." The text of the provision is an absolute prohibition and does not allow for any exceptions.
According to Judicial Watch's lawsuit, the "emoluments" of the office of U.S. Secretary of State increased three times during Mrs. Clinton's most recent U.S. Senate term. That term, which began on January 4, 2007, does not expire until January 2013, regardless of Mrs. Clinton's recent resignation. The lawsuit notes that Congress attempted to evade this clear constitutional prohibition with a so-called "Saxbe fix" last month, reducing the Secretary of State's salary to the level in effect on January 1, 2007. This maneuver, first used in the Taft Administration, has been more frequently used in recent years by both parties, allowing notably Republican Senator William Saxbe to become U.S. Attorney General in 1973 and Democratic Senator Lloyd Bentsen to become Treasury Secretary in 1993. A similar "fix" has been enacted for Senator Ken Salazar to join the Obama Cabinet as Secretary of the Interior.
Judicial Watch's lawsuit, however, points out that the legislation "does not and cannot change the historical fact that the 'compensation and other emoluments' of the office of the U.S. Secretary of State increased during Defendant Clinton's tenure in the U.S. Senate . . . ." The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is required to give expedited consideration to the lawsuit.
"This historic legal challenge should remind politicians of both parties that the U.S. Constitution
is not to be trifled with," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Mrs. Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as the U.S. Secretary of State until at least 2013, when her second term in the U.S. Senate expires. We hope the courts will put a stop to these end runs around the Constitution and affirm the rule of law."
Why do we believe everything Bad, Illegal and Unconstitutional when it comes to Obama?
As you know, I posted yesterday an article, that was forwarded to me by Devvy Kidd, a reporter and writer with some 20 years of experience. The article dealt with Obama planning to make changes to the military oath. This article was printed in Atlas Shrug and Oil for Immigration web sites.
Will Obama really change the military oath? Will there be changes to the Constitution? We don't really know. The main reason is that Obama has zero credibility. When a man spends reported $800,000 on attorneys to keep original birth certificate sealed, you know that this birth certificate shows him as ineligible for presidency, otherwise he would've shown it to us. You know this man is defrauding the whole country and needs to be removed from office ASAP. When his side kick Rick Warren calls him a son of an African immigrant, when BO Sr was never an immigrant, but rather a Kenyan on a student visa, which made BO not a Natural Born Citizen, you know they are manipulating the facts.
I hope each and every member of the military or any other citizen for that matter should write to him and demand written assurance that he will not be making any changes to the constitution and demand to see all of his records under FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) in order to find out, what is his legal name and what is his citizenship. Until BO steps up to the plate, the citizens will believe anything and everything about him, and rightfully so.
Will Obama really change the military oath? Will there be changes to the Constitution? We don't really know. The main reason is that Obama has zero credibility. When a man spends reported $800,000 on attorneys to keep original birth certificate sealed, you know that this birth certificate shows him as ineligible for presidency, otherwise he would've shown it to us. You know this man is defrauding the whole country and needs to be removed from office ASAP. When his side kick Rick Warren calls him a son of an African immigrant, when BO Sr was never an immigrant, but rather a Kenyan on a student visa, which made BO not a Natural Born Citizen, you know they are manipulating the facts.
I hope each and every member of the military or any other citizen for that matter should write to him and demand written assurance that he will not be making any changes to the constitution and demand to see all of his records under FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) in order to find out, what is his legal name and what is his citizenship. Until BO steps up to the plate, the citizens will believe anything and everything about him, and rightfully so.
Obama and AntiMilitary Actions
Available for download is a poor quality PDF of writing from Barack Obama in 1983 for Columbia. He wrote and supported Students Against Arms and Arms Race Alternative. These are anti military and anti war activists.
More material for downloading available here.
Some text of the article:
Most students at Columbia do not have first hand knowledge of war. Military violence has been a vicarious experience, channeled into our minds through television, film, and print.
The more sensitive among us struggle to extrapolate experiences of war from our everyday experience, discussing the latest mortality statistics from Guatemala, sensitizing ourselves to our parents' wartime memories, or incorporating into our framework of reality as depicted by a Maller[?] or a Coppola. But the taste of war -- the sounds and chill, the dead bodies -- are remote and far removed. We know that wars have occurred, will occur, are occurring, but bringing such experience down into our hearts, and taking continual, tangible steps to prevent war, becomes a difficult task.
Two groups on campus, Arms Race Alternatives (ARA) and Students Against Militarism (SAM) work within these mental limits to foster awareness and practical action necessary to counter the growing threat of war. Though the emphasis of the two groups differ, they share an aversion to current government policy. These groups, visualizing the possibilities of destruction and grasping the tendencies of distorted national priorities, are throwing their weight into shifting America off the dead-end track.
"Most people my age remember well the air-raid drills in school, under the desk with our heads tucked between our legs. Older people, they remember the Cuban Missile Crisis. I think these kinds of things left an indelible mark on our souls[?], so we're more apt to be concerned," says Don Kent, assistant director of programs and student activities at Earl Hall Center. Along with the community Volunteer Service Center, ARA has been Don's primary concern, coordinating various working groups of faculty, students, and staff members, while simultaneously seeking the ever elusive funding for programs.
"When I first came here two years ago, Earl Hall had been a holding tank for five years. Paul Martin (director of Earl Hall) and I discussed our interests, and decided that ARA would be one of the programs we pushed." Initially, most of the work was done by non-student volunteers and staff. "Hot issues, particularly El Salvador, were occupying students at the time. Consequently, we cosponsored a lot of activities with community organizations like SANE (Students Against Nuclear Energy)."
With the flowering of the nuclear freeze movement, and particularly the June 12 rally in Central Park, however student participation has expanded. One wonders whether this upsurge comes[?] from young people's penchant for the latest 'happenings' or from growing awareness of the consequences of nuclear holocaust. ARA maintains a mailing list of 500 persons and Don Kent estimates that approximately half of the active members are students. Although he feels that continuity is provided by the faculty and staff members, student attendance at ARA sponsored events -- in particular a November 11 convocation on the nuclear threat -- reveals a deep reservoir of concern. "I think students on this campus like to think of themselves a sophisticated, and don't appreciate small vision. So they tend to come out more for the events; they do not want to just fold leaflets."
Mark Bigelow, a graduate intern from Union Theological Seminary who works with Don to keep ARA running smoothly, agrees. "It seems that students here are fairly aware of the nuclear problem, and it makes for an underlying frustration. We try to talk to that frustration."
Consequently, the thrust of ARA is towards generating dialogue which will give people a rational handle on this controversial subject. This includes bringing speakers like Daniel Ellsberg to campus, publishing fact sheets compiled by interested faculty, and investigating the possible development of an interdisciplinary program in the Columbia curriculum dealing with peace, disarmament, and world order.
Tied in with such a thrust is the absence of what Don calls "a party line." By taking an almost apolitical approach to the problem, ARA hopes to get the university to take nuclear arms issues seriously. "People don't like having their intelligence insulted," says Don. "so we try to disseminate information and allow the individual to make his or her own decision."
Generally, the narrow focus of the Freeze movement as well as academic discussions of first versus second strike capabilities, suit the military-industrial interests, as they continue adding to their billion dollar erector sets. When Peter Tosh sings that "everybody's asking for peace, but nobody's asking for justice," one is forced to wonder whether disarmament or arms control ensues[?], severed from economic and political issues, might be another instance of focusing on the symptoms of a problem instead of the disease itself. Mark Bigelow does not think so. "We do focus primarily on catastrophic weapons. Look, we say, here's the worst part . Let's[?] work[?] on that. You're not going to get rid of the military in the near future, so let's at least work on this."
Mark Bigelow does feel that the links are there, and points to fruitful work being done by other organizations involved with disarmament. "The Freeze is one part of a whole[?] disarmament movement. The lowest common denominator, so to speak. For instance, April 10-16 is Jobs For Peace week, with a bunch of things going on around the city. Also, the New York City Council may pass a resolution in April calling for greater social as opposed to military spending. Things like this may dispel the idea that disarmament is a white issue, because how the government spends its revenue affects everyone."
The very real advantages of concentrating on a single issue is leading the National Freeze movement to challenge individual missile systems, while continuing the broader campaign. This year, Mark Bigelow sees the checking of Pershing II and Cruise missile deployment as crucial. "Because of their small size and mobility, their deployment will make possible arms control verification far more difficult, and will cut down warning time for the Soviets to less than ten minutes. That can only be a destabilizing factor[?]." Additionally, he sees the initiation by the
U.S. of the Test Ban Treaty as a powerful first step towards a nuclear free world.
ARA encourages members to join buses to Washington and participate in a March 7-8 rally intended to push through the Freeze resolution which is making its second trip through the House. ARA also will ask United Campuses to Prevent Nuclear War (UCAM), an information and lobbying network based in universities, nationwide, to serve as its advisory board in the near future. Because of its autonomy from Columbia (which does not fund political organizations), UCAM could conceivably become a more active arm of disarmament campaigns on campus, thought the ARA will continue to function solely as a vehicle for information and discussion.
Also operating out of Earl Hall Center, Students Against Militarism was formed in response to the passage of registration laws in 1980. An entirely student-run organization, SAM casts a wider net than ARA, though for the purposes of effectiveness, they have tried to lock in on one issue at a time.
"At the heart of our organization is an anti-war focus," says junior Robert Kahn, one of SAM's fifteen or so active members. "From there, a lot of issues shoot forth -- nukes, racism, the draft, and South Africa. We have been better organized when taking one issue at a time, but we are always cognizant of other things going on, and collaborate frequently with other campus organizations like CISPES and REELPOLITIK."
At this time, the current major issue is the Solomon Bill, the latest legislation from Congress to obtain compliance to registration. The law requires that all male students applying for federal financial aid submit proof of registration, or else the government coffers will close. Yale, Wesleyan, and Swathmore have refused to comply, and plan to offer non-registrants other forms of financial aid. SAM hopes to press Columbia into following suit, though so far President Sovern and company seem prepared to acquiesce to the bill.
Robert believes students tacitly support non-registrants, though the majority did not comply.
"Several students have come up to our tables and said that had they known of the ineffectiveness of the prosecution, they would not have registered." A measure of such underlying support is the 400 signatures on a petition protesting the Solomon Bill, which SAM collected the first four hours it appeared. Robert also points out that prior to registration, there were four separate bills circulating in the House proposing a return to the draft, but none ever got out of committees, and there have not been renewed efforts. An estimated half-million non-registrants can definitely be a powerful signal.
Prodding students into participating beyond name signing and attending events is tricky, but SAM members seem undaunted. "A lot of the problem comes not from people's ignorance of the facts, but because the news and statistics are lifeless. That's why we search for campus issues like the Solomon bill that have direct impact on the student body, and effectively link the campus to broader issues." By organizing and educating the Columbia community, such activities lay the foundation for future mobilization against the relentless, often silent spread of militarism in the country. "The time is right to tie together social and military issues," Robert continues, "and the more strident the Administration becomes, the more aware people are of their real interests."
The belief that moribund institutions, rather than the individuals, are at the root of the problem, keep SAM's energies alive. "A prerequisite for members of an organization like ours is the faith that people are fundamentally good, but you need to show them, and when you look at the work people are doing across the country, it makes you optimistic."
Perhaps the essential goodness of humanity is an arguable proposition, but by observing the SAM meeting last Thursday night, with its solid turnout and enthusiasm, one might be persuaded that the manifestations of our better instincts can at least match the bad ones. Regarding Columbia's possible compliance, one comment in particular hit upon an important point with the Solomon bill, "The thing we need to do is expose how Columbia is talking out of two sides of its mouth."
Indeed, the most pervasive malady of the collegiate system specifically, and the American experience generally, is that elaborate patterns of knowledge and theory have been disembodied from individual choices and government policy. What members of ARA and SAM try to do is infuse what they have learned about the current situation, bring the words of that formidable roster on the face of Butler Library, names like Thoreau, Jefferson, and Whitman, to bear on the twisted logic of which we are today a part. By adding their energy and effort in order to enhance the possibility of a decent world, they may help deprive us of a spectacular experience--that of war. But then, there are some things we shouldn't have to live through in order to want to avoid the experience.
More material for downloading available here.
Some text of the article:
Most students at Columbia do not have first hand knowledge of war. Military violence has been a vicarious experience, channeled into our minds through television, film, and print.
The more sensitive among us struggle to extrapolate experiences of war from our everyday experience, discussing the latest mortality statistics from Guatemala, sensitizing ourselves to our parents' wartime memories, or incorporating into our framework of reality as depicted by a Maller[?] or a Coppola. But the taste of war -- the sounds and chill, the dead bodies -- are remote and far removed. We know that wars have occurred, will occur, are occurring, but bringing such experience down into our hearts, and taking continual, tangible steps to prevent war, becomes a difficult task.
Two groups on campus, Arms Race Alternatives (ARA) and Students Against Militarism (SAM) work within these mental limits to foster awareness and practical action necessary to counter the growing threat of war. Though the emphasis of the two groups differ, they share an aversion to current government policy. These groups, visualizing the possibilities of destruction and grasping the tendencies of distorted national priorities, are throwing their weight into shifting America off the dead-end track.
"Most people my age remember well the air-raid drills in school, under the desk with our heads tucked between our legs. Older people, they remember the Cuban Missile Crisis. I think these kinds of things left an indelible mark on our souls[?], so we're more apt to be concerned," says Don Kent, assistant director of programs and student activities at Earl Hall Center. Along with the community Volunteer Service Center, ARA has been Don's primary concern, coordinating various working groups of faculty, students, and staff members, while simultaneously seeking the ever elusive funding for programs.
"When I first came here two years ago, Earl Hall had been a holding tank for five years. Paul Martin (director of Earl Hall) and I discussed our interests, and decided that ARA would be one of the programs we pushed." Initially, most of the work was done by non-student volunteers and staff. "Hot issues, particularly El Salvador, were occupying students at the time. Consequently, we cosponsored a lot of activities with community organizations like SANE (Students Against Nuclear Energy)."
With the flowering of the nuclear freeze movement, and particularly the June 12 rally in Central Park, however student participation has expanded. One wonders whether this upsurge comes[?] from young people's penchant for the latest 'happenings' or from growing awareness of the consequences of nuclear holocaust. ARA maintains a mailing list of 500 persons and Don Kent estimates that approximately half of the active members are students. Although he feels that continuity is provided by the faculty and staff members, student attendance at ARA sponsored events -- in particular a November 11 convocation on the nuclear threat -- reveals a deep reservoir of concern. "I think students on this campus like to think of themselves a sophisticated, and don't appreciate small vision. So they tend to come out more for the events; they do not want to just fold leaflets."
Mark Bigelow, a graduate intern from Union Theological Seminary who works with Don to keep ARA running smoothly, agrees. "It seems that students here are fairly aware of the nuclear problem, and it makes for an underlying frustration. We try to talk to that frustration."
Consequently, the thrust of ARA is towards generating dialogue which will give people a rational handle on this controversial subject. This includes bringing speakers like Daniel Ellsberg to campus, publishing fact sheets compiled by interested faculty, and investigating the possible development of an interdisciplinary program in the Columbia curriculum dealing with peace, disarmament, and world order.
Tied in with such a thrust is the absence of what Don calls "a party line." By taking an almost apolitical approach to the problem, ARA hopes to get the university to take nuclear arms issues seriously. "People don't like having their intelligence insulted," says Don. "so we try to disseminate information and allow the individual to make his or her own decision."
Generally, the narrow focus of the Freeze movement as well as academic discussions of first versus second strike capabilities, suit the military-industrial interests, as they continue adding to their billion dollar erector sets. When Peter Tosh sings that "everybody's asking for peace, but nobody's asking for justice," one is forced to wonder whether disarmament or arms control ensues[?], severed from economic and political issues, might be another instance of focusing on the symptoms of a problem instead of the disease itself. Mark Bigelow does not think so. "We do focus primarily on catastrophic weapons. Look, we say, here's the worst part . Let's[?] work[?] on that. You're not going to get rid of the military in the near future, so let's at least work on this."
Mark Bigelow does feel that the links are there, and points to fruitful work being done by other organizations involved with disarmament. "The Freeze is one part of a whole[?] disarmament movement. The lowest common denominator, so to speak. For instance, April 10-16 is Jobs For Peace week, with a bunch of things going on around the city. Also, the New York City Council may pass a resolution in April calling for greater social as opposed to military spending. Things like this may dispel the idea that disarmament is a white issue, because how the government spends its revenue affects everyone."
The very real advantages of concentrating on a single issue is leading the National Freeze movement to challenge individual missile systems, while continuing the broader campaign. This year, Mark Bigelow sees the checking of Pershing II and Cruise missile deployment as crucial. "Because of their small size and mobility, their deployment will make possible arms control verification far more difficult, and will cut down warning time for the Soviets to less than ten minutes. That can only be a destabilizing factor[?]." Additionally, he sees the initiation by the
U.S. of the Test Ban Treaty as a powerful first step towards a nuclear free world.
ARA encourages members to join buses to Washington and participate in a March 7-8 rally intended to push through the Freeze resolution which is making its second trip through the House. ARA also will ask United Campuses to Prevent Nuclear War (UCAM), an information and lobbying network based in universities, nationwide, to serve as its advisory board in the near future. Because of its autonomy from Columbia (which does not fund political organizations), UCAM could conceivably become a more active arm of disarmament campaigns on campus, thought the ARA will continue to function solely as a vehicle for information and discussion.
Also operating out of Earl Hall Center, Students Against Militarism was formed in response to the passage of registration laws in 1980. An entirely student-run organization, SAM casts a wider net than ARA, though for the purposes of effectiveness, they have tried to lock in on one issue at a time.
"At the heart of our organization is an anti-war focus," says junior Robert Kahn, one of SAM's fifteen or so active members. "From there, a lot of issues shoot forth -- nukes, racism, the draft, and South Africa. We have been better organized when taking one issue at a time, but we are always cognizant of other things going on, and collaborate frequently with other campus organizations like CISPES and REELPOLITIK."
At this time, the current major issue is the Solomon Bill, the latest legislation from Congress to obtain compliance to registration. The law requires that all male students applying for federal financial aid submit proof of registration, or else the government coffers will close. Yale, Wesleyan, and Swathmore have refused to comply, and plan to offer non-registrants other forms of financial aid. SAM hopes to press Columbia into following suit, though so far President Sovern and company seem prepared to acquiesce to the bill.
Robert believes students tacitly support non-registrants, though the majority did not comply.
"Several students have come up to our tables and said that had they known of the ineffectiveness of the prosecution, they would not have registered." A measure of such underlying support is the 400 signatures on a petition protesting the Solomon Bill, which SAM collected the first four hours it appeared. Robert also points out that prior to registration, there were four separate bills circulating in the House proposing a return to the draft, but none ever got out of committees, and there have not been renewed efforts. An estimated half-million non-registrants can definitely be a powerful signal.
Prodding students into participating beyond name signing and attending events is tricky, but SAM members seem undaunted. "A lot of the problem comes not from people's ignorance of the facts, but because the news and statistics are lifeless. That's why we search for campus issues like the Solomon bill that have direct impact on the student body, and effectively link the campus to broader issues." By organizing and educating the Columbia community, such activities lay the foundation for future mobilization against the relentless, often silent spread of militarism in the country. "The time is right to tie together social and military issues," Robert continues, "and the more strident the Administration becomes, the more aware people are of their real interests."
The belief that moribund institutions, rather than the individuals, are at the root of the problem, keep SAM's energies alive. "A prerequisite for members of an organization like ours is the faith that people are fundamentally good, but you need to show them, and when you look at the work people are doing across the country, it makes you optimistic."
Perhaps the essential goodness of humanity is an arguable proposition, but by observing the SAM meeting last Thursday night, with its solid turnout and enthusiasm, one might be persuaded that the manifestations of our better instincts can at least match the bad ones. Regarding Columbia's possible compliance, one comment in particular hit upon an important point with the Solomon bill, "The thing we need to do is expose how Columbia is talking out of two sides of its mouth."
Indeed, the most pervasive malady of the collegiate system specifically, and the American experience generally, is that elaborate patterns of knowledge and theory have been disembodied from individual choices and government policy. What members of ARA and SAM try to do is infuse what they have learned about the current situation, bring the words of that formidable roster on the face of Butler Library, names like Thoreau, Jefferson, and Whitman, to bear on the twisted logic of which we are today a part. By adding their energy and effort in order to enhance the possibility of a decent world, they may help deprive us of a spectacular experience--that of war. But then, there are some things we shouldn't have to live through in order to want to avoid the experience.
Obama- in empty words is pro Israel, in reality-Pro Palestinian terrorists, pro destruction of Israel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FROM WND'S JERUSALEM BUREAU
Obama 'friend': End of Israel 'within reach'
Activist boasts 'Western support, complicity' starting to crack
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 30, 2009
12:20 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Ali Abunimah
JERUSALEM – Accusing the Jewish state of "genocide," an anti-Israel Palestinian activist once commended by President Obama has predicted the end of Israel, which, he boasted, is "within reach, in our lifetimes."
In a piece earlier this month titled, "Why Israel won't survive," Ali Abunimah, co-founder of Electronic Intifada, a pro-Palestinian online publication, accused Israel of war crimes and gloated, "Now, the other pillar of Israeli power – Western support and complicity – is starting to crack. We must do all we can to push it over."
"It is Israel as a Zionist state, not Palestine or the Palestinian people, that cannot survive this attempted genocide. Its problem is legitimacy, or rather a profound and irreversible lack of it," wrote Abunimah.
(Story continues below)
Abunimah previously was described as close to Obama and has introduced the politician at pro-Palestinian events. Referring to a time period in the late 1990s, Abunimah said that "Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation."
Abunimah was quoted stating Obama was "quite frank that the U.S. needed to be more evenhanded, that it leaned too much toward Israel."
He noted Obama's unusual stance toward Israel, commenting "these were the kind of statements I'd never heard from a U.S. politician who seemed like he was going somewhere, rather than at the end of his career."
In his piece this month, Abunimah blasted Israel's three-week campaign against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, accusing the Israel Defense Forces of "massacr[ing] civilians in the hope that the population would turn against those fighting the occupier."
"The death toll keeps rising as more bodies are pulled from carpet-bombed neighborhoods," Abunimah claimed.
Israel did not carpet-bomb any area in the Gaza Strip. It carried out surgical precision strikes against specific Hamas targets. The IDF regularly warned civilians of incoming attacks with phone calls or text messages. The IDF routinely employed what it terms "roof knocking" – just prior to a targeted bombing, the building in question would receive a telephone call in Arabic warning that the structure was going to be bombed.
Hamas, on the other hand, was widely condemned for utilizing civilians as human shields and storing weapons and military infrastructure in civilian zones, including apartment buildings.
But Abunimah asserted: "Israel simply cannot bomb its way to legitimacy. What choice will Israel make? In the absence of any political and moral legitimacy the only arguments it has left are bullets and bombs. Left to its own devices Israel will certainly keep trying – as it has for sixty years – to massacre Palestinians into submission."
He claimed "Israel's real goals (in Gaza) were to restore its 'deterrence' fatally damaged after its 2006 defeat in Lebanon (translation: its ability to massacre and terrorize entire populations into submission) and to destroy any Palestinian resistance to total Israeli-Jewish control over historic Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea."
Zionism, he asserted, is an ideology of "racial supremacy, extremism and hate, is a dying project, in retreat and failing to find new recruits. ... It is within reach, in our lifetimes."
Obama, anti-Israel activist raised funds for Islamic causes
In the 1990s, Obama was a speaker at events in Chicago's large Palestinian immigrant community to raise funds for U.N. camps for the so-called Palestinian refugees. Abunimah recalls introducing Obama at one such event, a 1999 fundraiser for the Deheisha Palestinian camp in the West Bank.
"I knew Barack Obama for many years as my state senator – when he used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time," stated Abuminah during an interview last year with Democracy Now!, a nationally syndicated radio and television political program.
"I remember personally introducing [Obama] onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. And that's just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation," Abunimah said.
Abunimah previously described meeting with Obama at a fundraiser at the home of Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, reportedly a former PLO activist.
"[Obama] came with his wife. That's where I had a chance to really talk to him," Abunimah recalled. "It was an intimate setting. He convinced me he was very aware of the issues [and] critical of U.S. bias toward Israel and lack of sensitivity to Arabs. ... He was very supportive of U.S. pressure on Israel.
According to quotes obtained by Gulf News, Abunimah recalled a 2004 meeting in a Chicago neighborhood while Obama was running for his Senate seat. Abunimah quoted Obama telling him "warmly" he was sorry that "I haven't said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race."
"I'm hoping when things calm down, I can be more up front," Abunimah reportedly quoted the senator as saying.
Abunimah said Obama urged him to "keep up the good work" at the Chicago Tribune, where Abunimah contributed guest columns that were highly critical of Israel.
Abunimah serves on the board of the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, a controversial Arab group founded by Khalidi's wife that mourns the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe" and supports intense immigration reform, including providing driver's licenses and education to illegal aliens.
WND broke the story the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit on which Obama served as a paid director alongside a confessed domestic terrorist, provided $75,000 in grants to the AAAN.
'Very active terror apparatus'
Obama's 1999 fundraising for the Palestinian Deheisha camp raised the eyebrows of one senior Israeli security official who was contacted for comment on the issue. The official, who was not aware of Obama's fundraising, noted Deheisha, which is located near the city of Bethlehem, had a "very active" Palestinian terror apparatus in 1999, carrying out scores of deadly shootings against Israeli civilians that year.
Two of the most deadly suicide bombings in 2002 also were planned from Deheisha, where the suicide bombers originated, said the security official. In one such bombing, in March of that year, 11 people were killed and over 50 injured, four critically when a Deheisha bomber detonated his explosives next to a group of Jewish women waiting with their baby carriages for their husbands to leave a nearby synagogue.
The question of so-called Palestinian refugees is a sensitive one for supporters of Israel. All Israeli prime ministers have stated a final peace deal with the Palestinians cannot include the "return" of "refugees."
When Arab countries attacked the Jewish state after its creation in 1948, some 725,000 Arabs living within Israel's borders fled or were flushed out when the Jewish state pushed back attacking Arab armies. Also at that time, about 820,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries or fled following rampant persecution.
While most Jewish refugees were absorbed by Israel and other countries, the majority of Palestinian Arabs have been maintained in 59 U.N.-run camps that do not seek to settle the Arabs elsewhere.
There are currently about 4 million Arabs who claim Palestinian refugee status with the U.N., including children and grandchildren of the original fleeing Arabs; Arabs living full-time in Jordan; and Arabs who long ago emigrated throughout the Middle East and to the West.
Other cases of worldwide refugees aided by the U.N. are handled through the international body's High Commission for Refugees, which seeks to settle the refugees quickly, usually in countries other than those from which they fled.
The U.N. created a special agency – the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA – specifically to handle registered Palestinian refugees. It's the only refugee case handled by the U.N. in which the declared refugees are housed and maintained in camps for generations instead of facilitating the refugees' resettlement elsewhere.
The U.N. officially restricts the definition of refugee status worldwide for nationalities outside the Palestinian arena to those who fled a country of nationality or habitual residence due to persecution, who are unable to return to their place of residence and who have not yet been resettled. Future generations of original refugees are not included in the U.N.'s definition of refugees.
But the U.N. uses a different set of criteria only when defining a Palestinian refugee – allowing future generations to be considered refugees; terming as refugees Arabs who have been resettled in other countries, such as hundreds of thousands in Jordan; removing the clause requiring persecution; and removing the clause requiring a refugee to be fleeing his or her "country of nationality or habitual residence."
Palestinian leaders, including Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, routinely refer to the "right of return," claiming it is mandated by the U.N. But the two U.N. resolutions dealing with the refugee issue recommend that Israel "achieve a just settlement" for the "refugee problem." The resolutions, which are not binding, do not speak of any "right of return" and leave open the possibility of monetary compensation or other kinds of settlements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FROM WND'S JERUSALEM BUREAU
Obama 'friend': End of Israel 'within reach'
Activist boasts 'Western support, complicity' starting to crack
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 30, 2009
12:20 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Ali Abunimah
JERUSALEM – Accusing the Jewish state of "genocide," an anti-Israel Palestinian activist once commended by President Obama has predicted the end of Israel, which, he boasted, is "within reach, in our lifetimes."
In a piece earlier this month titled, "Why Israel won't survive," Ali Abunimah, co-founder of Electronic Intifada, a pro-Palestinian online publication, accused Israel of war crimes and gloated, "Now, the other pillar of Israeli power – Western support and complicity – is starting to crack. We must do all we can to push it over."
"It is Israel as a Zionist state, not Palestine or the Palestinian people, that cannot survive this attempted genocide. Its problem is legitimacy, or rather a profound and irreversible lack of it," wrote Abunimah.
(Story continues below)
Abunimah previously was described as close to Obama and has introduced the politician at pro-Palestinian events. Referring to a time period in the late 1990s, Abunimah said that "Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation."
Abunimah was quoted stating Obama was "quite frank that the U.S. needed to be more evenhanded, that it leaned too much toward Israel."
He noted Obama's unusual stance toward Israel, commenting "these were the kind of statements I'd never heard from a U.S. politician who seemed like he was going somewhere, rather than at the end of his career."
In his piece this month, Abunimah blasted Israel's three-week campaign against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, accusing the Israel Defense Forces of "massacr[ing] civilians in the hope that the population would turn against those fighting the occupier."
"The death toll keeps rising as more bodies are pulled from carpet-bombed neighborhoods," Abunimah claimed.
Israel did not carpet-bomb any area in the Gaza Strip. It carried out surgical precision strikes against specific Hamas targets. The IDF regularly warned civilians of incoming attacks with phone calls or text messages. The IDF routinely employed what it terms "roof knocking" – just prior to a targeted bombing, the building in question would receive a telephone call in Arabic warning that the structure was going to be bombed.
Hamas, on the other hand, was widely condemned for utilizing civilians as human shields and storing weapons and military infrastructure in civilian zones, including apartment buildings.
But Abunimah asserted: "Israel simply cannot bomb its way to legitimacy. What choice will Israel make? In the absence of any political and moral legitimacy the only arguments it has left are bullets and bombs. Left to its own devices Israel will certainly keep trying – as it has for sixty years – to massacre Palestinians into submission."
He claimed "Israel's real goals (in Gaza) were to restore its 'deterrence' fatally damaged after its 2006 defeat in Lebanon (translation: its ability to massacre and terrorize entire populations into submission) and to destroy any Palestinian resistance to total Israeli-Jewish control over historic Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea."
Zionism, he asserted, is an ideology of "racial supremacy, extremism and hate, is a dying project, in retreat and failing to find new recruits. ... It is within reach, in our lifetimes."
Obama, anti-Israel activist raised funds for Islamic causes
In the 1990s, Obama was a speaker at events in Chicago's large Palestinian immigrant community to raise funds for U.N. camps for the so-called Palestinian refugees. Abunimah recalls introducing Obama at one such event, a 1999 fundraiser for the Deheisha Palestinian camp in the West Bank.
"I knew Barack Obama for many years as my state senator – when he used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time," stated Abuminah during an interview last year with Democracy Now!, a nationally syndicated radio and television political program.
"I remember personally introducing [Obama] onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. And that's just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation," Abunimah said.
Abunimah previously described meeting with Obama at a fundraiser at the home of Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, reportedly a former PLO activist.
"[Obama] came with his wife. That's where I had a chance to really talk to him," Abunimah recalled. "It was an intimate setting. He convinced me he was very aware of the issues [and] critical of U.S. bias toward Israel and lack of sensitivity to Arabs. ... He was very supportive of U.S. pressure on Israel.
According to quotes obtained by Gulf News, Abunimah recalled a 2004 meeting in a Chicago neighborhood while Obama was running for his Senate seat. Abunimah quoted Obama telling him "warmly" he was sorry that "I haven't said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race."
"I'm hoping when things calm down, I can be more up front," Abunimah reportedly quoted the senator as saying.
Abunimah said Obama urged him to "keep up the good work" at the Chicago Tribune, where Abunimah contributed guest columns that were highly critical of Israel.
Abunimah serves on the board of the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, a controversial Arab group founded by Khalidi's wife that mourns the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe" and supports intense immigration reform, including providing driver's licenses and education to illegal aliens.
WND broke the story the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit on which Obama served as a paid director alongside a confessed domestic terrorist, provided $75,000 in grants to the AAAN.
'Very active terror apparatus'
Obama's 1999 fundraising for the Palestinian Deheisha camp raised the eyebrows of one senior Israeli security official who was contacted for comment on the issue. The official, who was not aware of Obama's fundraising, noted Deheisha, which is located near the city of Bethlehem, had a "very active" Palestinian terror apparatus in 1999, carrying out scores of deadly shootings against Israeli civilians that year.
Two of the most deadly suicide bombings in 2002 also were planned from Deheisha, where the suicide bombers originated, said the security official. In one such bombing, in March of that year, 11 people were killed and over 50 injured, four critically when a Deheisha bomber detonated his explosives next to a group of Jewish women waiting with their baby carriages for their husbands to leave a nearby synagogue.
The question of so-called Palestinian refugees is a sensitive one for supporters of Israel. All Israeli prime ministers have stated a final peace deal with the Palestinians cannot include the "return" of "refugees."
When Arab countries attacked the Jewish state after its creation in 1948, some 725,000 Arabs living within Israel's borders fled or were flushed out when the Jewish state pushed back attacking Arab armies. Also at that time, about 820,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries or fled following rampant persecution.
While most Jewish refugees were absorbed by Israel and other countries, the majority of Palestinian Arabs have been maintained in 59 U.N.-run camps that do not seek to settle the Arabs elsewhere.
There are currently about 4 million Arabs who claim Palestinian refugee status with the U.N., including children and grandchildren of the original fleeing Arabs; Arabs living full-time in Jordan; and Arabs who long ago emigrated throughout the Middle East and to the West.
Other cases of worldwide refugees aided by the U.N. are handled through the international body's High Commission for Refugees, which seeks to settle the refugees quickly, usually in countries other than those from which they fled.
The U.N. created a special agency – the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA – specifically to handle registered Palestinian refugees. It's the only refugee case handled by the U.N. in which the declared refugees are housed and maintained in camps for generations instead of facilitating the refugees' resettlement elsewhere.
The U.N. officially restricts the definition of refugee status worldwide for nationalities outside the Palestinian arena to those who fled a country of nationality or habitual residence due to persecution, who are unable to return to their place of residence and who have not yet been resettled. Future generations of original refugees are not included in the U.N.'s definition of refugees.
But the U.N. uses a different set of criteria only when defining a Palestinian refugee – allowing future generations to be considered refugees; terming as refugees Arabs who have been resettled in other countries, such as hundreds of thousands in Jordan; removing the clause requiring persecution; and removing the clause requiring a refugee to be fleeing his or her "country of nationality or habitual residence."
Palestinian leaders, including Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, routinely refer to the "right of return," claiming it is mandated by the U.N. But the two U.N. resolutions dealing with the refugee issue recommend that Israel "achieve a just settlement" for the "refugee problem." The resolutions, which are not binding, do not speak of any "right of return" and leave open the possibility of monetary compensation or other kinds of settlements.
Need more help from attorneys, law students, paralegals and legal secretaries for impending legal actions e-mail dr_taitz@yahoo.com
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Who worries about the cow when it is all about the ice cream
From a teacher in the Nashville area:
Who worries about the cow when it is all about the ice cream?
The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year.
The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote.
To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot.
The class had done a great job in their selections.
Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother.
The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie went first He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best.
Everyone applauded. He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise.
She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream" She sat down.
The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream."
She surely could say more. She did not have to.
A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She didn't know.
The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream.
Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a landslide.
Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream and 52% of the people reacted like nine year olds. They want ice cream.
The other 48% of us know we're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess.
Who worries about the cow when it is all about the ice cream?
The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year.
The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote.
To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot.
The class had done a great job in their selections.
Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother.
The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie went first He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best.
Everyone applauded. He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise.
She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream" She sat down.
The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream."
She surely could say more. She did not have to.
A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She didn't know.
The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream.
Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a landslide.
Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream and 52% of the people reacted like nine year olds. They want ice cream.
The other 48% of us know we're going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess.
First Judge stands up to Obama
It's a first! FIRST JUDGE TO FINALLY STAND UP TO THE OBAMA-NATION ! After all 9 SCOTUS Justices failed to stand up to Barry Soetoro (Obama's citizenship name in Indonesia)there comes Judge James Pohl, an Army colonel. Military Judge Denies Obama Request to Suspend Hearings at Guantanamo By Peter FinnWashington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 29, 2009; 3:17 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/29/AR2009012902021.html?wprss=rss_nation Seventeen US sailors were killed in the attack on the USS Cole [GALLO/GETTY] A military judge in Guantanamo Bay today denied the Obama administration's request to delay proceedings for 120 days in the case of a detainee accused of planning the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole warship, an al-Qaeda strike that killed 17 service members and injured 50 others. The decision throws into some disarray the administration's efforts to buy time to review individual detainee cases as part of its plan to close the U.S. military prison at the Guantanamo naval base in Cuba. The Pentagon may now be forced to temporarily withdraw the charges against Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi citizen of Yemeni descent.
Nashiri is facing arraignment on capital charges on Feb. 9, and Judge James Pohl, an Army colonel, said the case would go ahead.
"We just learned of the ruling here . . . and we are consulting with the Pentagon and the Department of Justice to explore our options in that case," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. Asked at a news briefing whether the decision would hamper the administration's ability to evaluate the cases of Guantanamo detainees, Gibbs replied: "No. Not at all."
In one of his first actions, President Obama issued an executive order instructing Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates to make sure all military commission proceedings "are halted" during a review of the cases of individual detainees at Guantanamo and of the broader system of military commission trials.
The administration chose to achieve that by instructing military prosecutors to seek 120-day suspensions of legal proceedings in the cases of 21 detainees who have been charged. Approximately 245 prisoners are being held at Guantanamo.
The request was quickly granted in other cases when prosecutors told military judges that a suspension was in the "interests of justice" so that the "president and his administration [can] review the military commissions process, generally, and the cases currently pending before military commissions, specifically."
But Pohl said he found the government's reasoning "unpersuasive" and he clearly felt he was not bound to bow to the administration's wishes.
The government, Pohl wrote, sought a delay because if cases went ahead, the administration's review could "render moot any proceedings conducted during the review"; "necessitate re-litigation of issues"; or "produce legal consequences affecting options available to the Administration after completion of the review."
"The Commission is unaware of how conducting an arraignment would preclude any option by the administration," said Pohl in a written opinion, which was obtained by The Post. "Congress passed the military commissions act, which remains in effect. The Commission is bound by the law as it currently exists, not as it may change in the future."
The judge wrote that "the public interest in a speedy trial will be harmed by the delay in the arraignment."
Nashiri's military defense attorney did not object to postponing the arraignment but requested that discovery and other issues go forward "It's somewhat of a shock," said Navy Cmdr. Stephen C. Reyes, Nashiri's military defense attorney.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said at a briefing today that "this department will be in full compliance with the president's executive order. . . . And so while that executive order is in force and effect, trust me there will be no proceedings continuing down at Gitmo with military commissions."
Susan Crawford, the Pentagon official who approves charges and refers cases to trial, can withdraw charges, an action that would halt proceedings without reference to the judge. It would also allow the government to reinstate charges either in a military commission in Guantanamo or in federal court or military court if it decides to abolish the exiting system of prosecuting detainees.
But it would bring the Nashiri case back to square one and cost the government time if it attempted to re-start the case within military commissions system. Some military defense attorneys had urged the withdrawal of charges in all cases, which would have been a clear indication that military commissions were dead. But the Obama administration instead sought only a suspension, a decision that some human rights activists described as 'life support" for the current system.
If Crawford withdraws charges in the Nashiri case, some military defense attorneys in other cases, including the trial of suspects in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said they would also seek the withdrawal of charges against their clients.
"There should be a withdrawal of charges in all cases and we will directly engage the prosecutors and [Crawford] on that," said Jon Jackson, an Army major, who is defending Mustafa al-Hawsawi, an accused 9/11 conspirator.
And if an arraignment goes ahead and Nashiri enters a plea, subsequent proceedings would be subject to double jeopardy rules, according to defense lawyers. That could severely complicate the administration's ability to move Nashiri's case to federal court or courts martial, defense lawyers said.
Pentagon officials, who requested anonymity, said they believe Crawford will have no option but to withdraw charges without prejudice in Nashiri's case and possibly all cases going to trial in Guantanamo Bay.
Nashiri has been in U.S. custody since late 2002, and he is one of three detainees the government has acknowledged was subjected to an interrogation technique that simulates drowning while he was held by the CIA.
Nashiri was transferred to Guantanamo Bay in September 2006 along with other "high-value" detainees, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Thursday, January 29, 2009; 3:17 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/29/AR2009012902021.html?wprss=rss_nation Seventeen US sailors were killed in the attack on the USS Cole [GALLO/GETTY] A military judge in Guantanamo Bay today denied the Obama administration's request to delay proceedings for 120 days in the case of a detainee accused of planning the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole warship, an al-Qaeda strike that killed 17 service members and injured 50 others. The decision throws into some disarray the administration's efforts to buy time to review individual detainee cases as part of its plan to close the U.S. military prison at the Guantanamo naval base in Cuba. The Pentagon may now be forced to temporarily withdraw the charges against Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi citizen of Yemeni descent.
Nashiri is facing arraignment on capital charges on Feb. 9, and Judge James Pohl, an Army colonel, said the case would go ahead.
"We just learned of the ruling here . . . and we are consulting with the Pentagon and the Department of Justice to explore our options in that case," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. Asked at a news briefing whether the decision would hamper the administration's ability to evaluate the cases of Guantanamo detainees, Gibbs replied: "No. Not at all."
In one of his first actions, President Obama issued an executive order instructing Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates to make sure all military commission proceedings "are halted" during a review of the cases of individual detainees at Guantanamo and of the broader system of military commission trials.
The administration chose to achieve that by instructing military prosecutors to seek 120-day suspensions of legal proceedings in the cases of 21 detainees who have been charged. Approximately 245 prisoners are being held at Guantanamo.
The request was quickly granted in other cases when prosecutors told military judges that a suspension was in the "interests of justice" so that the "president and his administration [can] review the military commissions process, generally, and the cases currently pending before military commissions, specifically."
But Pohl said he found the government's reasoning "unpersuasive" and he clearly felt he was not bound to bow to the administration's wishes.
The government, Pohl wrote, sought a delay because if cases went ahead, the administration's review could "render moot any proceedings conducted during the review"; "necessitate re-litigation of issues"; or "produce legal consequences affecting options available to the Administration after completion of the review."
"The Commission is unaware of how conducting an arraignment would preclude any option by the administration," said Pohl in a written opinion, which was obtained by The Post. "Congress passed the military commissions act, which remains in effect. The Commission is bound by the law as it currently exists, not as it may change in the future."
The judge wrote that "the public interest in a speedy trial will be harmed by the delay in the arraignment."
Nashiri's military defense attorney did not object to postponing the arraignment but requested that discovery and other issues go forward "It's somewhat of a shock," said Navy Cmdr. Stephen C. Reyes, Nashiri's military defense attorney.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said at a briefing today that "this department will be in full compliance with the president's executive order. . . . And so while that executive order is in force and effect, trust me there will be no proceedings continuing down at Gitmo with military commissions."
Susan Crawford, the Pentagon official who approves charges and refers cases to trial, can withdraw charges, an action that would halt proceedings without reference to the judge. It would also allow the government to reinstate charges either in a military commission in Guantanamo or in federal court or military court if it decides to abolish the exiting system of prosecuting detainees.
But it would bring the Nashiri case back to square one and cost the government time if it attempted to re-start the case within military commissions system. Some military defense attorneys had urged the withdrawal of charges in all cases, which would have been a clear indication that military commissions were dead. But the Obama administration instead sought only a suspension, a decision that some human rights activists described as 'life support" for the current system.
If Crawford withdraws charges in the Nashiri case, some military defense attorneys in other cases, including the trial of suspects in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said they would also seek the withdrawal of charges against their clients.
"There should be a withdrawal of charges in all cases and we will directly engage the prosecutors and [Crawford] on that," said Jon Jackson, an Army major, who is defending Mustafa al-Hawsawi, an accused 9/11 conspirator.
And if an arraignment goes ahead and Nashiri enters a plea, subsequent proceedings would be subject to double jeopardy rules, according to defense lawyers. That could severely complicate the administration's ability to move Nashiri's case to federal court or courts martial, defense lawyers said.
Pentagon officials, who requested anonymity, said they believe Crawford will have no option but to withdraw charges without prejudice in Nashiri's case and possibly all cases going to trial in Guantanamo Bay.
Nashiri has been in U.S. custody since late 2002, and he is one of three detainees the government has acknowledged was subjected to an interrogation technique that simulates drowning while he was held by the CIA.
Nashiri was transferred to Guantanamo Bay in September 2006 along with other "high-value" detainees, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Follow up, trying to identify the congressman that raised his hand to object, but was interrupted by our beloved Pelosi
Hi Orly,could You forward this to the person who searches for the man that raised his hand for objection. 1.) I am going through all the pictures of this site or google the name when there is no picture. Here.http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml 2.)I have looked at the clip and had the strong feeling this man is either Indian, Latino or light skinned Black. I have then looked especially for Indian or Latino names, since this takes so long.Just for fun I clicked on "Al Green" I wanted to see if it is the musician.This guy looks just like the man that raised his hand. Black beard, glasses, tall etc. Could You get there to see that this person is actually black? Or am I blind?He really looks like our man. Here.http://www.house.gov/algreen/gallery/index.shtml regardless I will keep on looking through the list,Sincerely,Petra
Robert Jay March-March Report
Robert Jay March -- March Report
The view of Marxist-Leninists that they should "smash the state" is alive and well in the current administration, headed by the Usurper-in-Chief and his Democrat (not democratic) co-conspirators.
The ideologues of the Democrat machine have never shown a reluctance to sabotage the economy, thus hurting the very poor and impoverished they claim to represent, in order to further their own goals. When Ronald Reagan cut marginal tax rates, it resulted in a doubling of tax revenues received by the Treasury, yet the Democrats, in violation of an agreement with Reagan, increased spending sufficiently to cause a deficit, which they, as planned, then blamed on Reagan.
Having artificially triggered a melt-down in our economy by forcing banks who knew better into making unwise housing loans to unqualified people who had no hope of repaying, and goosing the problem along with end-of-day short-selling when McCain was pulling ahead of Obama, the expected panic was unleashed, resulting in a voter demand to "throw the rascals out." Whenever such a mood exists, the party of the "rascals" currently in the White House is ejected, and replaced by the other party's "rascals." Thus, Spanky, Stymie and Darla Hood were cast aside, and replaced by Darth Vader, Ra's Al Ghul and Cruella De Vil.
Crisis. Panic. Solution.
The Left frequently manipulates the public by means of the the crisis-panic-solution paradigm. Step One: create a crisis. Publicly call attention to the created crisis by use of the "bully pulpit" and help from lackeys in the media. Step Two: wait for the expected panic to materialize. Fan the flames of said panic until they are white-hot. Step Three: Rush to the rescue. Propose a solution, which apparently deals with the crisis, but is actually a means of imposing the programs and spending that you could not pass fairly, and ram it through the legislature before the panic dies down.
The Democrat Party played the American people like Guitar Hero, again placing the blame for their own pre-planned "crisis" on the very people who warned us that it was coming as long as six years ago, but the tune is wearing thin. You can only play one chord for so long before the audience realizes that you cannot actually play the guitar, and walks out.
Less than a week after the phony inauguration of a faux-President, marred by the flubbed Oath of Office that betrayed the consciousness of guilt by both Obama and Roberts, Obama's media minions have already begun biting at his heels. (Note to Chris Matthews: that tingling in your leg was just an early symptom of sciatica.)
Thousands of us have been crying out "The Emperor has no clothes." Just as in the fairy tale, it's only a matter of time before the larger crowd realizes it, and takes up the cry. When this finally happens, the means to force exposure is available to us, thanks to a tool left to us by George W. Bush.
"W" to the Rescue.
On January 16, 2009, three days before he left office, President Bush signed an Executive Order entitled "Granting Reciprocity on Excepted Service and Federal Contractor Employee Fitness and Reinvestigating Individuals in Positions of Public Trust.' As soon as they got in office, the Obaminons tried to scrub this from the White House web site, but the info was already out there. It appears on pages 4111-4113 of The Federal Register.
We have a PDF of the entire Order below, but here's a taste:
Sec. 5. Reinvestigation of Individuals in Positions of Public Trust. Individuals in positions of public trust shall be subject to reinvestigation ... to ensure their suitability for continued employment.
Hmmm. Now, who exactly in the employ of the Federal Government needs to have their backgrounds re-investigated. Have you heard any outcries for any such reinvestigation of anyone except ... oh, now, who could it be ... OBAMA! (Apologies to Dana Carvey's Church Lady.)
Dr. Orly Taitz has picked up the ball and is running with it. She has served U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and the FBI Chicago office with a subpoena to produce "any and all records in regards to level of character and conduct necessary pertaining to Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barry H. Obama, II a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro. These documents have direct relation to holding a Position of Public Trust."
Now, don't get too excited yet. The success of such a petition requires that a court actually enforce the law. We haven't seen much of that lately. Yet, somehow, it is comforting to know that, as George W. Bush conducted himself as a consummate gentleman and a polished executive on his way out, he left us with this means of salvaging our form of Government.
Paraphrasing what the former President said, standing on the rubble of the World Trade Center in 2001, he heard us, and the people who shredded the Constitution are gonna hear from all of us soon.
The view of Marxist-Leninists that they should "smash the state" is alive and well in the current administration, headed by the Usurper-in-Chief and his Democrat (not democratic) co-conspirators.
The ideologues of the Democrat machine have never shown a reluctance to sabotage the economy, thus hurting the very poor and impoverished they claim to represent, in order to further their own goals. When Ronald Reagan cut marginal tax rates, it resulted in a doubling of tax revenues received by the Treasury, yet the Democrats, in violation of an agreement with Reagan, increased spending sufficiently to cause a deficit, which they, as planned, then blamed on Reagan.
Having artificially triggered a melt-down in our economy by forcing banks who knew better into making unwise housing loans to unqualified people who had no hope of repaying, and goosing the problem along with end-of-day short-selling when McCain was pulling ahead of Obama, the expected panic was unleashed, resulting in a voter demand to "throw the rascals out." Whenever such a mood exists, the party of the "rascals" currently in the White House is ejected, and replaced by the other party's "rascals." Thus, Spanky, Stymie and Darla Hood were cast aside, and replaced by Darth Vader, Ra's Al Ghul and Cruella De Vil.
Crisis. Panic. Solution.
The Left frequently manipulates the public by means of the the crisis-panic-solution paradigm. Step One: create a crisis. Publicly call attention to the created crisis by use of the "bully pulpit" and help from lackeys in the media. Step Two: wait for the expected panic to materialize. Fan the flames of said panic until they are white-hot. Step Three: Rush to the rescue. Propose a solution, which apparently deals with the crisis, but is actually a means of imposing the programs and spending that you could not pass fairly, and ram it through the legislature before the panic dies down.
The Democrat Party played the American people like Guitar Hero, again placing the blame for their own pre-planned "crisis" on the very people who warned us that it was coming as long as six years ago, but the tune is wearing thin. You can only play one chord for so long before the audience realizes that you cannot actually play the guitar, and walks out.
Less than a week after the phony inauguration of a faux-President, marred by the flubbed Oath of Office that betrayed the consciousness of guilt by both Obama and Roberts, Obama's media minions have already begun biting at his heels. (Note to Chris Matthews: that tingling in your leg was just an early symptom of sciatica.)
Thousands of us have been crying out "The Emperor has no clothes." Just as in the fairy tale, it's only a matter of time before the larger crowd realizes it, and takes up the cry. When this finally happens, the means to force exposure is available to us, thanks to a tool left to us by George W. Bush.
"W" to the Rescue.
On January 16, 2009, three days before he left office, President Bush signed an Executive Order entitled "Granting Reciprocity on Excepted Service and Federal Contractor Employee Fitness and Reinvestigating Individuals in Positions of Public Trust.' As soon as they got in office, the Obaminons tried to scrub this from the White House web site, but the info was already out there. It appears on pages 4111-4113 of The Federal Register.
We have a PDF of the entire Order below, but here's a taste:
Sec. 5. Reinvestigation of Individuals in Positions of Public Trust. Individuals in positions of public trust shall be subject to reinvestigation ... to ensure their suitability for continued employment.
Hmmm. Now, who exactly in the employ of the Federal Government needs to have their backgrounds re-investigated. Have you heard any outcries for any such reinvestigation of anyone except ... oh, now, who could it be ... OBAMA! (Apologies to Dana Carvey's Church Lady.)
Dr. Orly Taitz has picked up the ball and is running with it. She has served U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and the FBI Chicago office with a subpoena to produce "any and all records in regards to level of character and conduct necessary pertaining to Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barry H. Obama, II a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro. These documents have direct relation to holding a Position of Public Trust."
Now, don't get too excited yet. The success of such a petition requires that a court actually enforce the law. We haven't seen much of that lately. Yet, somehow, it is comforting to know that, as George W. Bush conducted himself as a consummate gentleman and a polished executive on his way out, he left us with this means of salvaging our form of Government.
Paraphrasing what the former President said, standing on the rubble of the World Trade Center in 2001, he heard us, and the people who shredded the Constitution are gonna hear from all of us soon.
We need patriots from Maine to schedule a personal meeting with this congressman ASAP, he is completely clueless
January 29, 2009
Natural Born Citizen Harold Sorensen
Pob 44
luverne, Maine 04240
Dear Harold:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns that President-elect Obama has not proven his citizenship. I appreciate hearing from you.
The rumors concerning President-elect Obama's citizenship are not valid. Candidates for President of the United States face rigorous scrutiny and provide public documents regarding their citizenship. I am confident that President-elect Obama has proven that he is a citizen. He was born in Hawaii and lived there for most of his pre-college years.
I look forward to working with President-elect Obama in the 111th Congress. Government works best when it stands for the working families of this country. This means supporting important programs in education, healthcare, and economic development. It also means bringing the national deficit under control, so our children will not be burdened by tremendous debt, and making sure that free trade is fair trade with protections for environment and labor standards.
Thank you again for sharing your views with me. In addition, I also provide occasional email updates on a range of issues affecting people in Maine. If you would like to receive this information, please visit my website at http://michaud.house.gov/email_newsletter.asp and sign up for my email newsletter. I appreciate the opportunity to represent you.
With warmest regards,
Michael H. Michaud
Member of Congress
Natural Born Citizen Harold Sorensen
Pob 44
luverne, Maine 04240
Dear Harold:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns that President-elect Obama has not proven his citizenship. I appreciate hearing from you.
The rumors concerning President-elect Obama's citizenship are not valid. Candidates for President of the United States face rigorous scrutiny and provide public documents regarding their citizenship. I am confident that President-elect Obama has proven that he is a citizen. He was born in Hawaii and lived there for most of his pre-college years.
I look forward to working with President-elect Obama in the 111th Congress. Government works best when it stands for the working families of this country. This means supporting important programs in education, healthcare, and economic development. It also means bringing the national deficit under control, so our children will not be burdened by tremendous debt, and making sure that free trade is fair trade with protections for environment and labor standards.
Thank you again for sharing your views with me. In addition, I also provide occasional email updates on a range of issues affecting people in Maine. If you would like to receive this information, please visit my website at http://michaud.house.gov/email_newsletter.asp and sign up for my email newsletter. I appreciate the opportunity to represent you.
With warmest regards,
Michael H. Michaud
Member of Congress
Who was the man that tried to object on 01.29.09.
I received several e-mails that one man raised his hand and Chaney tried to check if there are objections, at which time Pelosi interrupted, started clapping and de facto prevented Congressmen and Senators from making any objections. Please check on the video, who this man is. Is it John Linder of GA? We need to talk to him.
Orly, I have watched this video over and over, hoping that what I was wrong. Unfortunately, the evidence is there, loud and clear. Pelosi interrupted Cheney and the process whereby, the objections would have been solicited. Cheney did not go back and ask for objections. There was definitely a man in the audience that had raised his hand and was not part of the crowd clapping for the glorious news. I have retained these videos and have looked at them frame by frame to make sure I'm not mistaken. I am not. The required procedures were not followed. Jerry Piecemaker
Orly, I have watched this video over and over, hoping that what I was wrong. Unfortunately, the evidence is there, loud and clear. Pelosi interrupted Cheney and the process whereby, the objections would have been solicited. Cheney did not go back and ask for objections. There was definitely a man in the audience that had raised his hand and was not part of the crowd clapping for the glorious news. I have retained these videos and have looked at them frame by frame to make sure I'm not mistaken. I am not. The required procedures were not followed. Jerry Piecemaker
from Ray Kraft
We have to stop this guy. To have the Military take their oath to the President,rather than the Constitution, puts the President above the Constitution, and makeshim Caesar Obama. Ray
This can happen here, if you don't stand up
This blog out of England portends trouble for US if we don't get our Washingtonian heads out of the sands of Mecca most hastily.
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/01/lord-ahmed-threatens-parliament-into.html
Buckle your seatbelts. Expect some turbulance.
Spread the word.
Tom K.
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/01/lord-ahmed-threatens-parliament-into.html
Buckle your seatbelts. Expect some turbulance.
Spread the word.
Tom K.
A new idea from a reader, Scott. Flood White House system with demands for production of eligibility
Dean, I was just looking at the whitehouse.gov website and discovered that they have a "contact us" page with a form to fill out and submit with a question or comment: (http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/). I think it would be fantastic if we could flood their website with demands that Obama produce his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to be president. Maybe we can crash the White House servers with thousands upon thousands of emails... Maybe we could ask that everyone submit their comments at the same time! That ought to get their attention!! Comments? http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Did anybody else notice this? e-mail me
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
Orly, *** FYI and use ...Important ?**** NO Response required
I read somewhere( please X-check ) someone has posted on you tube the
video of the proceedings 8 Jan of the electoral college. I did not
watch this video but the individual who posted stated that someone (
elector ? ) raised their hand and immediately Nancy Pelosi sprang to her
feet and began clapping and roused the electors to do the same. If this
is true , this MAY have interfered with the opportunity to object and
in fact may have been intentional obstruction of procedure. If this is
a potential work around I would put my name on the list to sue her in a
heartbeat !!!!! There is nothing in my Oath of Office to conflict me in
this regard.
Orly, *** FYI and use ...Important ?**** NO Response required
I read somewhere( please X-check ) someone has posted on you tube the
video of the proceedings 8 Jan of the electoral college. I did not
watch this video but the individual who posted stated that someone (
elector ? ) raised their hand and immediately Nancy Pelosi sprang to her
feet and began clapping and roused the electors to do the same. If this
is true , this MAY have interfered with the opportunity to object and
in fact may have been intentional obstruction of procedure. If this is
a potential work around I would put my name on the list to sue her in a
heartbeat !!!!! There is nothing in my Oath of Office to conflict me in
this regard.
another constitutional violation in CA, we are sinking in more debt
Hi,
If you know of someone in California who wants a little fame, here is the makings of a good case.
"Callifornia State Controller John Chiang announced on January 26 that California's bills exceed its tax revenues and credit line and that the state is going to print its own money known as IOUs. The template is already designed. Instead of receiving their state tax refunds in dollars, California residents will receive IOUs. Student aid and payments to disabled and needy will also come in the form of IOUs. California is negotiating with banks to get them to accept the IOUs as deposits."
Now what is wrong with this?
How about the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 10:
No State shall...emit Bills of Credit, make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts....
"A bill of credit is some sort of paper medium by which value is exchanged between the government and individuals. An interest-bearing certificate that was issued by Missouri, and usable in the payment of taxes, was thus ruled to be an unconstitutional bill of credit."
"Such bills of credit are declared to mean promissory notes or bills issued exclusively on the credit of the state, and for the payment of which the faith of the state only is pledged."
Looks to me that there is a serious Constitutional question. But as George Bush noted, the Constitution is just a piece of paper; I suppose anything goes. When was the last time you were in a state where you used gold or silver coin as legal tender? A new President who was born to a non US citizen father, hence making him not a "natural born citizen", but the Supreme Court refuses to hear any case challenging his Constitutional qualification. So California is about to issue bills of credit, and nobody seems to notice that this is a blatant violation of the US Constitution.
Regards,
Neil Hauschild
If you know of someone in California who wants a little fame, here is the makings of a good case.
"Callifornia State Controller John Chiang announced on January 26 that California's bills exceed its tax revenues and credit line and that the state is going to print its own money known as IOUs. The template is already designed. Instead of receiving their state tax refunds in dollars, California residents will receive IOUs. Student aid and payments to disabled and needy will also come in the form of IOUs. California is negotiating with banks to get them to accept the IOUs as deposits."
Now what is wrong with this?
How about the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 10:
No State shall...emit Bills of Credit, make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts....
"A bill of credit is some sort of paper medium by which value is exchanged between the government and individuals. An interest-bearing certificate that was issued by Missouri, and usable in the payment of taxes, was thus ruled to be an unconstitutional bill of credit."
"Such bills of credit are declared to mean promissory notes or bills issued exclusively on the credit of the state, and for the payment of which the faith of the state only is pledged."
Looks to me that there is a serious Constitutional question. But as George Bush noted, the Constitution is just a piece of paper; I suppose anything goes. When was the last time you were in a state where you used gold or silver coin as legal tender? A new President who was born to a non US citizen father, hence making him not a "natural born citizen", but the Supreme Court refuses to hear any case challenging his Constitutional qualification. So California is about to issue bills of credit, and nobody seems to notice that this is a blatant violation of the US Constitution.
Regards,
Neil Hauschild
marriage licenses
Writing about Ayers and Dorhn got me thinking. Ann Dunham and BO SR supposedly got married in HI, however nobody has ever found an actual marriage license, only an application for one. Ayers and Dorhn were in underground for 11 years, under assumed names. How did they get a marriage license? Didn't they need to supply their birth certificates or passports with their application for marriage license? What did they submit? Where did they get birth certificates under assumed names? How about social security cards? Who was the "creative artist" that supplied those? Is he the same Michelangelo, that created BO's short form birth certificate, seletive service certificate and all the other docs? Maybe the same person of interest can explain the mistery of some 80 entries in national databases, showing some 80 different addresses and social security nambers for BO.
another question to ask Mr. Pritzker
From what I recall Mr. Pritzker was a graduate of North-Western school of law and is very influential and a big benefactor there. Was he the one that used his connections and pulled the strings to get Bernadine Dorhn a position to teach at North Western school of law and be in charge of youth outreach program even though she is not licensed with the IL bar and has a conviction for domestic terrorism? It may be a pure coincidence of course.
Just to connect the dots: Pritzker and his sister Penny are amongst the biggest supporters of BO. BO sat on the Annenberg challenge board for 6 years with Ayers; and Michelle worked in the same firm where Ayers's wife (or common law wife) Bernadine Dorhn worked. Dorhn and Ayers were leaders of Weather underground and were involved in masterminding the bombing of police headquarters, Pentagon and Capitol. I remember reading a famous speech given by Bernadine Dorhn after Charles Manson groupies murdered Sharon Tate, that was 8 month pregnant. Dorhn was telling her followers to dig it and take example from these people, in how they murdered those people and later sat down to eat dinner and stuck a fork in Tate's belly. Never in my life have I seen such a depraved, sick disregard for human life, particularly coming from a woman. I wonder if the parents of the students in that program were told who she is, if they ever signed a consent, allowing her to be anywhere near their children. I, personally, as a parent, wouldn't want her anywhere near my kids. Same goes for the programs run by Ayers. Do the parents know who he is, what is his past? If you are a parent of a child in any of the programs ran by these people, please contact me.
Orly
Just to connect the dots: Pritzker and his sister Penny are amongst the biggest supporters of BO. BO sat on the Annenberg challenge board for 6 years with Ayers; and Michelle worked in the same firm where Ayers's wife (or common law wife) Bernadine Dorhn worked. Dorhn and Ayers were leaders of Weather underground and were involved in masterminding the bombing of police headquarters, Pentagon and Capitol. I remember reading a famous speech given by Bernadine Dorhn after Charles Manson groupies murdered Sharon Tate, that was 8 month pregnant. Dorhn was telling her followers to dig it and take example from these people, in how they murdered those people and later sat down to eat dinner and stuck a fork in Tate's belly. Never in my life have I seen such a depraved, sick disregard for human life, particularly coming from a woman. I wonder if the parents of the students in that program were told who she is, if they ever signed a consent, allowing her to be anywhere near their children. I, personally, as a parent, wouldn't want her anywhere near my kids. Same goes for the programs run by Ayers. Do the parents know who he is, what is his past? If you are a parent of a child in any of the programs ran by these people, please contact me.
Orly
Need to cut computer time
I wanted to thank everybody for all the e-mails and help and support. I got some 17,000 e-mails. I am sorry, it is hard for me to answer. Additionally on Monday a tire blew up on my car, I got in a slight accident, nothing major but got a bad back pain and will have to cut the hours of computer time until the the back pain is more manageable. Thank you again for your support, I am not snobbing anybody by not answering, just need some time to rest and get better.
Orly
Orly
Is superior bank of Chicago Il connected to superior bank in Birmingham AL?
You mention the Pritzker - Superior Bank connection. I know Pritzker and Superior were based in Chicago. I have not done any research on this Superior Bank in Birmingham, Alabama to see if it is connected to Pritzker, but it received TARP money according to the following article: http://bailoutsleuth.com/2008/11/at-least-eight-more-banks/ Superior Bancorp, of Birmingham , Ala. , announced that it would receive $69 million.
Nanci Pelosi, from reader James Canon
Remember the big flap about Sarah Palin's dress? Americans! Where are you? Are you awake? We haven't heard any comment on "Queen Madam" Pelosi's snit about having to ride home in the small private, economy jet that comes with the Speaker's job. Remember how Madame Pel's was so aggravated that this little jet had to refuel while transporting her to California every week? Remember that she insisted on a luxurious 200 seat jet to fly her to California nonstop, instead? Hello Folks! Are you awake? Can you muster even a little indignation? Washington legislators who observed the Madam's Big Fat jet grinned with glee as Joe informed everyone that Nancy's luxury Jet will require hard working American tax payers to buy thousands of gallons of expensive jet fuel every week. She only works 3 days a week but her gas guzzler luxury jet flights home, to California , costs taxpayers $60,000 one way! As Joe noted, 'Unfortunately we have to pay to bring her back on Monday night,' so there goes another $60,000. Folks, that is $480,000 per month or an annual cost to taxpayers of $5,760,000. And she complains about the cost of the war? She could take the smaller jet which she says would cramp her style -- but since her flying in style takes precedence over war costs -- what the hell, eh? Military families in this country do without while this woman, who heads up the most do-nothing Congress in the history of our country, spends lavishly to fly herself and associates to and from California every week. That burns me!! How about you? Madame Pelosi expects you and I to conserve our carbon footprint by driving smaller cars and buying a bicycle pump to over-inflate our tires for better economy while she and her hypocrite cohorts waste tax payer dollars. Ticks me off mightily! How about you?
"Yank and scrub"
Somebody just posted that they (meaning Annenberg challenge merry crowd) had ample time to yank and scrub the files of Annenberg challenge and nothing will come out of this, meaning if Fitzgerald unseals them, everything will look kosher.
On contrair, if they scrubbed the fies, there will be a clear inconsistency between the tax returns, as filed and what shows now. Unless somebody is seriously hacking into the IRS computer system and completely re-calculates all of the tax returns of all of those foundations, they are in deep...Moreover, keep in mind, that the tax returns of all of these funds are public knowledge. How do they know that I and a few other people didn't download and print out hard copies of the tax returns of all of these foundations, as they were filed with IRS? do I need to remind you, how did Elliott Ness get Capone?
Orly
On contrair, if they scrubbed the fies, there will be a clear inconsistency between the tax returns, as filed and what shows now. Unless somebody is seriously hacking into the IRS computer system and completely re-calculates all of the tax returns of all of those foundations, they are in deep...Moreover, keep in mind, that the tax returns of all of these funds are public knowledge. How do they know that I and a few other people didn't download and print out hard copies of the tax returns of all of these foundations, as they were filed with IRS? do I need to remind you, how did Elliott Ness get Capone?
Orly
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Can Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald unseal the records of the Annenberg Challenge?
Chicago Annenberg Challenge Shutdown?
According to this article by Mr. Kurtz, there are 132 boxes, containing 947 files, sealed from the public and currently in the Richard J Dailey library of the University of Chicago. BO was the president of the Annenberg challenge. William Ayers de facto ran the program. Innitially Annenberg foundation donated 50 mln, to be used with 2:1 matching funds. Officially a total of 160 mln was raised. According to the research done by Prof Stanley Diamond of CA, due to fund swap it was 500 mln total. Mr. Fitzgerald has subpoenaed JB Pritzker. From what I recall Pritzkers were big donors of Annenberg challenge. Additionally BO was on the board of Joyce foundation that was also one of the donors for Annenberg challenge. I believe, he was on the board of Woods as well. From what I recall they were big donors as well. I hope Mr. Fitzgerald can get those records from U of Chicago before Mr. Pritzker's grand jury testimony and before those records somehow disappear, just like my case disappeared from the docket of the Supreme court. Was there any other connection between Mr. Pritzker and Obama? Penny Pritzker was the chair of Obama Campaign financing. I wonder if Superior bank, where she worked got TARP money? This ban supposedly was going under due to numerous subprime mortgages. Did they get lown guarantees from the Congress and Senate? We know it was around 7.7 trillion in loan guarantees given in general, how much of it was received by Superior Bank? Maybe Mr. Pritzker can tell which accounting firm did external audit of Annenberg Challenge foundation as well as Annenberg itself? Does stimulus package provide for any financial aid for their foundation or other foundations that donated to Annenberg challenge. Does Mr. Pritzker have an explanation, how could it happen that with 500 million donated to the organization, they had zero results. Student's academic achievement after 6 years of Annenberg were as poor as all the other schools in Chicago. So where did the money go?
It is of concern, because our elected officials just gave 900 Billion of our taxpayer dollars to Obama, the guy that sent 500 million down the drain while being the president of Annenberg Challenge.
-< Back 1 2 3
The question of who the donor is and/or who holds formal authority over access to the collection, is also critical. It’s notable that after trying to ascertain this information several times, I have still not received a proper reply. One obvious question is whether Bill Ayers and perhaps even Barack Obama himself may be connected to the donor. Obama began his CAC board chairmanship in early 1995, and stepped down from the chairmanship in late 1999, though he remained on the board until CAC phased itself out of existence in 2001. At that time, CAC handed over its remaining assets to a permanent new institution, the Chicago Public Education Fund. Obama served on this Fund’s “Leadership Council,” from 2001 through 2004, overlapping with council service by Bill Ayers’s father, Thomas, and Ayers’s brother, John. Bill Ayers, as noted, was a CAC founder, its guiding force, and co-chaired CAC’s powerful “collaborative.” CAC appears to have been housed at UIC because of Ayers’s connection to the school.
↓ Keep reading this article ↓
Nordlinger: Davos Journal, Part I
Editors: California Rules
Kahane: Do the Right Thing: Die
Ferrara: The Constitutional Right to Listen
Geraghty: A Formula for Frustration
Robbins: More of the Same on Al-Arabiya
Nordlinger: Even the food in his mouth! &c.
McCarthy: Politicizing Justice
Adler: Climate Policy Crash
Hemingway: Challenging Gillibrand
Grin: Facing the Hollywood Giants
Franc: Time to Set Aside Set-Asides?
Lowry: When Maynard Met Nancy
Sowell: What Are They Buying?
Charen: Where Is Free-Market Economics When We Need It Most?
Kudlow: Obama’s Wounded Treasury Man
So informally, and perhaps formally, it would appear that both Ayers and Obama may be closely connected to the donor of the CAC records. In fact, Ayers himself may be the donor. In raising her belated point about the absence of a signed deed of gift, Ann Weller indicated that she had been alerted to the fact by the donor, and would henceforth be working with the donor to provide access “within the next few weeks.” One can at least speculate that Weller might have been in touch with her UIC colleague, Bill Ayers, either because he actually holds formal authority as donor, or because he is granted de facto authority over the papers by whatever entity has formal control. One can also speculate that, as former CAC board chair, board member, and as an official of CAC’s successor organization, Barack Obama himself might have had, or may still have, some sort of formal or informal role in this process. Could this help explain why I have never received a clear answer to my question about the identity of the donor?
Obama and Annenberg
I expect to follow up this piece with an examination of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and what it suggests about Obama’s personal, financial, and ideological ties with Bill Ayers. I will also discuss what Obama’s CAC connection might suggest about Obama’s links to various radical groups, about the political character of his service at various foundations, and about his leadership record. I treated some of these issues in “Inside Obama’s Acorn,” and have just explored them, using new material, in an article in the current issue of National Review, entitled “Senator Stealth.” Further information on the Obama-Ayers connection can be found in “Barack Obama’s Lost Years.” Of course there is no substitute for access to the CAC records, but at over 60 pages, the extremely detailed “finding aid” to the CAC records by itself provides important new information that helps extend our understanding of Obama’s political past. I will shortly have more to say about what the finding aid reveals. And while there were no major revelations in it, the contents of the folder from the chancellor’s archive are also of some interest.
We already know a good deal about Obama’s service at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. That information paints a disturbing picture, and one sharply at odds with Obama’s claim that Bill Ayers was just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood.” A number of bloggers, including, for example, Tom Maguire, at Just One Minute, have done excellent work on the CAC issue. (See here and here.) But the key reporting on the Obama-Ayers connection via the Chicago Annenberg Challenge has been done by Steve Diamond, at Global Labor and Politics. (See especially this important post of June 18, 2008.) Sad to say, the mainstream media has almost entirely ignored the issues so powerfully raised by Diamond, and discussed at length by various bloggers, even though Obama’s service at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge raises serious questions about the veracity of his account of his relationship with Ayers. Access to the CAC records promises to provide a treasure trove of documentary evidence fronting on this and many other critically important issues, from Obama’s policy views, to his political-ideological alliances, to his leadership abilities.
Access and Security
There will be time for substantive discussion later. The immediate concern is to swiftly gain public access to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, and to ensure the security of these documents in the meantime. Despite UIC library’s claim that it hopes to be able to provide access within the next few weeks, the apparently shifting and contradictory character of their reasons for denying access have left me with a low level of confidence in these assurances.
I intend to continue my efforts to examine the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, to take notes, and to order extensive photocopies, to be mailed to me and/or received personally by me, in a timely fashion. I call on the UIC library to take extraordinary steps to secure the documents until such time as this issue is resolved. The public needs clear assurances that none of the CAC records have been, or will be, damaged or removed. I call on UIC library to reveal the name of the donor of the CAC records and/or to specify the person, persons, or body that currently hold authority over these records. I also call on Barack Obama to voice support for the swift release of these records.
Libraries are designed, not to unduly restrict information, but to make it available to an interested public. This country is now mere months away from a momentous presidential election in which a central issue is the political background and character of a relatively young and unknown senator. The Chicago Annenberg Challenge records almost surely contain important information on Senator Obama’s political associations, policy views, ideological leanings, and leadership ability. His role as board chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge is the most important executive experience Obama has held to date. Given this, the public has an urgent right to know what is in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records.
If you agree, then please write to the president of the University of Illinois system, B. Joseph White. Ask him to take immediate public steps to insure the safety of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, to release the identity of the Collection’s donor, and above all to swiftly make the Collection available to me, and to the public at large. You can find an email link for White here. Telephone, fax, and mailing addresses for White’s offices can be found here.
— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
According to this article by Mr. Kurtz, there are 132 boxes, containing 947 files, sealed from the public and currently in the Richard J Dailey library of the University of Chicago. BO was the president of the Annenberg challenge. William Ayers de facto ran the program. Innitially Annenberg foundation donated 50 mln, to be used with 2:1 matching funds. Officially a total of 160 mln was raised. According to the research done by Prof Stanley Diamond of CA, due to fund swap it was 500 mln total. Mr. Fitzgerald has subpoenaed JB Pritzker. From what I recall Pritzkers were big donors of Annenberg challenge. Additionally BO was on the board of Joyce foundation that was also one of the donors for Annenberg challenge. I believe, he was on the board of Woods as well. From what I recall they were big donors as well. I hope Mr. Fitzgerald can get those records from U of Chicago before Mr. Pritzker's grand jury testimony and before those records somehow disappear, just like my case disappeared from the docket of the Supreme court. Was there any other connection between Mr. Pritzker and Obama? Penny Pritzker was the chair of Obama Campaign financing. I wonder if Superior bank, where she worked got TARP money? This ban supposedly was going under due to numerous subprime mortgages. Did they get lown guarantees from the Congress and Senate? We know it was around 7.7 trillion in loan guarantees given in general, how much of it was received by Superior Bank? Maybe Mr. Pritzker can tell which accounting firm did external audit of Annenberg Challenge foundation as well as Annenberg itself? Does stimulus package provide for any financial aid for their foundation or other foundations that donated to Annenberg challenge. Does Mr. Pritzker have an explanation, how could it happen that with 500 million donated to the organization, they had zero results. Student's academic achievement after 6 years of Annenberg were as poor as all the other schools in Chicago. So where did the money go?
It is of concern, because our elected officials just gave 900 Billion of our taxpayer dollars to Obama, the guy that sent 500 million down the drain while being the president of Annenberg Challenge.
-< Back 1 2 3
The question of who the donor is and/or who holds formal authority over access to the collection, is also critical. It’s notable that after trying to ascertain this information several times, I have still not received a proper reply. One obvious question is whether Bill Ayers and perhaps even Barack Obama himself may be connected to the donor. Obama began his CAC board chairmanship in early 1995, and stepped down from the chairmanship in late 1999, though he remained on the board until CAC phased itself out of existence in 2001. At that time, CAC handed over its remaining assets to a permanent new institution, the Chicago Public Education Fund. Obama served on this Fund’s “Leadership Council,” from 2001 through 2004, overlapping with council service by Bill Ayers’s father, Thomas, and Ayers’s brother, John. Bill Ayers, as noted, was a CAC founder, its guiding force, and co-chaired CAC’s powerful “collaborative.” CAC appears to have been housed at UIC because of Ayers’s connection to the school.
↓ Keep reading this article ↓
Nordlinger: Davos Journal, Part I
Editors: California Rules
Kahane: Do the Right Thing: Die
Ferrara: The Constitutional Right to Listen
Geraghty: A Formula for Frustration
Robbins: More of the Same on Al-Arabiya
Nordlinger: Even the food in his mouth! &c.
McCarthy: Politicizing Justice
Adler: Climate Policy Crash
Hemingway: Challenging Gillibrand
Grin: Facing the Hollywood Giants
Franc: Time to Set Aside Set-Asides?
Lowry: When Maynard Met Nancy
Sowell: What Are They Buying?
Charen: Where Is Free-Market Economics When We Need It Most?
Kudlow: Obama’s Wounded Treasury Man
So informally, and perhaps formally, it would appear that both Ayers and Obama may be closely connected to the donor of the CAC records. In fact, Ayers himself may be the donor. In raising her belated point about the absence of a signed deed of gift, Ann Weller indicated that she had been alerted to the fact by the donor, and would henceforth be working with the donor to provide access “within the next few weeks.” One can at least speculate that Weller might have been in touch with her UIC colleague, Bill Ayers, either because he actually holds formal authority as donor, or because he is granted de facto authority over the papers by whatever entity has formal control. One can also speculate that, as former CAC board chair, board member, and as an official of CAC’s successor organization, Barack Obama himself might have had, or may still have, some sort of formal or informal role in this process. Could this help explain why I have never received a clear answer to my question about the identity of the donor?
Obama and Annenberg
I expect to follow up this piece with an examination of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and what it suggests about Obama’s personal, financial, and ideological ties with Bill Ayers. I will also discuss what Obama’s CAC connection might suggest about Obama’s links to various radical groups, about the political character of his service at various foundations, and about his leadership record. I treated some of these issues in “Inside Obama’s Acorn,” and have just explored them, using new material, in an article in the current issue of National Review, entitled “Senator Stealth.” Further information on the Obama-Ayers connection can be found in “Barack Obama’s Lost Years.” Of course there is no substitute for access to the CAC records, but at over 60 pages, the extremely detailed “finding aid” to the CAC records by itself provides important new information that helps extend our understanding of Obama’s political past. I will shortly have more to say about what the finding aid reveals. And while there were no major revelations in it, the contents of the folder from the chancellor’s archive are also of some interest.
We already know a good deal about Obama’s service at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. That information paints a disturbing picture, and one sharply at odds with Obama’s claim that Bill Ayers was just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood.” A number of bloggers, including, for example, Tom Maguire, at Just One Minute, have done excellent work on the CAC issue. (See here and here.) But the key reporting on the Obama-Ayers connection via the Chicago Annenberg Challenge has been done by Steve Diamond, at Global Labor and Politics. (See especially this important post of June 18, 2008.) Sad to say, the mainstream media has almost entirely ignored the issues so powerfully raised by Diamond, and discussed at length by various bloggers, even though Obama’s service at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge raises serious questions about the veracity of his account of his relationship with Ayers. Access to the CAC records promises to provide a treasure trove of documentary evidence fronting on this and many other critically important issues, from Obama’s policy views, to his political-ideological alliances, to his leadership abilities.
Access and Security
There will be time for substantive discussion later. The immediate concern is to swiftly gain public access to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, and to ensure the security of these documents in the meantime. Despite UIC library’s claim that it hopes to be able to provide access within the next few weeks, the apparently shifting and contradictory character of their reasons for denying access have left me with a low level of confidence in these assurances.
I intend to continue my efforts to examine the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, to take notes, and to order extensive photocopies, to be mailed to me and/or received personally by me, in a timely fashion. I call on the UIC library to take extraordinary steps to secure the documents until such time as this issue is resolved. The public needs clear assurances that none of the CAC records have been, or will be, damaged or removed. I call on UIC library to reveal the name of the donor of the CAC records and/or to specify the person, persons, or body that currently hold authority over these records. I also call on Barack Obama to voice support for the swift release of these records.
Libraries are designed, not to unduly restrict information, but to make it available to an interested public. This country is now mere months away from a momentous presidential election in which a central issue is the political background and character of a relatively young and unknown senator. The Chicago Annenberg Challenge records almost surely contain important information on Senator Obama’s political associations, policy views, ideological leanings, and leadership ability. His role as board chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge is the most important executive experience Obama has held to date. Given this, the public has an urgent right to know what is in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records.
If you agree, then please write to the president of the University of Illinois system, B. Joseph White. Ask him to take immediate public steps to insure the safety of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, to release the identity of the Collection’s donor, and above all to swiftly make the Collection available to me, and to the public at large. You can find an email link for White here. Telephone, fax, and mailing addresses for White’s offices can be found here.
— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
Did any of you read the book "Fugitive Days" by William Ayers?
if you read this book and remember names and facts well, call me 949-683-5411
Obama suit dismissed as moot, SCOTUS denies another application
An article from Sonoran News.
By Linda Bentley | January 28, 2009
Amazon.com sells out of “Pocket Obama”
OLYMPIA, WASH. – During the first week in December, Stephen Pidgeon filed a complaint in the Washington Supreme Court on behalf of James Broe and 11 other registered voters requesting Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed set aside the votes cast for Barack Hussein Obama.
According to Pidgeon, “Reed failed to establish that Obama was even an American citizen running under his own name at the time of the election, let alone a ‘natural born citizen’ as required by the U.S. Constitution. Unlike other cases that have been dismissed for lack of standing, these plaintiffs have standing under a unique Washington statute that allows any registered voter to challenge the election of someone who, at the time of the election, was ineligible to hold the office.”
Pidgeon says the secretary of state’s office had already admitted it did nothing to determine Obama’s eligibility, and Obama “hasn’t produced a single piece of evidence to prove he was born in the United States and establish his eligibility.”
On Jan. 8, the same date Congress counted the electoral votes and declared Obama president, the Washington Supreme Court held an en banc conference to discuss Broe’s case and, in a unanimous decision, granted Reed’s motion to dismiss as moot.
Pidgeon plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Following U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s denial on Dec. 17 of Attorney Orly Taitz’ application for an emergency stay in the pending case of Gail Lightfoot against California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, challenging Obama’s eligibility, she refiled and submitted her application to Chief Justice John Roberts, who distributed the case for conference on Jan. 23.
On Jan. 13, Taitz filed a suggestion for the justices to recuse themselves from swearing Obama in as president as it would be a conflict of interest while there were cases still pending in their court regarding his eligibility.
Her suggestion was noted on the docket, although ignored as eight of the nine Supreme Court Justices (Samuel Alito absent) held an ex parte, private, closed-door meeting with Obama on Jan. 19, only days before Lightfoot’s case was to be discussed.
Taitz said she will file a motion to compel the records of that private meeting.
On Monday, Jan. 26, Taitz’ application was denied.
Lightfoot’s case asserts Obama’s presidency is illegitimate because his father was a foreign subject and there is no evidence Obama was actually born in Hawaii, since Hawaii State Statute allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to obtain a certification of live birth.
Further, when Obama immigrated as a child to Indonesia, which does not allow dual citizenship, his school records indicate his legal name was Barry Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia.
According to Taitz, Obama’s stepfather and mother, Lolo and Stanley Ann (Dunham) Soetoro, would have been required to relinquish Obama’s U.S. citizenship in order for him to become an Indonesian citizen, which was a requirement to attend school in Indonesia.
She claims there is ample evidence that Obama traveled on his Indonesian passport up until the time he became a U.S. Senator, whereby he reaffirmed his Indonesian citizenship as an adult.
“The swearing of Mr. Obama is null and void due to the fact that he was sworn in on a name that is not legally his name and he is a foreign subject from birth and now and never qualified as a natural born U.S. citizen,” said Taitz.
Taitz, also the principal attorney behind the Alan Keyes v. Debra Bowen lawsuit, was born in the former Soviet Union but escaped over 20 years ago to begin a life of freedom in the United States.
In addition to being an attorney, Taitz, who speaks five languages, is a licensed real estate agent and a dentist with a successful practice in Orange County, Calif.
Having experienced life under a totalitarian Communist regime, Taitz is dedicated to preventing the United States from following that same path and says she is “committed to doing everything in her power to prevent such a disastrous mistake,” while defending the rights and freedoms that exist for all citizens in the United States under the Constitution.
Taitz is working on another lawsuit on behalf of current and former military personnel and says the plaintiffs include a blood relative of Obama’s.
There have been 32 lawsuits filed to date challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president. And, as they are summarily dismissed in state and federal courts across the country, with the merits yet to be addressed, the U.S. Supreme Court also continues avoiding the Constitutional question at hand as the justices have denied each application that has come before them.
Meanwhile, Amazon.com is sold out of the $5.95 paperback titled “Pocket Obama,” released Jan. 8, 2009 by the History Company, which states, “Printed in a size that easily fits into pocket or purse, this book is an anthology of quotations borrowed from Barack Obama's speeches and writings … serves as a reminder of the amazing power of oratory and the remarkable ability of this man to move people with his words.”
“Bonnie Blue” posted a comment titled “Mao's Little Red Book Resurrected” on Jan. 25, 2009, stating, “This is either a joke or the most disturbing thing I've ever seen. Can sane Americans really have such worshipful adoration for any politician, especially to this level? Supporting a politician is one thing, but this is sick, sick, sick. Mao's Little Red Book, now Obama's Little Blue Book …”
The next day, Steve Sailer, president of the Human Biodiversity Institute in Chicago, posted, “Pocket Obama cured my insomnia! I used to be troubled by sleepless nights. But reading in bed this collection of the wisdom of President Obama – e.g., ‘The true test of the American ideal is whether we're able to recognize our failings and then rise together to meet the challenges of our time. Whether we allow ourselves to be shaped by events or history, or whether we act to shape them’ – has enabled me to awake each morning refreshed and ready to serve Chairman Obama.”
By Linda Bentley | January 28, 2009
Amazon.com sells out of “Pocket Obama”
OLYMPIA, WASH. – During the first week in December, Stephen Pidgeon filed a complaint in the Washington Supreme Court on behalf of James Broe and 11 other registered voters requesting Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed set aside the votes cast for Barack Hussein Obama.
According to Pidgeon, “Reed failed to establish that Obama was even an American citizen running under his own name at the time of the election, let alone a ‘natural born citizen’ as required by the U.S. Constitution. Unlike other cases that have been dismissed for lack of standing, these plaintiffs have standing under a unique Washington statute that allows any registered voter to challenge the election of someone who, at the time of the election, was ineligible to hold the office.”
Pidgeon says the secretary of state’s office had already admitted it did nothing to determine Obama’s eligibility, and Obama “hasn’t produced a single piece of evidence to prove he was born in the United States and establish his eligibility.”
On Jan. 8, the same date Congress counted the electoral votes and declared Obama president, the Washington Supreme Court held an en banc conference to discuss Broe’s case and, in a unanimous decision, granted Reed’s motion to dismiss as moot.
Pidgeon plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Following U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s denial on Dec. 17 of Attorney Orly Taitz’ application for an emergency stay in the pending case of Gail Lightfoot against California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, challenging Obama’s eligibility, she refiled and submitted her application to Chief Justice John Roberts, who distributed the case for conference on Jan. 23.
On Jan. 13, Taitz filed a suggestion for the justices to recuse themselves from swearing Obama in as president as it would be a conflict of interest while there were cases still pending in their court regarding his eligibility.
Her suggestion was noted on the docket, although ignored as eight of the nine Supreme Court Justices (Samuel Alito absent) held an ex parte, private, closed-door meeting with Obama on Jan. 19, only days before Lightfoot’s case was to be discussed.
Taitz said she will file a motion to compel the records of that private meeting.
On Monday, Jan. 26, Taitz’ application was denied.
Lightfoot’s case asserts Obama’s presidency is illegitimate because his father was a foreign subject and there is no evidence Obama was actually born in Hawaii, since Hawaii State Statute allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to obtain a certification of live birth.
Further, when Obama immigrated as a child to Indonesia, which does not allow dual citizenship, his school records indicate his legal name was Barry Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia.
According to Taitz, Obama’s stepfather and mother, Lolo and Stanley Ann (Dunham) Soetoro, would have been required to relinquish Obama’s U.S. citizenship in order for him to become an Indonesian citizen, which was a requirement to attend school in Indonesia.
She claims there is ample evidence that Obama traveled on his Indonesian passport up until the time he became a U.S. Senator, whereby he reaffirmed his Indonesian citizenship as an adult.
“The swearing of Mr. Obama is null and void due to the fact that he was sworn in on a name that is not legally his name and he is a foreign subject from birth and now and never qualified as a natural born U.S. citizen,” said Taitz.
Taitz, also the principal attorney behind the Alan Keyes v. Debra Bowen lawsuit, was born in the former Soviet Union but escaped over 20 years ago to begin a life of freedom in the United States.
In addition to being an attorney, Taitz, who speaks five languages, is a licensed real estate agent and a dentist with a successful practice in Orange County, Calif.
Having experienced life under a totalitarian Communist regime, Taitz is dedicated to preventing the United States from following that same path and says she is “committed to doing everything in her power to prevent such a disastrous mistake,” while defending the rights and freedoms that exist for all citizens in the United States under the Constitution.
Taitz is working on another lawsuit on behalf of current and former military personnel and says the plaintiffs include a blood relative of Obama’s.
There have been 32 lawsuits filed to date challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president. And, as they are summarily dismissed in state and federal courts across the country, with the merits yet to be addressed, the U.S. Supreme Court also continues avoiding the Constitutional question at hand as the justices have denied each application that has come before them.
Meanwhile, Amazon.com is sold out of the $5.95 paperback titled “Pocket Obama,” released Jan. 8, 2009 by the History Company, which states, “Printed in a size that easily fits into pocket or purse, this book is an anthology of quotations borrowed from Barack Obama's speeches and writings … serves as a reminder of the amazing power of oratory and the remarkable ability of this man to move people with his words.”
“Bonnie Blue” posted a comment titled “Mao's Little Red Book Resurrected” on Jan. 25, 2009, stating, “This is either a joke or the most disturbing thing I've ever seen. Can sane Americans really have such worshipful adoration for any politician, especially to this level? Supporting a politician is one thing, but this is sick, sick, sick. Mao's Little Red Book, now Obama's Little Blue Book …”
The next day, Steve Sailer, president of the Human Biodiversity Institute in Chicago, posted, “Pocket Obama cured my insomnia! I used to be troubled by sleepless nights. But reading in bed this collection of the wisdom of President Obama – e.g., ‘The true test of the American ideal is whether we're able to recognize our failings and then rise together to meet the challenges of our time. Whether we allow ourselves to be shaped by events or history, or whether we act to shape them’ – has enabled me to awake each morning refreshed and ready to serve Chairman Obama.”
Obama is ineligible in the eyes of world comunity
Russian Media Asks Who Is Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama Where Is His Birth Certificate
By Mark S. McGrew
I know that World leaders are fully accustomed to conducting business with all manner of criminals, terrorists, dictators and other illegitimate “leaders” of Nations.
Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama vs World Leaders
But Obama may be different, as no one knows his real name, his place of birth, who his true parents are or even his actual birth date.
Every relationship must contain an element of trust. Without trust, marriages, business relations, families and friendships are destroyed. At the least, constructive progress is stymied.
America is said repeatedly, to be a “Nation of Laws”. It is not. It is a Nation under the control of mob rule. When the American public understands that, America will be a Nation of Anarchy.
Obama not only refuses to show proof that he is eligible to become President of the United States of America, but he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to prohibit any one from discovering his true identity or his history.
Because Obama is not eligible to be the President of the United States, any agreements he makes are subject to change or removal by the current American government of by future administrations, far into the future. Any and all agreements he makes gives foreign powers permission to deny them, rescind them or renege on them, far into the future.
Any orders he gives to the American military are subject to being refused. Orders that Obama gives to America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff of the military can be refused. If Obama doesn’t like a particular Chief of Staff, or all of them, theoretically, he can fire them and replace them with new Staff. But even the order to fire a Chief or to demand his resignation can be lawfully refused by that Chief of Staff.
The security and abilities of NATO are being compromised as well as current agreements and Treaties around the World.
The only power Obama will have is that which is illegally permitted by a corrupt government.
The United States Congress is required, under the US Code of Federal Regulations to count the Electoral College votes for President and Vice President, ask if any member of Congress objects to the count and hear that Congressman’s objection. This is under Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15, “Upon such reading of any such certificate of paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any”.
The US Code can be found by clicking here, or go to this URL: http://uscode.house.gov/
Continue Reading It Gets More Interesting
Pages: 123
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/106972-0/
http://countusout.wordpress.com/
By Mark S. McGrew
I know that World leaders are fully accustomed to conducting business with all manner of criminals, terrorists, dictators and other illegitimate “leaders” of Nations.
Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama vs World Leaders
But Obama may be different, as no one knows his real name, his place of birth, who his true parents are or even his actual birth date.
Every relationship must contain an element of trust. Without trust, marriages, business relations, families and friendships are destroyed. At the least, constructive progress is stymied.
America is said repeatedly, to be a “Nation of Laws”. It is not. It is a Nation under the control of mob rule. When the American public understands that, America will be a Nation of Anarchy.
Obama not only refuses to show proof that he is eligible to become President of the United States of America, but he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to prohibit any one from discovering his true identity or his history.
Because Obama is not eligible to be the President of the United States, any agreements he makes are subject to change or removal by the current American government of by future administrations, far into the future. Any and all agreements he makes gives foreign powers permission to deny them, rescind them or renege on them, far into the future.
Any orders he gives to the American military are subject to being refused. Orders that Obama gives to America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff of the military can be refused. If Obama doesn’t like a particular Chief of Staff, or all of them, theoretically, he can fire them and replace them with new Staff. But even the order to fire a Chief or to demand his resignation can be lawfully refused by that Chief of Staff.
The security and abilities of NATO are being compromised as well as current agreements and Treaties around the World.
The only power Obama will have is that which is illegally permitted by a corrupt government.
The United States Congress is required, under the US Code of Federal Regulations to count the Electoral College votes for President and Vice President, ask if any member of Congress objects to the count and hear that Congressman’s objection. This is under Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15, “Upon such reading of any such certificate of paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any”.
The US Code can be found by clicking here, or go to this URL: http://uscode.house.gov/
Continue Reading It Gets More Interesting
Pages: 123
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/106972-0/
http://countusout.wordpress.com/
Truth about the military losses, you'll be surprised
Did you know?
Whatever your politics, however you lean and however you feel about the current administration, this report is interesting. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the below statistics:
The annual fatalities, by any cause, of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2007:
1980 2,392 (Carter)
1981 2,380 (Reagan)
1984 1,999 (Reagan)
1988 1,819 (Reagan)
1989 1,636 (George H W)
1990 1,508 (George H W)
1991 1,787 (George H W)
1992 1,293 (George H W)
1993 1,213 (Clinton)
1994 1,075 (Clinton)
1995 2,465 (Clinton)
1996 2,318 (Clinton)
1997 817 (Clinton)
1998 2,252 (Clinton)
1999 1,984 (Clinton)
2000 1,983 (Clinton)
2001 890 (George W)
2002 1,007 (George W)
2003 1,410 (George W)
2004 1,887 (George W)
2005 919 (George W)
2006 920 (George W)
2007 899 (George W)
Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,107 deaths
George W years (2001-2007): 7,932 deaths
Are you surprised when you look at these figures? They indicate the loss from the two latest Middle East conflicts are less than the loss of military personnel during Clinton's presidency when America wasn't even involved in a war--unless you include Bosnia and Mogadishu, Somalia. (Remember Blackhawk Down?) Even more surprising is that in 1980, during Carter presidency, there were 2,392 US military fatalities!
These figures appear to indicate many members of our media and politicians pick and choose the information on which they report--that they present only those "facts" that support their agenda. (Oh, Gosh, Do you think?) Consider the latest census of Americans. It shows the following distribution of American citizens by race:
European descent 69.12 percent
Hispanic 12.50 percent
Black 12.30 percent
Asian 3.70 percent
Native American 1.00 percent
Other 2.60 percent
Many members of the media lead us to believe the military death ratio is off balanced compared to the distribution by race in America. Here are the fatalities by race over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom:
European descent 74.31 percent
Hispanic 10.74 percent
Black 9.67 percent
Asian 1.81 percent
Native American 1.09 percent
Other 0.33 percent
Surprised again? Hopefully, during the time between now and November, intelligent Americans can decipher-- (Too Late)
the facts from the spin.
the spinners from the leaders.
those who seek even more power from those that seek justice.
the dividers from the uniters.
These statistics are published by the Congressional Research Service and may be confirmed at: www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf --
Whatever your politics, however you lean and however you feel about the current administration, this report is interesting. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the below statistics:
The annual fatalities, by any cause, of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2007:
1980 2,392 (Carter)
1981 2,380 (Reagan)
1984 1,999 (Reagan)
1988 1,819 (Reagan)
1989 1,636 (George H W)
1990 1,508 (George H W)
1991 1,787 (George H W)
1992 1,293 (George H W)
1993 1,213 (Clinton)
1994 1,075 (Clinton)
1995 2,465 (Clinton)
1996 2,318 (Clinton)
1997 817 (Clinton)
1998 2,252 (Clinton)
1999 1,984 (Clinton)
2000 1,983 (Clinton)
2001 890 (George W)
2002 1,007 (George W)
2003 1,410 (George W)
2004 1,887 (George W)
2005 919 (George W)
2006 920 (George W)
2007 899 (George W)
Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,107 deaths
George W years (2001-2007): 7,932 deaths
Are you surprised when you look at these figures? They indicate the loss from the two latest Middle East conflicts are less than the loss of military personnel during Clinton's presidency when America wasn't even involved in a war--unless you include Bosnia and Mogadishu, Somalia. (Remember Blackhawk Down?) Even more surprising is that in 1980, during Carter presidency, there were 2,392 US military fatalities!
These figures appear to indicate many members of our media and politicians pick and choose the information on which they report--that they present only those "facts" that support their agenda. (Oh, Gosh, Do you think?) Consider the latest census of Americans. It shows the following distribution of American citizens by race:
European descent 69.12 percent
Hispanic 12.50 percent
Black 12.30 percent
Asian 3.70 percent
Native American 1.00 percent
Other 2.60 percent
Many members of the media lead us to believe the military death ratio is off balanced compared to the distribution by race in America. Here are the fatalities by race over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom:
European descent 74.31 percent
Hispanic 10.74 percent
Black 9.67 percent
Asian 1.81 percent
Native American 1.09 percent
Other 0.33 percent
Surprised again? Hopefully, during the time between now and November, intelligent Americans can decipher-- (Too Late)
the facts from the spin.
the spinners from the leaders.
those who seek even more power from those that seek justice.
the dividers from the uniters.
These statistics are published by the Congressional Research Service and may be confirmed at: www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf --
Social Security benefits for illegals, sent by a reader Bill
SOCIAL SECURITY CHANGES
> It is already impossible to live on Social
> Security alone. If the government gives benefits to 'illegal' aliens who
> have never contributed, where does that leave those of us who have paid into
> Social Security all our working lives?
>
> As stated below, the Senate voted this week
> to allow 'illegal' aliens access to Social Security benefits. Attached is
> an opportunity to sign a petition that requires citizenship for eligibility
> to that social service.
>
> Instructions are below. If you don't
> forward the petition and just stop it, we will lose all these names.
>
> If you do not want to sign it, please just
> forward it to everyone you know.
>
> Thank you!
>
> It is already impossible to live on Social
> Security alone. If the government gives benefits to 'illegal' aliens who
> have never contributed, where does that leave those of us who have paid into
> Social Security all our working lives?
>
> As stated below, the Senate voted this week
> to allow 'illegal' aliens access to Social Security benefits. Attached is
> an opportunity to sign a petition that requires citizenship for eligibility
> to that social service.
>
> Instructions are below. If you don't
> forward the petition and just stop it, we will lose all these names.
>
> If you do not want to sign it, please just
> forward it to everyone you know.
>
> Thank you!
>
on manipulation of public court records from reader mr. Neil Turner
This manipulation of ‘public’ court records may also explain how some of the Obama/Soetoro ‘Constitutionally ineligible for POTUS’ cases ‘disappear’ from the SCOTUS docket …
Neil
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the truth finally comes out about Bush’s golf buddy, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton! May God have mercy on his soul!
Vol. 15 Issue No. 3 | January 21 – 27, 2009
Bush commutes sentences of agents Ramos and Compean
By Linda Bentley | January 14, 2009Border agents' sentence to expire March 20
Courtesy Photos: Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos (l), Jose Alonso Compean (r) Johnny Sutton
WASHINGTON, D.C. – On his last day in office, President Bush responded to two years of public outcry by commuting the 12 and 11-year prison sentences of Border Patrol agents Jose Alonso Compean and Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos, who have spent the majority of the past two years in solitary confinement after being convicted of shooting a Mexican drug smuggler in 2005.
Bush set their release date for March 20, although it was not clear why.
Both agents testified they believed drug runner Osvaldo Aldrete Davila was armed when he was shot fleeing back across the border, leaving behind a van loaded with nearly 800 pounds of marijuana.
Last week, Ronald Rodgers, pardon attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice, indicated the agents were not being considered for pardons at this time, although he did say a file had been opened to consider their eligibility for commutation.
Monica Ramos and her father Joe Loya have devoted the last two years to seeking justice for the two agents, hoping their convictions will be eventually be overturned.
Their lengthy sentences were due to U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton charging the agents with use of a weapon during the commission of a crime, which is a sentencing enhancement tool that carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years.
Johnny Sutton
However, as many have argued, Ramos and Compean were not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time of the shooting but performing their duties as border patrol agents.
Initially the agents were cleared of any wrongdoing but then the Mexican government became involved and insisted they be prosecuted.
Ramos and Compean later learned Aldrete Davila, while provided with immunity, a border-crossing card and other privileges in exchange for his testimony against the two agents, was caught smuggling drugs across the border on at least one other occasion, which conflicted with his testimony that he had only brought drugs into the country that one time so he could buy medicine for his sick mother.
When Aldrete Davila was convicted for his second drug run, he received a sentence of nine and a half years, lighter than both Ramos and Compean's.
Even though Aldrete Davila was prosecuted for his second drug smuggling incident, for which Sutton sent out press releases, Aldrete Davila's records were nowhere to be found on PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records).
Sonoran News later learned, by accident, Aldrete Davila's case was filed as Aledrete Davila, which appeared to be done purposefully to prevent access to his case file.
Meanwhile, every single one of Sutton's press releases, in which Aldrete Davila's name was mentioned, Sutton spelled his name Aldrete Davila, whereas on every single court document, he spelled it Aledrete Davila.
Neil
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the truth finally comes out about Bush’s golf buddy, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton! May God have mercy on his soul!
Vol. 15 Issue No. 3 | January 21 – 27, 2009
Bush commutes sentences of agents Ramos and Compean
By Linda Bentley | January 14, 2009Border agents' sentence to expire March 20
Courtesy Photos: Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos (l), Jose Alonso Compean (r) Johnny Sutton
WASHINGTON, D.C. – On his last day in office, President Bush responded to two years of public outcry by commuting the 12 and 11-year prison sentences of Border Patrol agents Jose Alonso Compean and Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos, who have spent the majority of the past two years in solitary confinement after being convicted of shooting a Mexican drug smuggler in 2005.
Bush set their release date for March 20, although it was not clear why.
Both agents testified they believed drug runner Osvaldo Aldrete Davila was armed when he was shot fleeing back across the border, leaving behind a van loaded with nearly 800 pounds of marijuana.
Last week, Ronald Rodgers, pardon attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice, indicated the agents were not being considered for pardons at this time, although he did say a file had been opened to consider their eligibility for commutation.
Monica Ramos and her father Joe Loya have devoted the last two years to seeking justice for the two agents, hoping their convictions will be eventually be overturned.
Their lengthy sentences were due to U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton charging the agents with use of a weapon during the commission of a crime, which is a sentencing enhancement tool that carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years.
Johnny Sutton
However, as many have argued, Ramos and Compean were not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time of the shooting but performing their duties as border patrol agents.
Initially the agents were cleared of any wrongdoing but then the Mexican government became involved and insisted they be prosecuted.
Ramos and Compean later learned Aldrete Davila, while provided with immunity, a border-crossing card and other privileges in exchange for his testimony against the two agents, was caught smuggling drugs across the border on at least one other occasion, which conflicted with his testimony that he had only brought drugs into the country that one time so he could buy medicine for his sick mother.
When Aldrete Davila was convicted for his second drug run, he received a sentence of nine and a half years, lighter than both Ramos and Compean's.
Even though Aldrete Davila was prosecuted for his second drug smuggling incident, for which Sutton sent out press releases, Aldrete Davila's records were nowhere to be found on PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records).
Sonoran News later learned, by accident, Aldrete Davila's case was filed as Aledrete Davila, which appeared to be done purposefully to prevent access to his case file.
Meanwhile, every single one of Sutton's press releases, in which Aldrete Davila's name was mentioned, Sutton spelled his name Aldrete Davila, whereas on every single court document, he spelled it Aledrete Davila.
Will Obama be removed from office, sent to us by a reader JoanSharon
http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2009/01/is-there-a-chance-obama-will-be-forced-out-of-office.html January 24, 2009
Is There a Chance Obama Will Be Forced Out of Office?
Commenter Jewel asks, “Do you really think there's a chance that Obama might be forced out of office? “
DemocracyRules Responds:
Yes, there is a good chance Obama will be forced out of office. The legal actions against him are increasing in number, and the legal arguments they make are becoming stronger, more precise, and more persuasive.
As of Jan 20, I became certain Obama should be removed from office. The eligibility of the President-elect must be proved before he takes the oath of office. Obama has claimed the office of President without proving his eligibility. Obama is an impostor.
The proof of eligibility rests in the hands of the candidate. Just like when we apply for a driver's license, we must show certain ID. It's our responsibility to get the ID, and present it when asked.
Obama’s mistake is irreversible. If he was eligible, he would have proved it by now. Impeachment is not necessary, he can be removed from office at any time, because it’s not necessary to impeach an impostor. The Constitution specifies the President must be eligible, and Obama is not eligible, therefore according to the Constitution he is not President.
Thus, Obama never was the President. Furthermore, as of Jan 20, he could be tried for fraud and/or treason. Few lawyers would expose themsleves to those risks if he/she could avoid it by producing a few pieces of paper.
Obama may have studied Constitutional law specifically for the purpose of learning how to game the system. He says he has always felt lost because he hardly knew his father, he moved a lot, and he didn't know where he belonged. He must have also known he wasn’t a US citizen. No wonder he felt lost.
Although the Constitution requires eligibility, it doesn’t provide clear details about who will vet the candidates.
In the 2008 election, a Nicaraguan Communist with only a green card was placed on some state ballots. Thousands voted for him. In 1968, Eldridge Cleaver, a convicted murderer/serial rapist, and member of the Black Panthers, ran for President even though he was too young to be eligible. He garnered about 30,000 votes.
In 1881, Vice President Chester Arthur took office when the sitting President died. New evidence suggests Arthur was not eligible because his father was not a US citizen. Arthur concealed his own birth date, destroyed evidence, and had all his personal papers burned before he died. But new research in 2008 uncovered the father’s naturalization certificate. The father became a US citizen long after Chester Arthur was born.
So Obama just stonewalled his citizen critics, and sailed on through, hoping to fake it for the next 8 years.
But the enforcement of the Constitution ultimately rests in the people. By now, millions doubt Obama’s eligibility, and hundreds of thousands are searching for more evidence to unseat him. As the evidence against Obama accumulates day by day, and the number of American doubters rises, there is a rising probability that Obama will be removed from office.
Pro Patria
DemocracyRules on January 24, 2009 at 03:57 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2c6053ef010536ea113d970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Is There a Chance Obama Will Be Forced Out of Office?:
Comments
take your meds
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{From DR -- Read the evidence.}
Posted by: Lou Dobbs | January 24, 2009 at 09:02 PM
DR - Thank you for your comments. The thing is - The Free Republic blog had a lengthy article in which it was stated that the FBI and CIA know all about Obama's citizenship situation. What was not explained, however, is why these agencies are choosing to ignore the issue. Can you offer an opinion on this? There was an enormous amount of information in this article that I had never seen anywhere else regarding Obama's mother's and grandparents' background. I keep wondering how many people are aware of all this information. It's mindboggling.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{From DR -- Here's my explanation: (1) Obama's victory is truly stunning. Racist thinking about blacks is still prevalent in America. Of course all humans tend towards racism, and white Americans are among the least racist people in the world. But it's still amazing, and wonderful that America voted in a black president. It's very hard to let go of that dream.
(2) Most people don't care about the legal details, and the MSM is trying to keep them ignorant. (3) Most people have heard of the Constitution, but they have no idea what's in it. If you corner them and explain, it seems to them that you're picking at details.
(4) In life and in politics, most people just go along with things the way they are, and try to adjust. In Germany the Nazi's took over because most people couldn't be bothered to resist. They were tired of war and hunger and economic problems and they just wanted to have normal lives. Hitler seemed like the best option.
(5) The bottom line is that right now only a small percentage of Americans see a "clear and present danger". Until they do, they will not become involved.
(6) That's our job, to spread the idea that America is in fact confronting a clear and present danger, right here, right now. We have to spread the word, no one else will do it for us.
Pro Patria}
Posted by: Jewel | January 25, 2009 at 04:25 AM
Excellent analysis, DR. I do believeyou are correct - we are being hoodwinked!
Posted by: rrobin | January 25, 2009 at 08:26 AM
I feel like a large part of the reason why no one is taking enough action here is because of the color of Obama's skin. No one will admit it of course...but who wants to be the person who de-thrones the first black president? Can you imagine the outrage from some members of the black community?
Personally, I think that risk is well worth it. Too bad not enough people are with me.
~T the D
http://thedrunkelephant.blogspot.com/
Posted by: T the D | January 25, 2009 at 02:09 PM
What can Americans do to have the impostor Obama removed from office?
Removing Obama would be unprecedented. Would it result in a nullification of the election, having Biden take office, declaring McCain the winner since he ran unopposed by an eligible candidate, or would we need a new special election to select the President?
The social ramifications of removing Obama don't frighten me, but I'd imagine it may spark extreme civil unrest in the black community.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{From DR -- Thanks for your comment.
(1) "What can Americans do to have the impostor Obama removed from office?" Massive civil disobedience. There are many peaceful ways to do this, but it will take millions of determined dissenters to make it work.
Most radicals believe people are sheep who can be easily manipulated, frightened, and controlled. Hitler thought this about his countrymen, and so did Lenin.
But is it true about Americans, in the year 2009? No one knows, but I have a feeling we are going to find out.
(2) "Removing Obama would be unprecedented."
Americans are weird the way they believe this, it's not true at all. In about one-half of all US presidencies, some 'unprecedented' disaster happens. Kennedy was shot and killed. Johnson was forced out after one term. Nixon had to resign. Ford was almost assassinated, and was forced out of power.
Carter barely finished one term, having perpetrated such a litany of humiliating failures that he should have left office by the back door. Reagan was shot and almost died.
Clinton committed perjury on a nationwide television address, and was impeached by the House. He avoided impeachment in the Senate by getting "smash mouth" Rahm Emanuel to perpetrate every dirty trick in the book against Clinton's Senate opponents.
I tell you, throwing a President out on his ear is perfectly normal.
(3) Once Obama is physically out of the White House, Biden can take over until a new election is held. There is nothing weird or strange about having a special election. This is the first time for a President, but Americans have a lot of special elections.
(4) One thing Obama proved is American Blacks are now fully part of the American body politic.
They are enfranchised politically and economically. They are better off than ever before, by a large margin, and they have a big stake in the American dream. Most Blacks don't live in ghettos, and they are getting better and better jobs.
If Obama is booted out, most Blacks will not run around in their suburban neighborhoods rioting. That's leftist fear-mongering.
Leftists have this fundamentally racist view that all Blacks are stupid, half-crazed, viscous animals, who need the constant care and protection of White social workers.
If you look at who has fomented rioting in the USA in the last 20 years, about 95% of it has been done by extreme left-wing, young, white, American men.
Pro Patria}
Is There a Chance Obama Will Be Forced Out of Office?
Commenter Jewel asks, “Do you really think there's a chance that Obama might be forced out of office? “
DemocracyRules Responds:
Yes, there is a good chance Obama will be forced out of office. The legal actions against him are increasing in number, and the legal arguments they make are becoming stronger, more precise, and more persuasive.
As of Jan 20, I became certain Obama should be removed from office. The eligibility of the President-elect must be proved before he takes the oath of office. Obama has claimed the office of President without proving his eligibility. Obama is an impostor.
The proof of eligibility rests in the hands of the candidate. Just like when we apply for a driver's license, we must show certain ID. It's our responsibility to get the ID, and present it when asked.
Obama’s mistake is irreversible. If he was eligible, he would have proved it by now. Impeachment is not necessary, he can be removed from office at any time, because it’s not necessary to impeach an impostor. The Constitution specifies the President must be eligible, and Obama is not eligible, therefore according to the Constitution he is not President.
Thus, Obama never was the President. Furthermore, as of Jan 20, he could be tried for fraud and/or treason. Few lawyers would expose themsleves to those risks if he/she could avoid it by producing a few pieces of paper.
Obama may have studied Constitutional law specifically for the purpose of learning how to game the system. He says he has always felt lost because he hardly knew his father, he moved a lot, and he didn't know where he belonged. He must have also known he wasn’t a US citizen. No wonder he felt lost.
Although the Constitution requires eligibility, it doesn’t provide clear details about who will vet the candidates.
In the 2008 election, a Nicaraguan Communist with only a green card was placed on some state ballots. Thousands voted for him. In 1968, Eldridge Cleaver, a convicted murderer/serial rapist, and member of the Black Panthers, ran for President even though he was too young to be eligible. He garnered about 30,000 votes.
In 1881, Vice President Chester Arthur took office when the sitting President died. New evidence suggests Arthur was not eligible because his father was not a US citizen. Arthur concealed his own birth date, destroyed evidence, and had all his personal papers burned before he died. But new research in 2008 uncovered the father’s naturalization certificate. The father became a US citizen long after Chester Arthur was born.
So Obama just stonewalled his citizen critics, and sailed on through, hoping to fake it for the next 8 years.
But the enforcement of the Constitution ultimately rests in the people. By now, millions doubt Obama’s eligibility, and hundreds of thousands are searching for more evidence to unseat him. As the evidence against Obama accumulates day by day, and the number of American doubters rises, there is a rising probability that Obama will be removed from office.
Pro Patria
DemocracyRules on January 24, 2009 at 03:57 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2c6053ef010536ea113d970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Is There a Chance Obama Will Be Forced Out of Office?:
Comments
take your meds
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{From DR -- Read the evidence.}
Posted by: Lou Dobbs | January 24, 2009 at 09:02 PM
DR - Thank you for your comments. The thing is - The Free Republic blog had a lengthy article in which it was stated that the FBI and CIA know all about Obama's citizenship situation. What was not explained, however, is why these agencies are choosing to ignore the issue. Can you offer an opinion on this? There was an enormous amount of information in this article that I had never seen anywhere else regarding Obama's mother's and grandparents' background. I keep wondering how many people are aware of all this information. It's mindboggling.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{From DR -- Here's my explanation: (1) Obama's victory is truly stunning. Racist thinking about blacks is still prevalent in America. Of course all humans tend towards racism, and white Americans are among the least racist people in the world. But it's still amazing, and wonderful that America voted in a black president. It's very hard to let go of that dream.
(2) Most people don't care about the legal details, and the MSM is trying to keep them ignorant. (3) Most people have heard of the Constitution, but they have no idea what's in it. If you corner them and explain, it seems to them that you're picking at details.
(4) In life and in politics, most people just go along with things the way they are, and try to adjust. In Germany the Nazi's took over because most people couldn't be bothered to resist. They were tired of war and hunger and economic problems and they just wanted to have normal lives. Hitler seemed like the best option.
(5) The bottom line is that right now only a small percentage of Americans see a "clear and present danger". Until they do, they will not become involved.
(6) That's our job, to spread the idea that America is in fact confronting a clear and present danger, right here, right now. We have to spread the word, no one else will do it for us.
Pro Patria}
Posted by: Jewel | January 25, 2009 at 04:25 AM
Excellent analysis, DR. I do believeyou are correct - we are being hoodwinked!
Posted by: rrobin | January 25, 2009 at 08:26 AM
I feel like a large part of the reason why no one is taking enough action here is because of the color of Obama's skin. No one will admit it of course...but who wants to be the person who de-thrones the first black president? Can you imagine the outrage from some members of the black community?
Personally, I think that risk is well worth it. Too bad not enough people are with me.
~T the D
http://thedrunkelephant.blogspot.com/
Posted by: T the D | January 25, 2009 at 02:09 PM
What can Americans do to have the impostor Obama removed from office?
Removing Obama would be unprecedented. Would it result in a nullification of the election, having Biden take office, declaring McCain the winner since he ran unopposed by an eligible candidate, or would we need a new special election to select the President?
The social ramifications of removing Obama don't frighten me, but I'd imagine it may spark extreme civil unrest in the black community.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{From DR -- Thanks for your comment.
(1) "What can Americans do to have the impostor Obama removed from office?" Massive civil disobedience. There are many peaceful ways to do this, but it will take millions of determined dissenters to make it work.
Most radicals believe people are sheep who can be easily manipulated, frightened, and controlled. Hitler thought this about his countrymen, and so did Lenin.
But is it true about Americans, in the year 2009? No one knows, but I have a feeling we are going to find out.
(2) "Removing Obama would be unprecedented."
Americans are weird the way they believe this, it's not true at all. In about one-half of all US presidencies, some 'unprecedented' disaster happens. Kennedy was shot and killed. Johnson was forced out after one term. Nixon had to resign. Ford was almost assassinated, and was forced out of power.
Carter barely finished one term, having perpetrated such a litany of humiliating failures that he should have left office by the back door. Reagan was shot and almost died.
Clinton committed perjury on a nationwide television address, and was impeached by the House. He avoided impeachment in the Senate by getting "smash mouth" Rahm Emanuel to perpetrate every dirty trick in the book against Clinton's Senate opponents.
I tell you, throwing a President out on his ear is perfectly normal.
(3) Once Obama is physically out of the White House, Biden can take over until a new election is held. There is nothing weird or strange about having a special election. This is the first time for a President, but Americans have a lot of special elections.
(4) One thing Obama proved is American Blacks are now fully part of the American body politic.
They are enfranchised politically and economically. They are better off than ever before, by a large margin, and they have a big stake in the American dream. Most Blacks don't live in ghettos, and they are getting better and better jobs.
If Obama is booted out, most Blacks will not run around in their suburban neighborhoods rioting. That's leftist fear-mongering.
Leftists have this fundamentally racist view that all Blacks are stupid, half-crazed, viscous animals, who need the constant care and protection of White social workers.
If you look at who has fomented rioting in the USA in the last 20 years, about 95% of it has been done by extreme left-wing, young, white, American men.
Pro Patria}
Urgent: Contact House This Morning on 'Stimulus' Bill
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Urgent: Contact House This Morning on 'Stimulus' Bill - temporary post
Temporarily re-posted from America's Right. Further information about ways to contact those in Congress may be found here: Senators' and representatives' addressses, telephone and fax numbers, and email addressesAdditional contact information, including staff of Senate & House leaders' staff And more from Captain's Quarters blog about how this is pay-to-play for the neo-Marxist operatives of ACORN and La Raza, to build their commissar base. Taxpayers pay, ACORN and La Raza play havoc upon a free America.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
HOUSE VOTES TODAY ON 'STIMULUS' BILL !!
The Senate bill is nearing $900 billion, according to The Wall Street Journal, and the House of Representatives votes TODAY.Call your representative. Take 45 seconds and do it NOW. Don't rely on your neighbor to call, don't rely on me to call. Call your congressman or congresswoman now and tell them, politely, that ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, that they should vote NAY on the so-called "stimulus" package.Remind them gently that, less than two years down the road, they'll be asking for your vote -- and tell them that you prefer to pull that lever for people who have your interests at heart. Please call. Please do it now....
Urgent: Contact House This Morning on 'Stimulus' Bill - temporary post
Temporarily re-posted from America's Right. Further information about ways to contact those in Congress may be found here: Senators' and representatives' addressses, telephone and fax numbers, and email addressesAdditional contact information, including staff of Senate & House leaders' staff And more from Captain's Quarters blog about how this is pay-to-play for the neo-Marxist operatives of ACORN and La Raza, to build their commissar base. Taxpayers pay, ACORN and La Raza play havoc upon a free America.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
HOUSE VOTES TODAY ON 'STIMULUS' BILL !!
The Senate bill is nearing $900 billion, according to The Wall Street Journal, and the House of Representatives votes TODAY.Call your representative. Take 45 seconds and do it NOW. Don't rely on your neighbor to call, don't rely on me to call. Call your congressman or congresswoman now and tell them, politely, that ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, that they should vote NAY on the so-called "stimulus" package.Remind them gently that, less than two years down the road, they'll be asking for your vote -- and tell them that you prefer to pull that lever for people who have your interests at heart. Please call. Please do it now....
Google's New News Archive
Google's news archive search of NEWSPAPERS (including those from INDONESIA).
Good news: Indonesian to English translation (simple "cut and paste") is available for free on http://translate.google.com
It's "possible" that some really incriminating evidencecould be found in INDONESIAN newspapers.
Thank you Dr. Backon!
Good news: Indonesian to English translation (simple "cut and paste") is available for free on http://translate.google.com
It's "possible" that some really incriminating evidencecould be found in INDONESIAN newspapers.
Thank you Dr. Backon!
A full list of subpoenas issued so far in by US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald in "Obama's senate seat for sale" affair.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
And on the fifth day, subpoenas were served related to Obama's senior staff
On Saturday morning, the list of subpoenas served by the U.S. Attorney's office in the Governor Rod Blagojevich case was made public. The list included one major surprise for the new administration.
A veritable "who's who" of Obama staffers, surrogates and affiliates were among those whose communications with Blago were served with subpoenas. Put simply, within one week of President Barack Obama's administration taking office, it is already under significant legal scrutiny that will -- at a minimum -- take precious time away from dealing with the country's monumental economic and foreign policy challenges.
And, once again, the mainstream media is AWOL, unwilling to report on this very newsworthy story.
Among those whose communications were served:
David Axelrod, Obama's "Karl Rove" and the biggest surprise on the list. Obama's team issued a report in December that said his staff had no "inappropriate contact" with Blago, so the inclusion of Axelrod is a bit of a shock.
Valerie Jarrett, Blago's "Senate Candidate 1", a real estate management executive and political hack of the first order. Her ties to failed and fraudulent real estate deals in Chicago were the subject of numerous investigations and should have instantly disqualified her for any public office.
Rahm Emanuel was already deeply involved in the case with some reports describing as many as 21 conversations with Blago's office during the period in question.
Tony Rezko, Obama's first advocate, fundraiser and adviser, was convicted last year on numerous charges related to kickbacks, and is now awaiting sentencing. Rezko is "cooperating with authorities, FBI Agent Daniel Cain said in an affidavit."
Other communications served include:
• Patricia Blagojevich, first lady
• River Realty, her former employer
• Friends of Blagojevich, the governor's campaign committee
• Citizens for Blagojevich, his former committee
• Robert Blagojevich, the governor's brother and campaign chairman
• Christopher Kelly, former adviser and fundraiser for governor
• Alonzo Monk, former Blagojevich chief of staff, now a lobbyist
• Milan Petrovic, lobbyist and campaign fundraiser
• John Wyma, former Blagojevich adviser, now a lobbyist
• Paul Rosenfeld, lobbyist
• J.B. Pritzker, wealthy Chicagoan whom Blagojevich might have considered to replace Obama in U.S. Senate
• Gery Chico, former Chicago school board president and one-time U.S. Senate candidate
• Doug Scofield, former Blagojevich adviser, now a consultant
• Scofield Communications
• Service Employees International Union
• Tom Balanoff, SEIU Illinois president
• Change to Win, an SEIU-affiliated activist group
• Sam Zell, owner of the Chicago Tribune
• Nils Larsen, an adviser to Zell
• The Chicago Tribune
• The Tribune Co., the newspaper's parent company
• Michael Vondra, owner of asphalt and construction companies
• Gerald Krozel, vice president of a concrete company
• John Johnston, president of Balmoral Park racetrack
• Fred Yang, Washington, D.C.-based Blagojevich consultant
• Garin Hart Yang Research Group, Yang's firm
• William Knapp, Washington, D.C.-based Blagojevich consultant
• Squire, Knapp & Dunn, Knapp's firm
• Doug Sosnick, political consultant
Blago's "Senate Candidate 3", Jan Schakowsky, was not served with a subpoena, but will have some questions of her own to answer in the days to come.
Let's recap, shall we? In the first week, Obama has not cut taxes -- the only proven way to revive the economy -- despite promising to do so for "95% of working Americans" (which was almost certainly a lie, but let's wait and see); signed an order to close Gitmo, certain to make America less safe; and promoted abortion on a global scale.
This is an article from American Thinker
Oh, and most of his senior staff is under legal scrutiny.
I can hardly wait for week two.
Update: Thomas Lifson offers the critical thought experiment: imagine if Rove, and not Axelrod, had been the subject.
Update II: An eagle-eyed commenter points out that Blago's communications with Axelrod, Jarrett, et. al. were the subject of subpoenas, not the parties themselves. So noted and corrected.
And on the fifth day, subpoenas were served related to Obama's senior staff
On Saturday morning, the list of subpoenas served by the U.S. Attorney's office in the Governor Rod Blagojevich case was made public. The list included one major surprise for the new administration.
A veritable "who's who" of Obama staffers, surrogates and affiliates were among those whose communications with Blago were served with subpoenas. Put simply, within one week of President Barack Obama's administration taking office, it is already under significant legal scrutiny that will -- at a minimum -- take precious time away from dealing with the country's monumental economic and foreign policy challenges.
And, once again, the mainstream media is AWOL, unwilling to report on this very newsworthy story.
Among those whose communications were served:
David Axelrod, Obama's "Karl Rove" and the biggest surprise on the list. Obama's team issued a report in December that said his staff had no "inappropriate contact" with Blago, so the inclusion of Axelrod is a bit of a shock.
Valerie Jarrett, Blago's "Senate Candidate 1", a real estate management executive and political hack of the first order. Her ties to failed and fraudulent real estate deals in Chicago were the subject of numerous investigations and should have instantly disqualified her for any public office.
Rahm Emanuel was already deeply involved in the case with some reports describing as many as 21 conversations with Blago's office during the period in question.
Tony Rezko, Obama's first advocate, fundraiser and adviser, was convicted last year on numerous charges related to kickbacks, and is now awaiting sentencing. Rezko is "cooperating with authorities, FBI Agent Daniel Cain said in an affidavit."
Other communications served include:
• Patricia Blagojevich, first lady
• River Realty, her former employer
• Friends of Blagojevich, the governor's campaign committee
• Citizens for Blagojevich, his former committee
• Robert Blagojevich, the governor's brother and campaign chairman
• Christopher Kelly, former adviser and fundraiser for governor
• Alonzo Monk, former Blagojevich chief of staff, now a lobbyist
• Milan Petrovic, lobbyist and campaign fundraiser
• John Wyma, former Blagojevich adviser, now a lobbyist
• Paul Rosenfeld, lobbyist
• J.B. Pritzker, wealthy Chicagoan whom Blagojevich might have considered to replace Obama in U.S. Senate
• Gery Chico, former Chicago school board president and one-time U.S. Senate candidate
• Doug Scofield, former Blagojevich adviser, now a consultant
• Scofield Communications
• Service Employees International Union
• Tom Balanoff, SEIU Illinois president
• Change to Win, an SEIU-affiliated activist group
• Sam Zell, owner of the Chicago Tribune
• Nils Larsen, an adviser to Zell
• The Chicago Tribune
• The Tribune Co., the newspaper's parent company
• Michael Vondra, owner of asphalt and construction companies
• Gerald Krozel, vice president of a concrete company
• John Johnston, president of Balmoral Park racetrack
• Fred Yang, Washington, D.C.-based Blagojevich consultant
• Garin Hart Yang Research Group, Yang's firm
• William Knapp, Washington, D.C.-based Blagojevich consultant
• Squire, Knapp & Dunn, Knapp's firm
• Doug Sosnick, political consultant
Blago's "Senate Candidate 3", Jan Schakowsky, was not served with a subpoena, but will have some questions of her own to answer in the days to come.
Let's recap, shall we? In the first week, Obama has not cut taxes -- the only proven way to revive the economy -- despite promising to do so for "95% of working Americans" (which was almost certainly a lie, but let's wait and see); signed an order to close Gitmo, certain to make America less safe; and promoted abortion on a global scale.
This is an article from American Thinker
Oh, and most of his senior staff is under legal scrutiny.
I can hardly wait for week two.
Update: Thomas Lifson offers the critical thought experiment: imagine if Rove, and not Axelrod, had been the subject.
Update II: An eagle-eyed commenter points out that Blago's communications with Axelrod, Jarrett, et. al. were the subject of subpoenas, not the parties themselves. So noted and corrected.
Proof Obama went by Barry Soetoro at Occidental
Lisa O shared the following:
There is a biography of Barry Soetoro 's Occidental College days. It states that when Barry Soetoro was 18-19 he attended school as BARRY SOETORO. And it wasn't until he met a girl by the name of REGINA that was the first to start calling him Barack. See:
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/obama-at-occidental-college/
The importance of this is that it clearly shows that Barry was using his Indonesian name, and of course, his Indonesian passport.
The International Herald Tribute (The Global issue of the New York Times)
also states:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/08/america/obama.php
"Nearly three decades ago, Barack Obama stood out on the small campus of Occidental College in Los Angeles for his eloquence, intellect and activism against apartheid in South Africa. But Obama, then known as Barry, also joined in the party scene."
The LA Times also claims below that Barry was the choice of names that Barry Soetoro used when he first arrived from Hawaii to Occidental:
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/29/local/me-oxy29
"Memories of 1980 at Occidental College’s Haines Hall have the standard fragments of the era: stereos blasting the B-52’s through the dorm, pot-fueled bull sessions about the revival of draft registration, late-night cramming for economics exams.
"That otherwise private nostalgia took on public significance this month when a former Haines Hall resident from Hawaii known at the time as Barry announced that he was forming an exploratory committee to run for president of the United States."
Even Occidental College states that Newsweek reported that Barry entered their college as BARRY SOETORO under his Indonesian passport and NOT as Barack Obama.
http://www.oxy.edu/x8270.xml
It was at Occidental where he stopped being called “Barry” and became Barack Obama, Newsweek pointed out in its account of Obama’s formative years that featured his black-and-white freshman photo on the cover. “It was when I made a conscious decision: I want to grow up,” he told the magazine.
One of Barry Soetoro's college buddies says this of our Indonesian student:
http://www.verdugomonthly.com/article.php?id=382&IssueNum=32
"Tom Moyes remembers the first time he heard the name Barack Obama. It was in the fall of 2004, after the electrifying speech Obama delivered at the 2004 Democratic Convention. That was the oration, of course, which introduced the young would-be Illinois Senator to America and inspired an instant following not only in the U.S. but around the world. Moyes had missed the speech because he was on an extended vacation in New Zealand at the time. “So I pick up this newspaper,” says Moyes, who grew up in San Gabriel and graduated from Occidental College in Eagle Rock, “and it has this huge article about this guy Barack Obama. And it says he had gone to Occidental at the same time I was there. And I said to myself, ‘There’s no way.’ I’d never heard the name Barack; I’m thinking it must be a mistake. “So I call a friend I went to Oxy with, Ken Sulzer, and I say, ‘Ken, I’m down here in New Zealand and there’s this article about some guy named Barack that went to college with us. Who is that?!’” “I said, ‘That’s Barry, man,’” says Sulzer, using the nickname Obama went by during his youth, “the guy with the big afro who lived across the hall from me in the dorm.’
It is clear that the students at Occidental did not know Barry Soetoro by the name of OBAMA. Instead he was using his Indonesian name and passport. This story cleverly hides the fact that the confusion came not from the first name Barry or Barack, but because of the LAST NAME Soetoro vs. Obama.
Okay so why did Barry suddenly change his name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Obama a year after he entered school? (I don't believe that REGINA story above.) It was simple. His mother and adopted dad got divorced in August of 1980. So naturally, when he entered Occidental in 1979 he used his Indonesian name...then immediately after his mom's divorce he desired to revert back to his birth name of Barack Obama.
See divorce records at: http://decalogosintl.org/documents/Soetoro_Divorce.pdf
There is a biography of Barry Soetoro 's Occidental College days. It states that when Barry Soetoro was 18-19 he attended school as BARRY SOETORO. And it wasn't until he met a girl by the name of REGINA that was the first to start calling him Barack. See:
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/obama-at-occidental-college/
The importance of this is that it clearly shows that Barry was using his Indonesian name, and of course, his Indonesian passport.
The International Herald Tribute (The Global issue of the New York Times)
also states:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/08/america/obama.php
"Nearly three decades ago, Barack Obama stood out on the small campus of Occidental College in Los Angeles for his eloquence, intellect and activism against apartheid in South Africa. But Obama, then known as Barry, also joined in the party scene."
The LA Times also claims below that Barry was the choice of names that Barry Soetoro used when he first arrived from Hawaii to Occidental:
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/29/local/me-oxy29
"Memories of 1980 at Occidental College’s Haines Hall have the standard fragments of the era: stereos blasting the B-52’s through the dorm, pot-fueled bull sessions about the revival of draft registration, late-night cramming for economics exams.
"That otherwise private nostalgia took on public significance this month when a former Haines Hall resident from Hawaii known at the time as Barry announced that he was forming an exploratory committee to run for president of the United States."
Even Occidental College states that Newsweek reported that Barry entered their college as BARRY SOETORO under his Indonesian passport and NOT as Barack Obama.
http://www.oxy.edu/x8270.xml
It was at Occidental where he stopped being called “Barry” and became Barack Obama, Newsweek pointed out in its account of Obama’s formative years that featured his black-and-white freshman photo on the cover. “It was when I made a conscious decision: I want to grow up,” he told the magazine.
One of Barry Soetoro's college buddies says this of our Indonesian student:
http://www.verdugomonthly.com/article.php?id=382&IssueNum=32
"Tom Moyes remembers the first time he heard the name Barack Obama. It was in the fall of 2004, after the electrifying speech Obama delivered at the 2004 Democratic Convention. That was the oration, of course, which introduced the young would-be Illinois Senator to America and inspired an instant following not only in the U.S. but around the world. Moyes had missed the speech because he was on an extended vacation in New Zealand at the time. “So I pick up this newspaper,” says Moyes, who grew up in San Gabriel and graduated from Occidental College in Eagle Rock, “and it has this huge article about this guy Barack Obama. And it says he had gone to Occidental at the same time I was there. And I said to myself, ‘There’s no way.’ I’d never heard the name Barack; I’m thinking it must be a mistake. “So I call a friend I went to Oxy with, Ken Sulzer, and I say, ‘Ken, I’m down here in New Zealand and there’s this article about some guy named Barack that went to college with us. Who is that?!’” “I said, ‘That’s Barry, man,’” says Sulzer, using the nickname Obama went by during his youth, “the guy with the big afro who lived across the hall from me in the dorm.’
It is clear that the students at Occidental did not know Barry Soetoro by the name of OBAMA. Instead he was using his Indonesian name and passport. This story cleverly hides the fact that the confusion came not from the first name Barry or Barack, but because of the LAST NAME Soetoro vs. Obama.
Okay so why did Barry suddenly change his name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Obama a year after he entered school? (I don't believe that REGINA story above.) It was simple. His mother and adopted dad got divorced in August of 1980. So naturally, when he entered Occidental in 1979 he used his Indonesian name...then immediately after his mom's divorce he desired to revert back to his birth name of Barack Obama.
See divorce records at: http://decalogosintl.org/documents/Soetoro_Divorce.pdf
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
This was posted on our blog originating from I think the BOPAC blog or something...check it out.
written by larry, January 25, 2009 I am a retired (25) police officer and spent 26 years in the United States Air force as a MSGT in charge of Training for the 482 Security Police Squadron. Was in Vietnam and also served in the Gulf War. For the last year I have been watching this site on a daily basis not believing that Barack Hussein Obama has become our president. I coach a High School softball team and everyone of my players had to produce a birth certificate to be eligible to play through the state. I hate to say this, but we in a total crisis and something will happen if this man is allowed to continue to lead this once proud nation. I have never posted before but know many FBI, Secret Service Agents, CIA and many other Federal Agents who have told me they are not to discuss this issue about Obama or they will be terminated from employment. We all need to take a step back and pray that something will come out on all of these lawsuits. I spoke to the Supreme Court Justice in my state who advised that the US Supreme Court have been ordered to throw out any case that deal with the fraud President elect. May God Help us All (Emphasis added and typos corrected) Obama's covered all the bases. Almost all.
written by larry, January 25, 2009 I am a retired (25) police officer and spent 26 years in the United States Air force as a MSGT in charge of Training for the 482 Security Police Squadron. Was in Vietnam and also served in the Gulf War. For the last year I have been watching this site on a daily basis not believing that Barack Hussein Obama has become our president. I coach a High School softball team and everyone of my players had to produce a birth certificate to be eligible to play through the state. I hate to say this, but we in a total crisis and something will happen if this man is allowed to continue to lead this once proud nation. I have never posted before but know many FBI, Secret Service Agents, CIA and many other Federal Agents who have told me they are not to discuss this issue about Obama or they will be terminated from employment. We all need to take a step back and pray that something will come out on all of these lawsuits. I spoke to the Supreme Court Justice in my state who advised that the US Supreme Court have been ordered to throw out any case that deal with the fraud President elect. May God Help us All (Emphasis added and typos corrected) Obama's covered all the bases. Almost all.
Maybe we should recall senator Sessions from Alabama (here is a letter from him and a suggested answer)
please send him a letter, stating that you have forwarded all the info to him and his letter will be read in 30 radio stations around the country and Defend our Freedoms convention in Dallas TX, April 2-5. The whole state of Al and the whole country should know that it might be time to start a petition to recall Senator Sessions, who after receiving all the information about Obama's lack of Natural born status, is personally attacking concerned citizens, instead of forwarding this info to the Senate Judicial committee, FBI and US attorney's office for criminal investigation of massive fraud committed by Obama, that is still refusing to provide his original birth certificate from Hawaii, after 32 law suits were filed around the country and Obama spent reported $800,000 in attorney's fees to keep this original vault birth certificate sealed. Please find out from the secretary of state, how many signatures do we need in the state of Alabama for a recall campaign. I can post a petition on the blog to sign to recall Sessions. We know that the replacement Senator will be a Republican as well. You will not end up with a liberal democrat, but it will be a Republican with decency and a backbone to demand from Obama production of his original BC, his immigration records, his passports from Indonesia, Kenya and Great Britain and his school and university enrollment records.
Here is the second letter I have received from Senator Jeff Sessions-Alabama. After the first letter, I sent him back a second one stating the facts on Obama's colb vs. birth certificate, and other facts. This letter is a disgrace. Especially the part about "engaging in personality politics". "As you are aware, stories have circulated that call into question President-elect Obama's citizenship. Additionally, various lawsuits have been filed alleging that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States, and therefore is constitutionally ineligible for the office of President. However, in June 2008, President-elect Obama released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate, and Hawaii's Director of the State Department of Health, Chiyome Fukimo, has verified it authenticity.I believe that President-elect Obama has met all of the requirements of citizenship as set forth the U.S. State Department, and therefore is eligible for the office of the presidency. As you may know , on Jan.8, 2009, Congress certified and tallied the Electoral College results that verified President-elect Obama's election as the next president of the Untied States.I firmly believe that the office of the presidency should be held in high regard and the president treated with respect, no matter who occupies the position. Rather than engage in personality politics, Americans should expect Congress and the President to work together to find substantive solutions to the pressing issues that our nation faces today.Thank you again for writing.
Here is the second letter I have received from Senator Jeff Sessions-Alabama. After the first letter, I sent him back a second one stating the facts on Obama's colb vs. birth certificate, and other facts. This letter is a disgrace. Especially the part about "engaging in personality politics". "As you are aware, stories have circulated that call into question President-elect Obama's citizenship. Additionally, various lawsuits have been filed alleging that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States, and therefore is constitutionally ineligible for the office of President. However, in June 2008, President-elect Obama released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate, and Hawaii's Director of the State Department of Health, Chiyome Fukimo, has verified it authenticity.I believe that President-elect Obama has met all of the requirements of citizenship as set forth the U.S. State Department, and therefore is eligible for the office of the presidency. As you may know , on Jan.8, 2009, Congress certified and tallied the Electoral College results that verified President-elect Obama's election as the next president of the Untied States.I firmly believe that the office of the presidency should be held in high regard and the president treated with respect, no matter who occupies the position. Rather than engage in personality politics, Americans should expect Congress and the President to work together to find substantive solutions to the pressing issues that our nation faces today.Thank you again for writing.
Attack on Redress of grievancies
Barack's Horrible Beginning
by Bruce Bialosky
42 Bruce Bialosky's Email | Author Archive | Author Biography Read Comments | Post Comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forward Print Share Single Page Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
View Larger Photo & More >>
Fox News
Stimulus or Simply Spending?
Watch Video
Fox News
'Sense of Urgency'
Watch Video
OBAMA-JOBS
Rep. Pete Hoekstra
Should Republicans meet President Obama half-way and compromise on his stimulus plan?
Yes
No
Yes (8 %)
No (92 %)
Our new president promised to hit the ground running and he certainly did. He started by eviscerating the first amendment of our Constitution while protecting the rights of foreigners accused of terrorism against the United States. That, people, is a leftist home run.
His Eminence did not technically attack the first amendment. As a supposed constitutional scholar, Mr. Obama knows that the first amendment states Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances. Thus, as president, the amendment does not actually state his position. We can assume that when he restricted by executive order the right of lobbyists to work in his administration, the executive branch is covered by this annoying little clause in the first amendment.
For some reason, the Democrats have wanted to make believe that there are only four rights protected in the first amendment. They have made "lobbyist" a dirty word -- apparently worse than "Gitmo" to them. Each time a new Democratic Administration comes in it, they blabber about the hideous people who actually speak for the interests of the American people.
Let us just have a short primer on what lobbyists actually do. They represent every interest in the United States from the bowlers of America, to the nurses of America to the soybean growers of America. The average citizen of this country has no ability to have his/her interests presented to a congressman, let alone the President, without having those interests presented by someone who knows the ropes of the Washington D.C. establishment. Anyway you cut it, that is what lobbyists do – petition the Government for redress of grievances.
Why the Democrats have such a problem with this function is unfathomable. Most times elected officials complain about the lobbyists that do not represent their pet interests. But in the case of the Democrats hobnobbing with Big Labor or the Environmental Lobby, that is quite fine by them.
Mr. Obama's proposal is preposterous. He states that he does not want anyone who has lobbied for the last two years to work in that area of the administration. That means if you are a financial expert you can work at the Interior Department, but not the Treasury. The silliness of the idea was displayed by Obama having already broken the rule by nominating William Lynn, a lobbyist for Raytheon, to be deputy secretary of defense.
Mr. Obama then wants to restrict what people can do for a living once they have left his administration. That means if someone leaves the Commerce Dept., they cannot help their successors and must go into something like teaching or becoming a gardener. With these rules, plus the attacks on government employees' character (like what happened to Scooter Libby), it will soon become totally ridiculous for anyone of significant talent to work for the federal government. In effect, what do you need this for – sacrificing your income for multiple years to have your character questioned, and then not being able to benefit from your knowledge once you return to private industry. As much as I love this country, the current state of affairs would not cause me to work under these conditions.
But was there any mention of this attack on the first amendment from the left? Not if you watch their in-house networks: MSNBC or CNN. They skipped right over that to applaud the proposed closing of Gitmo. They could not get enough of the end of that era. What to do with the terrorists still there was easy for these wise heads. Let's stick the terrorists in a flyover state like Kansas. The only real person who ever went there was Truman Capote. Never mind that citizens live right near where these questionable persons are to be dropped.
As the talking heads of MSNBC and CNN applauded the proposed transfer of the terrorists to a place they would never go, the rights of these people to not be tortured was applauded. Most importantly they continued to perpetuate the myth that torture does not work. Whether or not you believe the United States should be allowed to torture highly valued targets, please do not fall for this ridiculous argument that it does not work. It defies logic. Just ask yourself as to why it continues to be used for centuries by governmental and non-governmental entities like the Mafia. The Mafia may do it because they are sadists, but they also do it to gain information. While it may not work on rare occasions, it does work. To continue to state it does not work is just plain silliness. It is another instance where the left believes if they repeat a lie often enough it will become the truth.
Just to review, our new president attempted to gut one of the five rights provided in the first amendment, decided to move dangerous terrorists to American soil and to give them show trials to protect their rights and, most importantly, restricted methods used to gain useful information to be used to help win the war on terror. What an amazing start to what may prove to be a long four years.
by Bruce Bialosky
42 Bruce Bialosky's Email | Author Archive | Author Biography Read Comments | Post Comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forward Print Share Single Page Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
View Larger Photo & More >>
Fox News
Stimulus or Simply Spending?
Watch Video
Fox News
'Sense of Urgency'
Watch Video
OBAMA-JOBS
Rep. Pete Hoekstra
Should Republicans meet President Obama half-way and compromise on his stimulus plan?
Yes
No
Yes (8 %)
No (92 %)
Our new president promised to hit the ground running and he certainly did. He started by eviscerating the first amendment of our Constitution while protecting the rights of foreigners accused of terrorism against the United States. That, people, is a leftist home run.
His Eminence did not technically attack the first amendment. As a supposed constitutional scholar, Mr. Obama knows that the first amendment states Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances. Thus, as president, the amendment does not actually state his position. We can assume that when he restricted by executive order the right of lobbyists to work in his administration, the executive branch is covered by this annoying little clause in the first amendment.
For some reason, the Democrats have wanted to make believe that there are only four rights protected in the first amendment. They have made "lobbyist" a dirty word -- apparently worse than "Gitmo" to them. Each time a new Democratic Administration comes in it, they blabber about the hideous people who actually speak for the interests of the American people.
Let us just have a short primer on what lobbyists actually do. They represent every interest in the United States from the bowlers of America, to the nurses of America to the soybean growers of America. The average citizen of this country has no ability to have his/her interests presented to a congressman, let alone the President, without having those interests presented by someone who knows the ropes of the Washington D.C. establishment. Anyway you cut it, that is what lobbyists do – petition the Government for redress of grievances.
Why the Democrats have such a problem with this function is unfathomable. Most times elected officials complain about the lobbyists that do not represent their pet interests. But in the case of the Democrats hobnobbing with Big Labor or the Environmental Lobby, that is quite fine by them.
Mr. Obama's proposal is preposterous. He states that he does not want anyone who has lobbied for the last two years to work in that area of the administration. That means if you are a financial expert you can work at the Interior Department, but not the Treasury. The silliness of the idea was displayed by Obama having already broken the rule by nominating William Lynn, a lobbyist for Raytheon, to be deputy secretary of defense.
Mr. Obama then wants to restrict what people can do for a living once they have left his administration. That means if someone leaves the Commerce Dept., they cannot help their successors and must go into something like teaching or becoming a gardener. With these rules, plus the attacks on government employees' character (like what happened to Scooter Libby), it will soon become totally ridiculous for anyone of significant talent to work for the federal government. In effect, what do you need this for – sacrificing your income for multiple years to have your character questioned, and then not being able to benefit from your knowledge once you return to private industry. As much as I love this country, the current state of affairs would not cause me to work under these conditions.
But was there any mention of this attack on the first amendment from the left? Not if you watch their in-house networks: MSNBC or CNN. They skipped right over that to applaud the proposed closing of Gitmo. They could not get enough of the end of that era. What to do with the terrorists still there was easy for these wise heads. Let's stick the terrorists in a flyover state like Kansas. The only real person who ever went there was Truman Capote. Never mind that citizens live right near where these questionable persons are to be dropped.
As the talking heads of MSNBC and CNN applauded the proposed transfer of the terrorists to a place they would never go, the rights of these people to not be tortured was applauded. Most importantly they continued to perpetuate the myth that torture does not work. Whether or not you believe the United States should be allowed to torture highly valued targets, please do not fall for this ridiculous argument that it does not work. It defies logic. Just ask yourself as to why it continues to be used for centuries by governmental and non-governmental entities like the Mafia. The Mafia may do it because they are sadists, but they also do it to gain information. While it may not work on rare occasions, it does work. To continue to state it does not work is just plain silliness. It is another instance where the left believes if they repeat a lie often enough it will become the truth.
Just to review, our new president attempted to gut one of the five rights provided in the first amendment, decided to move dangerous terrorists to American soil and to give them show trials to protect their rights and, most importantly, restricted methods used to gain useful information to be used to help win the war on terror. What an amazing start to what may prove to be a long four years.
We are looking for active members of the military from Nashville-Fort Campbell area that want to challenge Obama e-mail dr_taitz@yahoo.com
Proof of Service To US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and FBI Chicago
This was a subpoena for "records to be produced" are described as follows:
"Per Executive Order from January 16, 2009, any and all documents relating to "fitness and determination" in regards to level of character and conduct necessary to perform work for or on behlf of a Federal Agency....continued with "Attachment 3"
Attachment 3
As per Executive Order: Granting Reciprocity on Excepted Service and Federal Contractor Employee Fitness and Reinvestigation Individuals in Positions of Public Trust, see attached, please provide copies of any and all records in regards to level of character and conduct necessary pertaining to Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barry H. Obama, II a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro. These documents have direct relation to holding a Position of Public Trust.
Documents to include:
- Certified copy of original long vault birth certificate
- Certified copies of any and all passports and passport applications held in the U.S., Indonesia, Great Britain and Kenya.
- Certified copies of any and all school applications, school registrations, grant or student loan applications or funding received for Occidental College, Columbia University, Columbia College, Harvard University
- Certified copies of any U.S. Port of Entry Records
- Certified copies of any documentation pertaining to Social Security. Documentation showing multiple social security numbers being held
- Certified copies of documentation showing a social security number being applied for in the state of Connecticut
- Certified copies of immigration and naturalization records
- Certified copies of any records showing legal name and name change.
Delivered to "L. Dickerson" at 219 s. Dearborn St. Chicago, Illinois (5th Floor) on 1/26/09 at 1:38 pm:
Delivered to "David Habitch" with the FBI's Chicago headquarters office, 2111 West Roosevelt Road, Chicago, Illinois on 1/26/09 at 2:11 pm.
"Per Executive Order from January 16, 2009, any and all documents relating to "fitness and determination" in regards to level of character and conduct necessary to perform work for or on behlf of a Federal Agency....continued with "Attachment 3"
Attachment 3
As per Executive Order: Granting Reciprocity on Excepted Service and Federal Contractor Employee Fitness and Reinvestigation Individuals in Positions of Public Trust, see attached, please provide copies of any and all records in regards to level of character and conduct necessary pertaining to Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barry H. Obama, II a/k/a Barry Obama, a/k/a Barry Soetoro. These documents have direct relation to holding a Position of Public Trust.
Documents to include:
- Certified copy of original long vault birth certificate
- Certified copies of any and all passports and passport applications held in the U.S., Indonesia, Great Britain and Kenya.
- Certified copies of any and all school applications, school registrations, grant or student loan applications or funding received for Occidental College, Columbia University, Columbia College, Harvard University
- Certified copies of any U.S. Port of Entry Records
- Certified copies of any documentation pertaining to Social Security. Documentation showing multiple social security numbers being held
- Certified copies of documentation showing a social security number being applied for in the state of Connecticut
- Certified copies of immigration and naturalization records
- Certified copies of any records showing legal name and name change.
Delivered to "L. Dickerson" at 219 s. Dearborn St. Chicago, Illinois (5th Floor) on 1/26/09 at 1:38 pm:
Delivered to "David Habitch" with the FBI's Chicago headquarters office, 2111 West Roosevelt Road, Chicago, Illinois on 1/26/09 at 2:11 pm.
CEOs of failed banks need to go
I have to say that for once I agree with AP. Below is an article by AP writer Bruce Schreiner of Louisville KY. It is a disgrace, that CEOs of most failed banks and financial institutions were kept on the job. I believe that the main condition in receipt of bailout dollars should've been replacement of failed management. Please, when you meet with your congressmen and senators, demand action in replacement of the CEOs and the rest of the management teams in the financial institutions that received our tax payer dollars. Demand full accountability on the bailout dollars received and demand to see the repayment schedule. When you take out a loan, a mortgage, you are repaying according to a schedule. The lawmakers need to demand from the banks and investment houses repayment schedule. We, the taxpayers are entitled to know, when the first 700 billion will be repayed and at what interest. I am particularly interested in the repayments from AIG that received reported 128 Billion, over a third of the initial 350 billion. I haven't seen BO and co talking about accountability from AIG, while grilling and ridiculing the executives of our automotive industry. Keep in mind that the auto makers got only 14 billion combined, a little more then one tenth of what AIG got. If AIG is not repaying our money, then it is too big for it's own good and for our good and it is time for it to be broken into smaller companies that can be managed, that can be kept profitable, where we can get again some healthy market place competition in the insurance industry instead of a monopoly.
Orly
PS maybe, one of our readers in KY can contact this AP writer, Bruce Schreiner. He sounds like a decent guy and might be willing to keep an open mind and write about BO's illegitimacy for presidency.
Yahoo! Bookmarks Print By MATT APUZZO and DANIEL WAGNER, Associated Press Writers Matt Apuzzo And Daniel Wagner, Associated Press Writers – 2 hrs 12 mins ago AP – In this April 3, 2008, file photo, JP Morgan Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon testifies …
Related Quotes Symbol Price Change
FNM 0.65 +0.01
FRE 0.64 0.00
JPM 25.09 +0.59
WFC 16.16 +0.68
WASHINGTON – They've been bailed out, but not kicked out. At banks that are receiving federal bailout money nearly nine out of every 10 of the most senior executives from 2006 are still on the job, according to an Associated Press analysis of regulatory and company documents.
The AP's review reveals one of the ironies of the bank bailout: The same executives who were at the controls as the banking system nearly collapsed are the ones the government is counting on to help save it.
Even top executives whose banks made such risky loans they imperiled the economy have been largely spared any threat to their jobs, as Washington pumped billions in taxpayer money into the companies. Less fortunate are more than 100,000 bank employees laid off during a two-year stretch when industry unemployment nearly tripled, bank stocks plummeted and credit dried up.
"The same people at the top are still there, the same people who made the decisions causing a lot of our financial crisis," said Rebecca Trevino of Louisville, Ky., a mother of three who was laid off from her job as a Bank of America training coordinator in October. "But that's what tends to happen in leadership. The people at the top, there's always some other place to lay blame."
That workers and managers experience a recession differently is hardly a surprise. What's new is that taxpayers are now shareholders in the nation's bailed-out banks, yet they lack the usual shareholder power to question management decisions or demand house-cleaning in the executive suites.
Wells Fargo & Co., for example, once was among the top lenders of subprime mortgages, or loans to buyers with low credit scores. The company received $25 billion in bailout money and plans layoffs in the coming months. But longtime CEO Richard Kovacevich remains the company's chairman, and the board recently waived its mandatory retirement age for him. John Stumpf, the president since 2005, became chief executive in 2007.
"Our senior leadership team of our CEO and his direct reports have an average tenure of almost a quarter-century with our company," Wells Fargo spokeswoman Julia Tunis Bernard said in a prepared statement. "Our unchanging vision, values and time-tested business model will continue to guide our leaders and our team into the future, and are now more than ever a competitive advantage as our industry evolves."
Under the government's no-strings-attached bailout plan, taxpayers must take it on faith that bank executives will make better decisions this time around, said Jamie Court, president of the California-based group Consumer Watchdog.
"When you deal with the same dogs, you're going to end up with the same fleas," Court said.
The bailout list includes banks of all sizes — from Wall Street giants to small community banks. Some led the rush into subprime mortgages. Others followed.
Many executives on the list are small-town executives who don't earn anything close to Wall Street salaries and who suffered alongside their communities when the economy turned sour. The trouble with the bailout is that nobody in government ever stopped to figure out who caused the avalanche and who simply got buried, said University of Maryland business professor Peter Morici.
"If they got involved in questionable loans and contributed to the speculative bubble, they should be out," Morici said. "These people should be removed and banned from banking, unless we wanted to make them all janitors. But the question then is, 'Can they be trusted wandering around the offices at night?'"
Barack Obama as president-elect and some in Congress have suggested auto company executives should lose their jobs as part of the bailout of that industry. But there has been no such suggestion about banks. Congress twice authorized $350 billion in bank bailout money. Both times, lawmakers set few conditions on the money.
The president of the American Bankers Association, Ed Yingling, said he understands taxpayers are frustrated. But most banks had nothing to do with the subprime crisis, he said. As for whether taxpayers should demand management changes, he said that was never a condition of the bailout plan the government crafted.
"Are we going to have the American people saying, 'We're invested in you, so now we should look at your margins, look at every loan you make, look at your lending policies?' No. That was never discussed," Yingling said. "You can't micromanage banks."
In some cases the market held executives accountable for the mortgage crisis. When banks such as Washington Mutual, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers were bought up, many executives lost their jobs. When the government took over mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, directors and executives were fired.
But the financial bailout has resulted in no such consequences. AP's review of the more than 200 publicly traded banks that received federal bailout money found that about 87 percent of the top three executives in 2006 — typically the chief executive, operating and financial officers — still remain on the job.
And that number is deceptively low, since those few executives who left their jobs often did so because they retired — or died. Several stayed on as directors or in consulting positions.
Even banks that were involved in risky lending saw little turnover:
_JPMorgan Chase & Co., which invested billions in subprime mortgages, has the same leadership team, led by CEO James Dimon. Dimon made about $28 million in 2007. The company is shedding about 10 percent of its investment bank staff.
_Cleveland-based KeyCorp, which ran subprime lending subsidiary Champion Mortgage until late 2006, received $2.5 billion in bailout money. Its chairman and CEO, Henry Meyer, has been in charge since 2001. Jeffrey Weeden, the company's chief financial officer, and Thomas Stevens, the administrative officer who oversaw the risk review group, have been on the job for years.
KeyCorp has been cutting jobs over the past two years, including 200 announced this month at a Tacoma, Wash., call center. A company spokesman said the bank was too busy preparing its earnings report to answer questions about whether taxpayers should have confidence in the company's management.
"The on-the-record comment I would make is that we declined to comment even though we'd like to, because we don't have time," spokesman Bill Murschel said.
_Capital One Financial Corp., one of the nation's biggest credit-card providers, dove into the risky mortgage business when it bought GreenPoint Mortgage in 2006. GreenPoint made exotic loans to borrowers without verifying income or credit scores, then sold those loans to investors.
A year later, Capital One shuttered GreenPoint, cutting 1,900 jobs. CEO Richard Fairbank and his top executives were not among them. The company received about $3.5 billion in bailout money.
In Louisville, Trevino and her family are living mostly off credit cards and savings while she interviews for jobs. Her husband is in commercial real estate, which has slowed significantly. After what she described as a bare-bones Christmas, she said she looked over her household finances and realized they might lose their home.
"That's when I was just, 'Lord, I know you have a plan. Can you just show me? I'd really like to know,'" she said.
Trevino said she isn't upset that her old boss, Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis, is still on the job. There are others in the industry with greater responsibility for the crisis, she said.
Trevino agreed the federal government needed to rescue the banks but said there should have been some oversight.
"It is surprising that leadership can make decisions that lead to financial ruin for so many," she said, "and then get bailed out for it."
___
Associated Press writer Bruce Schreiner in Louisville, Ky
Orly
PS maybe, one of our readers in KY can contact this AP writer, Bruce Schreiner. He sounds like a decent guy and might be willing to keep an open mind and write about BO's illegitimacy for presidency.
Yahoo! Bookmarks Print By MATT APUZZO and DANIEL WAGNER, Associated Press Writers Matt Apuzzo And Daniel Wagner, Associated Press Writers – 2 hrs 12 mins ago AP – In this April 3, 2008, file photo, JP Morgan Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon testifies …
Related Quotes Symbol Price Change
FNM 0.65 +0.01
FRE 0.64 0.00
JPM 25.09 +0.59
WFC 16.16 +0.68
WASHINGTON – They've been bailed out, but not kicked out. At banks that are receiving federal bailout money nearly nine out of every 10 of the most senior executives from 2006 are still on the job, according to an Associated Press analysis of regulatory and company documents.
The AP's review reveals one of the ironies of the bank bailout: The same executives who were at the controls as the banking system nearly collapsed are the ones the government is counting on to help save it.
Even top executives whose banks made such risky loans they imperiled the economy have been largely spared any threat to their jobs, as Washington pumped billions in taxpayer money into the companies. Less fortunate are more than 100,000 bank employees laid off during a two-year stretch when industry unemployment nearly tripled, bank stocks plummeted and credit dried up.
"The same people at the top are still there, the same people who made the decisions causing a lot of our financial crisis," said Rebecca Trevino of Louisville, Ky., a mother of three who was laid off from her job as a Bank of America training coordinator in October. "But that's what tends to happen in leadership. The people at the top, there's always some other place to lay blame."
That workers and managers experience a recession differently is hardly a surprise. What's new is that taxpayers are now shareholders in the nation's bailed-out banks, yet they lack the usual shareholder power to question management decisions or demand house-cleaning in the executive suites.
Wells Fargo & Co., for example, once was among the top lenders of subprime mortgages, or loans to buyers with low credit scores. The company received $25 billion in bailout money and plans layoffs in the coming months. But longtime CEO Richard Kovacevich remains the company's chairman, and the board recently waived its mandatory retirement age for him. John Stumpf, the president since 2005, became chief executive in 2007.
"Our senior leadership team of our CEO and his direct reports have an average tenure of almost a quarter-century with our company," Wells Fargo spokeswoman Julia Tunis Bernard said in a prepared statement. "Our unchanging vision, values and time-tested business model will continue to guide our leaders and our team into the future, and are now more than ever a competitive advantage as our industry evolves."
Under the government's no-strings-attached bailout plan, taxpayers must take it on faith that bank executives will make better decisions this time around, said Jamie Court, president of the California-based group Consumer Watchdog.
"When you deal with the same dogs, you're going to end up with the same fleas," Court said.
The bailout list includes banks of all sizes — from Wall Street giants to small community banks. Some led the rush into subprime mortgages. Others followed.
Many executives on the list are small-town executives who don't earn anything close to Wall Street salaries and who suffered alongside their communities when the economy turned sour. The trouble with the bailout is that nobody in government ever stopped to figure out who caused the avalanche and who simply got buried, said University of Maryland business professor Peter Morici.
"If they got involved in questionable loans and contributed to the speculative bubble, they should be out," Morici said. "These people should be removed and banned from banking, unless we wanted to make them all janitors. But the question then is, 'Can they be trusted wandering around the offices at night?'"
Barack Obama as president-elect and some in Congress have suggested auto company executives should lose their jobs as part of the bailout of that industry. But there has been no such suggestion about banks. Congress twice authorized $350 billion in bank bailout money. Both times, lawmakers set few conditions on the money.
The president of the American Bankers Association, Ed Yingling, said he understands taxpayers are frustrated. But most banks had nothing to do with the subprime crisis, he said. As for whether taxpayers should demand management changes, he said that was never a condition of the bailout plan the government crafted.
"Are we going to have the American people saying, 'We're invested in you, so now we should look at your margins, look at every loan you make, look at your lending policies?' No. That was never discussed," Yingling said. "You can't micromanage banks."
In some cases the market held executives accountable for the mortgage crisis. When banks such as Washington Mutual, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers were bought up, many executives lost their jobs. When the government took over mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, directors and executives were fired.
But the financial bailout has resulted in no such consequences. AP's review of the more than 200 publicly traded banks that received federal bailout money found that about 87 percent of the top three executives in 2006 — typically the chief executive, operating and financial officers — still remain on the job.
And that number is deceptively low, since those few executives who left their jobs often did so because they retired — or died. Several stayed on as directors or in consulting positions.
Even banks that were involved in risky lending saw little turnover:
_JPMorgan Chase & Co., which invested billions in subprime mortgages, has the same leadership team, led by CEO James Dimon. Dimon made about $28 million in 2007. The company is shedding about 10 percent of its investment bank staff.
_Cleveland-based KeyCorp, which ran subprime lending subsidiary Champion Mortgage until late 2006, received $2.5 billion in bailout money. Its chairman and CEO, Henry Meyer, has been in charge since 2001. Jeffrey Weeden, the company's chief financial officer, and Thomas Stevens, the administrative officer who oversaw the risk review group, have been on the job for years.
KeyCorp has been cutting jobs over the past two years, including 200 announced this month at a Tacoma, Wash., call center. A company spokesman said the bank was too busy preparing its earnings report to answer questions about whether taxpayers should have confidence in the company's management.
"The on-the-record comment I would make is that we declined to comment even though we'd like to, because we don't have time," spokesman Bill Murschel said.
_Capital One Financial Corp., one of the nation's biggest credit-card providers, dove into the risky mortgage business when it bought GreenPoint Mortgage in 2006. GreenPoint made exotic loans to borrowers without verifying income or credit scores, then sold those loans to investors.
A year later, Capital One shuttered GreenPoint, cutting 1,900 jobs. CEO Richard Fairbank and his top executives were not among them. The company received about $3.5 billion in bailout money.
In Louisville, Trevino and her family are living mostly off credit cards and savings while she interviews for jobs. Her husband is in commercial real estate, which has slowed significantly. After what she described as a bare-bones Christmas, she said she looked over her household finances and realized they might lose their home.
"That's when I was just, 'Lord, I know you have a plan. Can you just show me? I'd really like to know,'" she said.
Trevino said she isn't upset that her old boss, Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis, is still on the job. There are others in the industry with greater responsibility for the crisis, she said.
Trevino agreed the federal government needed to rescue the banks but said there should have been some oversight.
"It is surprising that leadership can make decisions that lead to financial ruin for so many," she said, "and then get bailed out for it."
___
Associated Press writer Bruce Schreiner in Louisville, Ky
from a reader "stitching along"
In a interview last night with Dubai-based In Al-Arabiya Network BHO said, “I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.”
He has only admitted to living in Indonesia as a child, what are the other Muslim countries he has lived in?
If you don't expose him, I think he will stick his foot into his own mouth. He will screw up sometime.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090127/pl_politico/18016
He spoke Arabic with someone at the inaugural lunch before Old Teddy had his seizure. He can remember and speak a language from when he was a kid.
I'm sorry that I told you before that his illegal alien aunt lived in NY, it was Boston. I read yesterday that she attended his inauguration and a ball, gown and all escorted by her attorney. They stayed at a expensive hotel in DC. I wonder who is paying for all of that since she was previously living in public housing illegally. She is supposed to be living in the Cleveland area now, but it is secret where.
He has only admitted to living in Indonesia as a child, what are the other Muslim countries he has lived in?
If you don't expose him, I think he will stick his foot into his own mouth. He will screw up sometime.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090127/pl_politico/18016
He spoke Arabic with someone at the inaugural lunch before Old Teddy had his seizure. He can remember and speak a language from when he was a kid.
I'm sorry that I told you before that his illegal alien aunt lived in NY, it was Boston. I read yesterday that she attended his inauguration and a ball, gown and all escorted by her attorney. They stayed at a expensive hotel in DC. I wonder who is paying for all of that since she was previously living in public housing illegally. She is supposed to be living in the Cleveland area now, but it is secret where.
US attorney's offices for you to visit and forward info on BO
Please, forward to me records: when did you call for appointment, when was the meeting, who did you talk to, what follow up was done.
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/offices/index.html
ALABAMA PHONE FAX
Middle District
Leura Garrett Canary, USA* (334)223-7280 (334)223-7560
131 Clayton Street
Montgomery, AL 36104
Web Site | Press Releases
701 701 Avenue "A" (334)490-0909 (334)490-0909
Opelika, AL 36801 (Unstaffed)
100 W. Troy Street (334)792-3583
Dothan, AL 36301 (Unstaffed)
Northern District
Alice H. Martin, USA* (205)244-2001 (205)244-2171
1801 Fourth Ave., North
Birmingham, AL 35203-2101
Web Site | Press Releases
400 Meridian Street, Suite 304 (256)534-8285 (256)539-3270
Huntsville, AL 35801
Southern District
Deborah J. Rhodes, USA* (251)441-5845 (251)441-5277
Riverview Plaza
63 S. Royal Street Suite 600
Mobile, AL 36602
Web Site | Press Releases
ALASKA PHONE FAX
Nelson P. Cohen, USA (907)271-5071 (907)271-3224
Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse
222 West 7th Ave., #9, Rm 253
Anchorage, AK 99513-7567
Web Site | Press Releases
Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse (907)456-0245 (907)456-0309
101 12th Ave., Rm. 310, Box 2
Fairbanks, AK 99701
ARIZONA PHONE FAX
Diane J. Humetewa, USA* (602)514-7500 (602)514-7693
Two Renaissance Square
40 North Central Ave. Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
Web Site | Press Releases
405 W. Congress, Suite 4800 (520)620-7300 (520)620-7320
Tucson, AZ 85701-5040
123 N. San Francisco Street, Suite 204
Flagstaff, AZ 86001
ARKANSAS PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Jane Duke, USA 501-340-2600 (501)340-2728
Post Office Box 1229
Little Rock, AR 72203
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
Deborah J. Groom, USA (479)783-5125 (479)785-2442
414 Parker Street
Fort Smith, AR 72901
CALIFORNIA PHONE FAX
Central District
Thomas P. O’Brien, USA* (213)894-2434 (213)894-0141
1200 U.S. Courthouse
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Web Site | Press Release
411 West Fourth Street, Suite 8000 (714)338-3500 (714)338-3708
Santa Ana, CA 92701-4599
3880 Lemon Street, Suite 210 (951)276-6210 (951)276-6202
Riverside, CA 92501
Eastern District
Lawrence G. Brown, USA (916)554-2700 (916)554-2900
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Web Site | Press Releases
2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401 (559)497-4000 (559)497-4099
Fresno, CA 93721
Northern District
Joseph P. Russoniello, USA* (415)436-7200 (415)436-7234
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055
San Francisco, CA 94102
Web Site | Press Releases
1301 Clay Street, Suite 340S (510)637-3680 (510)637-3724
Oakland, CA 94612
150 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 900 (408)535-5061 (408)535-5066
San Jose, CA 95113
Southern District
Karen P. Hewitt, USA (619)557-5610 (619)557-5782
880 Front Street, Room 6293
San Diego, CA 92101
Web Site | Press Releases
321 S. Waterman Ave., Room 204 (760)370-0893 (760)370-0894
El Centro, CA 92243
COLORADO PHONE FAX
David M. Gaouette, USA (303)454-0100 (303)454-0409
1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700
Seventeenth Street Plaza
Denver, CO 80202
Web Site | Press Releases
103 Sheppard Drive, No. 215 (970)247-1514 (970)247-8619
Durango, CO 81301
402 Rood Avenue, Suite 220 (970)257-7113 (970)248-3630
Grand Junction, CO 81501
CONNECTICUT PHONE FAX
Nora Dannehy, USA (203)821-3700 (203)773-5376
Connecticut Financial Center
157 Church Street Floor 23
New Haven, CT 06510
Web Site | Press Releases
915 Lafayette Blvd. (203)696-3000 (203)579-5550
Bridgeport, CT 06604
450 Main Street (860)947-1101 (860)240-3291
Hartford, CT 06103
DELAWARE PHONE FAX
David C. Weiss, USA (302)573-6277 (302)573-6220
Nemours Building, P.O. Box 2046
Wilmington, DE 19899-2046
Web Site | Press Releases
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PHONE FAX
Jeffrey A. Taylor, USA (202)514-7566 (202)307-3569
Judiciary Center Building
555 Fourth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Web Site | Press Releases
FLORIDA PHONE FAX
Middle District
A. Brian Albritton, USA* (813)274-6000 (813)274-6246
400 North Tampa Street, Suite 3200
Tampa, FL 33602
Web Site | Press Releases
300 N. Hogan Street, Suite 700 (904)301-6300 (904)232-2620
Jacksonville, FL 32202-4270
2110 First Street, Suite 3-137 (239)461-2200 (239)461-2219
Fort Myers, FL 33901
108 North Magnolia Avenue (352)629-0053 (352)671-6743
Suite 701
Ocala, Florida 34475
Mailing Address: 207 North West 2nd Street, Room 118
Ocala, Fl 34475
501 West Church Street, Suite 300 (407)648-7500 (407)648-7643
Orlando, FL 32805
Northern District
Thomas F. Kirwin, USA (850)942-8430 (850)942-9577
111 N. Adams Street, 4th Floor
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Web Site | Press Releases
300 East University Avenue, Suite 310 (352)378-0996 (352)371-1912
Gainesville, FL 32601
30 West Government Street (850)785-3495 (850)763-3415
Panama City, FL 32401
21 E. Garden Street (850)444-4000 (850)432-7763
Pensacola, FL 32502
Southern District
R. Alexander Acosta, USA* (305)961-9000 (305)530-7087
99 NE 4th Street
Miami, FL 33132
Web Site | Press Releases
500 East Broward Blvd., Seventh Floor (954)356-7255 (954)356-7336
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394
505 S. 2nd St., Suite 200 (772)466-0899 (772)466-1020
Ft. Pierce, FL 34950
500 Australian Ave., Fourth Floor (561)820-8711 (561)820-8777
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
GEORGIA PHONE FAX
Middle District
Frank Maxwell Wood, USA* (478)752-3511 (478)621-2604
P.O. Box 1702
Macon, GA 31202-1702 (shipping)
300 Mulberry Street, Suite 400
Macon, GA 31201 (office)
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 366 (912)430-7754 (912)430-7766
Albany, GA 31702
P.O. Box 2568 (706)649-7700 (706)649-7667
Columbus, GA 31902-2568
Northern District
David E. Nahmias, USA* (404)581-6000 (404)581-6181
600 U.S. Courthouse
75 Spring Street, S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303-3309
Web Site | Press Releases
Southern District
Edmund A. Booth, Jr., USA* (912)652-4422 (912)652-4388
P. O. Box 8970
Savannah, GA 31412
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 2017 (706)724-0517 (706)724-7728
Augusta, GA 30903
GUAM & NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS PHONE FAX
Leonardo M. Rapadas, USA* (671)472-7332 (671)472-7334
Sirena Plaza, 108 Hernan Cortez, Suite 500
Hagatna, GU 96910
P.O. Box 500377 (670)236-2980 (670)236-2945
Saipan, GU 96950-0377
HAWAII PHONE FAX
Edward H. Kubo, Jr., USA* (808)541-2850 (808)541-2958
Room 6-100, PJKK Federal Building
300 Ala Moana Boulevard
Honolulu, HI 96850
Web Site | Press Releases
IDAHO PHONE FAX
Thomas E. Moss, USA* (208)334-1211 (208)334-1413
Washington Group Plaza
800 Park Boulevard, Suite 600
Boise, ID 83712-9903
Web Site | Press Releases
205 North 4th Street, Room 304/305 (208)667-6568 (208)667-0814
Coeur d" Alene, ID 83814
801 E. Sherman, Room 192 (208)478-4166 (208)478-4175
Pocatello, ID 83201
ILLINOIS PHONE FAX
Central District
Rodger A. Heaton, USA* (217)492-4450 (217)492-4512
318 S. Sixth St.
Springfield, IL 62701
Web Site | Press Releases
One Technology Plaza (309)671-7050 (309)671-7259
211 Fulton Street
Peoria, IL 61602
1830 Second Avenue, Suite 320 (309)793-5884 (309)793-5895
Rock Island, IL 61602
201 S. Vine Street, Suite 226 (217)373-5875 (217)373-5891
Urbana, IL 61801
Northern District
Patrick Fitzgerald, USA* (312)353-5300 (312)353-2067
219 S. Dearborn Street, Fifth Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Web Site | Press Releases
308 West State, Room 300 (815)987-4444 (815)987-4236
Rockford, IL 61101
Southern District
A. Courtney Cox, USA (618)628-3700 (618)628-3730
Nine Executive Drive
Fairview Heights, IL 62208
Web Site | Press Releases
402 W. Main Street (618)439-3808 (618)439-2401
Benton, IL 62812
INDIANA PHONE FAX
Northern District
David A. Capp , USA (219)937-5500 (219)852-2770
5400 Federal Plaza
Hammond, IN 46320
Web Site | Press Releases
3128 Federal Building (260)422-2595 (260)426-1616
1300 South Harrison Street
Fort Wayne, IN 46802
204 S. Main Street, Room MO-1 (574)236-8287 (574)236-8155
South Bend, IN 46601
Southern District
Timothy M. Morrison, USA (317)226-6333 (317)226-6125
10 West Market Street, Suite 2100
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Web Site | Press Releases
IOWA PHONE FAX
Northern District
Matt M. Dummermuth, USA (319)363-6333 (319)363-1990
401 1st ST SE, Suite 400
Cedar Rapids, IA 52401-4950
Web Site
600 4th Street, Suite 670 (712)255-6011 (712)258-1821
Sioux City, IA 51101
Southern District
Matthew G. Whitaker, USA* (515)473-9300 (515)284-6288
U.S. Courthouse Annex
110 East Court Avenue
Suite 286
Des Moines, IA 50309
Web Site | Press Releases
U.S. Courthouse (563)449-5432 (563)449-5433
131 East 4th Street, Suite 310
Davenport, IA 52801
KANSAS PHONE FAX
Marietta Parker, USA (316)269-6481 (316)269-6484
1200 Epic Center
301 N. Main
Wichita, KS 67202
500 State Street, Suite 360 (913)551-6730 (913)551-6541
Kansas City, KS 66101
290 Federal Bldg. (785)295-2850 (785)295-2853
444 SE Quincy Street
Topeka, KS 66683
Web Site | Press Releases
KENTUCKY PHONE FAX
Eastern District
James A. Zerhusen, USA (859)233-2661 (859)233-2666
260 West Vine Street, Suite 300
Lexington, KY 40507-1671
Web Site | Press Releases
Post Office Box 72 (859)655-3200 (859)655-3212
Covington, KY 41012-0072
601 Meyers Baker Road, Second Floor (606)864-5523 (606)864-3590
London, KY 40741
Western District
David L. Huber, USA* (502)582-5911 (502)582-5097
Bank of Louisville Bldg.
510 West Broadway
Louisville, KY 40202
Web Site | Press Releases
LOUISIANA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Jim Letten, USA* (504)680-3000 (504)589-3594
500 Poydras Street
Room B210
New Orleans, LA 70130
Web Site | Press Releases
Middle District
David R. Dugas, USA* (225)389-0443 (225)389-0561
Russell B. Long Federal Building
777 Florida Street Suite 208
Baton Rouge, LA 70801
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
Donald W. Washington, USA* (318)676-3600 (318)676-3641
300 Fannin Street, Suite 3201
Shreveport, LA 71101-3068
Web Site | Press Releases
800 Lafayette Street, Suite 2200 (337)262-6618 (337)262-6680
Lafayette, LA 70501-6832
MAINE PHONE FAX
Paula Silsby, USA (207)780-3257 (207)780-3304
100 Middle Street Plaza
East Tower Sixth Floor
Portland, ME 04101-4100
Web Site | Press Releases
202 Harlow Street, Room 111 (207)945-0373 (207)945-0319
Bangor, ME 04401
MARYLAND PHONE FAX
Rod J. Rosenstein, USA* (410)209-4800 (410)962-0122
36 S. Charles Street, 4th Floor
Baltimore, MD 21201
Web Site | Press Releases
U.S. Courthouse Suite 400 (301)344-4433 (301)344-4518
Greenbelt, MD 20770
MASSACHUSETTS PHONE FAX
Michael J. Sullivan, USA* (617)748-3100 (617)748-3953
1 Courthouse Way
John Joseph Moakley Courthouse
Boston, MA 02210
Web Site | Press Releases
United States Courthouse (413)785-0235 (413)785-0394
300 State Street, Suite 230
Springfield, MA 01105-2926
Donohue Federal Building (508)793-0450 (508)793-0446
595 Main Street, Room 206
Worcester, MA 01608
MICHIGAN PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Terrence Berg, USA (313)226-9100 (313)226-4609
211 W. Fort Street, Suite 2001
Detroit, MI 48226
Web Site | Press Releases
101 First St., Suite 200 (989)895-5712 (989)895-5790
Bay City, MI 48708
210 Federal Building (810)766-5177 (810)766-5427
600 Church Street
Flint, MI 48502
Western District
Donald A. Davis, USA (616)456-2404 (616)456-2408
P.O. Box 208
Grand Rapids, MI 49501-0208
Web Site | Press Releases
Republic Bank, 2nd Fl. (906)226-2500 (906)226-3700
1930 U.S. 41 West
Marquette, MI 49855
315 W. Allegan, Room 252 (517)377-1577 (517)377-1698
Lansing, MI 48933
MINNESOTA PHONE FAX
Frank J. Magill, Jr., USA (612)664-5600 (612)664-5787
600 U. S. Courthouse
300 South Fourth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Web Site | Press Releases
266 U. S. Courthouse (651) 848-1950 (651)848-1943
316 North Robert Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Not a staffed office
MISSISSIPPI PHONE FAX
Northern District
Jim M. Greenlee, USA* (662)234-3351 (662)234-4818
900 Jefferson Avenue
Oxford, MS 38655-3608
Southern District
Dunn O. Lampton, USA* (601)965-4480 (601)965-4409
188 East Capitol Street, Suite 500
Jackson, MS 39201
Web Site | Press Releases
1575 20th Avenue (228)563-1560 (228)563-1571
Gulfport, MS 39501-2040
MISSOURI PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Catherine L. Hanaway, USA* (314)539-2200 (314)539-2309
Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse
111 South 10th Street, Room 20.333
St. Louis, MO 63102
Web Site | Press Releases
Rush H, Limbaugh (573)334-3736 (573)335-2393
Sr. U.S. Courthouse
555 Independence Street 3rd Floor
Cape Girardeau, MO 63703
Western District
John F. Wood, USA* (816)426-3122 (816)426-4210
Charles E. Whittaker Courthouse
400 E. 9th Street
Kansas City, MO 64106
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 117 (573)634-8214 (573)634-8723
Jefferson City, MO 65101
901 St. Louis, Suite 500 (417)831-4406 (417)831-0078
Springfield, MO 65806-2511
MONTANA PHONE FAX
William W. Mercer, USA* (406)657-6101 (406)657-6989
P.O. Box 1478
Billings, MT 59103
Web Site | Press Releases
181 Federal Building (406)723-6611 (406)723-5002
400 North Main
Butte, MT 59701
P.O. Box 3447 (406)761-7715 (406)453-9973
Great Falls, MT 59403
Paul G. Hatfield Courthouse 406)457-5120 (406)457-5130
901 Front St. Suite 1100
Helena, MT 59626
P.O. Box 8329 (406)542-8851 (406)542-1476
Missoula, MT 59807
NEBRASKA PHONE FAX
Joe W. Stecher, USA* (402)661-3700 (402)661-3080
1620 Dodge Street, Suite 1400
Omaha, NE 68102-1506
Web Site | Press Releases
487 Federal Building, (402)437-5241 (402)437-5390
100 Centennial Mall North
Lincoln, NE 68508
NEVADA PHONE FAX
Gregory A. Brower, USA* (702)388-6336 (702)388-6296
333 South Las Vegas Blvd
Lloyd George Federal Building
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Web Site | Press Releases
100 W. Liberty Street, Suite 600 (775)784-5438 (775)784-5181
Reno, NV 89501
NEW HAMPSHIRE PHONE FAX
Thomas P. Colantuono, USA* (603)225-1552 (603)225-1470
53 Pleasant Street, Room 352
Concord, NH 03301-3904
Web Site | Press Releases
NEW JERSEY PHONE FAX
Ralph J. Marra, Jr., USA (973)645-2700 (973)645-2702
Peter Rodino Federal Building
970 Broad Street, Suite 700
Newark, NJ 07102
Web Site | Press Releases
Camden Fed Bldg & U.S. Courthouse (856)757-5026 (856)968-4917
401 Market Street, 4th Floor
Camden, NJ 08101
402 East State Street, Room 430 (609)989-2190 (609)989-2275
Trenton, NJ 08608
NEW MEXICO PHONE FAX
Gregory J. Fouratt, USA (505)346-7274 (505)346-7296
P.O. Box 607
Albuquerque, NM 87103
Web Site
555 South Telshor, Suite 300 (575)522-2304 (575)522-2391
Las Cruces, NM 88011
NEW YORK PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Benton J. Campbell, USA (718)254-7000 (718)254-6479
147 Pierrepont Street
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Web Site | Press Releases
610 Federal Plaza (631)715-7900 (631)715-7922
Central Islip, NY 11722-4454
Northern District
Andrew T. Baxter, USA (315)448-0672 (315)448-0689
Post Office Box 7198
100 South Clinton Street
Syracuse, NY 13261-7198
Web Site | Press Releases
James Foley Bldg. (518)431-0247 (518)431-0249
445 Broadway, Room 218
Albany, NY 12207
304 Federal Building (607)773-2887 (607)773-2901
15 Henry Street
Binghamton, NY 13901
Southern District
Lev Dassin, USA (212)637-2200 (212)637-2685
One St. Andrews Plaza
New York, NY 10007
Web Site | Press Releases
300 Quarropas Street, Third Floor (914)993-1907 (914)993-1980
White Plains, NY 10601
Western District
Kathleen M. Mehltretter, USA (716)843-5700 (716)551-3052
138 Delaware Ave.
Buffalo, NY 14202
Web Site | Press Releases
620 Federal Building (585)263-6760 (585)263-6226
100 State Street
Rochester, NY 14614
NORTH CAROLINA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
George E. B. Holding, USA* (919)856-4530 (919)856-4487
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 800
Terry Sanford Federal Building & US Courthouse
Raleigh, NC 27601-1461
Web Site | Press Releases
Middle District
Anna Mills S. Wagoner, USA* (336)333-5351 (336)333-5438
P.O. Box 1858
Greensboro, NC 27402
Web Site | Press Releases
251 North Main Street, Suite 726 (336)631-5268 (336)631-5049
Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Western District
Gretchen C. F. Shappert, USA* (704)344-6222 (704)344-6629
227 West Trade Street, Suite 1650
Charlotte, NC 28202
Web Site | Press Releases
Room 233, U.S. Courthouse (828)271-4661 (828)271-4670
100 Otis Street
Asheville, NC 28801
NORTH DAKOTA PHONE FAX
Drew H. Wrigley, USA* (701)297-7400 (701)297-7405
655 First Ave. North , Suite 250
Fargo, ND 58102-4932
Web Site | Press Releases
William L. Guy Federal Building (701)530-2420 (701)530-2421
220 East Rosser Avenue, Room 372
Bismarck, ND 58501
OHIO PHONE FAX
Northern District
William J. Edwards, USA (216)622-3600 (216)522-3370
801 West Superior Avenue, Suite 400
Cleveland, OH 44113-1852
Website | Press Releases
2 South Main Street (330)375-5716 (330)375-5492
Akron, OH 44308
Suite 308, Four Seagate Third Floor (419)259-6376 (419)259-6360
Toledo, OH 43604
City Centre One (330)746-7974 (330)746-0239
100 E. Federal Plaza, Suite 325
Youngstown, OH 44503
Southern District
Gregory G. Lockhart, USA* (937)225-2910 (937)225-2564
Federal Building
200 W. Second Street #602
Dayton, OH 45402
Web Site | Press Releases
221 East 4th Street, Suite 400 (513)684-3711 (513)684-6710
Cincinnati, OH 45202
303 Marconi Boulevard Suite 200, (614)469-5715 (614)469-2200
Columbus, OH 43215
OKLAHOMA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Sheldon J. Sperling, USA* (918)684-5100 (918)684-5130
1200 West Okmulgee
Muskogee, OK 74401
Web site | Press Releases
Northern District
David E. O'Meilia, USA* (918)382-2700 (918)560-7938
110 West 7th Street, Suite 300
Tulsa, OK 74119
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
John C. Richter, USA* (405)553-8700 (405)553-8888
Suite 400, 210 West Park Avenue
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
OREGON PHONE FAX
Karin J. Immergut, USA* (503)727-1000 (503)727-1117
Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse
1000 SW Third Avenue, Suite 600
Portland, OR 97204-2902
Web Site | Press Releases
701 High Street (541)465-6771 (541)465-6582
Eugene, OR 97401
310 West 6th St (541)776-3564 (541)776-3583
Medford, OR 97501
PENNSYLVANIA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Laurie Magid, USA (215)861-8200 (215)861-8609
615 Chestnut Street, Ste. 1250
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Web Site | Press Releases
Middle District
Martin C. Carlson, USA (570)348-2800 (570)348-2816
P.O. Box 309
Scranton, PA 18501-0309
Web Site | Press Releases
Suite 220, Federal Building (717)221-4482 (717)221-4582
228 Walnut Street
Harrisburg , PA 17108-1754
Herman T. Schneebeli Federal Building (570)326-1935 (570)326-7916
240 West Third Street, Suite 316
Williamsport, PA 17701
Western District
Mary Beth Buchanan, USA* (412)644-3500 (412)644-4549
U. S. Post Office & Courthouse
700 Grant Street
Suite 4000
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Web Site | Press Releases
Federal Courthouse (814)452-2906 (814)455-6951
Room A330
17 South Park Row
Erie, PA 16501-1158
Suite 200, Penn Traffic Building (814)533-4547 (814)533-4545
319 Washington Street
Johnstown, PA 15901
PUERTO RICO PHONE FAX
Rosa E. Rodriguez-Velez , USA (787)766-5656 (787)766-6219
Torre Chardon , Suite 1201
350 Carlos Chardon Avenue
San Juan, PR 00918
RHODE ISLAND PHONE FAX
Robert Clark Corrente, USA* (401)709-5000 (401)709-5001
Fleet Center
50 Kennedy Plaza, 8th Floor
Providence, RI 02903
Web Site | Press Releases
SOUTH CAROLINA PHONE FAX
William Walter Wilkins, III, USA* (803)929-3000 (803)254-2912
First Union Building
1441 Main Street, Suite 500
Columbia, SC 29201
Web Site
PO Box 978 (843)727-4381 (843)727-4443
Charleston, SC 29402
PO Box 1567 (843)665-6688 (843)678-8809
Florence, SC 29503
PO Box 10067 (864)282-2100 (864)233-3158
Greenville, SC 29603
SOUTH DAKOTA PHONE FAX
Martin J. Jackley, USA* (605)330-4400 (605)330-4410
Post Office Box 3303
Sioux Falls, SD 57101-3303
Web Site | Press Releases
337 Federal Bldg & US Courthouse (605)224-5402 (605)224-8305
225 S. Pierre St.
Pierre, SD 57501
201 Federal Bldg & US Courthouse (605)342-7822 (605)342-1108
515 Ninth Street
Rapid City, SD 57701
303 Post Office and, U.S. Courthouse (605)226-7264 (605)226-7266
Aberdeen, SD 57401
TENNESSEE PHONE FAX
Eastern District
James R. Dedrick, USA* (865)545-4167 (865)545-4176
800 Market Street, Suite 211
Knoxville, TN 37902
Web Site | Press Releases
1110 Market Street, Suite 301 (423)752-5140 (423)752-5150
Chattanooga, TN 37402
220 West Depot Street (423)639-6759 (423)639-6451
Greeneville, TN 37743
208 Sunset Drive, Suite 509 (423)282-1889 (423)282-0849
Johnson City, TN 37604
Middle District
Edward Meacham Yarbrough, USA* (615)736-5151 (615)736-5323
110 Ninth Avenue, South, Suite A961
Nashville, TN 37203
Web Site | Press Releases
817 S. Garden Street, Room 205 (931)388-6030
Columbia, TN 37083
Post Office & Courthouse (931)528-2709
9 East Broad St.
Cookeville, TN 38503
Western District
Lawrence J. Laurenzi , USA (901)544-4231 (901)544-4230
800 Clifford Davis Federal Office Building
Memphis, TN 38103
Web Site | Press Releases
109 S. Highland, Suite 300 (731)422-6220 (731)422-6668
Jackson, TN 38301
TEXAS PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Rebecca A. Gregory, USA* (409)839-2538 (409)839-2550
350 Magnolia Avenue, Suite 150
Beaumont, TX 77701-2237
Web Site | Press Releases
Bank of America Bldg (936)639-4003 (936)639-4033
415 S. 1st Street
Lufkin, TX 75901
One Grand Centre (903)868-9454 (903)892-2792
1800 Teague Drive, Suite 500
Sherman, TX 75090
110 North College, Suite 700 (903)590-1400 (903)590-1439
Tyler, TX 75702
101 East Park Boulevard, Suite 500 (972)509-1201 (972)509-1209
Plano, TX 75704
500 State Line Ave. N., Suite 402 (903)794-9481 (903)792-5164
Texarkana, TX 77501
Northern District
James T. Jacks, USA (214)659-8600 (214)767-2898
1100 Commerce Street, Third Floor
Dallas, TX 75242-1699
Web Site | Press Releases
Amarillo Nat'l Plaza Two (806)324-2356 (806)324-2399
500 South Taylor St.
Amarillo, TX 79101-2446
801 Cherry Street, Unit 4 (817)252-5200 (817)978-3094
Burnett Plaza, Ste. 1700
Ft. Worth, TX 76102-6897
1205 Texas Ave., Ste. 700 (806)472-7351 (806)472-7394
U.S. Federal Building
Lubbock, TX 79401-4002
Southern District
Tim Johnson, USA (713)567-9000 (713)718-3300
P.O. Box 61129
Houston, TX 77208
Web Site | Press Releases
U.S. Courthouse (956)548-2554 (956)548-2711
600 East Harrison, Suite 201
Brownsville, TX 71406
One Shoreline Plaza South Tower, (361)888-3111 (361)888-3200
800 N Shoreline Blvd., Suite 500
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
P.O. Box 1179 (956)723-6523 (956)726-2266
1100 Matamoros, Suite 200
Laredo, TX 78042
Bentsen Tower (956)618-8010 (956)618-8009
1701 West Hwy 83, Suite 600
McAllen, TX 73341
P.O. Box 2685 (361)576-9988 (361)579-6820
312 South Main, 3rd Floor
Victoria, TX 77902-2685
Western District
Johnny K. Sutton, USA* (210)384-7100 (210)384-7105
601 N.W. Loop 410, Suite 600
San Antonio, TX 78216
Web Site | Press Releases
c/o DEA, 801 North 2nd Street (915)837-3421 (915)837-7485
Alpine, TX 79830
816 Congress Avenue, Frost Bank Plaza (512)916-5858 (512)916-5854
Austin, TX 78701
111 East Broadway, Rm. A306, 3rd Floor (830)703-2025 (830)703-3741
U.S. Courthouse
Del Rio, TX 78840
700 East San Antonio Ave., Suite 200 (915)534-6884 (915)534-6024
El Paso, TX 79901
400 W. Illinois Street, Suite 1200 (915)686-4110 (915)686-4131
Midland, TX 79702
106 West 4th St. (915)445-4343 (915)445-4343
U.S. Courthouse
Pecos, TX 79772 (Unstaffed)
800 Franklin, Suite 280 (254)750-1580 (254)750-1599
Waco, TX 76701
UTAH PHONE FAX
Brett L. Tolman, USA* (801)524-5682 (801)524-6924
185 South State Street, Suite 300
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Web Site | Press Releases
VERMONT PHONE FAX
Thomas D. Anderson, USA* (802)951-6725 (802)951-6540
P.O. Box 570
Burlington, VT 05402
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 10 (802)773-0231 (802)773-0214
Rutland, VT 05702
VIRGIN ISLANDS PHONE FAX
Paul A. Murphy, USA (340)774-5757 (340)776-3474
Federal Building and, U. S. Courthouse, Room 260
5500 Veterans Drive
St. Thomas, VI 00802-6424
Web Site | Press Releases
1108 King Street, Suite 201, Christiansted (340)773-3920 (340)773-1407
St. Croix, VI 00820-4951
VIRGINIA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Dana Boente, USA (703)299-3700 (703)299-2584
2100 Jamieson Ave
Alexandria, VA 22314
Web Site | Press Releases
World Trade Center (757)441-6331 (757)441-6689
101 W. Main Street, Suite 8000
Norfolk, VA 23510
Main Street Centre (804)819-5400 (804)771-2316
600 E. Main Street, Suite 1800
Richmond, VA 23219
Fountain Plaza Three (757)591-4000 (757)591-0866
Suite 300
721 Lakefront Commons
Newport News, Virginia 23606
Western District
Julia Campbell Dudley, USA (540)857-2250 (540)857-2614
310 First Street, S.W. Room 906
Roanoke, VA 24011
Post Office Box 1709
Roanoke, VA 24008
Web Site | Press Releases
180 W. Main Street (276)628-4161 (276)628-7399
Abingdon, VA 24210
255 West Main Street, Room 104 (434)293-4283 (434)293-4910
Charlottesville, VA 22901
WASHINGTON PHONE FAX
Eastern District
James A. McDevitt, USA* (509)353-2767 (509)353-2766
P.O. Box 1494
Spokane, WA 99210-1494
Web Site | Press Releases
Post Office Box 4065 (509)454-4425 (509)454-4435
Yakima, WA 98901
Western District
Jeffrey C. Sullivan, USA (206)553-7970 (206)553-0882
700 Stewart Street Suite 5220
Seattle, WA 98101-1271
Web Site | Press Releases
1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 (253)428-3800 (253)428-3826
Tacoma, WA 98402
WEST VIRGINIA PHONE FAX
Northern District
Sharon L. Potter, USA* (304)234-0100 (304)234-0110
P.O. Box 591
Wheeling, WV 26003-0011
Web Site | Press Releases
Federal Center (304)623-7030 (304)623-7031
320 West Pike Street, Suite 300
Clarksburg, WV 26301-2710
Post Office Box 190 (304)636-1739 (304)636-1967
Elkins, WV 26241-0190
U. S. Courthouse and Post Office Building (304)262-0590 (304)262-0591
217 West King Street, Suite 400
Martinsburg, WV 25401-3286
Southern District
Charles T. Miller, USA (304)345-2200 (304)347-7074
Post Office Box 1713
Charleston, WV 25326
Web Site | Press Releases
Post Office Box 1239 (304)529-5799 (304)529-5545
Huntington WV 25714
WISCONSIN PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Michelle L. Jacobs, USA (414)297-1700 (414)297-1738
530 Federal Building
517 East Wisconsin Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53202
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
Erik C. Peterson, USA* (608)264-5158 (608)264-5172
P.O. Box 1585
Madison, WI 53701-1585
Web Site | Press Releases
WYOMING PHONE FAX
Kelly H. Rankin, USA* (307)772-2124 (307)772-2123
P. O. Box 668
Cheyenne, WY 82003-0668
Dick Cheney Federal Building (307)261-5434 (307)261-5471
100 East B Street, Suite 2211
Casper, WY 82601
P.O. Box 449 (307)332-8195 (307)332-7104
Lander, WY 82520
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/offices/index.html
ALABAMA PHONE FAX
Middle District
Leura Garrett Canary, USA* (334)223-7280 (334)223-7560
131 Clayton Street
Montgomery, AL 36104
Web Site | Press Releases
701 701 Avenue "A" (334)490-0909 (334)490-0909
Opelika, AL 36801 (Unstaffed)
100 W. Troy Street (334)792-3583
Dothan, AL 36301 (Unstaffed)
Northern District
Alice H. Martin, USA* (205)244-2001 (205)244-2171
1801 Fourth Ave., North
Birmingham, AL 35203-2101
Web Site | Press Releases
400 Meridian Street, Suite 304 (256)534-8285 (256)539-3270
Huntsville, AL 35801
Southern District
Deborah J. Rhodes, USA* (251)441-5845 (251)441-5277
Riverview Plaza
63 S. Royal Street Suite 600
Mobile, AL 36602
Web Site | Press Releases
ALASKA PHONE FAX
Nelson P. Cohen, USA (907)271-5071 (907)271-3224
Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse
222 West 7th Ave., #9, Rm 253
Anchorage, AK 99513-7567
Web Site | Press Releases
Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse (907)456-0245 (907)456-0309
101 12th Ave., Rm. 310, Box 2
Fairbanks, AK 99701
ARIZONA PHONE FAX
Diane J. Humetewa, USA* (602)514-7500 (602)514-7693
Two Renaissance Square
40 North Central Ave. Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
Web Site | Press Releases
405 W. Congress, Suite 4800 (520)620-7300 (520)620-7320
Tucson, AZ 85701-5040
123 N. San Francisco Street, Suite 204
Flagstaff, AZ 86001
ARKANSAS PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Jane Duke, USA 501-340-2600 (501)340-2728
Post Office Box 1229
Little Rock, AR 72203
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
Deborah J. Groom, USA (479)783-5125 (479)785-2442
414 Parker Street
Fort Smith, AR 72901
CALIFORNIA PHONE FAX
Central District
Thomas P. O’Brien, USA* (213)894-2434 (213)894-0141
1200 U.S. Courthouse
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Web Site | Press Release
411 West Fourth Street, Suite 8000 (714)338-3500 (714)338-3708
Santa Ana, CA 92701-4599
3880 Lemon Street, Suite 210 (951)276-6210 (951)276-6202
Riverside, CA 92501
Eastern District
Lawrence G. Brown, USA (916)554-2700 (916)554-2900
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Web Site | Press Releases
2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401 (559)497-4000 (559)497-4099
Fresno, CA 93721
Northern District
Joseph P. Russoniello, USA* (415)436-7200 (415)436-7234
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055
San Francisco, CA 94102
Web Site | Press Releases
1301 Clay Street, Suite 340S (510)637-3680 (510)637-3724
Oakland, CA 94612
150 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 900 (408)535-5061 (408)535-5066
San Jose, CA 95113
Southern District
Karen P. Hewitt, USA (619)557-5610 (619)557-5782
880 Front Street, Room 6293
San Diego, CA 92101
Web Site | Press Releases
321 S. Waterman Ave., Room 204 (760)370-0893 (760)370-0894
El Centro, CA 92243
COLORADO PHONE FAX
David M. Gaouette, USA (303)454-0100 (303)454-0409
1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700
Seventeenth Street Plaza
Denver, CO 80202
Web Site | Press Releases
103 Sheppard Drive, No. 215 (970)247-1514 (970)247-8619
Durango, CO 81301
402 Rood Avenue, Suite 220 (970)257-7113 (970)248-3630
Grand Junction, CO 81501
CONNECTICUT PHONE FAX
Nora Dannehy, USA (203)821-3700 (203)773-5376
Connecticut Financial Center
157 Church Street Floor 23
New Haven, CT 06510
Web Site | Press Releases
915 Lafayette Blvd. (203)696-3000 (203)579-5550
Bridgeport, CT 06604
450 Main Street (860)947-1101 (860)240-3291
Hartford, CT 06103
DELAWARE PHONE FAX
David C. Weiss, USA (302)573-6277 (302)573-6220
Nemours Building, P.O. Box 2046
Wilmington, DE 19899-2046
Web Site | Press Releases
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PHONE FAX
Jeffrey A. Taylor, USA (202)514-7566 (202)307-3569
Judiciary Center Building
555 Fourth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Web Site | Press Releases
FLORIDA PHONE FAX
Middle District
A. Brian Albritton, USA* (813)274-6000 (813)274-6246
400 North Tampa Street, Suite 3200
Tampa, FL 33602
Web Site | Press Releases
300 N. Hogan Street, Suite 700 (904)301-6300 (904)232-2620
Jacksonville, FL 32202-4270
2110 First Street, Suite 3-137 (239)461-2200 (239)461-2219
Fort Myers, FL 33901
108 North Magnolia Avenue (352)629-0053 (352)671-6743
Suite 701
Ocala, Florida 34475
Mailing Address: 207 North West 2nd Street, Room 118
Ocala, Fl 34475
501 West Church Street, Suite 300 (407)648-7500 (407)648-7643
Orlando, FL 32805
Northern District
Thomas F. Kirwin, USA (850)942-8430 (850)942-9577
111 N. Adams Street, 4th Floor
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Web Site | Press Releases
300 East University Avenue, Suite 310 (352)378-0996 (352)371-1912
Gainesville, FL 32601
30 West Government Street (850)785-3495 (850)763-3415
Panama City, FL 32401
21 E. Garden Street (850)444-4000 (850)432-7763
Pensacola, FL 32502
Southern District
R. Alexander Acosta, USA* (305)961-9000 (305)530-7087
99 NE 4th Street
Miami, FL 33132
Web Site | Press Releases
500 East Broward Blvd., Seventh Floor (954)356-7255 (954)356-7336
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394
505 S. 2nd St., Suite 200 (772)466-0899 (772)466-1020
Ft. Pierce, FL 34950
500 Australian Ave., Fourth Floor (561)820-8711 (561)820-8777
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
GEORGIA PHONE FAX
Middle District
Frank Maxwell Wood, USA* (478)752-3511 (478)621-2604
P.O. Box 1702
Macon, GA 31202-1702 (shipping)
300 Mulberry Street, Suite 400
Macon, GA 31201 (office)
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 366 (912)430-7754 (912)430-7766
Albany, GA 31702
P.O. Box 2568 (706)649-7700 (706)649-7667
Columbus, GA 31902-2568
Northern District
David E. Nahmias, USA* (404)581-6000 (404)581-6181
600 U.S. Courthouse
75 Spring Street, S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303-3309
Web Site | Press Releases
Southern District
Edmund A. Booth, Jr., USA* (912)652-4422 (912)652-4388
P. O. Box 8970
Savannah, GA 31412
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 2017 (706)724-0517 (706)724-7728
Augusta, GA 30903
GUAM & NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS PHONE FAX
Leonardo M. Rapadas, USA* (671)472-7332 (671)472-7334
Sirena Plaza, 108 Hernan Cortez, Suite 500
Hagatna, GU 96910
P.O. Box 500377 (670)236-2980 (670)236-2945
Saipan, GU 96950-0377
HAWAII PHONE FAX
Edward H. Kubo, Jr., USA* (808)541-2850 (808)541-2958
Room 6-100, PJKK Federal Building
300 Ala Moana Boulevard
Honolulu, HI 96850
Web Site | Press Releases
IDAHO PHONE FAX
Thomas E. Moss, USA* (208)334-1211 (208)334-1413
Washington Group Plaza
800 Park Boulevard, Suite 600
Boise, ID 83712-9903
Web Site | Press Releases
205 North 4th Street, Room 304/305 (208)667-6568 (208)667-0814
Coeur d" Alene, ID 83814
801 E. Sherman, Room 192 (208)478-4166 (208)478-4175
Pocatello, ID 83201
ILLINOIS PHONE FAX
Central District
Rodger A. Heaton, USA* (217)492-4450 (217)492-4512
318 S. Sixth St.
Springfield, IL 62701
Web Site | Press Releases
One Technology Plaza (309)671-7050 (309)671-7259
211 Fulton Street
Peoria, IL 61602
1830 Second Avenue, Suite 320 (309)793-5884 (309)793-5895
Rock Island, IL 61602
201 S. Vine Street, Suite 226 (217)373-5875 (217)373-5891
Urbana, IL 61801
Northern District
Patrick Fitzgerald, USA* (312)353-5300 (312)353-2067
219 S. Dearborn Street, Fifth Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Web Site | Press Releases
308 West State, Room 300 (815)987-4444 (815)987-4236
Rockford, IL 61101
Southern District
A. Courtney Cox, USA (618)628-3700 (618)628-3730
Nine Executive Drive
Fairview Heights, IL 62208
Web Site | Press Releases
402 W. Main Street (618)439-3808 (618)439-2401
Benton, IL 62812
INDIANA PHONE FAX
Northern District
David A. Capp , USA (219)937-5500 (219)852-2770
5400 Federal Plaza
Hammond, IN 46320
Web Site | Press Releases
3128 Federal Building (260)422-2595 (260)426-1616
1300 South Harrison Street
Fort Wayne, IN 46802
204 S. Main Street, Room MO-1 (574)236-8287 (574)236-8155
South Bend, IN 46601
Southern District
Timothy M. Morrison, USA (317)226-6333 (317)226-6125
10 West Market Street, Suite 2100
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Web Site | Press Releases
IOWA PHONE FAX
Northern District
Matt M. Dummermuth, USA (319)363-6333 (319)363-1990
401 1st ST SE, Suite 400
Cedar Rapids, IA 52401-4950
Web Site
600 4th Street, Suite 670 (712)255-6011 (712)258-1821
Sioux City, IA 51101
Southern District
Matthew G. Whitaker, USA* (515)473-9300 (515)284-6288
U.S. Courthouse Annex
110 East Court Avenue
Suite 286
Des Moines, IA 50309
Web Site | Press Releases
U.S. Courthouse (563)449-5432 (563)449-5433
131 East 4th Street, Suite 310
Davenport, IA 52801
KANSAS PHONE FAX
Marietta Parker, USA (316)269-6481 (316)269-6484
1200 Epic Center
301 N. Main
Wichita, KS 67202
500 State Street, Suite 360 (913)551-6730 (913)551-6541
Kansas City, KS 66101
290 Federal Bldg. (785)295-2850 (785)295-2853
444 SE Quincy Street
Topeka, KS 66683
Web Site | Press Releases
KENTUCKY PHONE FAX
Eastern District
James A. Zerhusen, USA (859)233-2661 (859)233-2666
260 West Vine Street, Suite 300
Lexington, KY 40507-1671
Web Site | Press Releases
Post Office Box 72 (859)655-3200 (859)655-3212
Covington, KY 41012-0072
601 Meyers Baker Road, Second Floor (606)864-5523 (606)864-3590
London, KY 40741
Western District
David L. Huber, USA* (502)582-5911 (502)582-5097
Bank of Louisville Bldg.
510 West Broadway
Louisville, KY 40202
Web Site | Press Releases
LOUISIANA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Jim Letten, USA* (504)680-3000 (504)589-3594
500 Poydras Street
Room B210
New Orleans, LA 70130
Web Site | Press Releases
Middle District
David R. Dugas, USA* (225)389-0443 (225)389-0561
Russell B. Long Federal Building
777 Florida Street Suite 208
Baton Rouge, LA 70801
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
Donald W. Washington, USA* (318)676-3600 (318)676-3641
300 Fannin Street, Suite 3201
Shreveport, LA 71101-3068
Web Site | Press Releases
800 Lafayette Street, Suite 2200 (337)262-6618 (337)262-6680
Lafayette, LA 70501-6832
MAINE PHONE FAX
Paula Silsby, USA (207)780-3257 (207)780-3304
100 Middle Street Plaza
East Tower Sixth Floor
Portland, ME 04101-4100
Web Site | Press Releases
202 Harlow Street, Room 111 (207)945-0373 (207)945-0319
Bangor, ME 04401
MARYLAND PHONE FAX
Rod J. Rosenstein, USA* (410)209-4800 (410)962-0122
36 S. Charles Street, 4th Floor
Baltimore, MD 21201
Web Site | Press Releases
U.S. Courthouse Suite 400 (301)344-4433 (301)344-4518
Greenbelt, MD 20770
MASSACHUSETTS PHONE FAX
Michael J. Sullivan, USA* (617)748-3100 (617)748-3953
1 Courthouse Way
John Joseph Moakley Courthouse
Boston, MA 02210
Web Site | Press Releases
United States Courthouse (413)785-0235 (413)785-0394
300 State Street, Suite 230
Springfield, MA 01105-2926
Donohue Federal Building (508)793-0450 (508)793-0446
595 Main Street, Room 206
Worcester, MA 01608
MICHIGAN PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Terrence Berg, USA (313)226-9100 (313)226-4609
211 W. Fort Street, Suite 2001
Detroit, MI 48226
Web Site | Press Releases
101 First St., Suite 200 (989)895-5712 (989)895-5790
Bay City, MI 48708
210 Federal Building (810)766-5177 (810)766-5427
600 Church Street
Flint, MI 48502
Western District
Donald A. Davis, USA (616)456-2404 (616)456-2408
P.O. Box 208
Grand Rapids, MI 49501-0208
Web Site | Press Releases
Republic Bank, 2nd Fl. (906)226-2500 (906)226-3700
1930 U.S. 41 West
Marquette, MI 49855
315 W. Allegan, Room 252 (517)377-1577 (517)377-1698
Lansing, MI 48933
MINNESOTA PHONE FAX
Frank J. Magill, Jr., USA (612)664-5600 (612)664-5787
600 U. S. Courthouse
300 South Fourth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Web Site | Press Releases
266 U. S. Courthouse (651) 848-1950 (651)848-1943
316 North Robert Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Not a staffed office
MISSISSIPPI PHONE FAX
Northern District
Jim M. Greenlee, USA* (662)234-3351 (662)234-4818
900 Jefferson Avenue
Oxford, MS 38655-3608
Southern District
Dunn O. Lampton, USA* (601)965-4480 (601)965-4409
188 East Capitol Street, Suite 500
Jackson, MS 39201
Web Site | Press Releases
1575 20th Avenue (228)563-1560 (228)563-1571
Gulfport, MS 39501-2040
MISSOURI PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Catherine L. Hanaway, USA* (314)539-2200 (314)539-2309
Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse
111 South 10th Street, Room 20.333
St. Louis, MO 63102
Web Site | Press Releases
Rush H, Limbaugh (573)334-3736 (573)335-2393
Sr. U.S. Courthouse
555 Independence Street 3rd Floor
Cape Girardeau, MO 63703
Western District
John F. Wood, USA* (816)426-3122 (816)426-4210
Charles E. Whittaker Courthouse
400 E. 9th Street
Kansas City, MO 64106
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 117 (573)634-8214 (573)634-8723
Jefferson City, MO 65101
901 St. Louis, Suite 500 (417)831-4406 (417)831-0078
Springfield, MO 65806-2511
MONTANA PHONE FAX
William W. Mercer, USA* (406)657-6101 (406)657-6989
P.O. Box 1478
Billings, MT 59103
Web Site | Press Releases
181 Federal Building (406)723-6611 (406)723-5002
400 North Main
Butte, MT 59701
P.O. Box 3447 (406)761-7715 (406)453-9973
Great Falls, MT 59403
Paul G. Hatfield Courthouse 406)457-5120 (406)457-5130
901 Front St. Suite 1100
Helena, MT 59626
P.O. Box 8329 (406)542-8851 (406)542-1476
Missoula, MT 59807
NEBRASKA PHONE FAX
Joe W. Stecher, USA* (402)661-3700 (402)661-3080
1620 Dodge Street, Suite 1400
Omaha, NE 68102-1506
Web Site | Press Releases
487 Federal Building, (402)437-5241 (402)437-5390
100 Centennial Mall North
Lincoln, NE 68508
NEVADA PHONE FAX
Gregory A. Brower, USA* (702)388-6336 (702)388-6296
333 South Las Vegas Blvd
Lloyd George Federal Building
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Web Site | Press Releases
100 W. Liberty Street, Suite 600 (775)784-5438 (775)784-5181
Reno, NV 89501
NEW HAMPSHIRE PHONE FAX
Thomas P. Colantuono, USA* (603)225-1552 (603)225-1470
53 Pleasant Street, Room 352
Concord, NH 03301-3904
Web Site | Press Releases
NEW JERSEY PHONE FAX
Ralph J. Marra, Jr., USA (973)645-2700 (973)645-2702
Peter Rodino Federal Building
970 Broad Street, Suite 700
Newark, NJ 07102
Web Site | Press Releases
Camden Fed Bldg & U.S. Courthouse (856)757-5026 (856)968-4917
401 Market Street, 4th Floor
Camden, NJ 08101
402 East State Street, Room 430 (609)989-2190 (609)989-2275
Trenton, NJ 08608
NEW MEXICO PHONE FAX
Gregory J. Fouratt, USA (505)346-7274 (505)346-7296
P.O. Box 607
Albuquerque, NM 87103
Web Site
555 South Telshor, Suite 300 (575)522-2304 (575)522-2391
Las Cruces, NM 88011
NEW YORK PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Benton J. Campbell, USA (718)254-7000 (718)254-6479
147 Pierrepont Street
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Web Site | Press Releases
610 Federal Plaza (631)715-7900 (631)715-7922
Central Islip, NY 11722-4454
Northern District
Andrew T. Baxter, USA (315)448-0672 (315)448-0689
Post Office Box 7198
100 South Clinton Street
Syracuse, NY 13261-7198
Web Site | Press Releases
James Foley Bldg. (518)431-0247 (518)431-0249
445 Broadway, Room 218
Albany, NY 12207
304 Federal Building (607)773-2887 (607)773-2901
15 Henry Street
Binghamton, NY 13901
Southern District
Lev Dassin, USA (212)637-2200 (212)637-2685
One St. Andrews Plaza
New York, NY 10007
Web Site | Press Releases
300 Quarropas Street, Third Floor (914)993-1907 (914)993-1980
White Plains, NY 10601
Western District
Kathleen M. Mehltretter, USA (716)843-5700 (716)551-3052
138 Delaware Ave.
Buffalo, NY 14202
Web Site | Press Releases
620 Federal Building (585)263-6760 (585)263-6226
100 State Street
Rochester, NY 14614
NORTH CAROLINA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
George E. B. Holding, USA* (919)856-4530 (919)856-4487
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 800
Terry Sanford Federal Building & US Courthouse
Raleigh, NC 27601-1461
Web Site | Press Releases
Middle District
Anna Mills S. Wagoner, USA* (336)333-5351 (336)333-5438
P.O. Box 1858
Greensboro, NC 27402
Web Site | Press Releases
251 North Main Street, Suite 726 (336)631-5268 (336)631-5049
Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Western District
Gretchen C. F. Shappert, USA* (704)344-6222 (704)344-6629
227 West Trade Street, Suite 1650
Charlotte, NC 28202
Web Site | Press Releases
Room 233, U.S. Courthouse (828)271-4661 (828)271-4670
100 Otis Street
Asheville, NC 28801
NORTH DAKOTA PHONE FAX
Drew H. Wrigley, USA* (701)297-7400 (701)297-7405
655 First Ave. North , Suite 250
Fargo, ND 58102-4932
Web Site | Press Releases
William L. Guy Federal Building (701)530-2420 (701)530-2421
220 East Rosser Avenue, Room 372
Bismarck, ND 58501
OHIO PHONE FAX
Northern District
William J. Edwards, USA (216)622-3600 (216)522-3370
801 West Superior Avenue, Suite 400
Cleveland, OH 44113-1852
Website | Press Releases
2 South Main Street (330)375-5716 (330)375-5492
Akron, OH 44308
Suite 308, Four Seagate Third Floor (419)259-6376 (419)259-6360
Toledo, OH 43604
City Centre One (330)746-7974 (330)746-0239
100 E. Federal Plaza, Suite 325
Youngstown, OH 44503
Southern District
Gregory G. Lockhart, USA* (937)225-2910 (937)225-2564
Federal Building
200 W. Second Street #602
Dayton, OH 45402
Web Site | Press Releases
221 East 4th Street, Suite 400 (513)684-3711 (513)684-6710
Cincinnati, OH 45202
303 Marconi Boulevard Suite 200, (614)469-5715 (614)469-2200
Columbus, OH 43215
OKLAHOMA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Sheldon J. Sperling, USA* (918)684-5100 (918)684-5130
1200 West Okmulgee
Muskogee, OK 74401
Web site | Press Releases
Northern District
David E. O'Meilia, USA* (918)382-2700 (918)560-7938
110 West 7th Street, Suite 300
Tulsa, OK 74119
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
John C. Richter, USA* (405)553-8700 (405)553-8888
Suite 400, 210 West Park Avenue
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
OREGON PHONE FAX
Karin J. Immergut, USA* (503)727-1000 (503)727-1117
Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse
1000 SW Third Avenue, Suite 600
Portland, OR 97204-2902
Web Site | Press Releases
701 High Street (541)465-6771 (541)465-6582
Eugene, OR 97401
310 West 6th St (541)776-3564 (541)776-3583
Medford, OR 97501
PENNSYLVANIA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Laurie Magid, USA (215)861-8200 (215)861-8609
615 Chestnut Street, Ste. 1250
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Web Site | Press Releases
Middle District
Martin C. Carlson, USA (570)348-2800 (570)348-2816
P.O. Box 309
Scranton, PA 18501-0309
Web Site | Press Releases
Suite 220, Federal Building (717)221-4482 (717)221-4582
228 Walnut Street
Harrisburg , PA 17108-1754
Herman T. Schneebeli Federal Building (570)326-1935 (570)326-7916
240 West Third Street, Suite 316
Williamsport, PA 17701
Western District
Mary Beth Buchanan, USA* (412)644-3500 (412)644-4549
U. S. Post Office & Courthouse
700 Grant Street
Suite 4000
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Web Site | Press Releases
Federal Courthouse (814)452-2906 (814)455-6951
Room A330
17 South Park Row
Erie, PA 16501-1158
Suite 200, Penn Traffic Building (814)533-4547 (814)533-4545
319 Washington Street
Johnstown, PA 15901
PUERTO RICO PHONE FAX
Rosa E. Rodriguez-Velez , USA (787)766-5656 (787)766-6219
Torre Chardon , Suite 1201
350 Carlos Chardon Avenue
San Juan, PR 00918
RHODE ISLAND PHONE FAX
Robert Clark Corrente, USA* (401)709-5000 (401)709-5001
Fleet Center
50 Kennedy Plaza, 8th Floor
Providence, RI 02903
Web Site | Press Releases
SOUTH CAROLINA PHONE FAX
William Walter Wilkins, III, USA* (803)929-3000 (803)254-2912
First Union Building
1441 Main Street, Suite 500
Columbia, SC 29201
Web Site
PO Box 978 (843)727-4381 (843)727-4443
Charleston, SC 29402
PO Box 1567 (843)665-6688 (843)678-8809
Florence, SC 29503
PO Box 10067 (864)282-2100 (864)233-3158
Greenville, SC 29603
SOUTH DAKOTA PHONE FAX
Martin J. Jackley, USA* (605)330-4400 (605)330-4410
Post Office Box 3303
Sioux Falls, SD 57101-3303
Web Site | Press Releases
337 Federal Bldg & US Courthouse (605)224-5402 (605)224-8305
225 S. Pierre St.
Pierre, SD 57501
201 Federal Bldg & US Courthouse (605)342-7822 (605)342-1108
515 Ninth Street
Rapid City, SD 57701
303 Post Office and, U.S. Courthouse (605)226-7264 (605)226-7266
Aberdeen, SD 57401
TENNESSEE PHONE FAX
Eastern District
James R. Dedrick, USA* (865)545-4167 (865)545-4176
800 Market Street, Suite 211
Knoxville, TN 37902
Web Site | Press Releases
1110 Market Street, Suite 301 (423)752-5140 (423)752-5150
Chattanooga, TN 37402
220 West Depot Street (423)639-6759 (423)639-6451
Greeneville, TN 37743
208 Sunset Drive, Suite 509 (423)282-1889 (423)282-0849
Johnson City, TN 37604
Middle District
Edward Meacham Yarbrough, USA* (615)736-5151 (615)736-5323
110 Ninth Avenue, South, Suite A961
Nashville, TN 37203
Web Site | Press Releases
817 S. Garden Street, Room 205 (931)388-6030
Columbia, TN 37083
Post Office & Courthouse (931)528-2709
9 East Broad St.
Cookeville, TN 38503
Western District
Lawrence J. Laurenzi , USA (901)544-4231 (901)544-4230
800 Clifford Davis Federal Office Building
Memphis, TN 38103
Web Site | Press Releases
109 S. Highland, Suite 300 (731)422-6220 (731)422-6668
Jackson, TN 38301
TEXAS PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Rebecca A. Gregory, USA* (409)839-2538 (409)839-2550
350 Magnolia Avenue, Suite 150
Beaumont, TX 77701-2237
Web Site | Press Releases
Bank of America Bldg (936)639-4003 (936)639-4033
415 S. 1st Street
Lufkin, TX 75901
One Grand Centre (903)868-9454 (903)892-2792
1800 Teague Drive, Suite 500
Sherman, TX 75090
110 North College, Suite 700 (903)590-1400 (903)590-1439
Tyler, TX 75702
101 East Park Boulevard, Suite 500 (972)509-1201 (972)509-1209
Plano, TX 75704
500 State Line Ave. N., Suite 402 (903)794-9481 (903)792-5164
Texarkana, TX 77501
Northern District
James T. Jacks, USA (214)659-8600 (214)767-2898
1100 Commerce Street, Third Floor
Dallas, TX 75242-1699
Web Site | Press Releases
Amarillo Nat'l Plaza Two (806)324-2356 (806)324-2399
500 South Taylor St.
Amarillo, TX 79101-2446
801 Cherry Street, Unit 4 (817)252-5200 (817)978-3094
Burnett Plaza, Ste. 1700
Ft. Worth, TX 76102-6897
1205 Texas Ave., Ste. 700 (806)472-7351 (806)472-7394
U.S. Federal Building
Lubbock, TX 79401-4002
Southern District
Tim Johnson, USA (713)567-9000 (713)718-3300
P.O. Box 61129
Houston, TX 77208
Web Site | Press Releases
U.S. Courthouse (956)548-2554 (956)548-2711
600 East Harrison, Suite 201
Brownsville, TX 71406
One Shoreline Plaza South Tower, (361)888-3111 (361)888-3200
800 N Shoreline Blvd., Suite 500
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
P.O. Box 1179 (956)723-6523 (956)726-2266
1100 Matamoros, Suite 200
Laredo, TX 78042
Bentsen Tower (956)618-8010 (956)618-8009
1701 West Hwy 83, Suite 600
McAllen, TX 73341
P.O. Box 2685 (361)576-9988 (361)579-6820
312 South Main, 3rd Floor
Victoria, TX 77902-2685
Western District
Johnny K. Sutton, USA* (210)384-7100 (210)384-7105
601 N.W. Loop 410, Suite 600
San Antonio, TX 78216
Web Site | Press Releases
c/o DEA, 801 North 2nd Street (915)837-3421 (915)837-7485
Alpine, TX 79830
816 Congress Avenue, Frost Bank Plaza (512)916-5858 (512)916-5854
Austin, TX 78701
111 East Broadway, Rm. A306, 3rd Floor (830)703-2025 (830)703-3741
U.S. Courthouse
Del Rio, TX 78840
700 East San Antonio Ave., Suite 200 (915)534-6884 (915)534-6024
El Paso, TX 79901
400 W. Illinois Street, Suite 1200 (915)686-4110 (915)686-4131
Midland, TX 79702
106 West 4th St. (915)445-4343 (915)445-4343
U.S. Courthouse
Pecos, TX 79772 (Unstaffed)
800 Franklin, Suite 280 (254)750-1580 (254)750-1599
Waco, TX 76701
UTAH PHONE FAX
Brett L. Tolman, USA* (801)524-5682 (801)524-6924
185 South State Street, Suite 300
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Web Site | Press Releases
VERMONT PHONE FAX
Thomas D. Anderson, USA* (802)951-6725 (802)951-6540
P.O. Box 570
Burlington, VT 05402
Web Site | Press Releases
P.O. Box 10 (802)773-0231 (802)773-0214
Rutland, VT 05702
VIRGIN ISLANDS PHONE FAX
Paul A. Murphy, USA (340)774-5757 (340)776-3474
Federal Building and, U. S. Courthouse, Room 260
5500 Veterans Drive
St. Thomas, VI 00802-6424
Web Site | Press Releases
1108 King Street, Suite 201, Christiansted (340)773-3920 (340)773-1407
St. Croix, VI 00820-4951
VIRGINIA PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Dana Boente, USA (703)299-3700 (703)299-2584
2100 Jamieson Ave
Alexandria, VA 22314
Web Site | Press Releases
World Trade Center (757)441-6331 (757)441-6689
101 W. Main Street, Suite 8000
Norfolk, VA 23510
Main Street Centre (804)819-5400 (804)771-2316
600 E. Main Street, Suite 1800
Richmond, VA 23219
Fountain Plaza Three (757)591-4000 (757)591-0866
Suite 300
721 Lakefront Commons
Newport News, Virginia 23606
Western District
Julia Campbell Dudley, USA (540)857-2250 (540)857-2614
310 First Street, S.W. Room 906
Roanoke, VA 24011
Post Office Box 1709
Roanoke, VA 24008
Web Site | Press Releases
180 W. Main Street (276)628-4161 (276)628-7399
Abingdon, VA 24210
255 West Main Street, Room 104 (434)293-4283 (434)293-4910
Charlottesville, VA 22901
WASHINGTON PHONE FAX
Eastern District
James A. McDevitt, USA* (509)353-2767 (509)353-2766
P.O. Box 1494
Spokane, WA 99210-1494
Web Site | Press Releases
Post Office Box 4065 (509)454-4425 (509)454-4435
Yakima, WA 98901
Western District
Jeffrey C. Sullivan, USA (206)553-7970 (206)553-0882
700 Stewart Street Suite 5220
Seattle, WA 98101-1271
Web Site | Press Releases
1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 (253)428-3800 (253)428-3826
Tacoma, WA 98402
WEST VIRGINIA PHONE FAX
Northern District
Sharon L. Potter, USA* (304)234-0100 (304)234-0110
P.O. Box 591
Wheeling, WV 26003-0011
Web Site | Press Releases
Federal Center (304)623-7030 (304)623-7031
320 West Pike Street, Suite 300
Clarksburg, WV 26301-2710
Post Office Box 190 (304)636-1739 (304)636-1967
Elkins, WV 26241-0190
U. S. Courthouse and Post Office Building (304)262-0590 (304)262-0591
217 West King Street, Suite 400
Martinsburg, WV 25401-3286
Southern District
Charles T. Miller, USA (304)345-2200 (304)347-7074
Post Office Box 1713
Charleston, WV 25326
Web Site | Press Releases
Post Office Box 1239 (304)529-5799 (304)529-5545
Huntington WV 25714
WISCONSIN PHONE FAX
Eastern District
Michelle L. Jacobs, USA (414)297-1700 (414)297-1738
530 Federal Building
517 East Wisconsin Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53202
Web Site | Press Releases
Western District
Erik C. Peterson, USA* (608)264-5158 (608)264-5172
P.O. Box 1585
Madison, WI 53701-1585
Web Site | Press Releases
WYOMING PHONE FAX
Kelly H. Rankin, USA* (307)772-2124 (307)772-2123
P. O. Box 668
Cheyenne, WY 82003-0668
Dick Cheney Federal Building (307)261-5434 (307)261-5471
100 East B Street, Suite 2211
Casper, WY 82601
P.O. Box 449 (307)332-8195 (307)332-7104
Lander, WY 82520
Monday, January 26, 2009
Attorney General
I got this question in an e-mail (see below). I would agree that Vice President Cheney should've asked for objections and each congressmen should've objected, but I believe that strategically we are better off concentrating on one effort- exposing BO, as what he is, an usurper, and removing him out of the White House. With that in mind, I think that strategically you should concentrate on demanding that Att. Generals of each state investigate BO and fraud committed by him. You should schedule personal appointments, bring documents. For your convenience the necessary documents are posted on the page of Defend our Freedoms, on the right side. You can download the links and forward the documents to the attorney generals. Keep record of you visits, forward this record to me, I will post it, so we will have them all accountable. Let's hope and pray that we will find at least one attorney general that is not corrupt.
jublationantcptin@juno.com wrote:
Hello,
Thank you, again.
Can the Attorneys General also be asked to investigate this situation?
After the electoral vote count/certification by Congress, the presiding person (V.P. Cheney, according to one source I just read) is by law required to ask for any objections. If one Senator and one Representative place an objection to the winner of the vote count, Congress must investigate the legitimacy of the reasons behind the objection (in this case, the eligibility of the candidate to hold the office of pesidency.). This same source stated that no one objected because V.P. Cheney did not call for or allow any objections.
If that is the case, then the Congressional confirmation of Mr. O is invalidated by ANOTHER reason. Plus, Mr. Cheney broke the law.
Can we ask the Attorney Generals to also investigate this possible miscarriage of justice against the American people? We need to find out if ANYONE did or would have objected but was illegally prevented from doing so, or if their objections were ignored.
These leaders have too long gotten away with breaking our laws with no consequences. The consequences all fall on us, the people. I'm for changing THAT pattern right now. I pray the Attorneys General will be true to their oaths and carry out justice for us all.
Thank you for passing on these requests. I appreciate your efforts.
jublationantcptin@juno.com wrote:
Hello,
Thank you, again.
Can the Attorneys General also be asked to investigate this situation?
After the electoral vote count/certification by Congress, the presiding person (V.P. Cheney, according to one source I just read) is by law required to ask for any objections. If one Senator and one Representative place an objection to the winner of the vote count, Congress must investigate the legitimacy of the reasons behind the objection (in this case, the eligibility of the candidate to hold the office of pesidency.). This same source stated that no one objected because V.P. Cheney did not call for or allow any objections.
If that is the case, then the Congressional confirmation of Mr. O is invalidated by ANOTHER reason. Plus, Mr. Cheney broke the law.
Can we ask the Attorney Generals to also investigate this possible miscarriage of justice against the American people? We need to find out if ANYONE did or would have objected but was illegally prevented from doing so, or if their objections were ignored.
These leaders have too long gotten away with breaking our laws with no consequences. The consequences all fall on us, the people. I'm for changing THAT pattern right now. I pray the Attorneys General will be true to their oaths and carry out justice for us all.
Thank you for passing on these requests. I appreciate your efforts.
From Bill Grant MA
at some point in the future orly, i want you as attorney general of the usa. you put most americans to shame for their apathy, indifference and ignorance. rest assured that you have millions of your fellow-citizens behind you and remember to not be outcome based, but remain as you are, i.e., principles based. what's right will prevail. bill grantsouth boston, massachusetts
Transparency in Government-please respond to Mr. Obama-Soetoro
Mr. Obama-Barry Soetoro has issued this memorandum on transparency in government. Please respond to him and all the heads of departments and agencies with attachment of this order and executive order from Bush and demand from this fraud his original birth certificate, passports from Indonesia and Kenya, his immigration records and school/university registrations. You may also want to ask him to resign due to the fact that he failed to provide any records verifying that he is a natural Born citizen, you may want to ask those departments to investigate and start the indictment process. (thank you Mr. Hagen for forwarding this to me)
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIESSUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the Government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public input on how we can increase and improve opportunities for public participation in Government.Government should be collaborative. Collaboration actively engages Americans in the work of their Government. Executive departments and agencies should use innovative tools, methods, and systems to cooperate among themselves, across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector. Executive departments and agencies should solicit public feedback to assess and improve their level of collaboration and to identify new opportunities for cooperation.I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum. The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive. This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. This memorandum shall be published in the Federal Register. BARACK OBAMA
The Whitehouse
MON, JANUARY 26, 12:27 PM EST
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIESSUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the Government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public input on how we can increase and improve opportunities for public participation in Government.Government should be collaborative. Collaboration actively engages Americans in the work of their Government. Executive departments and agencies should use innovative tools, methods, and systems to cooperate among themselves, across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector. Executive departments and agencies should solicit public feedback to assess and improve their level of collaboration and to identify new opportunities for cooperation.I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum. The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive. This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. This memorandum shall be published in the Federal Register. BARACK OBAMA
The Whitehouse
MON, JANUARY 26, 12:27 PM EST
from a reader Michele Pecora
Dear Joe, Chris and Michael:
I listened to replays of Michael Medved's tirade about those of us who are doing our part to expose Barry Soetero/Barack Obama.
The callers were far more articulate than Medved. The passport discussion was so demonstrative of Medved's poor debate skills. He changed the subject at least three times while talking over the caller before weaseling out to a break.
On another occasion, as soon as an attorney introduced himself, Medved tossed out the "funds" card in his first sentence. Does he really think he is fooling anyone with that cheap defensive tactic? He has no basis for his rude banter and has displayed an amazing degree of ignorance and foolish amateur legal interpretations. I would laugh if I weren't so appalled.
Medved deserves to be sued for slander, but I notice that Dr. Orly Taitz graciously responded with a firm and informative letter. He is lucky that she took the high road in the face of his sleazy comments. If she were anything but dedicated to the cause, she wouldn't bother with Medved. She'd settle for suing him if it were about money.
Medved's sarcasim falls on its face. Is he trying to entertain?
I expect for him to act like an adult and offer the attorneys who are donating hours of their time to save America from this Usurper time to clear the air waves that he polluted.
Otherwise, he deserves to be sued to bankruptcy, for all I care. I would not have heard of him if it hadn't been for the outrage of true conservatives. And, by the way, I'm not making any money on this email.
Sincerely,
Michele Pecora, MBA, CPA
I listened to replays of Michael Medved's tirade about those of us who are doing our part to expose Barry Soetero/Barack Obama.
The callers were far more articulate than Medved. The passport discussion was so demonstrative of Medved's poor debate skills. He changed the subject at least three times while talking over the caller before weaseling out to a break.
On another occasion, as soon as an attorney introduced himself, Medved tossed out the "funds" card in his first sentence. Does he really think he is fooling anyone with that cheap defensive tactic? He has no basis for his rude banter and has displayed an amazing degree of ignorance and foolish amateur legal interpretations. I would laugh if I weren't so appalled.
Medved deserves to be sued for slander, but I notice that Dr. Orly Taitz graciously responded with a firm and informative letter. He is lucky that she took the high road in the face of his sleazy comments. If she were anything but dedicated to the cause, she wouldn't bother with Medved. She'd settle for suing him if it were about money.
Medved's sarcasim falls on its face. Is he trying to entertain?
I expect for him to act like an adult and offer the attorneys who are donating hours of their time to save America from this Usurper time to clear the air waves that he polluted.
Otherwise, he deserves to be sued to bankruptcy, for all I care. I would not have heard of him if it hadn't been for the outrage of true conservatives. And, by the way, I'm not making any money on this email.
Sincerely,
Michele Pecora, MBA, CPA
Open letter to Chief Justice Roberts from LtCol Earl Graef
Orly , Please at your discretion post this letter.
Memorandum and Open Letter
From: LtCol. David A. Earl-Graef
To: Chief Justice John G. Roberts
Date: 26 Jan 2006
Sir,
I can not express in words the disappointment I feel regarding the recent actions of the Court to deny those of us in the military important answers to questions regarding our Constitutional duty as clearly stated in our Oath of Office. While these actions are not an injury such as one might sustain on the field of battle, they constitute an egregious injury to the faith I have placed in the court. While I can not say that of its nature the injury is mortal, it is not without morbidity! While I can not say that I shall succumb to it, the actions of the Court have deeply wounded the spirit of this American Soldier. I am left brokenhearted and conflicted in this moment to the point of tears.
I had earlier written to you and asked that you consider the Oath of Office that I took and every American Soldier takes and asked that you honor and respect its sacred vows in your actions. I ask you now in your heart; have you done this? Have you placed aside the political concerns of this decision? Have you given honor to the fighting men and women who, in the face of death, carry the standard of freedom? Have you given honor to the fallen Soldiers who have no voice; those who are now across the river of eternity and whose bodies lay entombed across the river from where you sit, in the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery? Have you given honor to the Soldiers whose names are not inscribed on any piece of stone or mortar or recorded on any parchment or paper; the names American Soldiers that are known only to God?
Make no mistake, I am keenly aware of the burden placed upon you and do not in any way envy your responsibility or the responsibility of the court in this situation. The dire consequences facing our Nation in either circumstance around your decision are no less and perhaps more than has ever fallen before us as a Nation in our entire history.
Although in my darkest moments, when shadows of doubt encircle me, I remain steadfast to my Oath. Although I can not suppress a feeling of betrayal, I can not knowingly betray my country. I again plea to the Court to release me from this yoke of uncertainty that is weighing me down. Renew my faith in Justice and give me the direction I need to continue to serve. Above all I pray that you not let those Soldiers who have paid and are yet to pay the ultimate sacrifice defending the Constitution to have done so in vain.
Sincerely,
LtCol David Earl-Graef USAFR MC
Memorandum and Open Letter
From: LtCol. David A. Earl-Graef
To: Chief Justice John G. Roberts
Date: 26 Jan 2006
Sir,
I can not express in words the disappointment I feel regarding the recent actions of the Court to deny those of us in the military important answers to questions regarding our Constitutional duty as clearly stated in our Oath of Office. While these actions are not an injury such as one might sustain on the field of battle, they constitute an egregious injury to the faith I have placed in the court. While I can not say that of its nature the injury is mortal, it is not without morbidity! While I can not say that I shall succumb to it, the actions of the Court have deeply wounded the spirit of this American Soldier. I am left brokenhearted and conflicted in this moment to the point of tears.
I had earlier written to you and asked that you consider the Oath of Office that I took and every American Soldier takes and asked that you honor and respect its sacred vows in your actions. I ask you now in your heart; have you done this? Have you placed aside the political concerns of this decision? Have you given honor to the fighting men and women who, in the face of death, carry the standard of freedom? Have you given honor to the fallen Soldiers who have no voice; those who are now across the river of eternity and whose bodies lay entombed across the river from where you sit, in the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery? Have you given honor to the Soldiers whose names are not inscribed on any piece of stone or mortar or recorded on any parchment or paper; the names American Soldiers that are known only to God?
Make no mistake, I am keenly aware of the burden placed upon you and do not in any way envy your responsibility or the responsibility of the court in this situation. The dire consequences facing our Nation in either circumstance around your decision are no less and perhaps more than has ever fallen before us as a Nation in our entire history.
Although in my darkest moments, when shadows of doubt encircle me, I remain steadfast to my Oath. Although I can not suppress a feeling of betrayal, I can not knowingly betray my country. I again plea to the Court to release me from this yoke of uncertainty that is weighing me down. Renew my faith in Justice and give me the direction I need to continue to serve. Above all I pray that you not let those Soldiers who have paid and are yet to pay the ultimate sacrifice defending the Constitution to have done so in vain.
Sincerely,
LtCol David Earl-Graef USAFR MC
Urgent-need affidavits for motion to compel for the Supreme Court, Senate and Congressional Judicial committee hearings and FBI and US attorney
For immediate press release
01.26.09.
Dear fellow Americans and Patriots,
as you probably know, in my case Lightfoot v Bowen I filed a petition for emergency stay and asked it to be treated as a writ of certiorari based on Bush v Gore 2000 precedent. The Supreme Court has logged this petition as an application for stay pending filing a writ of certiorari. Since they denied the emergency petition today, it gives me an opportunity to file immediately the actual Writ of Certiorari and it will be done within a few days.
However, a number of things have transpired lately.
First, an exparte private closed door meeting between 8 out of 9 Justices of the Supreme Court (Justice Samuel Alito was not present) with Mr. Barry Soetoro-Barack Hussein Obama. I will file a motion to the Chief Jastice to compel the records of this private meeting, that was held only a few days before my case was supposed to be heard, where the plaintiffs state that Mr. Soetoro-Obama is illegitimate for presidency due to the fact that his father was a foreign subject and there is no evidence that Mr. Obama was really born in Hawaii, since the state of Hawaii statute 338 allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to obtain Hawaiian certification of live birth and such certification can be obtained based on an affidavit of one relative only. In spite of 32 legal actions filed around the country, Mr. Soetoro-Obama refused to provide his original birth certificate that is sealed in Hawaii, no hospital in Hawaii could find any records of Mr. Obama ever being born there and affidavits were given by a number of parties in Kenya, stating that he was born in Kenya. We believe that Mr. Obama has spent over $800,000 on numerous attorneys to keep his original birth certificate sealed, because the original vault birth certificate does not provide any corroborating evidence from any hospital about him being born there.
Additionally, Mr. Obama has immigrated to Indonesia as a child with his mother and step-father Lolo Soetoro and his school records from Indonesia show his legal name to be Barry Soetoro, citizen of Indonesia. Due to the fact that Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, Mr. Soetoro -Obama's parents had to relinquish his US citizenship in order to obtain his Indonesian Citizenship. There is ample evidence that Mr. Soetoro-Obama has travelled on his Indonesian passport up to the time he became US Senator, whereby he reaffirmed his Indonesian citizenship as an adult.
The swearing of Mr. Obama is null and void due to the fact that he was sworn in on a name that is not legally his name and he is a foreign subject from birth and now and never qualified as a Natural Born US Citizen
On Wednesday, January the 21st, when the Supreme Court reopened for business after inauguration, somebody deleted from the external docket all information about my case. Millions of people around the country and around the world watched that docket. A number of concerned parties have called the Supreme Court and got no explanation. Other cases were on the docket. Finally, information about my case was re-entered on the docket. I will be demanding from the Chief Justice John Roberts an immediate full investigation, as to how the information about a case of National and World importance, dealing with Mr Soetoro- Obama's illegitimacy for Presidency, disappeared from the docket of the Supreme Court. Incidentally an article about me and the cases I am handling, has disappeared from the Wikipedia. A copy of this letter will be forwarded to the Congressional and Senatorial Judicial committees for full investigation and hearing as well as FBI and US attorney's offices.
I would ask all of the citizens that observed this disappearing and reappearing of information on the docket of SCOTUS to write affidavits to that extend. Please go to the nearest UPS store. They usually have notary public on the premises. Have your signature notarised and have the affidavit scanned and e-mailed to me.
Watergate investigation started with a small hotel braking. Obamagate Congressional and Senatorial investigation will start with this breaking into the computer system of the Supreme Court of the United States and illegal deletion of all the information about my case from the external public docket.
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
dr_taitz@yahoo.com
drorly.blogspot.com
01.26.09.
Dear fellow Americans and Patriots,
as you probably know, in my case Lightfoot v Bowen I filed a petition for emergency stay and asked it to be treated as a writ of certiorari based on Bush v Gore 2000 precedent. The Supreme Court has logged this petition as an application for stay pending filing a writ of certiorari. Since they denied the emergency petition today, it gives me an opportunity to file immediately the actual Writ of Certiorari and it will be done within a few days.
However, a number of things have transpired lately.
First, an exparte private closed door meeting between 8 out of 9 Justices of the Supreme Court (Justice Samuel Alito was not present) with Mr. Barry Soetoro-Barack Hussein Obama. I will file a motion to the Chief Jastice to compel the records of this private meeting, that was held only a few days before my case was supposed to be heard, where the plaintiffs state that Mr. Soetoro-Obama is illegitimate for presidency due to the fact that his father was a foreign subject and there is no evidence that Mr. Obama was really born in Hawaii, since the state of Hawaii statute 338 allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to obtain Hawaiian certification of live birth and such certification can be obtained based on an affidavit of one relative only. In spite of 32 legal actions filed around the country, Mr. Soetoro-Obama refused to provide his original birth certificate that is sealed in Hawaii, no hospital in Hawaii could find any records of Mr. Obama ever being born there and affidavits were given by a number of parties in Kenya, stating that he was born in Kenya. We believe that Mr. Obama has spent over $800,000 on numerous attorneys to keep his original birth certificate sealed, because the original vault birth certificate does not provide any corroborating evidence from any hospital about him being born there.
Additionally, Mr. Obama has immigrated to Indonesia as a child with his mother and step-father Lolo Soetoro and his school records from Indonesia show his legal name to be Barry Soetoro, citizen of Indonesia. Due to the fact that Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, Mr. Soetoro -Obama's parents had to relinquish his US citizenship in order to obtain his Indonesian Citizenship. There is ample evidence that Mr. Soetoro-Obama has travelled on his Indonesian passport up to the time he became US Senator, whereby he reaffirmed his Indonesian citizenship as an adult.
The swearing of Mr. Obama is null and void due to the fact that he was sworn in on a name that is not legally his name and he is a foreign subject from birth and now and never qualified as a Natural Born US Citizen
On Wednesday, January the 21st, when the Supreme Court reopened for business after inauguration, somebody deleted from the external docket all information about my case. Millions of people around the country and around the world watched that docket. A number of concerned parties have called the Supreme Court and got no explanation. Other cases were on the docket. Finally, information about my case was re-entered on the docket. I will be demanding from the Chief Justice John Roberts an immediate full investigation, as to how the information about a case of National and World importance, dealing with Mr Soetoro- Obama's illegitimacy for Presidency, disappeared from the docket of the Supreme Court. Incidentally an article about me and the cases I am handling, has disappeared from the Wikipedia. A copy of this letter will be forwarded to the Congressional and Senatorial Judicial committees for full investigation and hearing as well as FBI and US attorney's offices.
I would ask all of the citizens that observed this disappearing and reappearing of information on the docket of SCOTUS to write affidavits to that extend. Please go to the nearest UPS store. They usually have notary public on the premises. Have your signature notarised and have the affidavit scanned and e-mailed to me.
Watergate investigation started with a small hotel braking. Obamagate Congressional and Senatorial investigation will start with this breaking into the computer system of the Supreme Court of the United States and illegal deletion of all the information about my case from the external public docket.
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
dr_taitz@yahoo.com
drorly.blogspot.com
New Subpoenas
New subpoenas that have been issued to Obama's senior staff from the Honorable Patrick Fitzgerald Office:
David Axelrod
Valerie Jarrett
Rahm Emanuel
Tony Rezko
Also served:
Patricia Blagojevich
Friends of Blagojevich, campaign committee
Citizens for Blagojevich, former committee
Robert Blagojevich
Christopher Kelly
Alonzo Monk
Milan Petrovic
John Wyma
Paul Rosenfeld
J.B. Pritzker
Gery Chico
Doug Scofield
Scofield Communications
Service Employees International Union
Tom Balanoff
Change to Win, activist group
Sam Zell, owner of the Chicago Tribune
Nils Larsen
The Chicago Tribune
The Tribune Co.
Michael Vondra
Gerald Krozel
John Johnston, president of Balmoral Park racetrack
Fred Yang
Garin Hart Yang Research Group
William Knapp
Squire, Knapp & Dunn, Knapp’s firm
Doug Sosnick, political consultant
David Axelrod
Valerie Jarrett
Rahm Emanuel
Tony Rezko
Also served:
Patricia Blagojevich
Friends of Blagojevich, campaign committee
Citizens for Blagojevich, former committee
Robert Blagojevich
Christopher Kelly
Alonzo Monk
Milan Petrovic
John Wyma
Paul Rosenfeld
J.B. Pritzker
Gery Chico
Doug Scofield
Scofield Communications
Service Employees International Union
Tom Balanoff
Change to Win, activist group
Sam Zell, owner of the Chicago Tribune
Nils Larsen
The Chicago Tribune
The Tribune Co.
Michael Vondra
Gerald Krozel
John Johnston, president of Balmoral Park racetrack
Fred Yang
Garin Hart Yang Research Group
William Knapp
Squire, Knapp & Dunn, Knapp’s firm
Doug Sosnick, political consultant
Michael Medved Audio Clips - We The People USA
Michael Medved Audio Clips - We The People USA:
Jean Kulig-Tucker, Founder of WeThePeopleUSA.ning.com wrote: "Listen to Audio Clips of the Jan 19, 2009 Michael Medved Show on my Audio Playlist located on the left-hand side of my Profile page to hear Medved talking trash about Phillip Berg, Dr. Orly Taitz and anyone else that wants to see Barack Hussain Obama's Actual Long-Form Vault Copy Birth Certificate.
It looks like (pic below) Medved is in for a shock when he actually sees BO's Birth Certificate! Oh....and don't forget to read about Orly's Request for A Retraction from Michael Medved and Salem Communications." Read more.
Note: Be sure to read Orly's Retraction Request Michael Medved.
Jean Kulig-Tucker continues by writing:
PATRIOTS, PLEASE POST THIS and PASS THIS ON TO YOUR CONTACTS. ORLY's LETTERS are BELOW.
Let's All help Orly by emailing Joe Davis, joeD@salem.cc, President of Salem Communications, Chris Henderson, chrish@salem.cc Salem Communication's General Counsel and Michael Medved at michael@michaelmedved.com or using Medved's Online Form at http://www.michaelmedved.com/askmike.
CALL Salem Communications, aka, Salem Web Networks www.salemwebnetwork.com at 805-987-0400 and the producers at the Michael Medved Show at 1-800-955-1776.
Let's tell Salem Communications and Michael Medved that we are going to BOYCOTT Salem Communications and all of their affiliate radio stations listed here http://townhall.com/SiteMap.aspx. Lets let them know that we will unsubscribe to www.Townhall.com, www.TownhallMagazine.com and BOYCOTT of their advertisors too, if they DO NOT issue a retraction and provide Orly with the appropriate airtime on Michael Medved's show or on another broadcast which will allow Orly to defend herself against Medved's slanderous, defamatory and completely ill-informed comments regarding her character and the merits of her legal actions.
Act Now!! Bombard them with Emails and Phone Calls!
Obama - Son of Kenya Soil
http://www.bunge.go.ke/downloads/Tenth%20Parl%201st%20Session/Hansard/5.11.08A.pdf
Parliament of the Republic of Kenya
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT [Kenya] Wednesday, 5th November, 2008
The House met at 9.00 a.m.
-Snip-
House Adjourn To Discuss Election Of Mr. Barrack Obama
Ms. Odhiambo: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. It is not on this issue. I stand on a point of order under Standing Order No.20 to seek leave for adjournment of the House to discuss the American presidential election results.
(Applause)
Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the President-elect, Mr. Obama, is a son of the soil of this country. Every other country in this continent is celebrating the Obama win. It is only proper and fitting that the country which he originates from should show the same excitement, pomp and colour. I, therefore, seek leave of the House that we adjourn to discuss the issue.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order! Order!
Ms. Odhiambo, Standing Order No.20 says:- "Any hon. Member may at any time rise in his place and seek leave to move the adjournment of the House for purposes of discussing a definite matter of urgent national importance."
This means national "Kenyan" importance. The election of Senator Barrack Obama-
-- An hon. Member: It is President Obama! Mr. Deputy Speaker: president-elect has not been sworn-in yet. The election of President-elect Obama is of utmost national importance to the United States of America. Ms. Odhiambo, you are a lawyer. You had better be very careful where you transgress between watching your own sovereignty and what can be interpreted in some quarters as some form of treason. We appreciate and respect him. We are happy and we were looking forward to his election. It is not a matter of urgent definite national importance to Kenya.
In any case, whereas the ruling from the Chair would not have been any different, you are supposed to approach the Chair at least two hours in advance and give a notice of that information. Nonetheless, let us hold our horses. Let the excitement not make us look like American citizens. We are citizens of the sovereign Republic of Kenya.
-snip-
"The Vice-President and Minister for Home Affairs (Mr. Musyoka): Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, while thanking you for that Communication from the Chair, I want to join the rest of the world and, indeed, all of us - and it is understandable that the rest of African Continent and the whole world is celebrating a dawn of a new era---
As we congratulate the American people and more, specifically, Senator Barrack Obama who is now President-elect, it is important to reflect on the journey that he has travelled so far. When countries get their foreign policy right, a lot of hope can ensue. What I have in mind is the famous Kennedy airlifts of the 1960s when many Kenyans were, due the friendship with the then Government and the late Tom Joseph Mboya, given the opportunity to travel to the United States of America as a result of [The Vice-President and Minister for Home Affairs]
which we now have an African American of Kenyan origin being President-elect. This is momentous. At 4.00 o'clock this morning, Senator Barrack Obama called me at midnight and told me: "Mr. Vice President, could you make sure you sort out this problem?" I want to assure him that the problem has since been sorted out. (Several hon. Members stood up)
Mr. Deputy Speaker: You are all out of order! Next Order! Order! Hon. Members,"
-end snip-
Parliament of the Republic of Kenya
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT [Kenya] Wednesday, 5th November, 2008
The House met at 9.00 a.m.
-Snip-
House Adjourn To Discuss Election Of Mr. Barrack Obama
Ms. Odhiambo: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. It is not on this issue. I stand on a point of order under Standing Order No.20 to seek leave for adjournment of the House to discuss the American presidential election results.
(Applause)
Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the President-elect, Mr. Obama, is a son of the soil of this country. Every other country in this continent is celebrating the Obama win. It is only proper and fitting that the country which he originates from should show the same excitement, pomp and colour. I, therefore, seek leave of the House that we adjourn to discuss the issue.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order! Order!
Ms. Odhiambo, Standing Order No.20 says:- "Any hon. Member may at any time rise in his place and seek leave to move the adjournment of the House for purposes of discussing a definite matter of urgent national importance."
This means national "Kenyan" importance. The election of Senator Barrack Obama-
-- An hon. Member: It is President Obama! Mr. Deputy Speaker: president-elect has not been sworn-in yet. The election of President-elect Obama is of utmost national importance to the United States of America. Ms. Odhiambo, you are a lawyer. You had better be very careful where you transgress between watching your own sovereignty and what can be interpreted in some quarters as some form of treason. We appreciate and respect him. We are happy and we were looking forward to his election. It is not a matter of urgent definite national importance to Kenya.
In any case, whereas the ruling from the Chair would not have been any different, you are supposed to approach the Chair at least two hours in advance and give a notice of that information. Nonetheless, let us hold our horses. Let the excitement not make us look like American citizens. We are citizens of the sovereign Republic of Kenya.
-snip-
"The Vice-President and Minister for Home Affairs (Mr. Musyoka): Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, while thanking you for that Communication from the Chair, I want to join the rest of the world and, indeed, all of us - and it is understandable that the rest of African Continent and the whole world is celebrating a dawn of a new era---
As we congratulate the American people and more, specifically, Senator Barrack Obama who is now President-elect, it is important to reflect on the journey that he has travelled so far. When countries get their foreign policy right, a lot of hope can ensue. What I have in mind is the famous Kennedy airlifts of the 1960s when many Kenyans were, due the friendship with the then Government and the late Tom Joseph Mboya, given the opportunity to travel to the United States of America as a result of [The Vice-President and Minister for Home Affairs]
which we now have an African American of Kenyan origin being President-elect. This is momentous. At 4.00 o'clock this morning, Senator Barrack Obama called me at midnight and told me: "Mr. Vice President, could you make sure you sort out this problem?" I want to assure him that the problem has since been sorted out. (Several hon. Members stood up)
Mr. Deputy Speaker: You are all out of order! Next Order! Order! Hon. Members,"
-end snip-
AP reporting on Obama's aunt, from reader Robert
this article was written by AP writer Joanne Viviano in OH. Commentary below is from one of the readers. My comment to this: why isn't AP doing it's job for once and not demanding from ICE under FOIA all of Obama's immigration records, his mother's travel in 1960-1961, his passport records. It was reported by former ICE agent that Obama came to US on foreign exchange student visa. Excerpts of Ca Assembly show Soetoro from Indonesia receiving foreign exchange student aid. Maybe AP should stop drinking Obama cool aid for a minute or two and start serious investigative reporting about him
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090126/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_aunt
...hiding in the open.
My understanding of the law is she cannot get asylum or a stay of deportation after an order has been issued to deport her. Now, she must get a Presidential pardon to stay.Lets see her birth certificate, lying documents to get government housing, medical care and welfare checks, voting records, fake social security number, passport, entry documents into the US-lets see it all!!!!Documents! We ain't got no STINKN documents!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090126/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_aunt
...hiding in the open.
My understanding of the law is she cannot get asylum or a stay of deportation after an order has been issued to deport her. Now, she must get a Presidential pardon to stay.Lets see her birth certificate, lying documents to get government housing, medical care and welfare checks, voting records, fake social security number, passport, entry documents into the US-lets see it all!!!!Documents! We ain't got no STINKN documents!
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Important
Obama paid his employees with debit cards. Those are empty now. I need a few empty debit cards. You might be able to buy them on e-bay as memorabilia
From reader Carol
We the People have what the tyrants and usurpers want....our money buying their products which they can use to control us.
If we identify the money flow and companies related to the people who are criminally destroying our Constitution, we can have great influence.
For example, some people behind Obama:
Oprah.........stop buying any products related to Oprah's empire
Pelosi...........multimillionaire from Starkist Tuna
Soros
Bush
Gore
Reid
Media control
General Electric has manipulated media, what products are they involved in?
Fox News controlled by shares owned by Saudi Arabia
If we had a detailed product list that was tied to supporting Obama, we could make an impact where it would hurt.
What auto companies supported Obama?
If somebody could organize us into pro-Constitution shopping behaviors, we could vote with our pocketbooks.
Gas/oil companies.
I noticed in some stock I owned (not much) that ING, a huge megabillionare company out of Holland stock value dropped 80%.
Procter and Gamble, of Cincinnati Ohio, dropped 7%.
It looks prettyobvious that ING was either an inside job, to affect the world market, or was targeted by some entity, trying to dismantle its power. I do not know world economics enough to know the cause, but I do know there is a big difference between 7% and 80%, and there is pretty obvious financial war going on.
I hope that somehow we can learn which products are in Oprah's empire and the Soros financial empire, and take away their control with a boycott of their products.
God bless America,
Carol
If we identify the money flow and companies related to the people who are criminally destroying our Constitution, we can have great influence.
For example, some people behind Obama:
Oprah.........stop buying any products related to Oprah's empire
Pelosi...........multimillionaire from Starkist Tuna
Soros
Bush
Gore
Reid
Media control
General Electric has manipulated media, what products are they involved in?
Fox News controlled by shares owned by Saudi Arabia
If we had a detailed product list that was tied to supporting Obama, we could make an impact where it would hurt.
What auto companies supported Obama?
If somebody could organize us into pro-Constitution shopping behaviors, we could vote with our pocketbooks.
Gas/oil companies.
I noticed in some stock I owned (not much) that ING, a huge megabillionare company out of Holland stock value dropped 80%.
Procter and Gamble, of Cincinnati Ohio, dropped 7%.
It looks prettyobvious that ING was either an inside job, to affect the world market, or was targeted by some entity, trying to dismantle its power. I do not know world economics enough to know the cause, but I do know there is a big difference between 7% and 80%, and there is pretty obvious financial war going on.
I hope that somehow we can learn which products are in Oprah's empire and the Soros financial empire, and take away their control with a boycott of their products.
God bless America,
Carol
Facebook | Tea Party: February 1, 2009
Facebook | Tea Party: February 1, 2009: "It is time for We The People to send a strong message to Washington DC - no more. No more loading our children and grandchildren with debt. No more bailing out speculators and bankers who made bets they knew were unsafe at the time. No more bailing out people who came to Congress to demand the removal of leverage limits, got what they asked for, then blew themselves up with the very leverage they demanded to be able to use.
There is a new movement starting called - The 2009 Tea Party - the purpose is to let Congress know just how we feel about their performances. On Feb. 1st we ask that every American send to their Senators and Congressmen a postcard, e-mail, etc. with a picture of a tea bag and this greeting:
2009 Tea Party
We're Mad as Hell
and we're not going to take it
ANYMORE
Welcome to the Revolution
We are determined to get as many people out there to voice their opinions. It worked all those many years ago for our patriots in Boston..Let the Revolution begin. If you are a member of Facebook, a group page has been set up called 2009 Tea Party. It has some good info. Spread the word!!
Read more.
From a group of readers
Good luck!
Like I said, stop funding them.
"Ever so often, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants" Thomas Jefferson
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Unalienable Rights wrote:
Well when the workd gets out, and it will, that this CURRENT government structure is OUR government , not anyone elses government.
It is OUR government's duty to protect RIGHTs. Privacy is arguably a RIGHT and the "illegal alien POTUS" has the right, too.
So where is the answer to the problem we have now?
The answer MAY not be in the courts but in the VOTERS' hands. LAW, recall of representatives, etc.
AND! The lack of 'standing' issue is a serious LEGAL problem. Cuz...one CANNOT compel the government to OBEY the laws IF one has NOT been injured ie: lacks standing.
So weigh the legal matters based on the red text above and you will SOON know that the Obama issue is OUR issue because he violated OUR law/s.
Just organize by calling and recruiting volunteers who are probably at the Grange, Eagles, Moose, Vet orgs. and on and on and on.
Get a laptop and do a Power Point presentation about Oblammmma etc at the organizations' meetings.
Put a sign on your vehicle saying we INAUGURATED an "ILLEGAL ALIEN" and have a website on the sign too, so the sign readers can find out what's going on with the "ILLEGAL ALIEN".
*****************************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Gary Mach wrote:
It is the difference between DeFacto and DeJure. Until we stop answering the wrong questions and start functioning in the correct realm programs will come and go as distractions and the machine keeps rolling along!
Their is a thing in court called traversing. It is used to keep an aponent off point. The idea is to get your aponent to traverse to an off point argument. If your aponent is kept off point you win. We can whine all we want about issues and not make any progress due to being off point. Most of (if not all) the programes keep the public off point. If they keep us asking the wrong questions they don't have give us the right answers,
The DeFacto Government is not the true Govt. and it's funding needs to end. That is some thing the people can do.
As to success and/or demise of the programs and bills you metioned they are all debatable. They are all off point.
What ever deal that goes down has a new bigger and badder one waiting in the wings. Voting the bums out is something the people can do to. But they don't. Why?
The people need to be reminded that nothing protects them as well as a Republican form of Govt. I don't mean being a Republican as to what they have become is some where left of center.
I think most will not get it untill it all colapses. Hopefully the people will do the right thing then and not just ask for more Govt.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Unalienable Rights wrote:
Maybe focusing on what can be done instead of what can't be done would be the way to go wouldn't it ?
What about MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) it worked didn't it ? AND! What about 'BRADY" and the BRADY BILL ...it worked didn't it ? AND! what about the DUBAI PORTS DEAL it went down ...didn't it ? AND! what about the AMNESTY BILL ...it went down didn't it ?
AND! if a group is focused on REMOVING Oblammmma ...it will work too; no doubt about it...and it won't be an easy task to accomplish either.
See the link below and also the links in the SIGNATURE area of this email.
Resource to Combine progress Data of various Obama Elimination Groups:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7bd2qt_43f3qddwdk
**************************************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Gary Mach wrote:
Until the voters figure out that their Senators, and Representatives aren't on their side and vote the bums out (If the votes really count, paper ballots might be in order here) nothing will change! We can recruit all we want but we still end up with people that don't know that Democrats and Republicans are almost identical in their core and will keep the machine rolling down the same path it has been on for the last 80+ years! If we don't break out of the 2 party system (it is really 1 party) we are doomed for sure! If the Congress did the right thing and did not abdicate their responsibility (because they have been paid off) we would not be in this mess. The Congress is a reflection of the dumbed down populace right now, they all wan't and have their hand out. Wellfair top to bottom! Fauxbamma only got in because the represenatives of the people didn't do their job. It starts there. No one is stealing our rights, the people have failed to hold their feet to the fire at the lower levels and retain our States rights! The population as a whole don't get it because they have been indoctrinated in the public school system and have no grasp on their responsibility to do their part. They want someone else to do the dirty work. The first thing people should be doing is cut off the funding and pay off ALL of their debt! With the debt paid off the house of cards colapses. Our monitary system is debt based, no debt no system, it is that easy! See the links in the signature below, and this link.
Resource to Combine progress Data of various Obama Elimination Groups:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7bd2qt_43f3qddwdk
***************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Unalienable Rights wrote:
Great quotes are not going to help remove the bad guy from office. There needs to be a volunteer recruiting and strategy developed to ALERT 50+ million voters who didn't vote for Oblammma the liar and "illegal alien". Not to forget the Other 60) million voters who voted for a LIAR and a CHEAT who is stealing OUR rights .....rights that take 75% of the states to change...not ONE liar who appears to have his way for now.
*******************************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jeff M wrote:
Subject: Great quote
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multipy wealth by dividing it."
~~~ The late Dr. Adrian Rogers , 1931 to 2005 ~~~
Like I said, stop funding them.
"Ever so often, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants" Thomas Jefferson
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Unalienable Rights
Well when the workd gets out, and it will, that this CURRENT government structure is OUR government , not anyone elses government.
It is OUR government's duty to protect RIGHTs. Privacy is arguably a RIGHT and the "illegal alien POTUS" has the right, too.
So where is the answer to the problem we have now?
The answer MAY not be in the courts but in the VOTERS' hands. LAW, recall of representatives, etc.
AND! The lack of 'standing' issue is a serious LEGAL problem. Cuz...one CANNOT compel the government to OBEY the laws IF one has NOT been injured ie: lacks standing.
So weigh the legal matters based on the red text above and you will SOON know that the Obama issue is OUR issue because he violated OUR law/s.
Just organize by calling and recruiting volunteers who are probably at the Grange, Eagles, Moose, Vet orgs. and on and on and on.
Get a laptop and do a Power Point presentation about Oblammmma etc at the organizations' meetings.
Put a sign on your vehicle saying we INAUGURATED an "ILLEGAL ALIEN" and have a website on the sign too, so the sign readers can find out what's going on with the "ILLEGAL ALIEN".
*****************************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Gary Mach
It is the difference between DeFacto and DeJure. Until we stop answering the wrong questions and start functioning in the correct realm programs will come and go as distractions and the machine keeps rolling along!
Their is a thing in court called traversing. It is used to keep an aponent off point. The idea is to get your aponent to traverse to an off point argument. If your aponent is kept off point you win. We can whine all we want about issues and not make any progress due to being off point. Most of (if not all) the programes keep the public off point. If they keep us asking the wrong questions they don't have give us the right answers,
The DeFacto Government is not the true Govt. and it's funding needs to end. That is some thing the people can do.
As to success and/or demise of the programs and bills you metioned they are all debatable. They are all off point.
What ever deal that goes down has a new bigger and badder one waiting in the wings. Voting the bums out is something the people can do to. But they don't. Why?
The people need to be reminded that nothing protects them as well as a Republican form of Govt. I don't mean being a Republican as to what they have become is some where left of center.
I think most will not get it untill it all colapses. Hopefully the people will do the right thing then and not just ask for more Govt.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Unalienable Rights
Maybe focusing on what can be done instead of what can't be done would be the way to go wouldn't it ?
What about MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) it worked didn't it ? AND! What about 'BRADY" and the BRADY BILL ...it worked didn't it ? AND! what about the DUBAI PORTS DEAL it went down ...didn't it ? AND! what about the AMNESTY BILL ...it went down didn't it ?
AND! if a group is focused on REMOVING Oblammmma ...it will work too; no doubt about it...and it won't be an easy task to accomplish either.
See the link below and also the links in the SIGNATURE area of this email.
Resource to Combine progress Data of various Obama Elimination Groups:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7bd2qt_43f3qddwdk
**************************************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Gary Mach
Until the voters figure out that their Senators, and Representatives aren't on their side and vote the bums out (If the votes really count, paper ballots might be in order here) nothing will change! We can recruit all we want but we still end up with people that don't know that Democrats and Republicans are almost identical in their core and will keep the machine rolling down the same path it has been on for the last 80+ years! If we don't break out of the 2 party system (it is really 1 party) we are doomed for sure! If the Congress did the right thing and did not abdicate their responsibility (because they have been paid off) we would not be in this mess. The Congress is a reflection of the dumbed down populace right now, they all wan't and have their hand out. Wellfair top to bottom! Fauxbamma only got in because the represenatives of the people didn't do their job. It starts there. No one is stealing our rights, the people have failed to hold their feet to the fire at the lower levels and retain our States rights! The population as a whole don't get it because they have been indoctrinated in the public school system and have no grasp on their responsibility to do their part. They want someone else to do the dirty work. The first thing people should be doing is cut off the funding and pay off ALL of their debt! With the debt paid off the house of cards colapses. Our monitary system is debt based, no debt no system, it is that easy! See the links in the signature below, and this link.
Resource to Combine progress Data of various Obama Elimination Groups:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7bd2qt_43f3qddwdk
***************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Unalienable Rights
Great quotes are not going to help remove the bad guy from office. There needs to be a volunteer recruiting and strategy developed to ALERT 50+ million voters who didn't vote for Oblammma the liar and "illegal alien". Not to forget the Other 60) million voters who voted for a LIAR and a CHEAT who is stealing OUR rights .....rights that take 75% of the states to change...not ONE liar who appears to have his way for now.
*******************************
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jeff M
Subject: Great quote
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multipy wealth by dividing it."
~~~ The late Dr. Adrian Rogers , 1931 to 2005 ~~~
From Victoria Winsor, Richmond VA
Dear Dr. Orly Taitz and Phil Berg, (et al)
Re: Jurisprudence
Quo Warranto
Ex parte
I continue to struggle to understand what has happened to the Law, the Constitution, the foundation of Rules of Civil Procedure, Statutes, FRCP and the like. Why has the National Bar and each State Bar, University Law Professors, juris doctrine; the foundation of law per se, allowed such lack of action. I fail to understand how the Supreme Court, knowingly having pending pleadings before all of the Justices, could have an ex parte closed discussion with the defendants, or for all the Judges to rule denied without explanation, nor grounds or foundation. Law is based upon facts and findings, evidence of fact that has been sealed by the defendants, difficult to obtain, however readily available. To my knowledge the defendant has not shown this original evidence to any authority nor that has admitted to having been shown. Not only was there an ex parte secret meeting, action was taken thereafter without the benefit of a written order, nor notice to plaintiffs. Did the defendant produce proof evidence to the Supreme Court? I do not know who has standing in this matter that affects the world, that is clear under constitutional law.
Thus, I have come full circle under juris doctrine. Where are the voices of Jurisprudence, the Bar, and the teachers of law? Does this not in fact affect the entire judiciary and the American Justice System? The Civil Rights of Americans have been violated by gross abuse of discretion and deliberate indifference. What is it that we can not see or scholars know we do not know? More and more de facto practice is taking the place of de jure with the results being a de facto country. It has been suggested that ‘people’ take their complaint to the U.S. Attorneys or DOJ. Even if we get their attention to this problematic issue what Court would DOJ take this to that private attorneys have not already attempted? Maybe we should try this in the press, however it has been said the press has already decided this case and is the cause and effect. .Possibly lawyers and the Bar should have a 3rd convention at historic St. John’s Church in Richmond, Virginia.
Cordially,
Victoria Windsor
Commonwealth of Virginia
Re: Jurisprudence
Quo Warranto
Ex parte
I continue to struggle to understand what has happened to the Law, the Constitution, the foundation of Rules of Civil Procedure, Statutes, FRCP and the like. Why has the National Bar and each State Bar, University Law Professors, juris doctrine; the foundation of law per se, allowed such lack of action. I fail to understand how the Supreme Court, knowingly having pending pleadings before all of the Justices, could have an ex parte closed discussion with the defendants, or for all the Judges to rule denied without explanation, nor grounds or foundation. Law is based upon facts and findings, evidence of fact that has been sealed by the defendants, difficult to obtain, however readily available. To my knowledge the defendant has not shown this original evidence to any authority nor that has admitted to having been shown. Not only was there an ex parte secret meeting, action was taken thereafter without the benefit of a written order, nor notice to plaintiffs. Did the defendant produce proof evidence to the Supreme Court? I do not know who has standing in this matter that affects the world, that is clear under constitutional law.
Thus, I have come full circle under juris doctrine. Where are the voices of Jurisprudence, the Bar, and the teachers of law? Does this not in fact affect the entire judiciary and the American Justice System? The Civil Rights of Americans have been violated by gross abuse of discretion and deliberate indifference. What is it that we can not see or scholars know we do not know? More and more de facto practice is taking the place of de jure with the results being a de facto country. It has been suggested that ‘people’ take their complaint to the U.S. Attorneys or DOJ. Even if we get their attention to this problematic issue what Court would DOJ take this to that private attorneys have not already attempted? Maybe we should try this in the press, however it has been said the press has already decided this case and is the cause and effect. .Possibly lawyers and the Bar should have a 3rd convention at historic St. John’s Church in Richmond, Virginia.
Cordially,
Victoria Windsor
Commonwealth of Virginia
Obama's approval rating drops 15% in one week
All Discussions My Discussions Add a Discussion We're sorry, but this discussion has just been closed to further replies.
Obama's Approval Rating Plummets 15% in a WeekPosted by Informer on January 25, 2009 at 12:33pm
View Discussions
by: Bill Dupray posted: 2009-01-24 18:43:00
Hmmmm. On January 16, 2008, Obama had an approval rating of 83%, which was during the transition, a time when Obama didn't actually do anything (remember "No comment - there is only one president at a time").
Today, a week later, he is at 68%.
What could account for this sudden plunge in popularity? Could it be that the guy wants to spend a trillion dollars of taxpayer money at a time when we actually need our money just to make ends meet? Call me crazy, but telling people he is going to take their money and use it to paint bridges ain't exactly persuasive stuff.
Maybe he is losing support among the lefties, who might be realizing that The One might be a warmonger, no better than Bush, for bombing innocent dirt farmers in Nowhereistan?
Whatever the reasons, his numbers are falling. From Politico.
The Gallup Poll on Saturday released the first job-approval rating for President Obama, based on interviews during his first three full days in office: 68 percent.
Now that he’s in office, Obama’s approval ratings are starting to normalize, as partisan back-and-forth picks up. Just a week ago, Gallup found an astonishing 83 percent approval of how he has handled his transition, showing he had even won over most Republicans.
The new job-approval figure puts him at the upper end of opening poll numbers for presidents, but doesn’t set a record.
Gallup’s initial job approval ratings were President John F. Kennedy, 72 percent; Dwight Eisenhower, 68 percent; Jimmy Carter, 66 percent; Richard Nixon, 59 percent; Bill Clinton, 58 percent; George W. Bush, 57 percent; and Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, 51 percent.
So JFK he ain't. Eisenhower and Carter are more his speed. As I recall, one of those guys had a real job before he became president, saving Europe and all. The other one was well . . . Jimmy Carter. And we know how that ended.
Have the bloom and the rose begun to part ways?
Share
Obama's Approval Rating Plummets 15% in a WeekPosted by Informer on January 25, 2009 at 12:33pm
View Discussions
by: Bill Dupray posted: 2009-01-24 18:43:00
Hmmmm. On January 16, 2008, Obama had an approval rating of 83%, which was during the transition, a time when Obama didn't actually do anything (remember "No comment - there is only one president at a time").
Today, a week later, he is at 68%.
What could account for this sudden plunge in popularity? Could it be that the guy wants to spend a trillion dollars of taxpayer money at a time when we actually need our money just to make ends meet? Call me crazy, but telling people he is going to take their money and use it to paint bridges ain't exactly persuasive stuff.
Maybe he is losing support among the lefties, who might be realizing that The One might be a warmonger, no better than Bush, for bombing innocent dirt farmers in Nowhereistan?
Whatever the reasons, his numbers are falling. From Politico.
The Gallup Poll on Saturday released the first job-approval rating for President Obama, based on interviews during his first three full days in office: 68 percent.
Now that he’s in office, Obama’s approval ratings are starting to normalize, as partisan back-and-forth picks up. Just a week ago, Gallup found an astonishing 83 percent approval of how he has handled his transition, showing he had even won over most Republicans.
The new job-approval figure puts him at the upper end of opening poll numbers for presidents, but doesn’t set a record.
Gallup’s initial job approval ratings were President John F. Kennedy, 72 percent; Dwight Eisenhower, 68 percent; Jimmy Carter, 66 percent; Richard Nixon, 59 percent; Bill Clinton, 58 percent; George W. Bush, 57 percent; and Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, 51 percent.
So JFK he ain't. Eisenhower and Carter are more his speed. As I recall, one of those guys had a real job before he became president, saving Europe and all. The other one was well . . . Jimmy Carter. And we know how that ended.
Have the bloom and the rose begun to part ways?
Share
Would you like to write to AP management about their writer Liz Sidoti
I was just about ready to throw up, when I read the heading by AP writer Liz Sidoti. She was saying that Obama broke from unpopular Bush administration by avoiding to take partizan, idological stands.(see below) I don't know what is wrong with this woman: either she is naturally thick or drank too much Obama cool-aid, but one of Obama's first orders was to remove a ban and allow our tax dollars to be used to finance abortions all over the world.
First of all about half of the populations of this country, conservatives and believers of all denominations oppose this action on moral grounds.
Second of all, majority of liberals, that don't oppose abortions in general, feel that our tax dollars should not be spent on abortions around the world, including Obama's native Africa or adopted Indonesia (he holds from birth foreign citizenship- originally of Great Britain, as his father's native Kenya was a British colony, later since 1963 citizenship of Kenya and since 1966 or 1967 citizenship of Indonesia- for which reason he is illegitimate for US presidency).
Based on all of the above, his first actions in office are highly divisive and highly insulting to great majority of population. I hope you write to AP management and board of directors and demand that they employ reporters with higher IQ and higher level of journalistic integrity.
Orly
breaks from Bush, avoids divisive stands
Buzz Up Send
Email IM Share
Digg Facebook Newsvine del.icio.us Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks Print By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer Liz Sidoti, Associated Press Writer – 2 mins ago
Featured Topics: Barack Obama Presidential Transition AP – President Barack Obama, accompanied by Vice President, and retired military members, gestures in the …
Play Video Barack Obama Video: President Obama Pushes Stimulus Package CBS4 Miami Play Video Barack Obama Video: New Details of Stimulus Package ABC News Play Video Barack Obama Video: First Strike on Obama's Watch ABC News WASHINGTON – Barack Obama opened his presidency by breaking sharply from George W. Bush's unpopular administration, but he mostly avoided divisive partisan and ideological stands.
First of all about half of the populations of this country, conservatives and believers of all denominations oppose this action on moral grounds.
Second of all, majority of liberals, that don't oppose abortions in general, feel that our tax dollars should not be spent on abortions around the world, including Obama's native Africa or adopted Indonesia (he holds from birth foreign citizenship- originally of Great Britain, as his father's native Kenya was a British colony, later since 1963 citizenship of Kenya and since 1966 or 1967 citizenship of Indonesia- for which reason he is illegitimate for US presidency).
Based on all of the above, his first actions in office are highly divisive and highly insulting to great majority of population. I hope you write to AP management and board of directors and demand that they employ reporters with higher IQ and higher level of journalistic integrity.
Orly
breaks from Bush, avoids divisive stands
Buzz Up Send
Email IM Share
Digg Facebook Newsvine del.icio.us Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks Print By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer Liz Sidoti, Associated Press Writer – 2 mins ago
Featured Topics: Barack Obama Presidential Transition AP – President Barack Obama, accompanied by Vice President, and retired military members, gestures in the …
Play Video Barack Obama Video: President Obama Pushes Stimulus Package CBS4 Miami Play Video Barack Obama Video: New Details of Stimulus Package ABC News Play Video Barack Obama Video: First Strike on Obama's Watch ABC News WASHINGTON – Barack Obama opened his presidency by breaking sharply from George W. Bush's unpopular administration, but he mostly avoided divisive partisan and ideological stands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
