Copy-Post-Distribute
The DARAJA Human Rights Case
Extra-judicial Punishment of Political Dissent;
Involuntary Medical Experiment / Procedures;
US-Sponsored Abduction of Refugee Child, SARAH DARAJA.
http://www.FolkSense.com/
In 2001 James Daraja and his daughter Sarah fled the US and sought the protection of Refugee Status in Canada, to escape persecution because of his political dissent as a university student and professor. -- In 2002 the US government arranged the abduction of Sarah Daraja (then nine years old) to prevent their claim for Refugee Status from coming to open court, and to discredit and conceal the human rights abuses that forced them to flee the United States.
* The persecution that we fled in 2001 included: federal “quality-of-life disruption”, placing harmful chemicals in our home, and manipulation of our medical care. -- By 2001, medical interference had already taken the life of one family member.
There is a blackout of our case in the US. No one will investigate or report our story. US human rights groups remain silent about our case. -- Ours is one of the "invisible" human rights cases in the US. --
The persecution that we fled continues to the very present. -- The Bush-Cheney administration used every method to keep our case from public view. Those same illegal government acts continue now under the Obama administration. -- We remain "excluded" from the protections of civil law.
The United Nations knew that we were not safe in Canada, but the Refugee Protection Officer refused to meet with us or to help in any way. The Canadian Centre for Victims of Torture refused to perform medical examinations for us. -- In 2002 the US recruited an absentee parent to carry out the abduction, and later to provide false information about Sarah’s medical history. They also used NCMEC (Nat’l Center for Missing & Exploited Children) to issue a false report that I had fled to Canada to avoid a custody case. -- I have been a single parent since my daughter was an infant, and her only legal custodial parent. There was no custody case.
When we learned of the abduction plan we returned to US territory (Buffalo, NY), so that the US could not deny involvement. -- Within weeks, a New York court presented a fraudulent petition from Ohio (the state we had fled) to take custody of Sarah Daraja, without notice or hearing -- despite the fact that none of the parties involved lived in Ohio. They then "dismissed" the petition one week later, after she had been taken illegally to yet another state, New Jersey. -- I have not seen my child since that time, five days after her ninth birthday. --
Although child abduction is a federal crime, US courts and the FBI refuse to intervene.
-- We remain “excluded” from the protections of civil law.
*** To help with the DARAJA Case:
Email President Barack Obama at www.whitehouse.gov/contact
Email House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Demand investigation and open hearing of the DARAJA case. --
"Legitimate National Security does not require child abduction."
Contact James Daraja: FreeSince2001@hotmail.com
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Obama: The Audacity of Hoax
“Ba-rack, go back --
We need a president!” --- Chant of the Disenchanted
Among the rapidly decreasing number of Obama supporters there is a common “explanation” for his reversal of campaign promises. It goes something like this: “Well, you know they won’t let him do …”
The people who use this “explanation” generally fall into one of two groups: 1) persons who are themselves accustomed to authoritarian presences in their own lives and identify with Obama because... "after all, he is black" or 2) those persons who simply can not bear to face the now obvious possibility that their champion is really just another political opportunist.
The idea that there is some great “They” in a position to foil Obama’s decisions runs counter to the US Constitution, and also to the political reality. Constitutionally, only Congress, the Senate, and the federal courts can erase the president’s decisions. However, in all these cases, the members of Congress, the Senate, and the judges of the federal courts have been painfully surprised by Obama’s turn-around away from his passionate campaign promises.
At the very start of the Obama presidency, his newly appointed Justice Department was in federal court to continue one of the terrorist-related cases from the Bush-Cheney administration. The case turned on the Bush-Cheney assertion that the government could keep secrets, even from the courts. On the first day of hearings under the Obama administration, the judge asked whether the government wished to “change” any of its previous positions or to offer any new proposals. Her expectation was, of course, prompted by the Obama pledge to end government secrecy. She was so surprised by the answer she received that she asked the same question three times. -- The Obama response: “No. We’ve talked with everyone and we are comfortable with the government’s present position.” - maintain the Bush-Cheney secrecy that he campaigned explicitly to end.
Both Bush and Obama allowed the banking industry to raid the US Treasury, taking taxpayer money to fill depleted bank reserves. That fact alone should have been an indicator that Obama’s true allegiance was to Power rather than the people. But it was not taken as such. Obama’s continued rhetoric, at least until the election, promised “a presidency for the people”, and “one that respects the Constitution.” Following his election, many people expected that he would, at least, try to fulfill that promise. -- Oops.
Obama has played a masterful hand of double entendre. On the one hand he claims “non-racial” Americanism; on the other he maintains the black messiah image, making speeches that stop just short of actually saying “We shall overcome”. Consequently, his largest block of unwavering support continues to be the black masses. But from Vermont to Latin America, critical questions are being raised about this New Age campaigner and Old School politician.
In Europe, where there is more than a theatrical memory of Nazism, Bush-Cheney represented an emotional as well as political reality. Europe was so relieved to be finally free of Bush-Cheney, and so eager to embrace the newly elected “Change You Can Believe In” (Obama’s campaign slogan) that they awarded Obama the Nobel Peace Prize -- for which he had absolutely no earned accomplishments.
The Obama reality: Under Barack Obama not even one of the Bush-Cheney “surveillance programs” has been investigated, punished, or discontinued. Over the objections of his own Attorney General (Eric Holder) and the new Director of CIA (Leon Panetta) Obama has maintained every one of the illegal programs that he promised to put an end to. Obama’s political mentor was Senator Joe Lieberman from Connecticut. Lieberman is so Right-wing that he lost the Democratic primary and had to become an Independent candidate so that Connecticut Republicans could help him return to Washington. Lieberman is known for advocating that the federal government do more “to establish Watch Lists”.
The Obama presidency has revealed the poverty of the US political system. It has shown that even under the most extreme circumstances the perennial Republican-versus-Democrat match can not produce truly ethical leadership, truly concerned with “We the People”.
For Obama, this is the ultimate “Visiting Professorship”. He gets to play at being President for four years, and to bask in the light of worldwide publicity. Although not as adept as Bill Clinton, Obama is certain to amass a financially significant “Presidential Library” or “Obama Foundation” by the time he finishes this adventure. -- Also certain is that the true hopes of the people and the false promises of the candidate will have left the US more cynical and less hopeful than he found them.
In retrospect it will have been Obama that did more to damage the cause of democracy in the United States than Bush-Cheney ever could. Almost everyone, both foreign and domestic, realized that Bush-Cheney were operating from an extremist position that could not stand under rational examination. Almost everyone waited for the eventual moderation of those extremist policies. Obama’s greatest qualification for the US presidency was his promise to make those alterations “on my first day in office”.
Perhaps because of his own confused biography, Obama has used his tenure in the White House to ingratiate himself with men who remind him of his grandfather. The same generals who advocated using Guantanamo to evade the Geneva Conventions are Obama’s military advisors. His obligations to the American people and to the US Constitution have been moved to the category of “necessary losses” -- if ever they actually occupied any other position.
From the perspective of the professional politician, Obama has pulled off the ultimate coup. He recognized an opportunity and took full advantage. He successfully out-maneuvered his opponents and claimed a uniquely valuable prize. Having gained his place in the history books, and having secured his place at the very top of the social ladder, Obama will depart with no clue whatever that he might have done anything wrong. FolkSense View - 2010
We need a president!” --- Chant of the Disenchanted
Among the rapidly decreasing number of Obama supporters there is a common “explanation” for his reversal of campaign promises. It goes something like this: “Well, you know they won’t let him do …”
The people who use this “explanation” generally fall into one of two groups: 1) persons who are themselves accustomed to authoritarian presences in their own lives and identify with Obama because... "after all, he is black" or 2) those persons who simply can not bear to face the now obvious possibility that their champion is really just another political opportunist.
The idea that there is some great “They” in a position to foil Obama’s decisions runs counter to the US Constitution, and also to the political reality. Constitutionally, only Congress, the Senate, and the federal courts can erase the president’s decisions. However, in all these cases, the members of Congress, the Senate, and the judges of the federal courts have been painfully surprised by Obama’s turn-around away from his passionate campaign promises.
At the very start of the Obama presidency, his newly appointed Justice Department was in federal court to continue one of the terrorist-related cases from the Bush-Cheney administration. The case turned on the Bush-Cheney assertion that the government could keep secrets, even from the courts. On the first day of hearings under the Obama administration, the judge asked whether the government wished to “change” any of its previous positions or to offer any new proposals. Her expectation was, of course, prompted by the Obama pledge to end government secrecy. She was so surprised by the answer she received that she asked the same question three times. -- The Obama response: “No. We’ve talked with everyone and we are comfortable with the government’s present position.” - maintain the Bush-Cheney secrecy that he campaigned explicitly to end.
Both Bush and Obama allowed the banking industry to raid the US Treasury, taking taxpayer money to fill depleted bank reserves. That fact alone should have been an indicator that Obama’s true allegiance was to Power rather than the people. But it was not taken as such. Obama’s continued rhetoric, at least until the election, promised “a presidency for the people”, and “one that respects the Constitution.” Following his election, many people expected that he would, at least, try to fulfill that promise. -- Oops.
Obama has played a masterful hand of double entendre. On the one hand he claims “non-racial” Americanism; on the other he maintains the black messiah image, making speeches that stop just short of actually saying “We shall overcome”. Consequently, his largest block of unwavering support continues to be the black masses. But from Vermont to Latin America, critical questions are being raised about this New Age campaigner and Old School politician.
In Europe, where there is more than a theatrical memory of Nazism, Bush-Cheney represented an emotional as well as political reality. Europe was so relieved to be finally free of Bush-Cheney, and so eager to embrace the newly elected “Change You Can Believe In” (Obama’s campaign slogan) that they awarded Obama the Nobel Peace Prize -- for which he had absolutely no earned accomplishments.
The Obama reality: Under Barack Obama not even one of the Bush-Cheney “surveillance programs” has been investigated, punished, or discontinued. Over the objections of his own Attorney General (Eric Holder) and the new Director of CIA (Leon Panetta) Obama has maintained every one of the illegal programs that he promised to put an end to. Obama’s political mentor was Senator Joe Lieberman from Connecticut. Lieberman is so Right-wing that he lost the Democratic primary and had to become an Independent candidate so that Connecticut Republicans could help him return to Washington. Lieberman is known for advocating that the federal government do more “to establish Watch Lists”.
The Obama presidency has revealed the poverty of the US political system. It has shown that even under the most extreme circumstances the perennial Republican-versus-Democrat match can not produce truly ethical leadership, truly concerned with “We the People”.
For Obama, this is the ultimate “Visiting Professorship”. He gets to play at being President for four years, and to bask in the light of worldwide publicity. Although not as adept as Bill Clinton, Obama is certain to amass a financially significant “Presidential Library” or “Obama Foundation” by the time he finishes this adventure. -- Also certain is that the true hopes of the people and the false promises of the candidate will have left the US more cynical and less hopeful than he found them.
In retrospect it will have been Obama that did more to damage the cause of democracy in the United States than Bush-Cheney ever could. Almost everyone, both foreign and domestic, realized that Bush-Cheney were operating from an extremist position that could not stand under rational examination. Almost everyone waited for the eventual moderation of those extremist policies. Obama’s greatest qualification for the US presidency was his promise to make those alterations “on my first day in office”.
Perhaps because of his own confused biography, Obama has used his tenure in the White House to ingratiate himself with men who remind him of his grandfather. The same generals who advocated using Guantanamo to evade the Geneva Conventions are Obama’s military advisors. His obligations to the American people and to the US Constitution have been moved to the category of “necessary losses” -- if ever they actually occupied any other position.
From the perspective of the professional politician, Obama has pulled off the ultimate coup. He recognized an opportunity and took full advantage. He successfully out-maneuvered his opponents and claimed a uniquely valuable prize. Having gained his place in the history books, and having secured his place at the very top of the social ladder, Obama will depart with no clue whatever that he might have done anything wrong. FolkSense View - 2010
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
