Links

This is the place to save specific videos or links that are often referenced or needed  on our blog.

 

303 responses to “Links

  1. Early life and education

    De Blasio was born Warren Wilhelm, Jr. in Manhattan, New York, the son of Maria (née De Blasio) and Warren Wilhelm.[2] His father was of German ancestry, and his maternal grandparents, Giovanni and Anna, were Italian immigrants[4][5] from the city of Sant’Agata de’ Goti in the province of Benevento.[6] He was raised in Cambridge, Massachusetts.[7] De Blasio’s mother graduated from Smith College in 1938, and his father graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Yale University. His mother was 44 years old when he was born, and he has two older brothers, Steven and Donald.[8] Although he was baptized Catholic, de Blasio is nonpracticing. He speaks Italian.[8]

    De Blasio has stated that he was 7 years old when his father first left home and 8 years old when his parents divorced.[9] In a 2012 interview, de Blasio described his upbringing: “[My dad] was an officer in the Pacific in the army, [and fought] in an extraordinary number of very, very difficult, horrible battles, including Okinawa…. And I think honestly, as we now know about veterans who return, [he] was going through physically and mentally a lot…. He was an alcoholic, and my mother and father broke up very early on in the time I came along, and I was brought up by my mother’s family—that’s the bottom line—the de Blasio family.”[10] In September 2013, de Blasio revealed that his father committed suicide in 1979 while suffering from incurable lung cancer.[11]

    In 1983, he legally changed his name to Warren de Blasio-Wilhelm, which he described in April 2012: “I started by putting the name into my diploma, and then I hyphenated it legally when I finished NYU, and then, more and more, I realized that was the right identity.” By the time he appeared on the public stage in 1990, he was using the name Bill de Blasio as he explained he had been called “Bill” or “Billy” in his personal life.[10] He did not legally change over to this new name until 2002, when the discrepancy was noted during an election.[12]

    De Blasio received a B.A. from New York University, majoring in metropolitan studies, a program in urban studies with courses such as Politics of Minority Groups and The Working Class Experience, and a Master of International Affairs from Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs.[13] He is a 1981 Harry S. Truman Scholar.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_de_Blasio

  2. People should incorporate themselves 2014. as soon as possible
    Call your lawyer to notify your HR officer you need a 1099.

    BEWARE: WHITE PRIVILEGE CONTENTS
    I love infernal irony.

  3. Putting this here. No real essence of anything except picture down towards bottom familiar and address alternative is not Indonesiah but Koncrd Masstwoshits. http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsandratoko.tripod.com%2F&act=url

  4. A perspective. Just an historical PSA, I guess.
    Interesting.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2543902/Photos-just-free-women-Afghanistan-Taliban-rule.html

    hmmmmmmm. I see. tail wagging dog…

    btw
    Hillary Clinton did a fine job throughout her long, modern day career in helping women and children all throughout the world, didn’t she? Not that it matters, at this time, in our Country’s History.

    Why are we there all these years? Do tell.

    • All the good work Laura Bush did in Afghanistan is all for naught under Hillary and Barry. Back to slavery for the women of that Muslim country.

  5. Subud, for a time when you have a clear head, cuppa coffee and chocolate donut.

    http://ginsbergblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/poetry-and-madness-at-esalen-1968.html#uds-search-results

    This is all starting to make sense to me now. The Beat Goes On… I typed a Seattle bundler’s name (from Links) in a search browser and this came up. Imagine that.

  6. and so it begins:

    HSBC is saying that they’re just trying to protect their customers, and they issued this statement:

    “We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual and out of keeping with the normal running of their account. Since last November, in some instances we may have also asked these customers to show us evidence of what the cash is required for.

    The reason being we have an obligation …

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/01/25/26-Jan-14-World-View-HSBC-cash-withdrawal-restrictions-raise-fears-of-bank-runs

    • One thing I know is in 1987ish when we signed legal documents (for mortgage) Every signature had to match the typed names. I signed with my middle name, instead of initial as typed everywhere, and all papers had to be redone. I notice Stanley Ann merely signed S. Ann Dunham, not matching full name typed in papers/legal decree.

      • That’s sort of the rule, isn’t it? On legal papers you sign your legal name, but at the very least it should match what the paper that you’re signing says.

        • Absolutely. The signature should match the name. I’ve had to do dovers myself in the past.

          Where’s the signature from the bogus long form? Let’s check it out.

          • The record reads “Stanley Ann Dunham” for the mother’s name, using her maiden name. Some say that’s why she signed Dunham: to match the way it’s on the record. But then, she “forgot” Stanley. If you’re going to match, you write Stanley Ann Dunham. It clearly says below the box for the mother’s name that it should be the “full maiden name”. But you’d sign with your current legal name, wouldn’t you? My mother did. No maiden name in her signature because she didn’t use her maiden name. We’re supposed to believe that in 1961 she went by “Ann Dunham Obama”. Somebody, of course, wrote the “Stanley” in above her signature, but was it SAD who did it? Have you ever seen a signature by her that simply reads, “Stanley Ann Obama”? Or even “Ann Dunham Obama”?

      • The first is from July 1980 and the second from Nov. 1980. Both are from her divorce papers from Lolo. She signed her name differently for the same legal event. I have updated the post that contains her other signatures, here.

        If that’s not bad enough, check out the permutations on her passport records. I know we went over these when they were released, but I only just noticed, after Papoose linked the divorce records. There’s one place in particular where she inserted Dunham and I don’t see why she would. She (or someone) had printed Stanley Ann Soetoro and then somebody used a caret and added Dunham. Why?

    • I didn’t ever realize Lolo was in Hawaii in August of 1980. Does this document infer he was?

      He signed this document in 1980. What else was going on at that time?

      • It’s interesting because one of them, at least, has to have been in Hawaii for the previous six months without interruption (the way I read it) and has to stay there for the next 3 months. Why would she not expect WEALTHY Lolo to pay child support for Maya? Why does it say that SAD is entitled to NONE of the properties owned by the couple? If she was such a struggling single mother, then why did she give up claim to all those assets? Why does she absolve Lolo of any responsibility to pay any of their joint debts? Why is Barry (if it is Barry) listed as an over-18 child of the two of them? If he’s not Lolo’s child, then why would he be mentioned at all?

        In 1980, that’s when Barry allegedly announced “no more Barry” and started using Barack Hussein Obama II instead of Barry Soetoro. Barry was going to Occidental. He was getting ready to go to Pakistan with his Muslim BFFs, first stopping off in Indonesia. This actually, I think, proves that SAD wasn’t in Indonesia for him to visit her on the way, so why then did he go to Indonesia first? This is all documented in the later biographies, iirc.

        My guess is that Lolo must have been nearby because on August 20 he was ordered to respond and by August 28 he had responded. That would be pretty quick if he were overseas, wouldn’t it? He signed the papers but notice: There’s no date for the signatures. That would seem to also be standard form.

        So in 1980, SAD’s LEGAL name, by the decree of that court, became once again “Stanley Ann Dunham”. If so, then WHY did she publish her anthropology works under Sutoro?

        Does it seem curious to you that there’s no text under the signatures for the clerk and the judge IDENTIFYING the person who’s signing? Isn’t that also standard procedure? To type or print and then sign? Who is the judge?

        • yes, adn on the page where it actually lists a child’s name, Maya, it appears that other information was washed out, there under.

          And why doesn’t this decree speak to “issues of this union”? Unless I missed it, the minor children aren’t described.

          I think we’re looking at another bogus document.

          On the filing of the complaint, shouldn’t there be addresses for the Plaintiff and Defendant — and in the body of the letter on that page, shouldn’t the subject’s names be written in caps?

          And how come the typist failed to put the paper in the typewriter correctly?

          • Yes, I read that this morning and decided not to post it… it doesn’t ring plausible to me. I could be wrong, but I think you can make an x …

            I always thought the messy check there was to obliterate what was in the block above it.

          • Yep. It’s not as interesting as it originally seemed. You have to be a techie to decide. I thought the writer would get to the point of what’s underneath the scribbled X. I think it was meant to cover up something, but what? If the form was blank or at least was blank in the attendant boxes, which is entirely possible if there was none but just an allegation by the grandma or mother of a home birth, then somebody would have to rectify that by entering something there. They already committed themselves to a hospital birth, so needed a signature of a practicing doctor, circa 1961. If they copped the signature and inserted it, they might have accidentally brought over something with it that they didn’t want. Alternately, as the writer said, they needed an X in the box that looked plausible. But why not just print it out without the X and then add one and then scan it back in? Duh. I already think they did that, anyway, because they showed something to Savannah.

    • on the last page it looks like one hand signed all 3 names. Check out the middle of Soetoro… the knot and the loop and second thought on signing a straight line through the t.

      hmmmm

    • I a pretty sure we saw another decree that included non minor children of the marriage. Or was that debunked?

  7. I think that decree is shady. Its weird all around.

    • I think the decree is shady but shady back then; like only one party participated? And was later told, hey, we are divorced deal with it.

      • just because I’m supercynical, I think alot of the documents are fabrication. There’s one “letter” there (scribe’d Lolo) that describes the Nativity.

        It seems they were having international difficulties in 1968. They were married in March 1965, he left in June of 1966 and they were begging forgiveness for technical errors on their applications in 1967… seems like zip 10 years later, they are “separated” in Indo and she’s Girl Wonder of All Things…

        The dreamy drunk dad who lost his legs in 1965-1968 but showedd up in 1970 is a figment of the Won’s imagination. It doesn’t mesh. At some point when they were figuring out how to get him here with a story, they pulled the Kenyan thingy. But then, wth is Mark and Joseph? another couple of “orphans”? ~ its a small world, in their world. Geithner, as an example. Ayres, as another.

        • maybe that’s why the passport tries to include BHO and exclude Soebarkah. Maybe it didn’t fly due to no docs. Maybe it is stricken as a matter of record and to discard it and start over would be to eliminate the attempted transaction. hmmmm. did soebarky finally get to America when he registered at Punahou as an Indonesian Prince?

        • I am willing to bet that there is absolutely no original birth certificate in the State of Hawaii (1949) for anyone named Barack Hussein Obama II and in light of that President Barack Hussein Obama II does not exist. and that is the universe-shattering information pending.

          i’ll wait.

        • Exactly. In the INS records, Lolo literally describes her as a dunce. She’s inexperienced. Her schooling isn’t finished. She can’t speak Indonesian (although only a short time later she’s TEACHING Bahasa Indonesian, we’re told. And she studied Russian, not Indonesian!) She can’t support herself. It’s a fable.

          I love that resume she suddenly developed. What an accomplished woman! Although her daughter had to find her unfinished dissertation on CDs in a drawer after she died, we once were told, and then voila! She gets a retroactive PhD, backdated 3 years before she died. Who really wrote the dissertation ascribed to her? Like mother like son? Was Alice Dewey SAD’s Bill Ayers?

          Drunk dad lost his legs and then regrew them! A modern medical miracle.

          • http://www.dukeupress.edu/Assets/PubMaterials/978-0-8223-4687-6_401.pdf

            That talks about how her dissertation was “revised” by Alice Dewey and some other anthropologist (Nancy I. Cooper) and then it was published 14 years after her death! It claims she was awarded the PhD in 1992, though. As anybody knows, a university publishes ALL PhD dissertations and puts them in the university library when the PhD is awarded. So why the special treatment for SAD, if she truly got a PhD in ’92? Notice that nowhere prior to this publication did ANYBODY call her “Doctor” Stanley Ann Dunham. You know that Barry WOULD HAVE USED that title, if she held it in 2008, so we can logically deduce that she got the PhD posthumously to bolster the credentials of the “mother” of the “first” “African-American” POtuS.

          • http://chronicle.com/article/Hot-Type-Obamas-Mothers/49279/

            Another version of the tale. It would be interesting, for posterity, of course, to READ the original dissertation as it was submitted to the University in 1992, according to Maya. Also according to her, Barry HAS a copy of the original but she doesn’t know if he ever read it. He’s too busy.

          • Apropos of nothing. While looking for other things, I ran across this, from 2012. Now Maraniss’s bio was already out, so there’s no excuse for them falsely saying she lived with BHO Sr. in his apartment and NOT with her parents, as Maraniss says.

  8. The Story Of My Life

  9. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1935

    That’s a timeline of the IRS scandal that may be useful someday.

    • So glad you captured this. I skimmed something and then couldn’t find it.
      donuts and coffee

      dropping by the Abby tonight. very interested in revisiting time 100 years ago. while I do the wash.

      • Oh, me, too. I can’t miss it. But I love all period and costume dramas. Pride and Prejudice (any version). This will take you back: Did you watch Poldark? I Claudius? (I’m aging myself here.) Dark Shadows! How’s about that one? Most of that’s been on PBS, which for a bunch of lefties funded by US, SOMETIMES comes up with something worthwhile, even if all they do is buy it from the UK.

    • He questions the method of response by the police. First, their protocol (all first response protocol) is that the first unit on the scene TAKES ACTION to “neutralize the threat.” It didn’t happen. The first unit parked a QUARTER MILE from the school and waited. So right off the bat, they didn’t follow standard protocol.

      He made FOIA requests about why no trauma helicopters responded. 20 children and 6 staff members were shot, so why no helicopters even requested?

      Why weren’t paramedics and EMT’s allowed into the building? Who declared them all dead within 11 minutes, when CT law says only a doctor can declare people dead? He asked who, where, why, when, etc.

      He’s a safety director himself but two homicide investigators came to his house to talk to him and tell him to stop asking questions or else they’ll file felony harassment charges against him. He’s a former state and federal law enforcement officer and he was only following the state FOIA LAWS.

      About two months after the incident, he began asking questions from the public schools. Why did the FBI classify the Sandy Hook report? It’s never been done before, on any shooting. Not in history. Obama, Holder, and Mueller probably had their reports within 72 hours, so why did the families and the public have to wait months for a report that makes no sense? In mid-February, he started sending requests. Almost a year later, before Christmas, they sent two plain clothes homicide detectives from Lake Co. sheriff’s office to “threaten and intimidate” him, about 10 in the morning. They read off of his resume, so they did a background check on him. They recommended that he hire a lawyer. He told them that the people receiving the requests and not responding to them, according to the law, are the ones who need to be investigated. He said he wasn’t going to stop and then they left. (The way they stonewall him sounds exactly like the HDOH. When they stonewall and the people get persistent, then they say they’re “harassing” the public officials. Next thing, they will probably try to pass a law against “persistent requestors” in CT.)

      Nobody responds to his requests or phone calls, emails or letters. He’s contacted “every key player in this puzzle” and they don’t respond. He’s complained to the education department about the behavior of people in the school districts, about how they refuse to respond at all, which is something else that is atypical. It’s just not done for public officials to ignore the public.

      He suspects that “it’s a scripted event that took place.” That it was planned for 2 to 2 1/2 years.

      He says there’s no way police transmissions lie. When cops say there are “multiple weapons”, a rifle and a shotgun, but nobody can find them, that doesn’t happen. (Assume he means that the cop transmissions are the truth and the story that was put out later is full of lies.)

      One story is that a policeman sent a kindergartner into room 8, for safety, presumably, when that room was later said to be a crime scene with multiple dead bodies in it. Another child was sent by a cop into room 10, same thing–it was supposed to be a crime scene with multiple bodies in it. No cop would send a child into a room to wait for a long time with dead bodies. Implication is that there were no bodies in those rooms and that the cops were telling the truth.

      He can’t believe parents didn’t want to see their own children. He knows from experience. It makes no sense that they weren’t allowed to see or touch their children’s bodies. THAT’S unheard of and the parents would have kicked “the door down.” It “doesn’t fit.”

      He believes there were no children killed. He knows from experience how people react in these situations, but the parents didn’t act as expected. His premise is that no helicopters or ambulances arrived or even were sent because there WERE no people to transport. There are too many discrepancies.

      The police report says there’s one shooter, who went through the door, fired hundreds of rounds, killed all those people.

      He wants to know who closed the doors of the car, which had all four doors open originally? Who put the rifle in the trunk? That’s tampering with a crime scene and it’s not done.

      He hopes to raise money, hire an attorney, and get people deposed. (Good luck with that! Let me guess–he won’t have standing. I suspect, however, that nobody’s going to hurt people like him because THEN they will have standing. For example, if he or someone else gets fired. Gives standing for a lawsuit, imho.)

      He says for 10 months they’ve ignored his FOIA requests. He plans, it seems, to sue them over this. They count on nobody going that far. He hopes then he’ll be able to get depositions.

      He’s going to the Sandy Hook area soon. They tore down the school. He was in the “media center” at Columbine. He knows what the scene would look like. They didn’t tear down Columbine, but they did tear down Sandy Hook. He asked them what environmental company they hired to remove all the “biohazards”. The response he got was that the person seemed to not even know what he was talking about. Who cleaned up the blood, brain matter, etc.? They wouldn’t answer the question. Apparently, they have to remediate such biohazards by law, even before tearing down the building. (Duh. Didn’t they say part of the reason they tore it down was finding asbestos? So there had to have been a contractor for that. We’ve basically had all these same questions here!)

      Who installed the security system: name, contract, cost, who paid? They won’t tell him. They say it will put the children at risk to respond. Taxpayer dollars are involved but they won’t respond to “simple requests.”

      The story is that they didn’t find the registered nurse for 4 hours? She’s in the closet, in the front office, so why didn’t the SWAT teams find her earlier? Huge fail (if true). Supposedly they made her cover her eyes as she was led out, so she wouldn’t see the blood, but she’s a NURSE, so what hasn’t she seen?

      When do you ever see a big traffic sign saying that everyone must sign in, as was visible in the photos? Port-a-potties were there within 3 hours? They didn’t have anything like that at Columbine.

      He’s asking simple questions and doesn’t want to offend anybody, but he’s a law enforcement professional asking questions about why STANDARD PROTOCOLS weren’t followed. He’s going to the school board meeting in CT, to look the people in the eye, because as a law enforcement professional, he will be able to read their body language.

      About the Super Bowl magazine: The names of the 26 children who sang were NOT published in the magazine. WHY NOT? Why would they not give out the names of the kids who performed?

      He gives his phone number, if anyone wants to talk to him.

      Why would they not tell the public what happened? Why is the report classified? He’s going to his senator to try to get a copy of the report, especially because Obama said he would use every resource to investigate this crime. He directed Mueller to take charge, but the FBI report isn’t included in the CT findings that were released.

      How could this be pulled off? “Follow the money,” is what he said. So much money has been collected. He’s never seen so many fundraisers.

      He’s NEVER seen a school shooting where NO lawsuits were filed against the school system. “That’s unheard of.”

      17 million bucks raised by United Way. Every parent got a huge chunk. Holder gave all the police officers a big check. NO lawsuits were filed. He’d look at other benefits they may have gotten, like witness relocation or whether people are getting tax relief for years. He thinks a “lot of deals” are going on.

      It’s a puzzle that needs to be put together, but the pieces don’t fit. Why would the report be classified when the shooter is dead? There was one shooter, according to the official report. It’s a simple case, so there’s no reason why the report would be classified.

      He says that autistic kids and those with Asperger’s have poor motor skills. How did Lanza, alone, carry all that equipment and shoot all those people in such a short time? No wounded, just dead. Skill that he himself doesn’t have. At Columbine, there were two shooters and many wounded.

      He’s asking simple questions but they’re closing their eyes. (I don’t even think the argument needs to consider autism or Asperger’s; the simple fact is that he was SKELETAL. Absolutely skeletal, so he had to be WEAK. HOW did he carry all that equipment and carry this shooting off? It makes NO SENSE. He was the size of a 10-year-old, one cop said, iirc.)

      He says he’s not going to stop. Is he afraid his life is in danger? He says he’s lived his life, is 67, and “whatever would happen from this day forward,” he says that he’s “had a great journey.” He’s willing to die for this. (Pray for this man’s safety.)

      He trains people on school safety, which is why he questions (“simple questions”) this story. He’d like to have a conference on this issue in Orlando. (Maybe he said he is having one.) He’s working on arranging it. People can come and bring their questions and thoughts.

      He’s considered suing the NFL. It would get publicity. They have a vested interest. They need to disclose who these people who sang were. The NFL paid for their visit, their hotels, food, etc. He thinks he could get leverage there. (He would need a lawyer for that one. The NFL is a private company. He’ll have to find a hook to hang this suit on. Some connection. Using the public airwaves? Was any public money involved?)

      He’s seen parents who lost children. He knows that parents would want to see their children’s bodies. They would be storming into the morgue to see their children. WHY and HOW, then, did the M.E. successfully prevent them (allegedly) from seeing the bodies? They gave them only photos, AND THE PARENTS ACCEPTED THAT. It makes no sense.

      • Excellent analysis, Miri.

        Thank you so much for taking the time to lay it all out.

        I’ll never forget seeing that giddy “father” coming to the cameras to speak to the public and share his grief.

        • You’re welcome. As I was listening, anyway, I figured I’d give a blow by blow. It’s worth listening to, though.

          I’ll never forget that guy laughing, either. Reminded me so much of when Bill Clinton was laughing as he came out of Ron Brown’s funeral–until he spotted the camera and went into his fake tears routine.

  10. Ministry – Empowerment of Women and Children

    See comments. and oldie but goodie.
    ;) ;)

  11. Putting these here for future reference. The first was only available via wayback, http://web.archive.org/web/20081004021420/http://www.eastandard.net/InsidePage.php?id=1143996073&cid=4&
    America bans ECK commissioners

    Published on 02/10/2008

    By Joseph Murimi

    Pressure continues to pile on ECK chiefs to quit, with the US imposing a travel ban on the 22 commissioners, and EU negotiating a soft landing for them.

    This comes ahead of the commissioners’ meeting with EU ambassadors to Kenya in Nairobi, this morning.

    Although the EU representatives in Nairobi refused to divulge details of the agenda of today’s meeting with ECK chairman Samuel Kivuitu and his team, impeccable sources intimated to us the ambassadors would be asking them to consider resigning to allow for reforms of the electoral system.

    The source from an EU country told The Standard the meeting would explore options for the commissioners to give them a ‘safe exit’ following the bungled General Election, last year.

    “The options include, but are not limited to, the commissioners getting a generous severance pay package,” said the source privy to the planning of the meeting.

    The Standard has established from sources within ECK that Kivuitu has come under increasingly heavy pressure to resign as the first step in reforming the electoral body.

    ECK commissioners were roundly condemned by the public after the controversial presidential vote tallying that sparked a wave of violence that led to the death of over 1,200 people and the displacement of about 350,000 others in January and February.

    A scene during the announcement of the presidential election results at the KICC on December 30, last year. Photo: File/Standard
    The exit offer, it emerged on Wednesday, has been on the cards for some time as an option for the commissioners who enjoy security of tenure. The law states that getting a commissioner out of office before the expiry of their term would require the President to form a tribunal to probe their conduct.

    But Kivuitu is said to be unhappy the money offered for him to leave office.

    A commissioner, who spoke to us on condition of anonymity, said Kivuitu emerged from a meeting with a senior official of the French Embassy on Wednesday very upset.

    According to the commissioner, the embassy official told Kivuitu that if he accepted to resign they (EU) were prepared to pay his dues.

    But the EU officials is said to have told Kivuitu that they are ready to come in and help him find another engagement and fund his retirement.

    The EU’s verdict of the General Election last year was that it fell short of key international and regional standards for democratic elections.

    Most significantly, the electoral process suffered from a lack of transparency in the processing and tallying of results, which undermined the confidence in the accuracy of the final results of the presidential election.

    They were also ready to find a soft landing for him in form a job if he was interested.

    The commissioner said Kivuitu took offence with the suggestion that he gets the money or even a job outside Kenya if he so wished.

    A second commissioner we spoke to also confirmed the money and the soft landing offer that Kivuitu had been offered in exchange for his job at the commission.

    The commissioner said that the pressure from foreign missions for ECK’s top brass to resign amounts to interference with internal affairs of the country.

    He added that Kivuitu was appointed by the President under Section 3 of the Constitution, and that calls for him to quit show disrespect for the Constitution.

    When we contacted the US embassy’s press officer Ms Inmi Patterson on Wednesday on the travel ban, she declined to comment, saying they are on holiday.
    “I am not aware. We closed office on Tuesday at 4.30 and I would only confirm to you tomorrow when I get back to office,” she told The Standard on telephone.

    Can’t travel to US

    But an official at the embassy said the 22 commissioners were among 30 Kenyans banned from travelling to the US. When the US imposes a travel ban, they do not notify the person affected until they apply for a travel visa.

    The official said he was only aware of four commissioners whose visa applications had been turned down at the height of the post-election violence. But he did not disclose their names.

    When contacted, ECK commissioner Samuel Ngeny directed The Standard to the US embassy and hung up. “Contact the US embassy in that case,” he said, and hung up his phone.

    Vice-chairman Kihara Muttu said he was not aware of the ban.

    It also emerged on Wednesday that Kivuitu had been invited for a conference in the United States on November ahead of the November 4 presidential election.

    He had been invited by a media organisation to lecture on how to conduct elections, but has not put in his visa application.

    Commissioner Jack Tumwa noted that he has not received any notification of any US visa ban.

    “I’m in the dark just like you. Nothing has been communicated to me yet,” said Tumwa.

    Commissioner Alfred Ndambiri said he was not aware of the ban as he left for Brazil where he is leading a team from ECK to observe the country’s municipal elections scheduled for Friday.

    And on Wednesday, Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka said there was need to reform the Electoral Commission before the 2012 General Election.

    Defend themselves

    On Friday, Kalonzo outlined the processes necessary for the overhaul of the ECK and the entire electoral process before the next General Election.

    He said the Cabinet should discuss the Kriegler Report today and make recommendations that would lead to a formulation of a Sessional Paper to be tabled in Parliament.

    “Then the necessary legislations will be put in place to ensure the new team facilitates free and fair elections. Everyone knows there is need to reform ECK,” said Kalonzo.

    He said the ECK should be lean with about nine commissioners.

    He added commissioners should be given an opportunity to defend themselves before they are replaced.

    “There is a way of dealing with the matter until the recommendations by Kriegler are implemented,” said Kalonzo, who spoke to The Standard in an interview on Friday.

    The Kriegler report proposes overhaul of the ECK.

    On Wednesday, Kalonzo said there was need to take legislative steps to reconstitute the commission.

    He said the ECK matter should be looked at in a comprehensive manner instead of simply changing individuals.

    —Additional report by Mutinda Mwanzia

    And the picture that originally sent me to above article. Do not know the people, but look familiar. Do not even know any connection to what research goes on around here but instinct said to save. Who are their family members living in US? Interesting one guy was sceduled to come talk just prior to 2008 elections about ……how to run elections! A Kenyan coming to America to teach how to run an election?? http://www.abeingo.org/images_news/eck_commissioners_banned_US.jpg

    • Chu. Mark’s teacher? Nope. This is Michael. The teach was Steven. Related? No time to look today.

      • No, didn’t even dawn on me -the name chu. Wasn’t researching him.

        just a coinky dink. Looking at the history of microfinancing, etc. and just wanted to drop the links or future reference.

  12. Testing

  13. All right. Now that’s weird. I see what you mean and now I’m testing, too. See if this comment shows up on the recent comments list.

    • And surprise! It does not! Now that truly is weird, Papoose. I see what you mean. Is it just this post and no others? Is it whenever we don’t “reply” but just add a comment to the bottom?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s