Monthly Archives: December 2009

Final (???) Footnote to “Light Vanity, Insatiate Cormorant”

I hope and pray that this is the last time I will be called on, on this blog/website, to say anything more about Orly Taitz, but I keep getting bizarre hate-mail about it—and I wish all you tragically bored people would go out to rent DVDs or something, or maybe study the reality that private property is being abolished and destroyed by the mortgage crisis in America, or reflect on the reality that Barack H. Obama is neither a better nor significantly worse President than George W. Bush, that the differences between them are “skin deep” at best, and that every awful policy that Obama is implementing or perpetuating right now started under either Bush or even Clinton.  Our country is a tragic ghost of itself, and I for one see only governmentally imposed death and destruction for the American dream in our future, death and destruction for the Constitution, and death and destruction for everything that is good, positive, and constructive in our civilization and heritage.  But here is ONE LAST COMMENT on what some not-all-together inaccurate critics have called “The Charlie and Orly Melodrama/Country Western Songfest”:

Dear Tony Sparrow:
I don’t know who the blazes you are or what you do or where you get off judging me and Orly, or even being semi-interested in another person’s semi-personal semi-tragic love affair, but to the degree that you keep semi-intruding upon my space here to make nasty comments, I shall respond to you once more, but I will actually address this to the world as well:
I suppose I need to clarify something to everyone who wants to try to engage me in discussions about Orly Taitz: it is over. I am sorry it’s over. She made a big positive difference in my life while we were together but now she’s more than made up for it by making a really seriously negative difference in my life since we’ve broken up. It has all been very embarrassing for me and my family. The bottom line on my personal and professional relationship with Orly is the same: they are both OVER and they both would have ended much better if she had every listened to my advice, INCLUDING my advice about Lucas Daniel Smith.
I am truly sorry that Orly felt it necessary to strike out at me by making totally and unforgivably false accusations against me, but she has lied, very nearly perjured herself against me in fact, and I have nothing more to say about the matter than this: I never forged her signature on any document at all in any sense of the term “forged” so please stop asking me whether I actually signed it with her permission or without her permission. I have definitely hand-signed documents with Orly’s express permission on multiple occasions but I have never done so without her permission, and I did not do so on October 30, 2009, in relation to U.S. District Judge Dimitrouleas in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
I am sick of the degree to which some people seem obsessed with this issue. I for my part am totally over it. All the rest after this is just “settling up accounts.”
Orly is a acting like a petty, vengeful cat who got caught in the catnip jar and so are all her supporters who keep writing me hate mail. GROW UP, PEOPLE! Learn to recognize spiteful post-romantic vengeance when you see it. Learn to recognize a cover-up and a distraction when you see it. Some of you hate Obama but love Bush, suspect Obama of being a Muslim or “soft on terrorism” but don’t recognize Bush as among the worst terrorists in World History for what he did to his own country on 9/11/2001.
As for Lucas Daniel Smith, one final note: it’s not my fault that he blabbed about me and Orly. It was not so much that I ever “bragged” to him about Orly as that Orly was careless and casual about whether we were “seen” together by others living at 4 Via Corbina and since she made no effort to disguise what the true nature of our relationship was, it seemed to me there was no point in keeping secrets or not responding to questions. Everyone knew that Orly argued with Peyton (when he gave good advice), with me (pretty much about everything), and with Lucas. So it was natural of Lucas to ask what the real nature of my relationship with Orly was, and it was natural and not at all “ungentlemanly” of me to answer, since there were, at that time, without our group, absolutely positively no secrets.
But by making it public to the world, Lucas betrayed and injured me as well as Orly. But Orly treated him worse than he treated Orly, and in light of what I have seen, Orly apparently has a very light and frivolous notion of what is truth and what is falsehood, and Lucas has recently explained to me in greater detail by what he meant on 10/12/09 when he accused her of asking him to lie, and I believe what Lucas said is consistent with other behavior I have seen on Orly’s part.
At this point in time, I can honestly say I forgive Lucas the anger I felt against him, because Orly is just so damned difficult.
IF Orly would just shut up and stop accusing me of stupid things. I remain astounded at the whole forgery of a duplicate motion accusation, because if she admits she signed it once, why wouldn’t she admit to signing it twice with no significant alterations, except for dates?
I expect, I hope, this will be my last extra-judicial public comment or response to anything to do with my remarkably short but intense romance with Orly Taitz. She was a delightful companion and I miss her, but it is SOOO over and not worth talking about anymore….except in court…..and there only because SHE insisted on it….
So, in conclusion,
My Dear Fellow-Harvardian Tony Sparrow (and are you REALLY a graduate of Which school or degree program Exactly in ’00?):
Should you or anyone else wish to fight with me in Court or “like gentlemen” on any other field of honor, I am not only game but anxious—but please don’t waste my time. If you want to litigate the truth in a “paper court”, please choose an appropriate venue and jurisdiction.
If you want to “fight it out”—I think there are lots of open spaces in Sonora or Baja California where the pusillanimous weak-kneed laws against dueling are less likely to be enforced. Because of my “colorful” life history I cannot own or possess a gun in the United States, but while traveling abroad, it would seem to be a completely different matter, wouldn’t it?

Merry Christmas to All!

Joy to the World, the Lord is Come, Let Earth Receive her King!”
“If there’s a day in history that I’m familiar with, without a doubt one day stands out December 25.”
It hardly matters whether you believe that Christ was born of a virgin or that he was the descendant of the House of David or whether you believe that he will come again in Glory to judge both the quick and the dead, or in the resurrection of the dead in their flesh and the life in the world to come.  The simple fact is that the symbolic value to which hundreds of millions of people attach and attribute to this day is indeed “the hope and fears of all the years.”  The hope that people have for a good and decent life, whether those hopes be articulated by white, black, brown, yellow or red people, are embodied in the preaching called “The Good News” of the Gospels.
The lessons taught by that certain Rabbi Yeshua, son of Joseph, brother of James, are among the greatest lessons ever taught, and I don’t see how anyone can possibly argue with the truth, beauty, and value of the words that came down to us in those four amazingly short books attributed to his friends Mattias, Marcos, Lucas, and Ioannis.
Yes, there is no day in history like December 25, even if the “historical” Jesus was more likely to have been born closer to March 25 (I like to think that the historical Christos and I have a few things in common, and so I can imagine that the historical Jesus shared “my sign” and I’m an Aries…..)
No more beautiful speech was ever given than the Sermon on the Mount, and I do not see how people of all faiths cannot follow those words of justice and wisdom.
This year I am not sending out any Christmas Cards or Greetings by regular or electronic post.
For the First Time in 7 years I am spending the entire Holidays with my own only born son Charlie, and between all the crises with Orly and the various mortgage cases, there’s just been no time.
But to all my family, my friends, acquaintances, and yes, even to my enemies and critics (including the commie-pinko-bastards on so many hateful sites who ridicule me and everything I do), I say,
and likewise
—because on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets….
Yes, I would love my neighbors (and even my enemies and critics, which now include Dr. Orly Taitz) as myself, and by “love” I mean all that Jesus and St. Paul meant rendered in that Greek word “Agape”.    I tried to teach Orly this lesson all year, but it is particularly good to remember it at Christmastime,
it is good to remember that aside from Christ’s preaching in the Gospels, the greatest wisdom in the New Testament is found in St. Paul’s Letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 13:
1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not Love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all Faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not Love, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not Love, it profiteth me nothing.
4 Love suffereth long, and is kind; Love envieth not; Love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth Faith, Hope, and Love, these three; but the greatest of these is Love.

If we have to have a British Citizen for President, how about Lord Monckton of Brenchley? I’ll start his “exploration committee” right now….


by the Lord Viscount Monckton of Brenchley

monckton-1(Dec. 17, 2009: Copenhagen) — Today the gloves came off and the true purpose of the “global warming” scare became nakedly visible. Ugo Chavez, the Socialist president of Venezuela, blamed “global warming” on capitalism – and received a standing ovation from very nearly all of the delegates, lamentably including those from those of the capitalist nations of the West that are on the far Left – and that means too many of them.

Previously Robert Mugabe, dictator of Rhodesia, who had refused to leave office when he had been soundly defeated in a recent election, had also won plaudits at the conference for saying that the West ought to pay him plenty of money in reparation of our supposed “climate debt”.

Inside the conference center, “world leader” after “world leader” got up and postured about the need to Save The Planet, the imperative to do a deal, the necessity to save the small island nations from drowning, etc., etc., etc.

Outside, in the real world, it was snowing, and a foretaste of the Brave New World being cooked up by “world leaders” in their fantasy-land was already evident. Some 20,000 observers from non-governmental organizations – nearly all of them true-believing Green groups funded by taxpayers – had been accredited to the conference.

However, without warning the UN had capriciously decided that all but 300 of them were to be excluded from the conference today, and all but 90 would be excluded on the final day.

Of course, this being the inept UN, no one had bothered to notify those of the NGOs that were not true-believers in the UN’s camp. So Senator Steve Fielding of Australia and I turned up with a few dozen other delegates, to be left standing in the cold for a couple of hours while the UN laboriously worked out what to do with us.

In the end, they decided to turn us away, which they did with an ill grace and in a bad-tempered manner. As soon as the decision was final, the Danish police moved in. One of them began the now familiar technique of manhandling me, in the same fashion as one of his colleagues had done the previous day.

Once again, conscious that a police helicopter with a high-resolution camera was hovering overhead, I thrust my hands into my pockets in accordance with the St. John Ambulance crowd-control training, looked my assailant in the eye and told him, quietly but firmly, to take his hands off me.

He complied, but then decided to have another go. I told him a second time, and he let go a second time. I turned to go and, after I had turned my back, he gave me a mighty shove that flung me to the ground and knocked me out.

I came to some time later (not sure exactly how long), to find my head being cradled by my friends, some of whom were doing their best to keep the police thugs at bay while the volunteer ambulance-men attended to me.

I was picked up and dusted me off. I could not remember where I had left my telephone, which had been in my hand at the time when I was assaulted. I rather fuzzily asked where it was, and one of the police goons shouted, “He alleges he had a mobile phone.”

In fact, the phone was in my coat pocket, where my hand had been at the time of the assault. The ambulance crew led me away and laid me down under a blanket for 20 minutes to get warm, plying me with water and keeping me amused with some colorfully colloquial English that they had learned.

I thanked them for their kindness, left them a donation for their splendid service, and rejoined my friends. A very senior police officer then came up and asked if I was all right. Yes, I said, but no thanks to one of his officers, who had pushed me hard from behind when my back was turned and had sent me flying.

The police chief said that none of his officers would have done such a thing. I said that several witnesses had seen the incident, which I intended to report. I said I had hoped to receive an apology but had not received one, and would include that in my report. The policeman went off looking glum, and with good reason.

To assault an accredited representative of a conference your nation is hosting, and to do it while your own police cameramen are filming from above, and to do it without any provocation except my polite, non-threatening request that I should not be manhandled, is not a career-enhancing move, as that police chief is about to discover to his cost.

Nor does this incident, and far too many like it, reflect the slightest credit on Denmark. We must make reasonable allowance for the fact that the unspeakable security service of the UN, which is universally detested by those at this conference, was ordering the Danish police about. The tension between the alien force and the indigenous men on the ground had grown throughout the conference.

However, the Danish police were far too free with their hands when pushing us around, and that is not acceptable in a free society. But then, Europe is no longer a free society. It is, in effect, a tyranny ruled by the unelected Kommissars of the European Union. That is perhaps one reason why police forces throughout Europe, including that in the UK, have become far more brutal than was once acceptable in their treatment of the citizens they are sworn to serve.

It is exactly this species of tyranny that the UN would like to impose upon the entire planet, in the name of saving us from ourselves – or, as Ugo Chavez would put it, saving us from Western capitalist democracy.

A few weeks ago, at a major conference in New York, I spoke about this tendency towards tyranny with Dr. Vaclav Klaus, the distinguished economist and doughty fighter for freedom and democracy who is President of the Czech Republic.

While we still have one or two statesmen of his caliber, there is hope for Europe and the world. Unfortunately, he refused to come to Copenhagen, telling me that there was no point, now that the lunatics were firmly in control of the asylum.

However, I asked him whether the draft Copenhagen Treaty’s proposal for what amounted to a communistic world government reminded him of the Communism under which he and his country had suffered for so long.

He thought for a moment – as statesmen always do before answering an unusual question – and said, “Maybe it is not brutal. But in all other respects, what it proposes is far too close to Communism for comfort.”

Today, as I lay in the snow with a cut knee, a bruised back, a banged head, a ruined suit, and a written-off coat, I wondered whether the brutality of the New World Order was moving closer than President Klaus – or any of us – had realized.


Charlie arrived on the Winter Solstice, still looking at schools

So we went to UCLA; Charlie had just finished an on-line session with Dartmouth. He’s now also had personal interviews with representatives of Brown, Harvard, and Yale…. We are hopeful he’ll turn out better than his mom and dad ever did…. And so far, things look pretty good… I expect Charlie will be going to a fine school next year, I just don’t know which one.  I am certainly he’ll be everything his dad wasn’t: happy, healthy, stable (especially in his romantic relationships), successful, well-adjusted, have tons of friends….. and that he’ll enjoy every minute of every day wherever he ends up, because there’s nothing more fun than learning and growing…..

The Winter Solstice at cerca 3:30 PM on the UCLA "Midway"

December 21, 2009 is the Shortest Day of the Year

Winter Solstice at UCLA, cerca 3:30 p.m.

CEL III and CEL IV wandering around UCLA on the Winter Solstice

Light Vanity, Insatiate Cormorant: Consuming means, soon preys upon itself!

I do not think for two nano-seconds that what has happened between Orly and me is merely a “falling out.” Her treachery to me and the mortgage litigation which could have saved thousands of people their homes and showed the flaws in “Obamanomic” Socialism (which is, honestly, just a logical and even incrementally predictable outgrowth of Bush’s Grand Old Party Socialism) is not merely personal but leads me to question her willingness and commitment to fairness, honesty, justice, openness, and transparency, all the qualities for which we are allegedly fighting against Obama. You see, I happen to believe that Obama is a secretive, lying, thief who stole the Presidency based on fraud and trickery. He is also a socialist. However, I will also tell you that I have known many righteous and honest men and women who were socialists from all around the world (I can think of dozens of specific examples from Colombia, Denmark, Egypt, France, Greece, Honduras, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Lesotho, Lithuania….need I go on?).  I happen to disagree with their politics and deplore their lack of good sense when it comes to economics, but I cannot deny their honest character or sincerity because of our disagreement, no matter how appalled I am by their ideas sometimes.

And furthermore, we all know that righteous and honest men and women (be they socialists or conservatives) can be born in the U.S. or Canada, Uganda or Kenya, but the Barack Obama is not one of them.

Likewise, honest and righteous people can, from time-to-time, fall in love across “normative” boundaries of marriage and family.  It was my belief that Orly and I were such people and I begged her to “come clean” and openly admit what had happened. My feelings for her were always entirely honorable.  My intentions were always honorable.  I was committed to her.  She said she was committed to me.  Perhaps we should have ended up like (ironically) that famed French Socialist President Mitterand, mourned at his funeral by his wife and mistress crying on each other’s shoulders.  I don’t know.  I would have rather Orly left her husband because it would have been a clean break, and it would have accurately reflected how much we had in common and how much work we had to do on the mortgage front as well as the political front—fighting socialism’s highest ranking symbol (the President) and its highest ranking cause and engine (irresponsible credit economics as exemplified in the mortgage finance and foreclosure crisis facing America today).  Orly promised to aim her passion and dramatics against the Banks, which would have been a fantastic use of her talents. So the way I see it,

Orly has not only betrayed me, however, she has betrayed the principles of truth, honesty, candor, and transparency.   Orly has betrayed her commitment to a parallel and related cause, also: the cause of economic reform.

Moreover, and quite appallingly, horrifyingly, in fact, despicably, Orly has falsely accused me of forging her signature on a document which she had approved (by signing it at least ONCE, according to her own admissions).  Orly has falsely accused me of deceiving or defrauding a court in Florida, and asking a Judge to Dismiss a case in which she had not merely offered but promised and committed to appear and represent me and my co-Plaintiffs.

This was only one of several cases in which she not merely offered but promised and committed to appear but then refused to do.   Plus there is the whole business of drafting an affidavit carefully enough as to be so vague as to avoid actual perjury in falsely accusing me but so precise as to make the insinuation and suggestion very clear to any reader. No, Orly has proven herself no devotee of the truth, or justice or of righteousness, nor of any kind of honor. My love for her was totally honorable, as was my commitment to her cause.   I would have confronted her husband and told him to set her free had she ever allowed me to do so.  I would have challenged anyone in the world to question my devotion to her.

Let me make one thing clear: as much as I despised Obama’s politics and his proposals for more and more credit banks, including his July 2008 campaign promise for an Urban Development Bank, until I met Orly I never gave a second thought to the constitutional dimensions of his citizenship until I realized of what a vast pattern of compulsive lies they comprised but a tiny proportion. Orly convinced me that she was right, that this was a realistic crusade, and she enlisted my help.   But from the very beginning she refused to listen to any concept of caution or hesitation.

Because I fell in love with her, I followed her orders blindly, and now see that she simply used me as generating machine to produce semi-coherent texts. She never wanted thought or analysis (certainly she did not want to participate in any).  Furthermore, in addition to our romantic involvement, Orly offered to represent me in my nationwide crusade for sound financial practices and a restoration of private property, respect for the integrity of the mortgage finance system, and in general a return to a productive rather than credit-based welfare economy based on conformity to lies.  Orly promised, she committed, she showed signs of willingness actually to move forward with great plans.  She even seemed genuinely enthusiastic and to make an effort at learning what appeared to be a whole new field of law and economics to her.

And so we became more and more deeply involved.  By mid-October, when we were in New York together and Lucas Smith published his “declaration”, I had wrapped my life around Orly’s and I guess I honestly believed she had wrapped hers around mine and she said over and over again how much she was committed to me and how she never wanted us to separate.  Three weeks later she had abandoned me, and yet some people have the nerve to call ME mentally unstable!  I am honest about where I come from.  Orly is not.  Orly used her words and promises to induce me as long as she wanted and then she dumped me with no regard to her promises whatsoever.

And all the while I see now that Orly, while constantly flattering me about my “intelligence,” and “scholarship” and “intellectual capacity”, avoided as much as possible any use of my brains which might have cautioned hesitancy or restraint of any kind. This is how she has gotten herself into so much trouble. Her modus operandi is speeding, in cars and in courts. Her constant counter-plea, whenever I asked for time to sift through the legal or factual material, was that to wait even a moment to engage in reflective thought or analysis would be to lose her followers, her supporters, and it was for their sake that I had to write without thinking, without adequate research or time, without allowing thoughts to sink in or mature.

This is why we lost (no, it was not because of Carter’s conceivably but unlikely compromised Law Clerks….)—like the proverbial fools we rushed in where Angels might fear to tread. Orly then, embarrassed by her setbacks, embarrassed by Lucas Smith’s incomprehensibly malicious initial disclosures (Orly knew he was staying in my house in September and could not help but notice that she was there and coming out of the shower before anyone else was up….day-after-day—so don’t accuse ME of incaution here!) But despite her rashness and impetuousity and lack of caution or care, Orly and now her supporters blame ME for the explosion of all this. I suspect it would have been a mild and trivial sideline if Orly had merely, appropriately and honestly, separated from her husband during this time period, but she chose to try officially to keep the lid on something she lacked the care to keep secret in reality. We wandered around every city in the country together—I very proud to be with this wonderful, passionate, and yes quite beautiful woman.

Orly’s lack of judgment in the handling of our relationship exactly paralleled her lack of judgment in handling the constitutional eligibility litigation. She needed me and probably still needs me in every possible way, but I don’t have her husband’s money and so she chose to DUMP me, to DUMP real love, for the illusion of piles of federal reserve notes and other credits, and she goes on with her reckless rage and fire. So let me be like John of Gaunt her, and say of Orly that her “rash fierce blaze of riot cannot last, For violent fires soon burn out themselves; Small showers last long, but sudden storms are short; He tires betimes that spurs too fast betimes; With eager feeding food doth choke the feeder: Light vanity, insatiate cormorant, Consuming means, soon preys upon itself. ” (Richard II, Act II).

This is my “Gaunt” prophecy which I foretell to Orly’s followers. In betraying me she has betrayed all the values you might wish her to stand for.  She has failed dismally in her constitutional challenges to Obama in part because of her rash impetuosity, in part because she could not be bothered to listen to my advice (or anyone else’s so far as I can tell).  She is now in the process of betraying me in every last case in which we were involved together, all the mortgage cases she is actively trying to sabotage.

I fear I have to say she is a disloyal and treacherous person all around: personally, professionally, and ideologically her commitments to “higher values” must therefore be considered perhaps opportunistic at best.  A woman who makes and disregards her personal commitments as lightly and honestly as Orly Taitz can hardly be trusted to lead a national movement.  Anyone who betrays her professional duty to think to impress her followers, betrays quite possibly the best friend she ever had for the purpose of impressing her followers, and who will betray the essence of words like “love” and “forever”, cannot lead a movement dedicated to honor and integrity in government.  I am sorry, but the personal is a microcosm of the public, and while I think we all know that human emotions are fickle, the way we handle them is reflective of our character.  So Judge for yourself: if I had had my choice, Orly and I would have admitted our affair and she would have separated from her husband.

Orly’s choice is, once the cat was out of the bag—“I hate cats, I am allergic to cats, he was just a stray and mangy cat, I am a dog person not a cat person, that wasn’t even my bag, how did that cat get in my bag.”

When State Courts become abusive because of immunity….when you just can’t win…..

Federal Civil rights injunctions SHOULD BE available, and if you can present your case properly they MAY BE available…. this is a theory that I have been working on for almost 7 years now…. because the laws (statutory and common law) are there on the books, but somehow Younger v. Harris has been twisted beyond recognition, bent ALL out of shape and perverted.  It SHOULD be seen as the middle case between a trilogy of Dombrowski v. Pfister, Younger v. Harris, and Mitchum v. Foster, two of which upheld Federal Court injunctions against State Court proceedings and only one—Younger did not.  So why is Younger the one that all Defendants cite and few Plaintiffs know about in Civil Rights cases?  Could it be….that the Defendants for the most part run the law schools and print the law books and they want to increase and maximize the abusive power of the State Courts?

Dombrowski v. Pfister 1965



Younger v. Harris, February 23, 1971

Mitchum v. Foster, a case from Bay County, Florida

Mitchum v Foster 407_US_225

Happy Reading Everybody!  Write me whether you think I’m wrong!  Because, after all, we all have the right to proceed pro se or in propia persona in defense of our rights, even though the Bar works hard to keep everyone, including lawyers, as ignorant as possible about the law:



Another Case to Follow in New York (State Supreme Court, NYC)


My Co-plaintiff Bob Rivernider in Wellington, Florida sent me this case commenting on the connection between his own situation and what was revealed here in the Complaint Filed by a Title Insurance Corporation against Credit Suisse:

Insurance company lawsuit attached detailing how they were lied to to insurance a large pool of loans that are almost all in default that they had to pay the insurance on. Which means the lenders was paid off. They then foreclose sell the property and make more money, sweet deal. Until now. I expect more of these to be filed next year now that the MI companies are waking up to the fraud that the lenders were engaging in that they insured.

For Example: On my house which appraised in April 2006 for $810,000, they did a CMA which I just received in June 2006 value $695,000, US Bank bought the loan in Sept. 2006, did they know the value at the time? Where they lied to? Did they have insurance? Have they already been paid? Is my loan paid off already by an MI company?

See the comments about New Century and how they would not insure New Century loans. It was New Century who sold my loan to US Bank.