09-5322-OP

________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CIRCUIT
________________________________________________________________________

In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse

Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

________________________________________________________________________

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

________________________________________________________________________

Christopher-Earl: Strunk© in esse, Petitioner in the Original Proceeding for a

writ of mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 seeks an Order of the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia to Recuse the district Judge in 08-
cv-2234, 09-cv-1249, 09-cv-1295 with investigation of the impropriety of the
District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C. §455 and related law in its entirety; and
a stay of proceedings below until this matter is resolved herein.

__________________________________________________________________________

593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281

Brooklyn, New York 11238
Cell-845-901-6767
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse

i
 RESPONDENTS

The Honorable Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth

for the U.S. District for the District of Columbia
333 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001

The Honorable Richard J. Leon

United States District Judge for the
U.S. District for the District of Columbia
333 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room 6315,
Washington, DC 20001

RESPONDENTS

John Marcus McNichols (202) 514-6289 Fax: (202) 616-8460

WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY, LLP
725 12th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 434-5029; jmcnichols@wc.com
Attorney for Defendants Maryland Province
of the Society of Jesus and Fr. Timothy B.
Brown, S.J.
John Michael Bredehoft, Esq.
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street – P.O. Box 3037
Norfolk, VA 23514
(757) 624-3225, (757) 624-3169 (fax)
Counsels for Defendants:
The New York Province of the Society of
Jesus and Father Gerald Chojnacki, S.J.
Brigham John Bowen, A.U.S.A. for the
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Representing: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
STATE (DOS), And U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS).
Jennifer M. Olkiewicz
Assistant General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Federal Bureau of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Room PA-400
Washington, DC 20535
phone: (202) 220-9309, Fax: 220-9341.
Maria J. Rivera
TEXAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL
P.O. Box 12548
Austin, TX 78711
(512) 475-4099
maria.rivera@oag.state.tx.us
for the State of Texas

ii
 AFFIDAVIT of Christopher-Earl: Strunk© in esse, Petitioner in support of
the Original Proceeding for a writ of mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 seeks
an Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to
Recuse the District Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-1249, 09-cv-1295, with
investigation of impropriety of the District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C. §455
and related law in its entirety; and a stay of proceedings below until this
matter is resolved herein.

STATE OF NEW YORK )

) ss.:
COUNTY OF KINGS )

Accordingly, I, Christopher–Earl : Strunk © in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say:

1. Affiant place for service is at 593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281 Brooklyn, New York 11238;

Cell Phone (845) 901-6767; Email: cestrunck@yahoo.com; SKYPE: cestrunk.

2. Affiant, the Petitioner herein, makes this affidavit under FRAP Rule 21 and seeks an

original proceeding in this Petition for a Writ of Mandamus for an Order of the United States

District Court for the District of Columbia to Recuse the District Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-

1249, 09-cv-1295, with investigation of impropriety of the District Clerk’s Office with 28

U.S.C. §455 and related law in its entirety; and a stay of proceedings in District below until this

matter is resolved herein.

3. Petition Table of Contents: Page

• The impropriety of the U.S.D.C. of Washington D.C. Clerk’s Office.…………… 2

• The impropriety of the District Judge…………………………………………….. 5
• The Quo Warranto demand in re the treason of Usurper Barry Soetoro et al……... 15
• No salvation outside of the Gnostic Mystery Religion ……………………………. 20
• Pontifex maximus’ Council of Trent versus Rosicrucian Protestant / Templars.…. 27
• The Jesuit Templars before and after the Bull of 1773 banning the Jesuits…........... 33
• Papal Crusader Father Leonard Feeney S.J. versus the Jesuit Templars of Boston… 37
• Benedict XVI’s Fatima versus John Paul II / Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Vatican II.. 38
• Argument for relief is for a nation of laws not men ……………………………………40
• Affiant Jurat …………………………………………………………………………….43
• Exhibit 2-F: The Affidavit of Edward M. Person, Jr. material witness - process server
• Exhibit 13: The Affidavit of Eric-Jon Phelps, expert witness for testimony.
• Annexed are Exhibit 1, Exhibit 2-A to Exhibit 2-M and Exhibit 3 through Exhibit 19.

1
 4. That on June 24, 2009, in the original proceeding 08-5503-OP before the Honorable

Chief Judge Sentelle, and Honorables Ginsburg and Tatel Circuit Judges in their Per Curiam

Order, see Exhibit 1, held that Petitioner file a new original proceeding for relief quote:

“To the extent petitioner seeks relief not requested in his original petition,
petitioner must file a separate petition for a writ of mandamus to bring the
matter properly before the court.”

5. That on July 7, 2009, Affiant went to U.S. District Court for the Washington District of

Columbia and filed a verified complaint 09-cv-1249 entitled Strunk v. The New York Province

of the Society of Jesus et al. in the matter of injury associated inter alia with the non-

enforcement of the Logan Act (18 USC 953 and related law), see a copy of the filing payment

Receipt No. 4616022135 herewith marked Exhibit 2-A, and then assigned by local rules to

District Judge Richard J. Leon.

The impropriety of the U.S.D.C. of Washington D.C. Clerk’s Office

6. That on July 13, 2009, Affiant went to US District Court for the Washington District of

Columbia to file a verified complaint 09-cv-1295 entitled Strunk v. UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS et al. with a request for a three

judge panel with 28 USC 2284 in the matter of Nationwide / Statewide injury associated inter

alia with the on-going 2010 Census enumeration in 13 USC 141, 13 USC 195 and related law.

7. That at approximately 10:30 AM on July 13, 2009, when Affiant appeared before the

U.S. District Court Clerk, believed to be Ms. Nancy M. Mayer-Whittington, there instructed

Affiant that a Plaintiff may not file under local rules any Verified Complaint with a request for a

28 USC 2284 three Judge panel without a Motion for such relief accompanying the filing, and

as such Affiant went to a local Kinko’s Copy Center to produce a hand written Notice of Motion

for three Judge Panel, supporting declaration and Memorandum of law, see Exhibit 2-B.

8. That at about 3:00 P.M. on July 13, 2009 Affiant returned to the U.S. District Court

2
Clerk to file a verified complaint 09-cv-1295 entitled Strunk v. UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS et al. with a request for a three

judge panel with 28 USC 2284 accompanied by Affiant’s Notice of Motion for three Judge

Panel, supporting declaration and Memorandum of law shown herewith as Exhibit 2-B, then

accepted for issuance of a summons after at about 3:20 P.M. Affiant tendered the filing payment

to the Cashier who issued the Receipt No. 4616022346 herewith marked Exhibit 2-C, and that

the case then was assigned by local rules to District Judge Richard J. Leon.

9. That on July 13, 2009, Affiant accompanied by Edward M. Person Jr., the process

server, went to U.S. District Court for the Washington District of Columbia, and there witnessed

the events at the Clerk’s Office when Affiant filed a verified complaint 09-cv-1295, and

thereafter at 5:05 PM, Mr. Person accompanied Affiant to Northern Baltimore to effect service

of the Summons, Complaint and Motion package upon both Defendants the Maryland Province

for the Society of Jesus and the Provincial, see the Return of Service form AO-440’s herewith

marked Exhibit 2-D and Exhibit 2-E.

10. For Mr. Person’s affidavit as a material witness on July 13, 2009, see Exhibit 2-F.

11. On July 27, 2009, Affiant and the process server Mr. Person returned to Washington

D.C. to complete the service of all defendants in both the 09-cv-1249 and 09-cv-1295 cases and

when completed Affiant filed all the Return of Service Form AO-440’s for all the respective

Defendants into the U.S. District Clerk’s night depository box on or about 8:39 P.M.

12. That on August 12, 2009, District Judge Richard J. Leon in both cases 09-cv-1249 and

09-cv-1295 separately ordered Affiant to respond to each MTD by the NYPSJ by September 11,

2009, see a copy of each order herewith marked Exhibit 2-G, and by September 18, 2009

regarding the Maryland Province MTD, see Exhibit 2-H.

13. That after August 15, 2009, Affiant in response to the Orders shown as Exhibit 2-G and

3
Exhibit 2-H started to retrieve the state of Maryland Secretary of State official records pertaining

to the Maryland Province of the Society of Jesus related to the membership in accordance with

the 7.1 Corporate Statement filed by their counsel in 09-cv-1295, see Exhibit 2-I.

14. That on or about August 15, 2009, Affiant retrieved from the state of Maryland

Secretary of State official records on its website (see Exhibit 2-J) for the Maryland Province of

the Society of Jesus membership corporation known as “Corporation for the Roman Catholic

Clergymen”, and discovered that on July 13, 2009 at 3:12 PM the “board of directors” filed the

“RESOLUTION TO CHANGE PRINCIPAL OFFICE OR RESIDENT AGENT” including the

principle place for service from 5704 Roland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21210-1399 to service at

the Treasurer's Office at 8600 LaSalle Road, Suite 620, Towson, MD 21286-2014.

15. The only way that the Maryland Province of the Society of Jesus members would know

that Affiant was about to file a compliant as to them, since it was not published until after the

filing fee was received on July 13, 2009 at about 3:20 PM, was for someone after 10:30 A.M. on

July 13, 2009 in the U.S. District Court Clerk’s Office for the Washington D.C. to call and

notify the Maryland Province of the Society of Jesus members of the pending filing.

16. That Affiant seeks an order of mandamus by the United States Court of Appeals for the

District of Columbia Circuit (DCC) of the United States District Court for the District of

Columbia (DCD) in 09-cv-1295 to investigate the involvement of the District Clerk Office in

interference with the case by providing the phone records of the Court and for all private phone

records of the Clerks working there in the Clerk’s Office to determine who called the

Defendants before the case was filed.

17. That on the basis of the findings with evidence of impropriety of the Clerk’s office that

the entirety of District be recused for further involvement in any matter associated with indexes:

08-cv-2234 (see the Docket at Exhibit 2-K), 09-cv-1249 (see the Docket at Exhibit 2-L), 09-

4
cv-1295 (see the Docket at Exhibit 2-M) and furthermore that Judge Richard J. Leon show

cause why he should not answer to Affiant’s request for his recusal in all cases including

Affiant’s Quo Warranto demand for an inquest with 08-cv-2234 as follows:

The impropriety of the District Judge

18. That on November 22, 2008, Affiant sent by USPS the complaint Strunk v DOS under

FOIA 5 U.S.C. Section 552 (now with DCD case number 08-cv-2234) along with Affiant’s

informa pauperus motion for relief, stamped received by the DCD clerk on November 26, 2008.

19. That the DCD instructions for informa pauperus relief state that any filing for such relief

will not be considered for four to six weeks.

20. On December 2, 2008, Affiant hand delivered the Petition for Writ of Mandamus to

expedite Poor Person Relief for the complaint Strunk v DOS under FOIA 5 U.S.C. Section 552

(now with DCC original proceeding 08-5503-OP) with Affiant’s informa pauperus motion for

relief at the DCC drop box, docketed by the DCC clerk on December 3, 2008.

21. That on December 2, 2008, Affiant served a copy of the 08-5503-OP petition upon the

Clerk of DCD along with the supplement to the Complaint including the Exhibit H Indonesian

School Record of Barry Soetoro, left out from the Complaint of November 22, 2008.

22. That after December 3, 2008 DCC ordered DCD to respond to DCC thereafter; and

23. That on December 23, 2008, the FIAT ORDER in 08-cv-2234 granting the Motion for

Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis was signed by Judge Henry H. Kennedy for, "Leave to file

without prepayment of cost granted”, and that was then assigned to Judge Richard J. Leon.

24. Because the Affiant is not an attorney or officer of the court the Summons was not

issued for service by the U.S. Marshal Service until after December 29, 2008.

25. That because Affiant is not noticed by ECF it was not known that the Supplement

Exhibit H was not included with the Complaint entered on the docket December 29, 2008; and

5
therefore based upon new allegations discovered after December 2, 2008 germane to 08-cv-

2234, Affiant filed the Supplemental Complaint on January 5, 2009, as of right within 20 days

of service of the original Summons for issuance of an amended Summons by Judge Leon.

26. On January 8, 2009, DCC Clerk dismissed 08-5503-op as moot without prejudice.

27. That on January 27, 2009, Opposition counsel filed for an extension of time to answer

the Complaint of November 22, 2008, shown on Exhibit 2-K as Docket Item #7; and to wit

28. On February 3, 2009, Affiant filed the dispositive Motion for Reconsideration of the

Defendants Motion for time extension, shown at Exhibit 2-K - Docket item #10, because Judge

Leon was delaying action on the Supplement Amended Complaint from January 5, 2009, and

even denied Affiant’s right to reply to Defendant’s opposition to Affiant’s Motion for

Reconsideration of Extension of Time on March 5, 2009.

29. That on February 10, 2009, Judge Leon acted upon the docketing of the Supplement

Amended Complaint shown as Exhibit 2-K - Docket Item # 9, without issuing the Summons.

30. On February 27, 2009, only after an extended fight, Judge Leon ordered service of the

Supplement Amended Complaint with Summons for service by the U.S. Marshal Service,

shown in Exhibit 2-K – Docket Item #11 with four different entries on four different dates.

31. That the outrageous behavior of Judge Leon to delay due process is on-going, in that any

Judge should only be acting in a ministerial manner under 5 U.S.C. §552, the Judge appears to

be a party-in-interest to the action; and as such Affiant obtained a copy of Judge Richard J.

Leon’s resume online with the Clerk at DCD (see Exhibit 3) that in relevant part states :

“…received his A.B. from Holy Cross College in 1971, his J.D. cum Laude from
Suffolk Law School in 1974, and his LL.M. from Harvard Law School in 1981.
…Partner in the Washington office of in Baker & Hostetler (1989-1999), and
Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease (1999-2002)… Deputy Chief Minority Counsel
for the U.S. House Select "Iran-Contra" Committee …Chief Minority Counsel to
the US. House Foreign Affairs Committee's "October Surprise" …Task Force
Special Counsel to the U.S. House Banking Committee for its "Whitewater"
investigation… Special Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District
6
 of New York. ...former full-time law professor at St. John's Law School (1979-
1983) …(currently) adjunct law professor at the Georgetown University Law
Center and the George Washington University Law School. “ (emphasis added)

32. On March 5, 2009, Affiant filed a motion using the USPS two day mail to Recuse Judge

Leon (see Exhibit 4), stamped received by the Clerk of DCD March 10, 2009.

33. That on March 19, 2009 Leave to file any motion was denied by Judge Richard J. Leon

in regards to Plaintiff's Notice of Motion for Recusal, (jf) (Entered: 03/19/2009) see Exhibit 5.

34. That on April 2, 2009, in response to Defendants’ Counsel second motion for extension

of time to answer (see Exhibit 6-A), Affiant filed the Notice of Cross-Motion for The Failure of

The Return of the Document Notice of Motion to Recuse in its Entirety (see Exhibit 6), because

DCD kept the Original Recusal Notice page, shown as Exhibit 6-C, on April 9, 2009 also

denied.

35. That based upon information and belief supported by evidence of actions to date, Judge

Richard J. Leon is a co-adjudicator of the openly communist / synarchist Jesuit Order of the

Society of Jesus (1) directed now by General Nicholas (the Black Pope located in the Vatican

1
“The power of the Society of Jesus in the Catholic Church is beyond doubt enormous. It
is said, apparently with truth, that the Jesuit General, the “Black Pope” as he is called, can make
and unmake bishops and even cardinals. He has various agents and representatives within the
walls of the Vatican, and he can gain the ear of the Pope whenever he wishes. . . . Again and
again the Society has been able to oppose successfully the plans and wishes of Popes. . . . the
Society which is perennial at Rome is able to block the efforts of passing Popes [like Pope John
Paul I who sought to prematurely establish diplomatic relations with Israel prior to the end of
the Company’s Cold War]. . . . The Order is to the Church what the Church is to the world. The
Order is a kind of parasite sucking the vital power of the Church. . . . It holds the confidence and
consciences of so many bishops, cardinals, and prelates; . . . in fine, [it] works in so many ways
on the functionaries of the Church, that it has become as it were an inner circle in the Church. It
has made the Pope more and more like its own autocratic General; and has reduced the bishops
more and more to the status of Provincials in the Society who are officials nominated by and
controlled by the General, without any inherent authority. An interesting proof of Jesuit prestige
and power in this country is the existence, in the shadow of the Capitol, at Washington, of the
Jesuit School for Foreign Service [which trained the past CFR/CIA Director, Knight of Malta
George J. Tenet having overseen the demolition of the World Trade Center in obedience to his
master, Edward Cardinal Egan], opened a few years ago through the instrumentality of an Irish-
7
State), and much worse that goes directly to the need for Judge Leon to Recuse himself from

sitting on this or any other case brought by Affiant in this venue, and as a matter germane herein

is that Judge Leon is a paid employee of the Jesuit’s Georgetown University for whom the

Department of State Foreign service was created by Fr. Edmund A. Walsh, S.J. (2); whose legacy

American, Fr. Edmund Walsh, S.J. At this school of diplomatic service, said to be the largest
of its kind in America, young Americans [to be later recruited into the Order’s CFR] are trained
to guide the future fortunes of the Republic. . . . There is no small irony in the situation. Jesuits
by rule are detached from love of country . . . Each and every Jesuit is bound under oath to
obey the behests of his General at Rome, who at present happens to be a Pole [Wladimir
Ledochowski] and who most probably will never be an American. It is quite within the power
of the General to dictate the principles and theories to be taught by the Jesuits at Washington . . .
one cannot forget the words of the Pope, Clement XIV, who accused them of ‘rising up against
the very kings who admitted them into their countries.’ ” [Emphasis added]
E. Boyd Barrett, 1927 Irish American Ex-Jesuit The Jesuit Enigma
2
Fr. Edmund A. Walsh, S.J. : Under the Wilson Administration, The Bureau of
Investigation’s General Intelligence Division (GID) was officially organized on August 1,
1919. Acting on [second generation Irish Roman Catholic Francis P. Garvan’s
recommendation, Palmer appointed John Edgar Hoover, special assistant to the attorney
general, chief of the GID. . . . [With the birth of America’s two Communist parties in Jesuit-
ruled Chicago in late August, 1919] Hoover used it to launch his career as an anti-Communist
crusader. . . . Communism was, Hoover finally decided, ‘the most evil, monstrous conspiracy
against man since time began’[while he was under the guidance of Georgetown University
Jesuit Edmund A. Walsh who would be sent to Russia in 1922 to negotiate with the Order’s
Masonic Jewish Bolsheviks on behalf of the Pope and there the open friendship between Jesuit
Edmund A. Walsh and Soviet Bolshevik Gregori Zinoviev (Apfelbaum) that lead to Stalin’s
elevation to Chairmanship of the Comintern]. . . .Late that summer key BI agents and selected
immigration officials were brought to Washington for secret briefings. They were told that there
would be two mass-roundups . . . The chosen date, November 7, 1919, was the second
anniversary of the Russian Revolution [while the second date for warrant-less, mass-roundups
would be January 2, 1920, the Jesuits using their American-financed Russian Revolution to
justify the creation of Masonic Hoover’s fascist American Gestapo/Cheka exercising
inquisitional powers by creating “the Communist Red Scare”].” [Emphasis added]
Curt Gentry, 1991 American Historian J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets

Eric Jon Phelps, American Christian Historian, (2007) Vatican Assassins, wrote:

There are detailed and official minutes (reports) of these unheard-of crimes [further
suppressed by the Allied Powers at the Nuremberg trials involving Cardinal Spellman’s
Masonic CFR members Walter Cronkite, William L. Shirer and Justice Robert H. Jackson
advised by Georgetown University Jesuit Edmund A. Walsh] in that “. . . the Hitler regime in
the beginning interned Catholic priests in concentration camps because they refused to obey his
dictates . . .Persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany has been directed only against those
8
elements which did not entirely submit to the ever-increasing centralization of authority in
Church and State [as described in Pope Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors and his conferred
Infallibility in 1870]. To this end the Vatican helped crush out [directed the crushing out of] the
Catholic popular parties both in Italy and Germany and centralized all political matters in Rome.
This ensured to the [Masonic] dictators freedom from popular interference on the part of
Catholics [via the Concordats with Hitler and Mussolini]; it established a more complete
dictatorial regime within the Catholic Church itself; it enabled the Vatican to enter into secret
concordats [like the Concordat with Lenin and Stalin negotiated by Georgetown Jesuit
Edmund Walsh under cover of the to be President Commerce Secretary Herbert Hoover’s
Mission of Relief in 1922] with fascist countries already existing, and with democratic countries,
like Spain, France, Belgium [which, under the Order’s King Leopold II having invited the
Jesuits into the Congo, murdered ten million Black Congolese], and Portugal, after the
destruction of their democratic governments by revolution and blitzkrieg…
That Masonic General MacArthur and Jesuit SMOM Walsh, in Tokyo, in 1947 as the
Masonic President Truman’s conqueror of Japan, General Douglas MacArthur, with his
immediate master at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (1947-48), Georgetown
Jesuit Professed of the Fourth Vow, Edmund A. Walsh. Having previously overseen the
Nuremberg Trials (1945-47) via Masonic prosecutor Robert H. Jackson and having
electronically censored all testimony regarding Vatican control of the Third Reich via fellow
Georgetown University School of Foreign Service professor holding the rank of an Army
Colonel, Dr. Leon E. Dostert —the damnable Jesuit’s chief interpreter during all the war
trials!!!—, Walsh also manipulated the proceedings in Tokyo through his servant, MacArthur,
who in turn ruled chief American prosecutor, Joseph B. Keenan. Even as this powerful Jesuit
secured the acquittal of Knight of Malta Franz von Papen, even so he ensured the safety of
Masonic Hirohito from the shame of a public trial.
“ADOLF SCHICKLGRUBER and THE THULE-GESELLSCHAFT. . . .
Between 1880 and 1890 many personalities—among them some of England’s most brilliant
minds—found together and formed ‘THE HERMETIC ORDER OF THE GOLDEN
DAWN. Its members came largely from the Mother Grand Lodge of FREEMASONS and
ROSICRUCIANS [London’s Grand Lodge having been founded by four Masonic Jesuit
Coadjutors in 1717 fully intending to restore the Pope’s Stuart Dynasty to the throne of
England]. . . . [The] Members . . . among others [were] . . . ALEISTER CROWLEY (perhaps
the best-known magician of the last hundred years who later got into black magic, founder of
the Thelema [sexual “Desire”] Church and 33rd degree Freemason of the Scottish Rite) [and
the inspiration of free sex, drugs and rock n’ roll]. . . . In 1917 the [extremely wealthy] occultist
[and 33rd Degree Freemason, Bavarian Catholic] BARON RUDOLF VON
SEBOTTENDORFF [whose Munich newspaper, “Volkischer Beobachter,” became the official
daily of the NSDAP Nazi Party], the George Gurdjieff disciple—[General] KARL
HAUSHOFER [Hitler’s second occult “esoteric mentor” (replacing Dietrich Eckart) who
founded the Luminous Lodge or the “Vril Society” in Berlin and was questioned and released
by Army officer Jesuit Edmund A. Walsh after the war] . . . met in Vienna. . . . [German
Masons] Sebottendorff and Haushofer were experienced travelers of India and Tibet and much
influenced by the teachings and myths [including the Aryan mythology used to justify Nazi
mass-murder] of those places. During the First World War Karl Haushofer had made contacts
with one of the most influential secret societies of Asia, the Tibetan ‘Yellow Hats’ . . . The
contacts between Haushofer [with Moses Pinkeles] and the ‘Yellow Hats’ led in the Twenties to
the formation of Tibetan colonies in Germany. . . .
9
 A circle formed around BARON RUDOLF VON SEBOTTENDORFF that, via the
[German] ‘Teutonic Order’ [the “Germanenorden”] in 1918 in Bad Aibling became the
‘THULE-GESELLSCHAFT’ [the Thule Society]. . . . Dietrich Bronder [who wrote] Before
Hitler Came and E. R. Carmin [who wrote] Guru Hitler named the leading members as:

1. Baron Rudolf von Sebottendorff, Grand Master of the Order [who from 1942 to
1945 was an agent for both the Nazi SS and the British SIS]
2. Guido von List, Master of the Order [who tutored Hitler in Vienna, the Jesuits also
instructing Hitler in Vienna’s Hofberg Library during the years 1907-1913 before his arrival in
Munich, 1913]
3. Joerg Lanz von Liebenfels, Master of the Order [who, as the Roman Catholic priest
”Father Georg,” first met Hitler as a child at the Dominican Lambach Abbey in Austria; he
later left the priesthood, became a Freemason and a Lutheran, openly and boldly wrote against
the Jesuit Order, called for the incineration of the Jewish people as “an offering to God,” and
without question was a secret Jesuit Temporal Coadjutor].
4. Adolf Hitler, ‘Fuhrer,’ and German Chancellor, SS Superior [who was a Roman
Catholic and a high Freemason; a close friend of the Bank of England’s Masonic president,
Montagu Norman; and the obedient servant to his German Jesuit masters in Rome, Bavarian
Robert Leiber and Augustin Bea, controlling the former “German Pope” who brought him to
power, Pope Pius XII].
5. Heinrich Himmler, Reichsfuhrer SS and Reichsminister [who being a most devoted
Bavarian Roman Catholic was appointed to head the SS by Hitler through the influence of
Munich’s Crown Prince Rupprecht of Wittelsbach and Archbishop Michael von Faulhaber].
6. Bernhardt Stempfle, father confessor and confidant of Hitler, [who, being a priest of
the Order of Saint Jerome, was the true author of Mein Kampf, it defining both the Pan-
German movement and the “Jewish International Conspiracy” as put forth by the Jesuits].
7. Rudolf Steiner, founder of the anthroposophic teaching [who was also a high
Freemason of the Scottish Rite; the head of the German Theosophical Society, Grand Master of
the Illuminati order ORDO TEMPLI ORIENTIS (OTO) along with his “brother” 33rd Degree
Freemason of the Scottish Rite, England’s Aleister Crowley].

“The symbol of Thule was the swastika counter-clockwise. . . . The Thule-Gesellschaft

engaged Hitler as a speaker at election rallies. Later the anti-Bolshevik and Thule-brother
DIETRICH ECKART [to whom Mein Kampf was later dedicated] taught him how to write and
speak properly. Eckart made Hitler what he later represented. He influenced him into the
Munich and Berlin scenes and [Masonic] Hitler adopted the Thule views almost completely. . . .
Hitler took the Thule salute ‘Heil und Sieg’ (Salvation and Victory) and made it into ‘Sieg
Heil.’ This salute together with the raising of the arm is a magical ritual which is used to form
voltes. . . .According to Franz Bardon, Adolf Hitler was also a member of an ‘F.O.G.C. Lodge’
(Freimaurerischer Orden der Goldenen Centurie, Dresden, Germany, [Free] Masonic Order of
the Golden Century), which is actually known as the ‘99 Lodge.’ There are 99 of these ‘99
Lodges’ in many places of the world, all with 99 members. Each lodge is presided by a demon,
and each member has his personal demon. The deal is that the demon helps the person gain
money and power, but his soul is, after death, committed to serve the demon. In addition, one
member is sacrificed every year to the lodge demon. It will be replaced by a new member. The
members of the ‘99 Lodges’ are also industrialists and bankers of the highest caliber and today
are more important than ever. . . . The SS, also called the ‘Black Order,’ was everything but a
10
police troop. It was a proper religious order of a hierarchic make-up. The brutal Nazi party as a
holy order? In hindsight this seems ridiculous, until one notices that it wouldn’t be the first time
in history that a holy order was responsible for the most monstrous atrocities. The Jesuits, but
also the Dominicans who ruled the Catholic Inquisition in the Middle Ages, are prime examples.
The BLACK ORDER was the practical realization of the esoteric and occult belief system of the
Thule-Gesellschaft. Within the SS there was a further secret society, the elite and innermost
circle of the SS, the SS ‘SCHWARZE SONNE’ (Black Sun) [composed of Jesuit priests within
high-level, 33rd Degree Freemasonry, as was Joseph Rattinger, the founder of the
Bilderbergers]. . . . The Thule-Gesellschaft and the later SS ‘Schwarze Sonne’ (Black Sun) not
only worked closely together with the Tibetan colony in Berlin but also with a Tibetan order of
black magic [the Jesuits having penetrated Tibet in the Seventeenth century and today control
the Tibetan Dalai Lama].” [Emphasis added] Jan van Helsing, 1995 Swiss Historian Secret
Societies and Their Power
In the 20th Century according to Jesuit Edmund A. Walsh, “At a Masonic Congress held
in [Jesuit-ruled] Brussels at this time [1911], Rasputin was discussed as a possible instrument
for spreading the tenets of the order in Russia; it was thought that under his destructive
influence the dynasty could be destroyed in two years.” -The Fall of the Russian Empire: The
Story of the Last of the Romanovs and the Coming of the Bolsheviki, Edmund A. Walsh, S.J.,
(Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1928) p. 110.
Masonic Lenin’s Jewish Lieutenants; Agents for the Jesuits, 1918, Bolsheviks Gregori
Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Anatoli Lunacharsky and Nikolai Bukharin were a few of Lenin’s top
lieutenants in agitating what Jesuit Edmund Walsh declared to be “the most significant single
political event in the history of Western civilization since the decline and disappearance of the
Roman Empire.”
The Black Pope was the POWER behind that upheaval as he used German General Erick
Ludendorff to bring Soviet Jews to power in permitting Lenin’s sealed train to pass through
Germany. With Lenin given “the poison cup” in 1924, Stalin “liquidated” every Jew involved in
the revolution during the Purges of the Thirties except Lazar Kaganovich—the Order’s token
Jew! These traitors gave credence to the Nazi cry of an “International Masonic Jewish
Conspiracy.” The Fall of the Russian Empire: The Story of the Last of the Romanovs and the
Coming of the Bolsheviki, Edmund A. Walsh, S.J., (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1928).
Jesuit Edmund Walsh and Bolshevik Gregori Zinoviev, Moscow, 1922, Founding
Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service in 1919, Walsh was ordered to the Vatican in 1922 and
appointed by Jesuit General Ledochowski to negotiate with the “Bolsheviks” in creating the
USSR. Walsh, secretly commanding his Masonic Jewish Bolsheviks including Gregori
Zinoviev, oversaw the wicked murder of select Roman Catholic priests while securing the
release of his brother Jesuit, Archbishop Edward Ropp. At that time, Russia was in shambles
having been bloodied by WWI (1914-1918), civil war with the Whites (1918-1920), civil war
with the Poles (1919-1920), the mass-murder of the Orthodox clergy and Lenin’s induced
famine. Moscow’s Comintern Chairman (1919-1926), Gregori Zinoviev (Apfelbaum), along
with Vladimir Lenin and Lev Kamenev formed the Soviet “leadership nucleus”—secretly
guided by Walsh. The socialist World Revolution as described at the Black Pope’s secret
meeting at Chieri had now been unleashed on Orthodox Russia: the stage was now set for the
birth of Jesuit Nazism. Masonic Temporal Coadjutor Josef Stalin later “liquidated” Zinoviev at
the first Great Purge trial in 1935. Successfully portraying to the world the Bolshevik
Revolution as an anti-Catholic, atheist, Marxist-Leninist, Masonic Jewish conspiracy, Walsh led
the Order’s SMOM-backed Cold War and “Anti- Communist Crusade” in America with
11
allows segmented multi-tiered control over the Defendant DOS, Defendant DHS, CIA and the

Office of the President whose use of HUD, FBI, DOJ and Treasury to profiteer, are Affiant’s

opponents in multiple cases in EDNY cases: Strunk et al. v. The Federal Reserve Bank of New

York et al. 07-cv-1171, Strunk v CIA et al. 08-cv-1196, Strunk v. USPS et al. 08-cv-1744,

Strunk v NYS DOS et al. 08-cv-4289, NDNY cases: Loeber et al. v Spargo et al. 04-cv-1193,

Forjone et al. v. California et al. 06-cv-1002 and herein Strunk v US DOS et al. DCD 08-cv-

2234, Strunk v New York Province of the Society of Jesus et al. 09-cv-1249 (see Exhibit 7), so

that by requesting a 28 U.S.C. §2284 Three Judge Panel, shown as Exhibit 2-B in re Strunk v US

DOC Bureau of Census et al. DCD 09-cv-1295 verified July 9, 2009 (see Exhibit 8), now also

awaits the Recusal of Judge Leon and formation of due process with 28 USC §2284.

36. That Affiant is the only political candidate who openly opposes the Jesuits’ control over

national policy in the united States of America and the state of New York, see website

www.strunk.ws, and that historically the Jesuits since 1688 operate the Jacobite Illuminized

Freemasonry through the Grand Orient Lodge and the Rex Templars since 1776 through the

Bavarian Illuminati currently with Propaganda Duo (P-2) Lodges --- the Company of Jesus

effectively operate both left and right with Hegelian methods and control the Pope by threat.

37. As such Affiant as a matter of the law of the land demands each Jesuit along with each

member of SMOM (3), including Secretaries Clinton, Napolitano, Panetta and undersecretaries

Fordham University President Jesuit Robert I. Gannon, Walsh advising Jesuit-trained Senator
Joseph McCarthy.
3
The Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) : The Sovereign Military and Hospitaler
Order of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta, known also as the Sovereign Military Order of
Malta, or SMOM, is juridically, politically, and historically unique in the world today.
Representing initially the most powerful and reactionary segments of the European aristocracy,
for nearly a thousand years beginning with the early crusades of the Twelfth Century, it has organized,
funded, and led military operations against states and ideas deemed threatening to its
power. It is probably safe to say that the several thousand Knights of SMOM, principally in Europe,
North, Central, and South America, comprise the largest most consistently powerful and reactionary
membership of any organization in the world today.

12
 Although an exclusively [Roman] Catholic organization, in this century it has collaborated with,
and given high awards to non-Catholic extremists in its current crusade against
progressive
forces in the West, the national liberation movements, and the socialist countries.
To be a Knight, one must not only be from wealthy, aristocratic lineage, one must also have a
psychological worldview which is attracted to the "crusader mentality'' of these "warrior
monks." Participating in SMOM Ñ including its initiation ceremonies and feudal ritual dress Ñ
members
embrace a certain caste/class mentality; they are sociologically and psychologically predisposed to
function as the ''shock troops" of Catholic reaction. And this is precisely the historical role the Knights
have played in the wars against Islam, against the Protestant "heresy,'' and against the Soviet ''Evil
Empire." [...]

SMOM's Sovereign Diplomacy

As its name suggests, SMOM is both a ''sovereign'' and, historically, a "military" organization. Its
headquarters, occupying a square block in Rome at 68 Via Condotti, enjoys the extra-territorial legal
status granted to an embassy of a sovereign state. The Italian police are not welcome on its territory, it
issues its own stamps, and has formal diplomatic relations and exchanges ambassadors with a number of
countries.
On November 13, 1951 Italian President Alcide de Gasperi recognized the diplomatic sovereignty
of SMOM, although he held off formal exchange of diplomatic envoys.2 On January 11, 1983 the New
York
Daily News announced that, "The Vatican and the order of the Knights of Malta, believed to be the
smallest sovereign state in the world, have agreed to establish full diplomatic relations, a joint statement
said today. "
[SMOM] President Reagan's Ambassador to the Vatican, William Wilson, is, coincidentally, a
Knight of Malta.3 On September 5, 1984 French Foreign Minister Claude Cheysson signed a formal
protocol with SMOM for various cooperative projects including "aid to victims of conflicts."4 (See below
on Americares.) http://www.mosquitonet.com/~prewett/caqsmom25.1.html

Quote: The Knights of St. John were founded in the late 11th Century, and rose to
prominence in the First Crusade of 1095. In 1120, Pope Urban II officially recognized them as a
military religious order, and for centuries they remained one of the most powerful military
forces in Christendom, first from their headquarters on the island of Rhodes, and then on
Malta, from which they were finally driven by Napoleon in the late 18th Century. The Knights
were recognized as a sovereign state by a Hapsburg Emperor in the 16th Century. They remain a
sovereign state, run from their headquarters at 68 Via Condotti in Rome. They maintain their
own fleet of aircraft, have diplomatic relations with 92 nations as well as the United Nations and
the Holy See, and enjoy diplomatic immunity. The order is entirely Roman Catholic, and its
higher ranks must document an aristocratic lineage and coat-of-arms of at least three centuries.
The Grand Master of the order is both a secular prince, and a cardinal of the Church.
Reflecting its history, its membership is still heavily comprised of individuals with a military or
intelligence background. Pope Pius XII ordered an investigation of this nominally Catholic
organization in the 1950s. The Papal Commission charged, among other things, that the Order
should not have the sovereignty of a state, and ordered modifications of the SMOM "to bring
them into conformity with decisions of the Holy See." However, Pius XII died before the Order
could be fully reined in.
In addition to the Roman Catholic SMOM, there are four Protestant orders of the
Knights, all founded within the last 150 years or so, and all run by ruling houses of Europe. The
Roman Catholic and Protestant orders effectively merged on Nov. 26, 1963, four days after
the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The Sovereign Head of the British Knights is Queen

13
Elizabeth, while the Netherlands Knights were headed until his death by the former SS official,
Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, consort of Queen Juliana.
http://www.illuminati-news.com/112606b.htm

As a member of the Knights of Malta, and by virtue of your blood oath of obedience to
the Pope, you are required to support to the death the desires of the head of the Order of the
Knights of Malta-in this case, Pope Benedict XVI -over and above any other allegiance you may
feel or pretend to feel toward any other loyalty such as a loyalty to the Constitution for the
united States of America.
Those who are presently members of the Knights of Malta must on penalty of death
support those policies advocated by the Vatican. It is not hard for them to do this. They
BELIEVE in these policies and principles. The polices which are espoused and proclaimed by
the office of the Pope are as follows:

1. End of sovereignty for the United States and other countries.

2. End of absolute property rights.
3. End of all gun rights.
4. The new international economic Order (world government).
5. The redistribution of wealth and jobs.
6. Calls for nations to trust the United Nations.
7. Total disarmament.
8. Promote the United Nations as the hope for peace.
9. Promote UNESCO, the deadly educational and cultural arm of the United Nations.
10. Promote interdependence.
11. Support sanctions honoring Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin-the New Age Humanist
Priest.
12. Support the belief that the economic principle of traditional Christian or Catholic social
doctrine is the economic principle of communism.
13. Promote the Pope as the acting go-between for the United States and the Soviet Union.

It doesn't really matter what kind of religious or political affiliation a member professes,
when they take an oath as a Knight they are obligated by that blood oath of obedience to follow
the political lead of the Vatican and will do so to their dying breath as all good Knights of Malta
do. Their first loyalty is to the Vatican, anything else is secondary.
Each and every member is under complete and total obedience to the Vatican's political
ambitions. The "Knights of Malta" are the militia of the Pope. In the book "Behold a Pale
Horse" you will find research into this. It is one of the NWO SECRET SOCIETIES that are
determined to overrun and destroy America. The Pope is not innocent of this either.

Milton William Cooper's - Behold a Pale Horse (pp88-89) Quote:

The Knights of Malta is a world organization with its threads weaving through business,
banking, politics, the CIA, other intelligence organizations, P2, religion, education, law,
military, think tanks, foundations, the United States Information Agency, the United Nations,
and numerous other organizations. They are not the oldest but are one of the oldest branches of
the Order of the Quest in existence. The world head of the Knights of Malta is elected for a life

14
under the Black Pope Jesuit General along with sworn members of the Opus Dei cult founded by

the synarchist Jesuit Jose Marie Escriva, whose membership includes five Justices of the U.S.

Supreme Court, and Illuminized Freemasons like Barry Soetoro requires any government

employee register as a foreign agent under 18 U.S.C. §953 (the Logan Act) and related law in its

entirety including the Vienna Convention Treaties since 1961, and or resign from public office.

The Quo Warranto demand in re the treason of the Usurper Barry Soetoro et al.

38. That on May 27, 2009 in related matters presented herein Affiant responded in case 08-

cv-2234 (see Exhibit 9 with Sub-exhibits 1 thru 16) to both the Answer of the Department of

State and Motion for partial dismissal as ordered by Judge Leon done by June 1, 2009, and that

Judge Leon remains a party-in-interest to the matter while an adjunct at Georgetown paid by the

Jesuits, prejudices any expectation of relief including the Quo Warranto Demand by Notice of

Cross Motion to convert the F.O.I.A. case 08-cv-2234, shown in Exhibit 9, for cause.

39. That 08-cv-2234 Defendants responded to Affiant’s Cross Motion shown as Exhibit 9

requesting a stay of further discovery against Defendants DOS and DHS Secretaries having

term, with the approval of the Pope. The Knights of Malta have their own Constitution and are
sworn to work toward the establishment of a New World Order with the Pope at its head.
Knights of Malta members are also powerful members of the CFR and the Trilateral
Commission. (p.86)
The Knights of Malta ALL have diplomatic immunity. They can ship goods across
borders without paying duty or undergoing customs check. Does that ring any bells?
In any case, that is power. The Knights of Malta is held up by a backbone consisting of
nobility. Nearly half of the 10,000 members belong to Europe's oldest and most powerful
families. This cements the alliance between the Vatican and the "Black Nobility." The Black
Nobility is mostly the rich and powerful of Europe.
The head of the Black Nobility is the family that can claim direct descendancy from the
last Roman emperor. Maybe now you can see that things are beginning to fall into their proper
place. Membership in the Knights of Malta entails obedience to one's superior in THE ORDER
and ultimately to the Pope. Therefore, a U.S. ambassador who is also a member of the Knights
of Malta faces a conflict of interest. Why is this fact ignored? President Bush appointed Knight
of Malta Thomas Melledy to the post of U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican.

15
been served with a demand for Answers (see Exhibit 10), and that Affiant in reply filed on or

about June 12, 2009 opposed such a stay and demanded an expedited Quo Warranto inquest

proceed (see Exhibit 11); and on June 19, 2009 Defendants’ Reply for a Stay to wit District

Judge Leon ordered a Stay of further discovery (see Exhibit 12).

40. To date there has been no further action by the District Judge on Affiant’s demand for a

Quo Warranto inquest of the Usurper Barry (Davis) Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama,

a.k.a. Barry Dunham with nickname “Birdie”, (hereinafter known as “the Usurper”) – despite

the dire effect that such delay has upon the matters of National Security directed by the Usurper,

which Affiant observed as an act of treason among the underlying enterprise fraud.

41. That on August 24, 2009, as an act of naked Treason, the Usurper is aiding and abetting

the enemies of the people of the united States of America and People of New York, announced

he wants to keep Ben Bernanke on as Federal Reserve Chairman, alleging he shepherded

America through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, quote:

"Ben approached a financial system on the verge of collapse with calm and wisdom; with
bold action and out-of-the-box thinking that has helped put the brakes on our economic
freefall," said Obama, with Bernanke standing by his side. "Almost none of the decisions he
or any of us made have been easy."

42. That the Usurper’s naked treason coincides with the White House budget office August
23, 2009 announcement that it foresees a cumulative $9 trillion deficit from 2010-2019, $2

trillion more than the administration estimated in May. Moreover, the figures show the public

debt doubling by 2019 and reaching three quarters the size of the entire national economy; and

those analysts with the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected a cumulative $7

trillion deficit from 2010-2019.

43. In such reappointment of Bernanke the Usurper does so while under the control and

direction of the Jesuit Provincial of the New York Province for the Society of Jesus, David

Ciancimino, who manages and oversees the centralized wealth and economic power of the
16
American Empire through his control of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York City (which

houses over 600,000 gold bricks), JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, etc., as well as Wall

Street, the Stock Market and the Securities and Exchange Commission first headed by Knight of

Malta Joseph P. Kennedy, the foremost short-seller of stock in 1929 precipitating the Stock

Market Crash and Great Depression (see affidavit of Eric-Jon: Phelps © in esse, Exhibit 13).

44. That Eric-Jon: Phelps © in esse has been an expert witness in a prior case in California

Superior Court, a copy of the Court Document confirms, see Exhibit 14, is provided by therein

Plaintiffs’ counsel Jonathan Levy, Esq. with a recommendation in conversation with Affirmant.

45. That the Usurper and his cohorts, including the Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke, are

systematically looting the living standard and posterity of Affiant and those similarly situated,

and now compounded by the U.S. District Court of the Washington District of Columbia failure

to provide substantive due process and equal protection of law in the Quo Warranto demand- is

justice delayed therefore justice denied causing irreparable harm and National Security disaster.

46. That on November 8, 2002, evidenced by the ‘Remarks’ by New York Federal Reserve

Bank Governor Ben S. Bernanke at the Conference to Honor Milton Friedman, University of

Chicago, Chicago, Illinois On Milton Friedman's Ninetieth Birthday, wherein Governor

Bernanke admitted the entire collapse of the stock market and several State banking systems

from 1929 through 1933 was done intentionally by the efforts of the Federal Reserve and that

such policies continue unchecked to this day under their policy and control, see the Federal

Reserve document with the entire speech Remarks at Exhibit 15.

47. That Jesuit priest James Shea, Provincial the Maryland Province of the Society of Jesus,

is the overseer of Jesuit Georgetown University president, Knight of Malta/CFR member John

DiGioia; he in turn directing the domestic and foreign policy of Prince Hall Rite, 32nd

Freemason, Mulatto U.S. President Barry (Davis) Soetoro (alias “Barrack Hussein Obama”)

17
through Georgetown University directing Roman Catholic papal knight Vice President Joe

Biden, both Sunni Moslem Obama and Roman Catholic Biden being groomed for these

positions by Jesuit Temporal Coadjutors for over twenty years, including Roman Catholic U.S.

Senator and CFR member Edward M. Kennedy and Roman Catholic ex-National Security

Advisor and CFR/TC member Zibignew Bzrezinski; as shown in Exhibit 13.

48. That Zibignew Bzrezinski in service of the SMOM devised both Senator McCain’s and

Senator Obama’s campaign message through the insertion of each of his sons into strategic

positions within each of the respective campaign staffs to control the message of each candidate.

49. That the Usurper is a Muslim at birth by the marriage of his mother and father, and

whereby he automatically inherited his Father’s Muslim bondage, which he embraced as the

adopted son of Lolo Soetoro after his mother in 1964 divorced Barack Hussein Obama Sr. and

then married Lolo Soetoro who put Barry “Birdie” Soetoro into the Madrasah education in

Jakarta Indonesia; and at which attended until Birdie Soetoro returned to live with his

Grandmother Madeline Dunham in Hawaii in the early 1970’s under an Indonesian Passport.

50. That the Usurper, in keeping with his creed, embraced Sharia law in his trip to Saudi

Arabia on June 3, 2009, in his presentation to the Gnostic Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, then in

Turkey where in all instances he went without his wife; and then when on or about August 13,

2009 the Usurper Muslim acted to protect the property and purported shrine of Adolf Hitler’s

main agent for recruiting Muslims to the Nazi banner, Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, the Grand

Mufti of Jerusalem (A terrorist leader and leading member / co-founder along with the Jesuits of

the Nazi SS, who fled Jerusalem when the British attempted to arrest him and spent part of the

war as the guest of honor of the Nazis) from demolition by the Israelis with permits to build.

51. That Usurper’s actions as a radical Sunni Muslim are foreshowed in both of his books:

Quotes from Dreams of My Father (ghost written by Bill Ayers):

18
 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect
that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'

'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my
mother's race...'

'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe.
And white.'

'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the
black masses, to strike out and name names.'

'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was
into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I
sought in myself: the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'

And a quote from Audacity of Hope:

‘I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.’

52. That many members of the present Roman Catholic Curie College of Cardinals are

practicing Muslims, in that Islam itself is a creation of the Church of Rome; in that it was

through Khadeejah, a.k.a. Khadījah bint Khuwaylid (Arabic: ‫ )ﺧﺪﻳﺠ ﺔ ﺑﻨ ﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﻠ ﺪ‬or Khadījah al-

Kubra (555 CE – 619 CE) the first wife of the Islamic prophet Muhammad (Khadijah was the

daughter of Khuwaylid ibn Asad and Fatimah bint Za'idah and belonged to the clan of Banu

Hashim), a super wealthy devout Roman Catholic business lady that gave employment to

Muhammad. She lived in a convent, and her confessor priest took special notice of Muhammad,

and encouraged Khadeejah to marry him. She did, and the priest soon became Muhammad's

most trusted mentor.

53. Other than Islam that came out of that relationship Khadeejah had a daughter by

Muhammad, that became his favorite daughter named “Fatima”; and for which a city in

Portugal is named after her. And to see the Islamic, Roman Catholic connection, Fatima,

Portugal was the place chosen by the Society of Jesus for the bonus Virgin Mary apparition to

three shepherd children where it was announced in 1917 to the world, that the world of obstinate

19
heretics, heretics and schismatics are condemned to receive "The Great Chastisement”.

54. That the Usurper, is the agent of the Great Chastisement along with his cohorts as agents

devised by the Jesuit Company Fatima Prophesy introduced in 1917, that is being

systematically implemented to coincide with December 21, 2012 schedule as prophesized; and

55. Further, as events unfold prima facie proof of Usurper’s fraud has become known

through the efforts of the Honorable Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. to obtain the actual record of the

Divorce case between Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Hussein Obama Sr., and who as a

matter of custody needed to obtain the actual certified birth record of Barack Hussein Obama II

(Jr.) who was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, and having obtained such, is now on file for

verification in the eligibility case in U.S.D.C. CDCA Barrett v Obama et al. SAcv09-000082

before District Judge David O. Carter (see Exhibit 16); and furthermore, as of September 4,

2009 the declaration of Lucas Daniel Smith, including a copy of the actual Obama birth

certificate from the Coast General Hospital in Mombasa Kenya dated August 5, 1961 with a

footprint and doctor’s signature (see Exhibit 17) was filed.

No salvation outside of the Gnostic Mystery Religion – Mithraism and Zoroastrian

56. The Usurper creed coincides with doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, that

unlike the apostolic Christian Orthodox Church dating from Abraham of the Hebrews, have

never at anytime practiced the Christian religion; in fact whose creed is the direct outgrowth of

Zoroastrian (4), Mithraism (5), Gnosticism (6) pagan (7) astrological universal Sun worship as done

4
Zoroastrianism (pronounced /zɒroʊ æstri.ənɪzəm/) is the first monotheistic religion to have
been entered in recorded history, which is based on the teachings and philosophies of Zoroaster,
the religion's prophet and founder. Zoroastrianism is believed to have been founded around the
8th to 6th century BCE, but enters recorded history in the time period of the Achaemenid
Empire. Zoroastrianism flourished among the Iranian people and even received royal patronage
in the Achaemenid, Arsacid, and in the Sassanid empires. However, after the Muslim conquest
of Persia, Zoroastrianism quickly marginalized, with some Iranians willingly converting, while
others were forcibly converted to Islam.
20
5
The Mithraic Mysteries or Mysteries of Mithras (also Mithraism) was a mystery religion
which became popular among the military in the Roman Empire, from the 1st to 4th centuries
AD. It is best attested in the cities of Rome and Ostia and in the Roman provinces of
Mauretania, Britain, and in the provinces along the Rhine and Danube frontier.
Mithraism was an initiatory order, passed from initiate to initiate, like the Eleusinian
Mysteries. It was not based on a body of scripture, and hence very little written documentary
evidence survives. Soldiers and the lower nobility appeared to be the most plentiful followers of
Mithraism. Until recently, women were generally thought not to have been allowed to join, but
it has now been suggested that "women were involved with Mithraic groups in at least some
locations of the empire."
In antiquity, texts refer to "the mysteries of Mithras", and to its adherents, as "the
mysteries of the Persians." This latter epithet is significant, not only for whether the Mithraists
considered the object of their devotion a Persian divinity (i.e. Mithra), but for whether the
devotees considered their religion to have been founded by Zoroaster.
It is not possible to state with certainty when "the mysteries of Mithras" developed.
Clauss asserts “the mysteries" were not practiced until the 1st century A.D. Mithraism reached
the apogee of its popularity around the 3rd through 4th centuries, when it was particularly
popular among the soldiers of the Roman Empire. Mithraism disappeared from overt practice
after the Theodosian decree of 391 banned all pagan rites, and it apparently became extinct
thereafter.
Although scholars are in agreement with the classical sources that state that the Romans
borrowed the name of Mithras from Avestan Mithra, the origins of the Roman religion itself
remain unclear and there is yet no scholarly consensus concerning this issue (for a summary of
the various theories, see history, below). Further compounding the problem is the non-academic
understanding of what "Persian" means, which, in a classical context is not a specific reference
to the Iranian province Pars, but to the Persian (i.e. Achaemenid) Empire and speakers of
Iranian languages in general.
By the third century, Mithraism was officially sanctioned by the Roman emperors.
According to the fourth century Historia Augusta, Commodus participated in its mysteries:
Sacra Mithriaca homicidio vero polluit, cum illic aliquid ad speciem timoris vel dici vel fingi
soleat "He desecrated the rites of Mithras with actual murder, although it was customary in them
merely to say or pretend something that would produce an impression of terror".
Concentrations of Mithraic temples are found on the outskirts of the Roman Empire:
along Hadrian's Wall in northern England three mithraea have been identified, at Housesteads,
Carrawburgh and Rudchester. The discoveries are in the University of Newcastle's Museum of
Antiquities, where a mithraeum has been recreated. Recent excavations in London have
uncovered the remains of a Mithraic temple near to the center of the once walled Roman
settlement, on the bank of the Walbrook stream. Mithraea have also been found in Poetovio
(today Ptuj) in Pannonia, along the Danube and Rhine river frontier, in the province of Dacia
(where in 2003 a temple was found in Alba-Iulia) and as far afield as Numidia in North Africa.
As would be expected, Mithraic ruins are also found in the port city of Ostia, and in
Rome the capital, where as many as seven hundred mithraea may have existed (a dozen have
been identified). Its importance at Rome may be judged from the abundance of monumental
remains: more than 75 pieces of sculpture, 100 Mithraic inscriptions, and ruins of temples and
shrines in all parts of the city and its suburbs. A well-preserved late second-century mithraeum,

21
regionally from Samaria to Egypt and beyond, and whose Isis / Horus and Osiris cult is the so-

called Trinity of the Roman Catholic Church Gnostic Mystery Religion; and in which the

Pontifex maximus, the Caesar or Pope, claims infallibility (8) worldwide temporal and spiritual

with its altar and built-in stone benches, originally built beneath a Roman house (as was a
common practice, the religion being a "secret" one), survives in the crypt over which has been
built the Basilica of San Clemente, Rome.
6
Gnosticism (Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis, knowledge) refers to diverse, syncretistic religious
movements in antiquity consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that
humans are divine souls trapped in a material world created by an imperfect god, the demiurge;
this being is frequently identified with the Abrahamic god, and is contrasted with a superior
entity, referred to by several terms including Pleroma and Godhead. Depictions of the
demiurge—the term originates with Plato's Timaeus—vary from being as an embodiment of
evil, to being merely imperfect and as benevolent as its inadequacy permits. Gnosticism was a
dualistic religion, influenced by and influencing Hellenic philosophy, Judaism (see Notzrim),
and Christianity;
The gnōsis referred to in the term is a form of revealed, esoteric knowledge through
which the spiritual elements of humanity are reminded of their true origins within the superior
Godhead, being thus permitted to escape materiality. Consequently, within the sects of
Gnosticism only the pneumatics or psychics obtain gnōsis; the hylic or Somatics, though human,
being incapable of perceiving the higher reality, are unlikely to attain the gnōsis deemed by
Gnostic movements as necessary for salvation.
7
Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning "country dweller", "rustic") is a blanket term used
to refer to various polytheistic religions. The group so defined includes most of the Eastern
religions, Native American religions and mythologies, as well as non-Abrahamic folk religions
in general. More narrow definitions will not include any of the world religions and restrict the
term to local or rural currents not organized as civil religions. Characteristic of pagan traditions
is the absence of proselytism and the presence of a living mythology which explains religious
practice.
8
Papal infallibility is one of the great differences between Catholicism and Protestantism.
Very few seem to be aware of the awesome implications of this Catholic dogma. Hopefully, this
brief summary will illuminate them. Regarding papal infallibility the present-day Roman
Catholic Church says:

"The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his
office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful -- who confirms his brethren in the
faith -- he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals" (Catechism of
the Catholic Church (Liguori, MO: Liguori Publications), 1994, p.235).

Likewise, Vatican Council II declared the following about papal infallibility (all bold emphasis
is our own):
22
"The infallibility, however, with which the divine redeemer wished to endow his Church in
defining doctrine pertaining to faith and morals, is co-extensive with the deposit of revelation,
which must be religiously guarded and loyally and courageously expounded. The Roman
Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as
supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful -- who confirms his brethren in the faith (cf.
Lk. 22:32) -- he proclaims in an absolute decision a doctrine pertaining to faith and morals"
(Vol. 1, p.380).

"We believe in the infallibility enjoyed by the Successor of Peter when he speaks ex
cathedra as shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, an infallibility which the whole Episcopate
also enjoys when it exercises with him the supreme magisterium" (Vol. 2, p.392).

"This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic
teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra in such
wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one
sincerely adhere to decisions made by him conformably with his manifest mind and intention
..." (Vol. 1, p.379).

To the Roman Catholic, "ex cathedra" (Latin for from the seat) statements are as infallible
as the Bible. Though they are rare, the following are three "ex cathedra" statements or
"infallible" declarations of Roman Catholicism, which they place alongside the authority of the
Bible. (All emphasis is our own):

"There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved"
(Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)

"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of
every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff" (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull
Unum Sanctam, 1302.)

"[The Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes and teaches that none of those who are
not within the Catholic Church, not only Pagans, but Jews, heretics and schismatics, can
ever be partakers of eternal life, but are to go into the eternal fire 'prepared for the devil,
and his angels' (Mt. xxv. 41), unless before the close of their lives they shall have entered
into that Church; also that the unity of the Ecclesiastical body is such that the Church's
Sacraments avail only those abiding in that Church, and that fasts, alms-deeds, and other works
of piety which play their part in the Christian combat are in her alone productive of eternal
rewards; moreover, that no one, no matter what alms he may have given, not even if he were to
shed his blood for Christ's sake, can be saved unless he abide in the bosom and unity of the
Catholic Church." (Mansi, Concilia, xxxi, 1739.) (Pope Eugene IV, Bull Cantate Domino,
1441).

To believe in papal infallibility is to believe ONLY Roman Catholics can be saved, for they
alone are in submission to the Pope. It is, therefore, impossible for an informed Catholic to get
saved or to stay saved if he knows of these aforementioned Roman Catholic declarations and
still continues to believe in papal infallibility! This is so because salvation centers around
23
exclusive trust in the person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ and in Him alone. In other
words, all 100% of our trust for our soul's salvation MUST be in Jesus Christ alone apart from
trusting in a denomination or submission to any spiritual leader, including the Pope! Since this
is the Biblical message and Catholic "ex cathedra" statements contradict this, then belief in
papal infallibility must be rejected for the sake of salvation! In fact, the three ex cathedra
declarations just cited are clearly "another gospel" (Gal. 1:8,9).

Throughout the Scriptures, we are often warned of false prophets and false spiritual leaders (Mt.
7:15; 24:11; Rom. 16:18; 2 Cor. 11:13; Eph. 4:14; 1 Tim. 4:2; 2 Tim. 3:13; 4:3; Tit. 1:10, 2 Jn.
7; 1 Jn. 4:1; etc.). What can one conclude except that what these past popes have said regarding
salvation is on a par with what the founders of Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day
Adventism and what other proven false prophets have declared. All need to be flatly rejected,
not only as error, but deadly error -- even "damnable heresy" (2 Pet. 2:1, KJV)!

Furthermore, in direct contrast to these "infallible" declarations, the Roman Catholic Church is
now saying the following regarding Muslims. Their contradiction is:

"The Church's relationship with the Muslims.’ Thee plan of salvation also includes those who
acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to
hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's
judge on the last day' " (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1994, p.223).

QUESTION: If Muslims can be saved on the basis of professing to hold to the faith of
Abraham, why can't the Jews? (See aforementioned ex cathedra statement from 1441.)

• Did God change His mind sometime after 1441?

• The Creed of the Council of Trent (1564) summarizes the doctrines which Catholics
are to believe. Regarding the Pope, it states (all emphasis is Affirmant’s own):

"... I unhesitatingly accept and profess all the doctrines (especially those concerning the
primacy of the Roman Pontiff and his infallible teaching authority) handed down, defined,
and explained by the sacred canons and ecumenical councils and especially those of this most
holy Council of Trent (and by the ecumenical Vatican Council). And at the same time I
condemn, reject, and anathematize everything that is contrary to those propositions, and all
heresies without exception that have been condemned, rejected, and anathematized by the
Church. I, N., promise, vow, and swear that, with God's help, I shall most constantly hold and
profess this true Catholic faith, outside which no one can be saved and which I now freely
profess and truly hold. With the help of God, I shall profess it whole and unblemished to my
dying breath; and, to the best of my ability, I shall see to it that my subjects or those entrusted to
me by virtue of my office hold it, teach it, and preach it. So help me God and his holy Gospel"
(emphasis not in original). [The words in parentheses in this paragraph were inserted into the
Tridentine profession of faith by order of Pope Pius IX in a decree issued by the Holy Office,
January 20, 1877 (Acta Sanctae Sedis, X [1877], pp. 71 ff.).]

Hypothetically: If you call oneself a "Catholic" and reject papal infallibility, then
congratulations: You are proceeding along the right path! But according to the Creed of

24
power over Zoroastrian / Mithra Islamic worship of Baal or Lucifer the light bearer.

57. That Orthodox Christians per se are Jews who have their origin in Messianic Judaism

with the Torah not Cabalistic / Gnostic Judaism with Talmudic practice from Babylon; and

whose internal conflict is between two factions, those believing in the messiah versus those who

don’t, and that even before the 1st Century BC resulted in banishment from the Temple on

Sabbath for those Messianic-believers eventually leading to the practice of worship on Sunday,

notwithstanding the belief that somehow the Council of Nicaea (9) canonized the practice, in fact

Messianic followers even before the birth of Jesus at the risk of death for messianic belief were

banned from worship services on the Sabbath within Judaism while at the same time at conflict

the Council of Trent, you are not a real Catholic as they define one! Furthermore, you are
indirectly endorsing this dogma you don't believe by your presence and financial
donations. This makes you partly responsible for the spiritual harm that is occurring
through it!

In conclusion, four very important observations can be noted because of papal infallibility:

1. There exists a dangerous, false salvation plan or "another gospel" (Gal. 1:8,9) because of it.
2. There presently reigns contradictions and confusion regarding salvation of non-Roman
Catholics.
3. The unique authority of the Bible has been diminished.
4. It indirectly opens the door to other Catholic doctrine which conceals the true way of
salvation.
PAPAL INFALLIBILITY http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/papal.htm

9 The First Council of Nicaea was a council of Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in
Bithynia (present-day İznik in Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. The
Council was historically significant as the first effort to attain consensus in the church through
an assembly representing all of Christendom.

The First Council of Nicaea is believed to have been the first Ecumenical council of the
Christian Church. Most significantly, it resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called
the Creed of Nicaea. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent
general (ecumenical) councils of Bishops (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of
doctrinal orthodoxy— the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.
The council did not invent the doctrine of the deity of Christ. Instead, the council affirmed the
teachings of the Apostles regarding who Christ is; that Christ is indeed the one true God in
Deity and Trinity with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

25
with Mithraism / Zoroastrianism / Gnosticism that by accession of Caesars through Hadrian (10)

who by the end of the Second Roman-Jewish War had banned Jews from even looking upon

Jerusalem except for two times a year, and to further strife between Gnostic and Messianic

Jews.

58. That even the Protestant movement per se derives from the opposing struggle of

monarchies themselves dissatisfied with the actions of then Pontifex maximus, who all shared

the common creed of Gnostic Mystery Religions apart and at odds with Orthodox Christianity.

10
Publius Aelius Hadrianus (as emperor Imperator Caesar Divi Traiani filius Traianus
Hadrianus Augustus, and Divus Hadrianus after his apotheosis, known as Hadrian in English;
24 January 76 – 10 July 138) was emperor of Rome from AD 117 to 138, as well as a Stoic and
Epicurean philosopher. A member of the gens Aelia, Hadrian was the third of the so-called Five
Good Emperors, or the second of the recently proposed Ulpio-Aelian dynasty.

Second Roman-Jewish War (See also: Bar Kokhba revolt)

In 130, Hadrian visited the ruins of Jerusalem, in Judaea, left after the First Roman-Jewish War
of 66–73. He rebuilt the city, renaming it Aelia Capitolina after himself and Jupiter Capitolinus,
the chief Roman deity. A new temple dedicated to the worship of Jupiter was built on the ruins
of the old Jewish Second Temple, which had been destroyed in 70. In addition, Hadrian
abolished circumcision, which was considered by Romans and Greeks as a form of bodily
mutilation and hence "barbaric". These anti-Jewish policies of Hadrian triggered in Judaea a
massive Jewish uprising, led by Simon bar Kokhba and Akiba ben Joseph. Following the
outbreak of the revolt, Hadrian called his general Sextus Julius Severus from Britain, and troops
were brought from as far as the Danube. Roman losses were very heavy, and it is believed that
an entire legion, the XXII Deiotariana was destroyed. Indeed, Roman losses were so heavy that
Hadrian's report to the Roman Senate omitted the customary salutation "I and the legions are
well". However, Hadrian's army eventually put down the rebellion in 135, after three years of
fighting. According to Cassius Dio, during the war 580,000 Jews were killed, 50 fortified towns
and 985 villages razed. The final battle took place in Beitar, a fortified city 10 km. southwest of
Jerusalem. The city only fell after a lengthy siege, and Hadrian did not allow the Jews to bury
their dead. According to the Babylonian Talmud, after the war Hadrian continued the
persecution of Jews. He attempted to root out Judaism, which he saw as the cause of continuous
rebellions, prohibited the Torah law, the Hebrew calendar and executed Judaic scholars (see Ten
Martyrs). The sacred scroll was ceremonially burned on the Temple Mount. In an attempt to
erase the memory of Judaea, he renamed the province Syria Palaestina (after the Philistines),
and Jews were forbidden from entering its rededicated capital. When Jewish sources mention
Hadrian it is always with the epitaph "may his bones be crushed" (‫ שחיק עצמות‬or ‫שחיק טמיא‬, the
Aramaic equivalent), an expression never used even with respect to Vespasian or Titus who
destroyed the Second Temple.

26
 Pontifex maximus’ Council of Trent versus the Rosicrucian Reformation / Templars

59. That Protestant Roman Catholic priest Martin Luther, was a member of the Rosiscrucian

secret society (11), whose practice used the Luther seal or Luther rose that is a widely-

recognized symbol for Lutheranism. It was the seal that was designed for Martin Luther at the

behest of Prince John Frederick, in 1530, while Luther was staying at the Coburg Fortress

during the Diet of Augsburg. Lazarus Spengler, to whom Luther wrote his interpretation below,

sent Luther a drawing of this seal. Luther saw it as a compendium or expression of his theology

and faith, which he used to authorize his correspondence. Luther informed Philipp Melanchthon

on September 15, 1530 that the Prince had personally visited him in the Coburg fortress and

11
Rosicrucianism (symbol: the Rose Cross) is the theology of a secret society of mystics,
allegedly formed in late medieval Germany, holding a doctrine "built on esoteric truths of the
ancient past", which, "concealed from the average man, provide insight into nature, the physical
universe and the spiritual realm."
Between 1607 and 1616, two anonymous manifestos were published, first in Germany
and later throughout Europe. These were Fama Fraternitatis RC (The Fame of the Brotherhood
of RC) and Confessio Fraternitatis (The Confession of the Brotherhood of RC). The influence
of these documents, presenting a "most laudable Order" of mystic-philosopher-doctors and
promoting a "Universal Reformation of Mankind", gave rise to an enthusiasm called by its
historian Dame Frances Yates the "Rosicrucian Enlightenment".
In later centuries many esoteric societies have claimed to derive their doctrines, in whole
or in part, from the original Rosicrucians. Several modern societies, which date the beginning of
the Order to earlier centuries, have been formed for the study of Rosicrucianism and allied
subjects.
The Fama Fraternitatis presented the legend of a German doctor and mystic philosopher
referred to as "Frater C.R.C." (later identified in a third manifesto as Christian Rosenkreuz, or
"Rose-cross"). The year 1378 is presented as being the birth year of "our Christian Father," and
it is stated that he lived 106 years. After studying in the Middle East under various masters,
possibly those adhering to Sufism or Zoroastrianism, he was unable to spread the knowledge he
had acquired to any prominent European figures. Instead, he gathered a small circle of
friends/disciples and founded the Rosicrucian Order (this can be similarly deduced to have
occurred in 1407).
During Rosenkreuz's lifetime, the Order was said to consist of no more than eight
members, each a doctor and a sworn bachelor. Each member undertook an oath to heal the sick
without payment, to maintain a secret fellowship and to find a replacement for him before he
died. Three such generations had supposedly passed between c.1500 and c.1600, a time when
scientific, philosophical and religious freedom had grown so that the public might benefit from
the Rosicrucians' knowledge, so that they were now seeking good men.

27
presented him with a signet ring, presumably displaying the seal.

60. The seeds of Protestantism spread like a prairie fire, all over Europe; it could not be

contained. The excommunication and condemnation of Martin Luther and his teachings failed

utterly to have its desired effect. Since 1520, Pope Paul III's entire Catholic world had been

falling down around his ears where nearly half of Europe had turned away from the "one holy

Catholic Church". The Protestant revolt in Germany and England had rapidly eaten its way into

France, Holland, Belgium, Austria, Switzerland, and Czechoslovakia, and had infected every

other country. It had shattered the once universally accepted papal authority; successfully

attacked basic Catholic notions about priesthood, Eucharist, Sacraments, grace, Episcopal

office, emptied thousands of convents and monasteries, liquidated the unity of Catholic belief,

converted whole nations to the new faith, and inspired both political and military alliances

aimed at the physical destruction of Pope Paul III's papacy.

61. This by no means, was some passing fancy that was soon going to go away. The minds

of the people had been opened to great understanding, and for the sake of truth were willing to

face the fiercest and savage oppressions, the cruelest tortures and the most horrible of deaths. To

live a life free from Rome's corruption and bondage was valued greater than life itself. Rome

was in deep trouble here, and true to her character, brute force quickly became the main agenda

in her program. To stem the increasing tide of the advancing work of the Reformation three

main efforts were employed by Rome as it embarked on its Counter-Reformation.

62. These were the Inquisition, the newly authorized Jesuit Order, and the calling of a

Church council, which was held in Trent, Italy. Pope Paul III, on 21 June 1542, issued his

proclamation announcing the establishment of the Inquisition in Rome as a central authority for

all countries committed to the struggle against those who were accused of "heresy." The call for

a new council was voiced increasingly by both secular and ecclesiastical dignitaries, while in

28
Rome the Papal Inquisition began its terrible work.

63. So terrible was Rome's work of butchery and extermination in the following years that

some historians have given estimations that over a hundred million people were murdered

during those times. It was not an uncommon sight to see mass burnings of people alive at the

stake or see lined up on the sides of highways entering into cities, sharp stakes planted in the

ground where men and women were impaled upon them and left to writhe there until death gave

them release. These became a stark testimony and a warning to all concerned-obey Rome or

suffer the same consequences.

64. Natural Law (12) as Cannon Law penned by Thomas Aquinas, is embraced full tilt by all

12
THOMIST THEORY OF THE NATURAL LAW - Aquinas develops next his theory of
NATURAL LAW ("lex naturalis" or sometimes called "lex naturae"), the third universal law in
his hierarchy of laws. It is analogous to the concept of positive law or HUMAN LAW (fourth
law in Aquinas's hierarchy of laws). Human Law, defined by him as "an ordinance of reason for
the common good made and promulgated by the authority who has care of the community", is
the outgrowth of Natural Law. The basis for Natural Law is the religious scheme of reality, of
the human condition and of the governance of the world by God. Since all things are ruled and
measured by Eternal Law, which is nothing else than God himself, it follows that all somehow
share in it and their tendencies to their own proper acts and ends are from its impression. The
participation of the rational creature in the Eternal Reason through which it has its own natural
aptitude for its due activity and purpose Aquinas calls "NATURAL LAW." And the light of
natural reason by which we discern what is good and what is evil is the impression of the divine
light on us. He describes it further as the first principles of human moral activity that are self-
evident, indemonstrable ("sunt quaedam principia per se nota"), known to all. The first
command of law is "that good is to be sought and done, evil to be avoided"; on this command
"are founded all the other precepts of the law of nature". The commandments of the Natural
Law are recognized by the practical reason of itself as being human good ("quae ratio practica
naturaliter apprehendit esse bona humana"). According to Aquinas the order of the natural
commands corresponds to that of our natural tendencies:

1. The inclination towards the good of nature has in common with all substances the
tendency to preserve its own natural being.

2. The inclination towards things man's nature has in common with other animals, such as
coupling of a male and a female, and bringing up the young.

29
3. The human inclination for the good of his nature of intelligent being proper to him, for
example, that he should know the truth about God and living in society, that he should
shun ignorance, that he should not offend others with whom he ought to live in civility.

All these inclinations fall under one single root, namely that of Natural Law. Next
Aquinas argues that since our activity of reason and will derives from what we are by nature,
and since all reasoning originates from the principles which we recognize naturally as well as
the desire for objectives that are subordinate to ends derives from the natural desire for the
ultimate end, therefore it is only proper that first our acts should be directed towards this
ultimate end by Natural Law. Aquinas assumes here that our nature depends on Eternal Reason,
that there is an ultimate end that is God, for which we have a natural desire, and that the very
first principles which we recognize are not reasoned out and our natural desire is not chosen.
Therefore, natural here is what is preconscious, predetermined, and not reasoned out. At another
place he seems to accept the definition of Ulpian that the natural is what we have in common
with animals, or what is instinctive or intuitive, according to the definition of Gratian. Only later
do we recognize these natural tendencies as laws, precisely because we are rational creatures.
Even non-rational creatures participate in Eternal Reason in their own way: however, they
cannot perceive it as a law. When referring to them we may use the word "law" only in a
figurative manner. Because of the double nature of humans (rational and animal), some acts of
virtue are done following Natural Law since they belong to it by the fact that our proper form is
the soul. Therefore our natural tendency is to act according to virtue. Many virtues, however, do
not belong to Natural Law, but are reasoned out before they are held helpful to the good life: for
example, temperance modulates our natural desire for food, drink and sex. Sins, if they are
against reason, are against nature. On the other hand, some special sins run against nature, such
as homosexuality, which, as Thomas thought, is against the course natural to all animals.
Aquinas maintains further that the first common principles of theoretical or practical
reason, "the law of nature," are the same as the truth or rightness for all and are equally
recognized. With respect to the specific conclusions of theoretical reason, the truth is the same
for all, though not all recognize it equally. With respect to the particular conclusions derived by
practical reason, there is no general unanimity as to what is true or right, and even when there is
agreement there is not the same degree of recognition. In a few cases the desire to do right or
information may be wanting. He summarizes what is a natural right by quoting Gratian that
natural right is that "by which everyone is commanded to do to others what he would have done
to himself, and forbidden to do to others what he would not have done to himself." And it is
generally held that all human inclinations should be directed according to reason.
Thus, according to Aquinas, Natural Law is a spontaneous, intuitive, instinctive reflex of
tendency to seek what is good to preserve natural being, to preserve the species, and to learn
about God and to venerate him. This "law" has supernatural origin being created together with
human nature and is self-evident. The practical reason next arrives at the common principles of
this law which may differ in details and in specific conclusions. However, he postulates one
most general principle of practical reason quoting it in Gratian's formulation. This principle is
taken from the Judaic tradition into Christianity, but is found in all cultures.
Natural Law can be changed by Divine Law as well as by Human Law in the sense of
being added. But as for change by subtraction, meaning that something that once was Natural
Law ceases to be so, it is not possible. The first principles of the law of nature ("lex naturae")
are altogether unalterable. But its secondary precepts, which are like particular conclusions

30
Jesuits, and by each member’s oath all are Papal Crusader Knights when the time comes; and

now that the Tridentine Latin Mass once banned by Vatican II without permission with Benedict

XVI’s mandatory Latin Mass reinstatement even the touchy-feely passive-aggressive New Age

Templar Jesuits are on notice, and all must serve the Grand Design Plan that as of April 2008

with Benedict XVI’s speech, there is no salvation outside of the Gnostic Roman Church is

upfront, and the Great Chastisement count-down has begun.

65. Affiant does not leave this matter cold without referencing the fact that before the Jesuit

Order there was the infamous Sir Thomas More (7 February 1478 – 6 July 1535), also known

as Saint Thomas More, was an English lawyer, author, and statesman who in his lifetime

gained a reputation as a leading Renaissance humanist scholar, violently opposed Luther's

reformation, and occupied many public offices, including Lord Chancellor (1529–1532); He

was beheaded in 1535 when he refused to sign the Act of Supremacy that declared King Henry

VIII Supreme Head of the Church of England.

66. More coined the word "utopia", a name he gave to the ideal, imaginary island nation

whose political system he described in Utopia, published in 1516, defined creation of what now

is mis-defined as Marxism and or Communism’s Jesuit reductions of Paraguay in the 1600’s.

67. That More too held there is no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic Church and as

for heretics apostates and schismatics in his inquisition against Protestantism supported the

close to first principles, though not alterable in the majority of cases where they are right as they
stand, can nevertheless be changed on some particular and rare occasions.
Now expanding the scope of the Natural Law, Aquinas is using the notion of Natural
Law in a double meaning - the one, narrow as the very first principle or principles we recognize
unconsciously, and second, in the broader meaning including also particular conclusions
presumably derived from it in society. This very special twist led to such monstrosities as
justifying religious persecutions by Natural and Divine Laws. The persecution of the so-called
heretics, apostates, and unbelievers was the greatest perversion of the most fundamental human
tendencies, moral conscience, instituted by the Natural Law (if we accept the existence of such a
law). This is a typical example of Thomas's rationality and moral precepts of the Catholic
luminary. This sophistry served only one purpose: that of justifying ecclesiastical
totalitarianism.
31
Catholic Church and saw heresy as a threat to the unity of both church and society.

"He agreed with established English law, and with the lessons taught by the thousand-
year experience of Christendom, that in order for peace to reign, heresy must be
controlled. At the time, heresies were identified as seditious attempts to undermine
existing authority .... More heard Luther's call to destroy the heart of Christendom, the
Catholic Church, as a call to war. He therefore followed traditional procedures to ensure
the safety of this legitimate and time-honored institution."

However, More also sought radical clergy reform and more rational theology. His early actions

against the Protestants included

• aiding Wolsey in preventing Lutheran books from being imported into England.
• He also assisted in the production of a Star Chamber edict against heretical preaching,
treating heretics mercilessly.

During this time most of his literary polemics appeared. After becoming Lord Chancellor of

England, More set the task in light of the following quote:

“The author somewhat sheweth that the clergy doth no wrong in leaving heretics to [the]
secular hand, though their death follow thereon. And he sheweth also that it is lawful to
resist the Turk and such other infidels; and that princes be bounden thereto..”

68. More in June 1530 decreed that offenders were to be brought before the King's Council,

rather than being examined by their bishops, the practice hitherto. Actions taken by the Council

became ever more severe. In 1531, Richard Bayfield, a graduate of the University of Cambridge

and former Benedictine monk, was burned at Smithfield for distributing copies of Tyndale's

English translation of the New Testament.

69. Further burnings followed at More's instigation, including that of the priest and writer

John Frith in 1533. In The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer, yet another polemic, More took

particular interest in the execution of Sir Thomas Hitton, described "the devil's stinking martyr".

70. In regards to More's treatment of heretics; John Foxe (who "placed Protestant sufferings

against the background of ... the Antichrist") in his Book of Martyrs claimed that More had often

used violence or torture while interrogating them; and in April 1529 a heretic, John

32
Tewkesbury, was taken by More to his house in Chelsea and so badly tortured on the rack that

he was almost unable to walk. Tewkesbury was subsequently burned at the stake.

71. That the current annual Thomas More award in celebration of canon law to members of

our Judiciary includes certain judges here in Washington D.C. with the “Red Mass” , in that

More was beatified by Pope Leo XIII in 1886 and canonized with John Fisher after a mass

petition of English Catholics in 1935, as in some sense a 'patron saint of politics' in protest

against the rise of secular, anti-religious Communism. His joint feast day with Fisher is 22 June.

Fisher was the only remaining Bishop (owing to the coincident natural deaths of eight aged

bishops) during the English Reformation to maintain, at the King's mercy, allegiance to the

Pope. In 2000 this trend continued, with Saint Thomas More declared the "heavenly Patron of

Statesmen and Politicians" by Pope John Paul II; is commemorated on 6 July, in the Anglican

calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church.

72. After More came the Jesuit Order inquisition and Counter Reformation.

The Jesuit Templars before and after the Bull of 1773 banning the Jesuits

73. That the Jesuit Order’s role in the founding of America started first as a counter to the

Protestant movement that as a papal Military order of special forces stopped Protestantism dead in

its tracks. But what worried Rome and her Jesuits above anything else, was that between the years

1600 AD and 1700 AD, Protestant England was colonizing the New World along the east coast of

the North American continent with her diseased "heretics", and that Rome was losing control. In that

regard something had to be done! That "something" was the Jesuits’ Lord Baltimore George Calvert

and Charles Carroll in their founding of the Catholic Maryland colony.

74. The Jesuit Order despite the Bull promulgated by Pope Clement XIV in 1773,

suppressing and extinguishing the Jesuit Order “forever” is the Society’s resultant war on the

papacy through its Illuminati-controlled Grand Orient and Scottish-Rite Freemasonry leading

33
and directing the French Revolution and subsequent Napoleonic Wars; the Order’s restoration in

1814 and subsequent history as to how it presently exercises exclusive control over the Pope.

75. Nevertheless after 1773, the Catholic Maryland colony under notorious control of Jesuit

Bishop John Carroll (returning from Europe because of the Bull in 1774) then became a launching

pad for the Jesuits to infiltrate England's Protestant North American colonies, and in time, created

dissension between England and her colonies, having them in 1776 to declare independence; and

thirteen years later in 1789, a new nation, the United States of America was born. Correlated to fit

the exact same date, the Catholic Church hierarchy was officially set up with its diocese territory

being also the same as the new found United States of America. On this historic date of 1789, John

Carroll, the first elected Roman Catholic bishop of the United States, laid the cornerstone for the

Jesuit Georgetown College, known today as the Jesuit Georgetown University in the very seat of the

new United States government, the District of Columbia. Quoting from the Catholic Encyclopedia,

Copyright 1908, Volume 3, Subject, Carroll, Daniel, Page 381, you notice a rather conspicuous

Carroll family involvement, where they seemed to be in the thick of things where the federal city

was concerned.

"The choice of the present site of Washington was advocated by him, (Daniel Carroll) and
he owned one of the four farms taken for it, Notley Young, David Burns, and Samuel
Davidson being the others interested. The capitol was built on the land transferred to the
Government by Carroll, and there is additional interest to Catholics in the fact that, in 1663,
this whole section of country belonged to a man named Pope, who called it Rome."

"On 15 April, 1791, Carroll and David Stuart, as the official commissioners of Congress,
laid the corner-stone of the District of Columbia at Jone's Point near Alexandria, Virginia.
When the Congress met in Washington for the first time, in November, 1800, Carroll and
Notley Young owned the only two really comfortable and imposing houses within the
bounds of the city. Young's name is among those assisting as collectors of subscriptions
(1787) for the founding of Georgetown College."

Quoting again from the Catholic Encyclopedia, Copyright 1912, Volume 15, Subject, Washington,
District of Columbia, Page 558, it states:

"The States of Maryland and Virginia, in 1788 and 1789, had offered the requisite area, and
the "acceptance of Congress", under Acts of 16 July 1790, and 31 March, 1791, constituted
the District of Columbia the seat of the national government. The territory thus selected was

34
 determined as to its exact location and boundaries by George Washington: it included within
its limits the flourishing boroughs of Georgetown, Montgomery County (Maryland), and
Alexandria (Virginia); the rest of the territory was rural. The president was also authorized
to appoint three commissioners to lay out and survey a portion of the District for a federal
city, to acquire the land, and to provide buildings for the residence of the president, the
accommodation of Congress, and the use of the government departments. One of the
commissioners thus appointed was Daniel Carroll, of the family of Bishop John Carroll, and
one of the principal landed proprietors of the District; Major Charles Pierre L'Enfant, a
French Catholic, was employed to furnish a plan of the city, and to him the credit of its
magnificent design is mainly due; James Hoban, a Catholic, won by competition the prize
offered for a plan of the president's house, and the "White House" is constructed in
accordance with his design."

"The corner-stone was laid (13 October, 1792) by President Washington, who also officiated
at the laying of the cornerstone of the north wing of the Capitol (18 September l793): the site
which the Capitol occupies was part of the land of Daniel Carroll, and was practically a gift
from him to the United States. In 1800 President Adams came to the city, the transfer of the
departments from Philadelphia was effected, and Washington became the permanent capitol
of the United States."

"The first local authorities of Washington were the president, three commissioners appointed
by him, and the Levy Court; the city was incorporated in 1802, with a city council elected
by the people, and a mayor appointed by the president. Robert Brent, a Catholic and nephew
of Bishop Carroll, was the first mayor, and was annually reappointed by Presidents Jefferson
and Madison until 1812; in 1812 the duty of electing the mayor devolved on the council, and
from 1820 to 1871 on the people."

76. So the founding of the United States of America was only the first phase of the Jesuit

Order’s Grand Design to recapture the control that she lost during the Protestant Revolution.

77. Affiant quotes from the affidavit of Eric John Phelps accordingly as to the errant nature

of the present status of the Jesuit Order to be reviewed with the Logan Act and related law as a

matter of national security:

“That the Society of Jesus has re-gained its death grip over the papacy since no later than
October, 1836, in which year it secured a papal Brief by which Pope Gregory XVI gave
himself and his church over to the diabolical rule of the Order;

That the Jesuit Superior General of the Company of Jesus obtained absolute control over
every Roman Catholic cardinal, archbishop, bishop and priest through the decree of
papal infallibility issued by the Jesuit-directed and controlled First Vatican Council,
1870, the “Father General” now unfettered in his rule over the Pope’s Vatican Empire by
commanding the movements of one man;

That the Society of Jesus, in order to secure all past privileges granted to the Order prior
to its suppression , extorted the Bull Dolemus inter alia from Pope Leo XIII in 1880 by

35
 first poisoning and then providing the antidote after the Pope signed that Bull further
entrenching Jesuit tyranny over the Vatican; “ …etc.

78. At the top of the Freemasonry hierarchy sits the Jesuits. And it was Jesuit controlled

Freemasonry that became the unseen forces guiding the events of the American Revolution. It

brings to mind, a very startling statement, made by the 33 Degree Freemason, Manly P. Hall. He

is known to be one of the most prolific writers in the world about secrets of the Masonic Lodge

and is no doubt one of the key Masonic writers of all time, was often called Masonry's Greatest

Philosopher. In his book titled, The Secret Teachings of All Ages, 1977, page XCI, he wrote:

"Not only were many of the founders of the United States

Government Masons, but they received aid from a secret and
august body existing in Europe, which helped them to establish
this country for a peculiar and particular purpose known only to
the initiated few. The Great Seal is the signature of this exalted
body - unseen and for the most part unknown - and the
unfinished pyramid upon its reverse side is a trestleboard setting
forth symbolically the task to the accomplishment of which the
United States Government was dedicated from the day of its
inception."

79. There is a schism in the Jesuit Order according to Fr. Malachi Martin, S.J. in his book

the Jesuits confirmed that by the efforts of Fr. George Tyrell, S.J. (1861-1909) the Liberation

Theology Movement implemented with Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J. (1881-1955) in his

Phenomenology of Man, “New Age” philosophy, was implemented during Vatican II from 1962

thru 1965 by the attending Bishops under the control of the “New Age” Templar Jesuits,

coordinated under the protection of the SMOM business arm of the Jesuits’ Vatican; and

80. That since the creation of the Trappists after the death of DeMolay in which all the

Military Templars were forced into the monastic existence into the Trappist and Cistercian

Orders under their rivals the SMOM until the coming of the Jesuit Order, who now control the

Templars, whose networks of Illuminized Freemasonry include the esoteric levels of the

Scottish Rite and Grand Orient Lodge under the Jesuit Templars today.

36
 Papal Crusader Father Leonard Feeney S.J. versus the Jesuit Templars of Boston

81. In the case at point there is an example of the schism within the Jesuit order that is well

documented in a book written by Catherine Goddard Clarke in 1950 entitled The Loyolas and

The Cabots” – The Story of the Crusade of Saint Benedict Center 1940-1950 that occurred in

Boston Massachusetts and filled the press at the time.

82. Last year Affiant had the opportunity to interview and discuss the schism within the

Jesuit order from the experience of the assistant (who for security reasons must remain

nameless) to Father Leonard Feeney, S.J. (b. Lynn, Massachusetts 1897-02-18 - d. Ayer,

Massachusetts 1978-01-30 ), who was a U.S. Jesuit priest who defended the strict interpretation

of the Roman Catholic doctrine, extra Ecclesiam nulla salus ("outside The Church there is no

salvation"),

83. According to my source Fr. Feeney was a ferocious Papal Knight Crusader, who like a

fish out of water in a different time, is a carbon copy of Ignatius Loyola driven by the

Inquisition, who challenged the heretical liberal “New Age” Templar Jesuit controlled Boston

Diocese denial of Catholic doctrines, and as such argued that baptism of blood and baptism of

desire are unavailing and that therefore no non-Catholics will be saved. He fought against what

he perceived to be the liberalization of Catholic doctrine.

84. On 8 August 1949, the Holy Office sent an official declaration of the meaning of the

dogma extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, which Feeney refused to accept. After repeatedly refusing

summons to Rome, Feeney was excommunicated on 13 February 1953 by the Holy See for

persistent disobedience to legitimate Church authority, and the decree of excommunication was

later published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis. His followers maintained that his

excommunication was invalid because Fr. Feeney was not given a reason for his summons.

85. Feeney then set up a community called the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. He

37
was reconciled to the Church in 1972, but was not required to retract nor recant his

interpretation of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, which is inscribed on his tombstone.

86. Feeney was Editor of "The Point," which ran many anti-Semitic articles about Messianic

Jews / Christians and Gnostic Jews which I discussed in the context above. The following

quotes provide the general tenor of the publication in the nature of heretics:

"During two thousand years, the Jews have remained the most tenacious, dangerous foes
of Christ and His Church" (January-February, 1958)
"Since American newspapers are a typical product of that unholy ferment which has
been agitating the western world since the time of the French Revolution, it is quite easy
to isolate one cause of their being the way they are; namely: the influence of the Jews.
Essential to the understanding of our chaotic times is the knowledge that the Jewish race
constitutes a united anti-Christian bloc within Christian society, and is working for the
overthrow of that society by every means at its disposal." (April, 1958)
"Those two powers, the chief two in the world today, are Communism and Zionism.
That both movements are avowedly anti-Christian, and that both are in origin and
direction Jewish, is a matter of record." (September 1958)
"As surely and securely as the Jews have been behind Freemasonry, or Secularism, or
Communism, they are behind the “anti-hate” drive. The Jews are advocating tolerance
only for its destructive value — destructive, that is, of the Catholic Church. On their
part, they still keep alive their racial rancors and antipathies." (January 1959)

87. The following are article titles from 1957 giving a sense of split with New Age Jesuits:

January: "Jewish Invasion of Our Country--Our Culture Under Siege" February: "When
Everyone Was Catholic--The Courage of the Faith (Regarding the Jews) in the
Thirteenth Century" March: "Dublin's Briscoe (Jewish Lord Mayor) Comes to Boston"
April: "The Fight for the Holy City--Efforts of the Jews to Control Jerusalem" May:
"Our Lady of Fatima Warned Us (About Jewish Communists)" June: "The Rejected
People of Holy Scripture: Why the Jews Fear the Bible" July: "The Judaising of
Christians by Jews--Tactics of the Church's Leading Enemies" August: "A Sure Defense
Against the Jews--What Our Catholic Bishops Can Do for Us" September: "An Unholy
People in the Holy Land--The Actions of the Jews" October: "The Jewish Lie About
Brotherhood--the Catholic Answer--Israeli Brotherhood" November: "Six Pointers on
the Jews"

88. Were Papal Crusader Feeney, S.J. alive he would be made a Cardinal by Benedict XVI.

Benedict XVI’s Fatima versus John Paul II / Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Vatican II.

89. The history of the Reformation is no longer taught, or the Inquisition explained, or the

'battle-name' Protestant used. Rome hates to have her crimes exposed. She goes to great lengths to

38
censor and establish elaborate cover-ups. And she can; because of her powerful influence. But

Rome, even today, does not deny this barbaric time of her history. She just does not want to

advertise it and prefers to keep it quiet until she can employ it once again. But to many people,

Rome's scars have been indelibly etched upon their minds. So much so, that the 27 March 2000 issue

of the Time magazine ran an article on page 64 titled, "Is It Enough to Be Sorry?" It is a comment

on Pope John Paul II's apology for Roman Catholic atrocities. It reads in part as follows.-

"To err (for example, by burning your religious enemies at the stake, or standing by
silently as millions of Jews go to the ovens) may be human." "Pope John Paul II's
generalized apology for the wrongs committed by Roman Catholics over the
centuries (implicitly, the Crusades, the Inquisition and a terrible inaction and silence
in the face of the Holocaust) came during a Mass of Pardon at St. Peter's Basilica
that served as a penitential prelude to his visit this week to Israel. The global jury is
still deliberating on what to make of the apology."

More recently, 5 May 2001, the Baltimore Sun newspaper carried a front page report of Pope John

Paul II's visit to Greece under the heading, "Pope Seeks Forgiveness for Crusaders". The first

paragraph reads,

"Athens, Greece - Pope John Paul II, in a sweeping statement of regret aimed at
healing Christianity's East- West divide, begged God's forgiveness yesterday for sins
committed by Roman Catholics "against their Orthodox brothers and sisters",
including the plunder of the Byzantine capital by 13th century Crusaders."

"Tomorrow, the pope plans to become the first pontiff to step through the doors of a
mosque. He'll seek a moment of unity between Christianity and Islam-the world's
two largest faiths-whose contentious history extends back to the Crusades."

90. During pope Benedict XVI’s visit to USA, April 15-20, 2008 he presented to the

American Conference of Bishops his message of the celebration in the 200 year Anniversary in

the effort to conquer America for the Roman Church, having started with Bishop Father John

Carroll’s one diocese, that in 1808 grew to four and now is complete with 195 deemed ready for

carrying out the Fatima Prophesy of the Great Chastisement against the obstinate / apostate

heretics, and heretics.

91. Pope Benedict XVI has issued his decree to be carried out by the present day Father

39
Feeneys left in the Jesuit Order, who as Papal Crusaders notwithstanding the slight of hand of

the de Chardin New Age shenanigans of the Templar Jesuits passive aggressive posture in the

end are no different than that of the Papal Crusader Knight Father Leonard Feeney, S.J.

Argument for relief is for a nation of laws not men

92. By reason of the foregoing, the dire condition of our National Security must be defended

under the Logan Act and related law including the Vienna Convention Treaties since 1961

became the law of the land, and as such Affiant quotes from the affidavit of Eric John Phelps

accordingly for timely adjudication herein with emphasis added by Petitioner:

“The grave danger to the very existence of the papacy, the Order having murdered popes,
altered Canon Law for its advancement, including directing the Second Vatican Council
(1962-1965); the military “Company of Jesus” now serving as the primary impetus behind
the international social, religious, political and financial movement for a highly-centralized
“New World Order” which, at its consummation, necessitates the destruction of the Vatican
and thus the historic Roman Catholic faith;

The paramount influence of the Jesuit Order over Washington, D.C., through Georgetown
University via its political surrogate, the New York City/Washington, D.C.-based Council
on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its offspring, the Trilateral Commission (TC);

The secret and yet complete power of the Jesuit Order over a myriad of papal “Court
Jews” serving the Company via their membership in the CFR and/or in high-level
Freemasonry (Senator Arlen Specter, Senator Charles Schumer, Henry Kissinger, billionaire
George Soros, Obama’s White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Senior
Advisor David Axelrod, past and present chairmen of the Federal Reserve Board of
Governors, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke, etc.);

The absolute power of the Jesuit Order over the unified Intelligence Community of the
American Empire centralized at National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters, Fort Meade,
Maryland, it defending the pope’s purported power of “binding and loosing;”

The absolute power of the Jesuit Order over the Central Intelligence Agency (especially
since Director Panetta is a SMOM knight) since its creation with the National Security Act
in 1947, the CIA serving as the Order’s enforcement arm over its CFR;

The absolute power of the Jesuit Order over Pope Benedict XVI’s thirteen American
Roman Cardinal Archbishops includes the former president of Fordham University, CFR
member and Professed Jesuit priest under extreme oath of the fourth vow Joseph A. O’Hare.
The immediate foot soldiers of the American Cardinals include Knights of the Sovereign
Military Order of Malta (CFR member and President Regan’s Secretary of State, Alexander
M. Haig, Jr., whose brother, Francis Haig, is a powerful Jesuit priest under extreme oath of
40
 the fourth vow; CFR member and President Reagan’s National Security Advisor, Richard V.
Allen; etc.); the Knights of St. Gregory (CFR member and Fox News mogul Rupert
Murdoch, etc.); the Knights of Columbus (CFR-affiliated House Majority Leader John
Boehner, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, etc.) and Opus Dei (CFR-affiliated Supreme
Court Justice Antonin Scalia, former Director of the FBI Louis Freeh, convicted American
spy for the Russian KGB/SVR, FBI counterintelligence officer Robert Philip Hanssen,
etc.);”

93. That were a new lead District Judge chosen to replace Judge Leon, then based upon

Affiant’s review of the DCD online resumes, subject to none being member of a secret society

and or having received the Thomas More Award at the annual Red Mass, and Knights of

Columbus and Police Force consecration under the Blue Mass each year in that Affiant believes

Judge Reggie B. Walton, Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan and Judge Paul

L. Friedman are a satisfactory lead and or second district judge under 28 USC §2284; and

94. That based upon review of the other resumes, all the other Washington D.C. District

Judges including Judge Gladys Kessler who worked for the New York City Board of Education

when NYC is defendant in the Census case, and Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth who

Graduated from the University of Texas and from the University of Texas School of Law when

Texas is Defendant in the Census case are both unsatisfactory, and certainly every other

remaining district judge each have a questionable background not to be assigned to the FOIA

and Census cases,

95. The Quo Warranto Demand for the inquest with all related evidence and facts must

urgently be consolidated from other cases to be heard before this three judge court as the jury

formed within the Washington District of Columbia Circuit to hear the facts for a finding to be

presented to the District Court according to law for an interpretation of the Constitution Article

II Section 1 Clause 5 as to natural-born-citizen differentiated from merely a native born citizen

in the matter of multiple allegiances, and especially with prima facie evidence of foreign birth.

96. That Affiant has requested this relief before in this court as the exception shown in

41
Exhibit 1, and has no other venue to seek equity in this matter under 28 USC §455 and have

exhausted all administrative remedy.

97. That Affiant has a time restraint, regarding the questionable ongoing Census count and

ongoing treason of the Usurper Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama et al., which is

causing irreparable harm if not acted on in a timely manner by this Court.

98. On August 26, 2009 the White House responded to my service, wrote “due to separation

of powers, it is not within our authority to become involved in legal matters. You must resolve

this issue through the judicial system.” (see Exhibit 18). So here we/they are in the Levy Court.

99. Today Affiant received his Certification of Birth requested by the FBI (see Exhibit 19).

100. Will the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit of the

United States District Court for the District of Columbia in 09-cv-1295 investigate the District

Clerk Office by providing phone records of the Clerks working there?

101. Offshore, the Russians say WE are about to break-up. What does the Levy Court say?

The Ratification of the Constitution by the People of New York July 26, 1788, declared:

“That all Power is originally vested in and consequently derived from the People, and that
Government is instituted by them for their common Interest Protection and Security.

“That the enjoyment of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are essential rights which
every Government ought to respect and preserve.

That the Powers of Government may be reassumed by the People, whensoever it shall become
necessary to their Happiness; that every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said
Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the
Government thereof, remains to the People of the several States, or to their respective State
Governments to whom they may have granted the same; …

That the People have an equal, natural and unalienable right, freely and peaceably to
Exercise their Religion according to the dictates of Conscience, and that no Religious Sect
or Society ought to be favoured or established by Law in preference of others.”

YOU must resolve this issue through the judicial system…

42
Wherefore ,Affiant respectfully requests that there be an original proceeding trial herein before

this Circuit panel and that the panel order a response of DCD Judges in regards to Recusal under

28 USC 9455 and demand for investigation of the Clerk's office in the matter of interference

with due process, and that until such time that a trial and testimony is heard that all matters

except for due process set for September 11,2009 be stayed from further hearing by the District

Court, and that any response by other respondents be heard expeditiously accordingly as time is

of the essence with imminent irreparable harm that would result to Miant, and that this Court

provide further and different relief as it deems necessary for justice herein.

That Ailinnant has read the above and I know its contents as an expert witness; the facts

stated in the Petition are true to my own personal knowledge, except as to the matters therein

stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The

grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: 3rd

parties, books and records, and personal knowledge, except as to those stated upon information

and belief, which I believe to be true.

Christopher -Earl :Strunk O in esse

Sworn to before me this
the v day of September 2009

BEORGE ANDERSON
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01AN5070990
aualified in Kings County
NOTARY PUBLIC Commission Expires Jan. 6,20 11
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 1
 JHxtiteb $States Monrf o f Y p p e a l s
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

September Term 2008

Filed On: June 24, 2009

In re: Christopher Earl Strunk,

Petitioner

---- -
B E F O R E ~ e n i & x % w ~ u d gand
e , ~ i n s b ; rand
~ Tatel, Circuit Judges

ORDER

Upon consideration of the motion to restore the petition for a writ of mandamus,
construed as a motion for reconsideration, it is

ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration be denied. Petitioner's

mandamus petition sought an order requiring the district court to expedite consideration
of his motion for leave to file a complaint in forma pauperis. The court properly
dismissed the petition as moot after the district court granted the relief petitioner
requested by granting him in forma pauperis status and docketing his complaint. See
Pharmachemie B.V. v. Barr Labs., Inc., 276 F.3d 627, 631 (D.C. Cir. 2002) ("The
mootness doctrine limits Article Ill courts to deciding 'actual, ongoing controversies."').
Petitioner now claims that his original mandamus petition is not moot, but he seeks
different relief, namely, an order requiring the district court to consider his request for
recusal. To the extent petitioner seeks relief not requested in his original petition,
petitioner must file a separate petition for a writ of mandamus to bring the matter
----- properly
---before the court. --- ---- -

Per Curiam
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-A
 I
D~vjsio;~:'
Receipt ML.
Cxhier ID: .debB
, 45:6@2135
T pansaction Date: 07/87/2889
1
I

P s ~ e ?Hare: HAROLD V4N ALi EN

CIVIL FILING FEE
Fare YCIKO!.D CIRH CILLEN
Amount: S 3fl,Rfl
----- -.,.-------------------------
CYECK
Checl./Roney Order bh: 210
f l ~ Ten~lrred:
t 8356.00
--- -.-..-- -------------------------
Tatdl Due: $350.08
Taka1 Tendered: $358.PB
Chaye ht: Se.01

i7rtlv when the hai~k clears kbe I

check anney orner, or verifies I

c.redi{ o f fund;, i.; the fee Q P debt t
officially raid or Blscliarg~d. fl I
-
.- *fr? will be darorn for a - - -
~eturnedcheck. ,
I
\ . I
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-B
 f;sTUSbrs-ivrrm ~ o o q
u AI i-1~3'
--
' D I S ' W ~ ~ T ~ F Cc ~
-
\ t~
J €~ ~~A~~ /~ &
---.-.---
~ f i ~ , '
.
C G Q J-pw ~ kF r ~,,,fi
~ ~ - , r m ~ tc, N F
C ~ R I S T O P ~JOS
~ ; ~ ~ F ~
I
V, ~ ~ ~r ~ v07Ft..C GF
R
h D we C ~ ~ c s ~ r a
J
~ . ~ ~ ~ ~
m 7-lJ PrnpLt? I
I"" Jv3
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-C
Gotrrt Hare: District of C~lumbia
liivi.;ion: 1
Receipt Eluabf: 46i1022346
Cdshier IF: Irebb
Transaction Date: P?/X?/2%01
Payer ham?: New Case
---* .---,-- -----.- ------------------
C l V I L FIl.?NG FEE
For: He* Case
Rm~vilt: 8359.08
--.-,--.,-.-----.--------------- ---."--
CKN
flrt Tenderbd: $358. BR
---------- ---------*.--..-.- ---..*---

Total Due: $ 3 3 . Be
Total Tendered: $358.6U
Change Pet: BM.BO

Only when the bank clears the

check money a r d ~ r ,or v e r i f i e
credit -3: funds, i; the fee or debt
officially afd oa discha~ged. k
$45 fee uil! he rkrrped for a
retur~edcheck.
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-D
 A0440 ~ . D C - ~ ~ 2 0 SnmmmsmaWAction
0 3 )

I
(
RETURN OF SERVICE
Prr
Service ofthe Summons and complaint was made by mew 7-13-0 9
NAME OF
Smwk.
I Check one box helow to indjcate a~uro~riate
method ofservice

G Served personally upon the defendant Place where served: ~ f i A~v oW ~D@
f l 71
~~
c O F J GSVJ 8-e
r ~ \ q g q u , w? ~ w d \ ~ cPe~ ~L c (cry
fii k hf 0 2,~ 21d-/Te
S-!OT~@.
II G Left copies thereof at the defendant's dwelling house or usuai place of abode with a person of suitable age and
discretion then residing therein.

I
Name of person with whom the summons and complaint were left:
Fn.WARTIIA,SJ. Hff(fi)O L Ut-F
f i ~ m ~,

~
I

G Returned unexecuted:
JJ.7(/-WD S I M I ~ ,

mATEMENT OF SERVICE FEES

TRAVEL SERVIa.5

DECLARATION OF SERVER

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe United States of America that the foregoing information
contained in the Return of Service and Statement

Executed on ?-I 3-0 't

Date
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-E
 RETURN OF SERVICE
DATE
Service of the Summons and complaint was made by men) 7-13-47
NAME OF SERVER (PRINT) lTKE
e b ~ ; a @
\ . QR 5lfaUc.e
Check me bar below to indicate aunrounate method of service
fl-T/@&n(Y @. w u ,SJ. 47- 570Cf R U W A J ~
G Served personally upon the defendant. Place where sewed: /+K-,EJ- ff /Md (vlp 2 / 2 / 0 - ( 3 ? f i
/
('oSSf(r
t

G Left copies thereof at the defendant's dwelling house or usual place of abode with a person of suitable age and
discretion then residing therein.
Name of person with whom the summons and complaint were left: FF RflTIN, {'J-

G Returned unexecuted:
c 7" ~ l 0 . ~ ~ ~ 7 l G $ .

WATEMENT OF SERVlCE FEES

TRAVEL

DECLARATION OF SERVER

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States ofAmerica that the foregoing information
contained in the Return of Service and Statement of

Executed on
Date S~gnatweof Server

5 3 +a aek @, +175
0 - 1
Se#?&So~& f-L s4233- 3aa7
Addr-7 of Server

( 1) As to who may m p ea summons sec Rule 4 of the FeJaal Rules ofCwil R A .

 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-F
________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
______________________________________________________________

In re Christopher Earl Strunk,

Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus.

______________________________________________________________

AFFIDAVIT of
Edward M. : Person, Jr. © in esse

In support of Christopher-Earl: Strunk© in esse, Petitioner in the

Original Proceeding for a writ of mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 for an
Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to
Recuse the district Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-1249 09-cv-1295 and
investigation of District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C. §455 and related
law in its entirety.
______________________________________________________________

Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse

593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: cestrunck@yahoo.com
Cell- (845) 901-6767
 AFFIDAVIT of
Edward M. : Person, Jr. © in esse

In support of Christopher-Earl: Strunk© in esse, Petitioner in the Original

Proceeding for a writ of mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 for an Order of
the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to Recuse the
district Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-1249 09-cv-1295 and investigation of
District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C. §455 and related law in its entirety.

STATE of NEW YORK )

) ss.
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK )

I, Edward M. : Person, Jr. © in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say under
penalty of perjury:

1. Am a natural born citizen of the state of New York, over 18 years of

age and not a party to this instant action.

2. Affirmant place for service is at 5342 Clark Rd #175, Sarasota,

FL,34233; Email: zlox@gmx.com.

3. Affirmant makes this affidavit in support of Christopher-Earl: Strunk©

in esse (“Petitioner”), Petitioner in the Original Proceeding for a writ of

mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 for an Order of the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia to Recuse the district Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-

1249, 09-cv-1295 and investigation of District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C.

§455 and related law in its entirety.

4. That Petitioner has requested that Affirmant testify herein and or

2
related proceedings as a material witness to the events leading up to the filing,

the actual filing and subsequent events of the case Strunk v. US Department of

Commerce Bureau of the Census et al. DCD 09-cv-1295, and Strunk v. The New

York Province of the Society of Jesus et al. DCD 09-cv-1249 for whom I am the

process server in part of the Summons, Verified Complaint and Notice of

Motion for Three Judge Panel on July 13, 2009.

5. That Affirmant accompanied Petitioner on July 13, 2009 to the Clerk’s

Office at the U.S. District Court for Washington D.C.

6. That at or about 10:30 AM on July 13, 2009, Petitioner accompanied

by Affirmation who appeared before the Clerk of the District Court, with

description of a Caucasian woman approximately 55 years old , darker blondish

/graying hair worn in gathered bun fashion. The woman also wore glasses. The

woman also wore a brass like dedication brace on her left wrist. Everyone

expediting papers deferred to her and one court patron stated he interacts with

her all the time and she runs a tight ship. She appeared in charge exhibiting a

humble / tenacious demeanor and exhibiting authority. The above mentioned

Petitioner , in presence of Affirmant / Process Server, proceeded to file the

above case Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census et al.

DCD 09-cv-1295,

7. The Clerk directed Petitioner to resolve defects in the proposed filing

3
including the need to file an accompanying Notice of Motion to have a three

judge Panel simultaneous with accompanying the complaint.

8. The Petitioner left District Court approximately 11:15 AM with the

additional requirements bestowed upon him by above mentioned Clerk

9. That Petitioners time, as observed by affiant / process server, to serve

many defendants was curtailed by the task of locating paper (that the clerk

would not supply), seeking a copy station, traveling to a copying facility and

seeking coins for affiant/ process servers metered parking.

10. The Petitioners task was then to initiate hand writing numerous pages

of motion and resolving defects as underscored by Clerk

11. Coupled with writing, collating, sorting and stapling etc. Petitioners

time to serve various defendants was further truncated by approximately short of

(4) hours. Petitioner eventually returned to District Court for Washington D.C.

thus filing above mentioned case with above described Clerk at approximately

3:15 PM

12. Petitioner was unable to accomplish expediting service to the many

defendants and eventually Affirmant / Process Server was only able to serve

process upon (2) two defendants on July 13, 2009 as a result of Petitioners

unforeseen delays.

13. Petitioner and Affirmant / Process Server were forced to return to

4
Washington, D.C. on July 27, 2009 in order to complete service thus doubling

associated expense.

14. That Affirmant has read the above and I know its contents as an expert

witness; the facts stated in the Petition are true to my own personal knowledge,

except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief,

and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all

matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: 3rdparties, books

and records, and personal knowledge. except as to those stated upon information

~ d w a r dM. :Person, Jr. O irfesse

Sworn to before me
This 3 day of September, 2009

REBECCA L. FAHEY
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01FA6161659
Qualified in Suffolk County
Commission Expires Feb. 26,2011
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-G
Case 1:09-cv-01249-RJL Document 11 Filed 08/13/2009 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:09-cv-01249-RJL Document 11 Filed 08/13/2009 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:09-cv-01295-RJL Document 15 Filed 08/13/2009 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:09-cv-01295-RJL Document 15 Filed 08/13/2009 Page 2 of 2
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-H
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-I
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,

Plaintiff,

v.
Case No. 1:09cv1295-RJL
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE, BUREAU OF THE CENSUS, et
al.,

Defendants.

LOCAL CIVIL RULE 7.1 DICLOSURE CERTIFICATE

OF THE MARYLAND PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS

I, the undersigned, counsel of record for the Defendant Maryland Province of the Society

of Jesus, hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, neither the Maryland

Province of the Society of Jesus nor the civil entity through which it conducts its temporal

affairs, Corporation of the Roman Catholic Clergymen, has any parent company, subsidiary, or

affiliate that has issued any securities to the public. This representation is made in order that the

judges of this Court may determine the need for recusal.

Respectfully submitted,

MARYLAND PROVINCE OF THE

SOCIETY OF JESUS
By Counsel

____________/s/________________
John M. McNichols
D.C. Bar No. 490479
Attorney for Defendants Maryland Province
of the Society of Jesus and Fr. Timothy B.
Brown, S.J.

1
 WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
725 12th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 434-5000 (T)
(202) 434-5029 (F)
jmcnichols@wc.com

Date: August 3, 2009

2
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 3rd day of August 2009, I will electronically file the

foregoing Certificate with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a

notification of such filing (NEF) to the following:

John M. Bredehoft, Esq.

Kaufman & Canoles, P.C.
150 West Main Street
Norfolk, VA 23510
jmbredehoft@kaufcan.com

I further certify that I will send the same by U.S. Mail to the following non-filing users:

Christopher-Earl: Strunk
Christopher (aka “Chris”) Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281
Brooklyn, NY 11238

___________/s/__________________
John M. McNichols
D.C. Bar No. 490479
Attorney for Defendants Maryland Province of the
Society of Jesus and Fr. Timothy B. Brown, S.J.
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
725 12th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 434-5000 (T)
(202) 434-5029 (F)
jmcnichols@wc.com

3
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-J
 CORPORATE CHARTER APPROVAL SHEET
*.
** KEEP WITH D O C ~ ~ ~ ~**E N T
--
DOCUMENT
CODE BUSINESS CODE 7

&
# Do 00 7599 4
1000361998380715
Close Stock Nonstock

P.A. Religious

Merging (Transferor)

A=- n---a- r -LA rr-

ID # 000075994 RCK # 1000361998380715
PRGES: 0002
CORPORRTION OF THE ROMRN CRTHOLIC CLERG
Y HEN
HRIL
BOCK

Surviving (Transferee)

New Name

FEES REMITTED

Base Fee: 25 Change of Name

Org. & Cap. Fee: )rGChange of Principal Office
Expedite Fee: Change of Resident Agmt
Penalty: 7Change of Resident Agent Address
State Recordation Tax: Resignation of Resident Agent
State Transfer Tax: Designation of Resident Agent
Certified Copies and Resident Agent's Address
Copy Fee: Change of Business Cocle
Certificates
Certificate of Status Fee: Adoption of Assumed Kame
Personal Property Filings:
Mail Processing Fee: 5
Other: Other Change(s)

TOTAL FEES: $3O*0 0

Code
Credit Card Check Cash
Attention:
(-/ Documents on /d b #
J Mail: Name and Address
/WILLIRH P . RYRNS,S.J.
STE. 620
8600 LRSALLE RD
TOWSON HD 21286-2001

COM
"r" NT(S):

~ C U S TID :0002304870
WORK ORDER:0001747908
DRTE:07-15-2009 11:51 AM
RUT. PRID:$120.00
 a- '
', RESOLUTION TO CHANGE PRINCIPAL OFFICE OR RESIDENT AGENT

* h he d i r e c t o d d of
Corporation of the Roman Catholic Clergymen
(Name of Entity)

organized under the laws of Maryland , passed the following resolution:

(state)

[CHECK APPLICABLE BOX(ES)]

E
d The principal oftice is changed from: (old address)
5704 Roland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21210-1399

to: (new address)

Treasurer's Office I/
I _ 8600 LaSalle Road, Suite 620, Towson, MD 21286-2014

&
The namwmd address of the resident agent is changed from: s? 3
a
- tho
William P. Ryan, S.J. & g!!-J,
-
c
- --- -- *-
SmoT-.-,7

5704 Roland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21210-1399

z;usi'[q
to:
William P. Ryan, S.J. -
."J
P
Y
"

8600 LaSalle Road, Suite 620, Towson, MD 21286-2014

i certify under penaifie of pejury fie fo-ing is true.

L t i i $1.
u Secretary
. . .-. -- .

I hereby consent to my designation in this document as resident agent for this enhty.
--- .
.- . . - -..- .-- -... . . . - -
~ U S TID:0002384870
WORK ORDER:0001747908
DFITE:07-15-2009 11:Sl AH
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-K
 TERMINATED: 02/02/2009
PROSE-NP, TYPE-I LEAD ATTORNEY

U.S. District Court

District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:08-cv-02234-RJL
STRUNK v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Date Filed: 12/29/2008
Assigned to: Judge Richard J. Leon Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Cases: 1:09-cv-01249-RJL Nature of Suit: 895 Freedom of
1:09-cv-01295-RJL Information Act
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government
Cause: 05:552 Freedom of Information Act
Defendant
Plaintiff
CHRISTOPHER EARL represented by CHRISTOPHER EARL
STRUNK STRUNK
593 Vanderbilt Avenue
Apartment 281
Brooklyn, NY 11238
(845) 901-6767
PRO SE
V.
Defendant
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF represented by Brigham John Bowen
STATE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington , DC 20530
(202) 514-6289
Fax: (202) 616-8460
Email: brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Wynne Patrick Kelly
U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
555 Fourth Street, NW
Washington , DC 20530
(202) 305-7107
Email: wynne.kelly@usdoj.gov
Defendant
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF represented by Brigham John Bowen
HOMELAND SECURITY (See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Date Filed # Docket Text
12/29/2008 1 COMPLAINT against U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE (Filing
fee $ 0.00) filed by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK.
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered:
01/03/2009)
12/29/2008 SUMMONS Not Issued as to U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
(jf, ) (Entered: 01/03/2009)
12/29/2008 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by
CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK (jf, ) (Entered: 01/03/2009)
12/29/2008 FIAT ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma
pauperis. Signed by Judge Henry H. Kennedy on 12/23/08. "Leave
to file without prepayment of cost granted" (jf, ) (Entered:
01/03/2009)
01/02/2009 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed U.S. Attorney served on
12/31/2008, answer due 1/30/2009. (tg, ) (Entered: 01/05/2009)
01/05/2009 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Wynne Patrick Kelly on behalf of U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE (Kelly, Wynne) (Entered:
01/05/2009)
01/13/2009 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
served on 1/9/2009, answer due 2/9/2009. (jf, ) (Entered:
01/14/2009)
01/26/2009 6 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and
Complaint Executed on Attorney General. Date of Service Upon
Attorney General 1/8/09. (jf, ) (Entered: 01/26/2009)
01/27/2009 7 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or otherwise
respond to Plaintiff's complaint by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
STATE (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Kelly, Wynne)
(Entered: 01/27/2009)

01/28/2009 ORDER granting 7 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE answer due 3/31/2009. Signed by
Judge Richard J. Leon on 1/28/09. (lcrjl2) (Entered: 01/28/2009)
01/28/2009 Set/Reset Deadlines: US Department of State Answer due by
3/31/2009, (kc) (Entered: 01/28/2009)
02/02/2009 8 NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL by Brigham John
Bowen on behalf of U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Substituting
for attorney Wynne Patrick Kelly (Bowen, Brigham) (Entered:
02/02/2009)
02/10/2009 9 AMENDED COMPLAINT against U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
filed by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK. (received on 2/10/09
)(jf, ) (Entered: 02/11/2009)
02/13/2009 10 MOTION for Reconsideration re ORDER granting 7 Motion for
Extension of Time to Answer. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
answer due 3/31/2009 by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit) "Leave to file granted" by Judge
Richard J. Leon(jf, ) (Entered: 02/13/2009)
02/19/2009 11 Memorandum in opposition to re 10 MOTION for Reconsideration
re Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer filed by U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed
Order)(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered: 02/19/2009)
03/19/2009 Leave to File Denied by Judge Richard J. Leon. Plaintiff's Notice
of Motion for Recusal. (jf) (Entered: 03/19/2009)
03/19/2009 13 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and
Complaint Executed on Attorney General. Date of Service Upon
Attorney General 5/13/09. (jf, ) (Entered: 03/20/2009)
03/25/2009 14 Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or
Otherwise Respond by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Attachments: # 1
Text of Proposed Order)(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered: 03/25/2009)
04/02/2009 ORDER granting 14 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or
Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Signed by
Judge Richard J. Leon on 04/02/09. (lcrjl2) (Entered: 04/02/2009)
04/09/2009 15 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 9
Amended Complaint by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Attachments: # 1
Text of Proposed Order)(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered: 04/09/2009)
04/16/2009 MINUTE ORDER granting 15 Motion for Extension of Time to
Answer or Otherwise to Respond to Plaintiff's Amended
Complaint. Answer or Response due 4/23/2009. Signed by Judge
Richard J. Leon on 04/16/09. (lcrjl2) (Entered: 04/16/2009)
04/17/2009 Set/Reset Deadlines: Answer or response due by 4/23/2009, (kc)
(Entered: 04/17/2009)

02/22/2009 ORDER denying 10 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge
Richard J. Leon on 02/22/09. (lcrjl2) (Entered: 02/22/2009)
02/27/2009 SUMMONS (4) Issued as to U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S.
Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (jf, ) (Entered: 03/03/2009)
03/05/2009 Leave to File Denied by Richard J. Leon. Plaintiff's Surreply
Declaration in support of plaintiff's notice of motion for
reconsideration of the order granting defendant's first motion for
extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint.
(jf) (Entered: 03/06/2009)
03/12/2009 12 SUMMONS Returned Executed U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
served on 3/10/2009, answer due 4/9/2009; U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOMELAND SECURITY served on 3/10/2009, answer due
4/9/2009, RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and
Complaint Executed as to the US Attorney, served on 3/10/2009,
answer due 4/9/2009 (jf, ) (Entered: 03/12/2009)
04/23/2009 16 MOTION to Dismiss (Partial) by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (Oct. 16, 2008 FOIA Request), # 2
Exhibit B (Nov. 22, 2008 FOIA Request), # 3 Exhibit C (Dec. 25,
2008 FOIA Request), # 4 Exhibit D (1st DOS Ltr., Jan. 12, 2009),
# 5 Exhibit E (2nd DOS Ltr., Jan. 12, 2009), # 6 Exhibit F (Pl.'s
Decl., Nov. 22, 2009), # 7 Text of Proposed Order)(Bowen,
Brigham) (Entered: 04/23/2009)
04/23/2009 17 ANSWER to 9 Amended Complaint by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.
Related document: 9 Amended Complaint filed by
CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK.(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered:
04/23/2009)
04/28/2009 18 ORDERED that, on or before June 1, 2009, the plaintiff shall file
his opposition or response to the defendants' partial motion to
dismiss. If the plaintiff fails to respond timely, the Court may grant
the defendants' motion as conceded. Signed by Judge Richard J.
Leon on 4/27/09. (kc) (Entered: 04/28/2009)
06/01/2009 19 Memorandum in opposition to re 16 MOTION to Dismiss
(Partial) filed by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK.
(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(jf, ) (Entered: 06/05/2009)
06/01/2009 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK.
(See Docket Entry 19 to view document) (jf, ) (Entered:
06/05/2009)
06/08/2009 20 REPLY to opposition to motion re 16 MOTION to Dismiss
(Partial) MOTION to Dismiss (Partial) filed by U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed
Order)(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered: 06/08/2009)
06/09/2009 21 MOTION to Stay Discovery by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
(Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Bowen, Brigham)
(Entered: 06/09/2009)
06/09/2009 22 RESPONSE re Jury Demand : Opposition to Jury Demand filed by
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed
Order)(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered: 06/09/2009)
06/15/2009 23 Memorandum in opposition to re 21 MOTION to Stay Discovery
filed by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK. (jf, ) (Entered:
06/16/2009)
06/15/2009 24 REPLY to Defendants' Reponse to Plaintiff's notice of cross
motion of quo warranto demand for jury trial re Jury Demand filed
by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK. (jf, ) (Entered: 06/16/2009)
06/19/2009 25 REPLY to opposition to motion re 21 MOTION to Stay Discovery
filed by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOMELAND SECURITY. (Bowen, Brigham) (Entered:
06/19/2009)
06/19/2009 26 MINUTE ORDER granting 21 Motion to Stay Discovery. No
Discovery shall take place until further order of the Court. Signed
by Judge Richard J. Leon on 06/19/09. (lcrjl2) (Entered:
06/19/2009)
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-L
 JURY, PROSE-NP, TYPE-F PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
U.S. District Court
District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
Defendant
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:09-cv-01249-RJL
GERALD CHOJNACKI represented by John Michael Bredehoft
FR. S.J. (See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
STRUNK v. NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE Date Filed: 07/07/2009
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
SOCIETY OF JESUS et al Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Assigned to: Judge Richard J. Leon Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory
Mark E. Warmbier
Cases: 1:08-cv-01196-RMC Actions
(See above for address)
1:08-cv-02234-RJL Jurisdiction: U.S. Government
PRO HAC VICE
1:09-cv-01295-RJL Defendant
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Cause: 28:1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff Defendant
CHRISTOPHER EARL represented by CHRISTOPHER EARL UNITED STATES
STRUNK STRUNK DEPARTMENT OF STATE
593 Vanderbilt Avenue (DOS)
Apartment 281
Brooklyn, NY 11238
(845) 901-6767 Defendant
PRO SE HILLARY RODHAM
CLINTON
(Secretary of DOS)
V.
Defendant Defendant
NEW YORK PROVINCE OF represented by John Michael Bredehoft UNITED STATES
THE SOCIETY OF JESUS KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C. DEPARTMENT OF
(NYSJ) 150 West Main Street HOMELAND SECURITY
P.O. Box 3037 (DHS)
Norfolk , VA 23514
(757) 624-3225
Fax: (757) 624-3169 Defendant
Email: jmbredehoft@kaufcan.com JANET NAPOLITANO
LEAD ATTORNEY (Secretary of DHS)

Mark E. Warmbier
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C. Defendant
150 West Main Street FEDERAL BUREAU OF
Suite 2100 INVESTIGATION
Norfolk , VA 23510 (FBI)
(757) 624-3000
Fax: (757) 624-3169

Defendant Complaint Executed. NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE

ROBERT MUELLER
(FBI Director)
Date Filed # Docket Text
07/07/2009 1 COMPLAINT against NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE
SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, HILLARY RODHAM
CLINTON, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, JANET NAPOLITANO, FEDERAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, ROBERT MUELLER ( Filing
fee $ 350, receipt number 4616022135) filed by CHRISTOPHER
EARL STRUNK. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover
Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 07/08/2009)
07/07/2009 SUMMONS (10) Issued as to NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE
SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, HILLARY RODHAM
CLINTON, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, JANET NAPOLITANO, FEDERAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, ROBERT MUELLER, U.S.
Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (jf, ) (Entered: 07/08/2009)
07/07/2009 2 NOTICE OF RELATED CASE by CHRISTOPHER EARL
STRUNK. Case related to Case No. 08-1196 & 08-2234. (jf, )
(Entered: 07/08/2009)
07/27/2009 3 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and
Complaint Executed as to UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
STATE served on 7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009; HILLARY
RODHAM CLINTON served on 7/27/2009, answer due
9/25/2009; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY served on 7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009; JANET
NAPOLITANO served on 7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009;
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION served on
7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009; ROBERT MUELLER served on
7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009., RETURN OF
SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as
to the US Attorney, served on 7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009.
(jf, ) (Entered: 07/28/2009)
SOCIETY OF JESUS served on 7/17/2009, answer due 8/6/2009;
GERALD CHOJNACKI served on 7/17/2009, answer due
8/6/2009 (jf, ) (Entered: 07/28/2009)
07/28/2009 6 NOTICE of Appearance by John Michael Bredehoft on behalf of
NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS,
GERALD CHOJNACKI (Bredehoft, John) (Entered: 07/28/2009)
07/28/2009 7 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name-
Mark E. Warmbier, :Firm- Kaufman & Canoles, :Address- 150
West Main St., Suite 2100 Norfolk, VA 23510. Phone No. - (757)
624-3000. Fax No. - (757) 624-3169 by NEW YORK PROVINCE
OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI
(Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Mark E. Warmbier, # 2 Text of
Proposed Order Admitting Mark E. Warmbier Pro Hac
Vice)(Bredehoft, John) (Entered: 07/28/2009)
08/03/2009 MINUTE ORDER granting 7 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac
Vice. Signed by Judge Richard J. Leon on 08/03/09. (lcrjl2)
(Entered: 08/03/2009)
08/04/2009 8 Corporate Disclosure Statement by NEW YORK PROVINCE OF
THE SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI. (Bredehoft,
John) (Entered: 08/04/2009)
08/06/2009 9 MOTION to Dismiss The Complaint By Defendants The New York
Province of The Society of Jesus and Fr. Gerald Chojnacki, S.J. by
NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS,
GERALD CHOJNACKI (Bredehoft, John) (Entered: 08/06/2009)
08/06/2009 10 MEMORANDUM re 9 MOTION to Dismiss The Complaint By
Defendants The New York Province of The Society of Jesus and Fr.
Gerald Chojnacki, S.J. filed by GERALD CHOJNACKI, NEW
YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS by NEW
YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD
CHOJNACKI. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1A, # 2 Exhibit 1B, # 3
Exhibit 2)(Bredehoft, John) (Entered: 08/06/2009)
08/13/2009 11 ORDER that, on or before September 11, 2009, the plaintiff shall
file his opposition to the defendants' motion to dismiss. If plaintiff
fails to respond timely, the Court may grant defendants' motion as
conceded. Signed by Judge Richard J. Leon on 8/12/09. (see
order.)(kc) (Entered: 08/13/2009)

07/27/2009 4 AFFIDAVIT of Service re 1 Complaint, by CHRISTOPHER

EARL STRUNK. (jf, ) (Entered: 07/28/2009)
07/27/2009 5 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 2-M
 (NYC)
JURY, PROSE-NP, TYPE-N

U.S. District Court Defendant

District of Columbia (Washington, DC) MICHAEL BLOOMBERG
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:09-cv-01295-RJL Mayor of NYC

Defendant
STRUNK v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT Date Filed: 07/13/2009
OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS et al Jury Demand: Plaintiff NEW YORK PROVINCE OF represented by John Michael Bredehoft
Assigned to: Judge Richard J. Leon Nature of Suit: 441 Voting THE SOCIETY OF JESUS KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
Demand: $999,999,999,000 Jurisdiction: U.S. Government (NYSJ) 150 West Main Street
Defendant P.O. Box 3037
Cases: 1:04-cv-01193-RCL
Norfolk , VA 23514
1:08-cv-02234-RJL
(757) 624-3225
1:09-cv-01249-RJL Fax: (757) 624-3169
Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act Email: jmbredehoft@kaufcan.com
Plaintiff LEAD ATTORNEY
CHRISTOPHER EARL represented by CHRISTOPHER EARL Mark E. Warmbier
STRUNK STRUNK KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
also known as 593 Vanderbilt Avenue 150 West Main Street
CHRIS Apartment 281 Suite 2100
Brooklyn, NY 11238 Norfolk , VA 23510
(845) 901-6767 (757) 624-3000
PRO SE Fax: (757) 624-3169
PRO HAC VICE
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
V.
Defendant Defendant
UNITED STATES GERALD CHOJNACKI represented by John Michael Bredehoft
DEPARTMENT OF FR., S.J. (See above for address)
COMMERCE BUREAU OF LEAD ATTORNEY
THE CENSUS ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
(BOC)
Mark E. Warmbier
(See above for address)
Defendant PRO HAC VICE
CARLOS GUTIERREZ ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Secretary of Commerce
Defendant
Defendant UNITED STATES
CITY OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY

(DHS) MARYLAND PROVINCE OF represented by John Marcus McNichols

THE SOCIETY OF JESUS WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY, LLP
(MPSJ) 725 12th Street, NW
Defendant Washington , DC 20005
JANET NAPOLITANO (202) 434-5043
Secretary of DHS Email: jmcnichols@wc.com
LEAD ATTORNEY

Defendant
Defendant
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES TIMOTHY B. BROWN represented by John Marcus McNichols
(House) (MPSJ PROVINCIAL) (See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
NANCY PELOSI
Defendant
(the Speaker of the House)
BARRY SOETORO
also known as
Defendant BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
STATES OF CALIFORNIA
Defendant
Defendant JOHN DOES
STATE OF TEXAS represented by Maria J. Rivera
TEXAS OFFICE OF THE
Defendant
ATTORNEY GENERAL
P.O. Box 12548 JANE DOES
Austin , TX 78711
(512) 475-4099
Email: Defendant
maria.rivera@oag.state.tx.us XYZ ENTITIES
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed # Docket Text

Defendant
STATE OF MARYLAND 07/13/2009 1 COMPLAINT against JANET NAPOLITANO, UNITED
STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, NANCY
PELOSI, STATES OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF TEXAS,
Defendant STATE OF MARYLAND, STATE OF HAWAII,
MARYLAND PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS,
STATE OF HAWAII
TIMOTHY B. BROWN, BARRY SOETORO, JOHN DOES,
JANE DOES, XYZ ENTITIES, UNITED STATES
Defendant DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE
CENSUS, CARLOS GUTIERREZ, CITY OF NEW YORK,
 MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, NEW YORK PROVINCE OF
THE SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616022346)
filed by CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf, ) (Entered: 07/14/2009)
07/13/2009 Summons (18) Issued as to JANET NAPOLITANO, UNITED
STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, NANCY
PELOSI, STATES OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF TEXAS,
STATE OF MARYLAND, STATE OF HAWAII,
MARYLAND PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS,
TIMOTHY B. BROWN, BARRY SOETORO, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF
THE CENSUS, CARLOS GUTIERREZ, CITY OF NEW
YORK, MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, NEW YORK
PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD
CHOJNACKI, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, USA (jf, ) (Entered: 07/14/2009)
07/13/2009 2 NOTICE OF RELATED CASE by CHRISTOPHER EARL
STRUNK. Case related to Case No. 09-1249,08-2234, 09-
1249, 06-1002(NDNY), 04-1193(NDNY). (jf, ) (Entered:
07/14/2009)
07/13/2009 3 MOTION FOR 28USC2284 Three Judge Court by
CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK. (jf, ) (Entered:
07/14/2009)
07/27/2009 4 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and
Complaint Executed as to JANET NAPOLITANO served on
7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009; UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES served on 7/27/2009,
answer due 9/25/2009; NANCY PELOSI served on
7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009; BARRY SOETORO served
on 7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009; UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF THE
CENSUS served on 7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009;
CARLOS GUTIERREZ served on 7/27/2009, answer due
9/25/2009; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY served on 7/27/2009, answer due
9/25/2009., RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of
Summons and Complaint Executed as to the US Attorney,
served on 7/27/2009, answer due 9/25/2009. (jf, ) (Entered:
07/28/2009)
07/27/2009 5 AFFIDAVIT of mailing re 1 Complaint,, by JANET
NAPOLITANO, STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF HAWAII,
BARRY SOETORO, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY. (jf, ) (Entered: 07/28/2009)
07/27/2009 6 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and
Complaint Executed. STATES OF CALIFORNIA served on
7/27/2009, answer due 8/17/2009; STATE OF MARYLAND
served on 7/27/2009, answer due 8/17/2009; MARYLAND
PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS served on
7/13/2009, answer due 8/3/2009; TIMOTHY B. BROWN
served on 7/13/2009, answer due 8/3/2009; CITY OF NEW
YORK served on 7/17/2009, answer due 8/6/2009;
MICHAEL BLOOMBERG served on 7/17/2009, answer due
8/6/2009; NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF
JESUS served on 7/17/2009, answer due 8/6/2009; GERALD
CHOJNACKI served on 7/17/2009, answer due 8/6/2009 (jf, )
(Entered: 07/28/2009)
07/28/2009 7 NOTICE of Appearance by John Michael Bredehoft on behalf
of NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS,
GERALD CHOJNACKI (Bredehoft, John) (Entered:
07/28/2009)
07/28/2009 8 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name-
Mark E. Warmbier, :Firm- Kaufman & Canoles, :Address-
150 West Main St., Suite 2100, Norfolk, VA 23510. Phone
No. - (757) 624-3000. Fax No. - (747) 624-3169 by NEW
YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS,
GERALD CHOJNACKI (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of
Mark E. Warmbier, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Admitting
Mark E. Warmbier Pro Hac Vice)(Bredehoft, John) (Entered:
07/28/2009)
08/03/2009 MINUTE ORDER granting 8 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro
Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Richard J. Leon on 08/03/09.
(lcrjl2) (Entered: 08/03/2009)
08/03/2009 9 NOTICE of Appearance by John Marcus McNichols on
behalf of MARYLAND PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF
JESUS, TIMOTHY B. BROWN (McNichols, John) (Entered:
08/03/2009)
08/03/2009 10 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint by MARYLAND
PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS, TIMOTHY B.
BROWN (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed
Order, # 2 Memorandum in Support
Memorandum)(McNichols, John) (Entered: 08/03/2009)

08/03/2009 11 LCvR 7.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate

Affiliations and Financial Interests by MARYLAND
PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (McNichols,
John) (Entered: 08/03/2009)
08/04/2009 12 Corporate Disclosure Statement by NEW YORK PROVINCE
OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI.
(Bredehoft, John) (Entered: 08/04/2009)
08/06/2009 13 MOTION to Dismiss The Complaint By Defendants The New
York Province of The Society of Jesus and Fr. Gerald
Chojnacki, S.J. by NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE
SOCIETY OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI (Bredehoft,
John) (Entered: 08/06/2009)
08/06/2009 14 MEMORANDUM re 13 MOTION to Dismiss The Complaint
By Defendants The New York Province of The Society of Jesus
and Fr. Gerald Chojnacki, S.J. filed by GERALD
CHOJNACKI, NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY
OF JESUS by NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY
OF JESUS, GERALD CHOJNACKI. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit 1A, # 2 Exhibit 1B, # 3 Exhibit 2)(Bredehoft, John)
(Entered: 08/06/2009)
08/13/2009 15 ORDER that, on or before September 11, 2009, the plaintiff
shall file his opposition or response to the defendants' motion
to dismiss. If the plaintiff fails to respond timely, the Court
may grant defendants' motion as conceded. SO ORDERED.
Signed by Judge Richard J. Leon on 8/12/09. (see order.)(kc)
(Entered: 08/13/2009)
08/20/2009 16 MOTION to Dismiss by STATE OF TEXAS (Attachments: #
1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Memorandum in
Support)(Rivera, Maria) (Entered: 08/20/2009)

09/02/2009 17 ORDER that, on or before September 18, 2009, the plaintiff

shall file his opposition or response to the defendants' motion
to dismiss. If the plaintiff fails to respond timely, the Court
may grant the defendants' motions as conceded. SO
ORDERED. Signed by Judge Richard J. Leon on 9/2/09. (see
order.)(kc) (Entered: 09/02/2009)
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 3

Photo: Beverly Reznedr
Chambers: (202) 354-3580
Courtroom Deputy:
Kenneth Cockrell (202) 354-3177
Court Reporter:
Patty A. Gels (202) 962-0200
Judge Richard J. Leon
Judge Leon was appointed to the United States District Court in February 2002. He
received his k B . from Holy Cross College in 1971, his J.D. cum Laude from Suffolk
Law School in 1974, and his U.M. from Haward Law School in 1981. Immediately
prior to his appointment to the bench, Judge Leon was engaged in private practice
in Washington, D.C., as a partner in the Washington office of Baker I5 Hostetler
(1989-1999), and Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease (1999-2002). Prior to and while
i n private practice, Judge Leon served as counsel to Congress in the investigations
of three sitting Presidents. In 1987, he was the Deputy Chief Minority Counsel for
the U.S. House Select "Iran-Contra" Committee. From 1992-1993, he was the Chief
Minority Counsel to the US. House Foreign Affairs Committee's "October Surprise"
Task Force. In 1994, Judge Leon was Special Counsel to the U.S. House Banking
Committee for its "Whitewater" investigation. He also served in 1997 as Special
Counsel to the bipartisan U.S. House Ethics Reform Task Force. Eartier in his
career, Judge Leon served at the U.S. Department of Justice in a number of
positions including Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Environment Division,
Senior Trial Attorney in the Criminal Section of the Tax Division, and as a Special
Assistant United States Attorney in the Southem District of New York. He also
sewed as a Commissioner on the White House Fellows Commission and the Judicial
Review Commission on Foreign Asset Control. A former full-time law professor at
St. John's Law School (1979-1983), Judge Leon is currently an adjunct law
professor at the Georgetown University Law Center and the Geoqe Washington
University Law School.
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 4
 Non-Domestic
In Care of:
593 Vanderbilt Avenue – 281
Brooklyn, New York
Zip Code exempt DMM 122-32
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Not a corporation
Living-Soul
Affiant
No Third Parties
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Z
      
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.: 08-2234 (RJL)
)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, and )
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND )
SECURITY, )
Defendant. )
)
Z

NOTICE OF MOTION FOR RECUSAL 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed affidavit of Christopher-Earl : Strunk, by

Special-Appearance, affirmed March 2, 2009 will move this Court, for the recusal of the

Honorable Richard J. Leon, U.S.D.J, at a time afforded by the Court if necessary at the United

States Courthouse, at 333 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20001, on the day and

month in 2009 , at a time and courtroom designated by the court, or as soon thereafter as counsel

can be heard, for recusal in accordance with 28 USC §455.

Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT motion to reconsider, also entered Sunday into the ECF Electronic Court Filing system (ECF),
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 that Your Honor had not even acknowledged my reply mailed with the USPS; and
Z
       3. As such, Affiant objects to a denial of due process, that should have been a ministerial
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, )
) task under FOIA, even if it were to merely clear a crowded calendar, necessitates Affiant to
Plaintiff, )
) question Your Honor’s impartiality that appears as impropriety as part of a pattern to date that
v. ) Civil Action No.: 08-2234 (RJL)
) includes: failure to enter the Supplement to the Complaint in a timely manner.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, and )
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND ) 4. That for the record and with no dishonor intended and if for no other reason other than as
SECURITY, )
Defendant. ) a matter of 28 USC §455 recusal clarification, Affiant asks whether or not the Court is able to
)
make a judgment free and clear of other commitments, and must answer the following questions:
Z
a) Are you a member of any fraternal organization, such as the Kiwanis, The ELKS, the
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION FOR RECUSAL 
Society of Jesus, Opus Dei, the Knights of Columbus, Knights of the Eucharist, the Free
STATE OF NEW YORK )
and Accepted Scottish Right Freemasons, the Grand Orient Lodge, The Shriners, and or
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )
have dual citizenship as a member of the Order of St John Sovereign Military Order of
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say under
the Knights of Malta, Rhodes and Jerusalem (SMOM) (2)?
penalty of perjury:
(1)
 That Affiant makes this Special-Appearance in support of the motion for recusal of

Judge Richard J. Leon in matters before the Court in accordance with 28 USC §455.
2. That Affiant was notified that as a result of the Sunday February 22, 2009 denial of my
1
28 USC §455. Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge: (a) any justice, judge, or
magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his
impartiality might reasonably be questioned. (b) He shall also disqualify himself in the
following circumstances: (1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or
personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding; (5) He …: (ii) Is
acting as a lawyer in the proceeding; (iv) Is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material
witness in the proceeding.
2
SMOM - According to the Constitutional Charter, members of the Order are divided into
three Classes. The members are to conduct their lives in an exemplary manner in conformity
with the teachings and precepts of the Church and to devote themselves to the humanitarian
assistance activities of the Order.
Members of the First Class are Knights of Justice, or Professed Knights, and the Professed
Conventual Chaplains, who have made vows of "poverty, chastity and obedience aspiring to
perfection according to the Gospel". They are religious for all purposes of Canon Law but are
not obliged to live in community.
The members of the Second Class, by virtue of the Promise of Obedience, are committed to
living according to Christian principles and the inspiring principles of the Order. They are
subdivided into three categories:
- Knights and Dames of Honour and Devotion in Obedience
- Knights and Dames of Grace and Devotion in Obedience
- Knights and Dames of Magistral Grace in Obedience

Strunk Affidavit Page 1 of 5 Strunk Affidavit Page 2 of 5

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

b) Have you received the Thomas More award during the annual Red Mass? and whose lodge is associated with the Free and Accepted Scottish Right Freemasons with

c) Have you taken any oath other than that of your oath of office? members Colin Powell, Jessie Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and many notables.

d) Have you taken a Knights of Columbus oath (See Exhibit 1) which is related to the Jesuit 7. That based upon information and belief, Barry Soetoro while a student at Columbia

4th level oath (see Exhibit 2)? University employed as an agent of the then Carter Administration National Security Advisor

e) Have you taken a Masonic oath (see Exhibit 3)? Zibignew Brezinski, (member of the SMOM) made trips to Pakistan as an Indonesian Citizen.

f) Have you taken a Kolnidre oath in which you must forgive all in your private capacity? 8. That based upon information and belief, Barry Soetoro obtained his first and only

g) Has Your Honor reported on the record any organizational membership, dual citizenship legitimate social security number while employed in college.

and or other oaths as may be construed to conflict with Your oath of office according to 9. That based upon information and believes that Barry Soetoro obtained his first and only

the Logan Act (18 USC §953)? USA Passport as a US Senator for “Official Use Only”.

5. That based upon information and belief the party-in-interest (in re 18 USC Section 371 - 10. That as a matter of concern herein, due to the nature of this instant action, Affiant quotes

Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States) John O. Brennan educated by the President John F. Kennedy’s secret society speech on April 27, 1961, then a Knight of

Jesuits at Fordham University was the Deputy to George Tenant, then Director of Central Columbus, expressed his wish to expose Jesuit and Vatican control, after being elected sided

Intelligence and member of the SMOM, conspired with Barry Soetoro as a spoliator. with the people rather than his Vatican controllers. Here are the words that led directly to his

6. That party-in-interest (in re 18 USC Section 1001 - Statements or entries generally) Barry death, in part stated:

Soetoro is a 32 level member of the Prince Hall Masons Lodge 459 (see Exhibit 4), whose “The very word secrecy is repugnant, in a free and open society. For we are, as a people,
inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret proceedings and to
Grand Master Honorable Leslie A. Lewis of Massachusetts, became a member while at Harvard; secret oaths.” … “For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless
conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on
infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead
of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system, which has
conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly
The Third Class consists of lay members who do not profess religious vows or the Promise, efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific
but who live according to the principles of the Church and the Order. They are divided into six and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are
categories: buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is
questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.” - John F. Kennedy’s secret
- Knights and Dames of Honour and Devotion
society speech on April 27, 1961 (murdered on November 22, 1963).
- Conventual Chaplains and honorem
- Knights and Dames of Grace and Devotion
a) That based upon the foregoing Affiant prays of the Court answer the above questions and
- Magistral Chaplains
- Knights and Dames of Magistral Grace
or grant an Order to recuse His Honor according to 28 USC §455(a) (b), and grant further
- Donats (male and female) of Devotion
The requisites for admission to the various classes and categories are determined by the Code. and additional relief deemed necessary for justice herein.

Strunk Affidavit Page 3 of 5 Strunk Affidavit Page 4 of 5

The Oath of the Knights of Columbus,

Knights of Malta and Rhodes Scholars is
based upon the Oath of the Jesuits
(This is an extract of the Congressional Record of the House of Representatives dated February
15, 1913, where the oath is entered as purported to be of the Knights of Columbus).

"I, ............, now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed St.
John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, and all the saints, sacred host
of heaven, and to you, my Ghostly Father, the superior general of the Society of Jesus
rounded by St. Ignatius Loyola, in the pontification of Paul the III and continued to the
present, do by the womb at the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ,
declare and swear that His Holiness the Pope, is Christ's vice regent and is the true and
only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by virtue of
the keys of binding and loosing given His Holiness by my Savior, Jesus Christ, he hath
power to depose heretical kings, princes, States, Commonwealths, and Governments
and they may be safely destroyed. Therefore to the utmost of ray power I will defend this
doctrine and His Holiness's right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or
Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland,
Denmark, Sweden, and Norway and the now pretended authority and Churches of
England and Scotland, and the branches of same now established in Ireland and on the
Continent of America and elsewhere, and all adherents in regard that they may be
usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome."

"I do now denounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince, or
State, named Protestant or Liberals, or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates, or
officers."

"I do further declare that the doctrine of the Churches of England and Scotland, of the
Calvinists, Huguenots, and others of the name of Protestants or Masons to be damnable,
and they themselves to be damned who will not forsake the same."

"I do further declare that I will help assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness's agents,
in any place where I should be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Ireland, or America, or
in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to and do my utmost to extirpate the
heretical Protestant or Masonic doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal
or otherwise."

"I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding I am dispensed with to assume
any religion heretical for the propagation of the Mother Church's interest to keep secret
and private all her agents' counsels from time to time, as they intrust me and not divulge,
directly or indirectly, by word, writing, or circumstances whatever but to execute all that
should be proposed, given in charge or discovered unto me by you my Ghostly Father,
or any of this sacred order."

EXHIBIT 1 – Page 1 of 2
"I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own or any
mental reservation whatsoever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but
will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors
in the militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ."
"That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions
north, jungles of India, to the centers of civilization of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the
barbarous savages of America without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in
all things whatsoever is communicated to me."
"I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage
relentless war, secretly and openly against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am
directed to do to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare
neither age, sex, or condition, and that will hang, bum, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and
bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and
crush their infants' heads against the wails in order to annihilate their execrable race.
That when the same can not be done openly, I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the
strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor,
rank, dignity, or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either
public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or
superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus."
"In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and
with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in
testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination, may my
brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my
throat from ear to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein with all the
punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth and my soul shall be tortured by
demons in eternal hell forever."
"That I will in voting always vote for K. of C, in preference to a Protestant, especially a
Mason, and that I will leave my party so to do; that if two Catholics are on the ticket I will
satisfy myself which is the better supporter of Mother Church and vote accordingly."
"That I will not deal with or employ a Protestant if in my power to deal with or employ a
Catholic. That I will place Catholic girls in Protestant families that a weekly report may be
made of the inner movements of the heretics."
"That I will provide myself with arms and ammunition that I may be in readiness when the
word is passed, or I am commanded to defend the church either as an individual or with
the militia of the Pope."
"All of which I, ............, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed sacrament which I
am now to receive to perform and on part to keep this, my oath."
"In testimony hereof, I take this most holy and blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist and
witness the same further with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my
own blood and seal in the face of this holy sacrament."
EXHIBIT 1 – Page 2 of 2
regions of the North, the burning sands of the desert of Africa, or the jungles of
India, to the centers of civilization of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the
barbarous savages of America, without murmuring or repining, and will be
submissive in all things whatsoever communicated to me."
"I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity present, make
and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and
Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face
of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I
will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up
the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against
the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same
cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating
cord, the steel of the poniard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank,
dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in
life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent
of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of
Jesus."
"In confirmation of which, I hereby dedicate my life, my soul and all my corporal
powers, and with this dagger which I now receive, I will subscribe my name
written in my own blood, in testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken
in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the Militia of the
Pope cut off my hands and my feet, and my throat from ear to ear, my belly
opened and sulphur burned therein, with all the punishment that can be inflicted
upon me on earth and my soul be tortured by demons in an eternal hell forever!"
"All of which, I, .........., do swear by the Blessed Trinity and blessed Sacraments,
which I am now to receive, to perform and on my part to keep inviolable; and do
call all the heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness the blessed
Sacrament of the Eucharist, and witness the same further with my name written
and with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and sealed in the face
of this holy covenant."
(He receives the wafer from the Superior and writes his name with the point of his
dagger dipped in his own blood taken from over his heart.)
Superior:
"You will now rise to your feet and I will instruct you in the Catechism necessary
to make yourself known to any member of the Society of Jesus belonging to this
rank."
"In the first place, you, as a Brother Jesuit, will with another mutually make the
ordinary sign of the cross as any ordinary Roman Catholic would; then one cross
his wrists, the palms of his hands open, and the other in answer crosses his feet,
one above the other; the first points with forefinger of the right hand to the center
of the palm of the left, the other with the forefinger of the left hand points to the
center of the palm of the right; the first then with his right hand makes a circle
around his head, touching it; the other then with the forefinger of his left hand
touches the left side of his body just below his heart; the first then with his right
hand draws it across the throat of the other, and the latter then with a dagger
down the stomach and abdomen of the first. The first then says Iustum; and the
other answers Necar; the first Reges. The other answers Impious." (The meaning
of which has already been explained.) "The first will then present a small piece of
paper folded in a peculiar manner, four times, which the other will cut
longitudinally and on opening the name Jesu will be found written upon the head
and arms of a cross three times. You will then give and receive with him the
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 2 of 3
(The following material contained in Congressional Record, House Bill 1523, Contested election
case of Eugene C. Bonniwell, against Thos. S. Butler, February 15, 1913, pages 3215-6. The oath
appears in its entirety, in the book, THE SUPPRESSED TRUTH ABOUT THE ASSASSINATION OF
ABRAHAM LINCOLN, by Burke McCarty, pages 14-16).
The Extreme Oath of the Jesuits
"I, ..........., now, in the presence of Almighty God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the
blessed Michael the Archangel, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the holy
Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul and all the saints and sacred hosts of heaven, and
to you, my ghostly father, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, founded
by St. Ignatius Loyola in the Pontificate of Paul the Third, and continued to the
present, do by the womb of the virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus
Christ, declare and swear, that his holiness the Pope is Christ's Vice-regent and
is the true and only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the
earth; and that by virtue of the keys of binding and loosing, given to his Holiness
by my Savior, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes,
states, commonwealths and governments, all being illegal without his sacred
confirmation and that they may safely be destroyed."
"Therefore, to the utmost of my power I shall and will defend this doctrine of his
Holiness' right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant
authority whatever, especially the Lutheran of Germany, Holland, Denmark,
Sweden, Norway, and the now pretended authority and churches of England and
Scotland, and branches of the same now established in Ireland and on the
Continent of America and elsewhere; and all adherents in regard that they be
usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome. I do now
renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or state
named Protestants or Liberals, or obedience to any of the laws, magistrates or
officers."
"I do further declare that the doctrine of the churches of England and Scotland, of
the Calvinists, Huguenots and others of the name Protestants or Liberals to be
damnable and they themselves damned who will not forsake the same."
"I do further declare, that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of his Holiness'
agents in any place wherever I shall be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland,
Denmark, Sweden, Norway, England, Ireland or America, or in any other Kingdom
or territory I shall come to, and do my uttermost to extirpate the heretical
Protestants or Liberals' doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal
or otherwise."
"I do further promise and declare, that notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to
assume my religion heretical, for the propaganda of the Mother Church's interest,
to keep secret and private all her agents' counsels from time to time, as they may
entrust me and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or
circumstance whatever; but to execute all that shall be proposed, given in charge
or discovered unto me, by you, my ghostly father, or any of this sacred
covenant."
"I do further promise and declare, that I will have no opinion or will of my own, or
any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac
cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive
from my superiors in the Militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ."
"That I may go to any part of the world withersoever I may be sent, to the frozen
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 1 of 3
following questions and answers:-"
Question:- From whither do you come?
Answer:- The Holy faith.
Q.:- Whom do you serve?
A.:- The Holy Father at Rome, the Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church
Universal throughout the world.
Q.:- Who commands you?
A.:- The Successor of St. Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus or
the Soldiers of Jesus Christ.
Q.:- Who received you?
A.:- A venerable man in white hair.
Q.:- How?
A.:- With a naked dagger, I kneeling upon the cross beneath the banners of the
Pope and of our sacred order.
Q.:- Did you take an oath?
A.:- I did, to destroy heretics and their governments and rulers, and to spare
neither age, sex nor condition. To be as a corpse without any opinion or will of
my own, but to implicitly obey my Superiors in all things without hesitation of
murmuring.
Q.:- Will you do that?
A.:- I will.
Q.:- How do you travel?
A.:- In the bark of Peter the fisherman.
Q.:- Whither do you travel?
A.:- To the four quarters of the globe.
Q.:- For what purpose?
A.:- To obey the orders of my general and Superiors and execute the will of the
Pope and faithfully fulfill the conditions of my oaths.
Q.:- Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of
the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Vice-regent on
earth, let him be accursed and exterminated."
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 3 of 3

The Oath administered to the Illuminati is
based upon the Oath of the Jesuits
Before the Oath is administered it is said -- a sword is pointed at the breast:
"Shouldst thou become a traitor or perjurer, let this sword remind thee of each
and all the members in arms against thee. Do not hope to find safety;
whithersoever thou mayest fly, shame and remorse as well as the vengeance of
thine unknown brothers will torture and pursue thee."
Then in the Oath which follows he swears:
". . . Eternal silence, and faithfulness and everlasting obedience to all superiors
and regulations of the Order. I also renounce my own personal views and
opinions as well as all control of my powers and capacities. I promise also to
consider the well-being of the Order as my own, and I am ready, as long as I am a
member, to serve it with my goods, my honour, and my life . . . If I act against the
rules and well-being of the Society, I will submit myself to the penalties to which
my superiors may condemn me . . ."
"In the name of the son crucified (i.e. the Pentagram, the illuminised man), swear
to break the bonds which still bind you to your father, mother, brothers, sisters,
wife, relatives, friends, mistresses, kings, chiefs, benefactors, and all persons to
whomsoever you may have promised faith, obedience, and service. Name and
curse the place where you were born, so that you may dwell in another sphere, to
which you will attain only after having renounced this pestilential globe, vile
refuse of the heavens! From this moment you are free from the so-called oath to
country and laws: swear to reveal to the new chief, recognised by you, what you
may have seen or done, intercepted, read or heard, learned or surmised, and also
seek for and spy out what your eyes cannot discern. Honour and respect the
Aqua Tofana (i.e. an imperceptably slow poison) as a sure, prompt, and
necessary means of purging the globe by death of those who seek to vilify the
truth and sieze it from our hands. Fly from Spain, Naples, and all accursed land;
finally fly from the temptation to reveal what you may hear, for the thunder is no
prompter that the knife, which awaits you in whatsoever place you may be. Live in
the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (The Trinity of Illuminism --
Cabalistic and Gnostic. The Father -- the generating fire; the Holy Spirit -- the
Great Mother Nature, reproducing all things; the Son -- the manifestation, the vital
fluid, the astral light of Illuminism)."
Go to Superiors General of the Society of Jesus
Go to History of the Jesuits
Go to Initial Membership List of the Knights of Malta
"The three forms of initiation -- individual, group, or universal -- all lead to conscious or
unconscious control by a central power, who in some mysterious way makes its
influence felt; often clairvoyantly and clairaudiently seen and heard, but never physically
present or visible. the system in all three is the same -- cabalistic. Secretly here and there
individuals are prepared; these again form groups or centres from which influences
spread until they form a network covering the entire world. Like rays from a hidden sun
these groups are apparently divergent and detatched, but in reality all issue from the
same central body. The system is seen to be an insidious and secret dissemination of
ideas, orienting and breaking down all barriers of family, religion, morality, nationality,
and all self-initiative thought, always under the cloak of a new and more modern religion,
new thought, new morality, a new heaven and a new earth; until it evolves a gigantic
robot merely answering to the will and commands of a secret Master Mind. They dream
they are free, original, self-determining individuals; they are but the negative moon
reflecting and reproducing the light from the same hidden and cabalistic Sun. It is called
regeneration by the Illuminati; it is in truth individual death and disintegration, followed
by a resurrection as negative "light-bearers" of this cabalistic dark Sun whose Luciferian
"Grand Plan" is world domination." (Anonymous, Light-bearers of Darkness, The
Christian Book Club of America, p105).
The Jewish Encyclopaedia points out that Gnosticism "was Jewish in character long
before it became Christian," and quotes the opinion, "a movement closely connected
with Jewish mysticism." The Freemason Ragon says: "The Cabala is the key of the
occult sciences. The Gnostics were born of the Cabalists."
Rabbi Benamozegh says, "Those who will take the trouble to examine with care the
connection between Judaism and philosophic Freemasonry, theosophy, and the
mysteries in general . . . will cease to smile in pity at the suggestion that Cabalistic
theology may have a role to play in the religious transformations of the future. . . . It
contains the key to the modern religious problem" (Anonymous, Light- bearers of
Darkness, The Christian Book Club of America, p11).
"Chaldean thought acted powerfully upon orthodox Judaism and determined the growth
of a sect in its midst which was to transform Israel. . . . This sect was that of the
Pharisees. . . . What they borrowed (from the Chaldeans) in fact . . . was the essence of
the Pantheistic doctrine . . . It was then that was formed from these borrowings that
Kabalah of the Pharisees which was for long transmitted orally from Master to disciple,
and was, 800 years later, to inspire the compilation of the Talmud, and found its
completest expression in the Sepher ha Zohar. . . . This religion of the 'Deified Man,' with
which they were impregnated in Babylon, was only conceived as benefiting the Jew,
superior and predestinated being. . . ." (M. Flavien Bernier, Les Juifs et le Talmud, 1913).

Unknown to the members of these various secret societies seeking "Illumination"
and "deification," their masters are the Cabalistic Jew, the originator of Gnostic
mysticism. (Please see the text that follows).
The Jewish writer Bernard Lazare said, "It is certain that there were Jews even at the
cradle of Freemasonry -- Cabalistic Jews, as it is proved by certain existing rites . . . The
Jew is also a builder: proud, ambitious, domineering, he tries to draw everything to
himself. He is not satisfied with de-Christianising, he Judaises; he destroys the Catholic
or Protestant faith, he provokes indifference, but he imposes his idea of the world, of

EXHIBIT 3 – Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT 3 – Page 2 of 3

morals, and of life upon whose faith he ruins; he works at his age-old task -- the
annihilation of the religion of Christ!"

Mrs. Nesta Webster in Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, writes:

"The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion have been marvellously correct as
prophecy, foreshadowing all of this in a remarkable way, whatever their first origin,
before Maurice Joly used part of them in 1864."

"Dr. Ranking, who has devoted many years of study to the question . . . in a very
interesting paper published in the masonic journal, Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, observes:
'That from the very commencement of Christianity there has been transmitted through
the centuries a body of doctrine incompatible with Christianity in the various official
Churches. That the bodies teaching these doctrines profess to do so on the authority of
St. John, to whom, as they claimed, the true secrets had been committed by the Founder
of Christianity, that during the Middle Ages, the main support of the Gnostic bodies and
the main repository of this knowledge (Johannism) was the Society of the Templars.' And
he further said, 'The record of the Templars in Palestine is one long tale of intrigue and
treachery on the part of the Order'."

In his History of Magic, Eliphas Levi informs us:

"The Templars had two doctrines: one was concealed and reserved to the leaders, being
that of Johannism; the other was public, being Roman Catholic doctrine. . . The
Johannism of the adepts was the Kabalah of the Gnostics, but it degenerated speedily
into a mystic pantheism carried even to idolatry of Nature and hatred of all revealed
dogma. . . They fostered the regrets of every fallen worship and the hopes of every new
cultus, promising to all liberty of conscience and a new orthodoxy which should be the
synthesis of all persecuted beliefs. They went even so far as to recognise the pantheistic
symbolism of the grand masters of Black Magic . . . they rendered divine honours to the
monstrous idol Baphomet."

The mystic affiliations under the Pyramids of Egypt, the esoteric sect of Pythagoras, the
astrologers or mathematicians of Rome in the time of Domitian, the House of Wisdom in
Cairo, the Ismailis or Assassins, Companions of the Old Man of the Mountain, the
Templars, the Rose-Croix (Rosicrucians), the Carbonari, the Jesuits, Freemasons, B'nai
B'rith, Knights of Columbus, the Souffrants, the Chercheurs, Lodges of St. John, of
Melchisedek, Royal Priests, Masters of the Wise, the Asiatic Brethren . . . all appear to
form an uninterrupted chain of these superior affiliations . . . under the name of the
Illuminati, under the Directing Power of the Invisibles -- Earthly beings -- Masters working
on the Astral, whose self-appointed role was to be the arbiters and Masters of the World.
jesuits.htm

CHARTER OF THE PRINCE HALL MASONS –

LODGE 459

EXHIBIT 3 – Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT 4

 T he Prince Hall Wall
Wall
of Honor T he
You are invited to view the Prince Hall Wall Most Worshipful
Worshipful Prince Hall
of Honor. It is located on the second floor of Grand Lodge
our Grand Lodge building. This is where the Jurisdict ion of Mass achuset t s
portraits of all the distinguished gentlemen who
have served as Grand Master of this organization
may be seen. You will recognize many of the 24 Washington Street
names such as George Middleton, Lewis Hayden Dorchester, MA 02121
and John J. Smith. They are the same names
that are found on the black history trail in down
town Boston. They were the leaders in the
community. Many were legislators, professionals,
and businessmen.
You will enter a hallway. The first view to
attract your notice is a replica of the lodge The Five Facets of Freemasonry
room where Prince Hall and our ancient brethren
held their meetings. It was the back room of his
business, at the Sign of the Golden Fleece, in Fra
tern
down town Boston. This is where Prince Hall ity
conducted his business as a leather dresser and Fun
as a caterer.
In the room is a painting of Prince Hall. It is

Ph
ila
our conception of him as there are no existing

nt
paintings or drawings of what he looked like. The

hr
op
one description of him is that he was “a tall, lean

y
Negro of great dignity… he was thought by some ily
The Prince Hall Masonic Fam
to be of royal African blood.” Ph
library is located on the same ilo
Some of our more recent Grand Masters so
level. It contains rare reference ph
were Dr. William D. Washington, Dr. James R. y
books on religion and social issues. You
Lesueur and Attorney John Garvey Bynoe. will find a wealth of Black history, especially of
Our present Grand Master is the Honorable the Boston Black community. The library is That the
Leslie A. Lewis. available for research by contacting the Grand Legacy of Prince Hall Continues
Historian, Bro. Raymond T. Coleman.

T H E F I V E FAC
FAC E T S O F F R E E MA S O N RY
M O D E R N F R E E MA S O N RY Fraternity
Philanthropy
A N D T H E F I V E FAC
FAC ET S Philosophy
Family
Fun
There are many myths and misconceptions about Freemasonry. It is thought to be a Frat ernit y:
secret society whose members practice strange rites. Many link its beginnings to the Freemasonry is believed to be the oldest and largest
fraternity in the World. The Prince Hall Grand Lodge
building of the pyramids of Egypt or the craft guilds of the cathedral builders of Europe.
of Free and Accepted Masons, the successor to
African Lodge, is the oldest fraternal organization
Actually, the Freemasonry that is practiced today started as a fraternity, or started by Blacks in America. A bonding among men
social club for men. A minister, who taught philosophy, and other prominent and of good will and like interests.
well-educated men, formed an organization known as the Premier Grand Lodge of
England. It began in 1717. Philant hropy:
Support Charities, Scholarships, Volunteering and
Mentor projects.
Prince Hall and other men of color, who were made Masons in an Irish Military Meals for Seniors Holliday parties and gifts for Children
lodge, requested a charter from the Premier Grand Lodge of England to start a lodge in
America. A lodge charter was issued to them September 29th, 1784. That lodge was Philosophy:
The philosophy of our order is a system of moral and
designated African Lodge #459. social virtues based on fundamental truths. It is
taught by symbols, allegories, and lectures.
The greatest and best of men have always been associated with this fraternity. For Some of the Principals are:
this and other reasons, many are attracted to it. Fatherhood of God, Brotherhood of Man.
The Golden Rule. All men are equal.
Observing these principals tend to promote stability
To better understand the nature of our organization a chart has been prepared called
of character, morality and good citizenship
The Five Facets of Freemasonry. It uses five words, all beginning with an “F” sound, to Its Beliefs: Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth
explain what it is about. Its Basic Virtues: Temperance, Fortitude, Prudence and Justice

After reviewing this chart, if you have any interest in knowing more about our Family:
The Order of Eastern Star
organization or becoming a part of it, call the number below or visit our web site. An organization for our Wives, Widows,
Mothers, Sisters, and Daughters
A slogan we use is, “To become a Mason, Ask a Mason.” The Pythagorans
Male Youth Organization
If you, or a member of your family have any interest or questions on how to become The Youth Circle
a Mason, visit our web site at www.princehall.org or call 1-617-445-1145. Female Youth Organization

Fun:
Outings Conventions Trips Parties Banquets Social Events
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 5
District of Columbia live database Page 1 of 1

Utility Events
1:08-~~~02234-RJL.
STRUNK V. U J . DEPARTMENT OF STATE
PROSE-NP, TYPE-I

U.S. District Court

District of Colltmbia

Notice of Electronic Filing

l'he following transaction was entered on 3/19/2009 at 3.58 PM and filed on 3/19/2009
Case Name: STRUNK v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Case Number: 1 :08-cv-2234
Filer:
1)ocument Number: No document attached

1)ocket Test:
Leave to File Denied by Judge Richard J. Leon. Plaintiffs Notice of Motion for Recusal. (jf)

I:08-or-2234 Notice has been electronically mailed to:

Brigham John Bowen brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov, elizabeth.shapiro@usdoj.gov

1:08-cv-2234 Notice will be delivered by other means to::

CHRISTOPI-IER EARL STRUNK

593 Vanderbilt Avenue
Apartment 28 1
Brooklyn, NY 1 1238
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 6
7- Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

.................................... X
1
Christopher-Earl: Strunk O in esse,
1 .
Plaintiff, )

v. Civil Action No.: 08-2234 (RJL)

1
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, and )
U. S. DEPAR'IBENT OF HOMELAND )
SECURITY, )
Def-1
................................ X

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION FOR THE

FAILURE OF THE RETURN OF TFIE DOCUMENT NOTICE OF MOTION TO
RECUSE IN ITS ENTIRETY

STATE OF NEW YORK )

) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )

Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk O in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say under

penalty of perjury:

1. That M a n t makes this Special-Appearance of plaintiffs notice of cross motion for the

failure of the return of the document notice of motion to recuse in its entirety.

2. That this affidavit is in response to Defendant's Notice of Motion for a Second MOTION

for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond by U. S. DEPARTMENT OF

STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Attachments: # (1) Text of

Proposed Order)(Bowen, Brigham), emailed to affiant on March 25,2009 (see Exhibit A).

3. That M a n t filed a notice of motion to recuse received by the Clerk of the Court March

10, 2009. Under reserve with the copy-claim

. .
Strunk Aflidavit Page 1 of 2
Bv: O in essR
WClT A Gqd/~etnp
CI\ Gvr,SmL
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 7
 Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Civil Action No.: 09-cv-1249 (RJL)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
In the matter of the enforcement of the Logan Act in lieu of : Filed: July 7, 2009
the secession of the People of the state of New York from : jurisdiction over in 28 U.S.C. Sections 1331, 1332(a), 1343(a), 1344, 1357, 1361, "Venue" Section
the Union with the united States of America as of right by :
:
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse and the CHRISTOPHER :
(aka “CHRIS”) STRUNK jus tertii People, :
593 Vanderbilt Avenue – 281 Brooklyn New York 11238 : 2.
845-901-6767 Plaintiffs : VERIFIED
v. : COMPLAINT
: with
The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS : PETITION
(NYSJ); FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ, : 1983; as well as in the due process rights of the 5th , and protection against fiduciary breech of duty
John and Jane Does who are members of NYSJ and NYSJ XYZ : for a 28 USC §2284
entities; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE (DOS), : EXTRAORDINARY
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (Secretary of DOS), DOS agents : WRIT OF MANDAMUS
John and Jane Does who are members of SMOM, Opus Dei and or ; TO ENFORCE THE
Society of Jesus (S.J.), UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF : LOGAN ACT
HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS), JANET NAPOLITANO : and related Law
(Secretary of DHS), DHS agents John and Jane Does who are : under Title 18
members of SMOM, Opus Dei and or S.J.; FEDERAL BUREAU :
OF INVESTIGATION (FBI), ROBERT MUELLER (FBI Director),
FBI agents John and Jane Does who are members of SMOM, Opus :
Dei and or S.J.; : 3.
Defendants. :
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
Plaintiff Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, and by act of the State Legislature CHRIS STRUNK jus
tertii (Strunk, Plaintiffs) petition for: (i) a three judge panel use of 28 U.S.C. §2284 to hear the New
York Statewide and nationwide complaint of collective spiritual and individual temporal injuries
caused by captioned Defendants’ conduct by the failure to enforce the Logan Act and related Law
under Title 18 with injury by mis-application and mis-administration of law by Federal agents, (ii) a
temporary restraining order with preliminary injunction equity relief in the enforcement of the
Logan Act and related Law under Title 18 and OSCE Universal Human Rights Treaty, (iii) a
declaratory judgment on the Constitution Article 7: 9th and 10th Amendment right of the People to
secede from the Union without a republican form of government in the 1788 Ratification Document
by the People of New York; Strunk alleges 5 causes of action against each entity and named agent
or yet to be named individually and in official capacity based upon information and belief that:
Complaint and Petition - Page 1 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
sections of the New York ratification of the united States Constitution in concurrence with the
incorporation of the 1776 Declaration of the Independence into the April 20, 1777 Constitution of
the state of New York and with the subsequent adoption of the NYS Consolidated Law Chapter 6
"Civil Rights" in its entirety and specifically Article 5-A applies to the Logan Act and related law
under Title 18 that affords Jurisdiction properly before this Court with federal statute for United
States District Courts under 28 U.S.C. §1331 with a Federal question and under 28 U.S.C. §1346.
VENUE
5. Venue under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 28 U.S.C. 1391 is properly laid in this Court of the District
of Columbia as of right granted with 18 USC 953 where Defendants actions derive from and are to
be heard by an Article III three Judge Panel of 28 U.S.C. 2284, to this particular District Court for
the District of Columbia affords the proper venue under 28 U.S.C. §1391 (e) (2) for this action in
that the Defendants: The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ);
FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John and Jane Does who are members of
NYSJ and NYSJ XYZ entities; the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE (DOS),
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (Secretary of DOS), DOS agents John and Jane Does who are
members of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) 1, Opus Dei and or Society of Jesus
1
The Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) : The Sovereign Military and Hospitaler Order
of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta, known also as the Sovereign Military Order of
Malta, or SMOM, is juridically, politically, and historically unique in the world today.
Representing initially the most powerful and reactionary segments of the European
aristocracy, for nearly a thousand years beginning with the early crusades of the Twelfth Century, it
has organized, funded, and led military operations against states and ideas deemed
threatening to its power. It is probably safe to say that the several thousand Knights of SMOM,
principally in Europe, North, Central, and South America, comprise the largest most consistently
powerful and reactionary membership of any organization in the world today.
Although an exclusively [Roman] Catholic organization, in this century it has collaborated
with, and given high awards to non-Catholic extremists in its current crusade against
progressive forces in the West, the national liberation movements, and the socialist countries.
To be a Knight, one must not only be from wealthy, aristocratic lineage, one must also have a
Complaint and Petition - Page 3 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
JURISDICTION
1. The causes of action arise in conjunction to the nationwide controversy that this Court has
1391(e), and for particular proceeding in the 28 U.S.C. §2284 "Three-judge court" .
The derivation of liberty and rights protected in the U.S. Constitution from state action to
deprive fundamental and Civil Rights – in Civil action for deprivation of rights, involve a
conspiracy to interfere with civil rights as defined in 42 U.S.C. Section 1986, Section 1985, Section
by public officer(s)’ to protect Plaintiffs’’ spiritual property and unalienable rights intrinsic in the
required application of the 1st 4th 5th 8th 9th and 10th Amendments, and equal protection requirements
in the U.S. Constitution and by necessary due process later referenced in the 14th Amendment that
empowers Congress to protect persons from state actions in the New York State Constitution.
That 42 U.S.C. Section 1985 (3) in the matter of conspiracy states:
Depriving persons of rights or privileges If two or more persons in any State or Territory
conspire or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of
depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class or persons of the equal protection
of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws; or for the purpose of
preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or
securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws; or if
two or more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is
lawfully entitle to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner, toward or in
favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for President or Vice
President, or as a Member of Congress of the United States; or to injure any citizen in
person or property on account of such support or advocacy; in any case of conspiracy set
forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act
in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, hereby another is injured in his person or
property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privileges of a citizen of the
United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of
damages occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the
conspirators.
4. And in the guarantee clauses of the Federal Constitution in regards to enforcing applicable
Complaint and Petition - Page 2 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
psychological worldview which is attracted to the "crusader mentality'' of these "warrior
monks." Participating in SMOM Ñ including its initiation ceremonies and feudal ritual dress Ñ
members embrace a certain caste/class mentality; they are sociologically and psychologically
predisposed to function as the ''shock troops" of Catholic reaction. And this is precisely the
historical role the Knights have played in the wars against Islam, against the Protestant "heresy,''
and against the Soviet ''Evil Empire." [...]
SMOM's Sovereign Diplomacy: As its name suggests, SMOM is both a ''sovereign'' and,
historically, a "military" organization. Its headquarters, occupying a square block in Rome at 68 Via
Condotti, enjoys the extra-territorial legal status granted to an embassy of a sovereign state. The
Italian police are not welcome on its territory; it issues its own stamps, and has formal diplomatic
relations and exchanges ambassadors with a number of countries. On November 13, 1951 Italian
President Alcide de Gasperi recognized the diplomatic sovereignty of SMOM, although he held off
formal exchange of diplomatic envoys. On January 11, 1983 the New York Daily News announced
that, "The Vatican and the order of the Knights of Malta, believed to be the smallest sovereign state
in the world, have agreed to establish full diplomatic relations, a joint statement said today. "
[SMOM] President Reagan's Ambassador to the Vatican, William Wilson, is,
coincidentally, a Knight of Malta. On September 5, 1984 French Foreign Minister Claude Cheysson
signed a formal protocol with SMOM for various cooperative projects including "aid to victims of
conflicts."4 (See below on Americares.)
http://www.mosquitonet.com/~prewett/caqsmom25.1.html
Quote: The Knights of St. John were founded in the late 11th Century, and rose to
prominence in the First Crusade of 1095. In 1120, Pope Urban II officially recognized them as a
military religious order, and for centuries they remained one of the most powerful military forces
in Christendom, first from their headquarters on the island of Rhodes, and then on Malta, from
which they were finally driven by Napoleon in the late 18th Century. The Knights were recognized
as a sovereign state by a Hapsburg Emperor in the 16th Century. They remain a sovereign state, run
from their headquarters at 68 Via Condotti in Rome. They maintain their own fleet of aircraft,
have diplomatic relations with 92 nations as well as the United Nations and the Holy See, and enjoy
diplomatic immunity. The order is entirely Roman Catholic, and its higher ranks must document an
aristocratic lineage and coat-of-arms of at least three centuries. The Grand Master of the order is
both a secular prince, and a cardinal of the Church. Reflecting its history, its membership is still
heavily comprised of individuals with a military or intelligence background. Pope Pius XII ordered
an investigation of this nominally Catholic organization in the 1950s. The Papal Commission
charged, among other things, that the Order should not have the sovereignty of a state, and ordered
modifications of the SMOM "to bring them into conformity with decisions of the Holy See."
However, Pius XII died before the Order could be fully reined in.
In addition to the Roman Catholic SMOM, there are four Protestant orders of the Knights,
all founded within the last 150 years or so, and all run by ruling houses of Europe. The Roman
Catholic and Protestant orders effectively merged on Nov. 26, 1963, four days after the
assassination of John F. Kennedy. The Sovereign Head of the British Knights is Queen Elizabeth,
while the Netherlands Knights were headed until his death by the former SS official, Prince
Bernhard of the Netherlands, consort of Queen Juliana.
http://www.illuminati-news.com/112606b.htm
Complaint and Petition - Page 4 of 26
 Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
As a member of the Knights of Malta, and by virtue of your blood oath of obedience to the
Pope, you are required to support to the death the desires of the head of the Order of the Knights of
Malta-in this case, Pope Benedict XVI -over and above any other allegiance you may feel or
pretend to feel toward any other loyalty such as a loyalty to the Constitution for the united States of
America.
Those who are presently members of the Knights of Malta must on penalty of death support
those policies advocated by the Vatican. It is not hard for them to do this. They BELIEVE in these
policies and principles. The polices which are espoused and proclaimed by the office of the Pope
are as follows:
1. End of sovereignty for the United States and other countries.
2. End of absolute property rights.
3. End of all gun rights.
4. The new international economic Order (world government).
5. The redistribution of wealth and jobs.
6. Calls for nations to trust the United Nations.
7. Total disarmament.
8. Promote the United Nations as the hope for peace.
9. Promote UNESCO, the deadly educational and cultural arm of the United Nations.
10. Promote interdependence.
11. Support sanctions honoring Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin-the New Age Humanist Priest.
12. Support the belief that the economic principle of traditional Christian or Catholic social
doctrine is the economic principle of communism.
13. Promote the Pope as the acting go-between for the United States and the Soviet Union.
It doesn't really matter what kind of religious or political affiliation a member professes,
when they take an oath as a Knight they are obligated by that blood oath of obedience to follow the
political lead of the Vatican and will do so to their dying breath as all good Knights of Malta do.
Their first loyalty is to the Vatican, anything else is secondary.
Each and every member is under complete and total obedience to the Vatican's political
ambitions. The "Knights of Malta" are the militia of the Pope. In the book "Behold a Pale Horse"
you will find research into this. It is one of the NWO SECRET SOCIETIES that are determined to
overrun and destroy America. The Pope is not innocent of this either.
Milton William Cooper's - Behold a Pale Horse (pp88-89) Quote:
The Knights of Malta is a world organization with its threads weaving through business,
banking, politics, the CIA, other intelligence organizations, P2, religion, education, law, military,
think tanks, foundations, the United States Information Agency, the United Nations, and numerous
other organizations. They are not the oldest but are one of the oldest branches of the Order of the
Quest in existence. The world head of the Knights of Malta is elected for a life term, with the
approval of the Pope. The Knights of Malta have their own Constitution and are sworn to work
toward the establishment of a New World Order with the Pope at its head. Knights of Malta
members are also powerful members of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission. (p.86)
Complaint and Petition - Page 5 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
inherits all the privileges and unalienable rights of John and Heinrich Strunck of Baden who
affirmed an oath at Pennsylvania in 1756, and contributed to win the American Revolution in 1776.
8. Strunk is an Eagle Scout conferred by the Boy Scouts of America created by the Congress of
the united States of America in 1960, then followed with two Palms and as a Brother of the Order of
the Arrow provided leadership for Valhalla New York Troop 415 within the Washington Irving
Council in 1961 until 1965, and as the Junior Assistant Scout Master was the only leader after both
the Master and Assistant were discharged due to their involvement in molestation of innocents.
9. Strunk’s dedication to God and Country began in the state of New York as a Citizen born in
County of New York New York in 1947, who is an honorably discharged Vietnam Era Veteran in
1972, and as a citizen of New York State is now resident within the City of New York, County of
Kings, is within the New York 11th Congressional District ("CD"), in 57th Assembly District ("AD")
th th
in the 57 Election District ("ED") and 18 State Senate District (“SD”).
10. Strunk is a sovereign human being, not an animal, who acts spiritually in the image of god
by individual faith and hope, as such does not seek any right from a collective or temporal power.
11. Strunk’s jus tertii Honor granted in May 1985 with adoption of Senate 1073 and Assembly
1249 (see Exhibit A) resolution commitment to the consummate efflorescence of human dignity
with which they did praise Strunk for “unselfish dedication and competent discharge of duty…
above and beyond the responsibilities of job and duty…perception of the value and worth of others,
for his innate and ingenious concern for the preservation and enhancement of human dignity”.
12. Strunk’s spiritual duty is to God and Country in a leadership role of unselfish dedication and
competent discharge of duty…above and beyond the responsibilities of job and duty…perception of
the value and worth of others, for his innate and ingenious concern for the preservation and
enhancement of human dignity is representative of the People of New York jus tertii.
Complaint and Petition - Page 7 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
(S.J.), the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS),
JANET NAPOLITANO (Secretary of DHS), DHS agents John and Jane Does who are members
of SMOM, Opus Dei and or S.J.; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (FBI), ROBERT
MUELLER (FBI Director), FBI agents John and Jane Does who are members of SMOM, Opus
Dei and or S.J., as each cause of action is located within the District of Columbia and or operates
through misapplication and administration of the Logan Act and related law under Title 18 in
Washington District of Columbia, and the failure(s) of any Defendant and or ALL Defendants
separately and or in concert within the state and with Federal Defendant(s) was and is also done
within the District of Columbia, as a matter of the unregistered agents aiding and abetting the
unjust enrichment of each foreign Sovereign state of the Vatican, SMOM under the control of the
Society of Jesus thereby injuring Plaintiff in esse and Plaintiff jus tertii the People of New York.
6. Plaintiff Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse (“Plaintiff” “Strunk”), is a sovereign natural
living person, citizen of New York qualified to register and vote with place for service located at
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281 Brooklyn, New York 11238; telephone (845) 901-6767, SKYPE:
cestrunk, and E-mail: uncasvotes2@yahoo.com.
7. Strunk is entitled to membership in the Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution and
The Knights of Malta ALL have diplomatic immunity. They can ship goods across borders
without paying duty or undergoing customs check. Does that ring any bells?
In any case, that is power. The Knights of Malta is held up by a backbone consisting of
nobility. Nearly half of the 10,000 members belong to Europe's oldest and most powerful families.
This cements the alliance between the Vatican and the "Black Nobility." The Black Nobility is
mostly the rich and powerful of Europe.
The head of the Black Nobility is the family that can claim direct descendancy from the last
Roman emperor. Maybe now you can see that things are beginning to fall into their proper place.
Membership in the Knights of Malta entails obedience to one's superior in THE ORDER and
ultimately to the Pope. Therefore, a U.S. ambassador who is also a member of the Knights of Malta
faces a conflict of interest. Why is this fact ignored? President Bush appointed Knight of Malta
Thomas Melledy to the post of U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican.
Complaint and Petition - Page 6 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
13. That Strunk is defined by Roman Catholicism and its Islamic satrap as a “heretic”, and who
deny any free and independent individual liberty and or jus tertii standing to speak for so defined
heretical living person of the heretical People of New York that historically according to the actual
doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican and agents use of this term: A ‘label’, are
all to suffer spiritual condemnation by the inquisition as applied by the Papacy to anyone who dared
in the past, or who dares today, to question either (1) papal authority, or (2) any of the unscriptural
doctrines based solely upon ‘tradition’ that have been promulgated by the hierarchy of the Roman
Catholic Church, such as ‘transubstantiation’, ‘indulgences’, ‘papal infallibility’, ‘purgatory’,
‘worship of images’, ‘a celibate priesthood’, ‘auricular confession to a priest’, etc. in service of
submission of all to the exclusive doctrine of the faith.
14. The Roman Catholic Church operates a Roman cult internationally intent on worldwide
temporal power of the Pope whose agents and doctrine created the Islamic cult and Sharia Law as
identical doctrine that operate by works, unlike Protestantism, and Orthodox apostolic Christianity /
Messianic Judaism, that require any non-believer to submit, convert or die in an animal sacrifice by
fire or holocaust to channel their faith hope as an instrument to the Roman cult.
15. That from 1922 onward The Black Pope used the worldwide Versailles Treaty to
exterminate all heretics and non-believers whose collective sacrifice by fire invented the Spiritual
Occult death apparatus in the form of a huge pentagram machine (see Exhibit B) over the pre-
existing temples of satanic worship to channel all spiritual power stolen from the heretics by fire to
concentrate such power to the Roman Cult and from the 1928 creation of the Vatican Bank under
Mussolini by unjust spiritual and temporal enrichment used the pentagram machine fire sacrifice
holocaust theft of unalienable rights by God’s guarantee of free and independent human rights.
16. Strunk testified in 2001 in support of the express use of the State Constitution in
Complaint and Petition - Page 8 of 26
 Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD

reapportionment of political districts against Gerrymandering to no avail. God-Yahweh in existence nunc pro tunc the moment of Creation in Joint-Heir-with-His-Son Made

17. Strunk from 1999 filed a series of complaints challenging the Census, Gerrymandering and Debt-Free with the Yahshua Payment (consideration) of His Blood, in which Strunk Stands in the

unconstitutional use of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and Help America to Vote Act Kingdom of the Most-High-God Yahweh, and that is under reserve, without dishonor, without

(HAVA) in violation of the State’s plenary authority over suffrage and despite the adoption of the prejudice, without recourse in good faith, no dolus; and that this court and or Defendants or their

Copenhagen Treaty and Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Treaty in agents are unable to offer a higher consideration.

1991, aka the Treaty for Universal Human Rights adopted by the U.S. Senate promoted by the New 23. That the 1788 New York Ratification of the U.S. Constitution expressly reserves the right of

International Economic Order spokesman CIA Director and then President George HW Bush. the People of New York to secede from the Union were a republican form of government denied.

18. Strunk testified in 2003 in support of the State judiciary as published by Fordham University 24. That the united States of America is into its sixth plan for debt reorganization since 1776

both in support of the Lincoln- Eisenhower Doctrine and expanded citizen provision of Justice. and operate a multi-level ponzi scheme otherwise prohibited under the Constitution, according to

19. Strunk testified in 2007 in support of State Security to impeach then Governor Spitzer and the interpretation of the U.S. Supreme Court in its interpretation In re Amway Corp. (93 F.T.C.

for suppression of the agents of Ecumenism in the form of the “New Age Movement” and the 618; full name In the Matter of Amway Corporation, Inc., et al.) is a 1979 ruling, denies the

synarchist collectivism embraced by the Sovereign Military Knights of Malta under Vatican II as People of New York a republican form of government as a pre condition for their secession were

developed by Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., used by Fordham University to direct the efforts justice not provided.

of the United Nations in New York. 25. That the ongoing usurpation of the office of the President by Barack Hussein Obama who is

20. Strunk in part has opponents that are described in multiple his cases in EDNY: Strunk et al. directly under the control of the Vatican, SMOM and the Society of Jesus is the crisis whose actions

v. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York et al. 07-cv-1171, Strunk v CIA et al. 08-cv-1196, Strunk are void ab initio; and that without justice herein the People of New York as of right may secede

v. USPS et al. 08-cv-1744, Strunk v NYS DOS et al. 08-cv-4289, Strunk v DOS et al DCD 08-cv- from the Union were the denial of a republican form of government injury not rectified by

2234, with a demand for a 28 U.S.C. §2284 Three Judge Panel in re Strunk v US DOC Bureau of enforcement of law, and

Census et al. verified April 28, 2009 is pending filing in DCD and a Quo Warranto inquest against 26. That in the context of this Complaint and Petition for relief Strunk imputes no dishonor upon

the usurper Barack H. Obama that awaits the recusal of the questioned Judge Richard J. Leon, who the intent of the members of the Society of Jesus whose organic existence in fact each is true and

is subject to a Motion for a Writ of Mandamus in the Circuit Original Proceeding 08-5503-op. one with each spiritual oath that by practice is in fact the collective practice of sacrifice defined by

21. Strunk makes a special appearance in this action without relinquishing any sovereignty. their effective implementation of their oath which operates in the spiritual realm at odds to

22. In explanation, Strunk’s Special-Appearance is as a Living-Soul Son-of-the Most-High- Plaintiffs .liberty and independence in the temporal world; and notwithstanding what is normally

Complaint and Petition - Page 9 of 26 Complaint and Petition - Page 10 of 26

Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD

characterized when a supposed isolated individual Jesuit is caught in his practice of molestation and 83rd Street, New York, New York 10028.

sacrifice by fire as if merely a matter of moral turpitude in the temporal sense is the fact of being 31. Defendant FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., (NYSJ Provincial) is the Provincial of New

caught which is addressed, not the spiritual truth and practice of the oath to the holocaust by all. York Province of the Society of Jesus located at the above address with email: nykprov@nysj.org

27. Strunk revisits the Jesuit’s treachery to suborn parties in the case before the U.S. Supreme 32. The Society of Jesus has ten 10 provinces that constitute the USA and its possessions and

Court whose decision in The Republic of Texas v. White S. C., 7 Wall., 700-743 (1869) without the are a subset part of 83 provinces globally; in short the Jesuit Order formed by Ignatius Loyola in

1799 Logan Act enforced as to the Society of Jesus and SMOM as agents of a Foreign power, that 1546 as a continuous global command force were thrown out of 81 nations over time and that from

Plaintiff by inheritance and by his jus tertii representation of the interests of the People of New 1773 thru 1814 sought exile in Prussia and Russia under Frederick the Great and Catherine the

York as a recognized exemplary state citizen sustain the application of our right to secede, and as Great as well as in Lancashire England at Stony Hurst Jesuit College and the Louisiana purchase

such Plaintiffs provide facts below for five (5) causes of action as necessary: for their shelter from the 1773 Papal Bull there as it was arranged by U.S. Secretary of State

AS AND FOR THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Thomas Jefferson under the Washington Administration, as such the Society is:

(as applies to The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ); FR. a) A military Order NOT religious order of the Holy See and are among the SMOM who are
GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John and Jane Doe(s) members and XYZ
under the Society control at the dual headquarters occupying a square block within Rome
entities that by State non-feasance by Secretary of State and Attorney General under law fail
Italy at 68 Via Condotti
to enforce New York State Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A)
28. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and b) sworn to four oaths: obedience, chastity, poverty and a blood oath to serve the pope

paragraphs 1 through 27 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length. c) formed to reverse the Reformation under the Council of Trent

29. The first cause of action complained of is as applies to The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF d) focused on the exclusive control of Jerusalem to bar any other religion

THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ); FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John e) all about maintaining and increasing the wealth of the papacy

and Jane Does who are members of NYSJ and NYSJ’s XYZ entities (including the operation of the f) the most cunning and dangerous global fighting force known

Catholic Charities entity) with its agents and non-feasance of State action by the New York g) In France controlled Napoleon and the French Terror

Secretary of State and Attorney General under State law fail to register with the New York State h) Authored the Protocols for the Elders of Zion against the influence of mosaic Judaism,

Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A. especially Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli and Capt. Louis Dreyfus of the French Military

30. Defendant NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ) is a

membership association that is also incorporated in the state of New York in 1946 located at 39 East

Complaint and Petition - Page 11 of 26 Complaint and Petition - Page 12 of 26

 Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
33. Of the more than 36000 Jesuits
internationally a majority are in the United
States, in which the Society of Jesus is
organized into ten provinces or geographic
regions, each headed by a provincial
superior appointed by the Superior General
in Rome. Province Offices are organized
shown at the right:
34. The Vatican/s Holy See uses the many Concordats, 172 to date that have been signed with
'sovereign' nations, to give the Vatican institution special privileges with the European Union and
related projects.
35. The SMOM member President Ronald Reagan entered into a concordat recognition of the
Vatican as a sovereign foreign power who has received USA Ambassadors there since 1981.
36. “The power of the Society of Jesus in the Catholic Church is beyond doubt enormous. It is
said, apparently with truth, that the Jesuit General, the “Black Pope” as he is called, can make and
unmake bishops and even cardinals.
37. The Black Pope has various agents and representatives within the walls of the Vatican, and
he can gain the ear of the Pope whenever he wishes. . . . Again and again the Society has been able
to oppose successfully the plans and wishes of Popes. . . . the Society which is perennial at Rome is
able to block the efforts of passing Popes [like Pope John Paul I who sought to prematurely
establish diplomatic relations with Israel prior to the end of the Company’s Cold War]. . . .
38. The Order is to the Church what the Church is to the world. The Order is a kind of parasite
sucking the vital power of the Church. . . . It holds the confidence and consciences of so many
Complaint and Petition - Page 13 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
recorded in the Journals of the 62nd Congress, 3rd Session, of the United States Congressional
Record (House Calendar No. 397, Report No. 1523, 15 February, 1913, pp. 3215-3216).
46. That Defendant NYSJ entity as a corporation and or association is composed of more than
19 members who have taken the extreme oath of obedience and allegiance to the Black Pope with
emphasis on chastity, poverty and a blood oath to serve the pope to the exclusion of others.
47.
That membership in the Defendant NYSJ is limited to only those who have taken some
aspect of the extreme oath of obedience and allegiance to the Black Pope with emphasis on chastity,
poverty and a blood oath to serve the pope to the exclusion of all others.
48.
That Defendants Provincial and NYSJ and or its membership are not protected under the
NYS Beneficial Orders Law and as such must comply with the filing requirements of the New York
State Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A (2)
2
the New York State Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A
S 53. Copies of documents and statements to be filed. Every existing membership corporation,
and every existing unincorporated association having a membership of twenty or more persons,
which corporation or association requires an oath as a prerequisite or condition of membership,
(other than a labor union, a fraternity or sorority having chapters composed only of students in or
alumni of colleges and universities in this and another state or states, or a chapter of such fraternity
or sorority, or a benevolent order mentioned in the benevolent orders law), within thirty days after
this article takes effect, and every such corporation or association hereafter organized, within ten
days after the adoption thereof, shall file with the secretary of state a sworn copy of its constitution,
by-laws, rules, regulations and oath of membership, together with a roster of its membership and a
list of its officers for the current year.
Every such corporation and association shall, in case its constitution, by-laws, rules,
regulations or oath of membership or any part thereof, be revised, changed, or amended, within ten
days after such revision or amendment file with the secretary of state a sworn copy of such revised,
changed or amended constitution, by-law, rule, regulation or oath of membership.
Every such corporation or association shall within thirty days after a change has been
made in its officers file with the secretary of state a sworn statement showing such change.
Every such corporation or association shall at intervals of six months file with the
secretary of state a sworn statement showing the names and addresses of such additional members
as have been received in such corporation or association during such interval.
Complaint and Petition - Page 15 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
bishops, cardinals, and prelates; . . . in fine, [it] works in so many ways on the functionaries of the
Church, that it has become as it were an inner circle in the Church.
39. It has made the Pope more and more like its own autocratic General; and has reduced the
bishops more and more to the status of Provincials in the Society who are officials nominated by
and controlled by the General, without any inherent authority.
40. An interesting proof of Jesuit prestige and power in this country is the existence, in the
shadow of the Capitol, at Washington, of the Jesuit School for Foreign Service (which trained the
past CFR/CIA Director, Knight of Malta George J. Tenet having overseen the demolition of the
World Trade Center in obedience to his master, Edward Cardinal Egan), opened in 1919 through the
instrumentality of an Irish-American, Fr. Edmund Walsh, S.J.
41. At this school of diplomatic service, said to be the largest of its kind in America, young
Americans, to be later recruited into the Order’s Counsel on Foreign Relations (CFR , are trained to
guide the future fortunes of the Republic. . . .
42. Jesuits by rule are detached from love of country . . . Each and every Jesuit is bound under
oath to obey the behests of his General at Rome, and who most probably will never be an
American.
43. It is quite within the power of the General to dictate the principles and theories to be taught
by the Jesuits at Washington . . . one cannot forget the words of the Pope, Clement XIV, who
accused them of ‘rising up against the very kings who admitted them into their countries.’ ” E.
Boyd Barrett, 1927 Irish American Ex-Jesuit The Jesuit Enigma
44. Defendant Provincial has taken the extreme oath of obedience and allegiance to the Black
Pope with emphasis on chastity, poverty and a blood oath to serve the pope.
45. An English Translation of the text of the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction is meticulously
Complaint and Petition - Page 14 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
49. That Defendants Provincial and NYSJ and or its members are in violation of the New York
State Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A Section 53 for Copies of documents and statements
to be filed.
50. That historically back to the reign of Catholic Stuart Charles II of England used troops to
subdue the Dutch of New Amsterdam bringing a Provincial Jesuit and NYSJ to control the
administration of the colony of New York that in the Twentieth century are the Tammany Hall and
the Al Smith administrative machine in control to this day; and
51. Especially since the Governorship of Al Smith until this day is under the control of the
SMOM that operates under the association of the New York Province of the Society of Jesus
S 54. Resolutions concerning political matters. Every such corporation or association shall,
within ten days after the adoption thereof, file in the office of the secretary of state every resolution,
or the minutes of any action of such corporation or association, providing for concerted action of its
members or of a part thereof to promote or defeat legislation, federal, state or municipal, or to
support or to defeat any candidate for political office.
S 55. Anonymous communications prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any such corporation or
association to send, deliver, mail or transmit to any person in this state who is not a member of such
corporation or association any anonymous letter, document, leaflet or other written or printed
matter, and all such letters, documents, leaflets or other written or printed matter, intended for a
person not a member of such corporation or association, shall bear on the same the name of such
corporation or association and the names of the officers thereof together with the addresses of the
latter.
S 56. Offenses; penalties. Any corporation or association violating any provision of this article
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than one thousand dollars nor more
than ten thousand dollars. Any officer of such corporation or association and every member of the
board of directors, trustees or other similar body, who violates any provision of this article or
permits or acquiesces in the violation of any provision of this article by any such corporation, shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person who becomes a member of any such corporation or
association, or remains a member thereof, or attends a meeting thereof, with knowledge that such
corporation or association has failed to comply with any provision of this article, shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor.
S 57. Additional penalties. In addition to the penalties provided by section fifty-six of this article, a
violation of the provisions of this article may be restrained at the suit of the people by the attorney-
general.
Complaint and Petition - Page 16 of 26
 Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
concerted action by its members or of a part thereof to promote or defeat legislation, federal, state or
municipal, or to support or to defeat any candidate for political office.
52. That most recently Governor Pataki is a member of SMOM and or worked under the
direction of the association of the New York Province of the Society of Jesus providing for
concerted action of its members or of a part thereof to promote or defeat legislation, federal, state or
municipal, or to support or to defeat any candidate for political office.
53. That the present Governor Paterson is a Catholic working under the direction of the
association of the New York Province of the Society of Jesus providing for concerted action of its
members or of a part thereof to promote or defeat legislation, federal, state or municipal, or to
support or to defeat any candidate for political office.
54. That most recently NYC Mayor Giuliani is a member of SMOM and or worked under the
direction of the association of the New York Province of the Society of Jesus providing for
concerted action of its members or of a part thereof to promote or defeat legislation, federal, state or
municipal, or to support or to defeat any candidate for political office.
55. That the present NYC Mayor Bloomberg is a member of the Yorkshire St, John Order of the
SMOM and works under the direction of the association of the New York Province of the Society of
Jesus providing for concerted action of its members or of a part thereof to promote or defeat
legislation, federal, state or municipal, or to support or to defeat any candidate for political office.
56. That Defendants Provincial and NYSJ and or its members are in violation of the New York
State Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A Section 54 for Resolutions concerning political
matters in which such corporation or association shall, within ten days after the adoption thereof,
file in the office of the secretary of state every resolution, or the minutes of any action of such
corporation or association, providing for concerted action of its members or of a part thereof to
Complaint and Petition - Page 17 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ); FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John
and Jane Does who are members of NYSJ and NYSJ’s XYZ entities (including the operation of the
Catholic Charities entity) with its agents and non-feasance of State action by the New York
Secretary of State and Attorney General under State law fail to register with the New York State
Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A.
62. The NYSJ Provincial and NYSJ Members honor in part or whole the spiritual oath practice
of the spiritual molestation sacrifice of the innocent in theft of individual unalienable rights
63. The NYSJ Provincial and NYSJ Members honor in part or whole the spiritual oaths that
further the inquisition of heretics as by holocaust pentagram model to empower the Roman cult.
64. The NYSJ Provincial and NYSJ Members honor in part or whole the spiritual oaths to
prepare Strunk and Strunk jus tertii People of New York for the inquisition of heretics by holocaust
by the pentagram model to channel power to the Roman cult.
65. That Fr. Bruce Ritter, S.J. had proven the activity of the NYSJ and the past Provincial and
its members practiced in the honor of the spiritual oath to the spiritual molestation sacrifice of the
innocent in theft of individual unalienable rights, and that such unjust enrichment was aided and
abetted by the agents of the government for the state of New York, absent registration under the
New York State Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A and enforcement of related law.
66. Vatican agents honor to the spiritual oath to the Holocaust of heretic nonbelievers is done
for the purpose of their spiritual honor to disenfranchise Plaintiff and the People of New York’s
collective and unalienable spiritual property individually inherited by each human at creation from
God and as guaranteed free by Christ and his blood, in that Defendant Provincial, NYSJ and sworn
members are agents of a foreign power are sworn to enslave the spiritual property of any heretic and
non-catholic defined as merely an animal to be subject to the sacrifice of fire or holocaust.
Complaint and Petition - Page 19 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
promote or defeat legislation, federal, state or municipal, or to support or to defeat any candidate for
political office.
57. The Provincial officer of such NYSJ corporation or association and every member of the
board of directors, trustees or other similar body, violates the provision of this article or permits or
acquiesces in the violation of any provision of this article by any such corporation,
58. The Defendants NYSJ Provincial officers of such NYSJ corporation or association and
every member who becomes a member of any such corporation or association, or remains a member
thereof, or attends a meeting thereof, have knowledge that such corporation or association has failed
to comply with any provision of this article.
59. That Defendants’ actions by fact of prima facie malfeasance under law to violate registration
under state law is alleged done for the purpose of concealment to disenfranchise Plaintiff and the
People of New York’s vote strength, speech, association representation, religious rights with intent
to undermine knowledge of accountability of public governance and to suppress the right to petition
as a matter ripe for review herein, in that Defendants Provincial, NYSJ and sworn members are
agents of a foreign power that must be registered under the Logan Act aren’t.
AS AND FOR THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(as applies to The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ); FR.
GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John and Jane Does who are members of
NYSJ and NYSJ XYZ entities spiritual practice to eliminate individual faith and hope
actions to molest the innocent and sacrifice heretics to the holocaust maliciously harm
Plaintiffs who suffer spiritual and temporal injuries.
60. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and
paragraphs 1 through 59 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
61. The first cause of action complained of is as applies to The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF
Complaint and Petition - Page 18 of 26
Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD
AS AND FOR THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(as applies to The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ); FR.
GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John and Jane Does who are members of
NYSJ and NYSJ XYZ entities with its agents fail to register with the Logan Act and related
law under Title 18 by concerted malfeasance of the Federal Defendants , Plaintiffs suffer
from a denial of substantive due process.
67. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and
paragraphs 1 through 66 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
68. That as applies to Defendants the NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS
(NYSJ); FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John and Jane Does who are
members of NYSJ and NYSJ’s XYZ entities (including the operation of the Catholic Charities
entity) with its agents fail to register with the Logan Act (3) and related law under Title 18 by
concerted malfeasance of Federal Defendants : the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
STATE (DOS), HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (Secretary of DOS), DOS agents John and Jane
Does who are members of the SMOM, Opus Dei and or Society of Jesus (S.J.), the UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS), JANET NAPOLITANO
(Secretary of DHS), DHS agents John and Jane Does who are members of SMOM, Opus Dei and
or S.J.; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (FBI), ROBERT MUELLER (FBI Director),
3
§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United
States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any
foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct
of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or
controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any
foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained
from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
Complaint and Petition - Page 20 of 26
 Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD

FBI agents John and Jane Does who are members of SMOM, Opus Dei and or S.J.) 72. That all Jesuits whether or not in the employ of the united States of America DOS, DHS,

69. That Federal Defendants : the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE (DOS), FBI, DOJ and its agencies are nevertheless subject to the provisions of 18 USC Chapter 45 list in

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (Secretary of DOS), DOS agents John and Jane Does who are paragraph 71(a) thru 71 (j) above and are to register as required by the Federal Defendants as agents

members of the SMOM, Opus Dei and or Society of Jesus (S.J.), the UNITED STATES of a foreign power in effect aide and abet Defendants Provincial, NYSJ and sworn members are

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS), JANET NAPOLITANO (Secretary of agents of a foreign power are sworn to enslave the spiritual property of any heretic and non-catholic

DHS), DHS agents John and Jane Does who are members of SMOM, Opus Dei and or S.J.; defined as merely an animal to be subject to the sacrifice of fire or holocaust, injure Plaintiffs.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (FBI), ROBERT MUELLER (FBI Director), FBI AS AND FOR THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

agents John and Jane Does who are members of SMOM, Opus Dei and or S.J. are located for (as applies to The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ); FR.
GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John and Jane Does who are members of
service within Washington District of Columbia.
NYSJ and NYSJ XYZ entities with its agents fail to register with the Logan Act and related
70. That Federal Defendants DOS, DHS, FBI and other alphabet agencies employ members of
law under Title 18 by concerted malfeasance of the Federal Defendants , Plaintiffs suffer
the SMOM and Society of Jesus who individually have taken an oath of allegiance to the Black from a denial of equal protection.
73. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and
Pope and Vatican in conflict with the duties to upon hold and defend the U.S. Constitution and
paragraphs 1 through 72 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
operate against the interest of Plaintiff and Chris Strunk’s jus tertii People of New York who are
74. That as applies to the NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ);
thereby denied a republican form of government.
FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ; John and Jane Does who are members of
71. That the Federal Defendants of DOS, DHS, DOJ and its agents employ Jesuits directly for
NYSJ and NYSJ’s XYZ entities (including the operation of the Catholic Charities entity) with its
other than religious matters that interfere with the domestic and foreign interest of the United States
agents fail to register with the Logan Act and related law under Title 18 by concerted malfeasance
and other foreign nations in contradiction to 18 USC Chapter 45 for Foreign relations relate to;.
of Federal Defendants : the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE (DOS),
a) § 951. Agents of foreign governments
b) § 952. Diplomatic codes and correspondence
75. That the Jesuits and SMOM are agents of the Holy See and the Vatican sovereign state.
c) § 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments (the Logan Act)
d) § 954. False statements influencing foreign government
76. That those defendants fail to follow the mandates of 18 USC Chapter 45.
e) § 955. Financial transactions with foreign governments
f) § 956. Conspiracy to kill, kidnap, maim, or injure persons or damage \ property in a
77. That as a result of the failure to enforce provisions of 18 USC 45 as against the SMOM and
foreign country
g) § 957. Possession of property in aid of foreign government
Society of Jesus as sworn agents of a foreign power those Federal Defendants fail to follow the
h) § 958. Commission to serve against friendly nation
i) § 959. Enlistment in foreign service
mandates of 18 USC Chapter 50A – GENOCIDE CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
j) § 960. Expedition against friendly nation
PART I – CRIMES of GENOCIDE Sections 1091. (a) Basic Offense. - Whoever, whether in time

Complaint and Petition - Page 21 of 26 Complaint and Petition - Page 22 of 26

Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD

of peace or in time of war, in a circumstance described in subsection (d) and with the specific intent 81. By reason of on-going injury infringement of Plaintiffs’ jus tertii People of New York’s

to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such liberty, freedoms including the first fifth ninth and tenth amendment rights and right to a republican

Plaintiff jus tertii People of New York suffer injury by Defendants actions that - form of government with remedy as applies under Title 18 U.S.C. Chapter 50A (Proxmire Act), the

1) kills members of that group; Vienna Convention for Consular Affairs, the Law of Treaties, Admiralty Law, Civil Rights Act
2) causes serious bodily injury to members of that group;
3) causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties of members of the group pursuant to Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, the Bivens Case and all the above would apply to use the
through drugs, torture (mental/physical), or similar techniques;
4) subjects the group to conditions of life that are intended to cause the physical Racketeering Influence Corrupt Organizations Act under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 1965(c).
destruction of the group in whole or in part;
5) imposes measures intended to prevent births within the group; or
6) transfers by force children of the group to another group; or attempts to do so, shall Wherefore, Plaintiffs prayer and demand for equity relief by the Three Judge Panel as follows:
be punished as provided in subsection
A. A 28 USC 2284 Three Judge Panel be noticed.
78. That all Jesuits whether or not in the employ of the united States of America DOS, DHS,
B. Appointment of a special master to deal with the lack of law enforcement that denies a
FBI, DOJ and its agencies are nevertheless subject to the provisions of 18 USC Chapter 45 list in
republican form of government for the Plaintiffs’ jus tertii People of New York.
paragraph 77 -(1) thru 77 – (6) above who are agents of a foreign power whose spiritual oath act to
C. As a matter of the ongoing irreparable harm on the first and second cause of action a restraining
sacrifice by holocaust against all heretics are intent to cause irreparable harm to Plaintiffs exercise
order against The NYSJ Provincial, the NYSJ, its members, and entities under its control until
of unalienable rights.
such time a special master is able to assess damages for non compliance with New York State

Civil Rights Statute Chapter 6 Article 5-A

AS AND FOR THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
D. As a matter of the ongoing irreparable harm on the Third cause of action a restraining order
as applies to all Defendants, NYSJ XYZ entities and their agents intentionally wage spiritual against The NYSJ Provincial, the NYSJ, its members, and entities under its control until such
war against Plaintiffs who suffer from denial of a republican form of government for Foreign
time a special master is able to assess damages for non compliance with 18 USC Chapter 45 for
Power and its agents unjust spiritual and temporal enrichment.
79. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and Foreign relations.

paragraphs 1 through 78 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length. E. As a matter of the ongoing irreparable harm as to injuries of the First through Fifth causes of

80. That as applies to all Defendants with its agents who fail to register with the Logan Act and action a restraining order against The NYSJ Provincial, the NYSJ, its members, and entities

related law under Title 18 by concerted malfeasance of Federal Defendants in affect of conspiracy under its control until such time a special master is able to assess damages for non compliance

intentionally wage spiritual war against Plaintiffs who suffer from denial of a republican form of with 18 USC Chapter 50A – GENOCIDE CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I –

government. CRIMES of GENOCIDE Sections 1091. (a) Basic Offenses perpetrated in New York.

Complaint and Petition - Page 23 of 26 Complaint and Petition - Page 24 of 26

 Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD Strunk v. The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS et al. DCD

F. A preliminary hearing for permanent injunction for a writ of mandamus of Federal Defendants.
AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION
G. A declaratory judgment by revisiting The Republic of Texas v. White (1869) case done without
STATE OF NEW YORK )
enforcement of the 1799 Logan Act as applies to the Society of Jesus and SMOM and their ) ss.:
COUNTY OF KINGS )
agents as agents of a Foreign power and pursuant to New York State Civil Rights Statute
Accordingly, I, Christopher –Earl: Strunk, being duly sworn, depose and say:
Chapter 6 Article 5-A and 18 USC Chapter 45 for Foreign relations as applies to theft of

spiritual property to uphold the 1788 Ratification Document by Plaintiffs of New York
I have read the foregoing matter of the enforcement of the Logan Act in lieu of the secession of the
H. That based upon the Special Masters report for a jury trial for recovery of damages in the matter
People of the New York from the Union with the united States of America as of right by and for the
of ongoing abuse for the purposes of reimbursing the Plaintiffs’ jus tertii People of New York
CHRIS STRUNK jus tertii People of New York, COMPLAINT with PETITION for a 28 USC
and several state accordingly.
§2284 EXTRAORDINARY WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO ENFORCE THE LOGAN ACT
I. The costs of this action along with attorney fees as to 42 USC 1988 if applicable, including
and related Law under Title 18 with demand for DECLARATORY JUDGMENT and
those of the Special Master.
EQUITY RELIEF for Plaintiffs, and know the contents thereof and jus tertii effects those
J. Further and different relief as deemed necessary
similarly situated with five causes of action with spiritual and temporal injuries with irreparable
.
harm, affirms the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be
Respectfully submitted by:
alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my
Dated: July 4th , 2009 /s/ Christopher –Earl : Strunk
beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: 3rd. parties, books and
Brooklyn, New York _______________________________
Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse records, and personal knowledge.
593 Vanderbilt Avenue – 281
/s/ Christopher –Earl : Strunk
Brooklyn, New York
____________________________
845-901-6767
Christopher –Earl : Strunk
Sworn to before me this
the 6th day of July 2009

/s/

____________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

Complaint and Petition - Page 25 of 26 Complaint and Petition - Page 26 of 26

Exhibit A
 Exhibit B

Great_Vatican_Jesuit_Pentagram_of_Evil Page 1 of 1 Evil Symbols | Pentagram Page 1 of 2

Home
Key Facts
Symbols
Other names pentalpha, pentangle, key
of solomon, star of solomon

Year of origin 2,500-3,000 BCE

Location Mesopotamia,

Background

The pentagram originates as one of the oldest religious symbols and was associated from its very
birth with both a belief in its supernatural powers and rituals of human sacrifice.

In mathematics, a pentagram (sometimes known as a pentalpha or pentangle) is the shape of a five-

pointed star drawn with five straight strokes. The word pentagram comes from the Greek word
ȺİnjIJƾDŽǏĮNjNjǎnj (pentagrammon), a form of ȺİnjIJƾDŽǏĮNjNjǎǐ (pentagrammos) or ȺİnjIJƿDŽǏĮNjNjǎǐ
(pentegrammos), a word meaning roughly "five-lined" or "five lines".

The earliest known use of a pentagram in any culture was found in Mesopotamia cultures during the
earliest civilizations from around 2,500 to 3,500 BCE. In the Sumerian language, the pentagram
(always inverted with two points up and one point down) served as a pictograph of the word "UB"
meaning "corner, angle, nook; a small room, cavity, hole; pitfall".

In turn, the word UB (original name for pentagram) literally signified the most important religious
ceremony of the various Sumer cities at which they sacrificed people to their most important female
goddess, the "Queen of Heaven" also known as Inanna/Ishtar and in later centuries known as
Athena/Cybele and Venus. The Sumerians would big a great pit and depending on the type of
ceremony, would either place a large fire at the base of the pit into which people would be thrown, or
bound and tossed (as in the case of the death of a king). As a result, the pentagram has always been an
official symbol of the "Queen of Heaven" from the beginning of time.

From around 2,000 BCE, the pentagram took on the additional meaning of representing the five
major gods of key Akkadian/Sumerian mythology, with each god representing a point and the whole
star representing Ishtar as "Queen of Heaven". The pentagram and god association also had an
astrological connection as the star represented the five brightest celestial bodies in the night sky- the
planets of Jupiter, Mercury, Mars, Saturn and Venus- the brightest.

mhtml:file://D:\DCD\Jesuits and Logan Act\Great_Vatican_Jesuit_Pentagram_of_Evil.mht 7/6/2009 mhtml:file://D:\DCD\Jesuits and Logan Act\Evil Symbols Pentagram.mht 7/6/2009
Evil Symbols | Pentagram Page 2 of 2

Under the Amorites (Neo-Akkadians) of Ugarit, Mari and Ebla, the pentagram came to symbolize the
act of supreme sacrifice or Moloch in worshipping Astarte still with pits, but also more sophisticated
forms of sacrifice such as ovens.

However, under the Pythagorus religious cult during the 6th Century BCE in Greece, the Pentagram
was completely reinvented from being the single most evil symbol of all religious talismans to being a
symbol of good.

Under Pythagorus and his religious movement, the pentagram was given its "Wicca" positive
attributes of a symbol representing the five classical elements: water, earth, idea, heat and air with the
complete symbol representing the Greek goddess of health: Hygieia. While none of these attributes
have any historical substance to the original intent, design or real meaning of the pentagram, the
popularity of the "positive pentagram" have remained today.

The confused world concerning the pentagram

The world has become confused when trying to establish the origins and real meaning of the
pentagram.

In one instance, there is a substantial amount of contradictory information about the significance of
the shape of a pentagram. The original Sumerian, Akkadian, Jewish Black Magic and Middle Ages
Black Magic practices strictly adhered to the earliest of designs with a pentagram (as shown above)
being two points up, one point down, with the left and right triangles being smaller than the up or
down triangles.

Today, most pentagrams sold as black magic symbols are too geometrically perfect compared to the
ancient original design used throughout black magic history, while many versions promoted as "good"
are more in common with the ancient original design.

The largest authentic satanic pentagram in the world

The largest authentic black magic pentagram every created in history is the one devised by the Vatican
and Jesuits using their control of Catholic Dictators in Europe during World War II. Formed from the
five worst human sacrifice camps of World War II, the 300 mile wide Great Vatican Jesuit Pentagram
of Evil is the largest attempt to use this symbol in the sacrifice to the Queen of Heaven (aka Cybele).

The most important remaining pentagrams are in the buildings and floors of Vatican- dedicating the
temple of St Peter to effectively the largest shrine to Cybele in history.

Copyright © One-Evil.org 2009. All Rights Reserved

mhtml:file://D:\DCD\Jesuits and Logan Act\Evil Symbols Pentagram.mht 7/6/2009

 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 8
 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

In Care of:
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281 (iii) a declaratory judgment that according to the plenary power of Congress in U.S. Constitution
Brooklyn, New York
Zip Code exempt DMM 122-32
Phone: 845-901-6767 Article 1 Section 8, “Tourists” per se as would be defined in the Immigration and Naturalization
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Not a corporation - a Living-Soul Act of 1965 (INA) are not permanent residents, therefore, not counted in the Census for the purpose

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT of the 2010 Census allotment of U.S. House representatives to the people of a state of the several
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Civil Action No.: 09-cv-1295 (RJL)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x states; (iv) a declaratory judgment on resident suffrage in Washington D.C. within Maryland as of
In the matter of the 2010 Census Allotment of U.S. House seats : Filed: July 13, 2009
to disproportionately dilute and diminish the Vote Strength of : right; (v) a declaratory judgment on reparations for those who have suffered by the Jesuits and their
:
Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse, and the CHRISTOPHER : agents; and Strunk alleges seven causes of action against each entity and named agent or yet to be
(aka “CHRIS”) STRUNK jus tertii People, :
Plaintiff, : VERIFIED named individually and in official capacity based upon information and belief that:
v. : COMPLAINT
: JURISDICTION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE : with PETITION for
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS (BOC), CARLOS GUTIERREZ : 28 U.S.C. §2284 PANEL 1. The causes of action arise in conjunction to the decennial 2010 Census in Federal Statutes
(the Secretary of Commerce ), THE CITY OF NEW YORK : TRO, INJUNCTION
(NYC), MICHAEL BLOOMBERG (Mayor of NYC), : with DECLARATORY 13 U.S.C. §141, 2 U.S.C. §2(a) , and in Federal Constitution- Article I Section 2, Article I Section 8
The NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS : for a 28 USC §2284
(NYSJ); FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., Provincial of NYSJ, : JUDGMENT for Clause 18, Article II Section 1, Article IV Section 2 Clause 1, Article IV Section 4, Article V, and
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND : EQUITY RELIEF
SECURITY (DHS), JANET NAPOLITANO (Secretary of DHS), : by the First, Fifth, Ninth, Tenth, Twelfth, Thirteenth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Seventeenth,
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (House), :
NANCY PELOSI (the Speaker of the House), the States of ; :
CALIFORNIA, TEXAS, MARYLAND, HAWAII; :
Nineteenth, Twenty-fourth, and Twenty-sixth Amendment thereto, and nationwide controversy that
MARYLAND PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (MPSJ); :
this Court has jurisdiction over in 28 U.S.C. Sections 1331, 1332(a), 1343(a), 1344, 1357, 1361,
TIMOTHY B. BROWN (MPSJ Provincial), Barry Soetoro in esse :
(a.k.a. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA), JOHN DOE(S), : "Venue" Section 1391(e), for particular proceeding in the 28 U.S.C. §2284 "Three-judge court" .
JANE DOE(S) AND XYZ ENTITIES :
Defendants. : 2. The matter of derivation of liberty and rights protected in the U.S. Constitution from state
:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------x action to deprive fundamental and Civil Rights – in Civil action for deprivation of rights, involve a
Plaintiff Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, and by act of the State Legislature CHRIS STRUNK jus
conspiracy to interfere with civil rights as defined in 42 U.S.C. Section 1986, Section 1985, Section
tertii (Strunk, Plaintiffs) petition for: (i) a three judge panel use of 28 U.S.C. §2284 to hear the New
1983; as well as in the due process rights of the 5th , and protection against unreasonable statute in
York Statewide and nationwide complaint of spiritual and temporal injuries caused by caption
the 9th 10th Amendments pertaining to the federal government, and other due process rights in the
defendants’ conduct of the decennial 2010 Census with state action with Federal agents as to
14th Amendment that empowers Congress to protect persons from state actions. There being two
Bivens, (ii) a temporary restraining order with injunction equity relief in the 2010 Census Count,
aspects of substantive due process, in which protects a person's property from unfair government

Complaint - Page 1 of 31 Complaint - Page 2 of 31

Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

interference or taking and as similar clauses in the New York State Constitution. Department of Commerce Bureau of Census, Department of Homeland Security, JANET

3. That 42 U.S.C. Section 1985 (3) in the matter of conspiracy states: NAPOLITANO (Secretary of DHS), the UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Depriving persons of rights or privileges If two or more persons in any State or Territory (House), NANCY PELOSI (the Speaker of the House), and is where the individual Barry Soetoro
conspire or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of
depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class or persons of the equal protection in esse (a.k.a. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, a.k.a. “the Usurper”), as each is located within the
of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws; or for the purpose of
preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or District of Columbia, ALL collaborate with Defendants of the Society of Jesus, and failure(s) of any
securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws; or if
two or more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is Defendant and or ALL Defendants are in concert with State defendant(s) are also within the District
lawfully entitle to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner, toward or in
favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for President or Vice of Columbia, as a matter of fraud connected with use of tourists as if citizens for unjust enrichment.
President, or as a Member of Congress of the United States; or to injure any citizen in
person or property on account of such support or advocacy; in any case of conspiracy set AS AND FOR THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act
in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, hereby another is injured in his person or (Census Bureau by its agents with State action serving the NEW YORK PROVINCE OF
property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privileges of a citizen of the THE SOCIETY OF JESUS FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J. to count tourists as if
United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of permanent residents disproportionately diminishes and dilutes Strunk’s vote strength,
damages occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the speech and association representation rights in an Election and in Congress)
conspirators.
6. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and
4. And in the guarantee clauses of the Federal Constitution in regards to enforcing applicable
paragraphs 1 through 5 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
sections of the New York State Constitution Article I Sections 1,3,8,9,11, regarding Article II
7. Plaintiff Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse (“Plaintiff” “Strunk”), is a sovereign natural
Section 1, Article III Section 7 and NYS Consolidation Law Chapter 6 "Civil Rights" Article 2 Bill
living person, citizen of New York qualified to register and vote with place for service located at
of Rights Sec. 2. (equal protection and voting rights) per NYS Law Article 7 for Congressional
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281 Brooklyn, New York 11238; telephone (845) 901-6767, SKYPE:
Districts Sections 110 thru 112 and NYS Election Law. Jurisdiction is properly before this Court
cestrunk, and E-mail: uncasvotes2@yahoo.com.
pursuant to that federal statute with the United States District Courts under 28 U.S.C. §1331 with a
8. Plaintiff is a state of New York Citizen born in County of New York New York, honorably
Federal question and under 28 U.S.C. §1346.
discharged Vietnam Era Veteran, and as a citizen of New York State resident within the City of
VENUE
New York, County of Kings, is within the New York 11th Congressional District ("CD"), in 57th
5. Venue under 28 U.S.C. §1331 and 28 U.S.C. §1391 is properly laid in this Court of the
Assembly District ("AD") in the 72nd Election District ("ED") and 18th State Senate District (“SD”).
District of Columbia where Defendants actions derive from and are to be heard by an Article III
9. That Strunk makes a special appearance in this action without relinquishing sovereignty.
three Judge Panel of 28 U.S.C. §2284, to this particular District Court for the District of Columbia
10. In explanation, Plaintiff’s Special-Appearance is as a Living-Soul Son-of-the Most-High-
affords the proper venue under 28 U.S.C. §1391 (e) (2) for this action in that Defendants:
God-Yahweh in existence nunc pro tunc the moment of Creation in Joint-Heir-with-His-Son Made

Complaint - Page 3 of 31 Complaint - Page 4 of 31

 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
Debt-Free with the Yahshua Payment (consideration) of His Blood, in which Strunk Stands in the
Kingdom of the Most-High-God Yahweh, and that is under reserve, without dishonor, without
prejudice, without recourse in good faith, no dolus; and that this court and or defendants are
unable to offer a higher consideration.
11. That Strunk is defined by Roman Catholicism and its Islamic satrap as a “heretic”, and who
deny any free and independent individual liberty and or jus tertii standing to speak for so defined
heretical living person of the heretical People of New York that historically according to the actual
doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican and agents use of this term: A ‘label’, are
all to suffer spiritual condemnation by the inquisition as applied by the Papacy to anyone who dared
in the past, or who dares today, to question either (1) papal authority, or (2) any of the unscriptural
doctrines based solely upon ‘tradition’ that have been promulgated by the hierarchy of the Roman
Catholic Church, such as ‘transubstantiation’, ‘indulgences’, ‘papal infallibility’, ‘purgatory’,
‘worship of images’, ‘a celibate priesthood’, ‘auricular confession to a priest’, etc. in service of
submission of all to the exclusive doctrine of the faith.
12. The Roman Catholic Church operates a Roman cult internationally intent on worldwide
temporal power of the Pope whose agents and doctrine created the Islamic cult and Sharia Law as
identical doctrine that operate by works, unlike Orthodox apostolic Christianity / Messianic
Judaism, that require any non-believer to submit, convert or die in an animal sacrifice by fire or
holocaust to channel their faith hope as an instrument to the Roman cult.
13. That the substantive due process and equal protection issues associated with Strunk and a
special class of Plaintiffs being heretics and singled out for irreparable harm, Strunk filed a related
DCD case Strunk v. The New York Province of the Society of Jesus et al. 09-cv-1249 in the matter
of enforcement of the Logan Act directly effecting the ongoing 2010 Census enumeration.
Complaint - Page 5 of 31
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
21. NYC has a sanctuary policy that prevents enforcement of INA law on tourists.
22. Defendant MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, (Mayor) elected mayor in the NYC election of
2001 with The Mayor’s office and place for service located at 100 Gold Street NY, NY 10038, is
sued in his official capacity and individually.
23. That the Mayor both individually and in his official capacity promotes the NYC sanctuary
policy for tourists whether duly documented or not under U.S. law.
24. The Mayor promotes unlimited tourism along with citizenship equity with those state
citizens entitled to rights different than for tourists, resident aliens, minors and civilly dead.
25. NYC has more tourists from across the Atlantic Ocean than other states, but has less
proportionally per capita of state resident citizens and permanent resident aliens than say Florida,
California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, beyond the fact that NYC is a sanctuary city, primarily
because of the close proximity to Mexico and ease of travel there of tourists to those states instead
of NYC, and the fact the Federal Executive for more than thirty years and now especially the DHS
and its agencies arbitrarily do not enforce the INA and requirements of Congress as expressly
written, for whatever reason don’t.
26. That some States of the several States entice tourists to stay and reside while others don’t,
and NYC absolutely provides illegal enticement different than done in the rest of the state-
subdivisions, NYC and its agents behave outrageously in that regard with impunity.
27. The Mayor on April 7, 2009 announced by press release he intended to enumerate all
persons in NYC in the 2010 Census, and that the Mayor doing so (see Exhibit A).
28. In the previous 2000 decennial Census enumeration of all persons including tourists,
whether documented or not, however, resident in the city of New York were counted without
differentiation as to the INA law, and as a result the number of representatives that the people of the
Complaint - Page 7 of 31
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
14. The first cause of action complained of is for use of the 2010 Census count of tourists in
New York as if tourists were permanent residents in New York and the several states and territories
in the USA that will disproportionately dilute and diminish Plaintiff’s speech and vote strength in
the 11th New York U.S. House District, as applies to Defendants the Bureau of Census, The City of
New York, and Mayor Michael Bloomberg as an agent of the New York Province of the Society of
Jesus and their Provincial conspiring with the DOC, their agents and Executive branch.
15. Defendant the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF
THE CENSUS (Census Bureau) by its Director C. Louis Kincannon with duties enumerated in the
U.S. Constitution, 3 USC Sections 1 thru 15, 13 USC Sec. 141 /Sec. 195, P.L 94-171 and 2 USC 2a
and serves at the pleasure of Secretary of Commerce, is located at 14th Street between Constitution
& Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Washington D.C. 20230;
16. Defendant CARLOS GUTIERREZ , the Secretary of Commerce, is a Democrat with
duties enumerated in the US Constitution, 3 USC Sections 1 thru 15, 13 USC Sec. 141 /Sec. 195,
P.L 94-171 and 2 USC §2a serves at the pleasure of the President and Congress, and is located at
US Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
17. The Census Bureau and its agents are presently starting to count all persons in the United
States and or its territories as well as citizens overseas, using residence address before 2010.
18. That the Census Bureau counts tourists, and is obliged to differentiate between tourists,
citizens and resident aliens.
19. Defendant THE CITY OF NEW YORK, (NYC) is a New York state subdivision and as a
municipality entity represented by its corporation counsel Michael Cardozo located at the NYC Law
Department 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007.
20. NYC has a large tourist population and financially benefits from them.
Complaint - Page 6 of 31
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
state of New York were entitled to went from 31 CDs to 29 CDs.
29. That actions starting April 7, 2009 for accomplishing the 2010 decennial Census count by
the Mayor, NYC and its agents under the Mayor’s control with the Bureau of Census direction are
intent to repeat the same type enumeration as in 2000 of all persons including tourists whether
documented or not, however resident in the city of New York, counted without differentiation as to
the INA law and despite the fact that doing so will result in the number of representatives that the
people of the state of New York were entitled will be reduced from 29 CDs to 28 CDs.
30. Defendant NEW YORK PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (NYSJ) is a
membership association that is also incorporated in the state of New York in 1946 located at 39 East
83rd Street, New York, New York 10028.
31. Defendant FR. GERALD CHOJNACKI, S.J., (NYSJ Provincial) is the Provincial of New
York Province of the Society of Jesus located at the above address with email: nykprov@nysj.org
32. The Society of Jesus has ten 10 provinces that constitute the USA and its possessions and
are a subset part of 83 provinces globally; in short the Jesuit Order formed by Ignatius Loyola in
1546 as a continuous global command force were thrown out of 81 nations over time and that from
1773 thru 1814 sought exile in Prussia and Russia under Frederick the Great and Catherine the
Great as well as in Lancashire England at Stony Hurst Jesuit College and the Louisiana purchase
for their shelter from the 1773 Papal Bull there as it was arranged by U.S. Secretary of State
Thomas Jefferson under the Washington Administration, as such the Society is:
a) A military Order NOT religious order of the Holy See and are among the SMOM who are
under the Society control at the dual headquarters occupying a square block within Rome
Italy at 68 Via Condotti
b) sworn to four oaths: obedience, chastity, poverty and a blood oath to serve the pope
c) formed to reverse the Reformation under the Council of Trent
d) focused on the exclusive control of Jerusalem to bar any other religion
e) all about maintaining and increasing the wealth of the papacy
f) the most cunning and dangerous global fighting force known
Complaint - Page 8 of 31
 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

g) In France controlled Napoleon and the French Terror Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland, Washington District of Columbia and
h) Authored the Protocols for the Elders of Zion against the influence of mosaic Judaism,
especially Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli and Capt. Louis Dreyfus of the French Military 38. that the MPSJ maintains an allodial dead-hand control over the public real property

33. Of the more than 36000 Jesuits Washington District of Columbia entirely within the boundaries of Maryland were the ten square

internationally a majority are in the United mile portion of Colorado used as an alternative location of the one Capitol by Congress.

States, in which the Society of Jesus is 39. Defendant Fr. TIMOTHY B. BROWN, S.J.is the MPSJ Provincial, located at 5704

organized into ten provinces or geographic Roland Avenue Baltimore , MD 21210-1399 with email: provincial@mdsj.org

regions, each headed by a provincial 40. That Defendants NYSJ and MPSJ and their agents have a proprietary spiritual and temporal

superior appointed by the Superior General interest in the use of tourists to disenfranchise Plaintiffs and those similarly situated as heretics.

in Rome. Province Offices are organized 41. That Defendants NYSJ and MPSJ and their agents use the Tammany Hall Defendants to

shown at the right: regionalize and dismantle the USA, and render control of Congress to the Southwestern region.

34. The Vatican’s Holy See uses the many Concordats, 172 to date that have been signed with 42. That ALL Defendants’ ultra vires actions are by misapplication and administration of law to

'sovereign' nations, gives the Vatican special privileges with European Union and related projects, include tourists resident in NYC in the enumeration for the purpose of allotment of CDs to the

including the 1928 Jesuit controlled Mussolini’s setup of the reparation Vatican Bank with the People of New York after the U.S. House is provided with the enumeration have and will injure

equivalent of 90 plus Million Dollars that in 1929 after their three (3) American Knights of the Plaintiffs by disproportionately diminishing and diluting Strunk’s vote strength, speech and

SMOM manipulated margin calls caused the “crash” of the NY. Stock Exchange market whose association representation rights in each election and in Congress, the matter is ripe for review.

depressed industrial securities were then purchased by the Jesuits’ agents for the Vatican Bank.. AS AND FOR THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

35. The NYSJ Defendants have collective spiritual and temporal authority over the People of the (Census Bureau by its agents with State action to count tourists as if permanent residents
disproportionately diminishes and dilutes Strunk’s association rights jus tertii with the People
states of New York and Puerto Rico, NYC Tammany Hall, New York Federal Reserve Bank and of New York’s vote strength, speech and association representation rights in Congress)

XYZ entities and public and private John / Jane Doe(s); and NYSJ Defendants conspire with : 43. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and

36. Defendant MARYLAND PROVINCE OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS (MPSJ) paragraphs 1 through 42 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.

membership association is located at 5704 Roland Avenue Baltimore, MD 21210-1399. 44. The Second cause of action complained of is for use of the 2010 Census count of tourists in

37. That the Defendant Maryland Province of the Society of Jesus has collective spiritual and New York as if tourists were permanent residents in New York and the several states and territories

temporal authority over the People of the states of Pennsylvania, New jersey, Delaware, West in the USA that will disproportionately dilute and diminish Plaintiff’s speech and vote strength as

Complaint - Page 9 of 31 Complaint - Page 10 of 31

Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

the jus tertii People of New York in the U.S. House of Representatives, as applies to Defendants the AS AND FOR THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Bureau of Census, The City of New York, and Mayor Michael Bloomberg. (Census Bureau by its agents with State action to count tourists as if permanent residents do
disproportionately diminish and dilute Strunk’s association rights jus tertii like the People of
45. That NYC has the overwhelming greatest number of undocumented tourists compared with Louisiana’s vote strength, speech and association representation rights in Congress)

any other state subdivision depending upon which official or professional estimate used, is between 50. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and

489,000 were there 7 mil undocumented tourists nationally, to 2,466,424 were there 40 million paragraphs 1 through 49 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.

undocumented tourists nationally (see Exhibit B); and that beyond the undocumented tourists, 51. The Third cause of action for use of the 2010 Census count of tourists in New York and the

46. NYC on any given day has one million or more documented tourists on top of those several states and territories of the USA as if tourists were permanent residents in the USA that will

resident, visiting NYC’s tourist fantasy-land; evidenced recently with a glimpse behind the curtain disproportionately dilute and diminish Plaintiff’s speech and vote strength jus tertii the U.S. House

to see OZ, as with say Bernie Madoff busy at work laundering investments for his Illuminated NYC of Representatives along with and like the people similarly situated in the state of Louisiana, as

aristocracy masters through cutout entities who offer matching funds parked in Monaco’s black applies to Defendants the Bureau of Census, its agents, the City of New York, and Mayor Michael

bank accounts of the P-2 Lodge (the only remaining opaque banking facility in the World) for Bloomberg, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and many unnamed agents.

future H.U.D. Community Reinvestment Fund (CRA) outlays into the Freemasonic Cornerstone 52. Defendant UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (“US House”) in the

enterprise zone in lower Manhattan that becomes Tomorrow Land in 2030 – and needs TOURISTS. person of the "John Doe" Clerk of the House, with duties enumerated in the US Constitution, 3 USC

47. That Defendant Jesuits influence and control over the Congress and Executive as a matter of Sections 1 thru 15, 13 USC Sec. 141 /Sec. 195, P.L 94-171 and 2 USC §2a, with counsel duty by

interference with the affairs of the People of the united States is aimed at unjust spiritual and the Office of General Counsel to the House pursuant to Pub. L. 105-119, title II, Sec. 209, Nov. 26,

temporal enrichment to harm Plaintiffs and those similarly situated as heretics. 1997, 111 Stat. 2480; with all members located at US Capitol Building Washington DC 20515:

48. That Defendant Jesuits along with those similarly situated have not registered as agents of a 53. The clerk of the House receives the 2010 Census enumeration for allotment of seats to each

foreign power, the Vatican and SMOM as required with 18 USC §953 and related Title 18 laws. state of the several states on or about December 31, 2010, and thereafter provides it to the Speaker

49. That as a result of Defendants’ ultra vires action to include tourists resident in NYC in the of the House and others in senior status.

enumeration for the purpose of allotment of CDs to the People of New York after the U.S. House is 54. The projections of total enumerated persons including tourists whether documented or not in

provided with the enumeration will injure Plaintiffs by disproportionately diminishing and diluting the 2010 census are to be above 300 million or say 302,295,275 residents for use herein.

Strunk’s association rights jus tertii with the People of New York’s vote strength, speech and 55. Defendant NANCY PELOSI, the Speaker of the House of Representatives located at the

association representation rights in elections and in Congress. Capitol, and as representative from a California CD, has duties enumerated in the US Constitution,

Complaint - Page 11 of 31 Complaint - Page 12 of 31

 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

3 USC Sections 1 thru 15, 13 USC Sec. 141 /Sec. 195, P.L 94-171 and 2 USC §2a and rules. Pelosi, the state of California by its Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (State Capitol Building

56. Defendant Pelosi conspires with the racist organization La Raza Unita, the Aztlan Sacramento, CA 95814), and the state of Texas by its Governor Rick Perry (1100 San Jacinto

reconquistas, and ACORN all of whom are used by the Jesuits against the USA and heretics. Austin, Texas 78701).

57. That Defendant Speaker will provide for the allotment using all tourists whether 61. Upon information and belief Federal Defendants’ predecessors enacted a joint act of

documented or not and that based upon estimates only New York and Louisiana will both lose one Congress now known as statute Title 13 USC Section 141 on June 18, 1929 (then as amended in

representative in Congress, and that California and Texas will gain one representative in Congress 1941), was produced as a Band-Aid for Congressional unconstitutional behavior and gross

(see Exhibit C). negligence since the bogus 1920 Census, – as characterized by the 71st Congress 1st Session Senate

58. That as a result of Defendants’ ultra vires actions to include tourists resident in NYC and Report #2 on Census and Reapportionment ordered to print April 23, 1929.

elsewhere disproportionately in each state of the several states for the purpose of allotment of CDs 62. 13 USC §141 vests in the Executive (Commerce Secretary) ministerial power in the manner

to the people of New York after the U.S. House is provided with the enumeration that will injure in which a Census is taken; and also,

Plaintiffs by disproportionate diminishment and dilution of Strunk’s association rights jus tertii like 63. The statute 13 USC §141 grants discretionary power to allot membership in the House of

the People of Louisiana’s vote strength, speech and association representation rights in Congress. Representatives, states the Executive "shall have final authority for determining the geographic

AS AND FOR THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION format of an apportionment plan'' over and above the State legislatures' plenary power to

(Executive Branch Conspiracy with persons by ultra vires actions to disproportionately shift gerrymander Congressional District(s) “CDs”.
control of Congress to an unconstitutional enterprise using tourists is reverse discrimination
of a citizen’s right to suffrage and express forms of liberty different than non-citizens) 64. Based upon information and belief, by Public Law 105-119, Title II, Sec. 210(a)-(j) of

59. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and November 26, 1997 111 Statute 2483-2487, Congress established the U.S. Census Monitoring

paragraphs 1 through 58 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length. Board, appointed a committee enabling Congress to participate in execution of the 2010 Census

60. The fourth cause of action for a conspiracy for use of the 2010 Census count of tourists in under 13 USC §141 and implementation of contingency power modification under 13 USC §195.

New York and the several states and territories of the USA as if tourists were permanent residents in 65. Based upon information and belief, since 1930 our U.S. House seats entitlement for New

the USA that will disproportionately dilute and diminish Plaintiff’s speech and vote strength in the York of 45 when we had 12.5 million residents has been hijacked starting in 1950 then with 14.8

U.S. House of Representatives jus tertii along with the people similarly situated in those states with millions residents, by a cartel controlling Congress, that now would allot New York 28 CDs even

less tourists that benefit the states of Texas and California, as applies to Defendants the Bureau of though it has as many as say 19 million inhabitants minus tourists if there are only 7 million tourists

Census, its agents, The City of New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Speaker of the House Nancy in the nation and no less than 17,298,747 inhabitant without tourists were there say 40 million

Complaint - Page 13 of 31 Complaint - Page 14 of 31

Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

tourist in the nation; and as such New York would maintain the 29 CDs it now has were the seats in California is a partner as a result of arbitrary and capricious disproportionately larger voice in

the U.S. House not increased at the will of Congress, (see Exhibit D). Congress for which it is reasonably not entitled to under INA and the law of the land.

66. Were the requested 28 USC §2284 Three Judge Panel to find in a declaratory judgment 70. That as a result of Defendants’ ultra vires acts, with mis-application and mis-administration

regarding the disuse of tourists for an allotment that requires an accurate questionnaire and of law, to include tourists resident in NYC and elsewhere are disproportionately distributed in each

enumeration done during the 2010 census count now ongoing before say April 15, 2010, then on or state of the several states that were they to be used in equity for the purpose of allotment of CDs,

about December 31, 2010 the Congress would merely perform its duty as expressly required of law have to be proportional aren’t, and therefore, the Executive Branch as an enterprise conspiracy

for allotment or change the law to enlarge itself as is their plenary right without the use of tourists. maliciously disproportionately shift control of Congress to an cartel enterprise that use tourists in a

67. As a result of an allotment without tourists as shown in Chart of Exhibit D say with 20 reverse discrimination against a citizen’s right to suffrage and express forms of liberty different than

million tourists nationwide: Arizona, California, Georgia and Texas would lose one or more seats; non-citizens as a nationwide issue of monumental importance for review by the Panel herein.

as would Illinois and Nevada were an allotment done without say 40 million tourist; and at the same AS AND FOR THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

time shown on the same Chart on Exhibit D an increase of CDs for Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, (Executive Branch ultra vires Conspiracy to naturalize tourists by corruption of Congress
and suppression of the first amendment rights of citizens)
Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Wisconsin without 20 million tourists; or even more
71. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and
seats recovered for Alabama, Connecticut, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee and
paragraphs 1 through 70 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
Virginia were an allotment done without say 40 million tourists.
72. The fifth cause of action for a conspiracy for use of the 2010 Census count of tourists in
68. That Illuminized Mason, Governor Perry of the State of Texas has publicly threatened to
New York and the several states and territories of the USA as if tourists were permanent residents in
secede from the Union were the Federal government not to feed the interests of the Republic of
the USA that will disproportionately dilute and diminish Plaintiff’s speech and vote strength in the
Texas, and as such has made his support for Barry Soetoro conditional, as long as the Usurper acts
U.S. House of Representatives jus tertii along with the people similarly situated in those states with
in an ultra vires manner for the benefit of the Texas component of the enterprise which with
less tourists to unconstitutionally naturalize such tourists contrary to an act of Congress with the
California is a partner as a result of arbitrary and capricious disproportionately using tourists to
plenary power under Article I section 8 as applies to the Immigration and Naturalization Act, as
enlarge its Aristocracy’s voice in Congress for which otherwise it is not reasonably entitled to under
applies to Defendants the Bureau of Census, The City of New York, and Mayor Michael
INA and the law of the land.
Bloomberg, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, the state of California by its Governor
69. Similarly, the SMOM blessed Governor Schwarzenegger of California has made his support
Schwarzenegger, the state of Texas by its Governor Perry, the state of Arizona by its prior Governor
for Barry Soetoro conditional as well, as long as the Usurper benefits the enterprise in which
Janet Napolitano, now the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, plus various

Complaint - Page 15 of 31 Complaint - Page 16 of 31

 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

unnamed John Does(s), Jane Doe(s) and XYZ corporate entities, Barry Soetoro (a.k.a. BARACK with the intent to forward the enterprise to naturalize all undocumented tourists.

HUSSEIN OBAMA, a.k.a. “The Usurper”) is the number one naked undocumented tourist curiosity. 78. That Defendant Napolitano has systematically sabotaged and opposed enforcement of

73. Barry Soetoro (a.k.a. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA), the Usurper, is a naked undocumented border control between Arizona and Mexico, and has breeched her fiduciary duties.

tourist, and is usurping the office of the Presidency for an enterprise hidden from public view, is in 79. Defendant Napolitano and the Usurper actively use the naked power to chill speech, defame

the Capitol despite the fact Strunk fired him and returned his offer of contract on January 23, 2009; Plaintiff along with those similarly situated, and allege spurious threats of extremist and domestic

and the Usurper is the subject of a Quo Warranto inquest as all usurper acts are void ab initio. terrorism Joseph Goebbels style big lie in preparation of an imminent false flag operation, and that

74. That Defendant Barry Soetoro is at the hub of a conspiratorial enterprise to naturalize all outrageous defamation against: all those citizens wishing to enforce of INA, all those who are

undocumented tourists by use of the 2010 Census, as a defacto matter is wanton and relentless. Veterans, all those who question the lack of credentials of the Usurper, all those who are against

75. That the Jesuits’ Council on Foreign Relations and Goldman Sachs created Usurper and his infanticide and genocide, those who read and praise their bible and right to bear arms, all those who

agents act beyond the scope of 13 USC §195, 13 USC §141, U.S. Constitution and in violation of speak against the destruction of the family structure with the Jesuit devised sodomy liberation
th
the 10 Amendment the Usurpers uses the oval office to seize control over the 2010 Census in a movement, all those outraged by the destruction of the value of currency as a burden of debt

ultra vires manner as if the Executive were to have more than just ministerial duties. enslavement placed upon our children’s children future, and all those who use the right to speech,

76. That the Usurper and his agents are at the hub of the enterprise using an early taking of the association, religion, petition; in that the Usurper and DHS have outrageously issued a DHS

Census using the Jesuits’ ACORN to extort concessions from States of the several States, in the Intelligence Report outrageous invidious singling out of Plaintiff and those similarly situated, and

same way done by the Jesuit controlled Woodrow Wilson Administration, that in the 1920 Census 80. Despite the fact that DHS, the FBI, Napolitano, the Usurper continue the charade that

wrongly enumerated too early in January 1920 rather than during the planting season of April 1920 Timothy McVeigh was somehow a white-supremacist militiaman rather than a government

to extort Republican passage of the 15 points of the Treaty of Versailles, for which Fr. Edmund employee like Lee Harvey Oswald agent provocateur, (that when by FOIA the public record will

Walsh, S.J. of Georgetown University, was instrumental in implementation and supervision from show McVeigh was on loan from the DIA to infiltrate the phantom Patriot movement, in fact was

1918 forward; of which 14 points were adopted by Senators Borah and Lodge, who delayed the used an active government infiltrator and agent provocateur); and Defendants persist to spread black

1920 allotment of CDs until 1930, and prevented the USA from being dragged into the one world propaganda under the guise of Operation Vigilant Eagle by which the FBI, DHS, NSA, use

League of Nations then under the control of the Jesuit General as the United Nations is today. warrant-less wiretaps that interfere with Strunk since January 20, 2009; and as such like Senator

77. That the Defendant Usurper submitted the nomination for the ex-governor of Arizona, Janet Goldwater, Strunk contends “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no

Napolitano to be the Secretary of DHS, and which then was rubber stamped by Defendant Pelosi vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue! “

Complaint - Page 17 of 31 Complaint - Page 18 of 31

Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

81. That the Usurper and DHS Secretary, under Jesuit control, have initiated an inquisition 85. As a result of an allotment without tourists as shown in Chart of Exhibit D say with 20

against Plaintiffs along with those similarly situated as heretics, using the naked power of million tourists nationwide: Arizona, California, Georgia and Texas would lose one or more seats;

government under color of the Jesuits’ Patriot Act written at of Georgetown University in the as would Illinois and Nevada were an allotment done without say 40 million tourists; at the same

1990’s and who now use the Executive and Congressional Branch to assemble an enemies list to time were Washington D.C. residents counted with suffrage in Maryland, and say Washington DC

single out and invidiously discriminate against Strunk and others similarly situated as heretics.. were not to have any Tourists per se, it would have say 400,000 permanent residents there entitled

82. That all Defendants and the Executive Branch Conspiracy to naturalize tourists use ultra to one representative in the U.S. House as a member of the Maryland delegation, and who may vote

vires suppression of the first amendment right of citizens and have singled out Plaintiffs along with for the two U.S. Senators from Maryland as the Chart at Exhibit E shows there is an increase of

those similarly situated for invidious discrimination and outrageous treatment. CDs for Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Virginia, South

AS AND FOR THE SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION Carolina and Wisconsin without 20 million tourists; and were the calculation done without 40

as applies to DOC, the Maryland Province of the Society of Jesus, the MPSJ Provincial to millions although New York would lose a seat go to Connecticut in the northeast region.
maintain temporal and spiritual slavery with speaker of the House from California and
Executive Defendants to use the Census enumeration of tourists along with the ongoing 86. That the Maryland Jesuits are responsible for exploiting use of slavery, and in 1776 Bishop
disenfranchisement of the residents of Washington D.C. as citizens of the state of Maryland
choosing Congressional representation as an irreparably harm to Plaintiffs’ jus tertii People Fr. John Carroll, S.J. was responsible for deleting reference to elimination of slavery as part of 25%
of New York, Northeast and Mid-Atlantis States of the united States if America.
of the June Draft of the Declaration of Independence by Thomas Jefferson who wished to eliminate

83. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and the importation of slaves and sided with the English Parliament against King George then working

paragraphs 1 through 82 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length. with the Vatican and Barbary / Jesuit “Black Ship” pirates responsible for the slave trade.

84. The Sixth cause of action for a conspiracy by Defendants DOC and the Maryland Province 87. That Georgetown University was built with the proceeds of the Jesuits’ slave trade.

of the Society of Jesus and their Provincial to maintain temporal and spiritual slavery in Conspiracy 88. That Defendants Jesuits never apologized for their unjust enrichment with slavery.

with speaker of the House to use the 2010 Census count of tourists along with the ongoing 89. That Defendant Jesuits created the Hegelian tool of racial diversity to exploit Plaintiffs and

disenfranchisement of the residents of Washington D.C. who are citizens of the state of Maryland cause irreparable harm under color of their creation of the 14th Amendment America since 1868.

for the purpose of choosing Congressional representation that irreparably harms Plaintiff jus tertii 90. That Defendant Jesuits assassinated President Abraham Lincoln who resisted creation of the

People of New York, Northeast and Mid-Atlantis States of the united States if America to maintain 14 Amendment wished to reunite secessionists with the Union only with the 13th Amendment.
th

one more seat in the House from Connecticut that otherwise would be from the state of Maryland 91. Under the Jesuits Washington D.C. was and is a slave social economy as before the 13th

c/o Governor Martin O’Malley at 100 State Circle, Annapolis, Maryland 21401. Amendment because residents are not afforded equal treatment as Maryland residents with suffrage.

Complaint - Page 19 of 31 Complaint - Page 20 of 31

 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
92. Upon creation the majority of Washington D.C. residents were slaves, women, minors and
or transients without the privilege of suffrage at the creation of Washington D.C., and whereby
before the expansion of suffrage, notwithstanding Abraham Lincoln’s sponsored Bill to eliminate
Slavery in Washington D.C., was and remains blocked by the Defendant MPSJ and its agents.
93. The Congressional enactment of the Continuity of Government Act has created an alternate
location for the ten square miles for Washington D.C. to Colorado or elsewhere so that the real
property used in Maryland remains with the Defendant Jesuits who maintain an allodial title.
94. That all Defendants and the Executive Branch conspiracy to naturalize tourists use ultra
vires suppression of suffrage is a matter of unequal treatment that empowers the Southwest Region
to the detriment of Plaintiffs along with those similarly situated as heretics who are harmed by
invidious discrimination and outrageous treatment in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions.
AS AND FOR THE SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(The Hawaii enterprise to naturalize tourists as applies to racketeering unjust enrichment by
the State of Hawaii, Nancy Pelosi, Barry Soetoro, John Doe(s) Jane Doe(s) and XYZ entities)
95. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and
paragraphs 1 through 94 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
96. The seventh cause of action is for an ongoing racketeering conspiracy with use of false
billing funds associated with the illegal use of tourists as they are going to be used with the 2010
Census count of tourists in New York and the several states and territories of the USA as if tourists
were permanent residents in the USA that will not only disproportionately dilute and diminish
Plaintiff’s speech but steal Strunk’s liberty along with other citizens and their offspring by the
ongoing theft of property from all the way up from federal down to the state and local level to pay
for the exploitation of the undocumented tourist that show up in every form of public funded
provision of services from schooling, social services Medicaid etcetera all the way on the other side
Complaint - Page 21 of 31
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
18 USC §1957 – (engaging in monetary transaction in property derived from
specific unlawful activity)
99. Plaintiff first task in need of explanation is why Hawaii would in 1961 have a large
population of tourists who were essentially exploited slave labor, but were a huge burden to the
system in poverty and crime.
100. The Hawaiian answer, as it was a Democratic state and still is was to start registering
all those foreign kids by the thousands. The purpose being to tap into all those federal hundreds of
millions then which would profit the state.
101. Federal poverty programs flowed funds into the pockets of the Hawaiian retailers as
the golden goose pipeline. If one makes citizens out of tourists (e.g. illegals), then Hawaii converts
a debt into their asset in obtaining more funds in the system which empowers liberal - monocentrist
/ egalitarian fascists most of whom are Illuminized Masons and or Masons in the mould of Grand
Orient Lodgers as were Marx / FDR / Hitler / Mussolini / Lenin / Stalin / Mao.
102. The fact is there are hundreds of thousands of tourists registered in Hawaii. Do you
think even a Republican governor sitting on this explosive mess wants any of this coming out?
103. The entire state of Hawaii sold out the United States for filthy lucre, because they
were importing Asian slave labor for more than 30 years under the open door policy to build
railroads and work the fields notwithstanding the Article 1 Section 9 U.S. Constitution prohibition.
104. Plaintiff contends that the official Hawaiian elite’s nightmare would be the removal
of Soetoro under Quo Warranto and having 49 other states suing Hawaii for the money it would
cost to check all of their records over the Hawaiian fraud – so be it let is start here.
105. Hawaii has always been a corrupt enclave like Rhode Island.
106.Hawaii was the conduit in the Clinton years to get Chinese communists a stake in the United
States Stock Market, to which Hawaii had the first meltdown in this scheme in costing their
Complaint - Page 23 of 31
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
of drug treatment prosecution victim services and incarceration associated with the State Criminal
Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) that picks up only a small portion of guard labor costs in
funding of state incarceration of undocumented tourists.
97. In the context of the federal question presented here in the matter of ultra vires use of
tourists to allot U.S. House seats is the premier fundamental question underlying the matter being
who is paying for this mess being created and who is the oldest conspirator doing what is going on
now for more than a century long beyond the Island of Puerto Rico having its own impact here in
NYC on the east coast is the territory of Hawaii feeding cheap labor to the west coast in the
continuing scam long before it became a state, and that the scamming being done through Hawaii
has contributed toward triggering our financial meltdown today as referenced in overhead costs
imposed upon Citizen taxpayers and their offspring.
98. The Defendant Soetoro legacy in his background in the prior territory of Hawaii having
become prominent in national life exposes the Hawaiian scam as simply the tip of this iceberg
which the Governor of Hawaii Linda Lingle (c/o Governor of Hawaii State Capitol, Room 415
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813) must conceal, for Defendant Soetoro along with all those other enterprise
benefactors or beyond embarrassment, people ensconced in the power structure of Hawaii who
upon investigation will go to prison for false billing of the treasury and falsification of documents as
defined but not limited to the follows Federal statutes:
18 USC §1028 (a)(1)(4)(7)(c)(1)(2)(3)(d)(1)(f)- (fraud and related activity in
connection with identification documents)
18 USC §1324 (a) (1) (A) (iii.) (iv.) (Harboring illegal aliens)
18 USC §1341 (mail fraud)
18 USC §1343 (wire fraud)
18 USC §1425 (a) - (procure citizenship or naturalization unlawfully)
18 USC §1512 (b)(1)(2)(c)(1)(2)(d)(1)(2)(3)- (Tamper with witness, victim )
18 USC §1546 (a) - (fraud and misuse of documents)
18 USC §1952 (a) (1) (3) (b) (2) (3) – (interstate and foreign travel in aid of
racketeering Enterprise)
Complaint - Page 22 of 31
Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD
investors a fortune and ruining their banks.
107.That is why Hawaii is in collusion with Barry Soetoro. They were involved in massive
welfare fraud and do not want this coming out.
108.With this kind of background, in families being “informed” of the opportunities involved in
engaging in illegal citizenship as tourists whether documented or undocumented, one Stanley Ann
Dunham left Barry Soetoro in the Hawaiian system with Grandma Dunham.
109.Grandma Madelyn Dunham did earn some money in BankHo, her bank in Hawaii, but the
prestigious school Barry got into was the same game that brought Barack Sr. to America on a free
educational route too.
110.Birdie Barry Obama Soetoro was tapping into the welfare system of Hawaii, through his
Grandparents who obtained foreign student loans to get him into Occidental College.
111.The place Soetoro was sent to school by the Dunhams, was like many of the colleges in that
1979 period in tapping into government resources of free money to “educate” foreigners.
112.And as the reader should know schools of this nature are conduits of establishing globalist
outreach for foreign children to place them back there with an American outlook and of course
saying schools of this nature act to dry clean of billions of dollars in funds in “research”.
113.There are numerous studies linked to this gravy train of funds which flow into colleges and
back into corporations whose equipment and services are purchased.
114.So the Dunhams were adept at illegal activities in scamming the American system, so it is a
conclusion by what Birdie Barry Barack Hussein Obama (“Davis”) Soetoro has been up to with his
platoon of lawyers that he is covering something up.
115.Remember it is public information that Barry Obama Soetoro upon going into college
became Barack Hussein Obama. Freemason / Liberals (i.e. Colin Powell, Jessie Jackson) have
Complaint - Page 24 of 31
 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

explained this away as, “Barack was more intellectual sounding”. Not a chance, because what was her young impetus mistake into her glory.

going on is this: 120.Not for one moment though have the Rex Templars (under the Jesuit General), the

a. A college career recruiter shows up and says, “Barry come to Occidental as you Rothschilds nor Rockefellers (“globalists”) not known Barry Soetoro is dripping wet with fraud.
will have fun”.
b. Barry goes home and tells Gram Dunham he wants to go have fun. Either money 121.The globalists know full well how precarious of position Obama is in. They know if this
is tight or the Dunhams are basic welfare swindlers and being cheap as they are,
Gramma and Mama put their heads together and say, “Hey, we can get a free comes out the country will be in chaos and they know if Obama stays in office the continued
education if we dust off Barack sr. being a British subject.”
c. They tell Occidental that and Occidental says, “Great, but we need economic attack on America will simply provide their conduit in establishing their global order.
documentation”.
d. “Crapper in the wrapper”, Stan and Mad say as all they got is a bogus Hawaiian These financiers win no matter what as they have set this out to play out this way.
birth certificate making him American.
e. Then Stan and Mad remember that Barry was adopted by Indonesian Papa 122.At the very least in this, Barack Obama is guilty of federal money fraud and it could end
Soetoro.
f. They tell Occidental this and provide Barry Soetoro school records from there for Obama in the foreign student loans IF he had not shown a pattern for the period from 1971
Indonesia and Occidental says, “Eureka, you have struck it rich pilgrims. There
are golden grants in them Indonesian hills!” to at least 1982 in passing himself off as Barry Soetoro, resident of Indonesia as an adopted son
g. So Birdie becomes Barack and Occidental gets a big ole Obama grant to go with
all their other foreign student federal grants they have been milking the system from British Kenya all to tap into the American money supply. A normal moral person would never
for at the behest of the globalists.
have gotten themselves into this mess, but Obama because of his programming has been plowing on
116.The problem now is Occidental never figured their scammer would produce a person in the
in this using the shield of the patricians, globalists -including SMOM Zbignew Brezinski and
White House. See this system was designed to Americanize 3rd worlders with globalist nonsense
George Schwartz (Soros), who created him as they are powerful and connected people.
and then bury them back into Indonesia, Russia and Kenya to ruin those people’s lives, not ours.
123.Occidental College opens up the door to Barack Obama declaring in writing he is not
117.Occidental now has a huge problem as it engaged in federal student loan fraud which gave
American, but foreign. This progresses to Columbia in this fraud as Birdie at home with the racist
them like many of these globalist programs huge bankrolls to profit off of in exchange for
base elements as he dope slides along, concludes he is owed a little summer vacation with his
Rothschild plans.
Pakistani buddies. Always the Dunham corner cutter, he goes into Pakistan once again on an
118.None of these geniuses ever suspected a scammer scamming the system would have a parent
Indonesian passport which signifies again Barack Obama is Indonesian as Americans could not get
who would eventually tap into the Ford Foundation money and fellow traveler contacts which
into Pakistan.
would start opening doors, including psychiatric research doors in reprogramming a Birdie dope
124.Barry Soetoro would have probably gotten away with the money fraud, if he had not been
head in Columbia to become Barack the communist organizer of Chicago.
too cheap and decided he just had to flip the bird to the American system and get into Pakistan.
119.Stanley Ann Dunham got greedy in out of necessity. The problem is Stanley looks like she
Those records prove he is an affirmed triple citizen of British Kenya, Indonesia and America, if not
embezzled funds from the non-profit Ford Foundation to give Birdie a jump start at life in making

Complaint - Page 25 of 31 Complaint - Page 26 of 31

Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

Canada registration too. Any part of which disqualifies him for President of the United States. Someone is going to come forward with the papers which will light this up as it is in the globalists

125.Birdie Obama Soetoro is like the crook who steals a million dollars, but has to go back and interests to do this. Plaintiff would be more than willing to submit a RICO Statement in this regard

pick up the bank President’s pen in greed and that is the 20 dollar item that gets him busted. but not alone without the funds for which to respond to the torrent of paper fury that would follow –

126.There are Federal records for these Barry Obama Soetoro applications for funding in the I leave such to the various state attorneys’ general to do that.

Department of Education. As of the Usurper is attempting to further smear George W. Bush in 132.The activities of the defendants amount to an unlawful prima facie tort.

releasing Bush documents, to take the heat off of Birdie, the Dunham, Obama, Soetoro education 133.That Defendants by unjust enrichment interfere with sovereign State Citizens right to a

files are now open to the Freedom of Information act as all papers associated with a President are, republican form of government and peaceful use of our sovereign nation have aided and abetted the

as Birdie Barry Barack Hussein “Davis” Obama Soetoro made this a presidential issue when he injury of vote infringement against Citizens of the USA in violation of Civil Rights Act, the Bivens

hired attorneys to cover up what was being hidden at Occidental College. Case and subject to remedies and penalties under Law

127.This is a matter for the Justice Department as it is money fraud of college funds and it is a 134.That Defendants are a racketeering enterprise and by its conduct promote open borders and

matter for the Republican minority in Congress to demand and hold hearings investigating this; cause the conditions for unjust enrichment, have taken plaintiff’s personal proprietary property in

however it is also Plaintiff’s duty to apprise the Court of this as it bears upon the equity relief the form of proprietary suffrage rights and as damage to the class have forced tax dollars to be

demanded herein. directed to the enterprise measured based upon the following categories and amounts developed at

128.Those education loan records all exist and if someone destroyed them and they are missing, www.lmmigrationcounters.com sources and the formulas, used in computing the figures shown on

that spoliation is a federal crime of which Barack Obama is benefited by, as in he is then a guilty co their website and include reports issued by government agencies and private organizations follows:

conspirator in another felony. a) Number of Illegal Aliens (Tourists) in U.S. ..................... 21,218,615 Tourists
b) Money Wired to Mexico Since Jan. 2006 thru 2007......... $42,363,149,000
129. If you get money from someone illegally, and someone else burns the papers protecting c) Cost of Social Services for lllegals since 1996 thru 2007. $397,480,946,017
d) Children of Illegal Aliens (Tourists) in Public Schools .... 4, 184,824 Tourists
you, you are just as guilty as the person who lit the match. e) Cost of lllegals in K-12 Since 1996 thru 2007.................. $ 14,828,106,397
f) Illegal Aliens (Tourists) Incarcerated .................................... 351,087 Tourists
130. That is how all of this ties together from Hawaiian welfare fraud, Occidental College g) Cost of Incarceration since 2001 thru 2007....................... $ 1,477,239,843
h) Illegal Alien Fugitives .............................................................663,347 Tourists
student finance fraud and Barack Obama currency fraud defrauding the American public of funds i) Anchor Babies since 2002 thru 2007..................2,148,175 native-born Tourists
j) Skilled Jobs Taken by Tourists ...........................................10,232,441 Tourists
and places of education for its own citizens, in Hawaii use of tourists with each decennial Census
135.The plaintiff, and accommodation for being representative of a class of all citizens in
enumeration – it is a golden goose that keeps on giving as NYC and Mayor Bloomberg agree.
Brooklyn, NYC, the State and of the various States, were damaged in an amount exceeding $x,
131. This is really a large issue of global scale and Barack Obama is the tip of the felony iceberg.
which amount will be proven with certainty at the time of trial by jury.

Complaint - Page 27 of 31 Complaint - Page 28 of 31

 Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

136.Remedy and penalty as applies under Civil Rights Act pursuant to Title 42, the Bivens Case
G. As a matter of on-going irreparable harm on the fifth cause of action a restraining order against
and the Racketeering Influence Corrupt Organizations Act under Title 18 U.S.C. Section 1965(c)
further use of invidious allegations that Strunk and those similarly situated are somehow
and related law and equity.
extremists and domestic terrorists; and
Wherefore, Plaintiffs demand and prayer of equity relief by the Three Judge Panel as follows:
H. Consolidate this case with the matter of enforcement of the Logan Act as to the Jesuits, SMOM,

A. A 28 USC §2284 Three Judge Panel be noticed. Opus Dei and their agents, entitled Strunk v. NYSJ et al. DCD 09-cv-1249, as germane herein.

B. As a matter of imminent irreparable harm on the first cause of action a restraining order against I. Transfer the related case Forjone et al. v. California et al. of NDNY 06-cv-1002 to this District.

any further census taking until a questionnaire is prepared to at least ask:. “Are you a citizen?” J. Transfer the related case Loeber et al. v. Spargo et al. of NDNY 04-cv-1193 from an appeal

“Are you a permanent resident alien with a green card?”; and “Are there any other persons case now awaiting a briefing schedule in 2nd Circuit to this District when ordered remanded.

residing in the residence who are not and if so how many?” K. That the Court order reparations due Plaintiff and those similarly situated as heretics who have

C. A preliminary hearing for permanent injunction. suffered irreparable spiritual and temporal injuries with damages as a result of malice of the

D. As a matter of imminent irreparable harm a declaratory judgment that according to the plenary Defendant Jesuits their agents and as agents of the Vatican Bank in the present value calculation

power of Congress in U.S. Constitution Article 1 Section 8, “Tourists” per se as would be amount of five Trillion Dollars since 1999 as it operated a ponzi scheme.

defined in the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 (INA) are not permanent residents, L. That based upon the Special Masters report that there be a jury trial for recovery of damages in

therefore, not counted in the Census for the purpose of the 2010 Census allotment of U.S. House the matter of ongoing use of tourist as if citizens for the purposes of reimbursing the people of

representatives to the people of a state of the several states. the State of New York and several state accordingly.

E. As a matter of ongoing irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and those similarly situated as heretics M. The costs of this action along with attorney fees as to 42 USC §1988 if applicable, including

including those members of the class of solely based American resident who at the creation of those of the Special Master.
th th th N. Further and different relief as deemed necessary
the 13 14 and 15 Amendment were related to former slaves as a declaratory judgment of the
. Respectfully submitted by:
actual State residence for the purpose of suffrage that Maryland be order to provide suffrage to
th
Dated: July 9 , 2009 /s/ Christopher –Earl : Strunk
the residents of the Washington DC in the election of the Maryland delegation and that
Brooklyn, New York _______________________________
Maryland shall received an increase in House membership proportionately based upon Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue – 281
population at the 2010 Census enumeration and allotment. Brooklyn, New York 11238
845-901-6767
F. Appointment of a special master to deal with the census count.

Complaint - Page 29 of 31 Complaint - Page 30 of 31

Strunk v. US Department of Commerce Bureau of Census et al. DCD

AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK )

) ss.:
COUNTY OF KINGS )

Accordingly, I, Christopher –Earl : Strunk , being duly sworn, depose and say:

I have read the foregoing matter of the 2010 Census Apportionment of House seats to

disproportionately dilute and diminish the Vote Strength with COMPLAINT with PETITION for

a 28 U.S.C. §2284 PANEL, TRO, INJUNCTION with DECLARATORY JUDGMENT for

EQUITY RELIEF for Plaintiff(s) and those similarly situated as heretics with seven causes of

action with five exhibits annexed, and know the contents thereof and jus tertii effects those similarly

situated with six causes of action, and that the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the

matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to

be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief are as

follows: 3rd parties, books and records, and personal knowledge.

/s/ Christopher –Earl : Strunk

____________________________
Christopher –Earl : Strunk
Sworn to before me this
the 9th day of July 2009

/s/

____________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

Complaint - Page 31 of 31
 Est 2010 House Allotment seat Est 2010 House Allotment seat Est 2010 House Allotment seat
per state w/o 20 mil. Tourists per state w/o 30 mil. Tourists per state w/o 40 mil. Tourists
State Population House Population House Population House
Dif. Dif. Dif.
w/o Tourists CDs w/o Tourists CDs w/o Tourists CDs
Alabama 4671565 7 0 4,637,965 7 0 4,603,199 8 1
Alaska 655443 1 0 647,943 1 0 641,291 1 0
Arizona 4841751 7 -1 4,407,640 7 -1 4,038,966 7 -1
Arkansas 2779595 4 0 2,738,015 4 0 2,702,961 5 1
California 31914878 49 -4 28,180,977 45 -8 25,478,133 42 -11
Colorado 4329070 7 0 4,108,270 7 0 3,920,609 7 0
Connecticut 3480564 5 0 3,428,338 5 0 3,367,373 6 1
Delaware 796882 1 0 783,549 1 0 767,783 1 0
Washington DC 400000 1 1 400,000 1 1 400,000 1 1
Florida 16334779 25 0 15,879,478 25 0 15,361,459 25 0
Georgia 8025635 12 -1 7,692,617 12 -1 7,380,435 12 -1
Hawaii 1266940 2 0 1,264,798 2 0 1,255,295 2 0
Idaho 1323894 2 0 1,295,869 2 0 1,270,143 2 0
Illinois 12053019 19 0 11,380,214 18 -1 10,824,502 18 -1
Indiana 6337774 10 1 6,274,365 10 1 6,209,798 10 1
Iowa 3031430 5 0 2,999,201 5 0 2,961,885 5 0
Kansas 2754616 4 0 2,676,059 4 0 2,618,248 4 0
Kentucky 4256693 7 1 4,236,693 7 1 4,213,044 7 1
Louisiana 4435271 7 0 4,429,646 7 0 4,414,680 7 0
Maine 1356561 2 0 1,356,011 2 0 1,354,223 2 0
Maryland 5352206 8 0 5,283,662 8 0 5,172,939 9 1
Massachusetts 6463035 10 0 6,342,395 10 0 6,214,498 10 0
Michigan 10059504 16 1 9,950,304 16 1 9,860,376 16 1
Minnesota 5090764 8 0 4,994,764 8 0 4,919,085 8 0
Mississippi 2993220 5 1 2,983,620 5 1 2,966,592 5 1
Missouri 5884273 9 0 5,855,359 9 0 5,819,614 10 1
Montana 959567 1 0 959,017 2 1 957,228 2 1
Nebraska 1759583 3 0 1,722,783 3 0 1,691,507 3 0
Nevada 1793166 3 0 1,649,662 3 0 1,506,432 3 0
New Hampshire 1300150 2 0 1,300,150 2 0 1,294,238 2 0
New Jersey 8269361 13 0 7,948,686 13 0 7,643,700 13 0
New Mexico 1872203 3 0 1,817,193 3 0 1,761,317 3 0
New York 18493122 28 -1 17,861,512 29 0 17,298,747 28 -1
North Carolina 8283440 13 0 7,967,217 13 0 7,699,022 13 0
North Dakota 680744 1 0 680,194 1 0 678,405 1 0
Ohio 11960260 18 0 11,907,460 19 1 11,843,073 19 1
Oklahoma 3556101 5 0 3,485,207 6 1 3,425,523 6 1
Oregon 3414827 5 0 3,270,827 5 0 3,157,308 5 0
Pennsylvania 12913514 20 1 12,848,508 21 2 12,770,461 21 2
Rhode Island 1062940 2 0 1,040,540 2 0 1,017,363 2 0
South Carolina 4316567 7 1 4,263,287 7 1 4,214,722 7 1
South Dakota 801328 1 0 800,778 1 0 798,989 1 0
Tennessee 5905239 9 0 5,842,311 9 0 5,773,157 10 1
Texas 20213393 31 -1 18,549,588 30 -2 17,235,605 28 -4
Utah 2219337 3 0 2,112,087 3 0 2,031,604 3 0
Vermont 644643 1 0 644,093 1 0 642,304 1 0
Virginia 7412772 11 0 7,273,809 12 1 7,115,071 12 1
Washington 5902657 9 0 5,695,519 9 0 5,517,218 9 0
West Virginia 1927240 3 0 1,926,690 3 0 1,924,902 3 0
Wisconsin 5559710 9 1 5,505,262 9 1 5,440,093 9 1
Wyoming 522494 1 0 521,944 1 0 520,156 1 0
Totals 282,633,725 435 271,822,076 435 0 262,695,274 435

EXHIBIT E
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 9
 by the District Attorney for the Washington District of Columbia and U.S. Attorney General with

notice to Barrack Hussein Obama in esse, with Title 16 Chapter 35 (Quo Warranto statute) of
Non-Domestic
The District of Columbia Code in its entirety (1) with allegations of usurpation of Office of the
In Care of:
593 Vanderbilt Avenue – 281 President before the District Judge assigned herein, at a time afforded by the Court at the United
Brooklyn, New York
Zip Code exempt DMM 122-32 States Courthouse, at 333 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20001, on the day and
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Not a corporation month in 2009 , at a time and courtroom designated by the Court, or as soon thereafter as counsel
Living-Soul
Affiant can be heard.
No Third Parties
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Dated: May 26th , 2009
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Brooklyn New York /s/ Christopher-Earl : Strunk
 _____________________________
Z 593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281
       Brooklyn, New York;
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, ) Christopher-Earl: Strunk ©in esse
) cc: Brigham John Bowen, AUSA
Plaintiff, ) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
) 20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
v. ) Civil Action No.: 08-2234 (RJL) Washington, DC 20530
)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, and ) The Honorable Jeffrey Taylor
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND ) The U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia,
SECURITY, ) 555 4th Street, NW
Defendant. ) Washington, DC 20530
)
Z Barack Hussein Obama in esse
c/o The White House
NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
AND DECISION ON QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN Washington, DC 20500
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S 1
Chapter 35§ 16-3501 Persons against whom issued; civil action. states: A quo warranto may be issued from the
AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO ALLEGED POTUS:
United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the
United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed affidavit of Christopher-Earl : Strunk, by action.
Chapter 35§ 16-3502 states: The Attorney General of the United States or the United States attorney may institute a
Special-Appearance, affirmed May 26, 2009 with exhibits annexed with Federal Rules of Civil proceeding pursuant to this subchapter on his own motion or on the relation of a third person.
Chapter 35§ 16-3503 states: If the Attorney General or United States attorney refuses to institute a quo warranto
Procedure (FRCvP) Rule 81(a)(2) will move the Court, with the Quo Warranto demand for jury proceeding on the request of a person interested, the interested person may apply to the court by certified petition for
leave to have the writ issued.
Chapter 35§ 16-3544 states: In a quo warranto proceeding, the defendant may demur, plead specially, or plead “not
trial of the issue of facts and then a decision on question of first impression of natural-born-
guilty” as the general issue, and the United States or the District of Columbia, as the case may be, may reply as in
other actions of a civil character. Issues of fact shall be tried by a jury if either party requests it. Otherwise they shall
citizen with Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution first offered for action be determined by the court.

Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT opposition to Defendants’ partial motion to dismiss plaintiff's amended complaint as to the
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Z corporate Office of the President of the united States (POTUS) alleged to be: Barack Hussein
      
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, ) Obama in esse (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) .
)
Plaintiff, ) 2. That on April 23, 2009, the Executive Branch Defendant’s counsels MICHAEL F.
)
v. ) Civil Action No.: 08-2234 (RJL) HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General, ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO (D.C. Bar No. 4 18925)
)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, and ) Deputy Branch Director, BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 98 1555) of the Civil Division of
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND )
SECURITY, ) the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE filed the Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss
Defendant. )
) Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (MTD), see Exhibit 1.
Z
3. That Defendants’ MTD requests an order to dismiss to the extent alleged that Plaintiff
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF QUO
WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON QUESTION OF seeks records relating to “President Obama” (see Exhibit 2), to wit Affiant denies the allegation
FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL
MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO THE that Barack Hussein Obama in esse is somehow the legitimate administrator POTUS in corporate
CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED:
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE capacity, and alleges that Barack Hussein Obama in esse usurps, intrudes into, unlawfully exercises,

a franchise conferred by the corporate office POTUS for the failure to prove eligibility as to the natural-
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss. born-citizen qualification in Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution as a matter of
COUNTY OF KINGS )
first impression, and was duly fired from the POTUS corporate capacity on January 23, 2009.
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, by special appearance being duly sworn,
4. That on February 2, 2009, Barack Hussein Obama in esse, and Eric Holder in esse
depose and say under penalty of perjury:
outrageously and arbitrarily substituted and replaced Defendant’s counsels: the United States
1. That Affiant makes this Special-Appearance in support of plaintiff’s notice of cross
Attorney for the District of Columbia JEFFREY A. TAYLOR, (D.C. Bar # 498610); RUDOLPH
motion of Quo Warranto demand, against the individual Barack Hussein Obama in esse (a/k/a
CONTRERAS, D.C. Bar # 434122 Assistant United States Attorney; and lead counsel WYNNE
Barry Soetoro) who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, unlawfully exercises, a
P. KELLY of the U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE of counsel to Washington District of Columbia
franchise conferred by the corporate United States office of the President (POTUS) for failing to
District Attorney, with BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 98 1555) united States’ Assistant
prove eligibility as a natural-born-citizen with Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’
Attorney of the Civil Division of the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE without the approval of
Constitution, for jury trial and a 28 U.S.C. §2284 three judge panel decision on question of first
Plaintiff, see Exhibit 3.
impression for interpretation of the eligibility requirement “natural-born-citizen” in response in
5. That on February 3, 2009, Plaintiff gave notice to Defendant’s lead Counsel shown as

Strunk Affidavit Page 1 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 2 of 20

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

Sub-exhibit 12 (that Barack Hussein Obama in his corporate capacity was fired on January 23, from Plaintiff in the cover-up with Barack Hussein Obama in esse, and Eric Holder in esse:

2009) annexed in Plaintiff’s Affidavit in support NOTICE OF MOTION FOR PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Defendants pray that the Court dismiss Plaintiffs suit with prejudice.
RECONSIDERATION OF DEFENDANT'S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO render judgment that Plaintiff take nothing. assess costs against Plaintiff, and award
Defendants all other relief to which they are entitled. (emphasis added by affiant)
ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT (see Exhibit 4 with Sub-
9. That Defendants’ Counsels MICHAEL F. HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General,
exhibits 1 through 14), by due service using the united States' Postal Service (USPS) and email
ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO (D.C. Bar No. 4 18925) Deputy Branch Director, BRIGHAM J.
notice to Defendant’s counsels (see Exhibit 5): the United States Attorney for the District of
BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 98 1555) of the Civil Division of the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
Columbia JEFFREY A. TAYLOR, (D.C. Bar # 498610); RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, D.C. Bar #
JUSTICE are committing a fraud upon the Court and further injuring Plaintiff by perpetuating
434122 Assistant United States Attorney; and lead counsel WYNNE P. KELLY; and due notice
the allegation that Barack Hussein Obama in esse is anything other than a usurper and as such
to the Court and Defendants as then was entered into the Court Docket.
are ultra vires and must withdraw from this case as they do not represent my interests herein as a
6. That on April 23, 2009, the Executive Branch Defendant’s counsels MICHAEL F.
sovereign natural-born-citizen of the united States of America (USA) with only limited express
HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General, ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO (D.C. Bar No. 4 18925)
powers granted by Plaintiff and the people under the united States’ Constitution.
Deputy Branch Director, BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 98 1555) of the Civil Division of
10. Based upon information and belief, Eric Holder in esse then and now usurps , intrudes into,
the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE in concert with Barack Hussein Obama in esse, and Eric
unlawfully exercises, a franchise conferred by the corporate office POTUS and the U.S. Senate in the
Holder in esse filed the Defendants’ Answer to the Amended Complaint (Answer), see Exhibit 6.
Office of Attorney General inter alia his actions are void ab initio suborns Defendant’s counsels
7. That the Defendants’ Answer shown as Exhibit 6 at page 13 allege affirmative defenses
MICHAEL F. HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General, ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO (D.C. Bar
despite Defendants default under FOIA 5 U.S.C. §552, to wit Plaintiff denies each alleged
No. 4 18925) Deputy Branch Director, BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 98 1555) of the
defense applies and contends each is part of a fraud upon the Court that compounds injury:
Civil Division of the united States’ DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, and as such ALL are
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1 . Plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. dismissed from representing Plaintiff and or Defendants herein and as such are all fired with
2. Records at issue are exempt or excluded from disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act. cause including breech of fiduciary duty and subject to the Quo Warranto statutory removal upon
3. Plaintiffs claims against DHS are moot.
4. The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted. investigation by this Court and jury trial on the issues of fact as members of an enterprise within
5. Defendant DHS has not been properly served with process.
the District of Columbia that usurp, intrude into, unlawfully exercise, the franchise conferred by
8. That in the Defendants’ Answer shown as Exhibit 6 at page 13, Defendants’ counsels
the corporate united States’ office of the President (POTUS), and for failing to prove eligibility
outrageously demand in the prayer for relief that Plaintiff be sanctioned despite Defendants
as a natural-born-citizen with Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution as a
default under FOIA 5 U.S.C. §552 and the righteous availability of public information withheld

Strunk Affidavit Page 3 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 4 of 20

Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

matter of first impression. Kingdom requesting records of Stanley Ann Dunham, and Barack Hussein Obama Jr., (see

 That as a dispositive statutory matter that supercedes further action in this FOIA Exhibit 7) and then also for Barack Obama Senior to the British Home Office on January 8 2009

complaint under 5 U.S.C. §552 Plaintiff as of right is entitled to a preliminary hearing on the (see Exhibit 8).

Quo Warranto matter first and that the MTD (shown as Exhibit 1) must not only be deemed 16. That based upon information and belief the British Chancellor of the Exchequer controls

premature but nugatory as against public policy until such time a jury trial on the issues of fact the Bond and original birth record of Barack Hussein Obama in esse, who as a British citizen of

and decision on question of first impression is done. the United Kingdom at birth is governed by the laws and subject to the Monarchy accordingly at

12. That Plaintiff affirmative response to Defendants defenses and prayer for relief as the birth whether it was in Hawaii or Mombassa Kenya on August 4, 1961.

matter of overreaching that further injures Plaintiff hereby responds to each of the Defendants’ 17. That on January 8 2009, Mark Lowen of the British Foreign Office Information

alleged defenses (listed in above paragraph 7) below: Management Group responded to Affiant’s FOIA request shown as Exhibit 7, therein-directed

I . Plaintiff denies any failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Plaintiff to contact the British Home Office (see Exhibit 9) and then as follow-up and

13. That Affiant in support of this Cross Motion in response to Defendants’ First Affirmative coordination with both FOIAs shown as Exhibit 7 and Exhibit 8, on January 13, 2009 Henry

Defense denies any failure to exhaust his administrative remedies, repeats each and every Leitch of the British Foreign Office Information Management Group confirmed the disposition

allegation contained in the above paragraphs 1 through 12 with the same force and effect as of both requests then properly sent to the Home Office (shown appended with Exhibit 7).

though herein set forth at length. 18. That on January 12, 2009 the British Home Office U.K. Border Agency FOI Team

14. That on January 27, 2009, shown at Case Docket item no. 7 and Exhibit 4 Sub-exhibit 1, acknowledged the request shown as Exhibit 8 (see Exhibit 10).

Defendant DOS’ Counsels: the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia JEFFREY A. 19. That the British Home and Foreign Office required Plaintiff to obtain permission from

TAYLOR, (D.C. Bar # 498610); RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, D.C. Bar # 434122 Assistant any living person including Barack Hussein Obama in esse before it would release documents;

United States Attorney; and lead counsel WYNNE P. KELLY admit to the fact that Plaintiff’s and that Affiant not having knowledge of the whereabouts for US Senator Obama did thereafter

FOIA request to the United Kingdom’s Foreign Office is germane to the FOIA case herein by the serve notice with request for permission upon Barack Hussein Obama in esse as his agent the

footnote #2 referenced in the motion to expand the time to answer complained that quote: fellow U.S. Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois.

“In addition to the purported amended complaint, Pro Se Plaintiff has also sent counsel for 20. That Affiant admits that Barack Hussein Obama in esse has not provided permission to
Defendant a copy of what appears to be an information request made by Plaintiff to the
government of the United Kingdom.” release documents and that or any response from U.S. Senator Richard Durbin as to the British

15. That on January 7, 2009, as of right Plaintiff while seeking to exhaust his administrative FOIA Requests and or the subject FOIA Requests herein.

process admits to the British FOIA request(s) to the British Foreign Office of the United

Strunk Affidavit Page 5 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 6 of 20

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234
21. That after January 27, 2009, when Barack Hussein Obama in esse was notified he is fired,
fired fired, as shown in Exhibit 4-Sub-exhibit 12 and when combined with the January 7, 2009
request for permission, the usurpers: Barack Hussein Obama in esse and Eric Holder in esse,
committed a fraud upon the Court, in a conspiracy to conceal and cover-up, substituted
Defendants’ counsel without due notice to Plaintiff (as shown in Exhibit 5) without approval
thereby injuring Plaintiff.
22. That there is a continuing conspiracy to defraud involving spoliation and or concealment
from the public of official documents under the control of the U.S. Department of State (DOS),
the Department of Homeland Security and elsewhere that started according to the DOS’s Office
of Inspector General (OIG) there was the passport file snooping discovered in March 2008
whose nature was characterized as "imprudent curiosity" by contract employees hired to help
DOS process passport applications.
23. However, notwithstanding such OIG characterization, Plaintiff complains is part of the
cover-up and effort by Barack Hussein Obama in esse while acting in his official capacity as a
U.S. Senator with others to withhold facts essential and germane herein for proving that he is not
a natural-born citizen, and
24. That Plaintiff filed with the Court the evidence of the pattern of concealment by Barack
Hussein Obama in esse as shown in Exhibit 4 Sub-exhibit 11, as the discovery of the conspiracy
reported by NewsMax in the press on January 12, 2009, with the recent theft of the DOS Data
Disks containing the Obama passport data from the National Archives believed to be associated
with the April 2008 assassination of the material witness Federal Officer Quarles Harris Jr.; and
25. That on February 20, 2009 Plaintiff filed an additional FOIA Request B8984 for the
Defendants DOS’s OIG 104 page Report issued on or about July 4, 2008 (see Exhibit 11), and
Strunk Affidavit Page 7 of 20
Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234
29. Affiant as shown in Exhibit 4 Sub-exhibit 12 duly fired Barack Hussein Obama from his
corporate capacity for cause on January 23, 2009 after he took the oath of office by timely return
of the offer of contract wishing no contract thereby revoked power of attorney, because he failed
to prove eligibility as a natural born citizen; notwithstanding his opinion to the contrary may
only be decided in this Court as a matter of law after the trial of facts before a jury.
30. That Defendants’ Answer, shown as Exhibit 6 dated April 23, 2009, affords Plaintiff the
opportunity to demand Defendants’ respective agents with authority and responsibility to
respond here to answer Plaintiff’s allegations for each respectively as follows:
31. That the facts and records in possession of the Secretary of State of the united States’
Department of State, and to wit Hillary Clinton (SOS) must respond affirmatively to Plaintiffs
allegations to the Secretary to answer as follows:
a. SOS was a Candidate in 2008 for President of the united States of America.
b. SOS in esse in 2008 was in contact with Philip J. Berg in esse of Pennsylvania
and or his agent in regards to the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama in esse to
be a Candidate for President of the united States of America.
c. SOS in esse asked Barack Hussein Obama in esse to nominate SOS to serve in his
administration as the Secretary of State, and the principal of the DOS.
d. SOS in esse was nominated by Barack Hussein Obama in esse to go before the
U.S. Senate to be confirmed as the Secretary of State of DOS.
e. SOS in esse was confirmed and is now the Secretary of State of DOS.
f. SOS took an oath of office before assuming the duties at DOS.
g. SOS has authority and responsibility over issuing passports.
h. SOS has authority over granting visas to those with a valid passport or wish to
enter or exit the united States of America and or its possessions.
Strunk Affidavit Page 9 of 20
Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234
that the DOS OIG FOIA Officer letter in the response on March 19, 2009 (see Exhibit 12)
provided the 104 page OIG Report (attached to the letter shown as Exhibit 12 only up to the
Report Executive Summary page 1) that almost in its entirely is redacted despite the fact that the
matter was is only classified “sensitive but unclassified) for public use, and to wit Affiant objects
to the redacting being germane herein.
26. That Defendants failure to respond to Plaintiff’s October 16, 2008 FOIA Request,
November 22, 2008 FOIA Request, and December 25, 2008 FOIA Request are in default under
FOIA, and as insult to Plaintiff’s Injuries claim as a defense as a second bite of the apple, like the
murderer who after murdering his family seeks a defense as an orphan, nevertheless are estopped
from claiming that Plaintiff somehow fails to exhaust process, because they did not offer timely
process and were not only acting above the law by default and delay but are denying substantive
due process as to the requirement to ascertain facts that must be readily available to Plaintiff and
the public at large in the matter of whether or not Barack Hussein Obama in esse is a natural-
born-citizen eligible to qualify for the administrator office of the POTUS as a matter of law and
equity, and further Defendants may not claim with default as a defense too.
27. That Plaintiff as of right reserves the opportunity to further respond to the Defendants’
First Affirmative Defense until each respective Secretary answers, and subject to the demand for
the Quo Warranto proceeding Jury Trial to determine the issue of facts.
II. Plaintiff denies that Records at issue are exempt or excluded from disclosure
under the Freedom of Information Act.
28. That Affiant in support of this Cross Motion in response to Defendants’ Second
Affirmative Defense denies that Records at issue are exempt or excluded from disclosure under
the Freedom of Information Act, repeats each and every allegation contained in the above
paragraphs 1 through 27 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
Strunk Affidavit Page 8 of 20
Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234
i. SOS has the authority to uphold and enforce the law of the land including treaties.
j. SOS has authority and responsibility to determine the fact of whether or not a
passport and or visa was issued and or granted by SOS's predecessor.
k. SOS has the authority to determine whether or not Barack Hussein Obama in esse
(a/k/a Barry Soetoro) or anyone was ever issued a USA passport.
l. SOS has the authority and responsibility to determine whether of not Barack
Hussein Obama or anyone was traveling with a passport from a country other than
the USA before issuing a USA passport whether for private individual or official
use.
m. SOS has the authority to require proof of citizenship upon application for issuance
of a USA passport.
n. SOS has authority and responsibility to determine whether or not the applicant
for a USA Passport has natural born citizen parents and where the applicant was
born.
o. SOS has authority and responsibility to determine whether or not an applicant for
a USA Passport has dual citizenship.
p. SOS has exercise of authority over the Department of Homeland Security as to
entry and exit information as relates to issuance, and or renewal of a USA
Passport.
q. SOS has exercise of authority over the National Archives as to all records related
to Passports and exit and egress from the USA and or its territories, and may
obtain any record requested under SOS authority.
r. SOS has authority and responsibility to communicate and request information
from any government that an applicant for a USA passport is a dual citizen.
s. SOS in esse stated in the candidate’s debate against the other Democratic
Strunk Affidavit Page 10 of 20
 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

candidate that SOS in esse in paraphrase don’t believe that a citizen of a country cc. SOS has the fiduciary duty in SOS’s capacity at Secretary of DOS to testify under

other than the USA without a green card as a permanent resident in a state of the oath to a jury as to whether or not Barack Hussein Obama or anyone is or is not a

several states or territory of the USA is entitled to receive a Driver’s license in dual citizen of the United Kingdom at birth.

any state or territory of the USA. dd. SOS has the fiduciary duty in SOS’s capacity as Secretary of DOS to testify under

t. SOS upon assuming office at DOS is familiar with Plaintiff’s request for oath to a jury as to whether or not U.S. Senator Barack Hussein Obama or anyone

information under the Freedom of Information Act. held a passport from a foreign country at the time a USA Official passport was

u. SOS and or SOS’s agent have spoken with Barack Hussein Obama in esse and or issued.

his agent in regards to Plaintiff’s FOIA request. ee. That SOS as a quid pro quo deal with Barrack Hussein Obama in esse conceals

v. SOS and or SOS’s agent have spoken with Eric Holder in esse and or his agent as from the public and Plaintiff the facts which are not private and not protected

US Attorney General in regards to Plaintiff’s FOIA request. under FOIA that would further prove that Barack Hussein Obama in esse in not a

w. SOS has authority and responsibility to release information as to whether or not a natural-born-citizen required to determine whether or not he is eligible to be

person has an USA official passport and when it was issued or changed. qualified to serve with Plaintiff’s power of attorney as the corporate POTUS

x. SOS has authority and responsibility to release information as to whether or not a administrator.

person has a dual citizenship when on an USA official Passport.

32. That the facts and records in possession of the Secretary of Homeland Security of the
y. SOS has authority to speak with the British Chancellor of the Exchequer to
united States’ Department of Homeland Security, and to wit Janet Napolitano (SHS) must
ascertain facts about the birth record of an applicant for a USA official or private

passport. respond affirmatively to Plaintiffs allegations to the Secretary to answer as follows:

z. SOS has the authority and sufficient information to know that Barack Hussein
a. SHS was the Governor of the State of Arizona in 2008.
Obama’s father was a citizen of the United Kingdom at the birth of Barack
b. SHS in 2008 was in contact with Barack Hussein Obama in esse a Candidate for
Hussein Obama junior on August 4, 1961.
President of the united States of America.
aa. SOS has the authority and sufficient information to know where and in what
c. SHS asked Barack Hussein Obama in esse to nominate SHS to serve in his
country Barack Hussein Obama in esse was born on August 4, 1961.
administration as the Secretary of DHS, and the principal of the DHS.
bb. SOS has the authority and sufficient information to know that Barack Hussein
d. SHS in esse was nominated by Barack Hussein Obama in esse to go before the
Obama in esse at birth on August 4, 1961, was a dual citizen of the United
U.S. Senate to be confirmed as the Secretary of DHS.
Kingdom.
e. SHS in esse was confirmed and is now the Secretary of State of DHS.

Strunk Affidavit Page 11 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 12 of 20

Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

f. SHS took an oath of office before assuming the duties at DHS. renewal and or issuance of a USA Passport.

g. SHS have authority and responsibility over controlling the USA border both for q. SHS have exercise of authority over the National Archives as to all records

exit and egress. related to exit and egress from the USA and or its territories, and may obtain any

h. SHS have exercise of authority over granting visas in conjunction with the US record requested under SHS’s authority.

Department of State to those with a valid passport or wish to enter or exit the r. SHS have authority and responsibility to communicate and request information

united States of America and or its possessions. from any government that an applicant for a USA passport is a dual citizen.

i. SHS has the authority to uphold and enforce the law of the land including treaties. s. SHS acted as Governor so that a citizen of a country other than the USA without a

j. SHS has exercise of authority and responsibility to determine the fact of whether green card as a permanent resident in a state of the several states or territory of

or not a valid passport and or visa was issued and or granted by SHS’s the USA to issue a Driver’s license in Arizona.

predecessor. t. SHS upon assuming office at DHS are familiar with Plaintiff’s request for

k. SHS have the exercise of authority to determine whether or not Barack Hussein information under the Freedom of Information Act.

Obama in esse (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) or anyone was ever issued a USA passport. u. SHS and or SHS’s agent have spoken with Barack Hussein Obama in esse and or

l. SHS have the authority and responsibility to determine whether of not Barack his agent in regards to Plaintiff’s FOIA request.

Hussein Obama was traveling with a passport from a country other than the USA v. SHS and or SHS’s agent has spoken with Eric Holder in esse and or his agent as

before The US Department of State issued a USA passport whether for private US Attorney General in regards to Plaintiff’s FOIA request.

individual or official use. w. SHS has exercise of authority and responsibility to release information as to

m. SHS have the authority to require proof of citizenship upon application for entry whether or not a person has an USA official passport and when it was issued or

in to the USA. changed.

n. SHS have authority and responsibility to determine whether or not the applicant x. SHS has authority and responsibility to release information as to whether or not a

for a Visa and or entry into the USA has a passport and where applicant was born. person has a dual citizenship.

o. SHS have authority and responsibility to determine whether or not an applicant y. SHS has authority to speak with SHS’s counterpart in the equivalent British

for a visa into the USA has a Passport and has dual or more citizenship. Department of Homeland Security under the British Chancellor of the Exchequer

p. SHS have exercise of authority over the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection to ascertain facts about the birth record of an applicant for a USA official or

within the purview of the Department of Homeland Security as to entry and exit private passport and or Visa.

information as relates to issuance of visa and or entry documents, and germane to z. SHS have the exercise of authority and sufficient information to know that Barack

Strunk Affidavit Page 13 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 14 of 20

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

34. That Plaintiff as of right reserves the opportunity to further respond to the Defendants’
Hussein Obama’s father was a citizen of the United Kingdom at the birth of
Second Affirmative Defense until each respective Secretary answers, and subject to the demand
Barack Hussein Obama junior on August 4, 1961.

aa. SHS have the exercise of authority and sufficient information to know where and for the Quo Warranto proceeding Jury Trial to determine the issue of facts.

in what country Barack Hussein Obama was born on August 4, 1961. III. Plaintiff in response denies that claims against DHS are moot.

bb. SHS have the exercise of authority and sufficient information to know that Barack 35. That Affiant in support of this Cross Motion in response to Defendants’ Third
Hussein Obama at birth on August 4, 1961, was a dual citizen of the United Affirmative Defense denies that claims against DHS are moot, repeats each and every allegation
Kingdom.
contained in the above paragraphs 1 through 34 with the same force and effect as though herein
cc. SHS have the fiduciary duty in SHS’s capacity at Secretary of DHS to testify
set forth at length.
under oath to a jury as to whether or not Barack Hussein Obama is or is not a dual
36. That Plaintiff as of right reserves the opportunity to further respond to the Defendants’
citizen of the United Kingdom at birth.
Third Affirmative Defense until each respective Secretary answers, and subject to the demand
dd. SHS have the fiduciary duty in SHS’s capacity as Secretary of DHS to testify
for the Quo Warranto proceeding Jury Trial to determine the issue of facts.
under oath to a jury as to whether or not U.S. Senator Barack Hussein Obama

held a passport from a foreign country at the time a USA Official passport was IV. Plaintiff in response denies that The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim for
which relief can be granted.
issued.
37. That Affiant in support of the Cross Motion in response to Defendants’ Fourth
ee. That SOS as a quid pro quo deal with Barrack Hussein Obama in esse conceals
Affirmative Defense denies that The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim for which relief
from the public and Plaintiff the facts which are not private and not protected
can be granted, repeats each and every allegation contained in the above paragraphs 1 through
under FOIA that would further prove that Barack Hussein Obama in esse in not a
36 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
natural-born-citizen required to determine whether or not he is eligible to be

qualified to serve with Plaintiff’s power of attorney as the corporate POTUS 38. That Plaintiff as of right reserves the opportunity to further respond to the Defendants’

administrator. Fourth Affirmative Defense until each respective Secretary answers, and subject to the demand

33. That based upon in formation and belief each Secretary of DOS and DHS are acting in for the Quo Warranto proceeding Jury Trial to determine the issue of facts.

concert with Barack Hussein Obama in esse and Eric Holder in esse to conceal publicly available V. Plaintiff in response denies that the Defendant DHS has not been properly served
with process.
facts that would be available at trial before this Court as a Quo Warranto statutory matter as to
39. That Affiant in support of this Cross Motion in response to Defendants’ Fifth Affirmative
the issue of facts as evidence presented to a jury concerning the matter of first impression as to
Defense denies that the Defendant DHS has not been properly served with process, repeats each
natural-born-citizen; and

Strunk Affidavit Page 15 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 16 of 20

Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

and every allegation contained in the above paragraphs 1 through 38 with the same force and to have a Quo Warranto forum to prove his eligibility able to return to the corporate office

effect as though herein set forth at length. capacity as evidenced by the fact he simulates the corporate POTUS duties.

40. That the Docket of the proceeding documents that the Summons and Complaint were 46. Further, the particularized injury to Plaintiff is different than the general public, is

duly served by the U.S. Marshal Service as provide for in the FRCvP Rules; and that the Court evidenced by the related FOIA case and injury alleged herein, where Plaintiff’s complaint of

has more than adequate authority over that process, of which Plaintiff was not in control of. injury and as a result of irreparable harm caused by the Usurper and co-conspirators is done not

41. That the contention that somehow the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection as an only the particular speech, property and liberty injury, that nevertheless according to the

agency under the Control of DHS had properly responded as a matter of substance over form to opposition counsel Plaintiff is to be sanctioned for something which as of right under statute and

the Plaintiff’s FOIA Request to Mark Hanson FOIA Officer for Border Protection also is the under the united States’ Constitution guarantees of protection of Affiant’s inalienable right setup

Mark Hanson FOIA Officer at the Office of International Trade, as such nevertheless responded to do that including the statutory discretion afforded under the Quo Warranto Statute as plaintiff

as the deck chairs on the Titanic are rearranged, see Exhibit 13; and is entitled too and having been wrongly withheld vital evidence of a crime by the POTUS

42. Further the DHS agency on its own webpage instructed Plaintiff of the FOIA format to be Executive while under the Usurpers is unconscionable and outrageous.

used as he did notwithstanding the designation the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection in 47. The nature of Affiant’s injury caused by the Usurper et al. is the subject of my response

the context was referred to as the Bureau of Customs and Border Control are one and the same. in opposition to a partial dismissal MTD as to the Usurper now in default and whose actions are

43. That Plaintiff as of right reserves the opportunity to further respond to the Defendants’ void ab initio, and that the Defendant DOS answer to my complaint there demands further

Fifth Affirmative Defense until each respective Secretary answers, and subject to the demand for discovery with production of documents and interrogatories, and that this action is intertwined

the Quo Warranto proceeding Jury Trial to determine the issue of facts. and inseparable, must be denied a hearing until a Quo Warranto investigation by jury and

QUO WARRANTO JURY TRIAL ON THE ISSUES OF FACT REQUIRED judicial finding is had on the matters of law.

44. That Affiant in support of this Cross Motion in response to Defendants’ Affirmative 48. That Barack Hussein Obama in esse, the usurper, whose actions while pretending as if the

Defenses and prayer for relief, demands the Quo Warranto trial before a jury and then after the corporate office of the united States of America Presidency are void ab initio.

facts are determined a decision on question of first impression as to natural-born citizen, repeats 49. That Barack Hussein Obama in esse, as the usurper of the franchise conferred by the

each and every allegation contained in the above paragraphs 1 through 43 with the same force corporate office POTUS appointed Eric Holder in esse to serve Plaintiff as the U.S. Attorney

and effect as though herein set forth at length. General and notwithstanding confirmation by the U.S. Senate is also deemed a usurper whose

45. That Barack Hussein Obama in esse usurps that office of POTUS and presumably wishes actions are void ab initio.

Strunk Affidavit Page 17 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 18 of 20

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

50. That Affiant on May 20, 2009 duly filed a pre-filing notice of intent (see Exhibit 14) Wherefore, Plaintiff as of right demands: a Quo Warranto statutory proceeding by this

prior to making this motion to Washington District of Columbia District Attorney the Honorable District Court with a jury trial on the issues of fact and a 28 U.S.C. §2284 three judge panel

Jeffery Taylor to institute a Quo Warranto proceeding in the name of the United States against decision on the question of first impression; investigation of the actions of parties counsels with

the individual Barack Hussein Obama in esse (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) who within the District of the usurpers; deny the Partial Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint deemed pre-mature; a

Columbia usurps, intrudes into, unlawfully exercises, a franchise conferred by the corporate protective order for Plaintiff in this and all related proceedings that prohibits direct and or

United States office of the President (POTUS) for failing to prove eligibility as a natural-born- collateral contact by any of the parties associated with the Usurpers and or their agents; a

citizen with Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution as a matter of first preliminary hearing on the Quo Warranto matter with issue of a subpoena ordering appearance

impression verified on May 19, 2009, see Exhibit 15 with Sub-exhibits A and B. served by the U.S. Marshal Service upon all above named parties; and for further other and

51. That Affiant’s letter/memorandum to the Honorable Jeffery Taylor shown as Exhibit 14 different relief as the Court may deem proper herein for Justice to be done.

is self explanatory and is entered into evidence herein in that Relator / Plaintiff is the sovereign I have read the foregoing AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF

employer of the POTUS who exercises authority over my personal grant of power of attorney CROSS MOTION OF QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION

permission given to administer the united States of America (Inc.) and remains unresolved; ON QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO

52. That the Honorable Jeffery Taylor, as a hold-over from the prior POTUS administration, DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT

is the only statutory party other than affiant who with permission of this Court that has authority AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

with Title 16 Chapter 35 of The District Of Columbia Code in its entirety to exercise the Quo ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE, and know the contents thereof; and the

Warranto statute herein to demand this Court order a jury trial on the issues of fact and decision same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on

on question of first impression the interpretation of what is a natural-born-citizen. information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs

53. That as a matter dispositive herein the Quo Warranto demand that alleges Usurper is a as to all matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: 3rd. parties, books and

British Citizen at birth by his own admission and as such is not eligible to meet the qualifications records, and personal knowledge.

necessary for POTUS office of administration of the USA then the MTD must be denied in its /s/ Christopher-Earl : Strunk
___________________________
entirety and Plaintiff granted relief including expenses and treble damage sanctions; and that all Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Sworn to before me
the usurpers actions to defraud the Court and Plaintiff and with the theft of records at the This 26th day of May 2009
/s/
National Archives and murder of material witness need investigation with 18 U.S.C. §1965(c). _____________________
Notary Public

Strunk Affidavit Page 19 of 20 Strunk Affidavit Page 20 of 20

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF

QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 1
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 2

Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 8 Filed 02/02/2009 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, )

)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 1:08-CV-02234 (RJL)
)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, )
)
Defendant. )
)

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Notice is hereby given that Brigham J. Bowen, Trial Attorney, Civil Division, United

States Department of Justice, hereby substitutes for Wynne Patrick Kelly, and requests that his

appearance be entered on behalf of Defendant in the above-captioned action.

Dated: February 2, 2009 Respectfully submitted,

MICHAEL F. HERTZ
Acting Assistant Attorney General

ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO
Deputy Branch Director

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 981555)
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
Federal Programs Branch
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
P.O. Box 883, 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
Washington, D.C. 20044
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE
(202) 514-6289
brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov
Counsel for Defendant

EXHIBIT 3
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 8 Filed 02/02/2009 Page 2 of 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 2nd day of February, 2009, a true and correct copy of

the foregoing Notice of Appearance was served upon Plaintiff by first class United States mail,

postage prepaid marked for delivery to:

Christopher E. Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Ave., #281
Brookyln, NY 11238

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

Brigham J. Bowen

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF

QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 4
2
 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DDC 08-cv-2234

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT letter to your Honor requesting issuance of a Summons, has not been done.
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
3. According to the USPS the Express Mail item described as Exhibit 3 with Label/Receipt
-------------------------------------------------x
) Number: EH18943283US was given Status: Delivered at 11:20 AM on January 6, 2009 in
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, )
) WASHINGTON, DC 20001; when signed for by P PLUMER.(see Exhibit 4).
Plaintiff, )
) 4. On January 7, 2009 as soon as I learned of Defendant’s Counsel appearance I forwarded
v. ) Civil Action No.: 08-2234 (RJL)
) a pdf copy by email (see Exhibit 5) of the Proposed Supplement shown as Exhibit 3 to
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, )
) Defendants Attorney as referenced on Page 1 at Footnote 1 of Defendant’s NOM shown as
Defendant. )
) Exhibit 2, and that acknowledges receipt of my application for the Supplement Amended
-------------------------------------------------x
Verified Complaint and Petition for Writ of Mandamus under F.O.I.A.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S FIRST MOTION
FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE
COMPLAINT
5. To date the proposed supplement has not been granted a summons for service by the US
Marshalls Service.
6. That on January 23, 2009 I received an untimely answer (see Exhibit 6) from the United

STATE OF NEW YORK ) States Department of State to my FOIA request dated October 16, 2008 shown as Exhibit 3 Sub-
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS ) Exhibit A.

Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say under 7. That on January 23, 2009 I received an untimely answer (see Exhibit 7) from the United

penalty of perjury: States Department of State to my FOIA request dated November 22, 2008 shown as Exhibit 3

1. That I make this Special-Appearance in support of my notice of motion for Sub-Exhibit E through G.

reconsideration of the order (see Exhibit 1) granting defendant’s first motion for extension of 8. On January 23, 2009, I forwarded to Defendant’s counsel a pdf copy by email (see

time to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint (see Exhibit 2). Exhibit 8) of the untimely FOIA answers shown as Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7 from the United

2. On January 5, 2009 I sent an express mail package (see Exhibit 3 with Sub-Exhibits A States Department of State dated January 12, 2009.

through I) to the Court with the original and two copies of my application for Supplement 9. On January 23, 2009 Defendant’s counsel notified affiant by email (see Exhibit 9)

Amended Verified Complaint and Petition for Writ of Mandamus under the Freedom of receipt of the untimely FOIA answers shown as Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7 from the United States

Information Act (F.O.I.A.) affirmed January 5, 2009 (Proposed Supplement), under a cover Department of State and that Defendant’s counsel requests 60 days with which to answer to the

Strunk Affidavit Page 1 of 7 Strunk Affidavit Page 2 of 7

Strunk v US Department of State et al. DDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DDC 08-cv-2234

amended complaint and Department of Homeland Security, Defendant’s counsel stated quote:. 13. That eight of the Justices of the Supreme Court, excluding Justice Alito to his credit, did

“… need for an extension to respond to your amended complaint (regarding DHS). meet with Barack Hussein Obama before he and Mr. Biden were sworn in multiple times on

Under the Rules, my response to your amended complaint is due 10 business days plus 3 January 20, 2009 first during the “Void Moon” before Noon and then during the “Sagittarius
mailing days after you file your amended complaint. I am going to need to move for an
extension as I have not been able to find out what component of DHS is handling your Moon” the day after.
request and what DHS’ response to your request will be. Thus, I plan to request an
additional sixty days from the Court in which to respond. Please let me know whether 14. That on January 23, 2009 within 72-hours from Barack Hussein Obama’s offer of His
you consent to this request at your earliest convenience.”
contract of Oath received by affiant on 20 January 2009 and 21 January 2009 respectively, and

10. On January 23, 2009 I replied in protest by email(see Exhibit 10) to Defendant’s provided a return response by Registered mail with the USPS in care of the Agent in Charge of

Counsel’s request for an extension of time shown as Exhibit 9, and that in the reply email I the Secret Service with NOTICE TO THE AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL NOTICE TO

embedded at link of a January 12, 2009 Newsmax.com Article (see Exhibit 11) by Ken PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT and FOR THE RECORD, both were accepted for value,

Timmerman reporting on the nefarious activities of John O. Brennan and Barack Hussein timely without dishonor and with consideration returned both with affiant redrafted the offer of

Obama in the matter of breaking and entering into the US Department of State’s passport data contract of my choosing wishing no contract in full accord with the Unified Commercial Code

base to effect spoliation of documents in criminal violation of law. (U.C.C.) and Fair Debt Collection Regulation Z, in my Special-Appearance as a Living-Soul

11. That before or during the month of March 2008 John O. Brennan, Barack Hussein Obama Son-of-the Most-High-God-Yahweh in existence nunc pro tunc the moment of Creation Joint-

and their agents (spoliators) entered into a conspiracy for spoliation of government records in Heir-with-His-Son Made Debt-Free with the Yahshua Payment (consideration) of His Blood, in

violation of the law, and notwithstanding an apology by then Secretary of State Rice after the which I Stand in the Kingdom of the Most-High-God Yahweh. Under reserve, without dishonor,

fact, any apology by whomever does not lessen the matter of spoliators crime having been without prejudice, without recourse in good faith, no dolus; for a true copy of the original see

committed; and by the nature of the act(s) absolutely is an estoppel against use of privacy waiver Exhibit 12.

of access to such documents, bars any waiver to access under privacy, that otherwise without a 15. Affiant’s return response shown as Exhibit 12 by Registered mail with the USPS in care

crime would prevent public access, now mandates that the public see the fruits of such crime by of the Agent in Charge of the Secret Service with Registered mail Label/Receipt Number: RE40

spoliators John O. Brennan, Barack Hussein Obama and their agents acting together in 0301 908U S was delivered at 8:07 AM on January 27, 2009 in WASHINGTON, DC 20223, for

conspiracy. a copy of the USPS Tracking record and proof of service by registered mail see Exhibit 13.

12. That the public has an overwhelming need to know what spoliation and cover-up directly 16. To date affiant has received no answer from Barack Hussein Obama and or his Agent(s)

pertains to the FOIA request herein. and remains in office despite having been Fired.

Strunk Affidavit Page 3 of 7 Strunk Affidavit Page 4 of 7

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DDC 08-cv-2234

17. On January 21, 2009, in the matter of the Freedom of Information Act (see Exhibit 14) 21. The FOIA does not require a complaint to be filed by an attorney, and Congress did not

(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/FreedomofInformationAct/ ) Barack Hussein Obama intend such in the FOIA statute.

issued a MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND 22. Based upon the foregoing affiant prays of the Court for an Order to alter or amend the

AGENCIES under the SUBJECT: Freedom of Information Act and where in part states quote: Order or a Judgment pursuant to FRCvP Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in

“…The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the regards to the order granting a 60-day extension of time to answer or respond to the Complaint
face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information confidential
merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures filed December 26, 2008 shown as Exhibit 1; amended to include the following:
might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears. Nondisclosure should never be
based on an effort to protect the personal interests of Government officials at the expense of a) That the Court compel Defendant response under FOIA as its response is untimely
those they are supposed to serve. In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch
agencies (agencies) should act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such b) That the Court compel that Defendant respondent superior shall obtain copies of all
agencies are servants of the public.”
documents in its possession and or having been transferred to other agency(ies),
18. That Defendant’s Counsel has withheld vital information from the Court in its
including but not limited to, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National
deliberation of the Defendant’s motion for additional time and has taken unjust advantage of the
Archives and Records Administration and or other agency(ies), and that all
Court to obtain an extension that prejudices affiant and the public right to know, especially in
documents be provided under seal for review in camera with affiant.
light of the crimes having been recognized and acknowledged.
c) That affiant’s request for a summons to be issued be granted in the matter of the
19. That Defendant’s Counsel has become a party-in–interest to the matter at hand at cross-
Proposed Supplement, for service by the U.S. Marshalls Service..
purposes to his duties and presumably, on February 2, 2009 the Justice Department having
d) That affiant be granted FOIA discovery of all records without bar as a matter of
recognized the appearance of impropriety has replaced the lead counsel.
privacy in that Barack Hussein Obama is complicit in a criminal cover-up and
20. That the U.S. DOS in its response to affiants’ November 22, 2008 FOIA request shown
spoliation activities.
as Exhibit 7 at page 3 directs the search for the FOIA requested documents to:
e) That affiant be granted the right of sur-reply

f) That affiant be granted reimbursement of all expenses related to this action granted as

a sanction against Defendant and Defendant’s agents and counsel, on a schedule of

submission determined by the Court;

g) That the Court take jurisdiction over the default of Barack Hussein Obama to answer

the return of contract;

Strunk Affidavit Page 5 of 7 Strunk Affidavit Page 6 of 7

 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 7 Filed 01/27/2009 Page 2 of 3

government agency or agencies.2

3. This request is not for purposes of delay, but is necessary for Defendant to be able

to adequately respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint. This is Defendant’s first request for an extension

of time.

4. The undersigned, after repeated attempts to contact Pro Se Plaintiff, conferred

with Pro Se Plaintiff and Pro Se Plaintiff opposes the relief requested.

5. A proposed order is attached.

Respectfully submitted,

JEFFREY A. TAYLOR, D.C. Bar # 498610

United States Attorney

RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, D.C. Bar # 434122

Assistant United States Attorney

/s/
WYNNE P. KELLY
Assistant United States Attorney
United States Attorney for the District of Columbia
555 4th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530
Tel: 202-305-7107
wynne.kelly@usdoj.gov

2
In addition to the purported amended complaint, Pro Se Plaintiff has also sent counsel
for Defendant a copy of what appears to be an information request made by Plaintiff to the
government of the United Kingdom.

Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 7 Filed 01/27/2009 Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 27th day of January 2009, a true and correct copy of

the foregoing Defendant’s First Motion for Extension of Time in which to Answer or Otherwise

Respond to the Complaint was served upon plaintiff by first class United States mail, postage

prepaid marked for delivery to:

Christopher E. Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Ave., #281
Brookyln, NY 11238

/s/
WYNNE P. KELLY
Assistant U.S. Attorney
 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2. This particular District Court for the District of Columbia affords the
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
--------------------------------------------------x Case No.: 08-cv-2234 (RJL) proper venue under 28 USC §1391 (e) (2) for this action in that the
:
CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK : SUPPLEMENT AMENDED Defendant U.S. Department of State and Defendant U.S. Department of
: VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Petitioner, : AND PETITION FOR Homeland Security as each is located within the District of Columbia and
v. : WRIT OF MANDAMUS
: UNDER F.O.I.A. the failure of the Defendant and or Defendants to act separately and or in
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, and :
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND : concert was also within the District of Columbia.
SECURITY, :
Defendants. : 3. Petitioner filed this complaint requesting this Court to Order the U.S.
:
-------------------------------------------------x Department of State and U.S. Department of Homeland Security to fulfill

NOW COMES Christopher Earl Strunk, as the Petitioner, and their obligations pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (hereinafter

brings this Supplement Amended Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil "FOIA") immediately turn over the following documents on the following

Procedure Rule 15(a)(1)(c)(1)(B)(d) of the Complaint filed with the clerk of individual:

the District Court on November 26. 2008, and pursuant to the Freedom of a. Stanley Ann Dunham, a/k/a Ann Dunham a/k/a Stanley Ann

Information Act, 5 U.S.C. §552, et sequitur, against the Defendants the Obama a/k/a Ann Obama a/k/a Stanley Ann Soetoro a/k/a Ann

United States Department of State, and U.S. Department of Homeland Soetoro a/k/a Stanley Ann Sutoro a/k/a Ann Sutoro a/k/a

Security, stating: Stanley Ann Dunham Obama a/k/a Ann Dunham Obama, born

JURISDICTION AND VENUE November 29, 1942 at Wichita Leavenworth KS. U.S., a.k.a.

1. This cause of action arises under the Freedom of Information Act Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and who died on November 7,

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §552. Jurisdiction is properly before this Court 1995 under the name Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro (a.k.a.

pursuant to that federal statute with the United States District Courts under Sutoro), SSN: 535-40-8522; and

28 USC §1331 with a Federal question and under 28 USC §1346. b. Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. a/k/a Barry Soetoro Date of Birth:

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 1 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 2 of 20

Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

August 4, 1961 and as a living natural person; and g. Adoption Records and/or Governmental "Acknowledgment"

4. The following documents: wherein Barack H. Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was

a. Any and all U.S. Applications for a U.S. Passport; "acknowledged" as Lolo Soetoro, M.A.'s son.

b. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United States 5. Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, the Petitioner,

and Kenya from the period of time of January 01, 1960 to Christopher Earl Strunk, petitions this Court for extraordinary relief in

December 31, 1975 and January 1, 1979 to December 31, the nature of a writ of mandamus under 28 USC §1651, directed to

1985; Respondent, United States Department of State, and its employees and

c. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United States agents in the United States Department of State and ;

and Indonesia from the period of time of January 01, 1960 to 6. This action seeks to compel the U.S. Department of State to

December 31, 1973 and January 1, 1979 to December 31, 1985; turn over the records requested pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act

d. The above travel records on for the dates specified travelling on referred to herein.

a U.S. Passport, Kenyan Passport, Indonesian Passport or any 7. In support of this amended verified petition, Petitioner avers the

other foreign passport and/or visa; following:

e. Foreign Birth Certificate registered and filed with the U.S. THE PARTIES

Embassy, Kenya and/or U.S. Embassy of Indonesia for Barack 8. Petitioner, Christopher Earl Strunk (hereinafter "Petitioner"), is an

H. Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961; individual who resides with place for service at 593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281

f. Foreign Birth Registry filed with the U.S. Embassy, Kenya Brooklyn, NY 11238; Email: uncasvotes2@yahoo.com, cell-845-901-6767.

and/or U.S. Embassy of Indonesia by Stanley Ann Dunham, et 9. Defendant, United States Department of State, is a Governmental

al. Registering the birth of Barack H. Obama a/k/a Barry Agency located at 2201 C Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20520.

Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961; and 10. Defendant, United States Department of Homeland Security, is a

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 3 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 4 of 20
 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

governmental agency created pursuant the Patriot Act, and whose Executive 15. That on October 30, 2008, Defendants agent signed the return receipt

level cabinet Secretary is Michael Chertoff with mailing address located at for the FOIA request shown as Exhibit A for Petitioner's FOIA request at the

Washington, DC 20528. U.S. Department of State; that thereafter, was delivered to my mailing

11. That under the Patriot Act the U.S. Department of Homeland address by the USPS, (see Exhibit D).

Security is in control of the Bureau of Customs and Border Control located 16. On or about November 7, 2008 Petitioner never received any

at 799 Ninth Street, N. W. at the Mint Annex Washington D.C. 20229. response from Defendant / Respondent for any of the information requested

FACTS in regards to above paragraph 3(a).

12. On October 17, 2008, Petitioner filed a FOIA request directed to the 17. On November 22, 2008, Petitioner filed the FOIA request with

United States Department of State request for the above cited records for the reference number B8475 the information detailed above in regards to above

person referenced at paragraph 3 (a) for the period from 1960 through 1963, living natural person described in paragraph 3(b); see the U.S. Department

and Petitioner sent the request via United States Postal Service, Certified of State request confirmation marked Exhibit E.

Mail, Return Receipt Requested; a true and correct copy of Petitioner's letter 18. On November 22, 2008, Petitioner filed a declaration in support of

is attached hereto and incorporated in by reference as Exhibit A. the FOIA request with reference number B8475 the information detailed

13. Petitioner filed the FOIA request for travel records shown as Exhibit above in regards to above living natural person described in paragraph 3(b),

A that was deposited with the USPS certified with return receipt request for with a cover letter and attachment of the FOIA request on the deceased

two-day delivery by October 20, 2008, as per the true and correct copy of person described in paragraph 3(a) see Exhibit F.

the USPS mailing purchase receipt attached herewith marked Exhibit B. 19. A true and correct copy of the return receipt is attached hereto and

14. That on October 27, 2008, the USPS confirmed delivery of the FOIA incorporated see Exhibit G.

request for records under the control of the United States Department of 20. That as a matter of Bureau of Customs and Border Control concern,

State, (see Exhibit C). based upon the school records (see Exhibit H) provided by Indonesian

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 5 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 6 of 20

Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

authorities as to Barry Soetoro’s adoption by Lolo Soetoro and schooling in and medical files, 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(6); information complied for law

Indonesia as a natural born Indonesian citizen, indicates that Barry Soetoro enforcement purposes, 5 U.S.C. §552 (b)(7); information contained in or

may be an illegal alien improperly in the United States. related to examination, operating or condition reports prepared by, on behalf

21. That as a matter of Bureau of Customs and Border Control concern, of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision

based upon information and belief there is an imposter presently using the of financial institutions. 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(8); nor does the information

deceased Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro’s (a.k.a. Sutoro) SSN: 535-40-8522 requested involve geological and geophysical information, 5 U.S.C.

for employment at the Ford Foundation and is residing in New York City. §552(b)(9).

22. On December 26, 2008, Petitioner filed a FOIA request for records 25. The above requested documents are extremely critical and important

cited above in paragraphs 3 through 4(g) and paragraph 21 directed to the to Petitioner as well as the general public and are of substantial public

Bureau of Customs and Border Control of the U.S. Department Of interest.

Homeland Security located at 799 Ninth Street, N. W. in the Mint Annex 26. The overwhelming majority of the Electoral College slates of the

Washington D.C. 20229 to the attention of Mark Hanson Director FOIA States of the several States received the majority advisory votes cast for

Division (see Exhibit I). Barack Hussein (“H.”) Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro [hereinafter "Obama"]

23. The above records do not fall within any of FOIA exemptions items. and thereby won the general election votes on November 4, 2008; and

24. The above documents do not involve any of the FOIA exemptions subsequent to canvassing in each State of the several States the Electoral

which include National defense or foreign policy records, 5 U.S.C. § College of each state of the several states is to be certified by the state

552(b)(1), internal personnel rules and practices of an agency, 5 U.S.C. officials over every state on or about December 1, 2008 is to assembly in

§552(b)(2); exemption by other federal statutes, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3); each State of the several States to cast their votes on December 15, 2008.

trade secrets, commercial or financial information, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4);

inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5); personnel

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 7 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 8 of 20
 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

27. Mr. Obama is not a U.S. "natural born" citizen and ineligible to serve 31. Under the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June 1952, is the law that

as the United States President, pursuant to the United States Constitution, applies to a birth abroad and is in effect at the time of birth, Marquez-

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. Marquez a/k/a Moreno v. Gonzales 455 F. 3d 548 (5th Cir. 2006), Runnett v.

28. Although Mr. Obama claims to have been born in two (2) separate Shultz, 901 F.2d 782, 783 (9th Cir.1990) (holding that "the applicable law

hospitals in Hawaii, he was actually born in Mombasa, Kenya to his mother for transmitting citizenship to a child born abroad when one parent is a U.S.

a U.S. citizen and his father a Kenyan National. citizen is the statute that was in effect at the time of the child's birth").

29. Mr. Obama's mother (referenced above in paragraph 3(a)) was not old 32. Stanley Ann Dunham, Mr. Barry Soetoro's mother, was only 18 when

enough pursuant to the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June 1952 to pass she gave birth to Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. She was not old enough to

on U.S. "natural born" citizenship to Mr. Obama. register Obama's birth in Hawaii or anywhere else as a United States "natural

30. The U.S. Law in effect during Mr. Obama's birth stated if you are born" citizen as she did not meet the residency requirements pursuant to our

born abroad to one U.S. parent and a foreign national, the U.S. parent must United States Laws; as such it does not matter that this is a minor

have resided in the United States for ten (10) years, five (5) of which were technicality, the law is applied regardless - see United States of America v.

after the age of Fourteen (14) in order to register the child's birth abroad in Cervantes-Nava, 281 F.3d 501 (2002), Drozd v. I.N.S., 155 F.3d 81, 85-88

the United States as a "natural born" U.S. citizen, under the Nationality Act (2d Cir.1998).

of 1940, revised June 1952, United States of America v. Cervantes-Nava, 33. Mr. Barry Soetoro has been asked for his "vault" version birth

281 F.3d 501 (2002), Drozd v. I.N.S., 155 F.3d 81, 85-88 (2d Cir.1998), certificate; however, he has refused, which has prompted law suits across the

United States v. Gomez-Orozco, 188 F.3d 422, 426-27 (7th Cir. 1999), United States.

Scales v. Immigration and Naturalization Service 232 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 34. Instead, Mr. Barry Soetoro and or his agent(s) placed an image of a

2000), Solis-Espinoza v. Gonzales 401 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2005). Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth (COLB), which is issued for all birth's

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 9 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 10 of 20

Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

registered in the State of Hawaii; the COLB, does not prove "natural born" when one parent is a U.S. citizen is the statute that was in effect at the time

citizenship or birth in Hawaii. of the child's birth").

35. A COLB is sufficient proof of citizenship; however, it does not prove 37. Mr. Barry Soetoro's citizenship status is further complicated by the

"natural born" citizenship, a COLB is issued to those who are simply fact he was enrolled by Lolo Soetoro in a public school, Fransiskus Assisi

"naturalized". School in Jakarta, Indonesia; the records received as copies of the school

36. There is absolutely NO doubt in Petitioner’s mind that Mr. Barry registration, in which it clearly states Mr. Barack Hussein Obama's name as

Soetoro's birth in Kenya was registered in Hawaii, at which time, yes they "Barry Soetoro" and lists his citizenship as Indonesian, shown as Exhibit H.

would have issued a COLB; however, Barry Soetoro's birth could have 38. Mr. Obama's father is listed as Lolo Soetoro, and Mr. Obama's

ONLY been registered as "naturalized" as his mother did not meet the Religion is listed as Islam.

citizenship requirements to register Barry Soetoro's birth as "natural born", 39. At the time Mr. Obama was registered the public schools obtained

Nationality Act of 1940, revised June 1952, United States of America v. and verified the citizenship status and name of the student through the

Cervantes-Nava , 281 F.3d 501 (2002), Drozd v. I.N.S., 155 F.3d 81, 85-88 Indonesian Government; and that Indonesia at this time was a police state

(2d Cir.1998), United States v. Gomez-Orozco, 188 F.3d 422, 426-27 (7th and foreign students were not allowed to attend public schools.

Cir. 1999), Scales v. Immigration and Naturalization Service 232 F.3d 1159 40. The Indonesian school, upon registration of a new student, verified

(9th Cir. 2000), Solis-Espinoza v. Gonzales 401 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2005), the citizenship status and name of the child with the Indonesian

and as such the law that applies to a birth abroad is the law in effect at the Government; moreover, Indonesian Immigration and police checked all

time of birth, Marquez-Marquez a/k/a Moreno v. Gonzales 455 F. 3d 548 public schools on a weekly basis to ensure the only students attending were

(5th Cir. 2006), Runnett v. Shultz, 901 F.2d 782, 783 (9th Cir.1990) (holding in fact Indonesian citizens.

that "the applicable law for transmitting citizenship to a child born abroad 41. Due to Mr. Obama's birth abroad, he could only be "naturalized",

second, he became a "natural" citizen of Indonesia; even if Obama's

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 11 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 12 of 20
 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

adoption and/or acknowledgment allowed him to choose his citizenship U.S.; and an adoption per se severs all relationship to the birth place and/or

status, there is more involved. citizenship of a birth parent.

42. Indonesia, still to this day, does not permit dual citizenship, and the 48. Once Indonesian "natural" citizenship status occurred, it stayed; and

law in Indonesia states if a minor who lost citizenship in another country in order, according to Indonesia, which is whose law prevails, Mr. Obama

may reclaim that citizenship; however, prior to age 21, they must swear a would have been required to relinquish in writing under oath his Indonesian

declaration signed and served and filed with Indonesia their desire to citizenship and file the declaration with Indonesia government.

relinquish their citizenship status. 49. Indonesian citizenship does not expire without a person, in

43. Furthermore, if this is not done by age 21, they lose that right; and as declaration, swears under the penalty of perjury, to relinquish Indonesian

stated in the Indonesian laws, "at the age of 18, the child can choose whether Citizenship and files said document with the government no later then age

to stay an Indonesian citizen or follow their foreign father's citizenship. They 21, as under the Indonesian Constitution, Article 2.

will be then given additional three more years to decide on which nationality 50. If Mr. Barry Soetoro wanted to fully regain any U.S. Citizenship

to choose.", e.g. 18 + 3 = 21. status he may have had, he would have had to undue the adoption or go

44. The problem here is the citizenship of Mr. Obama's father "Soetoro" through paternity to prove Soetoro was NOT his father in the case of Soetoro

is Indonesian; Indonesia did not recognize dual citizenship. Acknowledging Mr. Obama as his son, both of which gave Mr. Obama

45. The Indonesian citizenship law was designed to prevent apatride "natural" Indonesian status, which is the same as U.S. "natural born"

(stateless) or bipatride (dual citizenship); Indonesian regulations recognize citizenship status.

neither apatride nor bipatride citizenship. 51. Under Indonesian law, when a male acknowledges a child as his son,

46. The Hague Convention prevented the U.S. from interfering with it deems the son—in this case Obama—to be an Indonesian State citizen;

Indonesia's laws. the Constitution of Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 62 of 1958 Law No. 12

47. Indonesia did not recognize dual citizenship, thus, neither did the of 2006 dated 1 Aug. 2006 concerning Citizenship of Republic of Indonesia,

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 13 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 14 of 20

Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

and Law No. 9 of 1992 dated 31 Mar. 1992 concerning Immigration Affairs Ivan S Kerno, International Law Commission, United Nations General

and Indonesian Civil Code (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Perdata) Assembly, 6th April 1953.); thus, Mr. Barry Soetoro is not a "natural born"

(KUHPer) (Burgerlijk Wetboek voor Indonesie). citizen and my not even be a naturalized citizen.

52. Further, the Indonesia Constitution, Article 2 states "It is stipulated ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF RELIEF

that an adopted child has the same status as a natural child and that his or 56. Petitioner / Plaintiff has standing to sue under the Freedom of

her relationship to the birth parents is severed by adoption". Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq. (1994); and anyone denied

53. Further, the Indonesia Constitution, Article 2 states: "on the condition information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552

of ratification of the adoption by the District Court: ‘The law stipulates that et seq. (1994) has standing to sue regardless of his or her reasons. Akins

children of mixed couples automatically assume their father's citizenship, vs.FEC, 322 US. App. D.C. 58; 101 F.3d 731; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31253

and a divorced wife cannot take custody of her children because they have (1996), 524 U.S. 11 (1998); Public Citizen vs. FTC, 276 U.S. App. D.C.

different citizenship’….”. 222, 869 F.2d 1541(D.C. Cir. 1989).

54. Furthermore, Indonesia did not allow Dual Citizenship or Dual 57. Petitioner / Plaintiff has suffered an informational injury as a voter

Nationality thus Mr. Barry Soetoro is not a U.S. Citizen, he is Indonesian; and member of the public; and the lack of information on Mr. Barry

neither Mr. Obama's place of birth or the nationality of his American parent Soetoro's citizenship, caused by the State Departments action, limited the

are relevant, the Indonesian Law takes precedence under The Master information available to him as a voter and impaired his ability to influence

Nationality Rule of Article 4 of the Hague Convention of 1930. and inform the public and policymakers.

55. The United States accepts the existence of Dual Nationality only if 58. If a party is denied information that will help it in making a voting

the other country does; however, Hague Conventions are applied by the decision that party is obviously injured in fact; and as stated in Akins, the

United States and this has been in effect since before 1930 (Memorandum court noted that:

on Nationality, including Statelessness: Document A/CN.4/67, Prepared by "[a] voter deprived of useful information at the time he or she votes
suffers a particularized injury in some respects unique to him or herself

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 15 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 16 of 20
 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234 Strunk v. U.S. Department of State et al. DCDC 08-cv-2234

just as a government contractor, allegedly wrongfully deprived of either prove that Barry Soetoro is in fact a "natural born" U.S. Citizen or
information to be made available at the time bids are due, would suffer a
particularized injury even if all other bidders also suffered an injury." they will prove he is not, at which point he will have to be removed as the

59. Even if all individuals who voted for any of the other Democratic Presidential candidate and would require a restraint upon the Electoral

candidates for President, suffered the same injury that does not take away College vote cast and certified on or after December 15, 2008; however,

from the individual injury that Petitioner / Plaintiff suffered. after January 20, 2009 will require Defendant U.S. Department Of

60. Even assuming a request under FOIA triggered legitimate Privacy Homeland Security with control of the Bureau of Customs and Border

Act concerns, the U.S. Department of State was required to provide Control to enforce U.S. Title 8 and related laws as to Mr. Barry Soetoro, and

Petitioner with reasonably segregable portions of that correspondence, 5 the living person using the SSN: 535-40-8522 accordingly in coordination

U.S.C. §552(b); Department of State v. Ray, 502 U.S. 164 (1991) (disclosure with the U.S. Department of Justice.

of personal information without identifying details), Baltimore Sun v. 63. For the above aforementioned reasons, the above requested

Marshals Service, 131 F. Supp. 2d 725, 729 (D. Md. 2001) (identity of documents are of great public interest and without receiving said documents;

purchasers of seized government property disclosed). our Country is at risk of allowing an illegal candidate to serve as President

61. There are no per se rules of nondisclosure, see Stern v. FBI, 737 F.2d of the United States which constitutes a huge National Security dilemma.

84, 91 (D.C. Cir. 1984); and FOIA Exemption 6 does not justify the 64. The court determines whether disclosure is warranted by

withholding of information regarding individuals particularly where the "balanc[ing] the public interest in disclosure against the [privacy] interest

privacy interest is minimal and the public interest in disclosure is strong, and Congress intended the Exemption to protect." Dep't of Justice v. Reporters

the balance of interests under Exemption 6 "instructs the court to tilt the Comm. for Freedom of Press, 489 U.S. 749, 776 (1989). The public interest

balance in favor of disclosure." Getman v. NLRB, 450 F.2d 670, 674 (D.C. in disclosure lies in "open[ing] agency action to the light of public scrutiny,"

Cir. 1971). Reporters Comm., 489 U.S. at 772.

62. These issues can be easily resolved; the documents requested will 65. Under FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552, Attorney Fees and Costs are

Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 17 of 20 Supplement Petition for Writ of Mandamus – Page 18 of 20
 SUPPLEMENT TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT
and PETITION for WRIT OF MANDAMUS under F.O.I.A.

EXHIBIT “H”
 SUPPLEMENT TO THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT
and PETITION for WRIT OF MANDAMUS under F.O.I.A.

EXHIBIT “I”
 Certificate of Service of NOM for Reconsideration - Strunk v US DOS DDC 08-cv-2234 ... Page 1 of 2

Certificate of Service of NOM for Reconsideration - Strunk v US DOS DDC 08-cv-2234

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 9:59 PM
From: "Christopher Strunk" <cestrunck@yahoo.com>
To: brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov, wynne.kelly@usdoj.gov
Cc: joel.graber@oag.state.ny.us, cestrunck@yahoo.com

CES_NOM_for_reconsideration_of_time_extension_with_Affidavit_and_Exhibits_affirmed_020309_DDC_08-cv-2234.pdf (6185KB)

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Case 08-cv-2234

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On February 3, 2009, I, Christopher Earl Strunk, under penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 USC 1746,
caused the service of four copies of the NOTICE OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT with supporting affidavit and
Exhibits annexed affirmed February 3, 2009 as a complete set three of which were each placed in a
sealed folder properly addressed with proper postage served by USPS mail upon:

Brigham John Bowen

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington , DC 20530
(202) 514-6289
Fax: (202) 616-8460
Email: brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON WYNNE P. KELLY
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO Assistant United States Attorney
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED United States Attorney for the District of Columbia
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF 555 4th Street, N.W.
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE Washington, D.C. 20530
Tel: 202-305-7107
wynne.kelly@usdoj.gov

EXHIBIT 5 The Honorable David I. Schmidt

Justice of the State of New York Supreme Court County of Kings Part 1
360 Adams Street
Brooklyn, New York 11201

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_77431_1_1347249_0_AFVkxEIA... 5/26/2009
Certificate of Service of NOM for Reconsideration - Strunk v US DOS DDC 08-cv-2234 ... Page 2 of 2
Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 8 Filed 02/02/2009 Page 2 of 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
And one pdf of the complete copy sent to the email of : I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 2nd day of February, 2009, a true and correct copy of

Assistant Attorney General Joel Graber, Esq. the foregoing Notice of Appearance was served upon Plaintiff by first class United States mail,
NYS Office of Attorney General
120 Broadway postage prepaid marked for delivery to:
New York, New York 10271-0332

I do declare and certify under penalty of perjury: Christopher E. Strunk

Dated: February 3, 2009
Brooklyn , New York
593 Vanderbilt Ave., #281
/s/ Brookyln, NY 11238
_________________________
Christopher- Earl : Strunk
/s/ Brigham J. Bowen
Brigham J. Bowen

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_77431_1_1347249_0_AFVkxEIA... 5/26/2009

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF

QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 6
 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 7

Re: FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 3 Re: FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 2 of 3

Re: FOIA Request Wednesday, January 7, 2009 6:23 PM a. Stanley Ann Dunham, a/k/a Ann Dunham a/k/a Stanley Ann Obama a/k/a Ann
From: "Christopher Strunk" <cestrunck@yahoo.com> Obama a/k/a Stanley Ann Soetoro a/k/a Ann Soetoro a/k/a Stanley Ann Sutoro
To: dp-foi.img@fco.gov.uk a/k/a Ann Sutoro a/k/a Stanley Ann Dunham Obama a/k/a Ann Dunham Obama,
Cc: mike.page@bdsus.mod.uk
born November 29, 1942 at Wichita Leavenworth KS. U.S. , a.k.a. Stanley Ann
CES_request_British FOIA_010709.pdf (77KB)
Dunham Obama and who died on November 7, 1995 under the name Stanley Ann
Dunham Soetoro (a.k.a. Sutoro), SSN: 535-40-8522; and
I have also sent a signed copy of the request by regular mail.
b. Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. a/k/a Barry Soetoro Date of Birth: August 4,
Best regards 1961 and as a living natural person; and

Christopher Strunk 2. The following documents:

a. Any and all U.K. Applications for a U.K. Passport;
--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Christopher Strunk <cestrunck@yahoo.com> wrote: b. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United States and Kenya
From: Christopher Strunk <cestrunck@yahoo.com> from the period of time of January 01, 1960 to December 31, 1975 and January 1,
Subject: FOIA Request 1979 to December 31, 1985;
To: dp-foi.img@fco.gov.uk c. Any record of the above named individuals having reserved or flown on a
Cc: mike.page@bdsus.mod.uk British Overseas Airline Corporation (BOAC) connecting flight from Hawaii to
Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 6:04 PM
Mombasa , Mombasa to Seattle and or Mombasa to Hawaii from January 1, 1960
Christopher Earl Strunk through December 31, 1964.
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - #281 d. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United States and Indonesia
Brooklyn, New York 11238 from the period of time of January 01, 1960 to December 31, 1973 and January 1,
Cell phone: (845) 901-6767, Fax (212)307-0247 1979 to December 31, 1985;
E-mail cestrunck@yahoo.com e. The above travel records on for the dates specified travelling on a U.S.
Passport, Kenyan Passport, Indonesian Passport or any other foreign passport
and/or visa;
Information Rights Team f. Foreign Birth Certificate registered and filed with the U.K. Foreign Office,
Information Management Group Embassy in Kenya and/or U.K. Embassy in Indonesia for Barack H. Obama a/k/a
Foreign and Commonwealth Office Barry Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961;
Old Admiralty Building g. Foreign Birth Registry filed with the U.K. Embassy, Kenya and/or U.K.
London Embassy of Indonesia by Stanley Ann Dunham, et al. Registering the birth of
SW1A 2PA Barack H. Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961; and
United Kingdom h. Adoption Records and/or Governmental "Acknowledgment" wherein Barack
Tel: + 44 (020) 7008 0123 H. Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was "acknowledged" as Lolo Soetoro, M.A.'s son.
Email: dp-foi.img@fco.gov.uk
It is also my understanding that I will receive your reply to my request within 20 working
days. That in your reply to my request, it will confirm or deny whether you hold the
Dear F.O.I.A. Director, information requested, and will either provide the information you have requested, or explain
why we have not provided it; and that for any information you withhold, you will quote an
I, Christopher Earl Strunk, am a citizen of the United States , and hereby make this request for exemption under the Act.
information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) of Britain that came into operation
in 2000. I understand that FOIA grants me the right to request to see information held by the Respectfully submitted by:
Foreign & Commonwealth Office. Dated: January 7, 2009
Brooklyn , New York /s/ Christopher Earl Strunk
1. As such I request the following documents on the following individuals: _________________________

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_220219_2_344878_0_AF9kxEIA... 5/26/2009 http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_220219_2_344878_0_AF9kxEIA... 5/26/2009

Re: FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 3 of 3

Christopher Earl Strunk

cc: mike.page@bdsus.mod.uk

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_220219_2_344878_0_AF9kxEIA... 5/26/2009

FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 1

FOIA Request Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:57 PM

From: "Henry.Leitch@fco.gov.uk" <Henry.Leitch@fco.gov.uk>
To: cestrunck@yahoo.com

Dear Mr. Strunck,

In response to your request of the 7th January 2009, I have been advised that you
should direct your request to UKBA, contact details herewith:-

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/

Regards

Henry Leitch
Information Management Group
***********************************************************************************
Visit http://www.fco.gov.uk for British foreign policy news and travel advice and http://blogs.fco.gov.uk to read
our blogs.
Please note that all messages sent and received by members of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and its
missions overseas may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded in accordance with the
Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communications) Regulations 2000. We keep
and use information in line with the Data Protection Act 1998. We may release this personal information to
other UK government departments and public authorities.
***********************************************************************************

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_188308_1_1680467_0_AGJkxEIA... 5/26/2009
 subject access request for information under the Freedom of Information Act - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 3

subject access request for information under the Freedom of Information Act
Thursday, January 8, 2009 1:41 PM
From: "Christopher Strunk" <cestrunck@yahoo.com>
To: UKBApublicenquiries@ukba.gsi.gov.uk,
Freedom.Informationteam@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Cc: DP-FOI.IMG@fco.gov.uk, mike.page@bdsus.mod.uk, cestrunck@yahoo.com

Christopher Earl Strunk

593 Vanderbilt Avenue - #281
Brooklyn , New York 11238
Cell phone: (845) 901-6767, Fax (212)307-0247
E-mail cestrunck@yahoo.com

UK Border Agency
Central Freedom of Information Team
11th Floor
Lunar House, Short Corridor
40 Wellesley Road
Croydon
CR9 2BY
Email: UKBApublicenquiries@ukba.gsi.gov.uk
Freedom.Informationteam@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Fax: 020 8196 3172
Dear F.O.I.A. Director,

I, Christopher Earl Strunk, am a citizen of New York in the United States , and hereby make this
subject access request for information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) of 2000 in
Britain under The Data Protection Act of 1998. I understand that FOIA under The Data Protection Act
1998 grants me the right to request to see information held by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office
under specific circumstances of which I hereby comply.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE
1. As such I request the following documents on the following individuals:
a. Stanley Ann Dunham, a/k/a Ann Dunham a/k/a Stanley Ann Obama a/k/a Ann
Obama a/k/a Stanley Ann Soetoro a/k/a Ann Soetoro a/k/a Stanley Ann Sutoro a/k/a Ann
Sutoro a/k/a Stanley Ann Dunham Obama a/k/a Ann Dunham Obama, born November 29,
1942 at Wichita Leavenworth KS. U.S. , a.k.a. Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and who
died on November 7, 1995 under the name Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro (a.k.a. Sutoro);
and

EXHIBIT 8 b. Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. Date of Birth: in 1936 Kanyadhiang village, Rachuonyo
District, Kenya and died 24 November 1982 (aged 46) Nairobi, Kenya; and

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_215278_1_1724849_0_AFRkxEI... 5/26/2009

subject access request for information under the Freedom of Information Act - Yahoo! Mail Page 2 of 3 subject access request for information under the Freedom of Information Act - Yahoo! Mail Page 3 of 3

Soetoro (a.k.a. Sutoro), is deceased according to a Wikipedia report see

c. Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. a/k/a Barry Soetoro Date of Birth: August 4, 1961 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Dunham
as a living natural person; and the deceased person who died on November 7, 1995 under the name Barack Hussein Obama,
Sr , is deceased according to a Wikipedia report see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama,_Sr.
2. The following documents: If there are any fees for searching for, reviewing, or copying the records, please let me know
before you task my request.
a. Any and all U.K. Applications for a U.K. Passport; If you deny all or any part of this request, please cite each specific
b. Any and all U.K. Applications for a Canadian Passport; Exemption you think justifies your refusal to release the information and notify me of appeal
c. Any and all U.K. Applications for a Kenyan Passport; procedures available under the law.
.
d. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United States and Kenya from the Dated: January 8, 2008
period of time of January 01, 1960 to December 31, 1975 and January 1, 1979 to Brooklyn New York /s/ Christopher Earl Strunk
December 31, 1985; _____________________
e. Any record of the above named individuals having reserved or flown on a British Christopher Earl Strunk
Overseas Airline Corporation (BOAC) connecting flight from Hawaii to Mombasa ,
Mombasa to Seattle and or Mombasa to Hawaii from January 1, 1960 through December cc:
31, 1964. DP-FOI.IMG@fco.gov.uk
f. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United Kingdom, United States, mike.page@bdsus.mod.uk
Indonesia and or Pakastan, from the period of time of January 01, 1960 to December 31,
1973 and January 1, 1979 to December 31, 1985; by regular mail:
g. The above travel records on for the dates specified traveling on a U.S. Passport,
Kenyan Passport, Indonesian Passport, Pakastani Passport, Canadian Passport, or any Former Illinois Senator Barack Hussein Obama
other foreign passport and/or visa; c/o Senator Durbin, Richard - (D - IL)
h. Foreign Birth Certificate registered and filed with the U.K. Foreign Office, 309 Hart Senate Office Building
Embassy in Kenya and/or U.K. Embassy in Indonesia for Barack H. Obama a/k/a Barry Washington DC 20510
Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961;
i. Foreign Birth Registry filed with the U.K. Embassy, Kenya and/or U.K. Embassy of
Indonesia by Stanley Ann Dunham, et al. Registering the birth of Barack H. Obama a/k/a
Barry Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961; and
j. Adoption Records and/or Governmental "Acknowledgment" wherein Barack H.
Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was "acknowledged" as Lolo Soetoro, M.A.'s son.

I, Christopher Earl Strunk, declare under penalty of perjury under The Data Protection Act
1998, as follows:
I am petitioner with place for service at 593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281 Brooklyn , New York
11238 ; Email: cestrunck@yahoo.com with Cell- (845) 901-6767.
This declaration is in support of my Freedom of Information Act request under The Data
Protection Act 1998 that seeks personal information about a living person subject Barry Soetoro a/k/a
Barack Hussein Obama, is a matter of personal non commercial use to be used in association with a
New York State court action 29642-2008 and if as a requirement of its release would be used in
camera as a stipulation required upon release to that court under seal; and as per my obligation
described at http://www.ico.gov.uk/what_we_cover/data_protection/your_legal_obligations.aspx that
the living person Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama has been sent notice by regular mail as
copied below.
the deceased person who died on November 7, 1995 under the name Stanley Ann Dunham

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_215278_1_1724849_0_AFRkxEI... 5/26/2009 http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_215278_1_1724849_0_AFRkxEI... 5/26/2009

 RE: FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 4

RE: FOIA Request Thursday, January 8, 2009 5:22 AM

From: "DP-FOI.IMG@fco.gov.uk" <DP-FOI.IMG@fco.gov.uk>
To: cestrunck@yahoo.com

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your email. You will need to direct your request to the UK Border Agency. I have copied
their web page on FOI and contact details below for your convenience.

Yours Sincerely

Mark Lowen
Information Management Group

Freedom of Information
A guide to making a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act

The Home Office and its Agencies are committed, under the Freedom of Information Act to:

z promote informed policy making and debate;

z provide timely and accessible information to explain the department's
z policies, actions and decisions; and
z respond to requests for information.

Any request to the Home Office for information will be handled in accordance with the provisions of the
Freedom of Information Act.

Requests for information

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE
The Home Office proactively publishes a wide range of information. In addition, in late 2002, government
departments established publication schemes under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Therefore, you may
first wish to search the Home Office Publication Scheme, departmental websites or check with the General
Enquiries section to find out if the information you require has already been published or if there are plans to do
so. Alternatively, if you know which part of the office might deal with the information you require, then contact
them direct.
Target
The Home Office target for meeting requests for information is twenty working days.

Requests for personal data

The Data Protection Act 1998 governs the processing of personal data (information relating to living
EXHIBIT 9 individuals). This legislation makes it possible for you to request access to personal data that the Home Office
may hold about you. A request for disclosure of such information is called a subject access request.
Should you wish to know more about your rights under the Data Protection Act 1998 you should consult the
Office of the Information Commissioner's website

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_217858_1_1730283_0_AF9kxEIA... 5/26/2009

RE: FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 2 of 4 RE: FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 3 of 4

--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Christopher Strunk <cestrunck@yahoo.com> wrote:

Limits of disclosure
From: Christopher Strunk <cestrunck@yahoo.com>
The Home Office will disclose information wherever possible. However, in certain limited circumstances, it will Subject: FOIA Request
be necessary to preserve confidentiality where it is not in the public interest to disclose. Where information is To: dp-foi.img@fco.gov.uk
refused, the Home Office will specify which exemption is being claimed and why. All requests for information Cc: mike.page@bdsus.mod.uk
will be carefully considered on their own merits and with close regard to the public interest. Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 6:04 PM

UK Border Agency freedom of information requests Christopher Earl Strunk

593 Vanderbilt Avenue - #281
UK Border Agency
Central Freedom of Information Team
Brooklyn, New York 11238
11th Floor Cell phone: (845) 901-6767, Fax (212)307-0247
Lunar House, Short Corridor E-mail cestrunck@yahoo.com
40 Wellesley Road
Croydon Information Rights Team
CR9 2BY
Information Management Group
Public enquiries
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Old Admiralty Building
UKBApublicenquiries@ukba.gsi.gov.uk London
Tel: 0870 606 7766 SW1A 2PA
United Kingdom
FOI enquiries Tel: + 44 (020) 7008 0123
Email: dp-foi.img@fco.gov.uk
Freedom.Informationteam@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Dear F.O.I.A. Director,
Fax: 020 8196 3172
I, Christopher Earl Strunk, am a citizen of the United States , and hereby make this request for
General Home Office enquiries information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) of Britain that came into operation
in 2000. I understand that FOIA grants me the right to request to see information held by the
Home Office Foreign & Commonwealth Office.
Direct Communications Unit 1. As such I request the following documents on the following individuals:
2 Marsham Street a. Stanley Ann Dunham, a/k/a Ann Dunham a/k/a Stanley Ann Obama a/k/a Ann
London
SW1P 4DF
Obama a/k/a Stanley Ann Soetoro a/k/a Ann Soetoro a/k/a Stanley Ann Sutoro
Tel: 0207 035 4848 a/k/a Ann Sutoro a/k/a Stanley Ann Dunham Obama a/k/a Ann Dunham Obama,
Fax:020 7035 4745 born November 29, 1942 at Wichita Leavenworth KS. U.S. , a.k.a. Stanley Ann
Telephone:020 7273 3476 (9:00am -5:00pm) Dunham Obama and who died on November 7, 1995 under the name Stanley Ann
public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Dunham Soetoro (a.k.a. Sutoro), SSN: 535-40-8522; and
b. Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. a/k/a Barry Soetoro Date of Birth: August 4,
From: Christopher Strunk [mailto:cestrunck@yahoo.com] 1961 and as a living natural person; and
Sent: 07 January 2009 23:23 2. The following documents:
To: DP-FOI.IMG a. Any and all U.K. Applications for a U.K. Passport;
Cc: Mike Page * BDS Washi -UNCLASSIFIED b. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United States and Kenya
Subject: Re: FOIA Request from the period of time of January 01, 1960 to December 31, 1975 and January 1,
I have also sent a signed copy of the request by regular mail. 1979 to December 31, 1985;
c. Any record of the above named individuals having reserved or flown on a
Best regards British Overseas Airline Corporation (BOAC) connecting flight from Hawaii to
Mombasa , Mombasa to Seattle and or Mombasa to Hawaii from January 1, 1960
Christopher Strunk through December 31, 1964.

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_217858_1_1730283_0_AF9kxEIA... 5/26/2009 http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_217858_1_1730283_0_AF9kxEIA... 5/26/2009

RE: FOIA Request - Yahoo! Mail Page 4 of 4

d. Entry and Exit Passport Records pertaining to the United States and Indonesia
from the period of time of January 01, 1960 to December 31, 1973 and January 1,
1979 to December 31, 1985;
e. The above travel records on for the dates specified travelling on a U.S.
Passport, Kenyan Passport, Indonesian Passport or any other foreign passport
and/or visa;
f. Foreign Birth Certificate registered and filed with the U.K. Foreign Office,
Embassy in Kenya and/or U.K. Embassy in Indonesia for Barack H. Obama a/k/a
Barry Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961;
g. Foreign Birth Registry filed with the U.K. Embassy, Kenya and/or U.K.
Embassy of Indonesia by Stanley Ann Dunham, et al. Registering the birth of
Barack H. Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro, Date of Birth: August 4, 1961; and
h. Adoption Records and/or Governmental "Acknowledgment" wherein Barack
H. Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was "acknowledged" as Lolo Soetoro, M.A.'s son.
It is also my understanding that I will receive your reply to my request within 20 working
days. That in your reply to my request, it will confirm or deny whether you hold the
information requested, and will either provide the information you have requested, or explain
why we have not provided it; and that for any information you withhold, you will quote an
exemption under the Act.
Respectfully submitted by:
Dated: January 7, 2009
Brooklyn , New York /s/ Christopher Earl Strunk
_________________________
Christopher Earl Strunk
cc: mike.page@bdsus.mod.uk

***********************************************************************************
Visit http://www.fco.gov.uk for British foreign policy news and travel advice and http://blogs.fco.gov.uk to read
our blogs.
Please note that all messages sent and received by members of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and its
missions overseas may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded in accordance with the
Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communications) Regulations 2000. We keep
and use information in line with the Data Protection Act 1998. We may release this personal information to
other UK government departments and public authorities. AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
*********************************************************************************** QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 10

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_217858_1_1730283_0_AF9kxEIA... 5/26/2009

FOI Request Re : Barack Obama and Family - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 1

FOI Request Re : Barack Obama and Family Monday, January 12, 2009 9:01 AM
From: "Freedom Of Information Team ( IND )" <ind.foiteam@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk>
To: cestrunck@yahoo.com

Dear Christopher Strunck

Thank you for your recent e-mail concerning the above. Your request is being dealt with under the terms of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 and we will respond shortly.

Regards
UKBA FOI Team

*********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are private and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed.
If you have received this email in error please return it to the
address
it came from telling them it is not for you and then delete it from
your system.

This email message has been swept for computer viruses.

*********************************************************************

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service
supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On
leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 11

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showletter?mid=1_192862_1_1693252_0_AGFkxEI... 5/26/2009
FOIA Request Letter B8984 - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 1

FOIA Request Letter B8984 Friday, February 20, 2009 8:59 PM

From: "FOIA Request" <FOIA@state.gov>
To: "Christopher-Earl Strunk" <cestrunck@yahoo.com>

Thank you for filing your FOIA request online on 2/20/2009. The process for completing your request will now
begin. Here is a review of your request.

I am willing to pay $ for my request.

I am an individual seeking information for personal use and not for commercial use.

The time period of my request is from 1/1/2008 to the present.

The records I request can be described as follows:

http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2008/07/106518.htm : The OIG Report within major redaction related to

the Office of the OIG Spokesman Washington, DC July 3, 2008 that gave a Special Briefing On The State
Department Inspector General's Report on Passport Records Access in re 2008/545 Released on July 4,
2008. There is no report available on line that can be found.

My additional comments are as follows: Requires an expedite in regards to current ongoing FOIA case in DCD
08-2234-cv

Christopher-Earl Strunk
cestrunck@yahoo.com
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281
Brooklyn
New York
11238
845-901-6767

Reference Number: B8984

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF

QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 12

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?pSize=25&sMid=1&fid=obama&sort=... 5/26/2009
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 13
 593 Vanderbilt Avenue, #281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse

The Honorable Jeffrey Taylor

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia,
United States Attorney's Office
555 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Re: U.S. and ex rel. Strunk v Barack Hussein Obama in esse

Subj: NOTICE of Verified Quo Warranto Complaint with Title 16
Chapter 35 of The District Of Columbia Code in its entirety

The Honorable Jeffrey Taylor

I, Christopher-Earl : Strunk © in esse, relator, am the interested-party in the above

referenced matter and hereby demand that your office institute a proceeding against in the name of
the United States against the individual Barack Hussein Obama in esse (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) who within
the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully exercises, a franchise conferred by the
corporate United States office of the President (POTUS) for failing to prove eligibility as a natural-born-
citizen with Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution as a matter of first impression.
That Relator’s original Verified Complaint is attached herewith, with the proviso that relator will use the
duplicate to demand a jury trial on the issues of fact and decision on question of first
impression with the District Judge in Strunk v DOS et al. 08-cv-2234 by Cross Motion to the
Defendant’s motion to dismiss on or before June 1, 2009 if within seven days your office has not
responded in the affirmative, nevertheless will go to the District Court as of right.
Relator refers your Honor to what the Supreme Court of the united States (SCOTUS) held as
instructive:

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF The seminal SCOTUS case which has interpreted the Quo Warranto statute is Newman v.
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
United States ex Rel. Frizzell, 238 U.S. 537 (1915). The opinion serves as a thorough education
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
on the history of quo warranto as well as the proper statutory interpretation. According to
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
SCOTUS, Newman at 552, the statute applies to any public office:
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE
The Revised Statutes declare that the District of Columbia shall be the seat of
government, and “all offices attached to the seat of government shall be exercised in the
District of Columbia.” The Code …provides that the… court shall have jurisdiction to
grant quo warranto “against a person who unlawfully holds or exercises within the
EXHIBIT 14 District a . . . public office, civil or military.” It was probably because of this fact that
national officers might be involved that the Attorney General of the United States was
given power to institute such proceedings…

1
 …the District Code, in proper cases, instituted by proper officers or persons, may be
enforceable against national officers of the United States. The sections are therefore to
be treated as general laws of the United States, not as mere local laws of the District.
Being a law of general operation, it can be reviewed on writ of error from this Court.
American Co. v. Commissioners of the District, 224 U. S. 491; McGowan v. Parish, 228
U. S. 317.
The next essential decision is in Newman v. United States ex Rel. Frizzell, 238 U.S. 537 at 546
(1915), the Supreme Court interpreted the role of the AG and US attorney as follows:
The District Code still treats usurpation of office as a public wrong which can be
corrected only by proceeding in the name of the government itself. It permits those
proceedings to be instituted by the Attorney General of the United States and by the
attorney for the District of Columbia. By virtue of their position, they, at their discretion
and acting under the sense of official responsibility, can institute such proceedings in any
case they deem proper. But there are so many reasons of public policy against permitting
a public officer to be harassed with litigation over his right to hold office that the Code
not only does not authorize a private citizen, on his own motion, to attack the
incumbent’s title, but it throws obstacles in the way of all such private attacks. It
recognizes, however, that there might be instances in which it would be proper to allow
such proceedings to be instituted by a third person, but it provides that such “third
person” must not only secure the consent of the law officers of the government, but the
consent of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia before he can use the name of
the government in quo warranto proceedings.
Further, in ANDRADE v. LAUER, 729 F.2d 1475, 234 U.S.App.D.C. 384 (1984), the
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has held that the defacto officer’s doctrine does
not prohibit “collateral attacks” of official actions based upon a public officer’s lack of
eligibility. These are not quo warranto suits to remove the official, they are civil suits to
challenge a specific action of that official.
In the Andrade case, the plaintiffs were Government employees who lost their jobs to
“reduction in force” ordinances which cut whole departments from the Government budget. The
plaintiffs sued alleging those who did the cutting were not Constitutionally qualified to make
such decisions in that their appointments violated the appointments clause of the US
Constitution.
The DC District Court held that the plaintiffs had no standing other than to bring a “direct
attack” in quo warranto to remove the alleged usurper. But the DC Court of Appeals reversed
and said the plaintiffs, who had suffered real injuries, could bring such an action on a case by
case basis if they could prove their injury in fact (being fired) was caused by a Government
official who was not eligible to serve.
Further, in UNITED STATES of America ex rel. STATE OF WISCONSIN v. FIRST
FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, 248 F.2d 804 (1957), the US court of
Appeals, 7th Circuit, provided an on point discussion of quo warranto in the district courts:
There have been submitted to this court only two instances in which original quo
warranto jurisdiction has been specifically conferred upon federal district courts. The
revised statutes of 1878 vested jurisdiction in these courts of proceedings brought by the
United States Attorney for the removal of persons holding office contrary to the
Fourteenth Amendment. Rev.Stat., Sections 563(14), 626(14), (1786). This Act was
repealed in the Judicial Code of 1911, 36 Stat. 1168. In 1901, Congress specifically
authorized the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to issue quo
warranto in the name of the United States. Act of March 3, 1901, 31 Stat. 1419, Title 16,
Section 1601 of the D.C. Code (1940). However, this grant is strictly limited and is
confined solely to situations involving franchises and public offices held within the
District of Columbia. There is no other specific statutory provision vesting original
jurisdiction in the district courts in quo warranto actions.
Furthermore, before the Quo Warranto statute existed there is a precedent for a sitting, voted in,
sworn in, Senator, Albert Gallatin was thrown out of office in 1793 for being constitutionally
ineligible to be a Senator, not having the 9 year requirement as a U.S. citizen. The full
congressional link and the procedure they used follows:
http://books.google.com/books?id=qkMFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA223-IA8&lpg=PA223-
IA8&dq=Albert+Gallatin+ineligible+Senator&source=bl&ots=GO4Ii8iPv7&sig=NVpzF
2CVNYUnIWYpNdjESd9gvYA&hl=en&ei=YIiwSaOeOteitgfYiIHEBw&sa=X&oi=boo
k_result&resnum=5&ct=result#PPA221,M1
Relator in consideration of the above referenced SCOTUS and other decisions comes
forth here with a direct not collateral attack upon the usurper intransigence who after all is in
esse and merely poses as the corporate administrator POTUS. The Usurper as an individual in
esse only has it in his interest to regain his corporate office were the issues of fact adjudicated.
1. That relator is the sovereign employer of the POTUS who exercises authority over
my personal grant of power of attorney permission given to administer the united
States of America (Inc.);
2. Relator duly fired Barack Hussein Obama in his corporate capacity for cause on
January 23, 2009 after he took the oath of office by timely return of the offer of
contract wishing no contract thereby revoked power of attorney due to his failure to
prove eligibility as a natural born citizen;
3. That Barack Hussein Obama in esse usurps that office and presumably wishes to have
a Quo Warranto forum to prove his eligibility to be able to return to the corporate
office capacity as evidenced by the fact he simulates the corporate POTUS duties.
4. Further as to relator standing, as the particularized injury different than the general
public, is evidenced by the related FOIA case where I complaint of injury and as a
result of irreparable harm caused by the Usurper personally not only the particular
speech injury and informational injury, but according to the opposition counsel I am
to be sanctioned for something which as of right under statute I am entitled too and
having been wrongly withheld by the POTUS Executive while under the Usurper.

2 3

5. The nature of my injury caused by the Usurper is the subject of my response in

opposition to a partial dismissal as to the Usurper now in default and whose actions
are void ab initio, and that the Defendant DOS answer to my complaint there
demands further discovery with production of documents and interrogatories, and that
this action is intertwined and inseparable.

I would be more than willing on or after June 1, 2009, to elaborate on this demand with SERVICE of NOTICE of Relator's Verified Quo Warranto Complaint affirmed 5-19-09 - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 6
an expanded memorandum that would also encompass the respectable work of the attorney Leo
Donofrio, Esq. of New Jersey, Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. of California, Mario Apuzzo, Esq. of New
Jersey and John D. Hemenway, Esq. of Washington District of Columbia as none represent
relator. However this is the required statutory notice of a pre-existing intent required of me.
On a personal note of great importance to me, I am a natural-born citizen of two married Wednesday, May 20, 2009 3:06 PM
SERVICE of NOTICE of Relator's Verified Quo Warranto Complaint affirmed 5-19-09
natural-born born citizens that makes me eligible to become president, however my son when From: "Christopher Strunk" <cestrunck@yahoo.com>
reaching 35 and having resided in the USA for 14 years at election may not be a natural-born To: president@whitehouse.net, AskDOJ@usdoj.gov, dc.outreach@usdoj.gov
Cc: joel.graber@oag.state.ny.us, DR_taitz@yahoo.com, johndhemenway@comcast.net, apuzzo@erols.com,
citizen because my wife at the time of his birth in New York was not a citizen and as such leo_donofrio2000@yahoo.com, cestrunck@yahoo.com
NOTICE_of_Relator_Quo_Warranto_Verified_Complaint_w_Exhibits_052009.pdf (2739KB)
because there is no interpretation as to the nature of Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 is a matter of
first-impression dear to me and is effecting my liberty now onward.
Your immediate response to this urgent matter is warranted and by way of a copy the service sent via regular and certified mail to Attorney General Eric Holder 70090080000239518358as well as to the U.S. Attorney for the D
additional parties-in –interest listed below they too are duly notified. I may be reached during the Obama in esse 70090080000239502364
day at (845) 901-6767.
593 Vanderbilt Avenue, #281
Sincerely yours, Brooklyn, New York 11238
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse

Dated: May 20th, 2009 /s/ Christopher-Earl : Strunk, in esse

Brooklyn, New York _________________________________ The Honorable Jeffrey Taylor
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia ,
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse United States Attorney's Office
555 4th Street, NW
Attached: Verified Quo Warranto Complaint with Demand for Jury Trial and Decision on Washington, DC 20530
Question of First Impression with exhibits Re: U.S. and ex rel. Strunk v Barack Hussein Obama in esse
Subj: NOTICE of Verified Quo Warranto Complaint with Title 16
Cc: Chapter 35 of The District Of Columbia Code in its entirety

The Honorable Jeffrey Taylor

The Honorable Eric Holder
U.S. Attorney General I, Christopher-Earl : Strunk © in esse, relator, am the interested-party in the above referenced matter and hereby demand that your off
Barack Hussein Obama in esse (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully exercises, a franchise confer
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Barack Hussein Obama in esse http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?pSize=25&sMid=149&fid=Inbox&sort=date&order=down&startMid=125&... 5/27/2009

c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

president@whitehouse.net, AskDOJ@usdoj.gov, dc.outreach@usdoj.gov

4

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF
QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE
EXHIBIT 15
U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC
1. This Complaint is to be heard with 28 USC §1345 in this particular District Court for the
District of Columbia that affords the proper venue under 28 USC §1391 (e) (2) for this action in
that Defendant in esse is usurping the Corporate office of the President of the united States of
America (POTUS) located within the District of Columbia and the failure of the Defendant in
esse to act in good faith with his corporate duty within the District of Columbia.
2. This Petition demands the Quo Warranto Act mandates this Court to create a jury trial to
determine the issue of facts: (i) where Defendant was born and (ii) whether or not both his
parents were united States’ Citizens at his birth; and thereafter a trial on the facts that the Court
as a matter of first impression must determine the law as to what is the natural-born-citizen
requirement of Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution.
3. This action demands to compel Defendant to show cause why he should not by removed
from the POTUS office as a usurper for his ineligibility with Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 and the
25th Amendment to the Constitution as applies to Article 2 Section 1 Clause 6.
4. In support of this verified complaint with two cause, Plaintiff avers the following:
5. Relator, Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse (hereinafter "Plaintiff", “Relator”), is an
individual who resides with place for service at 593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281 Brooklyn, NY
11238; Email: cestrunck@yahoo.com, SKYPE: cestrunk.
6. That Plaintiff is a natural-born citizen of New York with both Parents being citizens there
in the city of New York at the time of Plaintiff’s birth, that both Parents were married, and also
natural-born citizens of the united States of America (USA).
7. That Plaintiff is eligible to become the President of the united States of America
(POTUS) unlike Defendant because I meet the three requirements of eligibility: be at least 35
years of age, 14 years resident of the USA and be a natural born citizen at birth.
Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 2 of 8
U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
--------------------------------------------------
In the Quo Warranto matter of the united States of America
and ex relator Christopher-Earl : Strunk © in esse
Plaintiff / Relator
v.
Barack Hussein Obama (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) in esse
Defendant / Respondent
-------------------------------------------------
QUO WARRANTO COMPLAINT WITH DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
AND DECISION ON QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION
Plaintiff/Relator, Christopher-Earl : Strunk © in esse, in the name of the united States of
America brings this Verified Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule (FRCvP)
81(a)(2) first offered for action by the District Attorney for the Washington District of
Columbia, with TITLE 16 CHAPTER 35 (Quo Warranto) OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CODE in its entirety (1) with allegations of usurpation of Office of the President and failure of
duty against Defendant / Respondent as follows:
1
Chapter 35§ 16-3501 Persons against whom issued; civil action. states: A quo warranto may be issued
from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against
a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a
franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The
proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.
Chapter 35§ 16-3502 states: The Attorney General of the United States or the United States attorney may
institute a proceeding pursuant to this subchapter on his own motion or on the relation of a third person.
Chapter 35§ 16-3503 states: If the Attorney General or United States attorney refuses to institute a quo
warranto proceeding on the request of a person interested, the interested person may apply to the court by
certified petition for leave to have the writ issued.
Chapter 35§ 16-3544 states: In a quo warranto proceeding, the defendant may demur, plead specially, or
plead “not guilty” as the general issue, and the United States or the District of Columbia, as the case may
be, may reply as in other actions of a civil character. Issues of fact shall be tried by a jury if either party
requests it. Otherwise they shall be determined by the court.
Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 1 of 8
U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC
8. That Plaintiff makes a special-appearance in this action without relinquishing sovereignty
and or any inalienable individual right.
9. In explanation, Plaintiff’s Special-Appearance is as a Living-Soul Son-of-the Most-High-
God-Yahweh in existence nunc pro tunc the moment of Creation in Joint-Heir-with-His-Son
Made Debt-Free with the Yahshua Payment (consideration) of His Blood, in which Strunk
Stands in the Kingdom of the Most-High-God Yahweh, and that is under reserve, without
dishonor, without prejudice, without recourse in good faith, no dolus; and that this court and or
any temporal entity or person is unable to offer a higher consideration.
10. That Plaintiff has inalienable individual rights as described by the Declaration of
Independence of 1776 that pre-existed the creation of the united States’ Constitution.
11. That Plaintiff is the creator of the united States’ Constitution nunc pro tunc at the
moment of his Creation as an inheritance upon birth as a natural born-citizen.
12. That the Federal government is created by Plaintiff’s sovereign authority to protect his
inalienable individual rights and to define express limited rights for government to operate by.
13. That Plaintiff authority creates the corporate office of the President of the united States of
America, POTUS, to which Defendant Barack Hussein Obama was questionably elected without
presenting eligibility proof of his qualifications other than his opinion he was somehow eligible.
14. That Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution is controlling and
only requires three qualification be proven to be eligible for assuming the corporate office of the
Presidency, i.e. an applicant shall be 35 years of age, 14 years resident of united States of
America and a natural-born-citizen; this is a case of first impression about natural-born-citizen
15. Defendant, Barack Hussein Obama (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) is located for service in care of
the White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Washington, D.C. 20500.
Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 3 of 8
 U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC

16. Respondent Obama is not a USA "natural born" citizen eligible to serve as the united AS AND FOR THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

States President, pursuant to the united States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. (For Defendant’s default and Failure to
Reply to the return of contract further acts are void ab initio)
17. Although Mr. Obama claims to have been born in two (2) separate hospitals in Hawaii,
25. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and
he was actually born in Mombassa, Kenya to his mother a U.S.A. citizen and his father a Kenyan
paragraphs 1 through 24 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
National within the United Kingdom with law and Monarchy that governs.
26. That on January 23, 2009 within 72-hours from Barack Hussein Obama’s offer of His
18. That Mr. Obama Jr.’s natural father Mr. Obama Senior, was a British Citizen governed
contract of Oath received by Plaintiff on 20 January 2009 and again on 21 January 2009
under the laws of the United Kingdom married to Mr. Obama Jr.’s mother Stanley Ann Dunham
respectively, Plaintiff provided a timely return response by Registered mail with the United
at the time of Mr. Obama Jr.’s birth on August 4, 1961.
States Postal Service (USPS) in care of the Agent in Charge of the united States‘ Secret Service
19. Defendant Obama admits that his father at the time of his birth was a citizen of the
with NOTICE TO THE AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS
United Kingdom and that the British Nationality Act of 1948 governs dual citizenship at birth.
NOTICE TO AGENT and FOR THE RECORD, and that both were accepted for value, timely
20. That Defendant Obama acknowledges by endorsing Senate Resolution 511 you need 2
without dishonor and with consideration returned redrafted in the offer of contract of Plaintiff’s
U.S.A. Citizen parents to be qualified to be a natural born citizen.
choosing wishing no contract in full accord with the Unified Commercial Code (U.C.C.); for a
21. That Rep. John Bingham, author of the 14th Amendment, Congressional Globe, 39th, 1st
true copy of the original see Exhibit A.
Sess., pg 1291 (March 9, 1866) stated: “… every human being born within the jurisdiction of the
27. That Plaintiff’s return response shown as Exhibit A by Registered mail with the USPS in
United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of
care of the Agent in Charge of the Secret Service with Registered mail Label/Receipt Number:
your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.”
RE40 0301 908US was delivered at 8:07 AM on January 27, 2009 in WASHINGTON, DC
22. Defendant Obama has been asked for his "vault" version birth certificate; however, he
20223, for a copy of the USPS Tracking record and proof of service by registered mail see
has refused, which has prompted law suits across the United States.
Exhibit B.
23. Instead, Mr. Barry Soetoro and or his agent(s) placed an image of a Hawaiian
28. That Plaintiff has received no reply from Defendant Barack Hussein Obama and or his
Certification of Live Birth (COLB), which is issued for all birth's registered in the State of
Agent(s) and remains in office as a usurper despite having been fired.
Hawaii; the COLB, does not prove "natural born" citizenship or birth in Hawaii.
29. That Defendant Obama in esse fails to reply and is in default to Plaintiff.
24. A COLB is sufficient proof of citizenship; however, it does not prove "natural born"
30. Defendant Obama in esse is the usurper that has seized the corporate office of the united
citizenship, a COLB is issued to those who are simply "naturalized".
States of America Presidency.

Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 4 of 8 Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 5 of 8

U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC

31. Defendant Obama in esse is the usurper whose actions while pretending as if the AS AND FOR THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

corporate office of the united States of America Presidency are void ab initio. (For Defendant’s action to pay the debt with debt)

32. That Plaintiff as the nunc pro tunc creator of the USA presupposes that the Federal 35. Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in the above introduction and

Constitution is still in effect with full force even under the 1929 reorganization plan that after paragraphs 1 through 34 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.

1933 with “the Switch in Times Cases” in re United States v. the united States of America, Inc., 36. Defendant Obama has publicly announced he is paying the debt of the USA with debt,

series of SCOTUS cases that allow the creditors to put the united States of America Inc. through which is a Federal fraud crime when payment of debt may only be in specie, takes my property.

bankruptcy reorganization that in the process transforms the office of the President per se into 37. For the above aforementioned reasons, the above requested documents are of great public

the Trustee administrator for the U.S.A. debtor in control of the assets under the bankruptcy interest and without receiving eligibility proof, Plaintiff liberty is at risk were the usurper of the

reorganization plan. POTUS administrator which constitutes a huge National Security dilemma to continue.

33. That the united States of America, Inc. was created when under the first method to repay Wherefore, Relator demands this Court to create a jury trial with the Quo Warranto Act to

the revolutionary War debt the Articles of Confederation failed necessitated the adoption of the determine the issue of facts: (i) where Defendant was born and (ii) whether or not both his

second repayment plan method with the stronger Federal Union in 1789, that then without debt parents were united States’ Citizens at his birth; and thereafter a trial on the facts that the Court

repayment in 1859 again was transformed the third time promulgating the war between the as a matter of first impression must determine the law as to what is the natural-born-citizen

states, which then re-emerges as the Jesuit’s 14th Amendment America for the fourth time in requirement of Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the united States’ Constitution, that the Court

1929 with the Switch in Time cases that transformed the Constitution so that with the order the removal of the Usurper or legitimize the POTUS administrator, and provide further and

Administrative Procedures Act of 1948 when Administrator Clinton found 5 trillion Dollars to different relief for Justice herein.

pay the debt, but rather than to pay the debt eliminated the Glass- Stegall Act of 1933 and Respectfully demanded by,

continues the multi-level ponzi scheme again beyond five levels, notwithstanding the SCOTUS
Dated: May 19th , 2009 /s/ Christopher-Earl : Strunk, in esse
dicta against operation beyond the fifth reorganization cited in the Amway Case decision. Brooklyn, New York ___________________________
Christopher-Earl : Strunk © in esse
34. Relator / Plaintiff has suffered an informational injury as a voter and member of the

public; and by the lack of information on Mr. Barry Soetoro's citizenship, Defendant continued Attached Exhibits A through B

usurpation is taking Plaintiffs property without substantive due process afforded that undermines cc: sent via regular and certified mail to Attorney General Eric Holder as well as to the U.S.
Attorney for the District of Columbia, Mr. Jeffrey Taylor; and
Plaintiff’s sovereignty and inalienable liberty. Barack Hussein Obama in esse

Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 6 of 8 Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 7 of 8

 U.S. and ex Rel. Strunk v. Barack Hussein Obama DCDC

VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK )

) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )

Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, by special-appearance being duly sworn,

depose and say under penalty of perjury:
1. That I am the Plaintiff / Relator, Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, with place for
service at 593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281 Brooklyn, New York 11238.
2. That I am the sovereign employer of the POTUS who exercises authority over my grant
of power of attorney permission given to administer the united States of America Inc.
3. I duly fired Barack Hussein Obama (Respondent) for cause on January 23, 2009 after he
took the oath of office by timely return of the offer of contract wishing no contract thereby
revoked power of attorney due to his failure to prove eligibility as a natural born citizen.
4. That Respondent in esse usurps that office and presumably wishes to have a Quo
Warranto forum to prove his eligibility to be able to return to the corporate office capacity.
5. I hereby give my permission for a Quo Warranto jury trial of the issue of facts.
6. I have read the above Quo Warranto Complaint With Demand For Jury Trial And
Decision On Question Of First Impression with exhibits attached and aver that it is related to the
FOIA Case 08-cv-2234 for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus and I
know its contents; the facts stated in the Complaint herein are true to my own personal
knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as
to those matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon
information and belief are as follows: 3rd parties, books and records, and personal knowledge.
except as to those stated upon information and belief, which I believe to be true.
/s/ Christopher-Earl : Strunk, in esse
________________________
Christopher-Earl : Strunk © in esse
Sworn to before me
This 19th day of May 2009 QUO WARRANTO COMPLAINT WITH DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
/s/
AND DECISION ON QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION
_____________________
Notary Public EXHIBIT A

Quo Warranto Complaint – Page 8 of 8

QUO WARRANTO COMPLAINT WITH DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
AND DECISION ON QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION

EXHIBIT B

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF

QUO WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON
QUESTION OF FIRST IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

EXHIBIT 16
Court of Appeals Docket #: 08-5503 RE: Strunk DDC - Yahoo! Mail Page 1 of 3 Court of Appeals Docket #: 08-5503 RE: Strunk DDC - Yahoo! Mail Page 2 of 3

[Service Date: 12/03/2008 ]

Court of Appeals Docket #: 08-5503 RE: Strunk DDC Monday, May 25, 2009 12:34 PM Copies: 5 (Petition); Pages: 1-
From: "Bill Van Allen" <hvanallen@hvc.rr.com> 10; Disclosure Statement: Not
To: "CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK" <cestrunck@yahoo.com> Attached; Certificate of
Parties: Not Applicable to this
Filing [08-5503]--[Edited
12/05/2008 by EVS]
Court Case Billing
Calendar Opinions Orders/Judgments XML TXT Logout Help 12/03/2008 MOTION filed [1152840] by
Home Search History
Christopher Earl Strunk to
Case Selection Page proceed on appeal in forma
Opening Last Docket Originating Case pauperis (Response to Motion
Case No./Title Party
Date Entry No. served by hand due on
08-5503 Christopher Earl
05/21/2009 12/15/2008) [Service
12/03/2008 - Date:12/03/2008 ] Copies: 5
In re: Christopher Earl Strunk Strunk 11:48:17
92-1437 (Motion); Pages: 1-10;
10/29/1992 Disclosure Statement: Not
Intl Chem Workers Un, et al v. 09/18/1992 Dorothy L. Strunk OSHA-57FR42101
14:53:00 Attached; Certificate of
OSHA, et al
Parties: Not Applicable to this
92-1661 11/14/1994
12/22/1992 Dorothy L. Strunk OSHA Filing [08-5503]--[Edited
Action On Smoking v. DOL, et al 09:08:00
12/05/2008 by EVS]
Note:
* Click on Case No. to get Case Summary 01/08/2009 Relief Added CLERK'S
ORDER filed [1157954] it
* Click on Short Title to get Case Query
appearing that district court
* Click on Originating Case No. to get Case Summary for Originating Case has docketed petitioner's
complaint as No. 08cv2234,
Court Case Billing dismissing as moot petition
Calendar Opinions Orders/Judgments XML TXT Logout Help for writ of mandamus
Home Search History
[1152839-2] [08-5503]
If you view the you will be charged for 1 Pages $0.08
05/12/2009 MOTION WITH
General Docket ATTACHMENTS filed
United States Court of Appeals for DC Circuit [1181777] by Christopher Earl
Court of Appeals Docket #: 08-5503 Docketed: 12/03/2008 Strunk to Reopen Petition for
In re: Christopher Earl Strunk Termed: 01/08/2009 Writ of Mandamus. [Mail
Appeal From: United States District Court for the District of Columbia Service Date: 05/10/2009]
[08-5503]
Case Type Information:
1) Orig. Proceeding US 05/12/2009 MOTION filed [1181780] by
2) Mandamus Christopher Earl Strunk to
3) - proceed on appeal in forma
pauperis [Case Number 08-
Originating Court Information: 5503: ifppca] [Mail Service
District: 0090-1 : - Date: 05/10/2009] [08-5503]
Date Filed:
General Docket
United States Court of Appeals for DC
12/03/2008 US CIVIL ORIGINAL Circuit
PROCEEDING CASE
Court of Appeals Docket #: 08-5503 Docketed: 12/03/2008
docketed. [08-5503]
In re: Christopher Earl Strunk Termed: 01/08/2009
12/03/2008 PETITION w/ATTACHED Appeal From: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
EXHIBITS filed [1152839] by
Case Type Information:
Petitioner Christopher Earl
1) Orig. Proceeding US
Strunk for writ of mandamus.

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?pSize=25&sMid=30&fid=Inbox&sort... 5/26/2009 http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?pSize=25&sMid=30&fid=Inbox&sort... 5/26/2009

Court of Appeals Docket #: 08-5503 RE: Strunk DDC - Yahoo! Mail Page 3 of 3

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

2) Mandamus
3) - Case 08-cv-2234
Originating Court Information:
District: 0090-1 : - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Date Filed:

Prior Cases:
On May 27, 2009, I, Christopher Earl Strunk, under penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 USC 1746,
None
caused the service of three copies of the NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF QUO

Current Cases: WARRANTO DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON QUESTION OF FIRST
None
Panel Assignment: Not available IMPRESSION IN RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION

TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO ALLEGED POTUS:

In re: Christopher Earl Strunk Christopher Earl Strunk
In re - Petitioner [NTC Pro Se] BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE and SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT with 16 exhibits
Firm: 212-307-4444
593 Vanderbilt Avenue annexed affirmed May 26, 2009 as a complete set of which each placed in a sealed folder properly
#281
Brooklyn, NY 11238 addressed with proper postage served by USPS mail upon:

In re: Christopher Earl Strunk,

Brigham John Bowen, AUSA
In re - Petitioner U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
12/03/2008 US CIVIL ORIGINAL PROCEEDING CASE docketed. [08-5503] Washington, DC 20530
12/03/2008 PETITION w/ATTACHED EXHIBITS filed [1152839] by Petitioner Christopher Earl
Strunk for writ of mandamus. [Service Date: 12/03/2008 ] Copies: 5 (Petition); The Honorable Jeffrey Taylor
Pages: 1-10; Disclosure Statement: Not Attached; Certificate of Parties: Not The U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia,
Applicable to this Filing [08-5503]--[Edited 12/05/2008 by EVS] 555 4th Street, NW
12/03/2008 MOTION filed [1152840] by Christopher Earl Strunk to proceed on appeal in forma Washington, DC 20530
pauperis (Response to Motion served by hand due on 12/15/2008) [Service
Date:12/03/2008 ] Copies: 5 (Motion); Pages: 1-10; Disclosure Statement: Not Barack Hussein Obama in esse
Attached; Certificate of Parties: Not Applicable to this Filing [08-5503]--[Edited
c/o The White House
12/05/2008 by EVS]
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
01/08/2009 Relief Added CLERK'S ORDER filed [1157954] it appearing that district court has Washington, DC 20500
1 pg, 27.57 KB docketed petitioner's complaint as No. 08cv2234, dismissing as moot petition for writ
of mandamus [1152839-2] [08-5503]
05/12/2009 MOTION WITH ATTACHMENTS filed [1181777] by Christopher Earl Strunk to I do declare and certify under penalty of perjury:
Reopen Petition for Writ of Mandamus. [Mail Service Date: 05/10/2009] [08-5503]
05/12/2009 MOTION filed [1181780] by Christopher Earl Strunk to proceed on appeal in forma
Dated: May ____ , 2009
pauperis [Case Number 08-5503: ifppca] [Mail Service Date: 05/10/2009] [08-5503] Brooklyn, New York _________________________
Christopher- Earl : Strunk

http://us.mc576.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?pSize=25&sMid=30&fid=Inbox&sort... 5/26/2009
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 10
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 21 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:08-CV-02234 (RJL)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY,

Defendants.

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR STAY OF DISCOVERY

Defendants hereby respectfully move the Court to stay any and all discovery until the

pending cross-motions to dismiss [Dkt. #16] and for jury proceedings [Dkt. #19] have been

resolved and a scheduling order governing the remaining portions of this action has been

established. The grounds warranting the entry of a stay are set forth in Defendants’ June 8, 2009

consolidated filing [Dkt. #20].1

Dated: June 9, 2009 Respectfully submitted,

TONY WEST
Assistant Attorney General

ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO (D.C. Bar No. 418925)

Deputy Branch Director

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 981555)
Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice

1
Pursuant to LCvR 7(m), counsel has conferred with Plaintiff is informed that Plaintiff
opposes this motion.
Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 21 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 2 of 3

Federal Programs Branch

P.O. Box 883, 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20044
(202) 514-6289
brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov
Counsel for Defendants

2
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 21 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 9th day of June, 2009, a true and correct copy of the

foregoing Motion for Stay of Discovery was served upon Plaintiff by first class United States

mail, postage prepaid marked for delivery to:

Christopher E. Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Ave., #281
Brooklyn, NY 11238

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

Brigham J. Bowen

3
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 21-2 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:08-CV-02234 (RJL)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY,

Defendants.

[PROPOSED] ORDER
[#__]

Before the Court are (1) Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended

Complaint; (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Quo Warranto Proceedings; and (3) Defendants’ Motion

for a Stay of Discovery. For the reasons set forth in Defendants’ motions, the Court GRANTS

Defendants’ motions and denies Plaintiff’s motion. All claims regarding records concerning or

regarding President Barack H. Obama are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

Plaintiff’s motion for quo warranto proceedings and other relief is DENIED; and Defendants’

motion for a stay of discovery is GRANTED. No discovery shall take place until further order

of the Court.

SO ORDERED.

___________________________
June __, 2009 RICHARD J. LEON
United States District Judge
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:08-CV-02234 (RJL)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY,

Defendants.

DEFENDANTS’ CONSOLIDATED (1) REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’

PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT;
(2) OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUESTS FOR NON-FOIA RELIEF; AND
(3) MOTION FOR STAY OF DISCOVERY

Rather than attempt to defend his asserted (but false) entitlement to private passport and

travel records relating to President Barack Obama, Plaintiff Christopher Strunk has responded to

Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #16] by requesting that his entire Freedom of

Information Act (“FOIA”) case be set aside, at least temporarily, in favor of jury proceedings

regarding the President’s authority to hold his office, with concomitant discovery on a wide

range of issues, apparently to be heard by a three-judge panel under color of 28 U.S.C. § 2284.

Pl.’s Opp’n/Cross-Mot. [Dkt. #19]. None of these requests have merit. As to the underlying

Motion to Dismiss, Strunk concedes the solitary relevant issue by admitting that, in submitting

his FOIA requests for the President’s personal records, he failed to comply with agency privacy

regulations, and therefore has not exhausted his claims for such records. Defendants’ Partial

Motion to Dismiss should therefore be granted. Moreover, Defendants hereby (1) oppose

Strunk’s myriad requests for relief, all of which are meritless and fall well beyond the scope of
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 2 of 11

the FOIA complaint in this action; and (2) request immediate entry of a stay of discovery

pending resolution of the motion to dismiss.

I. BACKGROUND

As set forth more fully in Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss, this case arises from

three FOIA requests submitted by Strunk to the U.S. Department of State (“DOS”) and the U.S.

Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”). By these requests, Strunk seeks passport and travel

records pertaining to President Obama and to his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. The Obama

records are not subject to release because Strunk has failed to obtain privacy waivers, which are

required by regulation. The Dunham records are, however, subject to release, because Ms.

Dunham is deceased; DHS has released responsive Dunham travel records to Strunk and DOS is

currently processing Strunk’s request for Dunham passport applications.

Because Strunk has failed to obtain the necessary waiver regarding the Obama records,

Defendants moved to dismiss this action as to the President and separately filed an answer

regarding the allegations concerning the Dunham records. Strunk has responded by requesting

that his entire action under FOIA be set aside in favor of completely novel proceedings,

apparently to be conducted pursuant both to D.C. Code quo warranto provisions (see D.C. Code

§§ 16-3501 to 3503) and to 28 U.S.C. § 2284 (a statute providing for three-judge panels in

legislative apportionment cases and when required by Act of Congress). He also seeks discovery

into a wide range of issues relating to the President’s birth and citizenship.1 In addition, Strunk

1
Strunk’s allegations appear to be grounded in a widely discredited conspiracy theory
asserting that the President was not born in the United States and/or is otherwise not a United
States citizen. As recently observed by Judge James Robertson, this theory was “raised, vetted,
blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr.
Obama’s two-year-campaign for the presidency,” Hollister v. Soetoro, 601 F. Supp. 2d 179, 180

2
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 3 of 11

has filed a voluminous document in the D.C. Circuit, which appears to request, inter alia, the

recusal of Judge Leon either from this proceeding, or from a yet-to-be-filed census-related

action, or both. See In re: Strunk, No. 08-5503, Mot. for Restoration of the Pet. for Mandamus

(May 12, 2009).2 This appellate filing remains pending.

II. ARGUMENT

A. Claims Regarding President Obama Must Be Dismissed.

Dismissal of all claims concerning President Obama is manifestly warranted. The FOIA

(D.D.C. 2009), and yet it has still been the subject of numerous — and fruitless — lawsuits
across the country, see, e.g., Craig v. United States, No. 09-cv-343 (W.D. Okla. Apr. 16, 2009)
(dismissing Obama citizenship case for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction); Essek v. Obama, No. 08-379 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 15, 2009) (dismissing case regarding
Obama for lack of standing and jurisdiction); Cohen v. Obama, No. 08-cv-2150, 2008 WL
5191864, at *1 (D.D.C. Dec. 11, 2008) (dismissing suit regarding Obama on standing grounds);
Roy v. Federal Election, No. 08-1480, 2008 WL 4921263, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 14, 2008)
(dismissing suit regarding Obama and McCain for failure to state a claim); Stamper v. United
States, No. 08-cv-2593, 2008 WL 4838073, at *2 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 4, 2008) (dismissing suit
regarding Obama and John McCain for lack of jurisdiction); Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz, 958 A.2d
709, 713 (Conn. 2008) (dismissing case regarding Obama for lack of statutory standing and
subject matter jurisdiction); Marquis v. Reed, Superior Court Case No. 08-2-34955 SEA (Wash.
2008) (dismissing suit regarding Obama); Lightfoot v. Bowen, Supreme Court Case No. S168690
(Cal. 2008) (Original Proceeding) (denying Petition for Writ of Mandate/Prohibition and Stay
regarding Obama); Constitution Party v. Lingle, No. 29473, 2008 WL 5125984, at *1 (Haw.
Dec. 5, 2008) (unpublished) (dismissing election contest challenging Obama’s Nov. 4, 2008
victory); Martin v. Lingle, Supreme Court Case No. 08-1-2147 (Haw. 2008) (Original
Proceeding) (rejecting original writ petition regarding Obama on several grounds); Donofrio v.
Wells, 129 S. Ct. 752, 2008 WL 5115737 (U.S. Dec. 8, 2008) (declining to hear Obama
citizenship appeal from New Jersey state court case).
2
Prior to the docketing of the initial Complaint in this action, Strunk filed a petition for
mandamus relief in the D.C. Circuit, seeking to have his in forma pauperis petition expedited.
See generally In re: Strunk, No. 08-5503 (D.C. Cir.). The D.C. Circuit dismissed the petition
sua sponte on January 8, 2009, on the ground that Strunk’s Complaint had been docketed in this
action, rendering his mandamus petition moot. The new motion was filed on the docket of this
prior proceeding.

3
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 4 of 11

requires that records requests made pursuant to its provisions be “made in accordance with

published rules stating the time, place, fees (if any), and procedures to be followed,” 5 U.S.C.

§ 552(a)(3)(A), and “[f]ailure to comply with agency FOIA regulations amounts to a failure to

exhaust administrative remedies, which warrants dismissal,” Dale v. IRS, 238 F. Supp. 2d 99,

103 (D.D.C. 2002); see also Stebbins v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 757 F.2d 364, 366 (D.C.

Cir. 1985) (“Exhaustion of [administrative] remedies is required under the Freedom of

Information Act before a party can seek judicial review.”); West v. Jackson, 448 F. Supp. 2d 207,

211 (D.D.C. 2006) (“A requester must comply with an agency’s published regulations for filing

a proper FOIA request.”).

It is beyond dispute — and it is now conceded — that Plaintiff has failed to comply with

DHS and DOS regulations in seeking records concerning the President. See 22 C.F.R.

§ 171.12(a) (DOS) (“[R]equests for records pertaining to another individual shall be processed

under the FOIA and must be accompanied by a written authorization for access by the

individual, notarized or made under penalty of perjury, or by proof that the individual is

deceased (e.g., death certificate or obituary).”); 6 C.F.R. § 5.3 (DHS) (“If you are making a

request for records about another individual, either a written authorization signed by that

individual permitting disclosure of those records to you or proof that that individual is deceased

(for example, a copy of a death certificate or an obituary) must be submitted.”), § 5.21(f) (DHS)

(“If you are making a request for records concerning an individual on behalf of that individual,

you must provide a statement from the individual verifying the identity of the individual as

provided in paragraph (d) of this section. You must also provide a statement from the individual

certifying the individual’s agreement that records concerning the individual may be released to

4
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 5 of 11

you.”). As Strunk admits, the President “has not provided permission to release documents.”

Strunk Aff. [Dkt. #19] ¶ 20. Absent the appropriate waivers, Strunk’s FOIA requests for private

records relating to President Obama are not perfected, and his claims for these records must be

dismissed. See Pusa v. FBI, No. 99-04603, slip op. at 5-6 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 1999) (dismissing

case because plaintiff did not comply with agency regulations concerning third-party requests);

Harvey v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, No. CV 92-176, slip op. at 17-18 (D. Mont. Jan. 9, 1996)

(declining to grant motion for production of third-party records because plaintiff failed to submit

authorization at the administrative level), aff’d on other grounds, 116 F.3d 484 (9th Cir. June 3,

1997) (unpublished table decision); Freedom Magazine v. IRS, No. 91-4536, 1992 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 18099, at *10-13 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 1992) (finding that court lacked jurisdiction when,

prior to filing suit, plaintiff failed to provide waivers for third-party records as required by IRS

regulations).

B. Plaintiff’s Request For Quo Warranto Proceedings And Other Relief Must Be
Denied.

Strunk’s attempts to transform this action into a jury trial regarding the President’s

citizenship merit no consideration, for a host of reasons. First, even assuming the D.C. Code

provisions upon which Strunk relies in requesting quo warranto proceedings3 could be applied to

3
Statutory quo warranto (“by what authority”) provisions have roots in an ancient writ
used by the King of England to inquire into the authority by which a public office is claimed.
See U.S. ex rel. State of Wisconsin v. First Fed. Sav. and Loan Ass’n, 248 F.2d 804, 807-08 (7th
Cir. 1957), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 957 (1958). “[E]xcept as otherwise specifically provided by
statute, that there is no original jurisdiction in the federal district court to entertain an
information in the nature of quo warranto.” 248 F.3d at 809; see also 3 Roger Foster, A Treatise
on Federal Practice § 468a (6th ed. 1921) (observing that “the District Courts of the United
States have original jurisdiction to grant the writ of quo warranto only when specifically
authorized by statute”).

5
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 6 of 11

subject a sitting, duly elected President’s claim to office to judicial review — which is doubtful

(see 3 Roger Foster, A Treatise on Federal Practice § 468a (6th ed. 1921) (observing that “no

writ of quo warranto can issue from [the district courts] to try the title to the office of President

of the United States”)) — Strunk does not satisfy the statutory criteria for requesting such

proceedings. These statutes give authority only to the Attorney General or to the U.S. Attorney

for the District of Columbia to institute proceedings, on their own volition or “on the relation of

a third person.” D.C. Code § 16-3502. The one narrow exception, allowing private parties to

directly “apply to the court by certified petition for leave to have the writ issued,” is limited to

“interested person[s]” (as opposed to merely “third persons”), and it only applies when “the

Attorney General or United States attorney refuses to institute a quo warranto proceeding on the

request of a person interested.” Id. § 16-3503.

As used in the statute, the terms “third person” (as used in § 16-3502) and “interested

person” (as used in § 16-3503) carry specific, different meanings. In Newman v. United States

ex rel. Frizzell, 238 U.S. 537 (1915), the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed the predecessor D.C. quo

warranto statute (the language of which is substantially identical to the statute relied upon by

Strunk here),4 and held that “Congress used the words ‘third person’ in the sense of ‘any person,’

4
The predecessor statute provided:

Sec. 1538. AGAINST WHOM ISSUED. — A quo warranto may be issued from the
supreme court of the District in the name of the United States —
First. Against a person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises
within the District a franchise or public office, civil or military, or an office in any
domestic corporation.
Second. Against any one or more persons who act as a corporation within the
District without being duly authorized, or exercise within the District any corporate
rights, privileges, or franchises not granted them by the laws in force in said District. And
said proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.

6
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 7 of 11

and the phrase ‘person interested’ in the sense in which it so often occurs in the law, prohibiting

a judge from presiding in a case in which he is interested; preventing a juror from sitting in a

case in which he is interested; and permitting interested persons to institute quo warranto

proceedings.” Id. at 549-50. Put more directly, “[t]he interest which will justify such a

proceeding by a private individual must be more than that of another taxpayer. It must be ‘an

interest in the office itself, and must be peculiar to the applicant.’” Id. at 550.5

Naturally, Mr. Strunk cannot claim such an interest and his request must therefore be

denied. In any event, even assuming Strunk can claim to be an “interested person,” the Court

has broad discretion, under § 16-3503, to deny a quo warranto petition request, and Defendants

Sec. 1539. WHO MAY INSTITUTE. — The Attorney General or the district attorney
may institute such proceeding on his own motion, or on the relation of a third person. But
such writ shall not be issued on the relation of a third person, except by leave of the
court, to be applied for by the relator, by a petition duly verified, setting forth the grounds
of the application, or until the relator shall file a bond with sufficient surety, to be
approved by the clerk of the court, in such penalty as the court may prescribe,
conditioned for the payment by him of all costs incurred in the prosecution of the writ in
case the same shall not be recovered from and paid by the defendant.
Sec. 1540. IF ATTORNEY GENERAL AND DISTRICT ATTORNEY REFUSE. — If the
Attorney General and district attorney shall refuse to institute such proceeding on the
request of a person interested, such person may apply to the court by verified petition for
leave to have said writ issued, and if in the opinion of the court the reasons set forth in
said petition are sufficient in law, the said writ shall be allowed to be issued by any
attorney, in the name of the United States, on the relation of said interested person, on his
compliance with the condition prescribed in the last section as to security for costs.

D.C. Code Ch. LI, Quo Warranto, §§ 1538-40 (1911).

5
Elaborating on this holding, the Court observed that “one who has no interest except
that which is common to every other member of the public is not entitled to use the name of the
government in quo warranto proceedings,” and added, “[m]anifestly, Congress did not intend
that all these officers attached to the executive branch of the government at Washington should
be subject to attacks by persons who had no claim on the office, no right in the office, and no
interest which was different from that of every other citizen and taxpayer of the United States.”
Id. at 551-552.

7
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 8 of 11

respectfully suggest that the Court exercise its discretion by declining to indulge Strunk’s wishes

for a conspiratorial inquest into the President’s claim to office. Indulging this plaintiff is

especially unwarranted here, where the request comes via an attempt to transform, by simple

motion, a straightforward FOIA suit into a full-blown jury trial on matters far exceeding the

FOIA’s reach.6

Nor does Strunk’s desire for “a decision rendered by a three judge panel” warrant

consideration. Pl.’s Mem. of Law [Dkt. # 19] at 2 (requesting such a panel “with 28 U.S.C.

§ 2284, that needs to be expedited so were the decision appealed to SCOTUS, would save time

without involving the DC Circuit”). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284(a), three-judge panels are

convened only when “required by Act of Congress, or when an action is filed challenging the

constitutionality of the apportionment of congressional districts or the apportionment of any

statewide legislative body.” Plainly, these conditions are not met in this FOIA suit.

C. Defendants Request A Stay Of Discovery Pending Resolution Of Defendants’

Motion To Dismiss.

Finally, Strunk has served government counsel with broad-reaching requests for

admission, demanded to be answered personally by the Secretaries of DHS and DOS. (These

requests are duplicated in full in Strunk’s affidavit filed in support of his quo warranto jury trial

request, and relate primarily to the Secretaries’ personal abilities and alleged duties to make

inquiries into the citizenship and birth of the President. See Strunk Aff. [Dkt. #19] ¶¶ 31-32.) Of

6
Strunk also fails to clear numerous other hurdles established by these provisions,
including providing proof that the Attorney General and U.S. Attorney have “refuse[d]” to
institute proceedings, the filing of a separate civil action, and the filing of a bond “with sufficient
surety” for the payment, by Strunk, of “all costs incurred in the prosecution of the writ if costs
are not recovered from and paid by the defendant.” D.C. Code §§ 16-3501 to 3503.

8
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 9 of 11

course, discovery is generally not permitted in FOIA actions, and on the rare occasion when it is

allowed, its scope is constrained to inquiries regarding document indexing, classification,

retrieval and like matters. Wolf v. CIA, 569 F. Supp. 2d 1, 9 (D.D.C. 2008) (“Discovery is

generally unavailable in FOIA actions.”) (quoting Wheeler v. CIA, 271 F. Supp. 2d 132, 139

(D.D.C. 2003)); Voinche v. FBI, 412 F. Supp. 2d 60, 71 (D.D.C. 2006) (FOIA discovery is rare

and “is usually limited to the adequacy of the agency’s search and similar matters”); Schrecker v.

U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 217 F. Supp. 2d 29, 35 (D.D.C. 2002) (“Discovery in FOIA is rare and

should be denied where an agency’s declarations are reasonably detailed, submitted in good faith

and the court is satisfied that no factual dispute remains.”). Even by the most generous of

interpretations, the discovery sought by Strunk here far exceeds these strict limitations and

should be subject to a protective order. Rather than moving for such an order immediately,

however (and risk the possibility of additional efforts at inappropriate discovery by Plaintiff),

Defendants hereby seek only the more narrow relief of a stay of discovery until the pending

cross-motions have been resolved and a scheduling order governing the remaining portions of

this action has been established. Staying discovery until resolution of pending motions will

prevent unnecessary disputes over matters that ultimately may not be litigated at all, without

prejudicing Plaintiff’s ability to seek discovery, if any, once the scope of this action has more

fully been determined by the Court.

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court should grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint to the extent it seeks records relating to President Obama.

9
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 10 of 11

Plaintiff’s claims for mandamus relief should also be dismissed.7 Moreover, Plaintiff’s requests

for jury proceedings, a three-judge panel, and other non-FOIA relief should be denied, and

discovery should be stayed until the currently pending motions have been resolved.

Dated: June 8, 2009 Respectfully submitted,

TONY WEST
Assistant Attorney General

ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO (D.C. Bar No. 418925)

Deputy Branch Director

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 981555)
Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Programs Branch
P.O. Box 883, 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20044
(202) 514-6289
brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov
Counsel for Defendants

7
Plaintiff’s claim for mandamus relief must be dismissed, as mandamus is precluded by
the remedial scheme provided by the FOIA. Pickering-George v. Registration Unit, DEA/DOJ,
553 F. Supp. 2d 3, 4 n.1 (D.D.C. 2008) (“The exclusive nature of the FOIA precludes mandamus
relief.”); Kessler v. United States, No. 94-402, 1994 WL 193940, at *1 (D.D.C. May 4, 1994)
(writ of mandamus for release of records not available because remedies provided by the FOIA).

10
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 11 of 11

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 8th day of June, 2009, a true and correct copy of the

foregoing Consolidated Reply, Memorandum in Opposition, and Motion for Stay of Discovery

was served upon Plaintiff by first class United States mail, postage prepaid marked for delivery

to:

Christopher E. Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Ave., #281
Brooklyn, NY 11238

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

Brigham J. Bowen

11
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 22-2 Filed 06/09/2009 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:08-CV-02234 (RJL)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY,

Defendants.

[PROPOSED] ORDER
[#__]

Before the Court are (1) Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended

Complaint; (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Quo Warranto Proceedings; and (3) Defendants’ Motion

for a Stay of Discovery. For the reasons set forth in Defendants’ motions, the Court GRANTS

Defendants’ motions and denies Plaintiff’s motion. All claims regarding records concerning or

regarding President Barack H. Obama are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

Plaintiff’s motion for quo warranto proceedings and other relief is DENIED; and Defendants’

motion for a stay of discovery is GRANTED. No discovery shall take place until further order

of the Court.

SO ORDERED.

___________________________
June __, 2009 RICHARD J. LEON
United States District Judge
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 11
 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
------------------------------------x
)
Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.: 08-2234 (RJL)
)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, and )
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND )
SECURITY, )
)
Defendants. )
)
------------------------------------x

PLAINTIFF’S CONSOLIDATED (1) RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS

MOTION FOR STAY OF DISCOVERY WITH (2) REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF CROSS MOTION OF QUO WARRANTO
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND DECISION ON QUESTION OF FIRST
IMPRESSION AS TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES ALLEGED: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN ESSE

I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse, declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§1746 as follows:

1. That I make this Special-Appearance as Declarant in the Plaintiff’s consolidated (1)

response in opposition to Defendants motion for stay of discovery and (2) reply to defendants’

response to plaintiff’s notice of cross motion of quo warranto demand for jury trial and decision

on question of first impression as to the corporate office of the President of the united States

(POTUS) alleged: Barack Hussein Obama in esse.

2. The first order of business is stated by the Defendants’ Counsel in the summary of the

Background of their Memorandum with reference to the D.C. Circuit action by Plaintiff /

Petitioner in the matter of the Recusal of Judge Leon in this proceeding that effects the yet-to-be-

filed census-related action, See In re: Strunk, No. 08-5503, Motion for Restoration of the Petition

Strunk Declaration Page 1 of 5

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

for Mandamus (May 12, 2009), and in which the Petitioner filing anticipates the Court’s

response to that action, takes precedence over any matter before it.

3. The underlying Recusal matter with 28 U.S.C. §455 is dispositive, alleges that the Judge

is a Jesuit paid teacher at Georgetown University that was and is responsible for the creation and

operation of the Defendant Department of State Foreign Service whose review of this FOIA

matter for exit / egress documents of Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. in the

context of whether or not Barack Hussein Obama in esse is eligible to be qualified for POTUS,

and in which the court appears in conflict with impartiality.

4. This Recusal matter must be addressed first as it applies to this and related matters in that

Barack Hussein Obama is a usurper, and is not protected under FOIA as to his Official Use

Passport issued when he became a U.S. Senator and that it replaced a private passport that

Declarant contends was Indonesian, Canadian or British origin not of the USA because he had

traveled to Indonesia in 1981 and Pakistan which was not possible with a USA Passport.

5. If the Court decides to proceed without a Recusal, then it must create a 28 U.S.C. §2284

three Judge panel related to the Quo Warranto demand, in that Usurper actions are void ab initio

and disastrously affecting the entire nation exponentially as a matter of irreparable harm, and in

that context, beyond the Usurpers overreaching of 13 U.S.C. §195 in the ongoing Census using

the Acorn syndicalism organization, is wrongly acting to allot the 435 House seats with use of

tourists to affect the statewide and nationwide reapportionment – this matter will not go away,

and must be solved now not later because the Usurper’s actions alleged void ab initio compile

injury – the Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 “Natural-born-citizen” interpretation must be

accomplished by a Article III court now not later.

6. Then the Defendants Counsel alleges that I am somehow part of a conspiracy because I

Strunk Declaration Page 2 of 5

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

challenge Barack Hussein Obama in esse as a usurper based upon conspiratorial allegations

rather than facts, which I vigorously oppose as untrue and preposterous and when he footnote

that I am to be dismissed as a kook just as Judge Robertson and others had done because

somehow facts don’t count before this or any other court for the purpose of gaining discovery to

prove my injury, preposterously allege it an impossibility for me to be injured.

7. Were the Hollister Case filed by Attorney Berg in bad faith as Judge Robertson alleged

and in dismissal threatened extreme sanctions against Washington D.C. Attorney John D.

Hemenway, he remarkably backed off sanctions because to pursue sanctions would mandate the

process of discovery which the Judge did not want to provide (in my belief because that Judge

was in the tank for the Usurper), and as a result no court has ever dealt with any merits in any

case and no plaintiff has ever been given standing to challenge the eligibility of the usurper; that

is until now under this FOIA matter that must be resolved with discovery under my demand for a

Quo Warranto jury review, in that Plaintiff is absolutely entitled as a party-in-interest injured

directly herein by the Usurper who directs the actions of Defendants that are void ab initio.

8. That use of 42 U.S.C. 1985(3) applies to the Defendants who are in conspiracy with the

Usurper to seize POTUS as a heinous act that is proven by the conflict of facts admitted to by

the Usurper:

a) That he admits his father is a British Citizen at his Birth on August 4, 1961;

b) That he voted to support the opinion of the U.S. Senate in Resolution 511, that in

order to be a natural-born Citizen to be eligible for POTUS, the person must have two

Citizen Parents at the birth of the person.

c) That Barack Hussein Obama Jr. by the fact of the marriage between Stanley Ann

Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. at the time of his birth on August 4, 1961,

Strunk Declaration Page 3 of 5

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

notwithstanding where the birth occurred, renders Barack Hussein Obama Jr.

ineligible for POTUS.

Is a matter of conflicting facts that must be put before a jury and absolutely not a conspiracy in

any form as applies to Plaintiff’s the underlying intent in the FOIA matter.

9. As for the frustration of Plaintiff’s effort to gain permission from the malicious Barack

Hussein Obama et al. for access to FOIA Documents given his conspiratorial intent to usurp the

office of POTUS, clearly Plaintiff is to be given consideration by the Court under the doctrine of

frustration of effort and is not to be held responsible for the impossibility of a reasonable reply

by Barack Hussein Obama as such in the context of the crime being perpetrated.

10. However, notwithstanding whether or not the Usurper would give any permission for

private information, Plaintiff contends the Official Passport when the Usurper was U.S. Senator

mandates the release of information including the date of issuance, what passport it replaced, the

specifics of documents used for issuance if any existed and from what country, is an a official

public action with information due to any citizen is not private matter.

11. The decades long pattern shows Barack Hussein Obama is a serial liar whose affirmation

to the Illinois Attorney licensing Board even alleged he never used any other name, which is a

parsed lie to eliminate reference to Barry Soetoro whose record of foreign student financing and

scrapes with law involving his youthful exuberance prevents exposure, is one lie that had it been

properly cross checked by the Illinois Court System would have resulted in serious punishment.

12. There must not be a stay on the discovery of facts which would resolve the request for the

legitimately available public information as to the Usurper’s official public record as a U/S/

Senator whose actions were in conspiracy to cover-up and conceal public access to official

public documents associated with his Official Passport as U.S. Senator; there is no privacy

Strunk Declaration Page 4 of 5

 Strunk v US Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234

privilege short of national security, and even then must be determined in camera with Plaintiff.

13. On May 26, 2009 when the U/S/ Attorney of Washington D.C. received my demand for a

Quo Warranto proceeding, he promptly resigned on May 29, 2009 as an abdication by silence;

and when combined with the refusal by the Attorney General’s office to act, is therefore the lead

statutory matter controlling the FOIA request before this Court to resolve, and in that Plaintiff is

directly a third party-in-interest with standing in the matter.

14. Barack Hussein Obama in esse has been repeatedly served with notice of this matter and

maliciously refuses to respond with intent to frustrate my efforts to resolve my injury.

Wherefore, Plaintiff as of right demands discovery that would support the presentation of

facts to a Quo Warranto statutory proceeding by this District Court with a jury trial on the issues

of fact and a 28 U.S.C. §2284 three judge panel decision on the question of first impression that

supercedes this FOIA request, the Court must deny Defendants Motion for a stay of discovery,

and order a preliminary hearing in this matter;

Dated: June 12th , 2009

Brooklyn New York /s/ Christopher-Earl : Strunk
_____________________________
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281
Brooklyn, New York;
Email: uncasvotes2@yahoo.com,
Cell-845-901-6767
Christopher-Earl: Strunk ©in esse

cc: listing of service to follow

Brigham John Bowen, AUSA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Barack Hussein Obama in esse

c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Strunk Declaration Page 5 of 5

 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 12
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 25 Filed 06/19/2009 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:08-CV-02234 (RJL)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY,

Defendants.

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

FOR STAY OF DISCOVERY

The myriad reasons justifying the entry of a stay of discovery are adequately set forth in

Defendants’ June 8, 2009 consolidated filing [Dkt. #20]. Herewith, Defendants reply in support

of their motion only to raise two matters:

First, Plaintiff appears to concede, in his opposition to the motion [Dkt. #23, #24], that

(1) the only purported justification for the discovery he has attempted to propound is to make

inquiry in quo warranto into the President’s citizenship; and (2) that such discovery has no

bearing on the actual operative FOIA complaint in this action (under which complaint discovery

is manifestly inappropriate), which he asserts is “supercede[d]” by his requests for quo warranto

proceedings and recusal. At the very least, discovery cannot proceed unless the Court grants

leave to transform this FOIA suit into an inquest by jury into the President’s citizenship. Hence,

until the Court has ruled on that question, discovery must be stayed. Wolf v. CIA, 569

F. Supp. 2d 1, 9 (D.D.C. 2008) (“Discovery is generally unavailable in FOIA actions.”) (quoting

Wheeler v. CIA, 271 F. Supp. 2d 132, 139 (D.D.C. 2003)); Voinche v. FBI, 412 F. Supp. 2d 60,
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 25 Filed 06/19/2009 Page 2 of 3

71 (D.D.C. 2006) (FOIA discovery is rare and “is usually limited to the adequacy of the

agency’s search and similar matters”).

Second, Defendants observe that Plaintiff served counsel with his putative requests for

admission on May 22, 2009. Defendants respectfully request expedited consideration of their

motion and ask that a stay be issued prior to June 22, 2009, so that any argument from Plaintiff

that Defendants are somehow obligated to respond to this inappropriate discovery on or before

that date will be foreclosed.

Dated: June 19, 2009 Respectfully submitted,

TONY WEST
Assistant Attorney General

ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO (D.C. Bar No. 418925)

Deputy Branch Director

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (D.C. Bar No. 981555)
Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Programs Branch
P.O. Box 883, 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20044
(202) 514-6289
brigham.bowen@usdoj.gov
Counsel for Defendants

2
 Case 1:08-cv-02234-RJL Document 25 Filed 06/19/2009 Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 19th day of June, 2009, a true and correct copy of the

foregoing Reply in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Stay of Discovery was served upon

Plaintiff by first class United States mail, postage prepaid marked for delivery to:

Christopher E. Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Ave., #281
Brooklyn, NY 11238

/s/ Brigham J. Bowen

Brigham J. Bowen

3
 / DCD~ECFNotice@dcd.uscou
rts.gov
To DCD~ECFNotice@dcd.uscourts.gov

CC
06119l2009 05:16 PM
bcc
Subject Activity in Case 1:08cv-02234-RJL STRUNK v. U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE Order on Motion to Stay

T 1 1 T s ~ ~ a t i r - e r n m l m e s s a g ~ e n e r aby d C M m s y s t e -m . Please DO NOT

t ethe
- .. - - - -
RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended.
***NOTE T O 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

District of Columbia

Notice of Electronic Filing

The fdlowing@ansactionwas entered-on 6/1W009-at 5:16 PM and fikd on 6/19/2009

Case Name: STRUNK v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Case Number: 1:08-cv-2234
Filer:
Document Number: 26(No document attached)

Docket Text:
I
MINUTE ORDER granting [21] Motion to Stay Discovery. No Discovery shall take
I place until further order of the Court. Signed by Judge Richard J. Leon on
I 06119/09. (Icrjl2)

1:08-cv-2234 Notice has been electronically mailed to:

. - brigham.bowen@usdo&ov,
Brigham John Bowen - . elizabethshapiro@usdoj.gov

I~ 1:OS-cv-2234 Notice will be delivered by other means to::

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK

593 Vanderbilt Avenue
Apartment 28 1
Brooklyn, NY 11238
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 13
________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
______________________________________________________________

In re Christopher Earl Strunk,

Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus.

______________________________________________________________

AFFIDAVIT of
Eric-Jon: Phelps © in esse

In support of Christopher-Earl: Strunk© in esse, Petitioner in the

Original Proceeding for a writ of mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 for an
Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to
Recuse the district Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-1249 09-cv-1295 and
investigation of District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C. §455 and related
law in its entirety.
______________________________________________________________

Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse

593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
Email: cestrunck@yahoo.com
Cell- (845) 901-6767
 AFFIDAVIT of
Eric-Jon: Phelps © in esse

In support of Christopher-Earl: Strunk© in esse, Petitioner in the Original

Proceeding for a writ of mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 for an Order of
the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to Recuse the
district Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-1249 09-cv-1295 and investigation of
District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C. §455 and related law in its entirety.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA )
) ss
COUNTY OF BERKS )

I, Eric-Jon: Phelps© in esse, Affirmant, being duly sworn, depose and state

under penalty of perjury:

1. Am a natural born citizen of the Republic of California residing in the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, am over 18 years of age and not a party

to this instant action.

2. Affirmant’s residence for service of process is 203 South Fort Zellers

Road, Apt. D, Newmanstown, PA, 17073; Email: eric@vaticanassassins.org;

home phone : 610-295-5082.

3. Affirmant makes this affidavit in support of Christopher-Earl: Strunk© in

esse (“Petitioner”), Petitioner in the Original Proceeding for a writ of mandamus

under FRAP Rule 21 for an Order of the United States District Court for the

District of Columbia to recuse the District Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-1249, 09-

2
cv-1295 and investigation of District Clerk’s Office with 28 U.S.C. §455 and

related law in its entirety.

4. That Petitioner has requested that Affirmant testify herein and or related

proceedings as an expert witness on the Society of Jesus, also called the

Company of Jesus, and related organizations in the following matters:

a. The history of the Bible-based, Protestant Reformation;

b. The history of the Society of Jesus, a.k.a. the Jesuit Order,

established by Pope Paul III in 1540;

c. The Jesuit Order’s extreme oath of induction swearing complete

obedience to the Pope of Rome, which allegiance includes the

“extirpation” of all “heretics and liberals” by any means necessary

including political assassination;

d. The history of the Jesuit Order’s involvement in the western

hemisphere, especially as it relates to its de jure conversion of

“these United States of America” founded in 1787 into a

centralized, consolidated Empire in 1868 (via the Fourteenth

Amendment to the United States Constitution) until the present;

e. The history of the Bull promulgated by Pope Clement XIV in 1773,

suppressing and extinguishing the Jesuit Order “forever;” the

Society’s resultant war on the papacy through its Illuminati-

3
 controlled Grand Orient and Scottish-Rite Freemasonry leading and

directing the French Revolution and subsequent Napoleonic Wars;

the Order’s restoration in 1814 and subsequent history as to how it

presently exercises exclusive control over the Pope of Rome;

f. The grave danger to the very existence of the papacy, the Order

having murdered popes, altered Canon Law for its advancement,

including directing the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965); the

military “Company of Jesus” now serving as the primary impetus

behind the international social, religious, political and financial

movement for a highly-centralized “New World Order” which, at

its consummation, necessitates the destruction of the Vatican and

thus the historic Roman Catholic faith;

g. The paramount influence of the Jesuit Order over Washington,

D.C., through Georgetown University via its political surrogate, the

New York City/Washington, D.C.-based Council on Foreign

Relations (CFR) and its offspring, the Trilateral Commission (TC);

h. The secret and yet complete power of the Jesuit Order over a

myriad of papal “Court Jews” serving the Company via their

membership in the CFR and/or in high-level Freemasonry (Senator

Arlen Specter, Senator Charles Schumer, Henry Kissinger,

4
 billionaire George Soros, Obama’s White House Chief of Staff

Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Senior Advisor David Axelrod, past and

present chairmen of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Alan

Greenspan and Ben Bernanke, etc.);

i. The absolute power of the Jesuit Order over the unified Intelligence

Community of the American Empire centralized at National

Security Agency (NSA) headquarters, Fort Meade, Maryland, it

defending the pope’s purported power of “binding and loosing;”

j. The absolute power of the Jesuit Order over the Central Intelligence

Agency since its creation with the National Security Act in 1947,

the CIA serving as the Order’s enforcement arm over its CFR;

k. The absolute power of the Jesuit Order over Pope Benedict XVI’s

thirteen American Roman Cardinal Archbishops includes the

former president of Fordham University, CFR member and

Professed Jesuit priest under extreme oath of the fourth vow Joseph

A. O’Hare. The immediate foot soldiers of the American Cardinals

include Knights of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (CFR

member and President Regan’s Secretary of State, Alexander M.

Haig, Jr., whose brother, Francis Haig, is a powerful Jesuit priest

under extreme oath of the fourth vow; CFR member and President

5
 Reagan’s National Security Advisor, Richard V. Allen; etc.); the

Knights of St. Gregory (CFR member and Fox News mogul Rupert

Murdoch, etc.); the Knights of Columbus (CFR-affiliated House

Majority Leader John Boehner, Supreme Court Justice Samuel

Alito, etc.) and Opus Dei (CFR-affiliated Supreme Court Justice

Antonin Scalia, former Director of the FBI Louis Freeh, convicted

American spy for the Russian KGB/SVR, FBI counterintelligence

officer Robert Philip Hanssen, etc.);

5. That Affirmant hereby agrees to testify in this or any related other

proceeding schedule with reasonable due notice.

6. That Affirmant’s area of expertise on the Jesuit Order with references is

as follows:

a. History of the Order including its present Crusade against Islam;

b. Counter Reformation Doctrines of the Order;

c. Power of the Order over the late British Empire, American Empire,

Russian Empire and Chinese Empire;

d. Power over the Moslem World and Israel (Rome’s revived “Latin

Kingdom of Jerusalem”) via Freemasonry;

e. Power over all political leaders worldwide via Illuminized

Freemasonry ruling all Supreme Councils of the 33rd Degree;

6
 f. Power over the Pope’s International Intelligence Community and

International Crime Syndicate both conducting the Order’s

International Drug Trade; International Islamic Masonic Terrorist

Network; International Banking Community including all central

banks of Europe, the U.S., Canada, Britain, France, etc. through the

ubiquitous reach of the NSA, its most secret enclave being “The

Jew Room” from which all American Jews are denied access as a

matter of National Security;

7. That Affirmant was an expert witness for the Plaintiff(s) regarding the

Jesuit Order in the California case Kronzer Foundation v. Caritas of

Birmingham in the Superior Court of San Mateo County, Case No. CLJ

425608. See attached affidavit submitted in that case.

8. That Affirmant believes as a factual matter based upon Canon and related

law as well as press releases and private periodicals:

a. That the Society of Jesus has re-gained its death grip over the

papacy since no later than October, 1836, in which year it secured a

papal Brief by which Pope Gregory XVI gave himself and his

church over to the diabolical rule of the Order;

b. That the Jesuit Superior General of the Company of Jesus obtained

absolute control over every Roman Catholic cardinal, archbishop,

7
 bishop and priest through the decree of papal infallibility issued by

the Jesuit-directed and controlled First Vatican Council, 1870, the

“Father General” now unfettered in his rule over the Pope’s Vatican

Empire by commanding the movements of one man;

c. That the Society of Jesus, in order to secure all past privileges

granted to the Order prior to its suppression , extorted the Bull

Dolemus inter alia from Pope Leo XIII in 1880 by first poisoning

and then providing the antidote after the Pope signed that Bull

further entrenching Jesuit tyranny over the Vatican;

d. That according to the Code of Canon Law, the Pope must have a

Jesuit for his immediate confessor, the Jesuit General being fully

apprised of all secret designs and counsels of the “Vicar of Christ”

and his Roman Curia lest a covert movement to suppress the

Society be crowned with success as in the case of Pope Clement

XIV’s Bull of suppression and extinction of the Society in 1773;

e. That the Society of Jesus “tempers the Chair of St. Peter with

assassination,” should any Pope disobey clear commands of his

Jesuit confessor and advisors as in the case of Pope John Paul I;

f. That in upholding the Pope’s universal temporal power in his

fanatical quest to rule all nations, the Company of Jesus, exercising

8
 unrivaled control of Pope Pius IX, assassinated President Abraham

Lincoln (1865) and with its subsequent assassination of President

William McKinley (1901) assumed absolute control of its “Holy

Roman” Fourteenth Amendment, cartel-corporate fascist, socialist-

communist, American Empire with which to rule the world for the

benefit of the Jesuit papacy as Chicago Archbishop James Quigley

stated in The Chicago Tribune in 1903: “Within twenty years this

country will rule the world. Kings and emperors will soon pass

away, and the democracy of the United States will take their

place. . . . When the United States rules the world, the Catholic

Church will rule the world.”

g. That the Jesuit Order rules the world from America is attested to by

Fordham University graduate, G. Gordon Liddy, so stated in his

book, Will: The Autobiography of G. Gordon Liddy, pp. 23, 36:

“As much as I had admired the German Benedictines, I

admired the Jesuits more . . . These men [Jesuits at the Fordham

University Club] ran the world, and they enjoyed it.”

h. That Jesuit priest James Shea, Provincial the Maryland Province of

the Society of Jesus, is the overseer of Jesuit Georgetown

University president, Knight of Malta/CFR member John DiGioia;

9
 he in turn directing the domestic and foreign policy of Prince Hall

Rite, 32nd Freemason, Mulatto U.S. President Barry (Davis) Soetoro

(alias “Barrack Hussein Obama”) through Georgetown University

directing Roman Catholic papal knight Vice President Joe Biden,

both Sunni Moslem Obama and Roman Catholic Biden being

groomed for these positions by Jesuit Temporal Coadjutors for over

twenty years, including Roman Catholic U.S. Senator and CFR

member Edward M. Kennedy and Roman Catholic ex-National

Security Advisor and CFR/TC member Zibignew Bzrezinski;

i. That the Jesuit Provincial of the New York Province for the Society

of Jesus, David Ciancimino, manages and oversees the centralized

wealth and economic power of the American Empire through his

control of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York City (which

houses over 600,000 gold bricks), JPMorgan Chase, Bank of

America, etc., as well as Wall Street, the Stock Market and the

Securities and Exchange Commission first headed by Knight of

Malta Joseph P. Kennedy, the foremost short-seller of stock in 1929

precipitating the Stock Market Crash and Great Depression;

j. That on or about January 10, 1984 President Reagan, by Executive

Order, recognized the Vatican as a sovereign political state

10
 exchanging diplomats thereby laying the legal groundwork for the

signing of a treaty―a Concordat―with Rome, as did Roman

Catholic, Jesuit-advised, Knight of Malta-backed military dictators

Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Francisco Franco;

k. That as a result of said Executive Order issued by President Reagan

(having chosen at least six Knights of Malta to conduct his

administration), the Society of Jesus is acting in concert serving a

foreign sovereign (the Pope of Rome) ruling a sovereign state,

(Vatican City)―exclusive of all other considerations―intending to

submit the American peoples to a socialist-communist or socialist-

fascist military dictator secretly loyal to the “Vicar of Christ;”

9. That Georgetown University is within the jurisdiction of the Maryland

Province of the Society of Jesus, its Provincial having authority over

Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey, North Carolina,

Virginia, West Virginia and Washington, D.C., enveloping government

service in the Departments of State, Justice, Homeland Security and other

agencies manned by papal knights politically loyal to the Pope of Rome;

10. That this ubiquitous Jesuit Power extends to every State capital, to

include every State legislature, judiciary and governor in command of his

paramilitary state police;

11
 11. That if any governor seeks to seriously resist the occult, political and

financial power of the Jesuit Order, he will be removed fi-om office as was

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (an Orthodox "heretic" of Serbian

descent) who promised that his Illinois State government would rehse to

do business with the Jesuit Order's Bank of America headed by then

Chairman and now CEO, papal knight Kenneth D. Lewis;

12. That I, the Affirmant, have read the above and lmow its contents as an

expert witness; the facts stated in the Petition are true pursuant to my own

personal knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged

on information and belief. The grounds of Affirmant's beliefs as to all

matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: thrd parties

including a former CIA assassin, classical histories, encyclopedias, rare

books, official records, and personal knowledge except as to those stated

being logical conclusions premised upon undeniable facts.

~ r i c - ~ 0 O~in1ksse
~ s

Sworn and so Stated before me this 2"' day of September 2009.

- Notary Public

I
NOTARIAL SEAL
ANN M HASSLER
Notary Public
WOMELSDORF BOROUGH, BERKS COUNTY
MYCommission Expires Jan 24.2013
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 14
-
L T l O l l C l O I M m l R I ( O U I A - ~ r ~
TOM EASTON. CSB # 109218
-10;

541-317-9700
*L)mCnyLF~T

I,ewORiceofThcrmasQewe~yEssten
2782 NE Baroness PI,Bend OR 97701

A-ma- Rain(#TsWortzer Foundahn & Philip J. Kronzer

U U E OF COURT SUPEWOR COURT OF SAN MATE0
S T R E F T ~ Limited Jurisdiction
400 County Center
m,ac, Redwood City CA YO63
I
)*YC(
Iw

-IFF- K R O N m FOUNDATIOE( et &.

1- : CARITAS OF BIRMINGHAM

UI
-
DEClARA- ClJ 426608

My name is Eric Jon Phelps, author of Vatican Assassins: Wounded In The Hwse Of My Friends.' P u b l i i in 2001 the
work Lnvdved seventeen years of researchand three years d miting. My conclusionsare basic and are as fdtows:

1. The Society of Jesus founded by lgndus Lbyola in 1534. a b known as the Jesuit Order, was fwed to the Papacy in
1540 for purpose of destroying the risen Son of God's Grand and Glorious PlotestanlR e h a t i o n which gave to the
W d freedom ofconscience.

2. The Jesuit Order's intended pu- ol de- the Refommibn. which included the Reformation's religious and
'lbemr or hon-absolutist" political InslMons, was cabad the "Counter Refomration.'
3. The foundationin guidtng the Order towads the fulfillment d its Counter Reformatien was called 7heCouncil of Trent.'
The Council, having solemnly met in Trent, Italy, was composed of twenty-h Sessions and lasted for eighteen years. from
1545 to 1563.

4. The Council d Trent. guided by Jesuit Mego Layne;r, placed aver one hrmdred and twenty curses on the 'hem&"
Protestants and their 'liberal' &trines. The Fourth Session d Trent SpeciCmlly condemnedfreedom of conscience,
freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Pursuant to the decrees of the S e d Vatican Council (1963-1965) every
Pope at his coronatia, must uptPoldthe Order's evil Cound d Trenl

5. F m 1540 to 1648. virtually every war in Europe was ultimately ignited by the Sons of Layola. indoding the Thirty Years'
oerished.

6. TRe Society af Jesw. also known as the militw '%ompary of continued to wags war in conjundimwith its
high-level political assassinations, whL consolidating ail financial and p d i t i i l power into its 'Black Hand.' The Order. at
the apex of its power, controlledthe Roman Catholic Hierarchy, the Monarchs of Europe end consolidatedat1 the financial
weallh of Central and South America into its coffers.

[conunued on attached pages]

I of perjury under hd Iw d the^ State d Gatlfornia m a forego^ is tnra and mnect.

tu%ciQQpemky
0": ~ i * " / * ~ ~ ~
..................................................................................
Eric Jon Phdp
(Ivrrmclmrulg
 " 8 8 -

SHORTTiTlE: KRONZER FOUNDATION v. CARITAS OF BIRMINGHAM CASE

NUMBER:

CLJ 425608

1 7. Due t.o the ~ehement complaints of Europe's Roman Catholic Monarchs. the Bourbon Dynasties of Spain and
2 ~ranc~ In.partlcular, Pope Clement XIV suppre~sed the Society of Jesus in 1773 with a Papal Bull after a four-year
~nvestlg.atlon. D~ported form all of Sout~ Amenca an~ expelled from all of Catholic Europe, the Order took refuge
In Russia, Prussia, England and on the Island of COrsica. From Corsica the Order raised up its great Avenger the
3 Roman Catholic Freemason Napoleon Bonaparte. '.
I
4 8. Igniting the French Revolution and directing the Napoleonic Wars, the Society of Jesus punished the Monarchs
who were behind the Pa~al S.uppression ~nd made war on the Papacy. Pope Clement XIV was poisoned and the
5 Order used Napoleon to Imprison Pope PIUSVII for five years until he would restore the Jesuit Order to its former
status. That restoration was done in 1814 and the Jesuit-controlled absolutist Monarchs returned to their thrones.
6
9. From 1815, with the termination of the Congress of Vienna, until the outbreak of World War I in 1914, the Jesuit
7 Order suffered a series of tremendous setbacks. During the Nineteenth Century, called by the Order "the Century
of Disaster," the Company was expelled from Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, England, Portugal, and a
8 host of other nations around the globe. As a result the Society of Jesus retreated into Great Britain and America
and from these two mighty Protestant fortresses waged world wars for its international restoration. That epoch
9 which included the First and Second World Wars, was called "The Second Thirty Years' War," waged from 1914 to
1945.
10
10. The Jesuit Order, using Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli of Munich known also as "the German Pope," brought Adolf
11 Hitler to power. Jesuit Ludwig Kaas, the Chairman of the Center Party, and Franz von Papen, Hitler's Papal
Chamberlain and one Germany's most powerful Knights of Malta, further contributed to Hitler being given the
12 Chancellorship in 1933. The Reich Party Treasurer Xavier Schwarz -another Papal Knight of Malta -brought
Martin Bormann to power who, as an SS Genera! and Hitler's Secretary, oversaw every move and decision of the
13 Fuhrer.

14 11. At the height of Jesuit/Nazi Power in occupied Europe, the Order controlled Hitler; Petain of France; Mussolini of
Italy; Franco of Spain; Frank of Poland; Dregelle of Belgium; and Pavelic of Croatia. These Roman Catholic
dictators carried out the Inquisition of the Twentieth Century in accordance with the Company's evil Council of Trent,
15
12, After the Second Thirty Years' War ended in 1945, the Jesuits enabled top Nazis to escape Allied justice via
16 what has been called "the Vatican Ratlines." Francis Cardinal Spellman was the mastermind of the Ratline leading
into the United States by which thousands of Nazis were secretly admitted into America without the knowledge of
17 Congress or the American people. Additionally, the SS continued under another name. Merged with the former
OSS, the new name of the SS was now the CIA.
18
13. During the Pope's Cold War, the Jesuit General's CIA and Mafia jointly conducted an international Drug Trade
19 overseen by the Jesuit General's International Intelligence Community. The massive profits of the trade were
laundered through the Jesuit General's International Banks, including Chase Manhattan Bank and Citibank, both
20 being stockholders of the Order's Federal Reserve Bank.

21 14. President John F. Kennedy sought to break the power of the SSfCJA "into a thousand pieces;" he sought to
disestablish the Federal Reserve Bank; and he determined to end "Cardinal Spellman's" Vietnam War upon his
22 reelection. All this ended with his assassination in Dallas on November 22, 1963. President Kennedy was
"wounded in the house of his friends," cut down with Order's "leaden bullet," fired by the Central Intelligence
23 Agency. Francis Cardinal Spellman, the Archbishop of New York, was the mastermind behind the assassination of
one of his own Roman Catholic Knights of Columbus, President John F. Kennedy.
24 Indeed, the past is Prologue, The ubiquitous Power of the Jesuit General has continued in place until this moment
25 in 2003. His faithful soldiers, such as the late Ante Pavelic and Andrija Artukovic (the Himmler of Croatia), who

26 (Required for verified pleading) The items on this page stated on information and belief are (specify item numbe~, not line
numbe~):
27 This page may be used with any Judicial council fOfTnor any other paper filed with the court. Page 2-

Form Apprwedbylhe ADDITIONAL PAGE CAC2O1.001

JudK:iaJCoundlol~ifomia Attach to Judicial Council Form or Other Court Paper
MC-O20[NowJanuary 1.1967] www.ecourlforms.net

~ 4_""";"'~~--"'~.~-

.-'.b~",' ---
 .8 8 -
,

TITlE' CASE NUMBER

~HORT .KRONZER FOUNDATION v. CAR ITAS OF BIRMINGHAM :
CLJ 425608

1 carried out the massacres of Serbians in Yugoslavia during World War II, have inspired other popish soldiers of
today, one of them being the Jesuit, Bishop Paolo Hnilica.
2
Jesuit Paolo Hnilica, in seeking to consolidate more political and financial power into the hands of his idol -the
3 Company of Jesus -is a key player within the cult of Medjugorje, Bosnia. Feigning apparitions, Jesuit Hnilica has
, deceived tens of thousands of faithful Roman Catholics into making pilgrimages to Medjugorje while defrauding
4 them of millions of dollars. Meanwhile, he has continued to participate in the Jesuit General's Crusade against
Bosnian ORTHODOX Serbs -condemned "heretics" according to the Council of Trent.
5
In conclusion the cult of Medjugorje is just another Jesuit deception intended to funher consolidate all Spiritual and
6 Temporal power into the hands of a coming Jesuit Pontiff. That coming Pope, in restoring the Dark Ages, will be
"the abomination of desolation" as spoken of by Daniel the Prophet and Jesus the Messiah. Sitting in the rebuilt
7 Temple of Solomon to be worshipped as God, the coming resurrected Jesuit Pontiff will rule the world for forty-two
months until the Lord Jesus Christ as the risen Son of God returns and puts all nations under his earthly
8 government. Meanwhile Medjugorje will continue to further the power of the Jesuit General as he uses his faithful
soldiers, like Bishop Paolo Hnilica, in accordance with the maxims of the Counter Reformation's evil Council of
9 Trent.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 (Required for verified pleading) The items on this page stated on information and belief are (specify item numbers, not line
numbers): 3
27 l This page may be used with any Judicial council form or any other paper filed with the court. J Page

ADDITIONAL PAGE CRC2O1.~1

Fa""
Approved
byfl. .
Jvo"e'Gauna
DICalifonja Attach to Judicial Council Form or 0 t her C ou rt Pape r ,.n.." ~~~"rlfn, " nQt
MC.Q2Q
(NewJanuary
1.1987] WWW.ecou, "orms.ne~

~~-,~.
--,c ,.~0.""",-0..." ,~
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 15
FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002
Remarks by Governor Ben S. Bernanke
At the Conference to Honor Milton Friedman, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
November 8, 2002
On Milton Friedman's Ninetieth Birthday
I can think of no greater honor than being invited to speak on the occasion of Milton
Friedman's ninetieth birthday. Among economic scholars, Friedman has no peer. His
seminal contributions to economics are legion, including his development of the permanent-
income theory of consumer spending, his paradigm-shifting research in monetary
economics, and his stimulating and original essays on economic history and methodology.
Generations of graduate students, at the University of Chicago and elsewhere, have
benefited from his insight; and many of these intellectual children and grandchildren
continue to this day to extend the sway of Friedman's ideas in economics. What is more,
Milton Friedman's influence on broader public opinion, exercised through his popular
writings, speaking, and television appearances, has been at least as important and enduring
as his impact on academic thought. In his humane and engaging way, Milton Friedman has
conveyed to millions an understanding of the economic benefits of free, competitive
markets, as well as the close connection that economic freedoms such as property rights and
freedom of contract bear to other types of liberty.
Today I'd like to honor Milton Friedman by talking about one of his greatest contributions to
economics, made in close collaboration with his distinguished coauthor, Anna J. Schwartz.
This achievement is nothing less than to provide what has become the leading and most
persuasive explanation of the worst economic disaster in American history, the onset of the
Great Depression--or, as Friedman and Schwartz dubbed it, the Great Contraction of 1929-
33. Remarkably, Friedman and Schwartz did not set out to solve this complex and important
problem specifically but rather addressed it as part of a larger project, their magisterial
monetary history of the United States (Friedman and Schwartz, 1963). As a personal aside, I
note that I first read A Monetary History of the United States early in my graduate school
years at M.I.T. I was hooked, and I have been a student of monetary economics and
economic history ever since.1 I think many others have had that experience, with the result
that the direct and indirect influences of the Monetary History on contemporary monetary
economics would be difficult to overstate.
As everyone here knows, in their Monetary History Friedman and Schwartz made the case
that the economic collapse of 1929-33 was the product of the nation's monetary mechanism
gone wrong. Contradicting the received wisdom at the time that they wrote, which held that
money was a passive player in the events of the 1930s, Friedman and Schwartz argued that
"the contraction is in fact a tragic testimonial to the importance of monetary forces [p. 300;
all page references refer to Friedman and Schwartz, 1963]."
Friedman and Schwartz's account of the Great Contraction is impressive in its erudition and
development of historical detail, including the use of many previously untapped primary
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm
FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002
were thus a major concern.3 Benjamin Strong, the influential Governor of the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York and a key protagonist in Friedman and Schwartz's narrative, had
strong reservations about using monetary policy to try to arrest the stock market boom.
Unfortunately, Strong was afflicted by chronic tuberculosis; his health was declining
severely in 1928 (he died in October) and, with it, his influence in the Federal Reserve
System.
The "antispeculative" policy tightening of 1928-29 was affected to some degree by the
developing feud between Strong's successor at the New York Fed, George Harrison, and
members of the Federal Reserve Board in Washington. In particular, the two sides disagreed
on the best method for restraining brokers' loans: The Board favored so-called "direct
action," essentially a program of moral suasion, while Harrison thought that only increases
in the discount rate (that is, the policy rate) would be effective. This debate was resolved in
Harrison's favor in 1929, and direct action was dropped in favor of a further rate increase.
Despite this sideshow and its effects on the timing of policy actions, it would be incorrect to
infer that monetary policy was not tight during the dispute between Washington and New
York. As Friedman and Schwartz noted (p. 289), "by July [1928], the discount rate had been
raised in New York to 5 per cent, the highest since 1921, and the System's holdings of
government securities had been reduced to a level of over $600 million at the end of 1927 to
$210 million by August 1928, despite an outflow of gold." Hence this period represents a
tightening in monetary policy not related to the current state of output and prices--a
monetary policy "innovation," in today's statistical jargon.
Moreover, Friedman and Schwartz went on to point out that this tightening of policy was
followed by falling prices and weaker economic activity: "During the two months from the
cyclical peak in August 1929 to the crash, production, wholesale prices, and personal
income fell at annual rates of 20 per cent, 7-1/2 per cent, and 5 per cent, respectively." Of
course, once the crash occurred in October--the result, many students of the period have
surmised, of a slowing economy as much as any fundamental overvaluation--the economic
decline became even more precipitous. Incidentally, the case that money was quite tight as
early as the spring of 1928 has been strengthened by the subsequent work of James
Hamilton (1987). Hamilton showed that the Fed's desire to slow outflows of U.S. gold to
France--which under the leadership of Henri Poincaré had recently stabilized its economy,
thereby attracting massive flows of gold from abroad--further tightened U.S. monetary
policy.
The next episode studied by Friedman and Schwartz, another tightening, occurred in
September 1931, following the sterling crisis. In that month, a wave of speculative attacks
on the pound forced Great Britain to leave the gold standard. Anticipating that the United
States might be the next to leave gold, speculators turned their attention from the pound to
the dollar. Central banks and private investors converted a substantial quantity of dollar
assets to gold in September and October of 1931. The resulting outflow of gold reserves (an
"external drain") also put pressure on the U.S. banking system (an "internal drain"), as
foreigners liquidated dollar deposits and domestic depositors withdrew cash in anticipation
of additional bank failures. Conventional and long-established central banking practice
would have mandated responses to both the external and internal drains, but the Federal
Reserve--by this point having forsworn any responsibility for the U.S. banking system, as I
will discuss later--decided to respond only to the external drain. As Friedman and Schwarz
wrote, "The Federal Reserve System reacted vigorously and promptly to the external
drain. . . . On October 9 [1931], the Reserve Bank of New York raised its rediscount rate
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm
Page 1 of 11 FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002 Page 2 of 11
sources. But what is most important about the work, and the reason that the book is as
influential today as ever, is the authors' subtle use of history to disentangle complicated
skeins of cause and effect--to solve what economists call the identification problem. A
statistician studying data from the Great Depression would notice the basic fact that the
money stock, output, and prices in the United States went down together in 1929 through
1933 and up together in subsequent years. But these correlations cannot answer the crucial
questions: What is causing what? Are changes in the money stock largely causing changes
in prices and output, as Friedman and Schwartz were to conclude? Or, instead, is the stock
of money reacting passively to changes in the state of economy? Or is there yet some other,
unmeasured factor that is affecting all three variables?
The special genius of the Monetary History is the authors' use of what some today would
call "natural experiments"--in this context, episodes in which money moves for reasons that
are plausibly unrelated to the current state of the economy. By locating such episodes, then
observing what subsequently occurred in the economy, Friedman and Schwartz laboriously
built the case that the causality can be interpreted as running (mostly) from money to output
and prices, so that the Great Depression can reasonably be described as having been caused
by monetary forces. Of course, natural experiments are never perfectly controlled, so that no
single natural experiment can be viewed as dispositive--hence the importance of Friedman
and Schwartz's historical analysis, which adduces a wide variety of such episodes and
comparisons in support of their case. I think the most useful thing I can do in the remainder
of my talk today is to remind you of the genius of the Friedman-Schwartz methodology by
reviewing some of their main examples and describing how they have held up in subsequent
research.
Four Monetary Policy Episodes
To reiterate, at the heart of Friedman and Schwartz's identification strategy is the
examination of historical periods in the attempt to identify changes in the money stock or in
monetary policy that occurred for reasons largely unrelated to the contemporaneous
behavior of output and prices. To the extent that these monetary changes can reasonably be
construed as "exogenous," one can interpret the response of the economy to the changes as
reflecting cause and effect--particularly if a similar pattern is found again and again.
For the early Depression era, Friedman and Schwartz identified at least four distinct
episodes that seem to meet these criteria. Three are tightenings of policy; one is a loosening.
In each case, the economy responded in the way that the monetary theory of the Great
Depression would predict. I will discuss each of these episodes briefly, both because they
nicely illustrate the Friedman-Schwartz method and because they are interesting in
themselves.
The first episode analyzed by Friedman and Schwartz was the deliberate tightening of
monetary policy that began in the spring of 1928 and continued until the stock market crash
of October 1929. This policy tightening occurred in conditions that we would not today
normally consider conducive to tighter money: As Friedman and Schwartz noted, the
business-cycle trough had only just been reached at the end of 1927 (the NBER's official
trough date is November 1927), commodity prices were declining, and there was not the
slightest hint of inflation.2 Why then did the Federal Reserve tighten in early 1928? A
principal reason was the Board's ongoing concern about speculation on Wall Street. The
Federal Reserve had long made the distinction between "productive" and "speculative" uses
of credit, and the rising stock market and the associated increases in bank loans to brokers
9/2/2009 http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm 9/2/2009
Page 3 of 11 FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002 Page 4 of 11
to 2-1/2 per cent, and on October 16, to 3-1/2 per cent--the sharpest rise within so brief a
period in the whole history of the System, before or since (p. 317)." This action stemmed the
outflow of gold but contributed to what Friedman and Schwartz called a "spectacular"
increase in bank failures and bank runs, with 522 commercial banks closing their doors in
October alone. The policy tightening and the ongoing collapse of the banking system caused
the money supply to fall precipitously, and the declines in output and prices became even
more virulent. Again, the logic is that a monetary policy change related to objectives other
than the domestic economy--in this case, defense of the dollar against external attack--were
followed by changes in domestic output and prices in the predicted direction.
One might object that the two "experiments" described so far were both episodes of
monetary contraction. Hence, although they suggest that declining output and prices
followed these tight-money policies, the evidence is perhaps not entirely persuasive. The
possibility remains that the Great Depression occurred for other reasons and that the
contractionary monetary policies merely coincided with (or perhaps, slightly worsened) the
ongoing declines in the economy. Hence it is particularly interesting that the third episode
studied by Friedman and Schwartz is an expansionary episode.
This third episode occurred in April 1932, when the Congress began to exert considerable
pressure on the Fed to ease monetary policy, in particular, to conduct large-scale open-
market purchases of securities. The Board was quite reluctant; but between April and June
1932, it did authorize substantial purchases. This infusion of liquidity appreciably slowed
the decline in the stock of money and significantly brought down yields on government
bonds, corporate bonds, and commercial paper. Most interesting, as Friedman and Schwartz
noted (p. 324), "[t]he tapering off of the decline in the stock of money and the beginning of
the purchase program were followed shortly by an equally notable change in the general
economic indicator. . . . Wholesale prices started rising in July, production in August.
Personal income continued to fall but at a much reduced rate. Factory employment, railroad
ton-miles, and numerous other indicators of physical activity tell a similar story. All in all,
as in early 1931, the data again have many of the earmarks of a cyclical revival. . . . Burns
and Mitchell (1946), although dating the trough in March 1933, refer to the period as an
example of a 'double bottom.' " Unfortunately, although a few Fed officials supported the
open-market purchase program, notably George Harrison at the New York Fed, most did not
consider the policy to be appropriate. In particular, as argued by several modern scholars,
they took the mistaken view that low nominal interest rates were indicative of monetary
ease. Hence, when the Congress adjourned on July 16, 1932, the System essentially ended
the program. By the latter part of the year, the economy had relapsed dramatically.
The final episode studied by Friedman and Schwartz, again contractionary in impact,
occurred in the period from January 1933 to the banking holiday in March. This time the
exogenous factor might be taken to be the long lag mandated by the Constitution between
the election and the inauguration of a new U.S. President. Franklin D. Roosevelt, elected in
November 1932, was not to take office until March 1933. In the interim, of course,
considerable speculation circulated about the new President's likely policies; the uncertainty
was increased by the President-elect's refusal to make definite policy statements or to
endorse actions proposed by the increasingly frustrated President Hoover. However, from
the President-elect's campaign statements and known propensities, many inferred (correctly)
that Roosevelt might devalue the dollar or even break the link with gold entirely. Fearing the
resulting capital losses, both domestic and foreign investors began to convert dollars to gold,
putting pressure on both the banking system and the gold reserves of the Federal Reserve
9/2/2009 http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm 9/2/2009
FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002
System. Bank failures and the Fed's defensive measures against the gold drain further
reduced the stock of money. The economy took its deepest plunge between November 1932
and March 1933, once more confirming the temporal sequence predicted by the monetary
hypothesis. Once Roosevelt was sworn in, his declaration of a national bank holiday and,
subsequently, his cutting the link between the dollar and gold initiated the expansion of
money, prices, and output. It is an interesting but not uncommon phenomenon in economics
that the expectation of a devaluation can be highly destabilizing but that the devaluation
itself can be beneficial.
These four episodes might be considered as time series examples of Friedman and
Schwartz's evidence for the role of monetary forces in the Depression. They are not the
entirety of the evidence, however. Friedman and Schwartz also introduced "cross-sectional"-
-that is, cross-country--evidence as well. This cross-sectional evidence is based on
differences in exchange-rate regimes across countries in the 1930s.
The Gold Standard and the International Depression
Although the Monetary History focuses by design on events in the United States, some of its
most compelling insights come from cross-sectional evidence. Anticipating a large academic
literature of the 1980s and 1990s, Friedman and Schwartz recognized in 1963 that a
comparison of the economic performances in the 1930s of countries with different monetary
regimes could also serve as a test for their monetary hypothesis.
Facilitating the cross-sectional natural experiment was the fact that the international gold
standard, which had been suspended during World War I, was laboriously rebuilt during the
1920s (in a somewhat modified form called the gold-exchange standard). Countries that
adhered to the international gold standard were essentially required to maintain a fixed
exchange rate with other gold-standard countries. Moreover, because the United States was
the dominant economy on the gold standard during this period (with some competition from
France), countries adhering to the gold standard were forced to match the contractionary
monetary policies and price deflation being experienced in the United States.
Importantly for identification purposes, however, the gold standard was not adhered to
uniformly as the Depression proceeded. A few countries for historical or political reasons
never joined the gold standard. Others were forced off early, because of factors such as
internal politics, weak domestic banking conditions, and the local influence of competing
economic doctrines. Other countries, notably France and the other members of the so-called
Gold Bloc, had a strong ideological commitment to gold and therefore remained on the gold
standard as long as possible.
Friedman and Schwartz's insight was that, if monetary contraction was in fact the source of
economic depression, then countries tightly constrained by the gold standard to follow the
United States into deflation should have suffered relatively more severe economic
downturns. Although not conducting a formal statistical analysis, Friedman and Schwartz
gave a number of salient examples to show that the more tightly constrained a country was
by the gold standard (and, by default, the more closely bound to follow U.S. monetary
policies), the more severe were both its monetary contraction and its declines in prices and
output. One can read their discussion as dividing countries into four categories.
The first category consisted of countries that did not adhere to the gold standard at all or
perhaps adhered only very briefly. The example cited by Friedman and Schwartz was China.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm
FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002
nominal exchange rate regime chosen by each country would have been largely irrelevant.
The close connection among countries' exchange rate regimes, their monetary policies, and
the behavior of domestic prices and output, is strong evidence for the proposition that
monetary forces played a central role not just in the U.S. depression but in the world as a
whole.
Of course, those familiar with more recent work on the Great Depression will recognize that
Friedman and Schwartz's idea of categorizing countries by exchange rate regime has been
widely extended by subsequent researchers. Notably, in the paper that revived Friedman and
Schwartz's temporarily dormant insight, Choudhri and Kochin (1980) considered the
relative performances of Spain (which, as mentioned, did not adopt the gold standard), three
Scandinavian countries (which left gold with Great Britain in September 1931), and four
countries that remained part of the French-led Gold Bloc (the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy,
and Poland). They found that the countries that remained on gold suffered much more
severe contractions in output and prices than the countries leaving gold. In a highly
influential paper, Eichengreen and Sachs (1985) examined a number of key macro variables
for ten major countries over 1929-35, finding that countries that left gold earlier also
recovered earlier. Bernanke and James (1991) confirmed the findings of Eichengreen and
Sachs for a broader sample of twenty-four (mostly industrialized) countries (see also
Bernanke and Carey, 1996), and Campa (1990) did the same for a sample of Latin American
countries. Bernanke (1995) showed that not only did adherence to the gold standard predict
deeper and more extended depression, as had been noted by earlier authors, but also that the
behavior of various key macro variables, such as real wages and real interest rates, differed
across gold-standard and non-gold-standard countries in just the way one would expect if
the driving shocks were monetary in nature. The most detailed narrative discussion of how
the gold standard propagated the Depression around the world is, of course, the influential
book by Eichengreen (1992). Eichengreen (2002) reviews the conclusions of his book and
concludes largely that they are quite compatible with the Friedman and Schwartz approach.
The Role of Bank Failures
Yet another striking feature of the Great Contraction in the United States was the massive
extent of banking panics and failures, culminating in the Bank Holiday of March 1933, in
which the entire U.S. banking system was shut down. During the Depression decade,
something close to half of all U.S. commercial banks either failed or merged with other
banks.
Friedman and Schwartz take the unusually severe and protracted U.S. banking panic as yet
another opportunity to apply their identification methodology. Their argument, in short, is
that under institutional arrangements that existed before the establishment of the Federal
Reserve, bank failures of the scale of those in 1929-33 would not have occurred, even in an
economic downturn as severe as that in the Depression. For doctrinal and institutional
reasons to be detailed in a moment, however, the extraordinary spate of bank failures did
occur and led in turn to the massive extinction of bank deposits and an abnormally large
decline in the stock of money. Because the decline in money induced by bank panics would
not have occurred under previous regimes, Friedman and Schwartz argued, it can be treated
as partially exogenous and thus a potential cause of the extraordinary declines in output and
prices that followed.
Before the creation of the Federal Reserve, Friedman and Schwartz noted, bank panics were
typically handled by banks themselves--for example, through urban consortiums of private
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm
Page 5 of 11 FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002 Page 6 of 11
As they wrote (p. 361), "China was on a silver rather than a gold standard. As a result, it had
the equivalent of a floating exchange rate with respect to gold-standard countries. A decline
in the gold price of silver had the same effect as a depreciation in the foreign exchange value
of the Chinese yuan. The effect was to insulate Chinese internal economic conditions from
the worldwide depression. . . . And that is what happened. From 1929 to 1931, China was
hardly affected internally by the holocaust that was sweeping the gold-standard world, just
as in 1920-21, Germany had been insulated by her hyperinflation and associated floating
exchange rate."
Subsequent research (for example, Choudhri and Kochin, 1980) has identified other
countries that, like China, did not adhere to the gold standard and hence escaped the worst
of the Depression. Two examples are Spain, where the internal instability that ultimately led
to the Spanish Civil War prevented the country from re-adopting the gold standard in the
1920s, and Japan, which was forced from the gold standard after being on it for only a
matter of months. The Depression in Spain was quite mild, and Japan experienced a
powerful recovery almost immediately after abandoning its short-lived experiment with
gold.
The second category consisted of countries that had restored the gold standard in the 1920s
but abandoned it early in the Depression, typically in the fall of 1931. As Friedman and
Schwartz observed (p. 362), the first major country to leave the gold standard was Great
Britain, which was forced off gold in September 1931. Several trading partners, among them
the Scandinavian countries, followed Britain's lead almost immediately. The effect of
leaving gold was to free domestic monetary policy and to stop the monetary contraction.
What was the consequence of this relaxed pressure on the money stock? Friedman and
Schwartz noted (p. 362) that "[t]he trough of the depression in Britain and the other
countries that accompanied Britain in leaving gold was reached in the third quarter of 1932.
[In contrast, i]n the countries that remained on the gold standard or, like Canada, that went
only part way with Britain, the Depression dragged on."
Third were countries that remained on gold but had ample reserves or were attracting gold
inflows. The key example was France (see p. 362), the leader of the Gold Bloc. After its
stabilization in 1928, France attracted gold reserves well out of proportion to the size of its
economy. France's gold inflows allowed it to maintain its money supply and avoid a serious
downturn until 1932. However, at that point, France's liquidation of non-gold foreign
exchange reserves and its banking problems began to offset the continuing gold inflows,
reducing the French money stock. A serious deflation and declines in output began in
France, which, as Friedman and Schwartz pointed out, did not reach its trough until April
1935, much later than Great Britain and other countries that left gold early.
Fourth, and perhaps the worst hit, were countries that rejoined the gold standard but had
very low gold reserves and banking systems seriously weakened by World War I and the
ensuing hyperinflations. Friedman and Schwartz mention Austria, Germany, Hungary, and
Romania as examples of this category (p. 361). These countries suffered not only deflation
but also extensive banking and financial crises, making their plunge into depression
particularly precipitous.
The powerful identification achieved by this categorization of countries by Friedman and
Schwartz is worth reemphasizing. If the Depression had been the product primarily of
nonmonetary forces, such as changes in autonomous spending or in productivity, then the
9/2/2009 http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm 9/2/2009
Page 7 of 11 FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002 Page 8 of 11
banks called clearinghouses. If a run on one or more banks in a city began, the
clearinghouse might declare a suspension of payments, meaning that, temporarily, deposits
would not be convertible into cash. Larger, stronger banks would then take the lead, first, in
determining that the banks under attack were in fact fundamentally solvent, and second, in
lending cash to those banks that needed to meet withdrawals. Though not an entirely
satisfactory solution--the suspension of payments for several weeks was a significant
hardship for the public--the system of suspension of payments usually prevented local
banking panics from spreading or persisting (Gorton and Mullineaux, 1987). Large, solvent
banks had an incentive to participate in curing panics because they knew that an unchecked
panic might ultimately threaten their own deposits.
It was in large part to improve the management of banking panics that the Federal Reserve
was created in 1913. However, as Friedman and Schwartz discuss in some detail, in the
early 1930s the Federal Reserve did not serve that function. The problem within the Fed was
largely doctrinal: Fed officials appeared to subscribe to Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's
infamous 'liquidationist' thesis, that weeding out "weak" banks was a harsh but necessary
prerequisite to the recovery of the banking system. Moreover, most of the failing banks were
small banks (as opposed to what we would now call money-center banks) and not members
of the Federal Reserve System. Thus the Fed saw no particular need to try to stem the
panics. At the same time, the large banks--which would have intervened before the founding
of the Fed--felt that protecting their smaller brethren was no longer their responsibility.
Indeed, since the large banks felt confident that the Fed would protect them if necessary, the
weeding out of small competitors was a positive good, from their point of view.
In short, according to Friedman and Schwartz, because of institutional changes and
misguided doctrines, the banking panics of the Great Contraction were much more severe
and widespread than would have normally occurred during a downturn. Bank failures and
depositor withdrawals greatly reduced the quantity of bank deposits, consequently reducing
the money supply. The result, they argued, was greater deflation and output decline than
would have otherwise occurred.
A couple of objections can be raised to the Friedman-Schwartz inference. One logical
possibility is that the extraordinary rate of bank failure of the 1930s, rather than causing the
subsequent declines in output and prices, occurred because depositors and others anticipated
the collapse of the economy--that is, that the banking panics were endogenous to the
expected state of the economy. Friedman and Schwartz's institutional arguments persuade
me that this is unlikely. If previous arrangements had been in place, bank panics would not
have been allowed to progress to the degree they did, independent of the severity of the
downturn. Moreover, I don't find it plausible that, in 1930 and 1931, depositors and bankers
fully anticipated the severity of the downturn still to come.
A second possibility is that banking panics contributed to the collapse of output and prices
through nonmonetary mechanisms. My own early work (Bernanke, 1983) argued that the
effective closing down of the banking system might have had an adverse impact by creating
impediments to the normal intermediation of credit, as well as by reducing the quantity of
transactions media. Friedman and Schwartz anticipated this argument and adduced as
contrary evidence a comparison of the United States and Canada (p. 352). They pointed out
that (1) Canada's monetary policy was tied to that of the United States by a fixed exchange
rate; (2) Canada had no significant bank failures; but (3) Canada's output declines were as
severe as those of the United States. Friedman and Schwartz concluded that Canada's
9/2/2009 http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm 9/2/2009
FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002 Page 9 of 11 FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002 Page 10 of 11

monetary forces in the Great Depression.

economy declined because of its enforced monetary contraction--whether that monetary
contraction took place through bank failures or was enforced by the exchange-rate regime
was immaterial.
I would argue that Canada, both being a commodity exporter and being unusually highly
integrated with the United States, may not have been fully representative of the experience
of all countries in the 1930s. For example, in Bernanke (1995, table 3), I showed using a
sample of twenty-six countries that, with the exchange-rate regime held constant, countries
suffering severe banking panics had subsequent declines in output that were significantly
worse than those in countries with stable banking systems. This result supports the
possibility of an additional, nonmonetary channel for bank failures. At the same time, my
results were also strongly supportive of the view that adherence to the gold standard, and the
associated monetary contraction, was of first-order importance in explaining which
countries suffered severe depressions. Thus, as I have always tried to make clear, my
argument for nonmonetary influences of bank failures is simply an embellishment of the
Friedman-Schwartz story; it in no way contradicts the basic logic of their analysis.
Conclusion
The brilliance of Friedman and Schwartz's work on the Great Depression is not simply the
texture of the discussion or the coherence of the point of view. Their work was among the
first to use history to address seriously the issues of cause and effect in a complex economic
system, the problem of identification. Perhaps no single one of their "natural experiments"
alone is convincing; but together, and enhanced by the subsequent research of dozens of
scholars, they make a powerful case indeed.
For practical central bankers, among which I now count myself, Friedman and Schwartz's
analysis leaves many lessons. What I take from their work is the idea that monetary forces,
particularly if unleashed in a destabilizing direction, can be extremely powerful. The best
thing that central bankers can do for the world is to avoid such crises by providing the
economy with, in Milton Friedman's words, a "stable monetary background"--for example
as reflected in low and stable inflation.

Benjamin Strong and the Leadership Vacuum
Finally, what is probably Friedman and Schwartz's most controversial "natural experiment"
stems from the premature death, in 1928, of America's preeminent central banker, Benjamin
Strong. Strong, who was Governor of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the de
facto equivalent to a Fed Chairman today, had led the Federal Reserve throughout the
1920s. Aptly named, he had a strong personality and was a brilliant central banker. Quite
plausibly, his personality and skills created a leadership position within a Federal Reserve
System that--as suggested by its name--was intended by the Congress to be a relatively
decentralized institution.
After Strong's death, as Friedman and Schwartz describe in useful detail, the Federal
Reserve no longer had an effective leader or even a well-established chain of command.
Members of the Board in Washington, jealous of the traditional powers of the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York, strove for greater influence; and Strong's successor, George
Harrison, did not have the experience or personality to stop them. Regional banks also
began to assert themselves more. Thus, power became diffused; worse, what power there
was accrued to men who did not understand central banking from a national and
international point of view, as Strong had. The leadership vacuum and the generally low
level of central banking expertise in the Federal Reserve System was a major problem that
led to excessive passivity and many poor decisions by the Fed in the years after Strong's
death.
Friedman and Schwartz argued in their book that if Strong had lived, many of the mistakes
of the Great Depression would have been avoided. This proposition has been highly
controversial and has led to detailed examinations of what Strong's views "really were" on
various matters of monetary policymaking. This counterfactual debate somewhat misses the
point, in my opinion. We don't know what would have happened had Strong lived; but what
we do know is that the central bank of the world's economically most important nation in
1929 was essentially leaderless and lacking in expertise. This situation led to decisions, or
nondecisions, which might well not have occurred under either better leadership or a more
centralized institutional structure. And associated with these decisions, we observe a
massive collapse of money, prices, and output. Thus, it seems to me that the death of Strong
does qualify as one more natural experiment with which to try to identify the effects of
Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal
Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're
right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.
Best wishes for your next ninety years.
Endnotes
1. Accordingly, I hope the reader will forgive the many references to my own work in the
list of references below. They arise because much of my own research has followed up leads
from the Friedman-Schwartz agenda. Return to text
2. However, as Athanasios Orphanides pointed out to me, by 1929 the rate of output growth
was strong, which may have provided additional motivation for a tightening. Return to text
3. Apparently the Board was not entirely clear on the point that funds used to purchase stock
are not made unavailable for productive use. Of course, as stock sales are merely transfers of
existing assets, funds used to purchase stock are not dissipated but only transferred from one
person to another. Return to text
REFERENCES
Bernanke, Ben, "Non-Monetary Effects of the Financial Crisis in the Propagation of the
Great Depression," American Economic Review, 1983, 257-76.
Bernanke, Ben, "The Macroeconomics of the Great Depression: A Comparative Approach,"
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 1995, 1-28.
Bernanke, Ben, and Kevin Carey, "Nominal Wage Stickiness and Aggregate Supply in the
Great Depression," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1996, 853-83.
Bernanke, Ben, and Harold James, "The Gold Standard, Deflation, and Financial Crisis in

http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm 9/2/2009 http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm 9/2/2009

FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002 Page 11 of 11

the Great Depression: An International Comparison," in R. Glenn Hubbard, Financial

Markets and Financial Crises, Chicago: University of Chicago Press for NBER, 1991.

Burns, Arthur F. and Wesley C. Mitchell, Measuring Business Cycles, New York: National
Bureau of Economic Research, 1946.

Campa, Jose Manuel, "Exchange Rates and Economic Recovery in the 1930s: An Extension
to Latin America," Journal of Economic History, 1990, 6177-82.

Choudhri, Ehsan, and Levis Kochin, "The Exchange Rate and the International
Transmission of Business Cycles: Some Evidence from the Great Depression," Journal of
Money, Credit, and Banking, 1980, 565-74.

Eichengreen, Barry, Golden Fetters: The Gold Standard and the Great Depression, 1919-
1939, New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Eichengreen, Barry, "Still Fettered after All These Years," National Bureau of Economic
Research, Working Paper 9276, October 2002.

Eichengreen, Barry, and Jeffrey Sachs, "Exchange Rates and Economic Recovery in the
1930s," Journal of Economic History, 1985, 925-46.

Friedman, Milton and Anna J. Schwartz, A Monetary History of the United States, 1863-
1960, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1963.

Gorton, Gary, and Donald J. Mullineaux, "The Joint Production of Confidence: Endogenous
Regulation and Nineteenth-Century Commercial Bank Clearinghouses," Journal of Money,
Credit, and Banking, 1987, 457-68.

Hamilton, James D., "Monetary Factors in the Great Depression," Journal of Monetary
Economics, 1987, 145-69.

Return to top

2002 Speeches

Home | News and events

Accessibility | Contact Us
Last update: November 8, 2002

http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm 9/2/2009
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 16
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 17
1 1
2 2
Dr. Orly Taitz, Attorney-at-Law
3
29839 S. Margarita Pkwy
3 destruction in the near future. Plaintiffs fear that evidence relating to their
4 Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688 4 cause may be destroyed as soon as it is identified as relevant to the
ph. 949-683-5411
5 fax 949-766-7603 5 questions relating to their lawsuit, and for this reason have asked the Court
6 California State Bar No.: 223433 6 to consider allowing the Plaintiffs to take depositions pursuant to the
E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
7 7 ³VSLULW´RI5XOHHYHQWKRXJKDFDVHKDVDOUHDG\EHHQILOHGEXWSULRUWR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 the Rule 26(f) Conference which normally marks the initiation of formal
SANTA ANA (SOUTHERN) DIVISION
9 9 discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Captain Pamela Barnett, et al., §
10 Plaintiffs, § 10 3/$,17,))6¶$77251(<¶612TICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS
§
11 v. § Civil Action: 11 Counsel for Plaintiffs asks that this Court take note of the fact that
§
12 Barack Hussein Obama, § SACV09-00082-DOC (Anx) 12 she her office and mailing address has changed. All correspondence and
13 Michelle L.R. Obama, § 13 orders in this court should from this day forward be sent to her at:
Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, §
14 Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense, § 14 29839 S. Margarita Pkwy
Joseph R. Biden, Vice-President and §
15 President of the Senate, § 15 Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
Defendants. §
16 16 ph. 949-683-5411
17 NOTICE OF FILING 28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of 17 fax 949-766-7603
Lucas Daniel Smith with Exhibit and PL$,17,))6¶$77251(<¶6
18 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS 18 California Bar ID No. 223433
19 Come now the Plaintiffs with this Notice of Filing the 28 U.S.C. 19 Respectfully submitted,
20 §1746 Declaration of Lucas Daniel Smith together with attached Exhibit. 20
Friday, September 4, 2009
21 Plaintiffs ask this Court to take notice of the filing of certain 21
22 potentially critical evidence relevant to their Motion for Issuance of 22 By:________________________________
Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. (SBN 223433)
23 Letters Rogatory, set for hearing in open court on Tuesday, September 8, 23 Attorney for the Plaintiffs
24 2009 at 8:30 a.m. This notice is filed for the convenience of the Court and 24 29839 S. Margarita Pkwy
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
25 the parties as a supplement to the evidence filed on August 1, 2009, and 25 ph. 949-683-5411
fax 949-586-2082
26 $XJXVW   SHUWLQHQW WR WKH TXHVWLRQ RI ZKHWKHU ³VHFUHW´ RU IRU 26 California Bar ID No. 223433
27 whatever reason previously undisclosed but potentially dispositive 27
E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
28 documents may be available at the present time but are subject to 28
DR. ORLEY TAITZ DR. ORLEY TAITZ
28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Smith, September 3, 2009 - 1± FOR THE PLAINTIFFS 28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Smith, September 3, 2009 - 2± FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
1RWLFHVRI)LOLQJ'HFODUDWLRQ $WWRUQH\¶V&KDQJHRI$GGUHVV 26302 LA PAZ SUITE 211 1RWLFHVRI)LOLQJ'HFODUDWLRQ $WWRUQH\¶V&KDQJHRI$GGUHVV 26302 LA PAZ SUITE 211
MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691 MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691
(949) 683-5411 (949) 683-5411
E-MAIL: DR_TAITZ@YAHOO.COM E-MAIL: DR_TAITZ@YAHOO.COM

1 1
2 2
3 PROOF OF SERVICE 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4 I the undersigned Charles Edward Lincoln, being over the age of 18 and not a 4 SANTA ANA (SOUTHERN) DIVISION
5 party to this case, so hereby declare under penalty of perjury that on this, Friday, 5 Captain Pamela Barnett, et al., §
Plaintiffs, §
6 6HSWHPEHU,SURYLGHGIDFVLPLOHRUHOHFWURQLFFRSLHVRIWKH3ODLQWLIIV¶DERYH- 6 §
7 and-foregoing Notice of Filing of the 28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Daniel 7 v. § Civil Action:
§
8 6PLWKZLWKDWWDFKHG([KLELWDVDVXSSOHPHQWWR3ODLQWLII¶V 8 Barack Hussein Obama, § SACV09-00082-DOC (Anx)
Michelle L.R. Obama, §
9 9 Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, §
FIRST AMENDED SPECIAL MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF LETTERS Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense, §
10 ROGATORY AND FOR LEAVE TO 10 Joseph R. Biden, Vice-President and §
CONDUCT PRE-RULE 26(f) DISCOVERY President of the Senate, §
11 TO DEFENDANT HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, etc., TO PERPETUATE 11 Defendants. §
TESTIMONY, PRESERVE EVIDENCE, and TRANSMIT
12 LETTERS ROGATORY PURSUANT to 28 U.S.C. §§1781(a)(2)-(b)(2) 12
28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Daniel Smith with Exhibit
13 to all of the following non-party attorneys whose names were affixed to the 13
1. My name is Lucas Daniel Smith. I am over 18 years old, am of
14 ³67$7(0(172),17(5(67´ZKRKDYHDSSHDUHGLQWKLVcase in accordance with 14
sound mind and free of any mental disease or psychological impairment of
15 the local rules of the Central District of California, to wit: 15
any kind or condition.
16 7+20$632¶%5,(1 16
2. I am a citizen of the United States of America, I am 29 years old and
17 LEON W. WEIDMAN 17
I was born and raised in the state of Iowa.
18 ROGER E. WEST roger.west4@usdoj.gov (designated as lead counsel for President 18
3. I have personal knowledge of all the facts and circumstances
19 Barack Hussein Obama on August 7, 2009) 19
described herein below in this declaration and will testify in open court to
20 DAVID A. DeJUTE 20
all of the same.
21 FACSIMILE (213) 894-7819 21
4. On February 19, 2009 I visited the Coast General hospital in
22 DONE AND EXECUTED ON THIS Friday the 4h day of September, 2009. 22
Mombasa, Kenya.
23 23
5. I visited the hospital accompanied by one more person, a natural
24 24
Charles Edward Lincoln, III born citizen of the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly known as
25 charles.lincoln@rocketmail.com 25
Tel: (512) 923-1889 ³=DLUH´DQGEHIRUHLQGHSHQGHQFHDVWKH³%HOJLDQ&RQJR´
26 Dr. Orly Taitz, Attorney-at-Law 26
(California SBN 223433) 6. I traveled to Kenya and Mombasa in particular with the intent to
27 Orly Taitz Law Offices 27
Telephone: (949) 683-5411 obtain the original birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama, as I was
28 E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com 28
told previously that it was on file in the hospital and under seal, due to the
DR. ORLEY TAITZ DR. ORLEY TAITZ
28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Smith, September 3, 2009 - 3± FOR THE PLAINTIFFS 28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Smith, September 3, 2009 - 4± FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
1RWLFHVRI)LOLQJ'HFODUDWLRQ $WWRUQH\¶V&KDQJHRI$GGUHVV 26302 LA PAZ SUITE 211 1RWLFHVRI)LOLQJ'HFODUDWLRQ $WWRUQH\¶V&KDQJHRI$GGUHVV 26302 LA PAZ SUITE 211
MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691 MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691
(949) 683-5411 (949) 683-5411
E-MAIL: DR_TAITZ@YAHOO.COM E-MAIL: DR_TAITZ@YAHOO.COM
1 1
2 2
3 fact that the prime minister of Kenya Raela Odinga is Barack Hussein 3
4 Obama's cousin. 4
5 7. ,KDGWRSD\DFDVK³FRQVLGHUDWLRQ´WRD.HQ\DQPLOLWDU\RIILcer on 5
6 duty to look the other way, while I obtained the copy of the birth 6
7 certificate of Barack Hussein Obama. 7
8 8. The copy was signed by the hospital administrator. 8
9 9. The copy contain the embossed seal. 9 Exhibit A:
10 10. The true and correct photocopy of the Birth certificate obtained, is 10 /XFDV'DQLHO6PLWK¶V3KRWRFRS\RI
11 attached to this affidavit as Exhibit A. 11
Birth Certificate from the
12 11. I declare, certify, verify, state, and affirm under penalty of perjury 12
13 under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing 13
Coastal Hospital; District of Mombasa
14 statements of fact and descriptions of circumstances and events are true 14 Kenya, obtained in
15 and correct. 15 February 2009
16 12. I have not received any compensation for making this affidavit. 16
17 Further, Declarant saith naught. 17
18 Signed and executed in ____________, ___________ on this _____ 18
19 day of September, 2009. 19
20 20
21 21
22 By:_____________________________ 22
Lucas Daniel Smith
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
DR. ORLEY TAITZ DR. ORLEY TAITZ
28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Smith, September 3, 2009 - 5± FOR THE PLAINTIFFS 28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Smith, September 3, 2009 - 6± FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
1RWLFHVRI)LOLQJ'HFODUDWLRQ $WWRUQH\¶V&KDQJHRI$GGUHVV 26302 LA PAZ SUITE 211 1RWLFHVRI)LOLQJ'HFODUDWLRQ $WWRUQH\¶V&KDQJHRI$GGUHVV 26302 LA PAZ SUITE 211
MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691 MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691
(949) 683-5411 (949) 683-5411
E-MAIL: DR_TAITZ@YAHOO.COM E-MAIL: DR_TAITZ@YAHOO.COM
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 Exhibit A:
10 Lucas Daniel Smith’s Photocopy of
11
Birth Certificate from the
12
13
Coastal Hospital; District of Mombasa
14 Kenya, obtained in
15 February 2009
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
28 U.S.C. §1746 Declaration of Lucas Smith, September 3, 2009 - 6– DR. ORLEY TAITZ
FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
Notices of Filing Declaration & Attorney’s Change of Address 26302 LA PAZ SUITE 211
MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691
(949) 683-5411
E-MAIL: DR_TAITZ@YAHOO.COM
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 18
 THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON

August 26,2009

Mr. Christopher Strunk

Unit 28 1
593 Vanderbilt Avenue
Brooklyn, New York 11238

Dear Mr. Strunk:

Thank you for contacting the office of President Barack Obama. The
President appreciates your taking the time to voice your concerns and opinions.

We would like to be of assistance to you; however, due to the separation

of powers, it is not within our authority to become involved in legal matters. You
must resolve this issue through the judicial system.

Please be aware that you can visit www.usa.Pov or call 1-800-FEDINFO

for information about Federal Government assistance.

We hope your concerns are resolved to your satisfaction.

Again, thank you for your correspondence.

Sincerely,

F. Michael Kelleher
.. Special Assistant to the President and
Director of Presidential Correspondence
 In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk © in esse
Petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

MANDAMUS
________________________________________________________________________

EXHIBIT 19
 TmcfTYOF1YEWW)RK
DEPARTMENTOF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGl
OFFICE OF VITAL RECORDS
125 Worth Street, CN 4, Room 133
New York, N.Y. 10013-4090
*u E
c~TE : !:?a/ a l / f i ? T I M E : ( 3 1 . 3 1 . 2 3
1 ,aF
;;F(K.- I~E.:j-LNATIOPJ:
k,jBR-CGF; I E S :

TOTAL-FEE
?
.-7

2 B I R T H - - A p cr t LIGATIONS
'
MGIL-CUT
TIIAIllSACT ISN-M IX : i -CHECK--ONLY
-
THIS APPLICATION: $
p~

C E R T I F ~ C ~ ~ T E - N E M:;,j3766
~~~:
SEE - A m REQUIREMENTS
ON REVERSE AND APPLICABLE
FEES BELOW APPLICATION FOR A BIRTH RECORD
(Print All Items Clearlvl
-.
1. LAST NAME ON BIRTH RECORD 2. FIRST NAME 3. 0 FEMME

7. MOTHERS W E N NAME (NAME BEFORE MARRIAGE) I 8. CERTIFICATE NUMB~R

, (IF

9. FATHER'S NAME
LAST AkWDw/&
FIRST LAST
10. NO. OF COPIES 11. YWR

12. FOR WT
I 1
IF SELF. STATE S E L F

PURPOSE ARE YOU GOING TO USE THlS BlRM RECORD

Lt TI GARorJ
Copyofabirthrecotdcanbeissuedsnlymperts~lstbvvhomthe~ofbirthre~ifofage,oraperrentwothet~l~e.
IF THlS REQUEST IS NOT FOR YOUR OWN BIRTH RECORD OR THAT OF YOUR CHILD, NOTARIZED AUTHORIZATtON FROM THE PARENT
OR M E PERSON NAMED ON M E CERTIFICATE MUST BE PRESENTED WITH THlS APPLICATION.
Sedicm 3.1 9,NYC HeaHh Code provides, in parl: '. .no personshall make a fake, untnre or m*kkadingsMemeni or fwgethe signalumof another on a
acert-, application, registration, repal or other daament in paper, elecbonic or any other form or medium, re- to be submined or filed with the
D e m e n t ' Section 558 (e) of the NYC Charter providesthal any violation of the Health Code shall be treated and punished as a misdemeanor.

INT YOUR NAME AND RECORD YOUR ADDRESS BELOW

NOTEPLEASE ATTACH A S T ~ E D , S E L F - A D ~ ~ P E- - --- -- - .______----- - --

- - .
-

FEES ~~-- ~ - ~ - -
, . .
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
~ ~ ~

ONE COPY CwcwDES SEARCH OF TWO AD- YEARS), OH A CERiJMO "NOT FOUND SX
I- .......... $ltMW)
EACH ADDITIONAL COPY REQUESTED ........................................................................................................................................ ................................... $15.00
SEARCH FOR EACH ADDITIONAL E A R (WCTH THtS APPLICATION) ........................................................................................................ $ 3.00
! ' 1. Make check or money order payablW: N.Y.C. Depamnenl of Health and Mental Hygiene. CASH NOT ACCEPTED BY MAIL
I
2. If from a foreign country, send an international money order or check drawn on a U.S. Bank
: 3. Refundsfor over paymems are made upon request.
 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Petition for Original Proceeding

, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On September 10,2009, I, Christopher Earl Strunk, declare and certifL under penalty of perjury
pursuant to 28 USC 1746,

That I caused the service of seven (7) copies of Christopher-Earl: StrunkO in esse, Petition for
Original Proceeding for a writ of mandamus under FRAP Rule 21 seeks an Order of the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia to Recuse the district Judge in 08-cv-2234, 09-cv-
1249, 09-cv-1295 with investigation of the impropriety of the District Clerk's Office with 28 U.S.C.
$455 and related law in its entirety; and a stay of proceedings below until this matter is resolved
herein with supporting affidavit and exhibits annexed affirmed September 4, 2009, and each
complete set was placed in a sealed folder properly addressed with proper postage for USPS
Delivery Confirmation when served by USPS mail upon:

The Honorable Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth

for the U. S. District for the District of Columbia
333 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Confirmation # 03090330000186517220
The Honorable Richard J. Leon
United States District Judge for the
U.S. District for the District of Columbia
333 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room 63 15,
Washington, DC 20001
Confirmation # 03090330000186517237
Brigham John Bowen, Assistant U.S. Attorney
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Confirmation # 03090330000186517190
John Marcus McNichols, Esq.
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY, LLP
725 12th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
Confirmation # 03090330000186517121
I do declare and ce
John Michael BredehoR, Esq.
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street-P.O. Box.3037
Norfolk, VA 235 14
Confirmation#03090330000186517114
Ms. Jennifer M. Olkiewicz
Assistant General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Federal Bureau of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Room PA-400
Washington, DC 20535
Confirmation # 03090330000186517206
Ms. Maria J. Rivera, Esq.
TEXAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
P.O. Box 12548
Austin, TX 7871 1
Confirmation # 03090330000186517213

Dated: Septembe -
Brooklyn, New York