Demand for information under Freedom of Information Act and under Touhy v Regan, why petition was removed, what specific part of the petition violated personal privacy and whose privacy?
Posted on | January 14, 2013 | 5 Comments
Petition for Obama to resign due to his use of forged IDs
Demand for information under 5US 552 and Touhy v Regan
Inbox
|
x | |||
|
11:22 PM (1 minute ago)
|
|||
|
—
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
29839 Santa Margarita, ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, Ca 92688
949-683-5411 fax 949-766-7603
orlytaitzesq.com
Attention
wethepeople@whitehouse.gov
Demand for information under 5US 552 or alternatively under Touhy v Regan340 U.S. 462 (1951)
Dear sir/mdm
On Sunday afternoon on 01.13.2013 I placed a petition on WeThePeople@WhiteHouse.gov. Within hours by Monday morning the petition had 945 signatures of citizens of 49 states and was sure to reach the required 25,000 signatures within 30 days in order to receive a response from the President of the United States according to the rules of the site.
Such an enormous response from the public reflected the importance of the petition and great public concern.
In and around 8:30 in the morning on Monday 01.14.2013 this petition disappeared from the website.
Members of the public who tried to sign it received a response that it violated the policy of the website and was removed for that reason.
When members of the public complained, an e-mail was sent from the site, stating that the petition violated the privacy right.
I submitted a demand to reinstate the petition or provide me with an explanation, what part of the petition violated the privacy right and whose privacy right. I did not receive an answer.
As such I demand information to be provided to me under Freedom of Information Act 5US 552. I demand to know, why specifically my petition, so popular with the public nationwide, was removed. I demand to know, which part of the petition violated the privacy right and whose privacy.
If you refuse to provide the information under 5 U.S.552, I demand information to be provided to me under United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen – 340 U.S. 462 (1951)
Respectfully,
/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
Comments
5 Responses to “Demand for information under Freedom of Information Act and under Touhy v Regan, why petition was removed, what specific part of the petition violated personal privacy and whose privacy?”
Leave a Reply
January 15th, 2013 @ 2:56 am
The disappearance of your petition on the White House web site is symptomatic and characteristic of this current “Big Brother” Obama administration!!
That is exactly what has been happening for years so far with your legal actions against the fraudster and deceiver in Chief, Barack Hussein Obama, as your legal actions (and similar legal actions taken by others) have systematically been disappearing from the legal system with the help of corrupt judges who dismissed them without accepting to do a simple full discovery on the facts given!!
Even the judges of the Supreme Court of the USA have been acting dishonestly and in a corrupt way by refusing to hear in the past several cases related to Obama!!
This Obama administration has become like “Big Brother” of Orwell’s 1984, no different in several ways from a dictatorship state, preventing you and any person against Obama from fighting legally in court to get the truth to the attention of ALL Americans concerning Obama’s extremely serious forgeries and Obama’s ineligibility to be President of the USA under the Constitution of the USA!! Simply because Obama is not a “natural born citizen”, an indispensable condition that requires that BOTH of Obama’s parents be American citizens at the time of Obama’s birth (Obama’s father was a Kenyan)!
January 15th, 2013 @ 6:12 am
In the House of Representatives, Do you hae contact with a representative Stockton? You shoud have
January 15th, 2013 @ 6:20 am
you are makinf a number of comments whih you post here and send to my e-mail, but most of them do not make any sense. what does it have to do with the House of Represemtatives?y
January 15th, 2013 @ 6:49 am
I will make the prediction that your request will be ignored or exceptionally slow to be responded to. BO (I always use BO to refer to the dictator as he stinks) is above the law.
January 15th, 2013 @ 10:28 am
Keep “damanding” instead of “requesting”! That’s been so very successful!