"All Truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
- Arthur Schopenhauer
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.
- Mark Twain
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Friday, October 26, 2012
Man photographs hovering cigar-shaped UFO for over two hours as it is witnessed by thousands across three states
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Reposted from American Kabuki
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
THE GOVERNMENT HAS NOW CONCEDED THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE OF THE INVALIDITY OF TITLE 18!!
The foundation argument made is based on "no Constitutional" passage due to a lack of a quorum. There was no quorum in the creating the Federal Reserve act of 1913 either and the Income Tax Reforms Act, created the IRS, was never ratified. The following is the crack in the dam of the US corporation. This argument is valid in many other areas of unconstitutionality.
THE GOVERNMENT HAS NOW CONCEDED THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE OF THE INVALIDITY OF TITLE 18!!
UPDATE ON TITLE 18 CLASS ACTION
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2012
September 27, 2012
A Motion for Summary Judgment was docketed by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Court, requesting immediate relief for anyone on the petition.
The Motion is based on the un-refuted affidavits and proof that no Constitutional passage occurred for Title 18, the criminal code in the 80th Congress (1947-1948).
Since the Title also includes the only authorization to allow federal courts jurisdiction in any criminal case, whether Title 18, Title 21, or Title 26, 18 USC section 3231, then the motion requests relief for each person on the petition.
You have a limited amount of time to get on the petition.
Contact us immediately!
In a challenge to the Validity of Title 18 (Public Law 80-772), the government has now admitted that Public Law 80-772 is unconstitutional. These admissions can be used in the Class Action on Title 18 and in other federal criminal cases.
The original class action petition was filed in the DC court on 2/23/2012. The judge refused to rule on the merits or make findings of fact and conclusions of law and now it is on appeal. An opening brief, a reply brief, and a Motion for Summary Judgment have been filed by our group. The government has waived argument on the issues presented.
A verified request for proof of claim was filed in a separate case on August 27, 2012 by our group. 18 stipulated answers were provided, to which the government waived argument on all stipulations, thus admitting the stipulations.
Included in those admissions were that “no quorum existed on May 12, 1947 and June 22 and 23, 1948”, rendering 18 USC section 3231, which is the only statute which gives the district court jurisdiction to prosecute any federal crime, invalid.
The government also admitted that the quorum issue has never been heard on the merits; that no Supreme Court precedent exists for the government; and that the US attorney is violating the law by prosecuting any crime.
The government also admitted that no prior statute gives the federal courts jurisdiction; that the indictment is void on any federal criminal case; that the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a corporation; and that pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), the government was required to answer the proof of claims.
Since the government violated the APA, then their silence can only be equated with fraud. See U.S. v. Pruden, 424 F.2d 1021 (1970). Under the authority of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 USC section 556(D)-Burden of Proof, “the proponent of a rule or order bears the burden of proof.” The Supreme Court has stated that “if any tribunal (court) finds absences of proof of jurisdiction over person or subject matter, that case must be dismissed.” Louisville & Nashville R.R. v. Motley, 211 U.S. 149 (1908).
The Attorney General was given 3 opportunities to respond to affidavits of fact and a request for a certified question of law related to the invalidity of Title 18. No response was made. In U.S. v. Kis, 658 F.2d 526 (7th Cir. 1981), the court held: “Indeed, no more than that, [Affidavits], is necessary to make the prima facie case.” Id at 536. “Moreover the threshold of relevance is a low one.” Id at 537. “The burden is therefore on the Respondent who must come forward with special facts to support a legally sufficient rebuttal or defense.” Id at 538-39. The stipulated answers are now admitted.
Included in the stipulated facts the government has now admitted are:
An internal memorandum by Harley G. Lappin to Department Heads of the Bureau of Prisons on July 27, 2009 in which he states that “In order for any bill to be valid the Journals of both Houses must show that iw was passed in the presence of a Quorum. See United States v. Balin, Joseph & Co., 144 U.S. 1, 3 (1892). The Clerk of the House states that the May 12, 1947 vote was a ‘voice vote,’ but the Parliamentarian of the House states that a voice vote is only valid when the Journal shows that a quorum is present and that it’s unlawful for the Speaker of the House to sign any enrolled bill in the absence of a quorum. On May 12, 1947, a presence of 218 Members in the hall of the House was required to be entered on the Journal in order for the 44 Member 38 to 6 voice vote to be legal.”
A letter from Jeff Trandahl, clerk of the House to Mr. Charles R. Degan dated June 28, 2000, in which he states: “Congress was in session on June 1,3,4,7-12 and 14-19, 1948, however Title 18 was not voted on at this time.”
A letter from Karen L. Haas, clerk of the House, dated September 11, 2008, in which she stated: “After conducting a thorough examination of the journals, I found no entry in the journal of the House of any May 12, 1947 vote on the H.R. 3190 bill…”
A letter by Nancy Erickson to Mr. Wayne E. Matthews dated March 9, 2009 in which she stated that “I asked the Senate Historian’s office to review the correspondence you enclosed, and they were able to verify that no action was taken by the Senate on H.R. 3190 prior to the December 19, 1947 sine die adjournment.
A letter dated August 24, 2010 from the Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives which stated: “Our office has conducted research of the House Journal and the Congressional Record in regards to HR 3190 and the voice vote that was taken on May 12, 1947. After researching these official proceedings of the US House of Representatives we have been unable to find the names of the 44 Members who responded to the voice vote.”
Pursuant to their oath of office, the courts are required to follow the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent.
Contact Martin Michaelsson: MM@YourRemedyIsInTheLaw.com.
Brought to you by....
New Stanford/NYU study documents the civilian terror from Obama's drones
New research shows the terrorizing impact of drones in Pakistan, false statements from US officials, and how it increases the terror threat
Glenn Greenwald - guardian.co.uk,
Tuesday 25 September 2012 08.18 EDT
A vitally important and thoroughly documented new report on the impact of Obama's drone campaign has just been released by researchers at NYU School of Law and Stanford University Law School. Entitled "Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in Pakistan", the report details the terrorizing effects of Obama's drone assaults as well as the numerous, highly misleading public statements from administration officials about that campaign. The study's purpose was to conduct an "independent investigations into whether, and to what extent, drone strikes in Pakistan conformed to international law and caused harm and/or injury to civilians".
The report is "based on over 130 detailed interviews with victims and witnesses of drone activity, their family members, current and former Pakistani government officials, representatives from five major Pakistani political parties, subject matter experts, lawyers, medical professionals, development and humanitarian workers, members of civil society, academics, and journalists." Witnesses "provided first-hand accounts of drone strikes, and provided testimony about a range of issues, including the missile strikes themselves, the strike sites, the victims' bodies, or a family member or members killed or injured in the strike".
Here is the powerful first three paragraphs of the report, summarizing its main findings:
In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is aof a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling "targeted killing" of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts.
This narrative is false.
Following nine months of intensive reasearch-including two investigations in Pakistan, more than 130 interviews with victims, witnesses, and experts, and review thousands of pages of documentation and media reporting-this report presents evidence of the damaging and counter productive effects of current US drone strike policies. Based on extensive interviews with Pakistanis living in the regions directly affected, as well as humanitarian and medical workers, this report provides new and firsthand testimony about the negative impacts US policies aare having on civilians living under drones.
While noting that it is difficult to obtain precise information on the number of civilian deaths "because of US efforts to shield the drone program from democratic accountability", the report nonetheless concludes: "while civilian casualties are rarely acknowledged by the US government, there is significant evidence that US drone strikes have injured and killed civilians."
But beyond body counts, there's the fact that "US drone strike policies cause considerable and under-accounted for harm to the daily lives of ordinary civilians, beyond death and physical injury":
Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles and public spaces without warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities. Those living under drones have to face constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves. These fears have affected behavior.
The US practice of striking one area multiple times and evidence it has killed rescuers, makes both community members and humanitarian workers afraid or unwilling to assist injured victims. Some community members shy way from gathering in groups, including important tribal dispute-resolution bodies, out of fear they may attract the attention of drone operators. Some parents chose to keep their children home, and children injured or traumatized by strikes have dropped out of school.
Wazieris told our researchers that strikes have undermined cultural and religious practices related to burial, and made family members afraid to attend funerals. In addition, families who lost loved ones or their homes in drone strikes now struggle to support themselves.
In other words, the people in the areas targeted by Obama's drone campaign are being systematically terrorized. There's just no other word for it. It is a campaign of terror - highly effective terror - regardless of what noble progressive sentiments one wishes to believe reside in the heart of the leader ordering it. And that's precisely why the report, to its great credit, uses that term to describe the Obama policy: the drone campaign "terrorizes men, women, and children".
Along the same lines, note that the report confirms what had already been previously documented: the Obama campaign's despicable (and likely criminal) targeting of rescuers who arrive to provide aid to the victims of the original strike. Noting that even funerals of drone victims have been targeted under Obama, the report documents that the US has "made family members afraid to attend funerals". The result of this tactic is as predictable as it is heinous:
"Secondary strikes have discouraged average civilians from coming to one another's rescue, and even inhibited the provision of emergency medical assistance from humanitarian workers."
In the hierarchy of war crimes, deliberately targeting rescuers and funerals - so that aid workers are petrified to treat the wounded and family members are intimidated out of mourning their loved ones - ranks rather high, to put that mildly. Indeed, the US itself has long maintained that such "secondary strikes" are a prime hallmark of some of the world's most despised terrorist groups.
Perhaps worst of all, the report details at length that the prime excuse offered by Obama defenders for this continuous killing - it Keeps Us Safe™ by killing The Terrorists™ - is dubious "at best"; indeed, the opposite is more likely true:
The number of "high-level" targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low-estimated to just 2%. Furthermore evidence suggest that US strikes facilitated recruitment to violent non-state armed groups, and motivated further violent attacks.
All the way back in 2004, the Rumsfeld Pentagon commissioned a study to determine the causes of anti-US terrorism, and even it concluded: "Muslims do not 'hate our freedom,' but rather, they hate our policies." Running around the world beating your chest, bellowing "we're at war!", and bombing multiple Muslim countries does not keep one safe. It manifestly does the opposite, since it ensures that even the most rational people will calculate that targeting Americans with violence in response is just and necessary to deter further aggression.
A one-day attack on US soil eleven years ago unleashed a never-ending campaign of violence around the world from the target and its allies. Is it really a challenge to understand that continuous bombings and civilian-killing assaults over many years, in many Muslim countries, will generate the same desire for aggression and vengeance against the US?
Time and again, those who have attempted to perpetrate attacks on US soil have cited the Muslim children and other innocent human beings extinguished by Obama's drones. Recall the words of the attempted Times Square bomber, Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad, at his sentencing hearing when the federal judge presiding over his case, Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum, asked incredulously how he could possibly use violence that he knew would result in the deaths even of innocent children -- as though she were literally unaware that her own government continuously does exactly that:
"'Well, the drone hits in Afghanistan and Iraq, they don't see children, they don't see anybody. They kill women, children, they kill everybody. It's a war, and in war, they kill people. They're killing all Muslims' . . . .
"'I am part of the answer to the U.S. terrorizing the Muslim nations and the Muslim people. And, on behalf of that, I'm avenging the attack. Living in the United States, Americans only care about their own people, but they don't care about the people elsewhere in the world when they die.'"
The minute he was apprehended by US authorities, Shahzad, as reported by the Washington Post, "told agents that he was motivated by opposition to U.S. policy in the Muslim world, officials said. 'One of the first things he said was, 'How would you feel if people attacked the United States? You are attacking a sovereign Pakistan.'"
Perhaps most importantly, the report documents the extreme levels of propaganda used by the western press to deceive their citizens into believing pure myths about the drone campaign. As I've argued before, the worst of these myths is the journalistic mimicry of the term "militants" to describe drone victims even when those outlets have no idea who was killed or whether that term is accurate (indeed, the term itself is almost as ill-defined as "terrorist"). This media practice became particularly inexcusable after the New York Times revealed in May that "Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants."
Incredibly, even after that radical redefinition was revealed, and even after the Obama administration got caught red-handed spewing demonstrable falsehoods about the identity of drone victims, US media outlets continued to use the term "militant" to describe drone victims. The new report urges that this practice stop:
Journalists and media outlets should cease the common practice of referring to "militant" deaths, without further explanation. All reporting of government accounts of "militant" deaths should include acknowledgement that the US government counts all adult males killed by strikes as "militants", absent exonerating evidence. Media accounts relying on anonymous government sources should also highlight the fact their single-source information and of the past record of false government reports.
Significantly, the report says the prime culprit of these evils is what it calls the "dramatic escalation" of the drone campaign by the 2009 Nobel Peace laureate - escalated not just in sheer numbers (in less than four years, Obama "has reportedly carried out more than five times" the number ordered by Bush in eight years), but more so, the indiscriminate nature of the strikes. As Tuesday's Guardian article on this report states: it "blames the US president, Barack Obama, for the escalation of 'signature strikes' in which groups are selected merely through remote 'pattern of life' analysis."
The report is equally damning when documenting the attempts of the Obama administration to suppress information about its drone victims, and worse, to actively mislead when they deign selectively to release information. Recognizing the difficulty of determining the number of civilian deaths with exactitude - due to "the opaqueness of the US government about its targeted killing program" as well as the inaccessibility of the region - it nonetheless documents that "the numbers of civilians killed are undoubtedly far higher than the few claimed by US officials." In other words, the administration's public statements are false: "undoubtedly" so. As the LA Times summarizes the study's findings today: "Far more civilians have been killed by U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal areas than U.S. counter-terrorism officials have acknowledged."
(The report is particularly scathing about the patent unreliability of the New America Foundation and its leading drone-and-Obama cheerleader, Peter Bergen, also of CNN, who has been amply rewarded with lucrative access by the administration he dutifully defends. Echoing a recent article by the Atlantic's Conor Friedersdorf and an analysis from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the report concludes that scrutiny of Bergen's key claims "has since revealed omissions and inconsistencies in New America Foundation's dataset, calling its widely publicized conclusions into question." It documents "several other glaring omissions from New America Foundation's data" used to depict Obama's drone campaign as far more benign than it actually is.)
Finally, the report notes the threat to democratic accountability posed by the Obama administration's refusal to allow any transparency or judicial oversight regarding who the president orders killed: "The opaque position of the US government on civilian casualties is also emblematic of an accountability and democratic vacuum." In that regard, the report - as its final paragraph - quotes the question I have often asked about this state of affairs, an answer to which I have never heard from Obama's drone defenders:
What has always made that question particularly pressing for me is that American progressives cheered loudly when a similar question was posed by Al Gore in a widely celebrated 2006 speech he gave on the Washington mall denouncing the Bush/Cheney assault on civil liberties:
"'If the president has the inherent authority to eavesdrop on American citizens without a warrant, imprison American citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then what can't he do?'"
What has always amazed me about that is that, there, Gore was merely decrying Bush's mere eavesdropping on Americans and his detention of them without judicial review. Yet here Obama is claiming the power to decide who should be killed without a shred of transparency, oversight, or due process - a power that is being continuously used to kill civilians, including children - and many of these same progressives now actually cheer for that.
Democrats spent several days at their convention two weeks ago wildly cheering and chanting whenever President Obama's use of violence and force was heralded. They're celebrating a leader who is terrorizing several parts of the Muslim world, repeatedly killing children, targeting rescuers and mourners, and entrenching the authority to exert the most extreme powers in full secrecy and without any accountability -- all while he increases, not decreases, the likelihood of future attacks. This new Stanford/NYU report is but the latest in a long line of evidence proving all of that.
Romney Tobacco Deal With Russian Mob and GOP
Begun as Smuggling Operation Through GOP and KGB, Later Became Russian Mob Partnership
By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
Stories hitting the press today about Bain Capital and the Russian cigarette market tell only a small part of the story. Stories say that Romney sent representatives to Russia to aid them in selling cigarettes but this is quite misleading. The real deal was between the GOP and Russian Mafia with Bain only acting as “consultant.”
The GOP organized cigarette smuggling into Russia through Poland in late 1990 and early 1991, paying of KGB operatives in Russia. Cigarette sales in Russia were a method then of supplying income for disabled veterans, as cigarette kiosks were a “perk” of military service and a method of survival for many.
Initially, cigarettes came from vending companies in the US, were shipped in 20 foot containers into Gdansk, Poland, and trucked into Russia where the profits were split with the KGB.
The first few shipments were all Marlboro and traded for vodka which was offloaded in Chicago. Where it went from there, who knows.
The KGB, in turn, arranged for Soviet bankers to tour the US, with Republican Party hosts and CIA security. Arrangements were made to set up a worldwide money laundering operation, I think we know who runs that.
Word was already out that the Soviet Union was down to its last days. The commercial banks of Leningrad, Moscow, the Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia and Estonia made deals with members of the GOP to split their assets, money removed from Russia, half to go to the Bush family and party leaders, the other half to be kept for the KBG who would be invited into the United States to run the Russian mafia and take over heroin distribution through the communities they would establish in Brighton Beach/Little Odessa.
Money laundering began through Cyprus, where organized crime had taken a strong foothold, and moved through accounts in Switzerland and the Caymans to selected banks in the US, some in Denver, some in Detroit and the major one in Astoria, New York, the former home of the Steinway Piano Company.
The first cigarette deals were negotiated by old line CIA accompanied by national leaders of the GOP. Just by accident, I attended more than one of those meetings and I don’t even smoke.
I remember that thousands of cigarette machines were to be offered also but were refused. Russians felt they could never be secured.
Meetings were also held between the GOP, CIA and Diebold, the company accused of aiding in the rigging of voting machines. Diebold wanted a foothold in Soviet/Russian banking.
I remember Diebold talking about ATM machines and the Soviets responding that they had only recently decided to start using teller windows. You just don’t forget that level of irony.
As I remember, I may have sat through those also.
The bank deals were cemented during a private fundraiser at the Pierre hotel in New York. I remember sitting between a key US senator responsible for overseeing banking issues and a lobbyist for this new partnership.
The evening was an interesting mix of major corporations and “made guys” filling the room. There are photos, nobody was careful.
The critical issue to be clear on is that the cigarette deal had little to do with cigarette companies and much to do with enriching GOP leaders who financed their retirement, huge homes, boats, all of it with laundered stolen cash from Russia, profits from cigarette deals and cemented a partnership with the Russian mafia which would later be supplanted with deals run through Kosovo and Albania, more vicious criminals, less cultured and more conveniently located for managing the world’s heroin business.
This is why Camp Bondsteel was built, one of America’s largest overseas bases, to channel heroin from, at that time, Turkey, today from Afghanistan, into Western Europe and the US.
The question being asked is how a Mormon can represent “big tobacco” when the real question is why would a Mormon open hundreds or thousands of numbered bank accounts in “safe havens” and work with organized crime.
Then again, a study of both the CIA and FBI lends itself to tales of the “Mormon Mafia,” and their stranglehold on those organizations.
Anyone who comes against the Mormons and lives in the Western United States knows what real terrorism is like.
[Just study the case of Arizona's Governor Hunt's ill fated campaign against Mormon polygamy in early Arizona history -AK]
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=227055
Reposted from American Kabuki
Noble Gas Plasma Engine to Revealed at Power-Gen Conference, Orlando Florida, Dec 11, 2012
October 23, 2012
The Noble gas Engine will be revealed to the World on Dec. 11, 2012 at the Power-Gen conference in Orlando Florida. Inteligentry, TPT, and Plasmerg will have 6 booths in the conference along with companies manufacturing the engine or selling products using the Noble gas engine.
On display will be an engine running a generator/alternator. Since the engine neither consumes fuel or expells waste, it can be run inside. It has no intake or exhaust. The engine on display will be a two cylinder noble gas plasma engine and possibly a prototype four cylinder engine. The six cylinder will come out some where around July or August 2013.
Researchers think it will run for at least 1 1/2 years 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, on one noble gas fill, maybe even longer. One prototype of an earlier version of the engine has now run 1 1/2 years in Michigan. Others are in testing in locations around the world according to John Rohner.
When it hits the world will feel the ground shake, This will have a huge impact on oil companies and internal combustion engine and part manufacturers. The noble gas engine has no carburetor, valves, intake/ exhaust manifold, gas tanks.
This will make solar, and wind obsolete (they are much more expensive). The biggest impact will be in transportation (cars, trucks, ships/boats, trains and planes). Its impact won't stop there. Nuclear generation will feel it too. Then of course the Environmental benefits are absolutely NO carbon monoxide or carbond dioxide (CO2). Global warming due to carbon dioxide emissions will be a non-issue. Upon adoption, CO2 levels will start to drop.
This will have BIG opposition from vested interests who make huge profits from carbon fuels.
It will be be a big fight! So when this comes out SUPPORT IT... SCREAM AND YELL "WE NEED THIS NOW" They'll be less likely to try to kill it. This is a huge advance for our health and the health of the planet.
You can join my Facebook group, Noble Gas Engine fan group.
John Rohner is a member and comments once or twice a week.
Just saw your post on the Noble Gas Plasma Reactor. If that gets presented at Power-Gen it will be a major bomb-shell. I know that conference well as I used to work at a company that sent people to speak there (I used to be an energy analyst). Keeping my fingers crossed.
Keep up the good work...
Reposted from American Kabuki
The Document Also Contains Information As To Whether Or Not The German Government Conducted Official UFO Investigations During The Cold War…
A German citizen has won his first battle in an effort to view a UFO report created by the Scientific Service of the German Parliament (aka Bundestag). After attempts by the Bundestag to block the document’s release, the Berlin Administrative Court has ruled that the German citizen has the right to read the document as requested. The Bundestag is appealing the decision, sending it to the Supreme Administrative Court of Berlin-Brandenburg for a final decision. Germany has claimed that they have never officially investigated the UFO phenomenon. However, other European nations, such as Britain and France, have not only held official investigations, they have released thousands of previously classified documents. This is what has inspired German citizen Frank Reitemeyer in his quest to seek out Germany’s X-Files. He told the Berlin court:
I want to know facts and it bothers me that in France, England, USA, Canada, the citizens can see the UFO files, and I am not informed as a German from my German government. It is therefore such a glaring discrepancy…In France, a citizen is automatically informed by his government because the government provides the UFO files to the website of the space agency, so officially on the government side, anyone can view the documents free at home.
The document in question is titled, The search for extraterrestrial life and the implementation of UN Resolution A/33/426 on the observation of unidentified flying objects and extraterrestrial life forms. Reitemeyer knew of its existence due to the efforts of a UFO disclosure organization called Exopolitics Germany. President of the organization, Robert Fleicher, says a draft of the document was discovered in 2009. A freelance journalist, Lower Saxony, had contacted Fleicher asking him for some convincing evidence for UFOs that he could show a member of the Bundestag, Gitta Connemann, who he was about to interview. Fleicher sent them Exopolitics’ usual UFO briefing documents along with other files. Saxony said that Connemann was very impressed and promised to look into the issue further. A few weeks later she forwarded the UN report to Saxony, who then sent it to Fleicher. Fleischer shared the document with the media, and excerpts were printed in the German newspaper, Welt Kompakt. The document reviews materials that Germany had sent the UN in response to a UFO resolution passed in 1978 intended to create an “agency or a department of the United Nations for undertaking, coordinating and disseminating the results of research into unidentified flying objects and related phenomena.” The initiative was sponsored by the Prime Minister of Grenada, Sir Eric Gairy. Huffington Post reporter, Lee Speigel, aided Gairy in his effort by arranging audio visual UFO evidence for the presentation to the United Nations. Although the resolution passed, few countries chose to participate.