Freedom From War The United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE PUBLICATION 7277 Disarmament Series 5 Released September 1961 Office of Public Services BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C. - Price 15 cents

Freedom From War

The United States Program
for General and Complete
Disarmament in a Peaceful
World

 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

DEPARTMENT OF STATE PUBLICATION 7277
Disarmament Series 5
Released September 1961

Office of Public Services
BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C. - Price 15 cents

INTRODUCTION

The revolutionary development of modern weapons within a world divided by serious ideological differences has produced a crisis in human history. In order to overcome the danger of nuclear war now confronting mankind, the United States has introduced at the Sixteenth General Assembly of the United Nations a Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.

This new program provides for the progressive reduction of the war-making capabilities of nations and the simultaneous strengthening of international institutions to settle disputes and maintain the peace. It sets forth a series of comprehensive measures which can and should be taken in order to bring about a world in which there will be freedom from war and security for all states. It is based on three principles deemed essential to the achievement of practical progress in the disarmament field:

First, there must be immediate disarmament action:

A strenuous and uninterrupted effort must be made toward the goal of general and complete disarmament; at the same time, it is important that specific measures be put into effect as soon as possible.

Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective international controls:

The control organization must have the manpower, facilities, and effectiveness to assure that limitations or reductions take place as agreed. It must also be able to certify to all states that retained forces and armaments do not exceed those permitted at any stage of the disarmament process.

Third, adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established:

There is an inseparable relationship between the scaling down of national armaments on the one hand and the building up of international peace-keeping machinery and institutions on the other. Nations are unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of alternative ways to safeguard their legitimate interests. This can only be achieved through the progressive strengthening of international institutions under the United Nations and by creating a United Nations Peace Force to enforce the peace as the disarmament process proceeds.

--------

There follows a summary of the principal provisions of the United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World. The full text of the program is contained in an appendix to this pamphlet.

FREEDOM FROM WAR

THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM
FOR GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMAMENT
IN A PEACEFUL WORLD

SUMMARY

DISARMAMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES

The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations. In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:

• The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;
• The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
• The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;
• The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.

TASK OF NEGOTIATING STATES

The negotiating states are called upon to develop the program into a detailed plan for general and complete disarmament and to continue their efforts without interruption until the whole program has been achieved. To this end, they are to seek the widest possible area of agreement at the earliest possible date. At the same time, and without prejudice to progress on the disarmament program, they are to seek agreement on those immediate measures that would contribute to the common security of nations and that could facilitate and form part of the total program.

GOVERNING PRINCIPLES

The program sets forth a series of general principles to guide the negotiating states in their work. These make clear that:

• As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations must be progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure international security and the peaceful settlement of disputes;
• Disarmament must proceed as rapidly as possible, until it is completed, in stages containing balanced, phased, and safeguarded measures;
• Each measure and stage should be carried out in an agreed period of time, with transition from one stage to the next to take place as soon as all measures in the preceding stage have been carried out and verified and as soon as necessary arrangements for verification of the next stage have been made;
• Inspection and verification must establish both that nations carry out scheduled limitations or reductions and that they do not retain armed forces and armaments in excess of those permitted at any stage of the disarmament process; and
• Disarmament must take place in a manner that will not affect adversely the security of any state.

DISARMAMENT STAGES

The program provides for progressive disarmament steps to take place in three stages and for the simultaneous strengthening of international institutions.

FIRST STAGE

The first stage contains measures which would significantly reduce the capabilities of nations to wage aggressive war. Implementation of this stage would mean that:

• The nuclear threat would be reduced:
     All states would have adhered to a treaty effectively prohibiting the testing of nuclear weapons.
     The production of fissionable materials for use in weapons would be stopped and quantities of such materials from past production would be converted to non-weapons uses.
     States owning nuclear weapons would not relinquish control of such weapons to any nation not owning them and would not transmit to any such nation information or material necessary for their manufacture.
      States not owning nuclear weapons would not manufacture them or attempt to obtain control of such weapons belonging to other states.
     A Commission of Experts would be established to report on the feasibility and means for the verified reduction and eventual elimination of nuclear weapons stockpiles.
• Strategic delivery vehicles would be reduced:
     Strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles of specified categories and weapons designed to counter such vehicles would be reduced to agreed levels by equitable and balanced steps; their production would be discontinued or limited; their testing would be limited or halted.
• Arms and armed forces would be reduced:
     The armed forces of the United States and the Soviet Union would be limited to 2.1 million men each (with appropriate levels not exceeding that amount for other militarily significant states); levels of armaments would be correspondingly reduced and their production would be limited.
     An Experts Commission would be established to examine and report on the feasibility and means of accomplishing verifiable reduction and eventual elimination of all chemical, biological and radiological weapons.
• Peaceful use of outer space would be promoted:
     The placing in orbit or stationing in outer space of weapons capable of producing mass destruction would be prohibited.
     States would give advance notification of space vehicle and missile launchings.
• U.N. peace-keeping powers would be strengthened:
     Measures would be taken to develop and strengthen United Nations arrangements for arbitration, for the development of international law, and for the establishment in Stage II of a permanent U.N. Peace Force.
• An International Disarmament Organization would be established for effective verification of the disarmament program:
     Its functions would be expanded progressively as disarmament proceeds.
     It would certify to all states that agreed reductions have taken place and that retained forces and armaments do not exceed permitted levels.
     It would determine the transition from one stage to the next.
• States would be committed to other measures to reduce international tension and to protect against the chance of war by accident, miscalculation, or surprise attack:
     States would be committed to refrain from the threat or use of any type of armed force contrary to the principles of the U.N. Charter and to refrain from indirect aggression and subversion against any country.
     A U.N. peace observation group would be available to investigate any situation which might constitute a threat to or breach of the peace.
     States would be committed to give advance notice of major military movements which might cause alarm; observation posts would be established to report on concentrations and movements of military forces.

SECOND STAGE

The second stage contains a series of measures which would bring within sight a world in which there would be freedom from war. Implementation of all measures in the second stage would mean:

• Further substantial reductions in the armed forces, armaments, and military establishments of states, including strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and countering weapons;
• Further development of methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes under the United Nations;
• Establishment of a permanent international peace force within the United Nations;
• Depending on the findings of an Experts Commission, a halt in the production of chemical, bacteriological and radiological weapons and a reduction of existing stocks or their conversion to peaceful uses;
• On the basis of the findings of an Experts Commission, a reduction of stocks of nuclear weapons;
• The dismantling or the conversion to peaceful uses of certain military bases and facilities wherever located; and
• The strengthening and enlargement of the International Disarmament Organization to enable it to verify the steps taken in Stage II and to determine the transition to Stage III.

THIRD STAGE

During the third stage of the program, the states of the world, building on the experience and confidence gained in successfully implementing the measures of the first two stages, would take final steps toward the goal of a world in which:

• States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N. Peace Force.
• The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning.
• The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.
• The peace-keeping capabilities of the United Nations would be sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such arrangements sufficiently far-reaching as to assure peace and the just settlement of differences in a disarmed world.

Appendix

DECLARATION ON DISARMAMENT

THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM
FOR GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMAMENT
IN A PEACEFUL WORLD

The Nations of the world,
Conscious of the crisis in human history produced by the revolutionary development of modern weapons within a world divided by serious ideological differences;
Determined to save present and succeeding generations from the scourge of war and the dangers and burdens of the arms race and to create conditions in which all peoples can strive freely and peacefully to fulfill their basic aspirations;
Declare their goal to be: A free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world where adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations; a world where there shall be a permanent state of general and complete disarmament under effective international control and where the resources of nations shall be devoted to man's material, cultural, and spiritual advance;
Set forth as the objectives of a program of general and complete disarmament in a peaceful world:
(a) The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;
(b) The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
(c) The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to ensure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations;
(d) The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.
Call on the negotiating states:
(a) To develop the outline program set forth below into an agreed plan for general and complete disarmament and to continue their efforts without interruption until the whole program has been achieved;
(b) To this end to seek to attain the widest possible area of agreement at the earliest possible date;
(c) Also to seek --- without prejudice to progress on the disarmament program --- agreement on those immediate measures that would contribute to the common security of nations and that could facilitate and form a part of that program.
Affirm that disarmament negotiations should be guided by the following principles:
(a) Disarmament shall take place as rapidly as possible until it is completed in stages containing balanced, phased and safeguarded measures, with each measure and stage to be carried out in an agreed period of time.
(b) Compliance with all disarmament obligations shall be effectively verified from their entry into force. Verification arrangements shall be instituted progressively and in such a manner as to verify not only that agreed limitations or reductions take place but also that retained armed forces and armaments do not exceed agreed levels at any stage.
(c) Disarmament shall take place in a manner that will not affect adversely the security of any state, whether or not a party to an international agreement or treaty.
(d) As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations shall be progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure international security and the peaceful settlement of differences as well as to facilitate the development of international cooperation in common tasks for the benefit of mankind.
(e) Transition from one stage of disarmament to the next shall take place as soon as all the measures in the preceding stage have been carried out and effective verification is continuing and as soon as the arrangements that have been agreed to be necessary for the next stage have been instituted.
Agree upon the following outline program for achieving general and complete disarmament:

STAGE I

A. To Establish an International Disarmament Organization:
(a) An International Disarmament Organization (IDO) shall be established within the framework of the United Nations upon entry into force of the agreement. Its functions shall be expanded progressively as required for the effective verification of the disarmament program.
(b) The IDO shall have: (1) a General Conference of all the parties; (2) a Commission consisting of representatives of all the major powers as permanent members and certain other states on a rotating basis; and (3) an Administrator who will administer the Organization subject to the direction of the Commission and who will have the authority, staff, and finances adequate to assure effective impartial implementation of the functions of the Organization.
(c) The IDO shall: (1) ensure compliance with the obligations undertaken by verifying the execution of measures agreed upon; (2) assist the states in developing the details of agreed further verification and disarmament measures; (3) provide for the establishment of such bodies as may be necessary for working out the details of further measures provided for in the program and for such other expert study groups as may be required to give continuous study to the problems of disarmament; (4) receive reports on the progress of disarmament and verification arrangements and determine the transition from one stage to the next.

B. To Reduce Armed Forces and Armaments:
(a) Force levels shall be limited to 2.1 million each for the U.S. and U.S.S.R. and to appropriate levels not exceeding 2.1 million each for all other militarily significant states. Reductions to the agreed levels will proceed by equitable, proportionate, and verified steps.
(b) Levels of armaments of prescribed types shall be reduced by equitable and balanced steps. The reductions shall be accomplished by transfers of armaments to depots supervised by the IDO. When, at specified periods during the Stage I reduction process, the states party to the agreement have agreed that the armaments and armed forces are at prescribed levels, the armaments in depots shall be destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.
(c) The production of agreed types of armaments shall be limited.
(d) A Chemical, Biological, Radiological (CBR) Experts Commission shall be established within the IDO for the purpose of examining and reporting on the feasibility and means for accomplishing the verifiable reduction and eventual elimination of CBR weapons stockpiles and the halting of their production.

C. To Contain and Reduce the Nuclear Threat:
(a) States that have not acceded to a treaty effectively prohibiting the testing of nuclear weapons shall do so.
(b) The production of fissionable materials for use in weapons shall be stopped.
(c) Upon the cessation of production of fissionable materials for use in weapons, agreed initial quantities of fissionable materials from past production shall be transferred to non-weapons purposes.
(d) Any fissionable materials transferred between countries for peaceful uses of nuclear energy shall be subject to appropriate safeguards to be developed in agreement with the IAEA.
(e) States owning nuclear weapons shall not relinquish control of such weapons to any nation not owning them and shall not transmit to any such nation information or material necessary for their manufacture. States not owning nuclear weapons shall not manufacture such weapons, attempt to obtain control of such weapons belonging to other states, or seek or receive information or materials necessary for their manufacture.
(f) A Nuclear Experts Commission consisting of representatives of the nuclear states shall be established within the IDO for the purpose of examining and reporting on the feasibility and means for accomplishing the verified reduction and eventual elimination of nuclear weapons stockpiles.

D. To Reduce Strategic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Vehicles:
(a) Strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles in specified categories and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be reduced to agreed levels by equitable and balanced steps. The reduction shall be accomplished in each step by transfers to depots supervised by the IDO of vehicles that are in excess of levels agreed upon for each step. At specified periods during the Stage I reduction process, the vehicles that have been placed under supervision of the IDO shall be destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.
(b) Production of agreed categories of strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be discontinued or limited.
(c) Testing of agreed categories of strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be limited or halted.

E. To Promote the Peaceful Use of Outer Space:
(a) The placing into orbit or stationing in outer space of weapons capable c,f producing mass destruction shall be prohibited.
(b) States shall give advance notification to participating states and to the IDO of launchings of space vehicles and missiles, together with the track of the vehicle.

F. To Reduce the Risks of War by Accident, Miscalculation, and Surprise Attack:
(a) States shall give advance notification to the participating states and to the IDO of major military movements and maneuvers, on a scale as may be agreed, which might give rise to misinterpretation or cause alarm and induce countermeasures. The notification shall include the geographic areas to be used and the nature, scale and time span of the event.
(b) There shall be established observation posts at such locations as major ports, railway centers, motor highways, and air bases to report on concentrations and movements of military forces.
(c) There shall also be established such additional inspection arrangements to reduce the danger of surprise attack as may be agreed.
(d) An international commission shall be established immediately within the IDO to examine and make recommendations on the possibility of further measures to reduce the risks of nuclear war by accident, miscalculation, or failure of communication.

G. To Keep the Peace:
(a) States shall reaffirm their obligations under the U.N. Charter to refrain from the threat or use of any type of armed force--including nuclear, conventional, or CBR--contrary to the principles of the U.N. Charter.
(b) States shall agree to refrain from indirect aggression and subversion against any country.
(c) States shall use all appropriate processes for the peaceful settlement of disputes and shall seek within the United Nations further arrangements for the peaceful settlement of international disputes and for the codification and progressive development of international law.
(d) States shall develop arrangements in Stage I for the establishment in Stage II of a U.N. Peace Force.
(e) A U.N. peace observation group shall be staffed with a standing cadre of observers who could be dispatched to investigate any situation which might constitute a threat to or breach of the peace.

STAGE II

A. International Disarmament Organization:
The powers and responsibilities of the IDO shall be progressively enlarged in order to give it the capabilities to verify the measures undertaken in Stage II.

B. To Further Reduce Armed Forces and Armaments:
(a) Levels of forces for the U.S., U.S.S.R., and other militarily significant states shall be further reduced by substantial amounts to agreed levels in equitable and balanced steps.
(b) Levels of armaments of prescribed types shall be further reduced by equitable and balanced steps. The reduction shall be accomplished by transfers of armaments to depots supervised by the IDO. When, at specified periods during the Stage II reduction process, the parties have agreed that the armaments and armed forces are at prescribed levels, the armaments in depots shall be destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.
(c) There shall be further agreed restrictions on the production of armaments.
(d) Agreed military bases and facilities wherever they are located shall be dismantled or converted to peaceful uses.
(e) Depending upon the findings of the Experts Commission on CBR weapons, the production of CBR weapons shall be halted, existing stocks progressively reduced, and the resulting excess quantities destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.

C. To Further Reduce the Nuclear Threat:
Stocks of nuclear weapons shall be progressively reduced to the minimum levels which can be agreed upon as a result of the findings of the Nuclear Experts Commission; the resulting excess of fissionable material shall be transferred to peaceful purposes.

D. To Further Reduce Strategic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Vehicles:
Further reductions in the stocks of strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be carried out in accordance with the procedure outlined in Stage I.

E. To Keep the Peace:
During Stage II, states shall develop further the peace-keeping processes of the United Nations, to the end that the United Nations can effectively in Stage III deter or suppress any threat or use of force in violation of the purposes and principles of the United Nations:
(a) States shall agree upon strengthening the structure, authority, and operation of the United Nations so as to assure that the United Nations will be able effectively to protect states against threats to or breaches of the peace.
(b) The U.N. Peace Force shall be established and progressively strengthened.
(c) States shall also agree upon further improvements and developments in rules of international conduct and in processes for peaceful settlement of disputes and differences.

STAGE III

By the time Stage II has been completed, the confidence produced through a verified disarmament program, the acceptance of rules of peaceful international behavior, and the development of strengthened international peace-keeping processes within the framework of the U.N. should have reached a point where the states of the world can move forward to Stage III. In Stage III progressive controlled disarmament and continuously developing principles and procedures of international law would proceed to a point where no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force and all international disputes would be settled according to the agreed principles of international conduct.

The progressive steps to be taken during the final phase of the disarmament program would be directed toward the attainment of a world in which:
(a) States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N Peace Force.
(b) The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning.
(c) The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.
(d) The peace-keeping capabilities of the United Nations would be sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such arrangements sufficiently far-reaching as to assure peace and the just settlement of differences in a disarmed world.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1961 O 609147 [end of document]

On page 35, William Wood wrote, "Barack Obama II, child living with mother (she resides with her parents and subject [Obama Sr.] resides at 1482 Alencastre St.)." The memo was dated 8/31/1961, only 27 days after their child was supposedly born. Their respective residences were over 7 miles away from each other. Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/the_case_against_barack_obama_sr.html#ixzz2MdhZK02X Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

It is widely held that Barack Obama, Sr., goat herder from Kenya, is the father of President Obama.  We now know that this contention is probably false.

In Obama's autobiography, Dreams from My Father, he identifies Barack Obama, Sr. as his father.  This book has been the primary source of information for all who have written about him.  Yet two strong supporters of the president -- David Remnick, author of The Bridge, a biography of Obama, and Janny Scott, author of A Singular Woman, a biography of Ann Dunham -- have expressed doubts about the factual basis of Dreams:

Remnick: "Obama's memoir is a mixture of verifiable fact, recollection, recreation, invention and artful shaping."

Scott: "He gives his account of his parents' fleeting coming together and breaking apart in language and cadences reminiscent of those of folk tales or myths."

Thanks to Jack Cashill, we now know that Dreams from My Father was in large part a creation of Obama's neighbor and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, a man more interested in a "narrative" than in history.  So, as a practical matter, when trying to determine the truth about Obama's origins, everything from Dreams must be considered suspect.
The Wedding That Wasn't
There is no record that Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, and Barack Obama, Sr. were ever married.  There is no marriage license.  There were no witnesses.  But we do know from Ann's registration at the University of Washington that Ann did take Obama's name, so we must analyze what we know about their relationship.
Ann supposedly met Obama in a Russian language class, one of two classes that we know Ann took at the University of Hawaii in the fall semester of 1960.  The meeting story, however, comes from Dreams and is therefore unreliable.  Sally Jacobs, in her book, The Other Barack, makes reference to "Barack Obama's transcript from the University of Hawaii, Syracuse University, Frank C. Laubach Collection."  The transcript would show us if Obama Sr. took the same Russian class that Ann did.  When I requested the same records that Sally Jacobs had seen, Nicole Dittrich, the Reading Room supervisor, informed me that "...Obama Sr.'s Hawaii transcript[s are] currently missing from our collection." 
For the sake of argument, we will assume, regardless of how or when they met, that Ann and Obama said they were married.  We will also assume that they were in love.  We would then logically assume that the pair lived and acted like lovers.  They did not.
Heather Smathers, through a Freedom of Information Request (FOIA), posted on the internet Obama Sr.'s United States Immigration file.  From the documents (55 pages in all) we learn that Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham lived separately.
On page 35, William Wood wrote, "Barack Obama II, child living with mother (she resides with her parents and subject [Obama Sr.] resides at 1482 Alencastre St.)."  The memo was dated 8/31/1961, only 27 days after their child was supposedly born.  Their respective residences were over 7 miles away from each other.
Compounding their geographical separation is the fact that there is no documentary evidence that Ann or Obama Sr. ever drove a car while in Hawaii.  David Maraniss in "Into the Story" relates that "...she [Ann] never got a license and did not drive her entire life."  Obama was so poor that it is hard to imagine that he could afford roller skates, let alone a car.
Even more peculiar is the fact that Ann Dunham left her parents' home with her putatively newborn baby and enrolled in classes at the University of Washington in late August 1961.  This is confirmed by enrollment records from the University of Washington.  The classes she took were night classes.
After Ann's departure to Seattle, the couple would not see each other for ten years.  From an article by John Griffin of the Honolulu Advertiser, we learn that Obama Sr. left Hawaii for Harvard on 6/22/1962.  Ann did not return to Hawaii until late fall 1962 or early winter 1963, where she again enrolled in classes at the University of Hawaii.
One might argue that when Obama and Ann first told of their marriage, they really were in love, but something happened that caused a separation.  This contention is undermined by the immigration documents.  On page 39, a 4/10/1961 memo from Lyle Dahlin mentions his suspicion that the marriage was not a real one.  He wrote, "Recommend that Subject be closely questioned before another extention [sic] is granted - and denial be considered.  If his USC [United States Citizen] wife tries to petition for him make sure an investigation is conducted as to the bona-fide of the marriage."
The earliest record we have of a marriage comes from this same memo: "Mrs. McCabe, University of Hawaii, Foreign Student advisor, called on 4/10/61 and reported that BARACK H OBAMA, a student at the University since 1959 was married on February 2, 1961 to Stanley Ann Dunham."
Page 42 is an "APPLICATION BY ALIEN STUDENT FOR PERMISSION TO ACCEPT EMPLOYMENT."  It was filled out, by hand, by Obama Sr. on 3/3/1961, only one month after his supposed marriage.  Section 24 asked, "Economic necessity (explain how financial circumstances have changed since admission or change of status to student)."  Obama Sr. wrote, "This is because I did not come with enough for the entire period of my stay and thought would get some from scholarship and work."  What is glaringly missing is any mention of a wife and soon-to-be child -- important information, one would think, for a foreign student seeking permission to work. 
If anything had happened that ended their love for each other, it would have to have happened in the month of February 1961 for Obama not to mention his pregnant wife in March.  Yet, in April, Mrs. McCabe reported that they were married.  One must assume that it was either Obama or Ann who supplied that information, as there was no marriage record.
The next time Obama filled out this application was on August 31, 1961 (reminder:  nn and baby are now in Seattle).  On it, he stated that he was married, but he did something curious.  He wrote down a name but crossed it out, then filled in "Ann S. Dunham."  The crossed out name looks like it starts with a "K" like the "K" in Kenya just above it.  His wife's name in Kenya was Kezia.  Whether the scratched out name was Kezia or not, it's clear he wrote down another name before writing in Ann's.  Also, he got Ann's name wrong.  Stanley Ann Dunham, or S. Ann Dunham, is correct, but not Ann S. Dunham.  He left the box for name and address of child blank.

While Ann Was Away
We have photographic evidence that Obama spent time with students from the East West Center (EWC).  The EWC was created to promote understanding among the peoples of the Pacific Rim.  The Center describes itself as "[a] public, nonprofit organization with funding from the U.S. government."  It was located on the campus of the University of Hawaii.
The first sizable group of EWC students arrived in Hawaii in September 1961, after Ann had left for Seattle.  Lois Duggan, a September enrollee, wrote to her fellow students when Barack Obama was elected president: "We all converged on Honolulu a month after he was born there (no, not in a manger!) and knew -- well or in passing -- his father, though most of us then had no idea there was a baby."  It appears that Obama Sr. never spoke about his wife and child to his EWC friends -- strange behavior for a man who was supposedly in love.
Hawaiian Governor Neil Abercrombie also claims to have known Obama Sr. while he was in Hawaii; he says he was his "best friend."  Most of what Governor Abercrombie has said about Ann and Obama Sr. has proved false.  In The Bridge, a credulous David Remnick recorded a whopper: "'Stanley was disappointed that Barack had left his daughter, but not too disappointed,' Neal Abercrombie said.  'He figured that the marriage was going to fail sooner or later and so it might as well not go on so long that it would hurt Little Barry, as he always called him.'" 
Ann left Obama behind in August of 1961, yet Abercrombie would have us believe that Obama left Ann behind in June of 1962.  Clearly, Abercrombie can't be believed.  A "best friend" would know the facts, and Abercrombie obviously does not.
Finally, on May 29, 1962, Obama wrote his sponsor Tom Mboya: "You know my wife is in Nairobi there and I would really appreciate any help you may give her."  Here Obama is talking about his wife Kezia, whom he left in Kenya.  Thoughts of a wife and child in America seem never to have crossed his mind.
OK, so they weren't in love.
If the supposed marriage to Ann wasn't one of love, perhaps Obama Sr. was forced to marry her, shotgun-style.  The few documents we have argue against this. 
The documents make clear that Obama Sr. was given a "CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBILITY."  The previously mentioned memo from Lyle Dahlin noted that "[i]f he were convicted of bigamy we might get a deportation charge but not before."  Obama, faced with a shotgun marriage, would only have had to claim he still had a wife in Kenya.
Perhaps Obama and Ann had a one-night fling and Obama consented to marry Ann for moral reasons, without coercion.  In this scenario one would assume that Obama would take pride in and responsibility for raising his son.  This assumption is again challenged by the documents we have.
The first mention of a son in the immigration documents is on August 17, 1962.  Obama was apparently in Baltimore on his way to Harvard.  But the son he mentions is Roy Obama, from his wife Kezia.  Barack Obama II isn't listed as a son until April 21, 1964.  This came as immigration officials were debating whether to ship Obama Sr. back to Kenya because, as M.F. McKeon of the Immigration Service wrote, "They were apparently having difficulty with his financial arrangements and couldn't seem to figure out how many wives he had."  Obama Sr. listed the address of his son Barack as "C/O University of Hawaii, Honolulu Hawaii (page 14)."  It appears Obama had no idea where his son was or how to contact him directly.
But the Birth Certificate Lists Obama Sr. as the Father
There are four anomalies in our president's recently released birth certificate regarding his father.  
The father's race is listed as African.  Obama Sr. had to know that there were both white and black "Africans," as both South Africa and Rhodesia were ruled by white minorities.  Obama Sr. was quoted by John Griffin in the Honolulu Advertiser saying that it is "rather strange, even rather amusing to see Caucasians discriminated against here."  It is difficult to imagine that the father would give his race as "African."
The father's birthplace is given as Kenya, East Africa.  This is like saying United States, Central North America.  On his "Alien Registration Fingerprint Chart" (page 52), his place of birth is listed as "Kisumu-Nyanza, Kenya."  Obviously, Obama knew where he was born.
The baby's name is listed as "Barack Hussein Obama, II."  But on page 14 of the immigration documents, Obama Sr. wrote the child's name as "Barack Obama 2^nd."
Finally, Obama Sr.'s age is incorrect.  The birth certificate states that he was 25, when in reality he was 27.  For the entire time he was in Hawaii, he listed his birth date as 6/18/1934 on all of his immigration documents, making him 27 on August 4^th 1961, the alleged birth date of his alleged son. 
Listing his race as African, botching his place of birth, the ignorance of his son's official name, and, most significantly, reporting an incorrect age, leaves us with only one conclusion:  Obama Sr. was nowhere around when the birth certificate was being filled out.
The Picture
There is a picture of Ann's father, Stanley Dunham, standing next to Obama Sr., with his arm around him.  The picture has generated much discussion in the blogosphere.

A careful review reveals many details which prove that it is a going away picture -- probably taken on June 22, 1962, while Ann and baby were still in Seattle.  Some have argued that because there are leis around Obama Sr.'s neck, it has to be an arrival picture.  However, the website "Blooms of Hawaii" states that "[a] lei is bestowed on another for many reasons -- it can symbolize love, friendship, parting, a wish for safety, and many other messages of peace."
If you look carefully at the 21 people in the picture, you can see that they are composed of two distinct groups: friends of Obama and crew from the boat that is taking him to the mainland.  The two men in the middle wearing sailor suits and the man kneeling in the front with a steward or cook's jacket on indicate crew, but some of Obama's East-West Center friends appear in the picture.  (Note: "best friend" Abercrombie does not!)  They all arrived in Hawaii after September 1961, making this likely a going away picture. 

But there is more we can learn from this picture.  Below is a cropped section focusing on Obama, the girl next to him, and Stanley Dunham.

You can see Stanley's arm around Obama.  You can see Obama's left arm, the one next to Stanley, holding a briefcase.  What you can't see is Obama's right arm, or the girl's left arm.  It appears that their arms are around each other.  Though this could be innocent, it could also show Obama with his girlfriend.  How then, can we explain Stanley's smiling visage?
What makes sense?
None of the scenarios for marriage we have discussed so far -- love, or love with a separation, a shotgun marriage, or doing the "right thing" -- makes any sense with the facts we know.  There is one scenario, however, that makes a lot of sense.
Let's assume that Ann was impregnated by someone unknown and was facing the stigma of becoming an unwed mother.  Obama Sr., for a fee, agreed to "marry" Ann.  Being a foreign national from Kenya, there would be no liability for him (child support, etc.), and it might have been a help for extending his stay in America. 
Ann's taking Obama's name for the sake of being "respectable" would explain all of what we now know: why there was no love in the relationship, the separate living arrangements, Ann and Barry leaving Obama and moving to Seattle, the EWC friends knowing nothing about Ann and child, Obama's letter to Mboya mentioning his wife Kezia, all of the mistakes on the birth certificate, and the apparent friendship between Obama and Ann's father Stanley.
The immigration documents support this scenario, as they show just how broke Obama Sr. was.  On 3/3/1961 Obama Sr. claimed $1,200 in income and $2,000 in annual expenses (page 42).  This was just one month after he was supposedly married.  He had a shortfall of $800.  He was a man in serious need of funds.  A pay for service arrangement is eminently believable, especially when the immigration documents show that he earned $5.00 a day as a dishwasher at the Ink Blot Coffee Shop (page 43) and worked for the Dole Corporation as an "ordinary summer worker" for $1.33 per hour (page 35). 
But if they weren't married, why did Ann file for divorce?
Ann filed for divorce in January of 1964.  Obama was notified while at Harvard; he signed an acknowledgement, and that was the extent of his involvement.  My guess as to why Ann filed for a divorce, when there was no marriage, is that she was now in love with Lolo Soetoro.  She wanted to make sure there was no legal reason, such as common-law marriage, that would potentially prevent their union.  Ann and Lolo were married in March of 1965.
We won't be fooled again...
The evidence is clear: there is no license; there was no marriage.  Ann took Obama's name, but there was no love, no estrangement, no coercion, no selfless gallantry in the "marriage."  Obama was a financially desperate student who got a big break when the Dunhams found him and paid him to be a father in name only.  Ann and son Barry went on with their lives, and Obama continued on with his studies.
Is it possible that our president doesn't know this?  I find that hard to believe.  I do know, though, that he used the compelling, but mythical, story of an African father and Midwestern mother to get elected.  I also believe that whether or not Obama knew the truth about his parents' relationship, he didn't realize then that Obama Sr.'s Kenyan nationality would lead opponents to question his "natural born citizen" status. 
In all likelihood, our President is a "natural born citizen" who was elected under false pretenses.  Mr. President, in the next election, please run on your record and not a mythological past.  History and your fellow citizens deserve this much.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/the_case_against_barack_obama_sr.html#ixzz2Mdhl2V6Z
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Father spoke of having Obama adopted US immigration files from ’61 reveal Kenyan student’s plan

• Home /
• News /
• Politics

Father spoke of having Obama adopted

US immigration files from ’61 reveal Kenyan student’s plan

President Obama as a young boy, with his father, who left when his son was 2. (Obama for America via Associated Press)

By Sally Jacobs Globe Staff / July 7, 2011

• E-mail|
• Print|
• Reprints|

Text size – +

In the spring of 1961, President Obama’s father revealed a plan for his unborn son that might have changed the course of American political history.

The elder Barack H. Obama, a sophomore at the University of Hawaii, had come under scrutiny by federal immigration officials who were concerned that he had more than one wife. When he was questioned by the school’s foreign student adviser, the 24-year-old Obama insisted that he had divorced his wife in his native Kenya. Although his new wife, Ann Dunham, was five months pregnant with their child - who would be called Barack Obama II - Obama declared that they intended to put their child up for adoption.

“Subject got his USC wife ‘Hapai’ [Hawaiian for pregnant] and although they were married they do not live together and Miss Dunham is making arrangements with the Salvation Army to give the baby away,’’ according to a memo describing the conversation with Obama written by Lyle H. Dahling, an administrator in the Honolulu office of what was then called the US Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Obama, the Subject, and his USC, or United States citizen, wife, obviously, did not put their baby up for adoption. Whether the young couple actually considered such a step, or the elder Obama made the story up in order to appease immigration officials who at the time were considering his request for an extension of his stay in the United States, is unclear. Family members on both sides of the marriage now say they never heard any mention of adoption.

But his statement provides a unique glimpse into the relationship between the president’s parents and the fragility of his connection to the father whom he would little know.

Dahling’s memo, dated April 12, 1961, is one of dozens of documents in the elder Obama’s “alien’’ file released by the Department of Homeland Security in response to a Freedom of Information Act request made in the course of research on a biography of Obama’s father. Obama was visiting the United States on a foreign student visa which required him to apply for an annual extension of his stay during the five years he was attending US colleges.

The memo advised that officials should continue to monitor the senior Obama’s personal life, and raised concerns about his behavior, noting that the previous summer he had been warned about his “playboy ways.’’

Robert L. Gibbs, the former White House press secretary, said at the time the document was released that President Obama had never been told that his mother had considered putting him up for adoption. Nor, Gibbs said, was Obama previously aware of the INS memo. Gibbs said that the White House had made no effort to determine if Dunham had ever had a conversation with the Salvation Army. The president, he added, “is absolutely convinced that she did not.’’Continued...

Father spoke of having Obama adopted

US immigration files from ’61 reveal Kenyan student’s plan

President Obama as a young boy, with his father, who left when his son was 2. (Obama for America via Associated Press)

By Sally Jacobs Globe Staff / July 7, 2011

• E-mail|
• Print|
• Reprints|

Text size – +

Page 2 of 4 --

From the early 20th century through the 1970s the Salvation Army operated nearly a dozen residential maternity homes throughout the United States, one of which was located in Honolulu. Residents who chose not to keep their babies were able to make arrangements to put them up for adoption through local agencies. The agency maintains records of its maternity homes but provides them only to birth mothers or children who request them, according to Kathy Lovin, public affairs manager for The Salvation Army’s western territory in Long Beach, Calif. Lovin declined to say whether Ann Dunham, who died in 1995, spoke with Salvation Army officials at all about the possibility of putting her child up for adoption.

• Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!
• ShareThis

Related

• Father spoke of having
  President Obama adopted
• House Republicans signal
  flexibility in deficit talks
• Political notebook: Obama
  connects with voters in tweets
• Date of 2012 Mass. primary
  to change due to conflict
• Khazei leads potential Brown challengers in fund-raising
• More political coverage

Neither President Obama nor the White House has since asked the Salvation Army if there is any record that his parents talked with the organization regarding his possible adoption, according to a White House press person who declined to be identified.

The INS memo can be regarded from several perspectives. On the one hand, Ann Dunham had good reason to consider surrendering her child. At the time that she gave birth in 1961, Dunham was just 18 years old, and mixed-race marriage - while legal in Hawaii - was a felony in many of the 22 states in which it was banned. Even in Hawaii, the only state at the time with a nonwhite majority, blacks accounted for less than 1 percent of the population, and a black face drew curious stares on the streets of Honolulu.

In his memoir, “Dreams from My Father,’’ President Obama mused that his mother might have considered putting her child up for adoption given the cultural hostility to mixed race marriages that existed at the time. Even in sophisticated urban centers, he wrote, “. . . the hostile stares, the whispers, might have driven a woman in my mother’s predicament into a back-alley abortion - or at the very least to a distant convent that could arrange for adoption.’’

While it is possible that the elder Obama’s statement to the student adviser was true, family and friends say they do not believe she ever considered such a thing. Dunham, they maintain, was a bold iconoclast even as a young woman and regarded her unborn child as very much her responsibility, one that she would never have surrendered.

“I never heard any talk of adoption whatsoever,’’ said Charles Payne, Dunham’s maternal uncle, who is now in his 80s and living in Chicago. “Ann decided she had done this and this was her child and she was going to take care of him. From day one, as far as I could tell, she and Madelyn [Dunham] and Stanley [Dunham] were all completely committed to Barack.’’Continued...

Father spoke of having Obama adopted

US immigration files from ’61 reveal Kenyan student’s plan

President Obama as a young boy, with his father, who left when his son was 2. (Obama for America via Associated Press)

By Sally Jacobs Globe Staff / July 7, 2011

• E-mail|
• Print|
• Reprints|

Text size – +

Page 3 of 4 --

Nor do several of Ann Dunham’s friends at the time recall her mentioning giving up her baby. On the contrary, Susan Botkin Blake, a high school friend of Dunham’s, describes how entranced her friend was with her small son during a visit to Seattle just weeks after he was born.

• Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!
• ShareThis

Related

• Father spoke of having
  President Obama adopted
• House Republicans signal
  flexibility in deficit talks
• Political notebook: Obama
  connects with voters in tweets
• Date of 2012 Mass. primary
  to change due to conflict
• Khazei leads potential Brown challengers in fund-raising
• More political coverage

“She was wildly in love with Barack Obama, her husband, and very excited about her future with him,’’ recalled Blake. “From my perspective, she had no equivocation about her baby in the slightest. She was thrilled with him.’’

Barack Obama Sr., on the other hand, would have had reason to worry that having a child in the United States could have significant consequences. For starters, Obama, who had two children in Kenya, was having severe financial problems. Although he told Dunham that he had gotten divorced from his Kenyan wife, he apparently did not tell her about his other children.

Obama was a member of the Luo ethnic group, the third largest of Kenya’s tribes, among whose members polygamy was common. His own father had at least four wives. In fact, Obama was still married to his Kenyan wife, Grace Kezia Obama, and apparently worried about the financial burden of another child.

Of greater concern was his immigration status. At the time that he made his statement about adoption in spring 1961, Obama was in the midst of applying to the INS for an extension of his stay in the United States. Although it was a routine process that was required of foreign students periodically, the application entailed an examination of the student’s academic record and general behavior.

Obama would have wanted to present a case that would impress immigration authorities. A bigamist with a mixed-race baby, if that is how authorities chose to see him, was not likely to be the strongest of candidates. As Gibbs assessed the elder Obama’s possible motive: “He was trying to convince immigration to let him stay. So, part of his effort was to convince immigration that some of the responsibilities that he had he would not continue to have.’’

University of Hawaii and federal immigration authorities were already alarmed about Obama’s relationships with women and perplexed as to his marital status. Since his arrival at the university in 1959, Obama had repeatedly failed to complete routine paperwork at UH’s foreign students office regarding his domestic status that would have clarified whether he had a wife in Kenya, according to an employee in the office who declined to be identified. Even the exact year of his own birth was unclear. Obama alternately reported to immigration and academic officials that he was born in both 1934 and 1936. Although the INS memo records the year of his birth as 1934, Obama’s family members and other records indicate that he was probably born in 1936.Continued...


 Page 4 of 4 --

When he married Dunham in February 1961, school administrators began to probe his status in earnest. Sumi McCabe, then UH’s foreign student adviser, first brought attention to the matter during a phone call to Dahling, the INS administrator, the following April. According to Dahling’s memo, “Mrs. McCabe further states that [Obama] has been running around with several girls since he first arrived here and last summer she cautioned him about his playboy ways. [Obama] replied that he would ‘try’ to stay away from the girls.’’ But he didn’t try very hard. Instead, he began dating the dark-eyed Ann Dunham.

• Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!
• ShareThis

Related

• Father spoke of having
  President Obama adopted
• House Republicans signal
  flexibility in deficit talks
• Political notebook: Obama
  connects with voters in tweets
• Date of 2012 Mass. primary
  to change due to conflict
• Khazei leads potential Brown challengers in fund-raising
• More political coverage

Now that he was married to a US citizen and was soon to become the father of an American child, immigration officials would not have been reassured by his official records. On some of the forms in his alien file, Obama reported that he had a Kenyan wife. After he married Dunham, he sometimes reported her as his wife. More often than not, he left the section blank.

All the while, he wrote letters to his family and friends back home in Kenya, inquiring about his wife and children there.

Noting that Obama appeared to have a wife in Kenya and another in Hawaii, Dahling raised the possibility in his memo of charging Obama with polygamy or bigamy in order to get a deportation order against him. In the end, he suggested they keep an eye on him.

“Recommend that Subject be closely questioned before another extension is granted - and denial be considered,’’ Dahling concluded. “If his USC wife tries to petition for him, make sure an investigation is conducted as to the bona fide of the marriage.’’

As it turned out, the matter soon moved out of Honolulu administrators’ purview. The following year, Obama left his small family in Honolulu and headed to Harvard University to pursue a doctorate in economics. While in Cambridge, Obama would not only meet his third wife, but the question of how many wives he had would spiral into a confrontation with devastating consequences.

Sally Jacobs is a Boston Globe reporter. Her book, “The Other Barack, The Bold and Reckless Life of President Obama’s Father,’’ will be released next week.

Who is our Homeland Security is planning to attack with 2,700 armored tanks and billions of rounds of hollow point bullets? They are releasing thousands of criminals from prisons, so it looks like the ones remaining as an enemy are law abiding Americans. Why there is no congressional investigation of Napolitano? Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 3 Comments Homeland Security? Robert Brodie 10:48 AM (53 minutes ago) to undisclosed recipients We have all heard how we are going to suffer with the sequestation but have you heard of this (see attached link). First homeland security buys and stockpilies ammo all hollow point. They tell us it is for training. If they are using hollow points for training, why won’t they just use the lesser expensive rounds for training and keep the more expensive (example 50 rounds $17.00, hollow point $30.00 for 20 rounds) for when they are needed seems like a waste to me but then add this into the equation (see link) http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/obama-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks-to-go-with-their-1-6-billion-bullet-stockpile/ Please, contact your congressmen. protest in front of their offices. Not only we need to remove the foreign criminal with forged IDs from the WH, we need to remove from office Napolitano, who is releasing the foreign criminals on the streets. Why is Napolitano threatening us with long lines in TSA checks? If she wants cuts in the budget, all she needs to do, is deported thousands of illegals, who are kept in prisons in the IS at the expense of $40,000 per prisoner per year, and she needs to return or sell these 2,700 tanks and billions of rounds of ammunition. We do not need it. We have US military to protect us

Who is our Homeland Security is planning to attack with 2,700 armored tanks and billions of rounds of hollow point bullets? They are releasing thousands of criminals from prisons, so it looks like the ones remaining as an enemy are law abiding Americans. Why there is no congressional investigation of Napolitano?

Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 3 Comments

Homeland Security?

 

Robert Brodie	10:48 AM (53 minutes ago)
to undisclosed recipients

We have all heard how we are going to suffer with the sequestation but have you heard of this (see attached link).  First homeland security buys and stockpilies ammo all hollow point.  They tell us it is for training.  If they are using hollow points for training, why won’t they just use the lesser expensive rounds for training and keep the more expensive (example 50 rounds $17.00, hollow point $30.00 for 20 rounds) for when they are needed seems like a waste to me but then add this into the equation  (see link)

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/obama-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks-to-go-with-their-1-6-billion-bullet-stockpile/

Please,

contact your congressmen. protest in front of their offices. Not only we need to remove the foreign criminal with forged IDs from the WH, we need to remove from office Napolitano, who is releasing the foreign criminals on the streets.

Why is Napolitano threatening us with long lines in TSA checks?

If she wants cuts in the budget, all she needs to do, is deported thousands of illegals, who are kept in prisons in the IS at the expense of $40,000 per prisoner per year, and she needs to return or sell these 2,700 tanks and billions of rounds of ammunition. We do not need it. We have US military to protect us

Great news! Nationalcoalition for Vietnam and Gulf War veterans joined my fight and seeking prosecution of ObamaForgeryGate Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 6 Comments Supreme Court Docket 12A606 8:37 AM (0 minutes ago) to me Dear Dr. Taitz, Please note that the National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition has voted to communicate with the House Judiciary Committee our dissatisfaction of the US Supreme Court denial on of the suit on February 19, 2013. Inasmuch as the Coalition has endorsed a significant number of the committee members, it is hoped that our effort is successful. A copy of our correspondence will be forwarded to you, Dr. Corsi and Sheriff Arpaio. John Molloy Chairman National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition

Great news! Nationalcoalition for Vietnam and Gulf War veterans joined my fight and seeking prosecution of ObamaForgeryGate

Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 6 Comments

Supreme Court Docket 12A606

 

	8:37 AM (0 minutes ago)
to me

 

 

 

 

Dear Dr. Taitz,
Please note that the National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition
has voted to communicate with the House Judiciary Committee our
dissatisfaction of the US Supreme Court denial on of the suit on February 19, 2013.

Inasmuch as the Coalition has endorsed a significant number of the
committee members, it is hoped that our effort is successful.
A copy of our correspondence will be forwarded to you,
Dr. Corsi and Sheriff Arpaio.
John Molloy
Chairman
National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition

One of the meetings tomorrow. Chief of staff for Senator Alexander assigned 2 staff members. Now suddenly these 2 members are unavailable. Please, call Senator Alexander (R-TN), let him know that his staff members are playing games Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 10 Comments meeting request Reif, Erin (Alexander) 8:26 AM (6 minutes ago) to me Ms. Taitz, Thank you for contacting Senator Alexander’s office to request a meeting on March 5. Unfortunately, neither myself nor Mackensie Burt are available for a meeting that day. Sincerely, Erin Reif Erin Reif Legislative Assistant Office of Senator Lamar Alexande

One of the meetings tomorrow. Chief of staff for Senator Alexander assigned 2 staff members. Now suddenly these 2 members are unavailable. Please, call Senator Alexander (R-TN), let him know that his staff members are playing games

Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 10 Comments

meeting request

Reif, Erin (Alexander) <Erin_Reif@alexander.senate.gov>	8:26 AM (6 minutes ago)
to me

Ms. Taitz,

Thank you for contacting Senator Alexander’s office to request a meeting on March 5. Unfortunately, neither myself nor Mackensie Burt are available for a meeting that day.

Sincerely,
Erin Reif
Erin Reif
Legislative Assistant
Office of Senator Lamar Alexande

Egyptians are in the streets protesting Obama-Kerry-Morsi- Muslim Brotherhood axis of Evil, spineless Americans are sitting at home scared! Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 20 Comments Members of Free Egyptians has written an open letter to Obama Inbox x Carmel Miller 8:37 AM (3 minutes ago) to me http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/egyptian-protesters-accuse-kerry-of-muslim-brotherhood-membership/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+fpm+(FrontPage+Magazine+%C2%BB+All) Egyptian Protesters Accuse Kerry of Muslim Brotherhood Membership March 3, 2013 By Daniel Greenfield Kerry’s visit to Egypt did not go smoothly as protesters turned out to denounce Obama and Kerry’s support for the Islamist regime of Morsi. Protesters held a banner reading, “They shook hands stained with the blood of children.” Others burned and stomped on photos of Kerry. They denounced American interference in Egyptian affairs and claimed that the alliance between the US and the Muslim Brotherhood is the true ruling regime in Egypt. And a simpler banned said, “Go to hell.” Many of the protesters had camped out overnight bringing their own mattresses with them. Others reportedly set fire to car tires outside the airport to prevent Kerry from entering the country. And some held up cartoons of Kerry, portraying him with an Islamic beard, saying “Kerry – member of the Brotherhood”. Meanwhile one of the founding members of Free Egyptians has written an open letter to Obama The USA has sponsored the so-called Arab Spring and has sold it to its taxpayers as the outcry of oppressed middle-eastern people for democracy, when all it achieved was bringing to power theocratic regimes that oppressed their people even more and turned the victim countries into failed states, namely Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Tunis and now Egypt which you are visiting to ensure that it joins the happy crowd. Is surrounding Israel by failed states your ultimate objective? Do you think that there can be lasting peace with countries that base their decisions on fanatic religious views? Do you think that peace can be perpetuated in a neighborhood of poverty, despair and extremism? Are you telling your taxpayers that you are squandering their money on a failed experiment that will create new Ben Ladens who will eventually turn against your country and the freedom, equality and liberty your people hold so dearly? Mr. Secretary, you are coming to Egypt to support Morsi and his gang who since coming to power in June of last year through a questionable election have broken the constitution and all the laws of Egypt. Mr. Morsi has issued illegal constitution amendment declarations and decrees in flagrant breach of the constitution he swore to uphold. When popular pressure mounted against these unprecedented actions, he decided to abrogate the most illegitimate of those decrees, yet kept all its effects in force!!!!! He sent his gang thugs to impose siege on the Supreme Court of Egypt for over 2 months to obstruct justice and prevent the court to issue sentences regarding the illegitimate Shoura Council (Upper House) and the second constituent assembly from which one third of the members withdrew. Would Mr. Obama be spared had he done the same in your country? His security apparatus seconded by his gang militias gratuitously killed and tortured hundreds of Egyptians during peaceful demonstrations. Irregularities and violations at the referendum for the new constitution in December of last year were called for by civil society organizations as sufficient ground to cancel and repeat the first phase of the referendum, yet you disregarded all this. You turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to all this and are now coming to force your hand on the free will of the true people of Egypt who sacrificed hundreds of its youth to live in freedom, equality and dignity. Mr. Secretary this is not what the constitution of the US stands for, this is not what your taxpayers are paying their government to do. Revisit your mandate and your pledge to uphold your constitution which stands for some of the best values of human mankind, but most of all revisit your conscience and respect the plight of a people that longs for all what your forefathers died for. Naguib Abadir, a freedom-loving Egyptian.

Egyptians are in the streets protesting Obama-Kerry-Morsi- Muslim Brotherhood axis of Evil, spineless Americans are sitting at home scared!

Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 20 Comments

Members of Free Egyptians has written an open letter to Obama

 

	Inbox		x

 

 

 

Carmel Miller	8:37 AM (3 minutes ago)
to me

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/egyptian-protesters-accuse-kerry-of-muslim-brotherhood-membership/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+fpm+(FrontPage+Magazine+%C2%BB+All)

Egyptian Protesters Accuse Kerry of Muslim Brotherhood Membership

March 3, 2013 By Daniel Greenfield

 

Kerry’s visit to Egypt did not go smoothly as protesters turned out to denounce Obama and Kerry’s support for the Islamist regime of Morsi.

 

Protesters held a banner reading, “They shook hands stained with the blood of children.” Others burned and stomped on photos of Kerry. They denounced American interference in Egyptian affairs and claimed that the alliance between the US and the Muslim Brotherhood is the true ruling regime in Egypt. And a simpler banned said, “Go to hell.”

Many of the protesters had camped out overnight bringing their own mattresses with them. Others reportedly set fire to car tires outside the airport to prevent Kerry from entering the country.
And some held up cartoons of Kerry, portraying him with an Islamic beard, saying “Kerry – member of the Brotherhood”.
Meanwhile one of the founding members of Free Egyptians has written an open letter to Obama

The USA has sponsored the so-called Arab Spring and has sold it to its taxpayers as the outcry of oppressed middle-eastern people for democracy, when all it achieved was bringing to power theocratic regimes that oppressed their people even more and turned the victim countries into failed states, namely Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Tunis and now Egypt which you are visiting to ensure that it joins the happy crowd.
Is surrounding Israel by failed states your ultimate objective?
Do you think that there can be lasting peace with countries that base their decisions on fanatic religious views?
Do you think that peace can be perpetuated in a neighborhood of poverty, despair and extremism?
Are you telling your taxpayers that you are squandering their money on a failed experiment that will create new Ben Ladens who will eventually turn against your country and the freedom, equality and liberty your people hold so dearly?
Mr. Secretary, you are coming to Egypt to support Morsi and his gang who since coming to power in June of last year through a questionable election have broken the constitution and all the laws of Egypt.
Mr. Morsi has issued illegal constitution amendment declarations and decrees in flagrant breach of the constitution he swore to uphold. When popular pressure mounted against these unprecedented actions, he decided to abrogate the most illegitimate of those decrees, yet kept all its effects in force!!!!!
He sent his gang thugs to impose siege on the Supreme Court of Egypt for over 2 months to obstruct justice and prevent the court to issue sentences regarding the illegitimate Shoura Council (Upper House) and the second constituent assembly from which one third of the members withdrew. Would Mr. Obama be spared had he done the same in your country?
His security apparatus seconded by his gang militias gratuitously killed and tortured hundreds of Egyptians during peaceful demonstrations.
Irregularities and violations at the referendum for the new constitution in December of last year were called for by civil society organizations as sufficient ground to cancel and repeat the first phase of the referendum, yet you disregarded all this.
You turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to all this and are now coming to force your hand on the free will of the true people of Egypt who sacrificed hundreds of its youth to live in freedom, equality and dignity.
Mr. Secretary this is not what the constitution of the US stands for, this is not what your taxpayers are paying their government to do.
Revisit your mandate and your pledge to uphold your constitution which stands for some of the best values of human mankind, but most of all revisit your conscience and respect the plight of a people that longs for all what your forefathers died for.
Naguib Abadir, a freedom-loving Egyptian.

Why is Arpaio acting like a panhandler instead of filing a criminal complaint against Obama? Tell him “Not a cent for you in donations until you file a criminal complaint against Obama for fraud and use of forged IDs in your jurisdiction” Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 18 Comments I got this e-mail from Sheriff Arpaio. It further asked for a donation. I feel that a sheriff, who is getting a high salary and benefits and 3,000 employees working for him in his sheriffs department, should not be asking for donations, but should be doing his job and filing criminal charges. He has all the evidence against Obama, he needs to file a criminal complaint immediately. Same goes for all the politicians, congressmen, senators, conservative organizations. Please, tell them “Not a cent for you until you file a criminal complaint against Obama” Fellow Patriot, I need your help now more than ever. In my last message I told you about the effort to remove me from office through a recall campaign. Well, just this week, the group behind this recall effort posted a comment on their site from an individual who stated the following: “He should see the color of his skin and where he comes from…stupid motherf***er…let’s kill him. I will kill him for free. I am going to Arizona to kill that a**hole.” Ignacio Carbajal is a U.S. Citizen living in Arizona who wrote these words while visiting Mexico. As disappointed as I am about this, I understand that there are still elements and people in this country that have no respect for the Rule of Law; that there are those who cannot accept the majority will when it comes to fair elections; that there are those who want to thwart the will of the voters and make them pay for a costly special election.

Why is Arpaio acting like a panhandler instead of filing a criminal complaint against Obama? Tell him “Not a cent for you in donations until you file a criminal complaint against Obama for fraud and use of forged IDs in your jurisdiction”

Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 18 Comments

I got this e-mail from Sheriff Arpaio. It further asked for a donation. I feel that a sheriff, who is getting a high salary and benefits and 3,000 employees working for him in his sheriffs department, should not be asking for donations, but should be doing his job and filing criminal charges. He has all the evidence against Obama, he needs to file a criminal complaint immediately. Same goes for all the politicians, congressmen, senators, conservative organizations. Please, tell them “Not a cent for you until you file a criminal complaint against Obama” 
Fellow Patriot,
I need your help now more than ever.
In my last message I told you about the effort to remove me from office through a recall campaign.
Well, just this week, the group behind this recall effort posted a comment on their site from an individual who stated the following:

“He should see the color of his skin and where he comes from…stupid motherf***er…let’s kill him. I will kill him for free. I am going to Arizona to kill that a**hole.”

Ignacio Carbajal is a U.S. Citizen living in Arizona who wrote these words while visiting Mexico. As disappointed as I am about this, I understand that there are still elements and people in this country that have no respect for the Rule of Law; that there are those who cannot accept the majority will when it comes to fair elections; that there are those who want to thwart the will of the voters and make them pay for a costly special election.

Grinols v Electoral college update, filed opposition Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 8 Comments Grinols Report of Technical failure of ECF Grinols opposition to motion to Dismiss filed Activity in Case 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Notice – Other caed_cmecf_helpdesk@caed.uscourts.gov 1:43 PM (14 minutes ago) to CourtMail This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply. U.S. District Court Eastern District of California – Live System Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered on 3/4/2013 at 1:43 PM PST and filed on 3/4/2013 Case Name: Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Case Number: 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Filer: Document Number: 81 Docket Text: NOTICE of CM/ECF Technical Failure on 3/1/2013 by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.. [RECEIVED in paper on 3/4/2013] (Donati, J) 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Notice has been electronically mailed to: Edward A Olsen , GOVT edward.olsen@usdoj.gov, karen.james@usdoj.gov, monica.lee@usdoj.gov, teisha.stogsdill@usdoj.gov George Michael Waters george.waters@doj.ca.gov, lydia.sandoval@doj.ca.gov Orly Taitz & nbsp orly.taitz@gmail.com 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Electronically filed documents must be served conventionally by the filer to: The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1064943537 [Date=3/4/2013] [FileNumber=6010332-0] [3c34f0b6d0d5a7e01b1c6ab97370486a73174c31cba1840b899ee6e24bdd29fb70a1 d02e4ccc6eef48eaf156ae497388c1246d3004fae6ff21cdbf23c481827d]] Activity in Case 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Opposition to Motion Inbox x caed_cmecf_helpdesk@caed.uscourts.gov 1:45 PM (19 minutes ago) to CourtMail This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply. U.S. District Court Eastern District of California – Live System Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered on 3/4/2013 at 1:45 PM PST and filed on 3/4/2013 Case Name: Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Case Number: 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Filer: James Grinols Keith Judd Thomas Gregory MacLeran Edward Noonan Robert Odden Document Number: 82 Docket Text: OPPOSITION by plaintiffs to [73] MOTION to DISMISS. [RECEIVED in paper on 3/4/2013 pursuant to [81] Notice of CM/ECF Technical Failure] (Donati, J) 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Notice has been electronically mailed to: Edward A Olsen , GOVT edward.olsen@usdoj.gov, karen.james@usdoj.gov, monica.lee@usdoj.gov, teisha.stogsdill@usdoj.gov George Michael Waters george.waters@doj.ca.gov, lydia.sandoval@doj.ca.gov Orly Taitz & nbsp orly.taitz@gmail.com 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Electronically filed documents must be served conventionally by the filer to: The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1064943537 [Date=3/4/2013] [FileNumber=6010347-0] [61de9069b55877f827e1f7cfc0d043be41b3baf96d910e18537772a76ee65246e2ea e992a9792c3537b037b15cde53c803e93fb6d80dd52fb44433870005b9de]]

Grinols v Electoral college update, filed opposition

Posted on | March 4, 2013 | 8 Comments

Grinols Report of Technical failure of ECF

Grinols opposition to motion to Dismiss filed

Activity in Case 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Notice – Other

caed_cmecf_helpdesk@caed.uscourts.gov	1:43 PM (14 minutes ago)
to CourtMail

This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system.  Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users.  To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply.

U.S. District Court

Eastern District of California – Live System

Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered  on 3/4/2013 at 1:43 PM PST and filed  on 3/4/2013

Case Name:	Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al
Case Number:	2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD
Filer:
Document Number:	81

Docket Text: NOTICE of CM/ECF Technical Failure on 3/1/2013 by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.. [RECEIVED  in paper on 3/4/2013]   (Donati, J)
2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Notice has been electronically mailed to:
Edward               A Olsen                                              , GOVT &nbsp &nbsp edward.olsen@usdoj.gov, karen.james@usdoj.gov, monica.lee@usdoj.gov, teisha.stogsdill@usdoj.gov
George               Michael Waters                                             &nbsp &nbsp george.waters@doj.ca.gov, lydia.sandoval@doj.ca.gov
Orly                 Taitz                                              &nbsp & nbsp orly.taitz@gmail.com
2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Electronically filed documents must be served conventionally  by the filer to:
The following document(s) are associated with this transaction:
Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1064943537 [Date=3/4/2013] [FileNumber=6010332-0] [

3c34f0b6d0d5a7e01b1c6ab97370486a73174c31cba1840b899ee6e24bdd29fb70a1 d02e4ccc6eef48eaf156ae497388c1246d3004fae6ff21cdbf23c481827d]] Activity in Case 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Opposition to Motion Inbox x caed_cmecf_helpdesk@caed.uscourts.gov 1:45 PM (19 minutes ago) to CourtMail This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system.  Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users.  To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply. U.S. District Court Eastern District of California – Live System Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered  on 3/4/2013 at 1:45 PM PST and filed  on 3/4/2013 Case Name: Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Case Number: 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Filer: James Grinols Keith  Judd Thomas Gregory MacLeran Edward  Noonan Robert Odden Document Number: 82 Docket Text: OPPOSITION by plaintiffs to [73]   MOTION to DISMISS. [RECEIVED in paper  on 3/4/2013 pursuant to [81] Notice of CM/ECF Technical Failure]  (Donati,  J) 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Notice has been electronically mailed to: Edward               A Olsen                                              , GOVT &nbsp &nbsp edward.olsen@usdoj.gov, karen.james@usdoj.gov, monica.lee@usdoj.gov, teisha.stogsdill@usdoj.gov George               Michael Waters                                             &nbsp &nbsp george.waters@doj.ca.gov, lydia.sandoval@doj.ca.gov Orly                 Taitz                                              &nbsp & nbsp orly.taitz@gmail.com 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Electronically filed documents must be served conventionally  by the filer to: The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1064943537 [Date=3/4/2013] [FileNumber=6010347-0] [61de9069b55877f827e1f7cfc0d043be41b3baf96d910e18537772a76ee65246e2ea e992a9792c3537b037b15cde53c803e93fb6d80dd52fb44433870005b9de]]