.

Romney Alinsky Connection.

2012-02-01T19:13:00.000-08:00

Mitt Romney's mentor, his father, a fan of Saul Alinsky

The Library of Congress preserved these photographs of what appears to be a meeting between the two men on September 13, 1967, in Rochester, New York.

I don’t think anyone who has always been turned off by Mitt Romney and lets be honest, that includes everyone in the TEA Party base, will be surprised to learn his dad was an Alinskyite.

Mitt Romney has called himself a Progressive and he was for abortion because of his Progressive Mother he was giving thanks to for those murderous views. If you have watched the downright mean way Romney has run both his campaigns for President, you will see he was Alinsky when Obama was making Alinsky cool for lefties.

It isn’t hard to recognize the brutality in which Romney attacks his opponents both in 2008 and this year to recognize the Alinsky style. The problem is and always will be with Mitt Romney his progressive views, for those like me who are conservative, it is the progressives in the Republican Party that has made the Grand Old Party, the Democrat-lite Party.

When Newt Gingrich mentions a manager to manage the decline of America, he is of course speaking of the progressive wing of the Republican Party, it is who the TEA Party has been fighting since 2009.

America cannot take another round of progressivism, the last 3 years have catapulted this great country to the edge of the precipice and our chance, only chance to turn back the hands of the lefties of all stripes, no matter what the call themselves, is 2012.

There is no tomorrow after November 2012, we will be sucked into a socialist drain.

I don’t know that Newt Gingrich is the answer either, other then he knows how those laws are written and the crap that is stuck inside them and can veto each and every one of them that We The People demand he veto.

I only know this is the last shot for America to turn back the hands of time and return us to a free market behemoth, with life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for every American.

A. Mitt Romney has stated his chief political mentor was his father, George Romney.

B. George Romney, a steadfast progressive, credited Saul Alinsky, met with him, and recommended his work.

A+B = Mitt Romney's chief political mentor was a steadfast progressive who credited Saul Alinsky, met with him, and recommended his work.

This is the extended version of the Romney Alinsky Connection.

It includes more information on Saul Alinsky and strengthens the case that Mitt Romney shares Alinsky's view of the world.

It also includes information from Hillary Clinton's thesis on Saul Alinsky, and th Lucifer connection. It also includes footage from Huntsman and Huckbee that was not in the prior video. This video still does not include all the evidence available, but is more reflective of my hard drive limitations.

Dr. James David Manning has an excellent video on Saul Alinsky on his youtube channel that I encourage people to watch. A big shout out the the guy reading Hilary's Thesis (I lost the link to the Chanel).

Please let me re-iterate, the argument that Romney is a Luciferian hangs on being an Alinskite, not to being a Mormon.

I leave that argument to theologians.

Additional information from http://www.therightscoop.com/

“The progressive Alinsky is infamous and actually toxic on the right,” Riehl wrote.

“George Romney’s endorsement of him,coupled with his acknowledged strong influence on son Mitt,will do little to assure suspicious conservatives concerned about Mitt Romney’s record as a progressive,including his introduction of Romneycare in Massachusetts.”

Birthright Citizenship

2012-01-30T04:13:00.001-08:00

Is Mitt Romney a “natural born citizen”?
It is absolutely clear that Mitt Romney is NOT a Natural Born Citizen unless he can prove that George Romney gained citizenship from naturalization prior to Mitt’s birth in 1947.

Having the Status of Birthright Citizenship Is Not Sufficient to Make One an
Article II “Natural Born citizen”

Mitt Romney / Not Eligable to hold the office of {POTUS}.

Call upon Mitt Romney now to either post Gaskell Romney’s US naturaliztion documents (or repatriated record) or George Romney‘s US naturaliztion documents that he would have filled out and signed when he was 21 years of age, or withdraw from the presidential race as Constitutionally unqualified to take the oath of office of the presidency of the United States.

Was George Romney (father of Mitt Romney) a U.S. citizen?
Not according to the historical records.

b. Colonia Dublán, Galeana, Chihuahua, México, 8 July 1907, d. Bloomfield Hills, Mich., 26 July 1995 [SSDI 577-10-6742], bur. Fairview Cemetery, Brighton, Mich.
m. Salt Lake City, Utah, 2 July 1931.

George Romney was born in Mexico to expatriated Mormon parents. George’s father is named Gaskell Romney.

If George Romney was not a “U.S. citizen” or became naturalized BEFORE Mitt was born, then neither can Mitt Romeny (his son) be natural born.

What amazes me most is even those I consider intelligent can read the quotes from Congress and SCOTUS rulings etc. and still will argue with what those words mean.

Folks it honestly is not ROCKET SCIENCE.

It is simply fact … read the quotes for yourself.

Just because no one in politics or the media is dealing with any of this?

None of that ALTERS THE FACTS OR CHANGES what our founders defined this term to mean.

HERE THEY ARE AGAIN United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898):

“At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of PARENTS who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also.

These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

This is straight forward FACT.

To be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN … you must be born in the country and your parents must BOTH BE CITIZENS.

BOTH REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET!

PARENTS can be born citizens or naturalized
(naturalized at the time of the child’s birth).

If both requirements are not met the child can still be a “US citizen” just not “natural born”.

No matter how anyone slices, dices or ginsus it Barack Obama has painted himself in a corner with his released Birth Certificate (be it real or fraud).

His father NEVER WAS A US CITIZEN.

For sure he does not meet the “natural born” requirement.
His US citizenship is iffy should his Hawaiian BC turn out to be a fraud.

Now to further hammer nails into the coffin lid of the Constitution comes Mitt Romney.

Here is further information just sent my way on his parentage and their citizenship.

Let me say this again … my research SHOWS NO REPATRIATION OR NATURALIZATION of George Romney.

That does not mean there is none … it does however cast serious problems into the cogs of what appears to be a well oiled Mitt Romney campaign for President machine.

I thank Edward Noonan for allowing me to republish this information.
MITT ROMNEY IS NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!

The big question is this…how did George and Gaskell Romney get their US Citizenship back if they ever had it at all?

If Gaskell (son) and Miles Park Romney (father) who were both Mexican citizens how could they transfer US Citizenship to George Romney?

Mitt Romney, however, may be a birthright baby because he fell under the 14th Amendment (I doubt they were under the jurisdiction of the US) but it is absolutely clear that Mitt Romney is NOT a Natural Born Citizen unless he can prove that George Romney gained citizenship from naturalization prior to Mitt’s birth in 1947. I have found no records showing this to be the case.

Edward C. Noonan

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/28/mitt-romneys-father-was-a-mexican-citizen-when-mitt-was-born/

"ACTS OF TREASON"

2012-01-27T13:22:00.000-08:00

There is a growing sentiment that Obama should be impeached for "High Crimes and Misdemeanors," as well as for being a CROOK and a CRIMINAL.

we have a President who allows our borders to be violated by illegals of any country while we are at war.

There is enough evidence presented to Congress to arrest him and prosecute him for an Act of War against the nation of Mexico, accessory to murder of thousands of innocent citizens in Mexico and America as well as the murder of United States Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. Resign??

Besides sending illegal guns to Mexico, Holder and Obama sold guns to criminal street gangs inside the United States where the guns will be used inside the United States. It will take years to find the thousands of guns these criminals sold to killers.

Eric Holder and his criminal operatives in his office and the Department of Justice need to be dragged out in handcuffs, jailed with no bail and put on trial with a jury of American citizens who are not federal government employees.

He allows them work permits, access to our services and when apprehended by law enforcement refuses to have them jailed or deported.

Barack Hussein Obama has crossed the line, and under Article III, Section 3 of our Constitution is guilty of treason by giving aid and comfort to the enemy and attempting to overthrow our government from within.

Now is the time for members of Congress,to finally do your Constitutional duty and hold Barack Hussein Obama accountable for his crimes against America.

Mr. Obama is a fraudulent president who is selling out America.

It’s time Mr. Obama is called accountable for his treasonous actions.

I can only hope our members of Congress,have the intestinal fortitude to do what needs to be done. It is time to make up your mind

“Do you stand with this fraud and treasonous president or with the American people and our Constitution which you swore to protect and defend”?

But first, what are "high crimes and misdemeanors?"

High crimes and misdemeanors is a phrase that comes from the U. S. Constitution; Article Two, Section 4 which states: "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Treason Law & Legal Definition

A person commits the crime of treason if he levies war against his state or country or sides to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

Treason is a crime under federal and some state laws. Treason is made a high crime, punishable by death, under federal law by Article III, section 3 of the U.S. Constitution: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

Under this article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. Treason requires overt acts such as giving sensitive government security secrets to other countries, even if such countries are not enemies.

Treason can include spying on behalf of a foreign power or divulging military secrets.

The majority of states outlaw treason in their constitutions or statutes similar to those in the U.S. Constitution. There have been only two successful prosecutions for treason on the state level, that of Thomas Dorr in Rhode Island and that of John Brown in Virginia

The word "high" in legal-speak from the 18th century simply means "against the State."

A "high crime" is one wherein the "impeached" officer of the United States seeks the overthrow of the country, or a high crime which gives aid or comfort to our country's enemies, or a high crime which injures the country to the profit of an individual or group. In democracies it also includes crimes which attempt to alter the outcome of elections. It is the "which injures the country to the profit of an individual or group"that many now believe is the reason to impeach Obama due to his wanton disregard for the taxpayer's money that "injured" our country to the profit of an individual or group.

These individuals and groups being:

1. George Kaiser and Solyndra

2. Phil Falcone and Light Squared

More and more people are finding Obama's failed leadership, to be a "Culture of Corruption" typical of "Chicago Style Politics" and no different than a Chicago Thug, CROOK and CRIMINAL.

Obama should be impeached for placing his friend's company; Light Squared, AHEAD of America's national security and for "Subornation of Perjury" or General William Shelton who is the Commander of the U.S. Air Force Space Command.

Subornation of Perjury is a legal phrase/term that describes the crime of persuading someone to commit perjury. The subornation of perjury occurred when someone above General Shelton's pay grade, and rank, pressured him into changing his congressional testimony to make it more favorable to the company of a major Democratic donor - which also happens to be Obama buddy, political cronie and billionaire investor Phil Falcone, regarding his company; "Light Squared."

In the case of Light Squared, it is believed that Obama himself, or one of Obama's thugs at Obama's direction, "pressured" Air Force General William Shelton, to change his testimony regarding Obama's friend's company, Light Squared (which is owned by Harbinger Capital, a hedge fund, and led by Obama buddy and billionaire investor Phil Falcone). Light Squared is a cell phone/broadband technology company) which uses a radio frequency that interferes with our nation's national security and our military's GPS (global positioning system) system.

In yet another of Obama's criminal undertakings, he directed $527 million of tax-payer's money, to go to yet another one of his cronies' company's, this time, to Solyndra, a Fremont, California based solar company. Within 2 years of receiving the $527 million in taxpayer funding, Solyndra declared bankruptcy on Aug. 31, 2011, putting 1,100 employees out of work, cheating (screwing) taxpayers out of $527 million.

George Kaiser, a democrat, is Obama's leading fundraiser, and owner/chief investor of Solyndra. George Kaiser - as Obama's top fundraiser for Obama, met with Obama in the White House 4 times in 2009 before his company received $527 million in tax-payer funding.

Before Kaiser's company received the $527 million in taxpayer funding, his application was REJECTED by the Bush Administration and REJECTED by Obama's own Department of Energy. Two years ago, before receiving $527 million in taxpayer funding, Obama's own Department of Energy stated this was a "failed company with a failed product" and the company would be bankrupt by September 2011!!!! Even with this information, Obama "directed" Kaiser's company to receive the the loan was approved.

The Obama "swamp" is OVERFLOWING in the toxic soup of "Chicago Style Politics" led by the corrupt National Socialists; Barack Hussein Obama and his billionaire buddies, cronies, and radical unions - with their "Culture of Corruption" running rampant and is destroying our country. "Pay-to-Play" and "pay for access" has corrupted the radical leftists and national socialists while our country is going down the drain.

Does this not make Obama a Chicago thug, crook, criminal, and a disgrace to the office of the president? We seriously doubt Obama will be elected to a 2nd term, not because his true colors are shining through as a radical, National Socialist from the extreme left wing of the democrat party, but because he may well be impeached long before next year's election, for "High Crimes and Misdemeanors!"

www.HighCrimesAndMisdemeanors.com

It is clear all Democrats are Communists and Socialists because they do not follow or believe in the “Law of the Land.”

If they were really Americans and believed in the US Constitution, they would conduct themselves in accordance with the laws of the Nation.

We may have only ONE MORE FREE ELECTION before we will be subjugated to Socialism.

I ask you to ask everyone you know this question “Is your Democratic ideals so valuable to you, that you are willing to throw away your rights and freedoms by not supporting the Constitution of the United States of America?”

~~~ We Must Vote Out of Office ALL Liberals

*"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."*

Obama’s name will not appear on ballot in Georgia.

2012-01-26T12:02:00.000-08:00

This has always been a Constitution issue and NOT about Obama's Birth Certificate.

As an admitted dual citizen
(as it is with a naturalized citizen)
Obama was never Constitutionally eligible.
This is straight forward FACT.

To be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN …
you must be born in the country and your parents must BOTH BE CITIZENS.

BOTH REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET!

PARENTS can be born citizens or naturalized
(naturalized at the time of the child’s birth).

I presented my case and gave interviews to all the major networks:
CBS, NBC, ABC and so on.

Dr. Orly Taitz Esquire

The case revolved around the “Natural Born Citizen” clause of the Constitution
and whether or not Obama qualifies under it to serve.

Natural-born citizen is a citizen, who owes allegiance or fealty to a government
of the country in which he or she was born, and whose parents were citizens
of the same country at the time of that individual's birth.

Natural-born citizen as a term of usage in the United States, evidently comes from the writings of Emmerich de Vatell (1714-1767), a Swiss philosopher and legal scholar who laid the foundations and concepts of modern law.

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Two presidents were born having a father who was not a citizen.

Chester Arthur was born in the US (though rumored to have been born in Canada), but his father was at that time a citizen of the UK.

Barack Obama, who was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. His father was a British national from Kenya who was at that time attended a university on a student visa.

Two potential candidates in the Presidential Election 2012
were born having a father who was not a citizen.

Marco Rubio was born in the US, but his parents were Cuban exiles who were not US citizens at the time.

Bobby Jindal was born in the US, but his parents were Indian nationals at the time of his birth.

As Obama’s father was not a citizen, the argument is that Obama, constitutionally, is ineligible to serve as President.

More to the point, if found ineligible, Obama’s name would not appear on the 2012 ballot in Georgia.

Obama himself, who had been subpoenaed to appear, of course was nowhere near Georgia. Instead, Obama was on a campaign swing appearing in Las Vegas and in Colorado ignoring the court in Georgia.

Has Obama’s attorney made good on his stated threat not to participate?
Is he directly ignoring the court’s subpoena?

Is he placing Obama above the law?

It seems so. Were you or I subpoenaed to appear in court, would we or our attorney be allowed such action or, non action?
Certainly not.

Over the last several weeks, Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had attempted several tactics to keep this case from moving forward. He first tried to have it dismissed, then argued that it was irrelevant to Obama.

After that, Jablonski argued that a state could not, under the law, determine who would or would not be on a ballot and later, that Obama was simply too busy with the duties of office to appear.

Obama has a lot of explaining to do. His attorney, Jablonski, was a NO SHOW as of course, was Obama.

“He’s thumbed his nose at the court.
He’s thumbed his nose at the secretary of the state in Georgia.

He’s thumbed his nose at the people and said, ‘I’m above it all.

I’m above the law,’

Court is called to order.

Obama’s birth certificate is entered into evidence.

Obama’s father’s place of birth, Kenya East Africa is entered into evidence.

Pages 214 and 215 from Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father” entered into evidence.

Highlighted. This is where Obama indicates that, in 1966 or 1967 that his father’s history is mentioned. It states that his father’s passport had been revoked and he was unable to leave Kenya.

Immigration Services documents entered into evidence regarding Obama Sr.

June 27th, 1962, is the date on those documents. Obama’s father’s status shown as a non citizen of the United States. Documents were gotten through the Freedom of Information Act.

Testimony regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen is given citing Minor vs Happersett opinion from a Supreme Court written opinion from 1875.

The attorney points out the difference between “citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” using charts and copies of the Minor vs Happersett opinion.

It is also pointed out that the 14th Amendment does not alter the definition or supersede the meaning of Natural Born.

It is pointed out that lower court rulings do not conflict with the Supreme Court opinion nor do they over rule the Supreme Court Minor vs Happersett opinion.

The point is, to be a natural born citizen, one must have 2 parents who, at the time of the birth in question, be citizens of the United States. As Obama’s father was not a citizen, the argument is that Obama, constitutionally, is ineligible to serve as President.

Judge notes that as Obama nor his attorney is present, action will be taken accordingly.

Carl Swinson takes the stand.

Testimony is presented that the SOS has agreed to hear this case, laws applicable, and that the DNC of Georgia will be on the ballot and the challenge to it by Swinson.
2nd witness, a Mr. Powell, takes the stand and presents testimony regarding documents of challenge to Obama’s appearance on the Georgia ballot and his candidacy.
Court records of Obama’s mother and father entered into evidence.

Official certificate of nomination of Obama entered into evidence.

RNC certificate of nomination entered into evidence.

DNC language does NOT include language stating Obama is Qualified while the RNC document DOES.

This shows a direct difference trying to establish that the DNC MAY possibly have known that Obama was not qualified.

Jablonski letter to Kemp yesterday entered into evidence showing their desire that these proceedings not take place and that they would not participate.
Dreams From My Father entered.

Mr. Allen from Tuscon AZ sworn in.

Disc received from Immigration and Naturalization Service entered into evidence. This disc contains information regarding the status of Obama’s father received through the Freedom of Information Act.

This information states clearly that Obama’s father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen.
At this point, the judge takes a recess.

The judge returns.

David Farrar takes the stand.

Evidence showing Obama’s book of records listing his nationality as Indoneasan [Indonesian]. Deemed not relevant by the judge.

Orly Taitz calls 2nd witness. Mr. Strump.
Enters into evidence a portion of letter received from attorney showing a renewal form from Obama’s mother for her passport listing Obama’s last name something other than Obama.

State Licensed PI takes the stand.

She was hired to look into Obama’s background and found a Social Security number for him from 1977. Professional opinion given that this number was fraudulent.

The number used or attached to Obama in 1977, shows that Obama was born in the 1890. This shows that the number was originally assigned to someone else who was indeed born in 1890 and should never have been used by Obama.
Same SS number came up with addresses in IL, D.C. and MA.

Next witness takes the stand.

This witness is an expert in information technology and photo shop.

He testifies that the birth certificate Obama provided to the public is layered, multiple layered. This, he testifies, indicates that different parts of the certificate have been lifted from more than one original document.

Linda Jordan takes the stand.

Document entered regarding SS number assigned to Obama. SS number is not verified under E Verify.

It comes back as suspected fraudulent.

This is the system by which the Government verifies ones citizenship.
Next witness.

Mr. Gogt.

Expert in document imaging and scanners for 18 years.

Mr. Gogt testifies that the birth certificate, posted online by Obama, is suspicious. States white lines around all the type face is caused by “unsharp mask” in Photoshop.

Testifies that any document showing this, is considered to be a fraud.
States this is a product of layering.

Mr. Gogt testifies that a straight scan of an original document would not show such layering.

Also testifies that the date stamps shown on Obama documents should not be in exact same place on various documents as they are hand stamped. Obama’s documents are all even, straight and exactly the same indicating they were NOT hand stamped by layered into the document by computer.

Next witness, Mr. Sampson a former police officer and former immigration officer specializing in immigration fraud.

Ran Obama’s SS number through database and found that the number was issued to Obama in 1977 in the state of Connecticut . Obama never resided in that state. At the time of issue, Obama was living in Hawaii.

Serial number on birth certificate is out of sequence with others issued at that hospital. Also certification is different than others and different than twins born 24 hours ahead of Obama.

Mr. Sampson also states that portion of documents regarding Mr. Sotoroe [Soetoro], who adopted Obama have been redacted which is highly unusual with regards to immigration records.

Suggests all records from Social Security, Immigration, Hawaii birth records be made available to see if there are criminal charges to be filed or not. Without them, nothing can be ruled out.

Mr. Sampson indicates if Obama is shown not to be a citizen, he should be arrested and deported and until all records are released nobody can know for sure if he is or is not a U.S. Citizen.

Taitz shows records for Barry Sotoro [Soetoro] aka Barack Obama, showing he resides in Hawaii and in Indonesia at the same time.
Taitz takes the stand herself.

Testifies that records indicate Obama records have been altered and he is hiding his identity and citizenship.
Taitz leave the stand to make her closing arguments.
Taitz states that Obama should be found, because of the evidence presented, ineligible to serve as President.

And with that, the judge closes the hearing.

What can we take away from this?

It’s interesting.

Now, all of this has finally been entered OFFICIALLY into court records.

One huge question is now more than ever before, unanswered.

WHO THE HELL IS THIS GUY?

Without his attorney present, Obama’s identity, his Social Security number, his citizenship status, and his past are all OFFICIALLY in question.

One thing to which there seems no doubt. He does NOT qualify, under the definition of Natural Born Citizen” provided by SCOTUS opinions, to be eligible to serve as President.

What will the judge decide? That is yet to be known, but it seems nearly impossible to believe, without counter testimony or evidence, because Obama and his attorney chose not to participate, that Obama will be allowed on the Georgia ballot.

It also opens the door for such cases pending or to be brought in other states as well.

Obama is in it deep and the DNC has some…a LOT…of explaining to do unless they start looking for a new candidate for 2012.

Now, some might say that it’s completely unrealistic to believe that SoS Kemp would actually strike Obama’s name from Georgia’s ballot, and that’s their prerogative. Remember, though, that States have complete and total authority, per the Constitution, to regulate elections within their respective jurisdictions as they see fit, as long as they themselves don’t violate the Constitution.

In other words, it would be fantastic to see a suit involving another Court against the State for regulating their elections; I don’t think it would work very well, else all States would subsequently not be able to regulate their own elections, and, ironically, that would be unconstitutional.

Obama will not get any popular vote or electors from the great state of Georgia!
Congratulations to all freedom-loving Americans!

http://politicalvelcraft.org/ , http://giveusliberty1776.blogspot.com/

phil [at] therightsideoflife [dot] com

Thanks to:Dr Orly /

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com /

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/

http://theobamafile.com/ ,http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/ and WND

http://www.art2superpac.com/

William M. Windsor.and Bunny and Sam Sewell

“If the judge’s recommendation – and I’ve been told that it’s going to be to disqualify Mr. Obama as a candidate – is followed by the secretary of state, Mr. Obama has got a real problem,” said Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation.

The judge has no option but to rule against obama
or else he admits the United State of Tyranny

A MAJOR CRIME IS BEING COMMITTED AGAINST THIS NATION
with the help of MANY Corrupted officials.

“NOW IS THE TIME for all GOOD MEN
to come to the aid of their country.”

– An old but meaningful statement.

Dictator Obama

2012-01-24T13:29:00.000-08:00

Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves;
and, under a just God, can not long retain it.

'Abraham Lincoln'

People need to stop listening to the mainstream media!

They do not tell you whats REALLY happening across the world or
even in our own country!

This is because our country is controlled by using the media and political figures.. People will believe anything on the news or what the government says and that’s how they can get away with murder!

Obama is governing like a dictator and it is obvious he wants to be Dictator of the United States instead of President of the United States.

Presidential power in the U.S. has limitations and fetters and American Presidents have to compromise and work in concert with fellow legislators to achieve their ends.

Presidents are also bound by the rule of law and have to work within it.

Dictators have no such restrictions.

When Obama says he can’t wait for the rule of law to implement his agenda as he did earlier this week he rejects the entire American political system and places it in jeopardy.

When Obama governs by Executive Order instead of by Legislative Fiat, as he has done all along and as he has pledged to continue doing, he effectively turns the United States into a dictatorship with him as the dictator. Obama has bypassed Congress and issued 95 Executive Orders so far, with many more to come as he has said so himself.

These are not the acts of an American President, they are the acts of an American Dictator and it is difficult to imagine a more serious threat to freedom and democracy in the United States than this.

What’s next, an attempt to cancel the 2012 Presidential election?

Don’t put it past him.

Congress must stop him in his tracks and re-establish the rule of law, constitutional authority and the system of checks and balances and separation of powers.

If it doesn’t there will be no stopping him and you can kiss freedom and democracy in the U.S. goodbye.

Obama’s contempt for the rule of law, constitutional authority and the system of checks and balances and separation of powers is palpable and he has spent his entire Presidency ignoring them. That is completely unacceptable for a President of the United States and he must be called to task now, while it is still possible and while there still is a United States. Obama is not simply eroding the rule of law, constitutional authority and the system of checks and balances and separation of powers… he is purposefully and blatantly trying to eliminate them.

Congress is waking up to the threat and a constitutional showdown is looming in the U.S. It is a showdown Congress and the American people cannot lose.

If they do it really will be Dictator Obama instead of President Obama and American freedom and democracy will be a thing of the past.

Where does it end?

It doesn’t! Till everyone accepts this “new” form of government without the Constitution!

Our country is getting destroyed by someone who didn’t even show his birth certificate! This is only a step towards the New World Order which is the master plan by all governments across the globe…

Remember the government is our public servants; We are not their slaves!!!

God Help Us,and God Bless America.

Capt-Dax

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil:
God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”

Re-elect him - or else

2012-01-22T06:40:00.000-08:00

INTERNAL TERRORISTS AS WELL AS INTERNATIONAL

With only two months before Islamic Iran's scheduled elections take place, severe conflict among rival groups has caused cracks which leak information otherwise kept under wraps.

One of these shows that just in one north-eastern, holy city, Mashhad, local authorities secretly executed some 550 people last year, including one Nigerian and quite a few Afghan nationals. That is in addition to the "official" ones.

That's more than one death a day in one city!

Previous annual statistics, based mostly in the capital city of Tehran showed one execution every EIGHT hours during 2011 but clearly understated the much higher real figure if the "secret" executions were to be factored in.

Remember there are more than 100 "unofficial" prisons in major Iranian cities run by different factions of the "law enforcement" groups which do not bother to report to the National Director of Prisons.

Each formal group, such as the IRGC (Revolutionary Guard) or Bassiji (Suppression Forces) or "Lebass Shakhsi" (Plain Clothes Enforcers) or paramilitary Special Forces has its own powerful men who act as their own legal system with power to accuse, arrest, condemn and put to death anyone they wish - outside the "formal " system of "injustice".

Add to this the theocratic courts when a local Mullah UNofficially wields the same power of life and death in smaller towns or villages, even though "officially" he must formally request a confirmation of a death sentence from the Central Supreme Court in Tehran.

Knowing no local official can easily check or ensure this took place, they mete out death with impunity. The execution often taking the form of death under torture, which requires no Central confirmation and is written off as accidental or a suicide.

To hide the evidence of torture, some bodies are returned to the family by authorities inside a block of concrete! Any bruising, swelling, wounding, eventually found on the body would be attributed to chiselling/chipping the corpse out of the concrete. Specially internal wounds from gang rape by others or with foreign objects.

Meanwhile the sabre rattling by Iran and threat of closing down the Hormoz Straits to Oil tankers is part of the internal strife arising from newly appointed Generals in various paramilitary Guard and Special Forces seeking to retain power in a war environment where they can blame the ills of the country and the people on "the war"! And if need be they will
cancel elections under the saem pretext.

SOUND AND FEEL FAMILIAR?

Obama is increasingly creating pretext after pretext to incite crisis by illegally acting contrary to our Constitution and creating a situation where he can declare martial law and suspend the 2012 national elections!

WARNING! There is also increasing talk in many circles that IF he senses he will not be re-elected in November 2012, Obama will DECLARE WAR ON IRAN! Psychological threat apart, that if you do not want America embroiled in another war (to suit his ambition to remain in the Oval Office), then re-elect him - or else - it serves as an inducement and reaason for him to become a wartime president and expect the nationa to rally around him when he cancels elections.

His corrupt Chicago politics mentality knows no bounds and cares nothing about America other than as a trough at which he can feast high on the hog for free, no matter what it costs our nation.

In short the only job he cares about is his own!

The only future that concerns him if his own. America for him and Michelle, as his mentor Reverend Wright repeatedly said: is "Not God Bless America, but God Damn America"! You cannot listen to this preacher for 20-years and pretend you care about America.

At no time has Iran's President Ahmadi-Nejad paid even lip service to the Islamic regime's Theocratic Constitution nor has Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and they both have increasingly hostile competition from a splintering theocracy of Mullahs vying for riches and power and more secular paramilitary, interested more in money than religion.

These set of conflicts have summoned Ahmadi-Nejad three times before Iran's parliament, which he has evaded. And three Kermanshah businessmen, charged with corruption on a national level will have to see how much pull they can muster and vie with other insiders of the Supreme Leader's coterie and of his son Mojtaba, who have also stolen several hundred BILLION dollars through falsified Letters of Credit in a horribly smelly set of circumstances with Bank Saderaat and those close to Ali Khamenei AND the Revolutionary Guard.

What a tangled web they weave! As they try to avoid getting stabbed in the back by allies they can no longer trust and/or are hoist with their own petard. Their credibility with the populace is down to nothing and they can no longer pretend they received 87% of the vote like last time - not even half of that. Nor even the more realistic 37% from before they would be happy to receive today.

They face a boycott from the populace and even potentially one or two million of them in protest in the streets as their safety and well being is endangered by the bellicose actions of the Mullahs, who threaten the well being of the industrial West and ever more rapidly a major attack on Iran by a highly disgruntled West where though the West may suffer enormous financial harm, the Mullahs will face the shock and awe of a magnitude ultiple times higher than Iraq, where the peripheral deaths could exceed 100,000 Iranians and deaths will very rapidly rise in increments of many tens of thousands.

With smart guided bombs coming at them the Iranian regime leadership will be decimated or annihilated so they should think carefully - as should Obama in the USA - before either of them unleash their own destructive plans and a boomerang backwash that could slap them in the face like a wet fish.

The world is on the brink.

Thanks: Mr Peters / Afghanistan.

Introduction For many years involved with intelligence and security matters in Iran with significant access at top levels during the rule of the Shah, until early 1979. Currently an Iran SME (subject matter expert), analyst/commentator, and multi-linguist.

Obama’s eligibility conundrum

2012-01-19T02:57:00.001-08:00

Justice Horace Gray’s opinion in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark has provided the basis for 14th Amendment citizenship since 1898. But history must record the fact that Gray, whether aware of it or not, had a greater personal stake in the outcome of the case than any Supreme Court justice ever has had in a case…and by a very wide margin. Gray’s appointment came at the hands of Chester Arthur. Back in Dec. ’08, this blog exposed the fact that Arthur’s father didn’t become a citizen of the United States until 1843, when Chester was 14 years old. Therefore, Chester Arthur was a natural-born subject of the British empire.

If the Supreme Court had decided in Wong Kim Ark (WKA) that the children of alien parents domiciled in the country were not citizens under the 14th Amendment, then Chester Arthur would not have been a citizen at birth. Upon being exposed, his administration might have been rendered void, his name stripped from the list of presidents, and his official actions reversed. That the Court decided Ark, and indirectly Arthur, were citizens, does not mean they were natural-born, as this requires a separate and distinct analysis.

In Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion from Caperton v. A.T. Massey, the Supreme Court stated, with regard to judicial recusal standards:

“Under our precedents there are objective standards that require recusal when ‘the probability of actual bias on the part of the judge or decision maker is too high to be constitutionally tolerable.’ …The inquiry is an objective one. The Court asks not whether the judge is actually, subjectively biased, but whether the average judge in his position is ‘likely’ to be neutral, or whether there is an unconstitutional ‘potential for bias.’ ” Caperton v. A.T. Massey, No. 08-22, 129 S.Ct. 2252 (2009).

Justice Gray, by any objective standard, should have recused himself if he had knowledge of Chester Arthur’s nativity.

Had the country been aware of Arthur having been born to an alien father, there would have been absolutely no need for the Court to have weighed in on WKA, whose citizenship would have been confirmed by the fact that a person born to an alien father had become POTUS with no challenge on that basis. If Justice Gray was aware of Chester Arthur having been born to an alien father, why didn’t he mention it in the 55 page opinion he authored in WKA? It certainly would have been very relevant to the issue before the Court.

That Gray never raised the issue tells us one of two things had to be true; either Gray didn’t know; or, he concealed such knowledge from the rest of the Court and the nation. Either way, Chester Arthur had something to hide, and he did a fine job of hiding it. My previous reports on this topic (here, and here) highlighted the numerous lies Arthur told to newspapers concerning his parental heritage.

There’s a haunting introduction in the catalogue of papers which remain at the Library of Congress from the Chester Arthur collection, which is virtually barren of documents since Arthur burned everything the day before he died:

“Charles E. McElroy, the son of Mary Arthur McElroy who was my grandfather’s First Lady, tells me that the day before he died, my grandfather caused to be burned three large garbage cans, each at least four feet high, full of papers which I am sure would have thrown much light on history.”

Indeed.

The issue of Chester Arthur having been born to an alien father wasn’t known to the public when Arthur ran for VP, or at anytime through his POTUS administration. And there has not been a single newspaper article, or legal reference to the issue, anywhere in recorded American history before 2008.

Since Dec. 2008, the issue has gained widespread attention. It has appeared in the Indiana Court of Appeals opinion from the case, Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, as well as in Jack Maskell’s Congressional Research Service memo, although neither source has been intellectually honest with its audience about the issue. In the Ankeny opinion, the Court deceptively remarked as follows:

“We note that President Obama is not the first U.S. President born of parents of differing citizenship. Chester A. Arthur, the twenty-first U.S. President, was born of a mother who was a United States citizen and a father who was an Irish citizen… Although President Arthur‟s status as a natural born citizen was challenged in the 1880 Presidential Election on the grounds that he was born in Canada rather than Vermont, the argument was not made that because Arthur‟s father was an Irish citizen he was constitutionally ineligible to be President. See generally id.” Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, Cause No. 49D10-0812-PL-55511, pg. 18 (2009).

Either the Court here was being coy, or they were being ignorant, in that they failed to discuss that the issue was not raised because it was not known. Had it been known, it certainly would have been raised.

We have direct evidence – that the issue was not known to the public – from two important sources. One is President Arthur himself, and the other is a crucially relevant law review article from 1916. Both sources provide translucent illumination upon the matter.

When Charles Evans Hughes was running for President, this very issue was brought to the attention of the public by former Secretary of State and Ambassador to Italy, Breckenridge Long, in an article written for the Chicago Legal News in 1916:

“Whether Mr. Hughes is, or is not, a ‘natural born’ citizen within the meaning of the Constitution, so as to make him eligible or ineligible, to assume the office of President, presents an interesting inquiry.

He was born in this country and is beyond question ‘native born.’ But is there not a distinction between ‘native born’ and ‘natural born? At the time he was born his father and mother were subjects of England. His father had not then been naturalized. The day after Mr.Hughes was born his father had a right, as an English subject, to go to the British consul, at New York, and to present his wife and infant and to claim any assistance he might need from the consul as the representative of the English government.

If war had broken out between this government and England this government would have had a right to interne the father, the mother and the son as subjects of an enemy power.”

Read the article in full. You will notice that it does not address the issue of Chester Arthur’s father having been an alien. Had the nation been aware of that fact, such knowledge would have determined the very issue in question thereby rendering it moot.

Long’s failure to draw a comparison to Arthur’s father, who was also a British subject for the first fourteen years of Chester’s life, is conclusively telling. Nobody knew about Chester Arthur’s little secret outside of whoever was keeping that secret. However, Long does mention Chester Arthur in the article for a separate reason which we will discuss below.

According to the 1951 consular compact between the United States and the United Kingdom, President Obama’s father also had the right to register Obama, Jr. as a citizen of the U.K. at a British consular office.

President Obama has never informed the nation whether such registration happened. If it did, he would still retain British citizenship unless he took official steps to renounce that citizenship. Without direct registration by his parents, Obama’s U.K. citizenship expired when he became a citizen of Kenya. My research indicates that he is not a British Overseas Citizen (BOC), as has been contended by some. I will go into more detail on this in the future.

MASKELL’S CRS PROPAGANDA ON CHESTER ARTHUR AND BRECKENRIDGE LONG.

Jack Maskell’s CRS propaganda memo mentions Arthur on page 48 at Footnote 208:

“As an historical matter it may be noted that Chester A. Arthur, 21st President of the United States, was apparently born in the United States (despite rumors being spread by opponents that he was born in Canada) in 1829 to a U.S. citizen-mother and a father who was not a U.S. citizen, but rather a citizen of Ireland and a British subject, although there have been assertions by some that this fact was not widely known at the time.” (Emphasis added.)

This is a subtle attempt to rewrite historical truth. It implies that there are only “assertions” that the fact wasn’t widely known, when, in reality, the assertions have been proved by the historical record. The issue wasn’t known to anyone in the public domain at all, not until Dec. 2008. Had the issue been public knowledge, it would have been discussed by Justice Gray, and by Breckenridge Long.

Maskell mentions the Long article in the very same footnote, but fails to inform his audience (Congress) that the article was written by a former Secretary of State, stating, “Although a question was raised by this individual at the time of Hughes’ candidacy...”

Maskell might have considered that members of Congress would be interested to know the article came from a career diplomat/department of state professional, but he chose to leave that out of his “research”.

SCOTUS RECUSAL ISSUES.

Obviously, a U.S. Supreme Court justice, who is called to pass judgment upon the eligibility of the president responsible for appointing him to the bench, would have a serious stake in the outcome, namely, his dream job and income therefrom. Not only would the honor and prestige of the appointment be at risk of being stripped, there’s a financial stake as well.

And if this issue ever reaches the Court as to Obama, Justices Sotomayor and Kagan must recuse themselves as well, according to 28 U.S.C. 455(a):

(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.

28 U.S.C. 451 defines “justice” as follows:

The term “justice of the United States” includes the Chief Justice of the United States and the associate justices of the Supreme Court.

Justice Gray’s awareness of Arthur’s nativity issue must be examined now in a forensic manner, but Justices Sotomayor and Kagan are certainly aware of Obama’s eligibility conundrum, and should they not be required to recuse themselves if the Court accepts review, the institution of the U.S. Supreme Court will never recover. It’s hallowed reputation will be irreversibly tainted.

This forensic process now continues from my recent report on Gray’s inexcusable misquotes regarding McCreery v. Somerville in the WKA opinion. Today, we set the stage for a deeper examination of WKA, by going back in time before it was decided to examine statements by Gray which directly contradict his opinion in WKA. We shall also pay very close attention to a hauntingly telling public statement by Chester Arthur.

JUSTICE GRAY CITED THE SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES AS PRECEDENT IN ELK v. WILKINS.

Two years earlier than Minor v. Happersett, with 8 of the 9 Justices from Minor on the bench, the Court construed the 14th Amendment as follows:

“The phrase, ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.” The Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36, 73 (1872).

According to this statement by the Court, those born in the country of alien parents are not citizens of the U.S. This quote was then followed by a very important distinction between foreign citizenship… and foreign race:

“The first clause of the fourteenth amendment changes this whole subject, and removes it from the region of discussion and doubt. It recognizes in express terms, if it does not create, citizens of the United States, and it makes their citizenship dependent upon the place of their birth, or the fact of their adoption, and not upon the constitution or laws of any State or the condition of their ancestry.” Id. at 95. (Emphasis added.)

Throughout the opinion, the Court discusses the “condition” of persons with regard to being free or slave. And the opinion of the Court shows great respect for the purpose of the 14th Amendment, to protect those who were previously oppressed:

“[O]n the most casual examination of the language of these amendments, no one can fail to be impressed with the one pervading purpose found in them all, lying at the foundation of each, and without which none of them would have been even suggested; we mean the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm establishment of that freedom, and the protection of the newly-made freeman and citizen from the oppressions of those who had formerly exercised unlimited dominion over him.” Id. at 71.

The Supreme Court, therefore, provided a clear distinction between the issue of racial discrimination, and the issue of foreign citizenship. This vital distinction provides important clarity upon the issue, and upon the virtue of the Minor/Slaughter-House Court, which will certainly be slandered as the issue generates more and more interest with the public leading up to the 2012 election, amidst the various ballot challenges now pending in the courts.

You can see the trend already put in play by Jack Maskell’s CRS propaganda memo, wherein he attempts, on page 28, to link Minor v. Happersett to the racist Dred Scott case, despite the fact that the Court in Minor never even mentions Scott v. Sandford in the entire case:

“In one early Supreme Court case after Dred Scott, the Court narrowly applied the earlier theory of citizenship in Dred Scott (as being only the original community of people who ratified the Constitution and their progeny)…”

This is Maskell’s modus operandi of deception clearly exposed. While the Court in Minor completely, and wisely, refrained from citing to Dred Scott, Maskell’s propaganda associates those justices directly with the blight of racism contained in Scott v. Sandford. This is a depraved allegation by Maskell.

Supreme Court decisions specifically cite to all authorities relied upon. The Court in Minor chose not to rely upon the Dred Scott opinion, and they never mention the case. Maskell is just making stuff up and labeling it “research”. That our tax dollars have funded this deceptive propaganda is deplorable. Meanwhile, it’s Justice Gray who endorsed the Dred Scott opinion for his own purposes. But Maskell, of course, gives Justice Gray a pass, even where Justice Gray blatantly misled the nation:

“In Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) 19 How. 393, Mr. Justice Curtis said: ‘The first section of the second article of the constitution uses the language, ‘a natural-born citizen.’ It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth.’ Id. 576. And to this extent no different opinion was expressed or intimated by any of the other judges.” U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 662 (1898). (Emphasis added.)

First, Gray never mentions that he’s quoting from the Curtis dissent. It’s standard protocol to identify a dissenting opinion. Second, unless the reader is wary enough to correctly interpret, “to this extent”, he will come away from the passage believing all of the justices agreed that anyone born in the country was a “natural-born citizen”. This is utterly false. Justice Daniel cited to the Law of Nations rule, quoting Vattel directly:

” ‘The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority; they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.’ ” Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393, 476 (1856)

Since Justice Gray was aware of Justice Daniel’s opinion, his assertion, that no other opinion was expressed by any of the other judges, indicates that, “to this extent”, was, to the extent of citizenship, and not to the issue of whether a citizen was natural-born. It takes a very discerning point of view to unearth the distinction. The motive for such parsing and deception appears to be the curing of Chester Arthur’s eligibility defect.

We shall now examine Justice Gray’s reliance, in Elk v. Wilkins, upon The Slaughter-House Cases, which he cited as precedent in his majority opinion of the Court:

“The main object of the opening sentence of the fourteenth amendment was to settle the question, upon which there had been a difference of opinion throughout the country and in this court, as to the citizenship of free negroes, (Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393;) and to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black, and whether formerly slaves or not, born or naturalized in the United States, and owing no allegiance to any alien power, should be citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside. Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 73; Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 , 306.” Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101 (1884). (Emphasis added.)

First, note that Gray, at this point in time, interprets the opening clause of the 14th Amendment to mean, “owing no allegiance to any alien power”. He clearly establishes as precedent that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and “owing no allegiance to any alien power” are synonymous. Then he cites to page 73 of The Slaughter-House Cases as precedent for this point.

Page 73 is the exact page of the opinion where the Court stated, “The phrase, ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.” Notice that Justice Gray treats this as precedent in Elk v. Wilkins, taking no issue with any of it.

While Elk v. Wilkins concerned the status of an American indian, which encompassed, I admit, a more complex issue, Gray’s statement above is given as a general statement of law, not as a specific reference to the status of indians.

The point is reinforced later in the opinion, when he states:

“Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of, and owing immediate allegiance to, one of the Indiana tribes, (an alien though dependent power,) although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more ‘born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’ within the meaning of the first section of the fourteenth amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United States, of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations.” Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 102 (1884). (Emphasis added.)

The paragraph concerns three classes of persons who are - in a geographical sense – born in the United States, but who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Those three classes are indians, children of ambassadors, and children born in the U.S. of foreign subjects, the parents having been born in the foreign nation themselves. The statement does not make sense if read to mean that the children of foreign subjects referred to in the quote are actually born on the foreign soil of the country to which their parents owe allegiance.

The comparison is solely focused upon persons born, in a geographical sense, in the U.S., but subject to an alien power. This statement must be read in conjunction with Justice Gray’s deference to page 73 of The Slaughter-House Cases, as well as the Court’s correlative characterization of the synonymous nature of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

In 1884, Justice Gray was all about following stare decisis by giving proper respect to the prior authority. But something happened – between 1884, when Elk v. Wilkins was decided, and 1898 when WKA was decided – that made Justice Gray turn about-face on this issue. We shall discuss below what I believe to have been the catalyst, but first we must review Justice Gray’s about-face from The Slaughter-House Cases in WKA:

“Mr. Justice Miller, indeed, while discussing the causes which led to the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, made this remark: ‘The phrase ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign states, born within the United States.’ 16 Wall. 73. This was wholly aside from the question in judgment, and from the course of reasoning bearing upon that question. It was unsupported by any argument, or by any reference to authorities; and that it was not formulated with the same care and exactness as if the case before the court had called for an exact definition of the phrase is apparent from its classing foreign ministers and consuls together…” U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 678 (1898).

Under Gray’s analysis here, his own errors in the WKA opinion, such as misquotes from McCreery v. Somerville and the statute there involved, would render his entire opinion in WKA to be dicta. Moreover, there was no mention of any problem with The Slaughter-House Cases when Justice Gray cited to page 73 of that decision in Elk v. Wilkins. Gray had no problem using it as a point of authority then. And his assertion that the point was not supported by any argument is bunk as well. There’s plenty of argument on the nature of citizenship in that case.

The unexplained inconsistency between Gray’s opinion in Elk v. Wilkins and WKA simply reeks of bias.

Here is another about-face from Gray’s prior opinion in Elk v. Wilkins:

“By the civil rights act of 1866, ‘all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed,’ were declared to be citizens of the United States. In the light of the law as previously established, and of the history of the times, it can hardly be doubted that the words of that act, ‘not subject to any foreign power,’ were not intended to exclude any children born in this country from the citizenship which would theretofore have been their birthright…But any possible doubt in this regard was removed when the negative words of the civil rights act, ‘not subject to any foreign power,’ gave way, in the fourteenth amendment of the constitution, to the affirmative words, ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.’ ” U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 688.

Again, in Elk v. Wilkins, Gray treats the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act synonymously, citing to The Slaughter-House Cases as authority, to the very page where the court stated persons born of aliens are excluded from citizenship. And what complicates all of this so effectively is the fact that Gray fails to acknowledge the truth of his prior stance in Elk v. Wilkins. Instead, he simply pretends that he never made such a ruling.

CHESTER ARTHUR SOUNDS THE ALARM.

The catalyst for Justice Gray’s about-face may have been the Fourth Annual Message by President Arthur. Just four weeks after the opinion from Elk v. Wilkins was issued (Nov 3, 1894), President Arthur’s address included the following veiled, but stunning, admission:

“An uniform rule of naturalization” such as the Constitution contemplates should, among other things, clearly define the status of persons born within the United States subject to a foreign power (section 1992) and of minor children of fathers who have declared their intention to become citizens but have failed to perfect their naturalization…A just and uniform law in this respect would strengthen the hands of the Government in protecting its citizens abroad and would pave the way for the conclusion of treaties of naturalization with foreign countries.” President Chester Arthur, Fourth Annual Message, Dec. 1, 1894.

What an incredible statement this truly is when viewed in the light of history. Chester Arthur was obviously rocked to the core by the Elk opinion, delivered just a few weeks earlier, from the highest Court of our nation, which firmly denied his right to hold the office of President. Arthur clearly understood that the implications of that decision were exactly as I have stated above, that persons born in the country of alien parents were excluded from citizenship. Arthur’s Fourth Annual Message is a cry from the wilderness to which he might have been banished. Arthur was a prestigious New York attorney who obviously understood the dire implication of the Court’s holding. The timing of these comments is directly related to Elk v. Wilkins. This is what I mean by forensic analysis.

The statement is rich with context and evidence. Consider that Arthur recognizes that persons born in the U.S. subject to a foreign power would require naturalization. Additionally, he calls for the status of such persons to be clarified. Which class of persons does he refer to? Certainly not ambassadors and ministers, since their status has always been clear. The status of indians was declared in Elk v. Wilkins, so he’s not making reference to them. That leaves the third class of persons discussed on page 73 of The Slaughter-House Cases, “citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States”. Since Justice Gray cited to that exact page as precedent, Arthur had good reason to be alarmed.

Those requiring naturalization are not natural-born. That the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was an act to naturalize the children of aliens born in the U.S. was discussed in Congress during the debates, such discussion actually having been quoted by Justice Gray in WKA:

“During the debates in the senate in January and February, 1866, upon the civil rights bill, Mr. Trumbull, the chairman of the committee which reported the bill, moved to amend the first sentence thereof so as to read: ‘All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States, without distinction of color.’ Mr. Cowan, of Pennsylvania, asked ‘whether it will not have the effect of naturalizing the children of Chinese and Gypsies, born in this country?’ Mr. Trumbull answered, ‘Undoubtedly;’…Cong. Globe, 39th Cong. 1st Sess. pt. 1, pp. 498, 573, 574.” U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 698.

Justice Gray cites this statement approvingly, taking no issue with its indication that persons born in the U.S. of alien parents require naturalization, despite his dicta concerning the British common law. And this confirms that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was a naturalization act. The only congressional power to regulate citizenship pertains to naturalization. For example:

“[C]ongress has no ‘power, express or implied, to take away an American citizen’s citizenship without his assent,’ Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S., at 257 .” Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815, 835 (1971).

This is also why Congress may never change or repeal Article 2, Section 1 by legislation. It would require a constitutional amendment. Therefore, native-born persons of alien parents, requiring such naturalization, could never be considered natural-born citizens. This is because, whatever the 14th Amendment may have done to cure their need for naturalization, the Amendment did not contain the phrase “natural-born”, and it did not confer any new privileges or immunities:

“The amendment did not add to the privileges and immunities of a citizen. It simply furnished an additional guaranty for the protection of such as he already had.” Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 171 (1874).

Therefore, no citizen is eligible to be POTUS who wouldn’t have been eligible prior to the enactment of the 14th Amendment.

President Arthur’s Fourth Annual Message was also concerned with the children of fathers who had failed to complete their naturalization after declaring intent to naturalize. He was cryptically speaking of himself. If the fact of Arthur’s birth to an alien father had been known, there would have been no need for him to raise the issue with the public in his Fourth Annual Message.

And in an amazing turn of events, Breckenridge Long specifically mentioned Chester Arthur’s Fourth Annual Message to show that President Arthur agreed that persons born to an alien father were not citizens at birth, and were not eligible to be President! This unequivocally proves that Breckenridge Long, and the rest of the nation, certainly had no idea Chester Arthur was British at birth.

WONG KIM ARK’S PARENTS WERE TECHNICALLY NATIONALS OF THE UNITED STATES.

And now we come to a truly amazing failure on the part of Justice Gray’s opinion in WKA. In the entire 55 page opinion, he traces the history of allegiance and citizenship all the way back to the 14th century, but, unbelievable as it may appear, Justice Gray failed to mention the specific article of law which actually determined the entire case. He did mention the treaty to which this article of law belongs, but he never quoted the provision which would have disposed of the issue on its face.

Having mentioned the treaty in the opinion, however, it is possible (and necessary) to limit the holding of WKA to this specific provision. Should the current Supreme Court wish to correct the mess Gray has left for them, the Court can avoid completely overturning the holding in WKA by strictly limiting it to those who were covered under the Burlingame-Seward Treaty.

I never understood how Justice Gray, in Elk v. Wilkins, could define “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” as being synonymous with “owing no allegiance to any alien power“, and then fail to apply that logic to the parents of WKA, while the parents were observed by Gray to have been subjects of the Chinese Emperor when their son was born. How did Gray determine that Ark owed no allegiance to China at birth? Justice Field’s dissent zeroes in on this:

“If the act of 1866 had not contained the words ‘and not subject to any foreign power,’ the children neither of public ministers nor of aliens in territory in hostile occupation would have been included within its terms on any proper construction, for their birth would not have subjected them to ties of allegiance, whether local and temporary, or general and permanent.

There was no necessity as to them for the insertion of the words, although they were embraced by them.

But there were others in respect of whom the exception was needed, namely, the children of aliens, whose parents owed local and temporary allegiance merely, remaining subject to a foreign power by virtue of the tie of permanenta llegiance, which they had not severed by formal abjuration or equivalent conduct, and some of whom were not permitted to do so if they would.

And it was to prevent the acquisition of citizenship by the children of such aliens merely by birth within the geographical limits of the United States that the words were inserted.” U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 721.

Generally, it is true that aliens owe only a local and temporary allegiance, but this was not the case as to the parents of Wong Kim Ark. Ark was born in 1873, when the Burlingame-Seward Treaty with China was in effect. Article 5 of that treaty states:

ARTICLE V. The United States of America and the Emperor of China cordially recognize the inherent and inalienable right of man to change his home and allegiance, and also the mutual advantage of the free migration and emigration of their citizens and subjects respectively from the one country to the other, for purposes of curiosity, of trade, or as permanent residents…

Article VI of the treaty provides that, “[N]othing herein contained shall be held to confer naturalization upon citizens of the United States in China, nor upon the subjects of China in the United States,” while Article V recognizes that subjects of China, when they change their home to the United States, and become permanent residents here, may also change their allegiance.

Note that the treaty does not say that they may gain a second allegiance, or a dual allegiance. The Treaty recognizes their right to change their “home and allegiance”. This was a completely unique provision, the necessity of which was related to the law in China that called for the beheading of subjects who tried to throw off their allegiance:

“But of all the treaties of the year, the most remarkable in its declarations respecting expatriation was that with China, commonly known as the Burlingame treaty. According to the terms of her penal code, China had apparently treated the renunciation of her allegiance as a capital offence. By article 5 of the Burlingame treaty, it was declared in the very substance of the act of Congress: ’The United States of America and the Emperor of China cordially recognize the inherent and inalienable right of man to change his home and allegiance.’ This declaration was absolutely unqualified, going in this respect beyond the stipulations of any other treaty.”

The Nation, December 14, 1893, pg. 444. (Emphasis added.)
Now compare that passage to the following from Justice Gray in WKA:

“Chinese persons, born out of the United States, remaining subjects of the emperor of China, and not having become citizens of the United States, are entitled to the protection of and owe allegiance to the United States, so long as they are permitted by the United States to reside here; and are ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’ in the same sense as all other aliens residing in the United States.” U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 u.S. 649, 694. (Emphasis added.)

But this is not necessarily true with regard to Chinese subjects who quit China for the U.S. while the Burlingame treaty was in force. According to the Burlingame treaty, Chinese subjects who were permanent residents here were absolved of owing allegiance to China. The treaty recognized their right to permanently change their home and allegiance.

Title 8, § 1101, (a)(22), of the United States Code, states:

(22) The term “national of the United States” means

(A) a citizen of the United States, or

(B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States.

This provision of the code was not in effect when Ark’s parents were born, but it does illustrate that there is a unique relationship recognized by the government which adheres to persons who, though not citizens, have a permanent allegiance to the United States.

Additionally, Title 8, § 1101, (a)(3), recognizes that such persons are not aliens:

(3) The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.

Despite Justice Gray’s erroneous assertion that Ark’s parents were subject to the jurisdiction thereof, “in the same sense as all other aliens residing in the United States”, the truth is that they were completely and permanently subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., because the treaty allowed them to permanently change their home and allegiance. The ties that binded them to China had been severed by the treaty, and this distinguished their status from all other foreign subjects who were domiciled here.

Justice Gray’s career on the bench is characterized by his use of the historical method. When we consider his failure to cite Article V, his misquotes concerning McCreery v. Somerville, and his flip-flopping from Elk v. Wilkins to Won Kim Ark, the emerging picture is very disturbing. This blister, if left to fester, will infect the Supreme Court with an incurable disease.

Treaties are the law of the land, and this one recognized a permanent change of allegiance upon a permanent change of residence. Justice Gray could have cut 50 pages from his opinion, and avoided construction of the 14th Amendment, by focusing upon the extraordinary treaty between the two countries, wherein China released its subjects from owing any allegiance at all to their mother country.

It’s beyond reason to imagine that Justice Gray simply overlooked Article V. And this is where our analysis must be somewhat presumptuous, for we must consider motive. Had the Court simply recognized that Ark’s case was unique due to the extraordinary powers of the treaty, the case would have failed to sanitize the citizenship of the man who appointed Justice Gray to the bench. But since Gray failed to exercise judicial restraint, the holding in WKA provided for the citizenship of Chester Arthur.

Leo Donofrio, Esq.

[Hat tip to Cindy Simpson re "The Nation" article.]

Thnks to : http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

“October Surprise”

2012-01-12T13:12:00.000-08:00

There is the account of a man who fell from the roof of a 10 story building. As he passed their windows on the way down, people on each floor heard him exclaim, “well…so far, so good.”

As the election approaches, Barack Hussein Obama might also be saying to himself “so far, so good.” But don’t count on it.

For any way you look at it, Obama’s fortunes are plummeting just as surely as the man from the roof. Sure, he diverted countless tax dollars to labor unions and favored corporations, receiving in return his “cut” in campaign contributions. He successfully maneuvered ObamaCare through a Democrat-packed congress, ensuring the universal dependency of 300 million people upon the government for goodness knows how many decades to come. And there is nothing the left enjoys more than prospective voters dependent upon Big Brother, first for their living and now for their very LIFE!

It’s a Democrat Party dream come true!

But according to the polls—and that includes polls which can actually be believed—Barack is not doing so well. The January 9th Rasmussen Tracking Poll shows that only 23% of likely voters strongly approve of the One’s efforts on behalf of the American people, while 42% strongly disapprove. In fact only 47% of Democrats themselves approve of the ways in which Obama has applied his self-proclaimed genius. (1)

Even Gallup Job Approval numbers foretell a dismal electoral future for the acting president. Polling “Americans” rather than likely voters—a practice which provides Barack and fellow Democrats quite a statistical boost– even here the smartest president in history finds 47% disapproval vs 46% who still support his Marxist ways. (2)

And these numbers are not likely to change significantly over the coming months unless it be for the worse.

And this is why, if Obama is to win re-election, something has to happen.

..Not the time honored “October Surprise,” consisting of some accusation of womanizing on the part of the Republican candidate, or claims of an ancient DUI arrest.

It must be something really big.!

..That is, a second 9/11; an explosion at a nuclear plant killing thousands and exposing millions to an expanding cloud of radiation; a lunatic running amok in the Capital Building, killing untold numbers of senators and House members– in short, a “time-freezing” event which will displace the upcoming election from all public consciousness and cause it to pale to comparative insignificance.

And of course the hero of the weeks which follow such a mind-numbing disaster will be Barack Hussein Obama.

..Americans, indeed the whole world, will watch as Obama is feted day and night by a national media unanimous in its awe at the extraordinary qualities of leadership, the manifest calm, the steely-eyed resolve and overwhelming compassion with which the One will have handled the aftermath of this unimaginable tragedy.

And suddenly an election once eagerly contemplated as the only means of saving the American people from a power hungry tyrant will become a timely expedient for placing clearly the greatest of all leaders once again in command of his grateful flock.

Make no mistake, Barack Obama and his worldwide collection of handlers and enablers are criminals. They will stop at nothing to retain the unparalleled power of the White House.

..The American people must understand this fact and be prepared to discern the concealed though recognizable hand of evil even in the commission of an event so despicable as to make it impossible that any human being should be capable of its mere contemplation.

I very much hope to be wrong in my suspicions of what Barack Obama & Co. might be capable.

Use this site to contact your Congressional Representative:
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
To read more use these links: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

Thnk you...Only if the election becomes an afterthought can Obama win it
By Coach Collins, on January 12th, 2012
by Doug Book, staff writer

"It's the BROWNSHIRTS, stupid."

2012-01-06T06:09:00.000-08:00

The mask is fully off.

Barack Obama is the most corrupt, power-mad politician in this nation's illustrious history.

By his actions in bypassing Congress and making appointments that should be subject to Senate approval while the Senate is still in session and innumerable extra-constitutional actions since he was inaugurated, he is following in the footsteps of the despots who dominated the 20th century.

In late September of 2008, it became clear to me that Barack Obama would be elected. Based on his background, education, motivation, and indoctrination, I saw a man who could single-handedly destroy the country and someone with no respect for the history, the Constitution, or the people of the United States.

The specter of a megalomaniac who was a stranger to the truth and would or say or do anything to achieve or retain power overcame me. In Barack Obama and his fellow travelers, I saw what I feared the most since I came to this country: a person and a political mindset that would, if allowed, spell the end of the noblest experiment in the history of mankind.

It was at that point that I wrote my first article for American Thinker in an attempt to warn the people of America that the result of the 2008 election would be critical to the nation's survival. This was the first column I had written since my college days over 40+ years before, and I am eternally grateful to American Thinker for publishing it and giving me a forum to speak to the American people.

I had to survive a war that was precipitated by those who were initially elected by the people in a democratic fashion. Yet once in power, they began to systematically usurp and overthrow the rule of law. Their lust for power led them to shred any written constitution or traditions as they systematically imposed new regulations, laws, and executive orders geared primarily to centralize authority in the government as individual rights and liberties were extinguished. In due course, they and their cronies became the government, as the people were powerless to stop them.

The people of Germany, the most advanced society in continental Europe, or Italy in the first four years of the 1930s, would have found it incredible to imagine what became of those countries by 1945. They would not think it even remotely possible.

The history of the United States and its traditions of liberty and individual freedom should be a bulwark against the successful emergence of people like Obama and his cronies. Yet why are the media, or the opposition party, or the members of Congress or the judiciary not shouting from the highest hilltop and taking action to stop these power-grabs? Has this country enjoyed peace and prosperity so long that everyone is jaded and preoccupied with him-- or herself, or in a self-induced stupor either ignoring what's happening or saying that these unconstitutional steps are minor? Is it because Obama happens to have black skin and everyone is too intimidated by political correctness to speak? Or is it as it was in Germany, Italy, and Russia among many -- a belief that the worst could never happen here?

I have seen and experienced the worst that man can offer, I am not intimidated, and I will say without reservation that Barack Obama and his cronies have the same mindset in their tactical approach, philosophy, and lust for power that was extant in Benito Mussolini and the Fascists in the early days of their regime. If the apologists for those in power in Washington want to vilify me for that comparison, so be it.

To the American people, it is far beyond time to wake up to who this man in the White House is and what his ambitions are. As for the Republicans in the Congress or running for office, the task is upon your shoulders to stop Barack Obama in his tracks before he goes any farther. It is time to do your sworn duty to preserve and protect the country. And for the Democrats who are so blinded by party loyalty that they would sell their country for the proverbial thirty pieces of silver, the long-term difficulties and potential downfall of the greatest nation on earth will be your legacy.

Thanks..Steve McCann

The Obama File

and rongordo

Which Republican will stand up to Obama? Initiate an impeachment process?
Well, imagine if you did, and the next days and weeks you had protesters outside your home, calling you, insulting your family and even making death threats.

This is what the Left does now, and why everyone is afraid to make any kind of necessary move against the king.

"It's the BROWNSHIRTS, stupid."

Article II Facts

2011-12-30T21:01:00.001-08:00

1. Constitutional Convention -

•Alexander Hamilton – “Citizen”
•John Jay – “Natural Born Citizen”
2. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Adopted 9 July 1868 -

3. Rep. John Bingham, Principal Framer of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution -

4. Supreme Court Cases that Cite “Natural Born Citizen” as One Born on U.S. Soil to Citizen Parents -

•The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
•Shanks v DuPont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
•Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
•Minor v Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
•United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
5. Attempts to Redefine or Amend Article II “Natural Born Citizen” Clause of the United States Constitution -

6. Citizenship Status of the Presidents of the United States and Their Eligibility Under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 -

7.Thirteen Presidential/Vice Presidential “Eligibility” Bills Introduced in State General Assembly’s between 2009 & 2011 -

1. Constitutional Convention – “Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.

See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -

2. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted 9 July 1868:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The intent and purpose of the (14th) amendment was to provide equal citizenship to all Americans either born on U.S. soil or naturalized therein and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It does not grant “natural born Citizen” status. It only confers “citizen” status, as that is the exact word used by the Amendment itself and that is the same word that appears in Article I, II, III, and IV of the Constitution. It just conveys the status of “citizen,” and as we learned from how the Framers handled the Naturalization Acts of 1790 and 1795, being a “citizen” does not necessarily mean that one is a “natural born Citizen.”

The Fourteenth Amendment only tells us who may become members of the community called the United States, i.e., those born on U.S. soil or naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are U.S. citizens. The amendment was needed because under Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856), slaves and their descendents, whether free or not, were not considered as being members of that community even though born on U.S. soil and unlike the American Indians subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the amendment only allowed these slaves and their descendents to become a member of the U.S. community by making them U.S. citizens. Once those persons or anybody else (e.g. Wong Kim Ark) so became a member of the U.S. community (became a U.S. citizen by birth on U.S. soil or through naturalization), then that person could join with another U.S. citizen and procreate a child on U.S. soil who would then be an Article II "natural born Citizen."

Hence, during the Founding, the original citizens created the new Constitutional Republic. Through Article II’s grandfather clause, they were allowed to be President. Their posterity would be the "natural born Citizens" who would perpetuate the new nation and its values. These “natural born Citizens,” born after the adoption of the Constitution, would be the future Presidents.

Subsequently, a “natural born Citizen” was created by someone first becoming a member of the United States (a U.S. citizen) by birth on its soil to a mother and father who were U.S. citizens or if not so born then through naturalization, and then joining with another similarly created U.S. citizen to procreate a child on U.S. soil. The product of that union would be an Article II “natural born Citizen.”

After the Fourteenth Amendment, it became sufficient to be a citizen if one were merely born on U.S. soil or naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. That U.S. citizen would then procreate with another similarly created U.S citizen and produce a “natural born Citizen.”

As we can see, becoming a U.S. citizen is only the first step in the process of creating a “natural born Citizen.” The second step is the two U.S citizens procreating a child on U.S. soil. It is these “natural born Citizens” who can someday be President or Vice President of the United States. Stated differently, a President must be a second generation American citizen by both U.S. citizen parents. A Senator or Representative can be a first generation American citizen by naturalization or birth. It is the extra generation carried by a President which assures the American people that he/she is born with attachment and allegiance only to the United States. [SOURCE CREDIT]

Now, let’s take a look at the Godfather of the 14th amendment and see what he had to say about “born a citizen” vs “natural born citizen” –

3. Rep. John Bingham, Principal Framer of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

During a debate (see pg. 2791) regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen. Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:

As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth. (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872.)

Notice that Bingham declares Houard to be a “natural-born citizen” by citing two factors – born of citizen parents in the US.

John Bingham, aka “father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins. Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor:

All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians. - (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:

Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.... - (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

According to Justice Black, Bingham’s words uttered on the floor of the House are the most reliable source. Bingham made three statements, none of them challenged on the Floor, which indicate that a natural born citizen is a person born on US soil to parents who were US citizens. [SOURCE CREDIT]

And of course we’ve all heard the Supreme Court has never ruled on or defined what a “natural born citizen” is, but that is a folly –

4. Supreme Court cases that cite “natural born Citizen” as one born on U.S. soil to citizen parents:

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says: “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)

Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.

Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As society cannot perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their parents, and succeed to all their rights.' Again: 'I say, to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen; for if he be born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. . . .

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”. [SOURCE CREDIT]

Let’s take a look at the numerous attempts congress has made over the years to change the definition of Article II even though any educated American knows that to change the constitution in any shape or form a constitutional amendment is required. -

5. Attempts to redefine or amend Article II “natural born Citizen” Clause of the U.S. Constitution:

The effort to remove the natural-born citizen requirement from the U.S. Constitution actually began in 1975 – when Democrat House Rep. Jonathon B. Bingham, [NY-22] introduced a constitutional amendment under H.J.R. 33: which called for the outright removal of the natural-born requirement for president found in Article II of the U.S. Constitution – “Provides that a citizen of the United States otherwise eligible to hold the Office of President shall not be ineligible because such citizen is not a natural born citizen.”

Bingham’s first attempt failed and he resurrected H.J.R. 33: in 1977 under H.J.R. 38:, again failing to gain support from members of congress. Bingham was a Yale Law grad and member of the secret society Skull and Bones, later a lecturer at Columbia Law and thick as thieves with the United Nations via his membership in the Council on Foreign Relations.

Bingham’s work lay dormant for twenty-six years when it was resurrected again in 2003 as Democrat members of Congress made no less than eight (8) attempts in twenty-two (22) months, to either eliminate the natural-born requirement, or redefine natural-born to accommodate Barack Hussein Obama II in advance of his rise to power. The evidence is right in the congressional record…

1. On June 11, 2003 Democrat House member Vic Snyder [AR-2] introduced H.J.R 59: in the 108th Congress – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsors: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14]; Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10]; Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4]; Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49]; Rep LaHood, Ray [IL-18]; Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4].

2. On September 3, 2003, Rep. John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 67: – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]

3. On February 25, 2004, Republican Senator Don Nickles [OK] attempted to counter the growing Democrat onslaught aimed at removing the natural-born citizen requirement for president in S.2128: – “Natural Born Citizen Act – Defines the constitutional term “natural born citizen,” to establish eligibility for the Office of President” – also getting the definition of natural born citizen wrong. – Co-sponsors Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK]; Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA]

4. On September 15, 2004 – as Barack Obama was about to be introduced as the new messiah of the Democrat Party at the DNC convention, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] introduced H.J.R. 104: – “Constitutional Amendment – “Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.” – No co-sponsors.

5. Again on January 4, 2005, Rep John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 2: to the 109th Congress – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the Office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]

6. Rep Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] tries again on February 1, 2005 in H.J.R. 15: – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.” – No Co-Sponsor

7. On April 14, 2005, Rep Vic Snyder [AR-2] tries yet again with H.J.R. 42: – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4]

8. All of these efforts failing in committee and the 2008 presidential election looming with an unconstitutional candidate leading the DNC ticket, Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO] tries to attach the alteration to a military bill in S.2678: on February 28, 2008 – “Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act – Declares that the term “natural born Citizen” in article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution, dealing with the criteria for election to President of the United States, includes any person born to any U.S. citizen while serving in the active or reserve components of the U.S. armed forces.” – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] – (This was the first effort to also assure that GOP Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain [AZ] would be cleared to run against the DNC primary victor.)

From June 11, 2003 to February 28, 2008, there had been eight (8) different congressional attempts to alter Article II – Section I – Clause V – natural born citizen requirements for president in the U.S. Constitution, all of them failing in committee — All of it taking placing during Barack Obama’s rise to political power and preceding the November 2008 presidential election.

In politics, there are no coincidences… not of this magnitude.

Finally on April 10, 2008, unable to alter or remove the natural born citizen requirement to clear the way for Barack Obama, the U.S. Senate acts to shift focus before the election, introducing and passing S.R.511: – declaring Sen. John McCain a “natural born citizen” eligible to run for and hold the office of president. There was never any honest doubt about McCain, the son of a U.S. Navy Commander. The Sponsor of the resolution is Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO]

S.R.511 States that John Sidney McCain, III, is a “natural born Citizen” under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States. S.R511 passed by a 99-0 unanimous consent of the Senate, with only John McCain not voting. The basis was – “Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens;” – a condition not met by Barack Hussein Obama II. – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT]; Sen Webb, Jim [VA]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (They had made certain that John McCain would run against Barack Obama)

However, in the McCain resolution is also this language – “Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the United States; – Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;”

The U.S. Constitution is not a dictionary. The definition of “is” is not in the constitution either. Yet this is the text that would later be issued in Congressional Research Service talking points memos distributed to members of congress, to protect an individual that all members of congress know and understand to be an “unconstitutional” resident of the people’s White House – Barack Hussein Obama II.

Once again, as the political left was unable to alter the U.S. Constitution by way of legitimate constitutional process, they resorted to altering the constitution via precedent setting, in short, knowingly electing and getting away with seating an unconstitutional president in order to alter Article II requirements for the office via breaking those constitutional requirements.

The press would not ask any questions and the American people were already too ill-informed of their constitution to know or too distracted by daily life to care. The press would provide the cover, swearing to the lies of an unconstitutional administration put in power by criminal actors focused only on their lofty political agenda of forever altering the American form of government.

The people would be caught up in a steady diet of daily assaults on their individual freedom and liberty and overlook the most obvious constitutional crisis in American history, the seating of an unconstitutional and anti-American president. [SOURCE CREDIT]

6. Citizenship Status of the Presidents of the United States and Their Eligibility Under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 -

Click Here to View Citizenship Status

As you can see our past presidents eligible after the grandfather clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 were all born on U.S. soil to Citizen parents.

7. Thirteen Presidential/Vice Presidential “Eligibility” Bills Introduced in State General Assembly’s between 2009 & 2011

Then we have the 13 eligibility bills introduced between 2009 and 2011 by Republican’s in their respective state general assemblies. Two made it to a Governor’s desk for signature – New Hampshire’s Governor signed HB1245 into law and Arizona's Governor, who was the Secretary of the State Board of Elections in 2008, vetoed HB295/529 – with the rest dying in committee,

So there you have the facts of this roaring debate in a nutshell. The people are dismissed as clueless while the congress, the media, the current crop of presidential contenders, the Republican and Democrat Parties and the legal system are all living in a fantasy land. The people are 100 percent correct, and the people have every intention of showing those who continue to obfuscate this extremely serious constitutional crisis the door.

SOURCE CREDITS:

1. Constitutional Convention - Navy CDR Charles Kerchner(Ret) www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

2. The Fourteenth Amendment - Attorney Mario Apuzzo www.Puzo1.blogspot.com

3. Rep. John Bingham - Attorney Leo Donofrio www.NaturalBornCitizen.wordpress.com

4. Supreme Court Cases - John Charlton www.ThePostEmail.com

5. Attempts to Amend Article II - J.B. Williams www.NewsWithViews.com

6. Citizenship Under Article II - Navy CDR Charles Kerchner(Ret) www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

7. Thirteen Eligibility” Bills - Art2SuperPAC www.Art2SuperPAC.com

“Fundamental Transformation”

2011-12-27T07:10:00.000-08:00

The election in 2012 is not far away and each of us have to get informed and share our information’s with others because We the People can NOT allow Obama Hussein Barack to win the election in 2012 .

– this will be the end of our country as we know and cherish and Socialism/Communism will triumph and we all will be endlessly and equally poor.

This will be the most important election of this Century – We the People MUST WIN.

In God We Trust

The importance of the 2012 election, the most consequential election of the 21st Century for the President, the Senate and the House – to the survival of our Constitutional Republic.

It have to be stressed that our form of government is a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy because in fact a Democracy is a rule of mob or simple majority and the rest of the society must obey the rules of the majority.

It is also true that Democracy is a transitional form of government, which usually leads to Anarchy, which is only a short transition to the Totalitarian Dictatorship, to be either Socialist, Communist, Fascist or Nazism.

They are all, similar Totalitarian political, economic and social systems with absolute tyranny governing everybody and everything with a very limited or no individual liberty and rights.

All rights are vested in the ruling Party to be either Socialist, Communist, Fascist or Nazis. Moreover, in this respect the Islamic despotic theocracy is also similar totalitarian, ideological, political and social system whose goal is the world dominance of Islam as was former Communist Soviet Union.

The foundation of our Republic was and is our Constitution for over 235 years as the Law of the Land and it is our Constitution which was the base of our phenomenal successes as a Nation in all areas of human achievements.

.. The Founding Fathers of our Republic left US the greatest document – the Constitution which established three independent branches of government:

1. Executive branch
2.Congress
3. Supreme Court

as a condition to check and balance the power of the Federal Government, to prevent any of the branches to become dominant and dictatorial.

Moreover, to make sure that Government will not ever become a new Tyrant as in many other countries was and is and treat the people as their subjects.

Our Constitution guaranty the individual liberty, economic liberty, individual responsibility, property rights, freedom of travels and communications, commerce, right to keep and bear arms as the ultimate guaranty of all our rights and the free speech among other rights in our Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The Rights of the States are clearly defined by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and they never should be infringed or violated by the Federal Government.

The Capitalistic free market economy is inherent to our Constitution and becomes the integral part in the formation of our nation as the most industrious, dynamic and solution oriented people including entrepreneurs.

It was our free market economy – the driving engine who propelled our country’s phenomenal economic growth, which increased the standard of living of the American people more than any other country in the World, during the first 150 years of our Republic.

Notwithstanding, the horrible losses in human resources during the Civil War, the economic growth slowed only temporarily, than resumed huge progress.

It is important to note, that for the most of these 150 years, our country did not have the Federal Reserve, which was created in 1913 and for the first 15 years did not have any impact on our economy or the American people.

However, the actions taken by the Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression, which lasted from 1929 till 1941, for 12 long years because of the policies and actions taken by FDR, elected in 1932, who took Office in March 1933, namely his Communistic New Deal which was a rotten deal for the American people.

The Communistic New Deal was a war against the economic recovery which started in the summer of 1933 but the New Deal killed the recovery and the American people had to endure the unprecedented misery for another eight years, thanks to FDR’s obsession with the Communistic ideas to manage the economy and the lives of the American people.

Indeed, FDR’s closest advisers were already professing the death of Capitalism and the dawn of the Collectivism/Communism in America nevertheless, they were ahead of time by about eight decades.

FDR was the worst President ever in the history of our country, who committed multiple treason’s against our country and the American people.

I wrote about this period of time and much more in my book: “Memoirs from the Turbulent Years and Beyond” – it is a factual story of the years from the end of WWI till year 2008 including predictions about Obama, the Radical Marxist/Communist ideologue and eloquent demagogue,which helped Obama to win the election in 2008.

Over the last decades the power of the Federal Reserve grew constantly to the detriment of our economy because of the interventionist policies of the Fed’s into the economy. Hence, the Fed’s adhere to the Keynesian theory of government fiscal programs and deficit spending to increase employment and stimulate the business activity, which is contrary to the free market economy and will not work, it is a fallacy for which many countries are paying heavy price, notably Europe and now our country.

Nevertheless, this theory never works, maybe for a very short period of time, nonetheless it is not any solution to the underlying economic problems.

Any interventions to the free market economy have adverse economic effects and will create recession or depression depending on the magnitude of the interventions and this is the phase, where we are now in our country.

The idea of government spending in any form of stimulus’s is an absolute insanity, a derange notion of ideological Leftist maniacs. However, if you are a fanatical, Radical Marxist/Communist as Obama is, you will use as many as possible stimulus’s to create more debt, more regulations and constrictions to overwhelm the free market, to create endless crisis to achieve instability and finally, the economic collapse, or economic implosion of the Capitalistic free market economy.

Moreover, the implosion of our economic system will be the dawn of the Socialistic/Communistic totalitarian tyranny, the dream of Obama, Soros and all these Radical Leftists, all these Socialists, Communists, Anarchists, Progressive lunatics with barbaric and murderous mentality.

The Democratic/Socialist Party for decades was tinkering and “improving” the free market economy by establishing new government sponsored entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac doing the mortgage business, during the L. B. Johnson Great Society’s boondoggle experiment which cost Billions of dollars and devastated the black families. Moreover, what an insane and devastating idea to get government in the mortgage business. However, very clever way to entangle government in another humongous program for which ultimately the taxpayers are responsible and must pay the bill in Billions of dollars and here lays most of the problems of the sub-prime loans, including the very destructive Community Reinvestment Act – the product of the Democratic/Socialist Party Congress inspired by President J. Carter a very mediocre man with Socialistic baggage – a very bad combination and results, which culminated in 2008 disaster, what an unnecessary tragedy. Please remember, whenever the Socialists, Communists, Progressives, Liberals or similar lunatics or intellectually retarded people get to even limited power, they will work hard to destroy our Republic because all these kind of people hate America, hate our Capitalistic economic system and destruction of this system is their ultimate goal, as is now Obama’s goal.

You might ask why? Because destruction of our economy which parallels the pauperization of the middle class is absolutely necessary to “fundamentally transform” America into the Socialistic/Communistic totalitarian tyranny – a modern slavery and a dream come true for Obama and his Radical Leftists advisers, czars, Union leaders, sycophants in Main Stream Media and delusional elitists.

As you can see, our economic problems created continuously by the members of the Democratic/Socialist Party started long ago, practically since FDR’s Presidency with some short setbacks, notably during President Ronald Reagan, the greatest President of the 20th Century because Reagan stopped the former Communist Soviet Union march to Conquest the World and Communist domination everywhere.

All these so called “leaders” in Congress like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and other leaders of the Democratic/Socialist Party were already proclaiming that free market do not work anymore and government have to play major role in solving economic problems like different Stimulus’s to reinvigorate the economy. However, have to be stated unequivocally that the real jobs, the productive jobs create only the private sector and not the Government.

Government create only bureaucratic, nonproductive jobs which have to be paid by taxpayers, therefore taxes must go up, because the taxpayers must pay the bureaucrats wages and benefits, than the economy slows down – Socialism on full display.

All these claims, were and are just pure fabricated lies to cover up the truth, that all leaders of the Democratic/Socialist Party were for years passing laws, regulations and different constrictions against the free market economy, which eventually start jamming the free market system and the results was a very serious economic and financial contraction and recession.

This should never happened, but happened because Congress actions over the years, often with Presidents acceptances were very frequently totally illogical, absurd, corrupt, showing very little understanding of the basic economics and the Fundamental doctrine of the Capitalistic free market economy which says: the wages should be allow to fall and rise as the market dictates and the adjustment of prices, supply and demand to their natural level as the market desire. If we, as a Nation and our Representatives in Congress as well as our President will adhere to this fundamental doctrine of the free market economy, our country will enter again the era of unprecedented progress, re-industrialization and growth in all areas of different industries, education, science, agriculture, energy, etc. because there will be no limits to our achievements.

Moreover, if We the People demand that our Congress and President implement the Fair Tax and the National Right to Work, than our unemployment will fall to about 3% in first two years and our GDP will surge to about 6-8% in first two years.

The American people can do this, if we release the full force of the free market, abolish at least 75% -85% of all regulations, curtail dramatically the government bureaucratic machine by about 75% and fight corruption without mercy, because we must start rapidly our economic recovery with energy industry leading the way.

Considering that our national debt is over 15 TRILLION dollars already and Obama in less than three years accumulated about 4.5 (four and half) TRILLION dollars in debt or 42% of all the debt accumulated since the beginning of our country – about 231 Years, than it is obvious that Obama MUST go – Obama is a mortal danger to the American people and our Republic.

Moreover, our country MUST make bold changes, we cannot continue on present course leading US to economic, financial, social, moral and military collapse.

The present rate of deficit spending is unsustainable, suicidal, intellectually bankrupt and MUST stop now and Congress MUST do their job – balance the budget now – hopefully Congress know simple mathematics – any Congressperson who will vote against balance budget MUST be fired by the voters.

I know it is not easy, but remember we have to big government, to many Departments, Agencies and to many government employees, to much corruption and thievery and we MUST cut all areas.

The Federal government budget can NOT EXCCED 16% of the GDP than our country will become the economic engine of the world and will flourish and be example to the other countries how to resolve the economic problems – especially Europe.

The election in 2012 will decide, if our Republic will survive or will perish – If American people will vote for the Republican candidate, whoever it is, our Constitutional Republic will survive and become again economically vibrant with steady growth of our GDP at the rate of about 6-8% per year and fast decreasing unemployment.

However, if American people will vote for Obama Hussein Barack, the Radical Marxist/Communist demagogue who is determined to finish Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America into Socialist/Communist totalitarian tyranny, than our Constitutional Republic will perish and American people will become slaves of the Socialist/Communist Oligarchy and stripped from individual liberty and all rights, because Constitution and Bill of Rights will be nullified by Obama and his minions and criminals.

Hubert Poetschke, www.hubertpoetschke.mycambridgewebsite.com

ABOLISH THE TSA!

RESIST THE NAZI POLICE STATE!

THESE PEOPLE ARE CRIMINALS!

51 Bullet-Pointed Facts

2011-12-26T13:19:00.000-08:00

What we do know for certain is

1. That Obama has never presented any prima facia documentation of his parentage, place of birth, or nationality.

2. There are a lot of highly placed individuals who are well aware of and even complicit in Obama's fraud.

Regarding item 1: Even if such evidence exists, there is no reason to believe that it is exculpatory. In any case, Mr. Obama's decision to withhold it violates his responsibility under Amendment 20 to "qualify" for the office he currently usurps.

He is also disqualified by the felonious presentation of forged birth documents, use of an altered selective service registration, and multiple social security numbers not issued to him.

Regarding item 2: We need to find out who these people are and why they're involved. Why did they pick Obama?

Then we need to bring all of these perpetrators to justice and reestablish our Constitution and the rule of law.

Perhaps a professional investigator reading this column could give us some tips on how to root out the people behind the scenes and shine the light on their dirty work.

Obama is not the only person subject to legal action.

If we go after the agents on the fringes sooner or later one will crack and Obama's whole house of cards will tumble down - including the puppet masters in the penthouse.

1. The Unenforced Definition of “Natural-Born Citizenship”
The U.S. Constitution requires that a presidential candidate be a natural-born citizen in order to be eligible for the office of President.

In seeking to define the meaning of “natural born citizenship”, those who blindly support Obama desperately seek a minimalist’s definition of the term.

They desire that a natural-born citizen is one to whom may be ascribed as few requirements as possible in order that a candidate, with whom they share ideological fetishes, can be president regardless of his actual fitness for the office.

They seek to assume jurisdiction over the declaration of being “natural born” in the minds of as many as possible while contending that “natural born citizenship” means the fewest, most remedial natal circumstances possible, which will allow their politigod, Barack Obama, just enough legitimacy to squeak by and be eligible.

Their definition allows Obama to merely meet what they consider the most easily argued, though obviously unverifiable characteristics of Obama’s obscure citizenry, in this case, his birth place.

Unfortunately for Obama supporters, the purposed intent of our founders was not so slight in this matter.

They sought to make the meaning of being a natural born citizen the highest,
most laudable position of all forms of citizenry. After witnessing the corruption and inbreeding and treasons of monarchal rule, America’s founders desired that becoming President of the United States to be as difficult as possible…politically, socially and biologically.

All arguments seeking to diminish this truth are reprobate and defamatory, made in the interest of serving one’s own political lust, not defending the sovereignty of our Constitution or upholding the value of the blood ransom paid by our people.

Hence, logically, our founders induced that the highest form of eligibility for the highest office would be a lawful mandate.

Consider the following:

Taking survey of all possible circumstances which, therefore, lend credibility to one’s claim to legitimacy, and thereby, eligibility to lead, there is much more to consider than simply one’s location of birth.

In order to meet the highest standard intended by our founders, we must also consider that biology must also meet this standard. Not only is it essential that a presidential candidate be born under the sovereign geographic protection of our Constitution, he must also be conceived by two parents of native citizenry, possessing U.S. citizenship.

Moreover, let’s consider further extension of this ideal by commanding that a presidential candidate also be conceived legitimately within the bounds of legal marriage of their parentage.

Having been measured and found wanton, those subservient to bias for persons over their respect for the office would not embrace this noble ideal. For them, uplifting the standard of the presidency remains an inferior cause to diminishing the requirements in order to provide access for their inferior candidate. Therefore, they seek to minimize the standard, not maximize the person.

Of course, this would disqualify many from being the President…as so it should!

However, let’s not even stop there.

We should also assume that our founders sought to ensure that a presidential candidate had also preserved their natural-born citizenship from “conception to election”, never having allowed it to be revoked, or never having it revoked even against their will. For, even those who lose their eligibility to no fault of their own should bear up in faith that this is the intention of higher power, sacrificing for the sake of sovereignty of the office rather than opportunity for the man!

Let all of these metrics define the standards of natural-born citizenship in America.

Bannish minimalism and seek the highest mark in the spirit of exceptionalism forged by our forefathers!

Hold this mantle lest that crown be stolen by any upon the earth without seeking the interests of God and country first! Daringly and boldly, let these marks serve as the highest definition of humanity’s advanced citizenship and the prescribed metrics for eligibility to be President of the U.S.!

We should set a higher bar, not lower it.

It is impossible to choose one’s own natural-born citizenship because it is preeminent and incumbent to one’s birth.

Historical writings, along with related legal precedents strongly suggest this form of citizenship is achieved when natural circumstances make it impossible for that individual to have any citizenship or allegiances other than with the United States at the time they are elected as President. Research of America’s founding culture reveals that a very heavy emphasis was placed on legitimacy at birth.

Therefore, it is probable that one’s most authentic degree of natural born identity does not occur at birth, but at conception. With this in mind, we must consider that the framers of the Constitution assumed it was commonly understood that the definition of “natural-born citizenship” for a presidential candidate to mean a citizenship status that was not just acheived by the event of birth but that it was a maintained status from “conception to election” in order to qualify a sovereign candidate. This is the most complete definition of natural born citizenship possible.

There is no other degree of more complete natural circumstances which can establish the status of one’s existence.

Therefore, theoretically, natural-born citizenship, in its purest, ineradicable form, could be measured by three metrics:

1) Biological conception by two U.S. citizen parents

2) Birth in a geographic region under the protection of the U.S. Constitution

3) Maintenance of that citizenship status without any unnatural interruption of parentage, legal process or administrative procedure.

This means that their citizenship has never been achieved by any legal or administration process at or after birth.

Dual citizens and expatriates are not natural-born citizens. Those who lose their natural-born status by taking the citizenship of another country or denouncing their natural born U.S. citizenship cannot regain it. A natural-born citizen is one who was born within a geographic region under the protections of the U.S. Constitution AND to two U.S. citizen parents, they being either natural-born or legally naturalized through immigration or repatriation.

Despite ongoing, unanswered questions about his geographic origins, Obama does not meet the requirements to be a natural-born citizen for two possible other reasons:

1) His alleged biological father, Barack Obama Sr., was not a U.S. Citizen

2) He was adopted by his muslim, Indonesian step-father, Lolo Soetoro, in the mid 1960s thereby taking Indonesian citizenship, thus forfeiting natural-born status.

“Preventing an individual with plural loyalties, whether by biological, political or geographic origins, which may present lawful or perceptable doubt as to his allegiances thereof, other than one with the fullmost sovereignty of advanced citizenry, which is that of one who remains natural-born from conception to election, from assuming the great power of this fragile office, was, without tolerance or vulnerability, the exaction of purpose of our fathers to induce the mandate of presidential eligibility upon our blood-ransomed Constitution…”

2. The Suddenness of Obama

The American public was essentially made nationally aware of Barack Obama following his 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention. Obama’s emergence into national politics was not a gradual inception. It was a sudden, covert ascendance to power seemingly assisted by foreign-like forces as an assault on vintage American conscience.

Obama was elected to the U.S. Congress as a Democratic Senator from Illinois in November, 2004, after his candidacy was promoted in the state by a vastly corrupt, liberal, Chicago-based political cartel and a conglomeration of burned-out, 1960′s, radicals like Bill Ayers and Madeline Talbott. Then despite his lack of executive experience, in February, 2007, after only two years of serving at the federal level, Obama announced his candidacy for the 2008 Presidential election defeating Hillary Clinton, a 17-year veteran of federal politics and former First Lady, for the Democratic Party Nomination.

Obama went on to then defeat John McCain, a decorated war veteran and a 34-year seasoned expert in federal politics as a longstanding Arizona senator, having been elected by a bowing consensus of ashamed white liberals, Bush-hating radicals and angry, racist minorities seeking reparative justice.

By all observable metrics, Obama should have been considered nothing but a long shot to contend for the DNC nomination. Instead, he defied these odds and even his own advice when, in 2005, he said,

“In order to run for president, a person needs to know what they are getting into…I am not confident I have that experience yet.”

3. The Foundations of Natural Born Citizenry
When the founders of America wrote the Constitution, they included the “natural-born” mandate in order to ensure that no President would be subject to, or exercise, a plurality of political interests in their international relationships.

Having experienced the corruption of a monarchy in Great Britain for generations, the founders of America, after declaring and defending their right to freedom from that corruption during the Revolutionary War, wrote the constitution within the legal framework of empowering inalienable rights and protection of the American people, not empowering the government.

Upon declaring independence from the crown, after seeing the destructive consequences of an intermingling of international loyalty through forced Royal intermarriage, in-breeding, monarchal polytheism, power sharing, birthright subversion and support of covert insurrections of inferior nations, the founders made it a law that any President had to be a natural-born citizen.

4. Logan Act Violated By Obama

With this mind, we learned, in October, 2008, that American author and columnist, Jerome Corsi was arrested while visiting Kenya during an investigation which revealed that Barack Obama had actively campaigned for and contributed money to Kenya’s Democratic Socialist Orange Party candidate, Raila Odinga,from 2006 to 2008.

Corsi had traveled to Kenya and acquired correspondence and documented evidence showing that Odinga, a fellow Luo tribe descendant and alleged paternal cousin of Obama, had entered into a written agreement with the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF), a highly influential and radical Kenyan Islamic foundation, seeking Odinga’s support for, among other things, Sharia Law, in exchange for the Islamic group’s support of Odinga’s candidacy.

The evidence acquired by Corsi also shows that Obama was aware of this agreement even while he was raising more than a million dollars of American money to support Odinga’s campaign.

The Orange Party Movement is the communist opposition party to President, Mwai Kibaki’s Party of National Unity (PNU).

Obama’s involvement in the Kenyan election, while an elected official of the U.S., was clearly a violation the Logan Act which prohibits American politicians from influencing or participating in foreign elections.

The Obama Administration’s U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, has refused to pursue any investigation of Obama’s activities with Odinga in Kenya in 2006 until 2008. In 2008, video of Obama’s speeches on behalf of Odinga surfaced on YouTube and several other websites which clearly show Obama stumping for Odinga.

In the aftermath of the December, 2007 election, which Odinga lost, the Orange party leadership and members of Kenya’s Luo tribe incited violence among his radical constituents.

Kenyan Muslims engaged in a week long violent demonstration in which they burned nearly 1000 Christian churches and murdered almost 1000 of Odinga’s political opposition which are members of the predominantly Christian, Kikuyu tribe. Under the threat of this violence, with the support of Obama and the Bush administration, the Kenyan majority PNU Party was forced to take an unprecedented action in the history of its government by artificially amending its constitution in order to create a leadership position for Odinga who was ensconced as the country’s first Prime Minister in April, 2008.

The tragic events and violence of the 2007 Kenyan election were the exact consequences the founders of America were trying to prohibit U.S. government officials from instigating or being influenced by.

Obama’s geopolitical connections, along with his probable biological relationship with the Kenyan Communist Party, now an active part of the Kenyan government, creates a relationship vulnerable to illicit influence. Obama has now brought that illicit relationship, and all of its consequences, with him into the office of the U.S. Presidency. The founders wisely understood that the mandate of Natural born citizenry for a President is the best possible protection against such vulnerability.

5. Suspicious Nomination Certifications

In July, 2009, documents were revealed showing that Obama was never officially certified to run for president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, by the Hawaiian Democratic Party. On August 27, 2008, the Hawaiian Democratic Party created a customized Nomination Certification document for Obama containing the following words:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado.”

In comparison, unlike the 2008 Hawaiian OCON for Obama, in every other previous Presidential election, the Hawaiian Democratic Party has certified the nomination of their state’s Democratic candidate with the following words:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the United States Constitution…”

Notice that the wording of HDP’s 2008 Official Certification of Nomination omits the words

“…under the provision of the United States Constitution…”

Upon receiving Hawaii’s State Nomination Certification for Obama, which omits the reference to the Constitutional legality of Obama’s nomination, the National Democratic Party Office created two separate documents with the same header title, “Official Certification of Nomination”, both versions were signed by Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Democratic National Convention, and Alicia Travis Germond, Secretary of the Democratic National Convention and notarized by a Denver notary.

One of these versions was sent from the National Democratic Party headquarters to each of the 49 states’ Democratic Party headquarters.

However, only the State of Hawaii received an Official Certification of Nomination from the DNC containing the words:

“…the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution…”

The document then lists Barack Obama and Joe Biden as the candidates. However, the rest of the 49 states received a different Official Certification of Nomination containing the words:

“…the following were duly nominated as candidates of said party for President and Vice President of the United States, respectively…”

Why was the state of Hawaii’s local Democratic Party headquarters sent a different OCON document from the National Party headquarters than the other 49 states?

There is strong evidence suggesting that Hawaii’s local Democratic Party officials refused to certify Obama’s nomination as being Constitutionally eligible.

As a result, Hawaii’s Election Commission, headed by Kevin Cronin, jockeying behind closed doors, refused to place Obama on the Hawaiian ballot under Hawaiian Election laws mandating that every candidate seeking placement on the Hawaiian presidential election ballot must be certified as “Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States”.

Since the DPH refused to place this language in its Official Certification of Nomination, Obama, therefore, required that the National Party Committee, headed by none other than Nancy Pelosi, take responsibility for declaring the constitutional eligibility of his nomination under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, even though his eligibility had never been vetted or verified as legal.

This has never happened in the history of America’s vetting endorsement process and indicates that the Democratic National Party leadership, including Nancy Pelosi, was made aware that there was a legal problem with Obama’s candidacy. However, the DNC certified it anyway and, in doing so, committed federal election fraud.

6. State Ballot-Fail!

It is the responsibility of each states’ party head office to certify that their candidate is Constitutionally eligible to serve in coordination with their state’s laws. Since Obama was not Constitutionally certified to run in the state of Hawaii in 2008, no other Secretary of State, in any state, ever confirmed that Obama was vetted by federal or party authorities in their state prior to being placed on the 2008 Presidential ballot there.

In fact, nearly a dozen Secretaries of State, including Hawaii’s, have officially refused to reveal any information about the vetting of Barack Obama in their state because they simply cannot even show that he was actually proven to be eligible there.

7. PUMA: The First Birthers

In early summer, 2007, the so called “Birther” conspiracy theory was first created by renegade members of an ultra leftist group known as the PUMAs. (That’s right! They were leftists). They were a splinter group of hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters who did not want to surrender the Democrat party nomination to Obama after a hard fought campaign leading to the 2008 Democratic nomination. In June, 2008, PUMAParty.com began promoting the idea that their party’s nomination of Barack Obama could be overturned on constitutional grounds that he was not eligible to be president based on the fact that he may not be a natural born citizen.

Thus, the Birther movement actually began in the minds of liberals, not “right-wing nuts” as Obama zealots love to claim.

8. Hawaiian Certi-Fiction

Shortly after PUMAparty.com began clamoring for a more thorough review of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility, the image of a document containing sparse information about Obama’s alleged birth was posted on the internet by undisclosed sources, from an unknown origin. The image appeared on extreme leftwing websites like the Daily Kos, The Huffington Post and later on two websites claiming to be non-partisan reviewers, Factcheck.org and politifact.com.

One of the fact checking sites is sponsored by the Annenberg Foundation from which the Chicago Annenberg Project received a large educational grant. Obama served as the chair on the board of directors for the Chicago Annenberg Project in 2002.

9. Certification of Identity, not Natural Birth.

The 2008 document image was determined to be created by an unknown source from a digital template form of a Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” which is a surrogate, independently published, municipal cover document issued to those applying for copies of birth certificates in the state of Hawaii since 2000. In response to Y2K system updates the State of Hawaii began migrating from paper copies of original birth records to digitally created printed documents. The state of Hawaii openly admits to changing its document format under the guise of preventing identity theft.

10. Cartoon Fun.

In 2009, it was demonstrated by three separate document specialists that an image of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was easily constructed and falsely authenticated using two different medical imaging software programs. This demonstration discredited the State of Hawaii’s claims that its “Certification of Live Birth” provided better protection against identity theft than old paper copies of the Certificate of Live Birth.

11. Department of Hawaiian Native Homelands.

The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was found to be so unreliable in clarifying the bearer’s legal and demographic identity that the State of Hawaii’s own Department of Native Homelands refused to accept it as a primary source of identification for its applicants seeking to purchase Hawaiian land reserved for genealogically native Hawaiians. Before 2010, the agency’s website stated:

“In order to process your application for identification as a native Hawaiian, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands utilizes information that is found only on the Original (Long Form) Vault Birth Certificate (‘Certificate of Live Birth’, not ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’), which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of birth than the ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ (a computer-generated printout).

Submitting the original Long Form Birth Certificate will save you time and money since the computer-generated ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ requires additional verification…”

Only after it was determined that the Department of Hawaiian Homeland’s policy against the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” conflicted with another Hawaiian state agency, the Department of Health’s, political endorsement of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, was the policy changed and the wording against the credibility of the document scrubbed from its website.

This led many to accuse the State of Hawaii government of selling out to protect against exposing the ineligibility of Obama rather than upholding the eligibility of thousands of potential native land owners in Hawaii. Some actually accused Hawaii’s land management of selling out to a liar while native Hawaiians were at risk of being deprived of their right to purchase native lands because non-natives could now use a less credible version of identification when applying for a land purchase.

12. Hawaii Denies COLB Image.

After all was said and done, the State of Hawaii has refused to ever confirm that it issued the 2008 document image. In light of sophisticated, digitally based document imaging technology, the authenticity of the image remains highly questionable, especially without the official endorsement of the Hawaiian Health Department. Some independent reviewers have, unequivocally, determined the image to be a forgery.

13. The Million Dollar Birth Cerificate.

On August 21, 2008, Philadelphia based attorney, Philip Berg, filed the first of several high profile cases attempting to force Obama to show authentic, legal, original documentation proving that he is eligible to be president of the U.S. Berg is a lifelong, registered Democrat with a history of running for Democratic office in Philadelphia. Following Berg’s case, other plaintiffs have filed similar suits including Alan Keyes and several military officers, all of which have been dismissed by irresponsible judges refusing to weigh the merits of evidence in the cases.

Some judges have even gone on record as saying the reason they dismissed their case was because “Questions about Obama’s eligibility had already been answered on Twitter.”

Since then, Obama has paid more than 1.6 million dollars to the Washington law firm, Perkins Coie to prevent the release of his original birth certificate, which costs about 20 dollars to order from the State of Hawaii.

14. Executive Order No. 13489

Obama was ensconced as President on January 20, 2009. Just one day after his inauguration, he signed Executive Order No. 13489 which essentially violates the Freedom of Information Act and prohibits the release of Obama’s personal and presidential records, during and after his presidency, by the National Archives without first being consulted by the National Archives Director and the Attorney General. Seven days later, Obama gave his famous “Transparency Will Be the Touchstone of This Administration” speech in which he hypocritically admonished previous administrations for what he feels are “too many secrets kept by government in Washington”. Obama vowed to change how government deals with secret information by making his administration more open.

Since this dishonest, landmark speech, the Administration has fought to keep Obama’s past secret more than any other President in American history.

15. Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin.

In April, 2008, after the fraudulent dismissal of more than two dozen civilian court cases which had been filed against Obama attempting to force him to produce original documented evidence of his natal identity, a highly decorated officer with more than 17 years of unblemished service in the U.S. Army brought the Obama eligibility into the active military ranks. Lieutenant Colonel, Dr. Terrence Lakin, an active duty flight surgeon serving the President’s Chief of Staff and working as a commanding ranked physician of a critical care facility, refused to deploy for duty in Afghanistan under his legal right to refuse orders that he, as an officer, believes are illegal.

According to Lakin, Barack Obama has not demonstrated provable, documented evidence that he is eligible to hold the office of President and is, therefore, not legally qualified to issue orders to the United States military as Commander In Chief. Lakin’s oath upon becoming an officer is to defend the constitution, not the president. His duty, as an officer to refuse deployment orders he believes are illegal, are legitimate based on clear and concise legal grounds. Despite this fact, however, Lakin pleaded guilty to a circus court under the command of the Obama administration’s military staff, and was sentence to six months in prison and dismissal from the service.

He has since been lauded and exalted for his sacrifice and commitment to his duty to defend the Constitution. Supporters may contribute to his fund at TerryLakinActionFund.com

16. The History Of Standard U.S. Certificates of Live Birth.

As census and vital statistics documentation methods evolved, the U.S. Department of Health has utilized a document template with the header title, “Certificate of Live Birth” since the early 1900’s. The U.S. National Vital Statistics Division, since its first published data report in 1915, refers to the U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” as “The standard ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, issued by the National Vital Statistics Division, has served for many years as the principal means of attaining uniformity in the content of the documents used to collect information on this vital event.” This document has evolved throughout a 110 year process with input from the National Conference on Vital Records and Statistics, the National Vital Statistics Division, The Census Bureau and the municipal state agencies are assigned with the responsibility of gathering, storing and reporting natal statistics to the U.S. Department of Health. Although it has undergone state specific revisions to support municipal laws and identity protection, it is important to note that it has never undergone a reduction in vital data content.

17. Hawaii’s Rogue Document.

The standard, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document template has been slightly revised by various states for the purpose of meeting identification and formatting needs, such as concealing the social security numbers of the parents. However, no state, except one, has ever reduced the overall quantity of information contained about the bearer’s natal identity, such that it is now impossible to determine their natural-born status, and then used that reduction of vital information in an endorsed document form. Only the State of Hawaii has created this form of independently published, digital documentation.

18. Hawaii Violates Federal Guidelines.

In the entire 110 year history of the standard, official, federal, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document’s existence, only the state of Hawaii has gone astray from the standard version to such a degree that it actually conceals one’s full natal identity rather than reveals it. When comparing document forms, the use of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” is an unauthorized reduction of content otherwise prescribed to confirm the bearer’s natal identity and, essential to verifying one’s eligibility to be a candidate for president, the bearer’s natural born status.

19. Exploitation of Hawaii’s Lost Culture.

Because of its remote, water-locked, geographic characteristics; its tumultuous indigenous history; and a vulnerable culture altered by a transference of sovereignty in the late 1800’s, the Hawaiian islands gained a reputation for maintaining a vague process for documenting immigration, vital events and indigenous population. Historical archives dating between 1890 and 1941 reveal that the Hawaiian Islands served as an unofficial, but widely pursued, sanctuary for thousands of foreign expatriates seeking protection from political persecution in China, Japan, Southeast Asiatic nations, the Middle East and, later, the United States.

This multicultural instability resulted in the implementation of less than thorough procedures for recording and differentiating native born, immigrant and indigenous populations.

One example of this surrogate nativity was granted to a Mr. Sun Yat Sen, a Chinese expatriate who received an official Certificate of Hawaiian Birth in 1904 stating that his birth had taken place in Hawaii in November, 1870. However, later evidence revealed that Mr. Sun’s birth had actually occurred in China in 1866. Archives reveal that the state of Hawaii has provided similar documentation to thousands of immigrants over the years without ever confirming their age, the birth place or their actual identity.This murky process was further complicated when Hawaii became a state of the U.S. which demanded that it begin implementing the federal documentation standards for U.S. citizens as well, in 1959.

Vulnerabilities in Hawaii’s documentation process created passive conditions which allowed unidentified inhabitants to later proclaim any identity, or multiple identities, they desired to serve their individual interests.

20. Hawaii’s Communist Past.

Based on investigations in the 1950’s and 1960’s, a disproportionate concentration of pro-communist activity was found to have become a part of Hawaiian culture. This is substantiated by an increase in the population and activity of communist sympathizers identified by the House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings conducted after WWII, during the beginning of the cold war between the U.S. and communist Russia. Evidence of pro-communist presence in Hawaii can be found in publications like the Honolulu Record in which one of Obama’s communist mentors, Frank Marshal Davis was a columnist.

Obama Sr. would later return to Kenya sometime in the mid 1960’s to promote his communist economic theories and work in government with his friend and leader of Kenya’s communist KANU party, Tom Mboya.

21. Hawaiian Document Proven Deficient.

In August, 2008, a former U.S. Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics Registrar stated that the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” cannot be considered an original birth certificate created at the time of occurrence of the birth because

“…it does not contain the signature of the licensed medical professional qualified to determine the characteristics of a live birth in accordance with administrative requirements established by the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division, and it does not contain the name and location of the hospital which issued the original record, which would be a U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” if the child was born in the United States.”

Further investigation of Hawaii’s revised statutes reveal that the Hawaiian Department of Health not only contends with federal law, it also contradicts its own self-declared authority to issue falsified birth nativity under HRS 338-17.

22. Hawaii’s Self-endowed Permission To Violate Federal Law
Hawaii Revised Statute HRS 338-17.8 states:

“Certificates for children born out of State.(a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]”

The law permits anyone born to parents who claimed Hawaii as their residence within one year of their birth, at any time before or after the enactment of the law, regardless of the actual location of the birth, to receive an original birth record which states that the location of birth is Hawaii, and, therefore, occurred in the U.S. Hawaiian lawmakers have confirmed that the law is not constrained to the date of birth. It is applicable to the date of application for the certificate.

This means this law would enable Obama, anytime after the age of 21 to apply for and receive a newly created original Hawaiian birth certificate after providing evidence that his mother or father merely resided in Hawaii for one year prior to his birth. He could have applied for this certificate any time since is parents are known to have resided in Hawaii since 1960. He could have been born outside of the U.S., however, the State of Hawaii is obligated by law to grant him an original birth certificate stating that Hawaii is his birth place simply because he was able to show that his parents claimed Hawaii as their residence.

Moreover, the evidence provided with Obama’s application may not be reviewed by any third party under this law. Only the Director of the Department of Health is granted with the authority to determine the validity and deadlines required in providing such evidence. In essence, under Administrative Rule 91, the state of Hawaii has empowered a state-level, municipal employee to determine the federal, natural-born status and therefore, the Constitutional eligibility, of any individual, even a sworn enemy of the United States, seeking the most powerful office in the world.

23. Obama’s Own Words.

On page 26 of his 1995 Autobiography, Dreams From My Father, Barack Obama admits to possessing a copy of his original birth certificate in the late 1970’s. This document was an official copy of an original vital record assumed to still be filed with the office of Vital Statistics in the city where Obama was born, wherever that is. Why does Obama not still possess this copy and where is the original used to produce it? Where is the official, original birth record used to produce the document which Obama himself admits to having more than thirty years before being issued a fake document from Hawaii?

Why is Obama lying about this document? What information does this document contain?

24. Obama Loses Natural-Born U.S. Citizenship By Adoption.

Barack Obama claims to have lived in Indonesia with his mother from approximately 1967 to 1971 where he assumed the surname of his step father, Lolo Soetoro and became a citizen of Indonesia.

Since Obama became a citizen of Indonesia, he forfeited any claim he may have had to Natural-born citizenship in the U.S. Recall, a Natural-born citizen is one whose citizenship is achieved by natural circumstances which, if unrevoked, make it impossible for them to have citizenship loyalties to any other governing power.

If a Natural-born citizen becomes a citizen of another country at any time prior to running for the office of the president, he or she is no longer eligible.

Because of this forfeiture, Obama is not eligible to be president because his Natural-born status cannot be reclaimed once legal or administrative procedures are employed to repatriate him in the U.S.

Also, despite Obama’s claims that he remained in Indonesia during this time, there is photographic evidence placing him in Hawaii in 1969. Questions remain how and why Obama may have traveled to Hawaii at this time, including any documentation he used, which raises doubts about the validity of his origins narrative, and therefore, doubts about his identity.

25. What’s In a Name?

Barry or Barack, Soetoro or Obama, or Subarkah? Records from his time in Indonesia reveal that Barack Obama has used at least one other alias and possibly two. He was registered for school under the name Barry Soetoro as a muslim student. When Obama applied for state bar license in 1992 to practice law in Illinois, the application asked if he had ever used an alias. He stated that he had not at that time.

There is evidence that suggests Obama was not honest about his use of other names throughout his life. Recent passport application information submitted by his mother in the 1960’s reveals that Obama may have had a third surname of “Subarkah” which his mother had written on the application.

26. Dunham’s Secret Absence.

Many records exist confirming Ann Dunham’s presence in Hawaii from late summer of 1960 until February of 1961. However, from February until September, 1961, there are no records or eyewitness accounts of her presence in Hawaii. In fact, the void is quite stark. Obama was allegedly born during this void of time in Dunham’s documented life. The next record indicating her possible location is a class registration record showing that she had enrolled in classes for fall term of 1961 at the University of Washington, just two weeks after allegedly giving birth to Obama in Hawaii.

27. Dunham Too Young To Confer Citizenship.

Ann Dunham turned 19 years old in November, 1961, almost four months after Obama was allegedly born in August, 1961. Citizenship laws in effect in the U.S. in 1961 required the mother of a child born outside the U.S., to a foreign father, to have lived in the U.S. for 14 consecutive years, five of which had to be after the age of 14. Since Dunham had not yet turned 19, she was not legally able to confer citizenship to Obama if the birth occurred outside the U.S.

Therefore, Obama is, at a minimum, a citizen of Great Britain. The founding fathers, in writing the eligibility mandate, having fought a Revolutionary War against Great Britain, would have rejected Obama as a presidential candidate for this reason.

28. Hospital Mystery.

No official records have ever been provided from any authoritative source to prove that Barack Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children. Not one administrative authority from Kapi’olani has ever verified or provided original patient records showing that Ann Dunham was ever a maternity patient there. As a testament to the longstanding controversy over Obama’s birth hospital, in the original ‘Early Life’ section of Barack Obama’s Wikipedia biography, beginning on March 3, 2004, it was stated that he was born in Queens Hospital. It was later clarified as Queens Medical Center.

In 2006, it was omitted and remained blank until June, 2008 when editors stated that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center. On January 24, 2009, Kapi’olani Medical Center, on the occasion of the hospital’s centennial celebration, allegedly received a letter in which Obama wrote, “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center – the place of my birth – I am pleased to add my voice to your voice of supporters.” It was later admitted by administrators at Kapi’olani that the letter was a facsimile created in a digital format.

To date, no administrator, or official of the Obama administration has ever confirmed that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center.

To date, Obama’s operatives have failed to identify the identity of Obama’s actual birthing doctor.

29. Obama’s Use of Multiple Social Security Numbers.

In 2010, Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels and Colorado private investigator John Sampson revealed that President Obama is using a Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state. In addition, the records indicate the number was issued between 1977 and 1979, not 1961 at the time of Obama’s birth. Moreover, Obama’s earliest employment reportedly was around 1975 at a Baskin-Robbins in Oahu, Hawaii. The Social Security website confirms the first three numbers in his SSN are reserved for applicants with Connecticut addresses and start with 040 through 049.

“Since 1973, Social Security numbers have been issued by our central office,” the Social Security website explains, “The first three (3) digits of a person’s social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number.”

In April, 2011, further investigation by ex-CIA personnel confirmed that Obama’s social security number was fraudulently issued after the original owner of the number, who had once resided in Connecticut, died in Hawaii in 1977. As a result, it is now supported by evidence that Barack Obama is committing social security fraud and that his number was issued through channels possibly provided by his grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, who worked in the financial and banking industry and who had ties to communist support organizations and international interests.

It is highly likely that Obama, when issued his current social security number, was not a legal citizen of the U.S. and, having access to records through his grandmother, was allowed to use the number after its original owner had died. It has been shown that the original owner of Obama’s social security number had opened at least one account at the bank where Madelyn Dunham was employed in Hawaii in 1965.

30. Obama’s Father Not a U.S. Citizen.

Obama’s alleged father was a Kenyan national with citizenship in Great Britain. His birth registration is recorded in the British National Archives, General Register Office “Registers and Returns of Births, Marriages and Deaths in the Protectorates of Africa and Asia, 1895-1965″. Obama’s children are also contained in these registers. He attended the University of Hawaii from 1959 to 1961 before abandoning Obama Jr. and Dunham to attend graduate school at Harvard in 1962.

Since Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, it is impossible for Obama to be a natural-born citizen.

The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” which has been misrepresented as the federally accepted, official document issued by the state of Hawaii for Barack Obama’s birth shows Obama’s father’s race as “African”. Unfortunately, this term violates the U.S. Department of Health’s acceptable classifications of race for official birth certificates. According to NVSD protocols, Obama Sr. is classified as a “Negro” in 1961, not “African”. The term “African” is not even an option in the NVSD manual. Africa is a continent not a race. For example, there are white people from Africa, but they would not be categorized as “African”. Using this premise, we could argue that Obama’s Certification of Live Birth should also list his mother’s race as “North American”?

If using geographic association in describing Obama’s mother’s race is so ridiculous, why is it acceptable to explain his father’s?

The use of the term “African” to describe the race of Obama’s father is yet another diminishment to the credibility and authenticity of Obama’s natal records. The inclusion of such a non-specific, vague, unclassifiable, misrepresentative term to describe an individual’s demography only raises yet more doubts about the ability of the Hawaiian Health Department to convey accurate vital statisics documentation.

31. Obama Marriage Mystery.

To date, no documented evidence exists proving that a legal marriage between Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham ever occurred in the U.S. The two were allegedly married in Hawaii in early 1961, after Obama Jr. was allegedly conceived sometime in November, 1960. However, no public announcement, or eyewitness of the marriage or marriage license has ever been found.

In Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams From My Father”, he states,

“In fact, how and when the marriage occurred remains a bit murky. A bill of particulars I have never quite had the courage to explore. There is no record of a real wedding, a cake, a ring, a giving away of the bride. No family members were in attendance. It is not even clear that people back in Kansas were even informed.”

Obama’s admission that ‘There is no record of a real wedding’, raises yet another doubt about his long disseminated, life biography with regard to the status of the relationship between his parents. The unanswered questions about his parents marriage contradicts the accuracy of testimony and records declaring Obama’s identity, such as his birth announcements in two Honolulu newspapers which undeniably state that his parents were married, and divorce documents which do not contain any reference to a legal marriage license.

There are fundamental questions about the relationship between Obama’s parents which no one has been able to answer. If they were married in Hawaii, what is the name of the officiate presiding at the wedding? Where did it take place? Does the Hawaiian Vital Statistics office possess a copy of the Obama’s marriage license which they used to determined their marital status for the birth announcements? If so, why was the Obama marriage never announced in those same papers? Why was the wedding kept secret?

Was the marriage even legal given the evidence that Obama Sr. was already married to a woman in Kenya?

32. Divorce Decree and Custody Documents.

In 2009, a set of what appears to be authentic document images of a Divorce Decree shows that Stanley Ann Dunham was awarded an uncontested divorce from Obama Sr. in March, 1964. The Divorce was granted in a Hawaiian civil Court on March 5, 1964 after a hearing to determine custody rights of the parents of Barack Obama Jr. According to the document images, Dunham had filed for divorce in January, 1964. The set of documents posted on the internet in 2009 are suspiciously missing the official birth certificate of Barack Obama Jr. which was requested by the court in order to confirm parentage.

33. Obama Sr. Already Married.

Obama’s father was apparently a bigamist. He was allegedly already married to a woman in Kenya when he allegedly married Barack Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. Obama’s other wife’s name was Kezia Aoko (also found as other spellings). This would nullify any marriage to Dunham because it is illegal in the U.S. to be married to more than one person.

34. Suspicious Death.

Obama Sr. died in 1982 after an alleged car accident. Recent investigations into his death reveal unanswered questions about his declining professional status and his strained relationship with Tom Mboya after he published a scathing report called, “The Problem with Our Socialism”, criticizing Mboya’s economic development plan for Kenya.

35. Birth Announcements.

In early 2009, researchers discovered announcements of Obama’s birth in two separate Honolulu-based news papers. An investigation of the procedures used to publish birth announcements reveals that the information used by the news papers came directly from the Hawaiian Department of Health’s bi-weekly birth registration lists. These birth announcements are typically published for registrations over a two week period and do not contain the location of the birth. The announcements always assume, without exception, that the parents are married, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” reveals that of the 17,616 births in Hawaii in 1961, there were 1044 illegitimate births in which the father was not identifiable. An average of three per day!

In every case, without exception, both papers publish all announcements with the surname of the father as if they are always married and with the assumption that two parents always exist at the time of birth, even when the father is dead. The announcements do not publish the first names of the parents or child, nor do they identify the name of the registrant. They publish the sex of the child, the address of the registrant and the day and month of the birth. The announcements do not print the location of the birth, the name of the attending physician, the name of the hospital, the time of birth or the given name of the child.

36. The Paper Chase.

An analysis of all of the birth announcements published along with Obama’s announcements in both newspapers reveals that both papers published the exact same announcements, including quantity of birth announcements, in the same exact order and in the same exact contextual format in both papers. The announcements are not published in alphabetical or chronological order which begs the question: What system was used to determine their order? They are obviously not randomly ordered since they appear in the same order in both papers. The possible answer: Geographic birth registration numbering. An investigation of the U.S. Department of Health’s archived natal data reports reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on the location of the registration office they are received in.

37. Obama’s Other Address.

The birth announcements were published containing the registrant’s address at 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., Honolulu, HI. This address has been proven by investigators to be the residence of Obama’s grandparents, Stanley and Madeline Dunham, as well as Obama’s mother. Directory records available in 1961 show that Obama’s father, Obama Sr., resided in an apartment at 625 11th Avenue, near the University of Hawaii. Why would a married man list an address for the birth of his son that was not his address?

38. Birth Registration Protocols.

An investigation reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on their associated location to the regional vital statistics registration office in which the vital event is recorded. There were four such offices available in Hawaii in 1961, two of which served immigration processing and vital events originating outside the Hawaiian Islands. Obama’s alleged birth registration number, 151-1961-010641, indicates that his birth was registered in one of these regional offices.

39. Non-Sequential Birth Registration.

Obama’s birth registration number appears to be non-sequential with other births recorded at the time of his birth. One example cites the standard “Certificate of Live Birth” records of twins born to Eleanor Nordyke, whose births occurred 19 hrs after Obama’s alleged birth in Kapi’olani Medical Center. The twins were assigned birth registration numbers ending in 037 and 038, respectively. Obama’s birth was assigned number 041 despite the fact that his birth allegedly occurred before the twins in the very same hospital. If no other births occurred between Obama’s and the Nordyke’s, one would expect that Obama’s birth registration number would end in 036, not 041. If other births did occur in the 19 hours between Obama’s and the Nordykes’, Obama’s registration number would be expected to be even lower.

40. Chiyome Fukino, Hawaii’s Reluctant Accomplice.

On October 31st, 2008, and, again on July 27th, 2009, the Director of the Hawaiian Department of Health released the only two official statements by the government of the State of Hawaii about Obama’s natal records. In her October, 2008 statement she release the following:

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record. Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawaii.”

The statement does not specify the type of original birth certificate on record and directly contradicts statements made by an official of the Hawaiian elections Office that the State of Hawaii does not possess an original birth certificate for Obama. Fukino further clarified her statement eight months later with the following:

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

The problem with this second statement is, first, she, again, does not identify the title of the “original vital records” documents she has seen. Notice she uses the word “records”, plural. Whether they are a U.S. Certificate of Live Birth, a Delayed Certificate of Live Birth or a Certificate of Foreign Birth accompanied with testimonial documents, medical records or other evidence is not disclosed by Fukino.

Second, she violated Hawaii’s identity protection law, the very same HRS 338-18 she cited in her first statement, by disclosing information from the vital records about Obama’s unverified birth place. If she is so willing to provide this private information, why not disclose the rest of it? Answer: Because this information serves the bias of the State of Hawaii’s endorsement of Obama’s legitimacy. Otherwise, Fukino would also disclose the other information that perhaps is NOT so favorable to Obama, as well, such as the title of the ‘original vital records’ or whether the certificate had been amended.

Third, and most grievous, as a state-level, municipal employee way out in the State of Hawaii, Fukino neither has the federal authority, nor the qualifications to determine the Natural-born status of a candidate for federal office. In fact, Fukino’s audacious, bizarre proclamation is laughable and only exposes the State of Hawaii’s fragile confidence in their documentation procedures, let alone its ability to declare the historical meaning of Natural-born citizenship. That job falls under the federal authority of the Secret Service, the State Department in coordination with the state Elections Offices.

41. Hawaii’s Amazing Legitimate Birth Rate.

Both papers also published the nearly two dozen announcements assuming that every child was born to married parents living at the same address, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” shows that there were 1044 illegitimate births in Hawaii in 1961 in which the father was not identifiable. This is an average of three illegitimate births per day! Over the nine day period of births covered by the announcements in these two issues, one would expect to see at least one single mother, or unmarried couple, giving birth among the more than two dozen announcements surrounding Obama’s birth from late July to early August, 1961.

In fact, a review of every issue of the newspapers in the entire year of 1961 shows that all birth announcements were published by “married parents”. If the newspapers indeed printed accurate announcements based on testimony from the actual parents or family members there should be some information which does not conform to this cookie-cutter identical format when comparing each announcement between newspapers. However, the rigidity of the format, and the possibility of inaccuracies, led investigators to conclude that the originating information used to publish birth announcements in 1961 was not conveyed from the parents or family directly to the newspapers, but instead was first processed by a single municipal source, before being provided to the news papers.

Therefore, since we know Hawaii registers foreign births as being native births, the announcements would be published without the location of the birth, or marital status of the parents, as a consideration. This then would suggest that if there is any inaccuracy originating with the source information, which occurs in the transference between the registrant and the municipal authority, the newspapers would never see the necessity to confirm the accuracy of the information. Why would a newspaper take official information certified from a government agency in the form of a list and then expend resources to get a second opinion about its accuracy from the original registrant? They wouldn’t.

The newspapers print announcements without ever knowing if they are accurate or not when the information comes from the local municipal authority.

Therefore, since the municipal authority does not create its birth list discerning between native birth and foreign birth registrations it employs the policy of only publishing the address of the registrant, not the location of the birth. Since the municipal authority treats all births as legitimate, by default, it would construct the birth registration list as though the parents are married in every announcement and submit the list to the newspapers who would publish what appears to be all local, native births to married couples. The problem with this flawed procedure is that the announcements are not an accurate account of the actual facts of the natal event.

Unfortunately, there is no legal requirement that a birth announcement in a newspaper must match the metrics of an official birth certificate.

42. The Welfare of Baby Obama
Upon analyzing the procedures used to publish birth announcements, we discover vulnerabilities in the assumptions about the accuracy and content of the birth announcements. With a simple explanation, it becomes much more reasonable to assume that Obama’s birth announcements were never a part of some crazy-minded conspiracy but, instead, were simply the result of being included in the Hawaiian Health Departments birth registration lists after Obama’s birth was registered by Obama’s grandparents, more than likely, for the simple reason of making sure their daughter and grandson could receive state benefits as resident citizens of the U.S. Obama’s grandparents were indeed residing at the published address found in the announcements.

However, ignorant, hostile Obama supporters enjoy the opportunity to claim that so-called “birthers” believe a conspiracy of such magnitude that Obama’s birth announcements were planted in the Hawaiian papers in 1961 just in case Obama might run for president some day. This is a ridiculous canard. Only a blind ideologue would fail to realize that birth announcements do not verify Constitutional eligibility in the first place.

Therefore, both sides of the argument, either lauding birth announcements or ridiculing them, as a viable part of any conspiracy to promote the legitimacy of Obama is idiotic. If Obama’s birth announcements were not automatically conveyed by the registrar, they were more than likely submitted in collaboration with his mother or grandparents as a practical matter in order to simply share the news of Obama’s birth with the community and to, possibly, act to secure Obama’s eligibility for welfare and baby formula, not a nomination to the presidency.

However, without publishing the identity of the registrant, the editors of the newspapers printed all of the week’s announcements based on typically practiced protocols after receiving the official birth lists from the Hawaiian Department of Health. There was nothing premeditated or fraudulent about this. Municipal laws were followed and journalistic standards were correctly assumed considering the official source in the newspapers’ view. The possible breakdown in accuracy occurred as a result of the Department of Health’s legal ability to include foreign births in the Hawaiian birth registration lists and the registrant omitting birth location information, while the papers did not print it any way.

43. Obama’s Secret Natal Data.

According to the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of theU.S. Volume 1 – Natality”, natal statistics were harvested using a “50% sampling method” and, furthermore, statistics were taken only from “even-numbered birth records” in 1961. Since Obama’s birth registration was allegedly an odd number, his unique natal statistics would remain ureported by the State of Hawaii, and unpublished as part of the U.S. Department of Health’s annual natal data report.

This is relative in the fact that, since Obama was a bi-racial, (categorized as non-white) baby allegedly born to an 18-year old, white mother and a non-white, non-citizen father, in an urban hospital in Hawaii in August of 1961, his natal statistics would be extremely notable and rare for this time and place. In fact, statistics show that less than 1 in 20,000 births occurred under these circumstances within the demographic classifications used by the National Vital Statistics Division in 1961.

The unconventional circumstances surrounding Obama’s birth are very conspicuous.

44. No Witnesses of Obama’s Birth Still Alive.

To date, no living eyewitness of Obama birth exists.

It is assumed that his birth was witnessed by at least three people including his doctor and his mother. However, no documentation of the birth has been provided containing the name of the doctor or eyewitnesses.

45. Obama’s Radicalism.

Obama has lived a life wrought with radicalism. In his book, “Dreams From My Father”, Obama writes,

“…I chose my friends carefully, the more politically active black students, the foreign students, the Chicanos, the Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.”

In the late 1970’s a teenaged Barack Obama met Frank Marshall Davis while the two were both living in Hawaii. Davis, an avowed member of the Communist Party and one of the era’s poetic pioneers of fierce anti-American radicalism, developed a paternal-like relationship with Obama, which Obama acknowledges in his book, “Dreams From My Father”. The 1951 report of the Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified him as a Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA) member.

Obama has maintained lasting relationships with radicals throughout his entire life. He worked with ACORN activist and chapter leader, Madeline Talbott in 1992. He had a close personal relationship with domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers and served with Ayers on the board of the Woods Foundation, a radical Chicago-based education activism organization. Obama attended a church for 20 years where radical pastor, Jeremiah Wright, still maintains an anti-American ministry under the guise of Black Liberation Theology.

As the Obama presidency rampaged through its first year, Senior Environmental Advisor, Van Jones, resigned in early September, 2009 amidst a firestorm of controversy over his criminal and communist past. Then, in November, Anita Dunn resigned her position as White House Communications Director when video surfaced which exposed her as being in favor of the communist philosophy of Chinese dictator and mass murderer, Mao Tse Tung. Dunn admitted her communist inclinations in a speech to a group of high school students.

46. The Deaths of Lt. Quarles Harris and Donald Young.

Quarles Harris was a key witness in a federal probe into charges that Obama’s passport information was stolen from the State Department, when he was fatally shot in front of a Washington D.C. church. Harris had been working as a contractor at the State Department and was cooperating with federal investigators when he was murdered.

In December, 2007, Donald Young was a choir leader at Obama’s church, First Trinity Baptist, and school teacher, who many believe had carnal knowledge of Obama’s past. Young was found shot to death in his Southside Chicago apartment.

47. Larry Sinclair’s Bizarre, But Probable Story.

Of all the sordid stories circulating about Obama’s past, the one told by Larry Sinclair is the darkest. Sinclair posted a YouTube video alleging that he and President Barack Obama engaged in sexual acts and drug use together in 1999, when Obama was an Illinois State Senator. He claims that then-State Senator Obama procured powdered cocaine for Sinclair, and crack cocaine for himself, which Obama allegedly smoked.

Sinclair also alleges that their drug use was followed by sex acts that included Sinclair performing fellatio on Obama. These acts were alleged to take place in a limousine from which Sinclair provided cell phone records to prove his location on the dates in question. Testimony from the limosine driver has never been publicly published. Sinclair was asked to provide “intimate details” about Obama’s physical features which would prove Sinclair’s claims. His testimony has never been published or made public. Sinclair confesses openly that he is a convicted felon having served time for check fraud and drug possession.

Sinclair repeated his claims about his relationship with Obama in a highly publicized press conference at the National Press Club on June 18, 2008.

48. Passport Documents Released.

Documents released in July, 2010, and posted on the Scribd.com website, show that Barack Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, applied for a passport in 1981, the same year Obama traveled to Pakistan. Dunham’s applications show that she had applied for and received three separate passports and a renewal between 1965 and 1981. However, in yet another example of convenient government complicity to obscure Obama’s actual past, the Hillary Clinton-led State Department claims that a General Services Administration directive in the 1980s resulted in the destruction of passport applications and other “non-vital” passport records, including Dunham’s 1965 passport application and any other passports she may have applied for, or held, prior to 1965. The released records also document that on Aug. 13, 1968, Ann Dunham applied to have her 1965-issued passport renewed for two years, until July 18, 1970.

The documents also reveal yet another possible name used to identify Barack Barry Hussein Obama Soetoro. According to the application for Dunham’s 1976 passport she uses the parenthetical name of (saebarkah), or perhaps “Subarkah”, which is a surname commonly found among Indonesian citizenry.

The existence of records of a passport or travel documents prior to 1965 would reveal information on Dunham’s circumstances at the time of Obama’s birth. Therefore, we can now add Ann Dunham’s original passport to the litany of records and documents now missing from Obama’s biographical history.

49. Tim Adams.

In July, 2010, Tim Adams, a senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu Elections Office in 2008, made the stunning claim Barack Obama definitely was not born in Hawaii as the White House maintains, based on information he was told by the Vital Statistics Office in Hawaii that there is no original birth record on file for Barack Obama. In a televised interview, Adams reported that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama does not even exist in the Aloha State. Adams’ statements conflicted directly with repeated affirmations by public officials in Hawaii that they had seen or had inspected Obama’s birth records that would document his representations that he was born in the state.

“There is no birth certificate,” said Adams after leaving his position with the Elections Office and now teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green.

“It’s like an open secret. There isn’t one. Everyone in the government there knows this. I managed the absentee-ballot office. It was my job to verify the voters’ identity.”

50. Hawaiian Governor Offended.

In December, 2010, newly elected Hawaiian Democratic governor, Neil Abercrombie proclaimed that he is undertaking an effort, in consultation with the Hawaiian Attorney General, to make Obama’s original birth documentation available to the public. In making his proclamation, Abercrombie claims that since he was a friend of the Obama’s during their attendance at the University of Hawaii and thereafter, he is personally offended by accusation from doubters that the Obama’s were involved in nefarious dealings with regard to Obama’s natal identity. Abercrombie said he also feels it is disrespectful to the office of the presidency to question Obama’s eligibility.

Despite being an alleged friend of the Obama family, Abercrombie was not invited to the couple’s alleged Hawaiian wedding in 1961, nor was he present at the alleged 1961 Hawaiian birth of Obama.

In response to Abercrombie’s proclamations, both Fox and MSNBC, while reporting on the story, admitted for the first time that Obama had not yet released an original version of his official, 1961, federal, U.S. Certificate of Live Birth signed by the attending physician bearing the name and seal of the hospital.

After exercising all of his gubernatorial power, Abercrombie later admitted to media that he could not find any official, original standard Certificate of Live Birth for Obama. Four months later, Hawaii released the image of the very document Abercrombie allegedly could not find.

51. Caught In the Lie.

The Forgery of Obama’s “Long Form Certificate of Live Birth”. On April 27, 2011, the Obama White House confirmed the release of a digital image of a purported document claimed by White House officials and Obama himself as his official, original Long Form Certificate of Live Birth issued by the Hawaii Health Department.

In the months following the image’s release, multiple document analysts and computer experts have denounced the image as a forgery stating that it exhibits “…blatant and poorly concealed artifacts and characteristics which make it impossible to have been created in the 1960’s before printing and typographic technologies existed”… which are shown to have been used to produce the document.

One expert, with more than 30 years of experience with Adobe called the image a “literal joke”.

Among many of the document’s failures at authenticity are the artifacts revealing it was produced by a computer printer, not a typewriter, technology which did not exist in the State of Hawaii’s Health Department in 1961.

Join citizens4freedom on facebookand share us with your fb friends.

We are 3700+ strong for freedom!

NATIONAL CALL FOR UNITED ACTION

2011-10-06T02:29:00.000-07:00

A Declaration to Restore the Constitutional Republic

“When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” – from the U.S. Declaration of Independence

An undisclosed number of American Veterans and former service members have come together to prepare and present this Call-to-Action on behalf of the U.S. Constitution, the Republic, the Rule of Law and equal justice for all freedom loving citizens of the United States of America. Acting together as one, via The Veteran Defenders of America, co-sponsored by civilian patriot group The Unites States Patriots Union, LLC – we issue the following CALL for peaceful disobedience.

1.We CALL upon every member of federal, state and local government, legislative, judicial, law enforcement and military, who have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitutional Republic from all enemies, foreign and domestic, to act upon those oaths for the stated purpose of restoring the Constitutional Republic.
2.We CALL upon ALL veterans and veteran organizations in America, who still believe in their oath to protect and defend, to unite with us at once – in this Declaration to Restore the Constitutional Republic.
3.We CALL for ALL citizens who still desire freedom and liberty, to stand with us in peaceful protest, and carry our demands to right the wrongs against our nation in the preservation of freedom, liberty, justice and the rule of law.
This is a NATIONWIDE Call-to-Action!

“We are Facing a Battle That Will Decide our Fate as a Nation!” – Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely (Ret.)

The time to unite and fight for the American way of life has arrived… We did not choose this fight, or this time. The fight has come to us in our time and we will not shrink from our responsibility to protect and defend the United States of America, our Constitutional Republic, and the American way of life. We CALL upon ALL freedom loving Americans to JOIN US in this honorable endeavor. We do so on the following basis…

Abuses and Usurpations
Barack Obama’s once strong approval rating now stands at only 19%. The approval rating of congress is no better. The people have lost all faith in their government…

The demise of our Constitutional Republic has been underway for nearly a hundred years. As the people placidly accepted intolerable offenses against the republic, the states, and the Constitution for decades, the Central power in Washington D.C. grew ever more powerful, ever more abusive, and ever more disconnected from the very people it was formed to represent.

During the last three years, the current administration has committed the most egregious offenses against the people, the states and the Constitution, since the founding of our country and today, they operate as a virtual dictatorship, against the governed, beyond the scope and authority the people granted them in the Constitution and at odds with the will of the vast majority of American citizens.

The actions of the Obama Administration in total, rise to the level of treason against the United States and its people.

The Democratic Socialists of America are currently running Washington D.C. and they recently issued this statement in a Call-to-Action for their millions of members –

“We are the alternative to the tea party conservatives, the Republicans whose only program is to say no, the Democrats who have forgotten what progressive politics really are and the progressives who think that they can stand apart from the left.”

This must not be permitted to stand…

Among other offenses, abuses and usurpations, is the following list of transgressions – (detailed in Appendix A) – altering our constitutional form of government and system of justice without authority…

•Violations against Article I of the U.S. Constitution – Congress
•Violations against Article II of the U.S. Constitution – The office of President
•Violations against Article III of the U.S. Constitution – Judicial Powers
•Violations against Article IV of the U.S. Constitution – The State
•Violations against Article V of the U.S. Constitution – The Amendment Process
•Violations against Article VI of the U.S. Constitution – Oath to the Constitution
•Violations against the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 3rd Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 4th Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 6th Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 7th Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 8th Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 9th Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Violations against the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights
•Unlawful use of Military force, here and abroad
•Violations of International Treaties and Laws
•Numerous violations of the public trust
•Misuse of the people’s resources
•The bankrupting of the nation, the states and the people
•Taxation without representation
•Confiscation and Redistribution of the people’s earned assets
•Abuse of Judicial power

..At this late date, the individually itemized list of abuses and usurpations would require an encyclopedia of unconstitutional offenses to the Republic and there is no evidence to suggest that there remains even one legitimate honest courtroom in the country to which all evidence could be presented.

There is no Article or Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which the current leadership in Washington D.C. has not abused and/or usurped over the last three years.

As a result, the normal courses of action for redress may not be adequate to solve the problem today, as all three branches of the federal government are currently acting as one, all of them beyond the scope and power granted them by the Constitution, against the principles of freedom, liberty and self-governance, and at odds with the vast majority of citizens.

Yet the Constitutional Representative Republic must be restored, no matter the means or the cost.

It is on this foundation that we morally and rightfully call for all good people to rise up, stand together, move to restore the Constitutional Republic, and hold those who have and would stand against the people, fully accountable.

WE THE PEOPLE
On behalf of the Veterans and former Service Members of America, who fought and died for freedom and liberty here and abroad, and all good and decent American citizens from sea to shining sea, we the people of the United States of America hereby demand the immediate restoration of our Constitutional Republic and an end to the Democratic Socialist abuses and usurpations which have become commonplace in the daily corruption of our governmental offices. As the true American people sit idle, the enemy grows in number and strength.

No longer will we sit idly by and tolerate the utter destruction of our country, at the hands of anti-American elitists in Washington D.C. who have mistaken the people’s peaceful tolerance for acceptance of their ill-advised behaviors. The time for all good and decent Americans to stand together, in defense of the Constitution, the Republic, freedom and liberty, has arrived. The Rule of Constitutional Law must prevail. We call upon all who have taken an oath to protect and defend, to take appropriate measures now.

We the people hereby demand

1.The immediate and unconditional orderly resignation of Barack Hussein Obama, II
2.The immediate and unconditional orderly resignation of Joseph R. Biden
In addition to the known fact that the Obama/Biden ticket was advanced by way of fraudulent representations concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama II, under Article II requirements for the office of President, the Obama/Biden has committed countless crimes against the U.S. Constitution, our Republican form of government and the American people while in control of the Executive Branch.

They are not able to do this alone, but with the help and cover of many anti-American players, who have also acted at odds with their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution, our Republic and the people of the United States. As a result, these players must be removed from office and held accountable for their actions as well.

This group includes, but is not limited to the following individuals -

The immediate and unconditional orderly resignation of the entire Obama Cabinet, including but not limited to;

•the White House staff and unelected Czars
•Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
•Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner
•Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta
•Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr.
•Interior Secretary Kenneth L. Salazar
•Acting Commerce Secretary Dr. Rebecca M. Blank
•Labor Secretary Hilda L. Solis
•Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
•Energy Secretary Steven Chu
•Education Secretary Arne Duncan
•Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano
•EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
•Office of Management & Budget Director Jacob J. Lew
•UN Ambassador Susan Rice, the entire Council of Economic Advisers
•Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan
•Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor
•· House Speaker John Boehner•· House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi•· Senate Leader Harry Reid •Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell – all of whom have committed treasonous acts against the people, the states and the U.S. Constitution.

Further, to reinstate the rule of law and the Law of this Land, the U.S. Constitution and our constitutional republic -

1.In compliance with Article II – Section I of the U.S. Constitution for the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, — the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

2.That every verifiable member of The Communist Party USA, The Socialist Party USA and The Democratic Socialists of America be immediately publicly identified and removed from office for overtly acting against freedom, liberty and the Constitutional Republic.

3.That in the event that these individuals refuse to immediately resign in an orderly fashion designed to serve the best interests of the United States, we demand that the 66 members of the people’s House who voted against the recent raising of the nation’s debt ceiling, to immediately begin impeachment proceedings against every member of the Obama administration.

4.That the seven remaining members of the U.S. Supreme Court place an immediate stay on all Executive and Legislative actions taken under the term of the unconstitutional administration beginning January 20, 2009.

5.That remaining members of the House and Senate immediately act to name new majority and minority leaders of congress, and work with the U.S. Supreme Court in the assigning of new temporary Executive Branch members, acting on behalf of the people and the will of the American majority until such time that the citizens of the United States can elect their new representatives in 2012.

6.The immediate and unconditional dissolution of all special interest congressional caucuses, including but not limited to The Progressive Caucus, The Black Caucus. In addition, the immediate closure of any and all congressional committees which have been given unconstitutional powers, including the Debt Committee of twelve just formed. Individuals are elected by the people to represent ALL of the people, not special interest groups.

7.That each state government immediately act to enforce its 10th Amendment right to protect and defend the people of their state against a tyrannical central power in Washington D.C., by recalling all State Guard troops home to protect the sovereignty and security of their respective citizens, as well as state resources and governments.

8.That each state government act immediately to cut itself off from federal funding, and take the necessary actions to balance their own state and local budgets immediately.

These are our initial demands and nothing less than complete compliance with each of these demands is acceptable to the people of the United States. These demands have been published for public support and delivered to all members of Congress.

Further, it is our position that the normal constitutional line of succession to the presidency does not apply in this circumstance, due to the widespread complicity by members of congress, regarding both the original fraud that placed this administration in power and the ongoing effort to cover up the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American citizens.

The abuse and usurpation of the U.S. Constitution will not be allowed to stand. It is on this basis that We the People make these demands, in full compliance with the law of this land, the Constitution of the United States of America.

It is our sincere desire to affect these immediate and unconditional changes to the people’s government through peaceful processes, causing a minimum degree of disruption to the vital ongoing business of the people and their representative government.

The individuals named in our demand for immediate and unconditional resignations have acted directly and overtly against the people, the states and the Constitution and they must be held fully accountable for their actions.

Call for the People to ACT Now
We are openly calling for the American people to draw a final line in the sand and take a moral and righteous stand for the Constitutional Republic, the rule of law and the future of freedom and liberty.

The time to be tolerant and silent has passed and the time for serious action has arrived. Only the people can restore the Constitution as the Supreme Law of this Land. We must do it peacefully if at all possible and our Founders provided all the tools necessary for peaceful corrections of a ship set off course by internal enemies.

We are calling for the following specific actions, by every active and former service member and every patriotic citizen, no matter their political stripe…

•We call upon all members of the U.S. Military, the U.S. Supreme Court, Federal, State, County, Local Law Enforcement, and all Intelligence agencies, to direct all assets of the people of the United States towards the restoration of the Constitutional Republic and stand with the American citizens in compliance with their oath to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution and the people of the United States.

•We call upon ALL American citizens to provide necessary pressure on all law enforcement, judicial, intelligence and military agencies, until those who have sworn to protect and defend the Constitution begin to act upon those oaths.

•The current administration has done all it can to whip racial tensions and class warfare into full-blown riots and civil war, including scheduling a “U.S. Day of Rage” for communists, labor union socialists, illegal immigrants, Muslims and blacks across the country. Their “Day of Rage” was scheduled for Constitution Day, September 17, 2011, and although it was a total flop, they will continue to rage against America. It is an open assault on free-market capitalism, waged by modern day Marxists who must be stripped of their entitlement mentality. The LEFT is also planning a “Cairo style occupation of Washington in October, on the ground on Wall Street now and headed towards Washington D.C.” These events are being run by the Obama White House, via a number of left-wing front organizations.

•We The Veteran Defenders of America and The United States Patriots Union call for a “unified march” from ALL fifty (50) states to Washington D.C. on Friday November 11, 2011, Veterans Day – led by American veterans and former service members with a clear purpose – to demand the immediate restoration of the U.S. Constitution, the removal and prosecution all of the individuals named herein, by voluntary resignation or articles of impeachment, and the end to Sharia Law on American soil. The Veterans March on D.C. Day – In defense of freedom, liberty and justice.

•We call for all Americans who truly do support our troops to march on D.C. with our veterans. We call upon ALL independent truckers, independent contractors, all non-union workers, all independent business owners, agents and investors, all who support free-market capitalism and the right to work, earn and own, to march together with our veterans and former service members on November 11, 2011 – Veterans Day!

•To be prepared to act as citizens to protect and preserve the Constitutional Republic, in the event that our public servants, who have sworn an oath to the Constitutional Republic, refuse for any reason, to act upon those oaths.

•To act peacefully, but prepared for a violent reaction from our nation’s enemies. To avoid if possible, the RACE WAR being incited by the Obama Administration and the Black and Progressive Caucuses.

•Locally, to confront all anti-American infringements upon our Natural Rights with boots on the ground whenever and wherever local, state or federal officials act beyond their scope of authority, or at odds with the Constitutional Rights of the people.

•To begin to openly identify and address government corruption at the local, county and state levels, too often found in both governmental and law enforcement offices, also sworn to protect and serve the people of the United States.

•To be ready and willing to end the taxation without real representation by refusing to fund the anti-American regime currently in control of Washington D.C., until such time as the taxpayers of this nation are once again properly represented.

•To make the necessary provisions to secure and protect your families and neighborhoods in the event of economic instability and social chaos, similar to events already witnessed abroad, by stocking up on cash, food and water supplies, as well as personal protection items.

•In the event that the current administration or its thug supporters attempt to use government or civilian force and violence to silence the people, as in the cases of Syria, Libya, Yemen, China’s Tiananmen Square, the Bonus Army of 1932 in the United States, or the UK presently wrestling with black and Muslim violence, the people must be prepared to defend themselves against such tyrannical tactics. We cannot expect that the federal government will act in the best interest of American veterans or citizens.

This CALL FOR ACTION is being issued as a joint initiative, by the leaders and members of The Veteran Defenders of America, The United States Patriots Union. All citizens who want to see the Constitutional Republic restored immediately are encouraged to immediately join one of these unified organizations and become directly engaged in our joint missions to restore America to that shining city on a hill, and beacon of freedom and liberty around the world. We the People are the solution!

Volunteer leaders across the country must join one of these organizations to take part in leading in their local areas. All supporters who do not wish to join these organizations but who do support the initiative can keep up with information concerning the action here.

Foundation for Our United Action
Our Declaration of 1776 establishes the principles upon which The United States of America was founded. On September 17, 1787, our nation’s Founders ratified The United States Constitution, forming a Constitutional Representative Republic as our system of self-governance. From that day forward, the American people are guaranteed a Constitutional Representative Republic of, by and for the people, which was to at all times, operate within the confines of the limited authority provided the government by the people and their respective states.

For decades, our federal government has been operating beyond its constitutional authority, infringing upon the Natural Rights of every American citizen and every American enterprise, until our government has indeed become destructive of the common cause of freedom and liberty.

In its usurpations of the Constitution, it has committed atrocities against the people for which it was designed to protect and serve, until the people are forced to rise up in the name of freedom and liberty, casting off the shackles of soft tyranny and it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Our United Mission
We are finished with changing America to suit every anti-American whim… This time, the change is coming to Washington D.C.

It is not our intent to separate from any foreign King, nor to abolish or alter our Constitutional Representative Republic, but rather to restore it, as the Supreme law of this land, under which both the government and the governed must live.

Our united mission is to end the march of democratic socialism, which has become the most dangerous modern threat to American peace, prosperity, freedom and liberty and reinstate the republican form of self-governance guaranteed every citizen in the U.S. Constitution.

To accomplish this objective, the people responsible for the usurpation of the Constitution must be immediately removed from office and held fully accountable for their actions, setting an example for future generations, who must also be forever vigilant in the common defense of freedom and liberty.

The long train of abuses and usurpations must be brought to a swift end and the Constitutional Republic must prevail, or the United States of America will soon cease to exist.

Our mission is just – it is moral – it is legal and constitutional and it is necessary…

This is not a call to overthrow our entire institutions of government, or subvert the Law of the Land, but rather to restore those institutions to their honorable constitutional forms. As such, and under their oaths to the Constitution and the people whom they are sworn to protect and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic, it is incumbent upon every citizen, veteran, soldier, officer and agent to use the tools of the people to protect the people and return our government to a Constitutional Republic of, by and for the people.

Let Freedom Ring! May the Creator, who endowed each of us with certain unalienable rights, among them the right to Life, Liberty and the individual Pursuit of Happiness free from government tyranny, bless this mission of, by and for the people of the United States, and may the Lord let freedom ring in America, once again.

We demand an end to government corruption, an end to despotic leadership in D.C., an end to the current assault on all decent and honest American taxpayers, businesses and honorable public servants of the people.

We demand the peaceful return of the people’s government, and we will remain resolute in the defense of the Constitution and the United States of America until the people can once again, feel secure in their nation and government.

IN GOD WE TRUST!

JOIN the MISSION HERE – http://www.veterandefenders.org/ or HERE – http://www.patriotsunion.org/
Non-member supporters can follow the mission here – http://www.facebook.com/groups/262343767138128/
Sign your name in support of the mission here!

Requests for information or interviews should be sent here!

APPENDIX “A”

As a preface to APPENDIX “A”, the following items only scratch the surface. The blatant abrogation of the United States Constitution, trampling the boundaries of law-based authority, deceit, bribery, aiding and abetting our sworn enemies, illegal manipulation of our election process and subverting election laws, and hundreds of other affronts and assaults to our liberties and freedoms, all fall under the category of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

1. Obama is a National Security threat since he definitely has questionable allegiance to the United States, not to mention his refusal to complete and release full, frank and truthful answers as to who he is. Obama has demonstrated a blatant disregard for the public safety and security.

2. Obama and his handlers released an obvious forged birth certificate after release at least two fraudulent COLBs (Certifications of Live Birth). Obama is also using numerous stolen Social Security numbers.

3. Obama and his incompetent advisors have wreaked economic tyranny on the American people, all the while calling for the rest of us to endure economic sacrifice.

4. Obama has destroyed accepted administrative process by creating 32 Czars who only report to him, bypassing the Congress and Cabinet. *

5. In one year, Obama and his minions doubled our national debt, which took 200 years to accumulate.

6. Obama and his Justice Department sided with a foreign government (Mexico) when they sued the State of Arizona in order to force the continuation of illegal immigration. *

7. Obama and his henchmen proposed a 1% tax on all bank transactions (HR4646) to be implemented after the November 2012 elections.

8. Obama signed HB1388 to use $20 million in taxpayer money to immigrate Hamas refugees to USA, and other migration assistance to Palestinian refugees.

9. Obama passed “Dream Act” by Executive Order which aide’s illegal aliens through “prosecutorial discretion” all to garner votes for his election. The Heritage Foundation has provided extensive proof that illegal aliens and immigrants with green cards are committing rampant voter fraud. *

10. Obama’s socialist, radical, dictatorial Moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, for thirty years a major source of energy for America, and which a Federal Court ruled was unconstitutional, continues to prevent drilling, all under the pretense to protect the environment and the fraudulent notion of global warming. He is indifferent to the loss of 10,000 jobs and 87,000 workers destroyed. Perfect excuse to push “Cap and Trade” with environmental regulations, and to push for governmental control of energy industries, i.e. General Motors, banking and healthcare.

11. Obama and his Czars want to tax church contributions and replace charities with government welfare. *

12. This administrations massive expansion of the federal government (350,000 employees) through agencies and Czars, whose goal is to “fundamentally transform America.”

13. Obama’s own Federal Elections Commission documented that he got at least $33.8 million from disallowed foreign contributions, including 520 contributions from interests in Iran, and $30,000 from Hamas-controlled Gaza area. *

14. Obama said, “We must reward our friends and punish our enemies.” 70 individuals who raised $50,000 or more for him “have been rewarded with ambassadorships or high ranking jobs.”

15. Obama and the cabal’s National Security Strategy released in May, allows for the targeted assassination of US citizens including “homegrown terrorists” without due process. *

16. Obama dhimmitude given Ramadan and Iftar dinners in the White House, while he cancels the National Day of Prayer without one word of objection from the Congress.

17. Obama and his Muslim buddies agree and defend a 15 story mosque, bankrolled by terrorist sympathizers and anti-American Muslim groups, to be erected feet from the hallowed ground of the World Trade Center.

18. Obama and his Justice Department’s refusal to support, defend and enforce US law, i.e. Defense of Marriage Act, stating it was unconstitutional, thereby circumventing established law and the rulings of the courts. *

19. Obama and his warmongers attack Libya without any authority from Congress. *

20. ObamaCare ruled unconstitutional and ordered stopped by the Federal Court…it was implemented regardless of the Federal Court. *

21. Congress said Cap and Trade was unconstitutional and refused to pass the same. Obama ordered the EPA to enact the provisions regardless of the Congressional ruling. *

22. Obama’s use of taxpayer money to pay for Democrat propaganda including $15 million for The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act road signs and $18 million for the continually misleading recovery.gov website. *

23. $770 million of taxpayer funds given to Egypt and Cyprus for the restoration of mosques through USAID. *

24. Obama has disgraced the United States by bowing to foreign potentates, while at the same time snubbed our longtime allies, Great Britain and Israel. Obama and his friends have deliberately fostered hate against the Jews and Israel by promoting a Palestinian State.

25. Obama’s Department of Justice refusing to prosecute Black Panthers in Philadelphia caught on tape brandishing weapons in front of a voting site to intimidate voters. Further the stated intentions of political appointees of Obama who said they would ignore voter crimes committed by blacks, Latinos and other minorities. *

26. Obama and his Cabinet intentionally refusing to secure our nation’s borders is in direct violation of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution. This is an effort to blackmail Republican support for comprehensive immigration reform. They are in essence holding the Border States and residents as political hostages during a time when they live in fear and danger. *

27. Obama and his handlers continually ignore Congress’s constitutional obligation to vet presidential appointees, as none of his 32 Czars was vetted by Congress, and his appointment of the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was appointed during Congress recess. *

28. Department of Homeland Security now investigating to determine the political association for those making Freedom of Information Act Requests. If you are a Republican you request will be delayed and even ignored altogether.

29. Obama’s Justice Department refusing to sue sanctuary cities for violating US immigration law. *

30. Obama’s executive order which allows Interpol to operate in the US with no restraints, and without any oversight from Congress, courts, FBI or local law enforcement. *

31. Obama’s administration and Justice Department discourage whistleblowers and prosecute them.

32. Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton’s ongoing effort to create international small arms accords that will subvert the Second Amendment rights of US citizens.

33. Obama and his State Department has failed to treat as an Act of War the takeover of sovereign land belonging to Arizona by the Mexican drug cartel.

34. The State Department used $23 million in taxpayer money to transform Kenya into a constitutionally communist country where freedom of speech is limited and property rights are based on social justice. Don’t forget the Kenyan constitution allows for Sharia Law in some regions, which means women will not have basic human rights. *

35. As part of the auto industry bailout and forced closings, shut down an unbelievable disproportionate number of dealerships in rural areas that did not vote for Obama.

36. Obama’s refusal to have a press conference and answer the difficult questions as is expected by every US President. And as is usual with his total lack of respect for anyone but himself…he is always late for everything.

37. Obama and his minions have downgraded the value of human life with their opposition to his signing “Born Alive Infants Protection Act”; however they lifted the ban on overseas abortion funding using US taxpayer’s money.

38. Obama’s State Department foreign policy continually will do anything to insult our allies, embarrass the United States, all the while elevating and promoting third world Muslim countries. *

39. Obama and his environmentalist henchmen are prohibiting US industries from taking advantage of our own natural resources including coal, oil, uranium and timber. *

40. Despite all the political rhetoric about the historical downgrade of our nation’s credit rating, the devaluation was a mere shadow of the colossal degradation Obama and his socialist cadres have inflicted on our Country since January 20, 2009. More significant than our nation’s credit, our nation’s credibility as a constitutional republic has suffered relentless and ruthless damage and offense. *

41. Obama deployed 1200 National Guard troops to Border States, where they will, under no circumstances, be used to stop the flow of illegal aliens and drug traffickers.

42. Despite a court’s ruling and Congress’s opposition, Obama’s FCC continues to try to gain control over the Internet, by reclassifying internet companies as telecommunications providers, thereby making them subject to FCC regulation. *

43. A slick move no one noticed moving the Census Bureau out of the Commerce Department directly into the White House and under the control and management of Rahm Emmanuel, Chief of Staff.

44. Obama attempts to run this Country with Executive Orders.

45. Under the cover of secrecy and without any input from Congress, state or local officials and current land owners, the Department of the Interior plans to take control of millions of public and private lands in Western states by designating them national monuments.

46. Obama through Eric Holder has handcuffed and taken over the CIA, which has been the most critical, independent information gathering resource safe-guarding our national security. Obama has revealed, ridiculed and condemned CIA interrogation methods which were previously approved by Congress and cleared through the Justice Department. He has demonstrated to our enemies (terrorists) that they need not fear us. *

47. Obama’s known history is replete with symbiotic associations and participation with admitted anti-American radicals, many of which/who advocate the destruction of American imperialism and capitalism, even though violent means. Consider William Ayers, Khalid Al Mansour, Rhashid Khalidi, Jeremiah Wright, Sol Alinsky, James Cone, Mike Klonsky, as well as organizations such as the Weather Underground, STORM, Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Woods Foundation, ACORN, which have all received major tax payer funded support. Obama has never denied or even argued about his nefarious involvement with these people and organizations.

48. At the expense of the American taxpayer to the tune of $6 Billion, Obama and his handlers have established their own Civilian Paramilitary Security Force made up with the likes of SEIU, STORM, ACORN, RUCKUS, The Apollo Project (Soros), AmeriCorps, Color of Change, Drummond Pike/Project and others who choose to remain anonymous. *

49. Loss of free speech to the tune of half a billion dollars of taxpayer money, given to Obama appointee Mark Lloyd “FCC Diversity Officer”, and avowed pro-Chavez radical, ordered by Obama to rein in free speech on the airwaves by reorganizing the FCC and placing a tax equal to annual operating costs on local radio stations, which they either pay or lose their license to a new minority owner. *

50. Historic and unprecedented move by Obama’s cabal to indoctrinate our children in socialist, humanist garbage, sent a video to all schools, and naturally this scheme was promoted by the NEA, with the children taking a pledge, “…to be a servant to our president and to all mankind”, and then they chant over and over “together we can.” He is asking our children to choose him and his agenda, over anything you might teach at home. *

51. Obama’s appointment of Safe Schools Czar, Kevin Jennings, founder of Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, has determined required reading material for our schools which promotes pornography, not to mention homosexuality. This information is so massive, if you type into Google, Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Is Promoting Child Porn in the classroom-Kevin Jennings and the GLSEN Reading List, click on the first site, you can read it for yourself…be prepared to vomit. *

52. Obama protected union interests over those of GM and Chrysler bond holders during bankruptcy proceedings, forcing investors to accept millions in losses, funds which they were legally entitled to. *

53. In a time when Americans are asked to sacrifice, I guess this does not apply to Michelle Obama, since she has 22 personal assistants, which does not include a markup artist and hair stylist, at the cost to the American taxpayer of $6,364,000 for 4 years. These assistants’ sole duties are to facilitate her social life. She must be a lot more incompetent than first thought, since as First Ladies Hillary Clinton only had 3 assistants, Jacqueline Kennedy had 1 assistant, and Laura Bush had 1 assistant.

54. On June 9, 2011, Obama signed Executive Order 13575 establishing the “White House Rural Council” which establishes unchecked federal control into rural America in education, food supply, land use, water use, recreation, property, energy, and the lives of 16% of the US population. No Congressional or local government oversight or input. *

55. Obama’s handler’s establishment of the “Super Committee” is the final nail in our republic’s coffin, and the establishment of a Marxist dictatorship. Congress has always had committees which meet and return to the main body with ideas and suggestions, which is then amended, debated, rewritten, and finally voted on. Not this Super Committee, their determinations are presented to the Congress who are not allowed to discuss debate, modify, rewrite. The Congress is limited to a straight up or down vote. Why is the Congress accepting this infringement on their constitutional duties? *

56. Obama forced British Petroleum to set up $20 billion slush fund supposedly to compensate Gulf coast residents and businesses, and sets up an Obama appointee to administer funds with no judicial or congressional oversight. *

57. Obama’s cabal cancelled 77 oil field development contracts already certified as proper by the Bush administration. This deliberate affront by Obama’s Interior Secretary prevents the extraction of 3 trillion gallons of oil in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and North Dakota, which is more than enough to end our dependence on foreign oil. *

58. Obama signed the Russian-American START treaty which hampers US missile defense development and makes it difficult for us to modernize our rapidly aging nuclear weapons arsenal. It represents unilateral disarmament by the US in return for nothing more than Russian good will. What a joke.

59. Perhaps one of Obama’s most pathetic stunts was his chair of the UN Security Council, never done by a US sitting President. He was in the right place sitting as chair over an organization ruled by tyrants, and showing his true dual loyalties.

60. We need to look at Obama’s character, or in this case, his lack thereof. Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishments. No experience, no education, no business sense or experience (only 8% of his entire administration has ever held a real job or run a business, other than being on the government dole), no military experience, a dangerous and treacherous narcissist, arrogant, incompetent, no class, serial liar, no humility, juvenile, no dignity, no genuine empathy, his personal narcissism and arrogance veiled by his hollow spoken empathy, quite ignorant, racist, Muslim, bereft of conscience, unable to determine between his fantasy and reality, incapable of genuine caring or concern, artificial, blames everyone else for his failure, and most of all Obama is a puppet, owned by his handlers, who maneuvered and manufactured his pathetic life.

61. Misuse of federal power and money in illegal international gun and drug running, the mis-distribution of taxpayer funds and manipulation of foreign governments, racketeering and smuggling, such as Project Gun Runner, resulting in the murder of U.S. agents.

NOTE: The items herein marked with an (*) at the end of the numbered statement, reflect a deliberate and malicious violation of the duties of the President as cited in Article II, Section 3. Of the United States Constitution, i.e. “…he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed…”.

##

by JB Williams, Timothy Joseph Harrington, and Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely (Ret.), ©2011

The Obama File

help fight the media

'My predictions'

2011-09-23T06:43:00.000-07:00

It is not hard to predict what leftists, Marxists and Communists will do. They use the same old commie playbook that has been around for years. All it takes is the courage to admit the truth, and see what is clearly in front of you.

Jesus often said to those He was speaking to, "those who have ears to hear, let them hear..."

Everyone there had ears on their head, so obviously some choose not to hear the truth, some choose to dismiss the truth, and others, because of brainwashing or propaganda, did not have the ability to hear the truth.

1. The race card will be played early and often. Our comrade president and his cronies will work hard to convince every person of color in the USA that white folks hate them. This will be the most racial election in history, and not because of those on the right. The true racists and bigots in this country today reside in the Democrat Party. They feed on race hatred, they eat it like candy. They are the folks that examine everything through the prism of race.

2. The ObamaMedia will go even further down the propaganda hell hole than they have gone before. You may think the media could not be any more in the tank for Obama than they have been, but, trust me, it is going to get worse. They will cover-up mistakes, they will smear opponents, they will make stuff up and flat out lie to protect Obama.

3. Since 1975, there have been well over NINE THOUSAND reports of union violence. Unions have much at stake, and since many of them were paid off handsomely with the stimulus Democrat slush fund nonsense, they know the gravy train will be over if the Marxists are not re-elected. Expect more union thuggery and violence, a lot more. One of Comrade Obama's main Communist allies, Jimmy Hoffa, Jr., on Labor day, called on union thugs to "take the SOB's out".

(Oh, by the way, the regime has published new rules for employment agencies. In these new rules, every employment agency will have to supply the feds (Obama) with the names, addresses and phone numbers, of any persons they send to work at any business that is having a dispute with the thug unions. That way, union terrorists will have the means to know where you are). The media will not report or they will grossly under-report the increase in union violence. They will accuse TEA Party Patriots of violence when none occurs, but real union thuggery will go unreported.

4. Attacks on the producers and the wealthy in America will continue to escalate. This administration treats wealthy folks much like Hitler treated the Jews, and really, for the same reason. The Obama administration needs the producers money, much like Hitler needed the money that the Jews had. It is Liberal government greed that is running wild. One of the great Liberal lies is that the rich persecute the poor, when in fact, it is the poor that persecute the rich.

5. Smears and lies against Republican women will escalate. Conservative women will be slandered, smeared, investigated, lied about, and their families attacked. Ask Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Meg Whitman or Christine O'Donnell. The accomplishments of these fine women will not be reported, and lies will be reported as fact.

6. Television networks will start playing more and more movies or programs that demonizes business. Expect more programs that show men (especially white men) in a bad light, and programs that degrade Christianity. Along with that will come programing intended to show that the poor little ol' Muslims are just misunderstood, and driven to their hatred by evil white men in America.

7. Government agencies, controlled by installed leftists, will begin to lie, even more than they are now, to make it appear that the Socialist agenda is working. They will lie about unemployment numbers. They will lie about economic numbers. They will lie about their waste and fraud.

8. Democrats will continue to lie about the true effects of ObamaCare on Seniors, and will demonize those Conservatives that truly want to repair the Ponzi scheme that is Social Security. Some seniors will be used as props, as reporters, in the tank for Obama, film seniors crying big tears, claiming that they are afraid Republicans are going to starve them or make them eat dog food.

9. The Obama inJustice Department will begin investigations on law abiding groups that oppose Dear Leader. Patriotic groups that speak out against the job murdering policies of this regime, will face harrassment and investigations aimed at shutting them up.

10. The Obama regime and their allies will ratchet up the voter fraud. More dead Democrats than ever will vote. There were incredible amounts of Democrat voter fraud in the last election (the last dozen elections really). More people voted for Democrats in Detroit than live there. Of course, this voter fraud was not investigated or dealt with because Democrats need voter fraud to survive. Democrats will work to see that as many illegals as possible vote. (Illegals got Harry Reid re-elected in a State where the Reid-Pelosi-Obama policies devastated the economy)

11. Radical leftists will take to the streets to do violence and property damage and disrupt normal business. The media will lie and claim that the TEA Party is to blame for the violence.

12. Voter intimidation will rise dramatically in the black community. Many black Americans, who are now waking up to the devastation that Democrats have levied against them with misguided policies, will be in danger of real harm if they stand against Comrade Obama.

13. Homosexuality and deviancy will be promoted like you have never seen before. Homosexuals will be prompted to make phony charges of discrimination and hate crimes.

14. The leftist propaganda in higher education will increase ten fold. Don't be surprised if your son or daughter is pounded with even more liberal lies instead of honest instruction. Your child will sign up for a class to study German, and instead, will be peppered with anti-American propaganda.

15. The IRS will be unleashed, even more than they are now, to hammer away at businesses, or individuals, that stand against, or fail to contribute to, the Obama regime. Much like the MOB operated, the IRS, or other government agencies will work to destroy opponents. Remember, liberals can never win in the arena of ideas so they have to cheat.

I can make these predictions with confidence because Liberals have nothing new. Marxism is not new. Government abuse is not new. Our Constitution was working fabulously, until liberalism crept into our society and began to eat away at our foundations like termites.

When comrade Obama was anointed the savior of the Earth and oceans, etc., I wrote, in frank terms, about the impending disaster that would come with Marxists in power.

Some cried that I was too harsh, and yet 2 1/2 years later, I was right about Obama and what his policies and hatred of America would do to this country. I said he was a Marxist, and I think that has been fairly well established now to all but the most rabid leftists.

I fully expect that some kool-aid drinkers will challenge my statement that Obama hates this country.

They will say he loves America.

Well, just about every wife beater out there claims that he loves the woman he is punching in the face. Yet, it matters not what the wife beater says, as actions speak louder than words.

Can Obama win re-election? You bet your mule he can. I wish I could predict the outcome of the election, but a growing number of Americans appear to love Socialism, and many liberals have such a hatred of America, that they will be glad to go to Hell, just as long as they can take America with them.

We conservatives have better take this next election seriously. Unless you enjoy economic slavery, radial Earth worship and social deviancy, we had better look soberly at what is happening.

And Liberals, don't worry if your messiah is defeated. He'll be around for years, living fat on taxpayer cash, to do his best to bring down America. Or, since Hugo Chavez is reported to be in bad health, Obama could fit right in as Chavez's replacement.

Whoever wrote this gets it.

Seen in the McCook Daily Gazette --

The Execution Of SEAL Team Six

2011-09-17T06:30:00.000-07:00

The entire Bin Laden episode was stagecraft. It was pure theater that was designed to give Obama a boost in the polls and give distraction and cover.

Distract from what?

Cover from what?

On May 5th, I had an email conversation with a retired military man with spook contacts.

..All were in total agreement that the Bin Laden episode was pure theater.

..The SEALS were sent into a compound as evidenced by the lost chopper on site.

..But Osama Bin Laden wasn't in that compound.

Osama Bin Laden has been dead for years.

..Bin Laden had a genetic condition that caused renal failure (this genetic condition is common among deeply inbred Saudi arab muslims). Bin Laden had been on dialysis BEFORE 9/11. Dialysis is difficult enough for people in first world countries who can have it done in outstanding facilities. Bin Laden was having it done either in caves or in homes post 9/11. People in renal failure having dialysis done in fricking caves do NOT live for ten more years. Period.

..There was no dialysis equipment found in the compound the SEALS raided on May 2. Of course there wasn't. Bin Laden wasn't in that compound because Bin Laden has been dead for years.

..This is why the "body" was declared "positively identified" faster than any known DNA testing process in existence - and this DNA testing was carried out not in a lab mind you, but inside Chinook and/or V-22 Osprey helos en route to the USS Carl Vinson.

..The body was then dumped into the Indian Ocean in a mad dash to ensure that "burial" took place within 24 hours of death in order to "honor" musloid burial traditions.

Not a single picture of the so-called "Bin Laden corpse" has ever been released - and never will.

The entire Bin Laden episode was stagecraft. It was pure theater that was designed to give Obama a boost in the polls and give distraction and cover. Distract from what?

Cover from what?

..April 20, 2011: The release date of Dr. Jerome Corsi's book, "Where's the Birth Certificate" is announced as May 17, and pre-sales begin on Amazon.com. Corsi's work is known to be extremely thorough and meticulous.

..Within hours, Corsi's book is #1 on Amazon.com - fully 28 days before its release. The Obama regime is panicked.

..April 27, 2011: In order to diffuse and undercut the Corsi book, the Obama regime releases a PDF image purported to be a scan of his original long-form Hawaiian birth certificate. Within hours, thousands of graphic designers, many of whom are self-professed Obama voters and supporters, isolate and demonstrate with dozens of objective proof sets that the PDF released by the Obama regime is not just a forgery, but an astoundingly incompetent and obvious forgery.

..April 27 through May 2: The Obama regime is now in a blind panic.

..Deeming it too risky, instead of commissioning the forged birth certificate from document and photo illustration experts within the CIA or NSA, the Obama regime instead farmed the project off on someone inside the White House with a functional but middling knowledge of photo illustration programs.

..To the thoroughly inexpert eyes of Barack Obama, Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett, the forged certificate file appeared extremely convincing, and was thus released with fanfare. Within hours, they knew that they had not only made a mistake, but a massive mistake that could land them all in prison.

The forger was so incompetent that he/she didn't even flatten the image thus compressing and masking the component layers before posting it. And that was just the tip of the iceberg of glaring flaws and errors. The mainstream press was, so far, completely complicit in the cover-up of the forgery, but Rathergate proved that if the forgery debunking generated any mainstream traction whatsoever, the end could come swiftly.

..The Obama regime needed a big distraction and they needed it fast.

..They had been planning on holding the staged Bin Laden capture and killing until 2012 for the thick of the campaign, and perhaps as an "October Surprise",
but it would have to be moved up to now.

May 2, 2011: The Bin Laden operation occurs. In all likelihood, a low-to-mid level Taliban or insurgent leader is killed.

May 3, 2011: Within hours, Vice President Joe Biden destroys any notions of OPSEC and bellows to the entire world in public remarks at a dinner at the Ritz Carlton that the Bin Laden raid was carried out by "the SEALS".

Within hours Obama regime had gleefully leaked that the raid was carried out by "SEAL Team 6", also known as DEVGRU.

>>Up until this point in history, all DEVGRU activities and information had been highly classified.<<

Now the term "SEAL Team 6" was blasted across every newspaper in the world, with Disney even moving to trademark the name.

>>The Obama regime wanted the ENTIRE WORLD to know the name "SEAL Team 6".<<

May 5, 2011: As I said earlier, I conversed with retired military contact with spook contacts regarding the obvious theatrics of the Bin Laden episode and the need for a cover-up by the Obama regime.

The conversation ended with the following exchange:

Ann: I'm on the US Military casualty email list. It would be NO PROBLEM to "hide" casualties.

It's a steady stream out of Afghanistan.

Contact: look for training accidents in the eastern mountains.

May 6, 2011: Obama travels to Ft. Campbell, KY to openly "meet and congratulate" SEAL Team 6 members. This receives huge press coverage, and the press declares the incident "a huge boost [for Obama] going into 2012."

The Execution of SEAL Team Six (Part 2)

Posted by Ann Barnhard

August 6, AD 2011

August 6, 2011: A Chinook helo is shot down in Tangi, Wardak Province, Afghanistan. Within hours, before family notifications could possibly have been completed, global press accounts positively confirm that 22 of the 30 Americans killed were not just SEALS, but members of SEAL Team 6.

>>Again, DEVGRU operations have been, up until now, highly classified.<<

..Today, the Obama regime made a point of immediately revealing the unit identities of the SPECOPS forces among the dead.

..In the past, DEVGRU men and other SPECOPS men have been killed in action, but their missions were so secret and so crucial to OPSEC that their deaths were covered-up by the government and attributed to such things as "training accidents" and the like and I have no problem with that.

..These men understand going in to intense units such as DEVGRU that OPSEC is paramount, that they will never be publicly acknowledged for their heroism, and that if they are killed or captured in action, the government will lie about that in order to protect OPSEC and to prevent the enemy from gaining a propaganda and morale coup.

Compare that reality with what happened. The Obama regime distributed this information, and the Obama regime's lapdog press instantly splashed headlines declaring this as the Taliban's "REVENGE" for the "death of Bin Laden." As I wrote this, the Drudge Report headline in bright red read,

"REVENGE: SEALS WHO GOT OSAMA KILLED IN AFGHANISTAN."

..I'll say what everyone else is thinking but is too scared to say. The Obama regime is almost certainly directly complicit in these deaths.

..The time, location and most especially, the PASSENGERS in the Chinook were passed to the Taliban. Additionally, you can't take out a Chinook with small arms fire or even standard RPGs such as the Taliban use. The Taliban needed serious weaponry to take this helo down, and that serious weaponry needed to be in exactly the right spot at exactly the right time, ready to fire.

..Why would the Obama regime kill Americans?

..I think the question is, why WOULDN'T the Obama regime kill Americans? The Obama regime is composed of Marxist-Leninist psychopaths. A glancing, superficial survey of 20th century history shows one glaring fact above all others: MARXISTS MURDER PEOPLE WITHOUT COMPUNCTION. Marxists also hate Americans, by definition. Three tacks:

1. The men on board the Chinook may have been the same men who participated or had direct knowledge of the staged Bin Laden raid and were killed to permanently silence them. See my email exchange of May 5 above.

2. These DEVGRU men were killed to send a signal to the surviving DEVGRU men who carried out the Bin Laden raid to keep their mouths shut.

3. Certainly, the release of the unit identity of the dead within hours before even family notification could have been made (which requires an IN PERSON visit to the family, remember) was an obvious bow to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the entire muslim world.

..This event was INSTANTLY propagandized by the Obama media as "revenge" exacted for Bin Laden's death. And remember, Bin Laden has been dead for many years. The raid of May 2 was pure stagecraft to distract the world from the release of the forged Obama birth certificate.

..I am not a conspiracy theorist.

..I can't stand Alex Jones or any 9/11 truther.

I have turned down dozens of interviews with such types. In fact, I am a huge believer in the Lex Parsimoniae, which is sometimes called "Occam's Razor", which states that the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one.

..I teach this as part of my job, namely that the cattle markets are neither manipulated nor impossible to operate within at a profit.

The reality is that the cattle industry participants do not make money because they are functionally incompetent. It is very, very simple.

True conspiracies are very rare.

..This entire Obama situation is a conspiracy, and I say that without the slightest hesitation.

.. Obama is not a citizen of the United States, he is a puppet front for a cabal of Marxist-Leninsts including Soros, Ayers, Dohrn, Strong, Jarrett and many, many others. These people are enemies of the United States.

..These people are deeply psychologically damaged, and are capable of ordering people murdered in order to protect themselves and increase their own power. The three dead homosexual black men from Trinity United Church of Christ, Young, Bland and Spencer, all of whom were sexually linked to Barack Obama, were probably the first people specifically murdered by the Obama regime. The hundreds of Mexicans and the two American agents Terry and Zapata were murdered by Operation Fast and Furious in order to advance and increase the power of the Obama regime.

..These SEALS and the others on board that Chinook were almost certainly betrayed and murdered by the Obama regime.

..Why did the Obama regime immediately reveal the unit identity of the SPECOPS forces involved in the first place, despite the fact that DEVGRU was highly classified?

..Why was the personnel composition of the Chinook released IMMEDIATELY today after the helo went down before even family notifications could be made?

WHY? Why would you hand your enemy, Al Qaeda and the Taliban, a massive propaganda coup?

WHY?

..I'll tell you why. Because the Obama regime IS THE ENEMY. They are Marxist tyrants who hold the lives of Americans not just cheap, but in scathing contempt.

..They will say anything, they will do anything, and they will murder ANYONE in order to protect themselves and consolidate and increase their power.

..Please, I beg you, for the love of God and all that is good in this world, read the history of the Soviet Union. Read about Lenin and Stalin and how they murdered people without any hesitation.

..Read about how Hitler was constantly ordering the murder of his own officers. Read about Communist China. Read about Mao and the millions upon tens of millions of murders he ordered. Read about the killing fields of the Communist Khmer Rouge in Cambodia led by Pol Pot. PLEASE.

>>Marxists MURDER PEOPLE. That is what they do.<<

..The Obama regime is MARXIST to the bone. If the Obama regime is not stopped, the 30 Americans murdered today in Afghanistan will be just the beginning. I promise you that.

Ayers and Obama have worked together on books for at least 21 years, and have cooperated in funneling tens of millions of dollars to leftist indoctrination progammes for youth.

...All this you may have already known.

...What is even more chilling is this expose' on how William Ayers is planning to implement their mutual Marxist ideology, should Ayers attain influence on Obama through their long standing relationship. Larry Grathwohl penetrated the Weather Underground to bring this fist hand account of Ayers' (and the Weather Underground's) plans. As you may know, Ayers remains unrepentant to this day, and lives just a few houses away from Barack Hussein Obama. Obama's flimsy and ever-shifting denials of his relationship with Ayers have all but completely disintegrated.

...Furthermore, the prime backer of Obama, Khalid Al Mansour, was a legal assistant to the Black Panther Party (with an office next door).

..It is known from testimony of Weather Underground members that the BPP and Weather Underground worked "very closely" together.

..Therefore it it likely that Mansour (who was advising Obama even before he moved from Hawaii, under the tutelage of Communist agent Frank Marshall Davis), was working with Ayers and Dohrn simultaneously.

..Here, again, is the clip of Larry Grathwohl, who infiltrated the Weather Underground Marxist terrorist organization in the 1970s.

..The Weather Underground was founded by Obama's political godfather, communist mentor (along with Frank Marshall Davis), murderer, and ghostwriter of "Dreams From My Father", Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn.

..In this interview, taped in 1980 while Obama was still just an unknown undergrad foreign scholarship student at Occidental College, Grathwohl describes the leadership of the Weather Underground (which is Ayers and Dohrn) discussing what will be done with the "unreformable, diehard capitalists" once they have overthrown the government of the United States.

..The answer is extermination in camps in the Southwest. The estimated total that would need to be killed? 25 million, which was 10% of the population at the time. Ayers & Dohrn already have overthrown the government of the United States via their puppet protégé, Barack Obama.

..They have guaranteed that the economy will collapse.

The only thing left for them to do is suspend the Constitution and open the camps.

Thx:Ann Barnhard

"Democracy is two wolves deciding what to eat for dinner.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." -Thomas Jefferson-

' Unfit for Command '

2011-09-15T06:09:00.000-07:00

' Narcissist & Chief '

Dr. Sam Vaknin is an Israeli psychologist.

Dr. Vaknin has written extensively about narcissism.

Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love believes "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist."

Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens!

Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves.

Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple, the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time.

All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life.

They gave them hope!! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom.

When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse.

"Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia, a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995".

One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents. Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and the! y do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and do not deserve their attention.

If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him. Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations.

The University of Chicago Law School provided him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father.

Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month.

A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power.

A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America. The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others...They are simply self serving and selfish.

Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not jus t a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous.

Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites.

The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites.

The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960's.

Obama will set the clock back decades... America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America, and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations.

It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.

When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late.

"To the extent that people are pathologically narcissistic, they can be controlling, blaming, self-absorbed, intolerant of others' views, unaware of others' needs and of the effects of their behavior on others, and insistent that others see them as they wish to be seen. ambitious and capable, the inability to tolerate setbacks, disagreements or criticism, along with lack of empathy, make it difficult for such individuals to work cooperatively."

The Making of a Fuehrer
http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html

Perhaps it is time to require each candidate to high office in the USA to submit to a rigorous physical and mental checkup with the results made public.

"The Third Jihad"

2011-09-13T06:30:00.000-07:00

From the producers of the captivating documentary, Obsession, comes a film that explores the existence of radical Islam in America and the emerging risk that this “homegrown jihad” poses to national security, western liberties and the “American way of life.”

The film, which is narrated by devout Muslim American Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, opens with the following statement: “This is not a film about Islam. It is about the threat of radical Islam. Only a small percentage of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims are radical. This film is about them.”

In 72 minutes, the film reveals that radical Islamists driven by a religiously motivated rejection of western values cultures and religion are engaging in a multifaceted strategy to overcome the western world. In contrast to the use of “violent jihad” and terror to instill fear in “non-believers,” The Third Jihad introduces the concept of “cultural jihad” as a means to infiltrate and undermine our society from within.

For more information, or to purchase the DVD: TheThirdJihad.com

Directed & Edited by: Wayne Kopping @WayneKopping
Produced By: Raphael Shore @No2RadicalIslam
Co-Directed and Co-Produced by: Erik Werth
imdb.com/title/tt1436475/

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

The Third Jihad: Radical Islam's Vision for America from Clarion Fund on Vimeo.

The Quran Says that People of Other Religions are
to be Violently Punished in This World

Allah himself fights against the unbelievers (9:30), so why should Muslims not fight in his cause rather than in the cause of evil (4:76)? About 19% of the Quran is devoted to the violent conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims:

Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know (8:60)

Strive hard (Jihad) against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed. (66:9, See also 9:73)

Muslims are to expect a reward in this life as well as the next (4:134), so it makes sense that unbelievers should be punished in this life as well:

…He whom Allah sendeth astray, for him there is no guide. For them is a penalty in the life of this world, but harder, truly, is the penalty of the Hereafter… (13:33:34)

There are at least two places in the Quran where the violent death of non-Muslims is referred to as Allah's reward for unbelief (2:191, 9:26), as in "such is the reward for unbelievers."

In the end, All beings on heaven and earth will be forced to bow down to Allah, either willingly or by force:

And unto Allah falleth prostrate whosoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly (13:15)

Those who resist Islam will be humiliated:

Those who resist Allah and His Messenger will be among those most humiliated. (58:20 - The context for this verse is the eviction of the Jewish tribes of Medina and the confiscation of their wealth, land, and children by Muhammad).

Non-Muslims are to be fought until religion is only for Allah:

And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah… (8:39 – “Persecution” in this context means resistance to Islam – defined in the prior verse as an unwillingness to believe (see verse 38). This passage was “revealed” following a battle that Muhammad deliberately provoked. Verse 2:193 essentially says the same thing and was also “revealed” at a time when the Muslims were not under physical attack).

Those with "diseased hearts" - which include Christians and Jews according to 5:52 - are to be "seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter" (33:60-62) along with "hypocrites" (Muslims who are judged not to be true believers by their associations with unbelievers or their unwillingness to engage in Jihad).

Non-Muslims are to be encroached on and pressured by the Muslims:

See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? (13:41 - See also 21:44)

And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden, and Allah has power over all things. (33:27, See also Bukhari 53:392)

Allah will grant Muslims authority and power over all other people:

Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their religion... (24:55)

(Muhammad's companions continued to self-fulfill this prophecy with an aggressive and senseless military expansion that left a trail of bodies from Spain to India).

Allah provides instructions to Muslims for dealing with unbelievers who are unwilling to accept Islamic rule:

Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them." This because they contended against Allah and His Messenger: If any contend against Allah and His Messenger, Allah is strict in punishment. (8:12-13)

Defeating non-Muslims should be easy for true believers because they are superior in intelligence and understanding:

O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence (8:65)

Other verses of violence may be found here.

Remember that the Quran says that not all men are equal in Islam. This also applies to Muslims themselves with regard to their aggressiveness toward unbelievers. Those who kill or are killed on behalf of Islam are more pleasing to Allah:

Not equal are those of the believers who sit at home... and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and lives" (4:95)

Conclusion

The pattern of violence and aggressive disregard for human suffering that is persistent in Muslim history and contemporary attitude toward non-believers reflects the message of the Quran, which is one of personal superiority and arrogance.

In today's world, Muslim dominance is characterized by the oppression and discrimination of non-Muslims, while Muslim minorities within larger societies are distinguished by varying degrees of petulant demand, discord and armed rebellion. Few Muslims are uncomfortable with this blatant double standard, in which Islam either plays the victim or unapologetically victimizes others, depending on its position of power - and the reason is obvious.

Islam is a supremacist ideology in which the role of non-believers is subordinate to the position of Muslims.

Those who resist Islamic rule are to be fought until they are either killed or fully humiliated and forced to acknowledge their inferior status by converting to Islam or by paying a poll-tax and otherwise accepting the subjugation of their own religion.

There is simply no other religion on earth that draws such sharp distinction between its own members and others, or devotes as much time of its holist text toward condemning and dehumanizing those who merely choose not to follow its dogma.

So much about Islamic terrorism and the general indifference of the broader Muslim community toward the violence makes sense only against this dual nature of Islam - as does the strange willingness of Muhammad's followers to tolerate their own subjugation under Ottoman or Arab tyrants, such as Saddam Hussein, while being violently opposed to a Jewish neighbor state.

The apologists are correct in saying that Islam teaches love and kindness, but they fail to add that this applies only to the treatment of those within the Muslim community. Loyalty to one's own identity group is valued above all else and empathy for those outside the faith is optional at best - and even explicitly discouraged in places.

If this is a "misunderstanding" of Islam by modern-day "radicals," then it is an error that the founder of Islam made as well. In Muhammad's time, non-Muslims were put to death merely for speaking out against the new religion and its self-proclaimed prophet. Likewise, the Jews of Qurayza were summarily rounded-up and executed on Muhammad's order, even though they had not even fought in battle.

Since the life of a non-Muslim is cheap, actual physical harm to a Muslim is not necessary to justify murder according to the example of Muhammad.

The Quran meets every criterion by which we define hate speech. Not only does the message inspire loathing and disregard for others, but the text mandates the superiority of Islam, even if the means of establishment are by force.

In his later years, Muhammad directed military campaigns to subjugate other tribes and religions, "inviting" them to Islam at the point of a sword and forcing them to pay tribute regardless. He set in motion the aggressive military campaigns that made war against all five major world religions in just the first few decades following his death.

Islam incorporates the ultimate devaluation of non-Muslims in the most obvious way by teaching that while a Muslim may be punished with death for murdering a fellow Muslim (Bukhari 83:17), no Muslim can be put to death for killing a non-Muslim (Bukhari 83:50). The Quran’s "Law of Equality," which assigns human value and rights based on gender, religion and status, is the polar opposite of equality in the sense intended by Western liberal tradition, which ideally respects no such distinction.

One can always find apologists willing to dismiss the harsh rhetoric of the Quran with creative interpretation, tortuous explanation or outright denial, but their words and deeds almost always belie a concern for Islam's image that does not extend to Islam's victims - at least not with the same sense of urgency - thus proving the point.

Of course, there are also exceptional Muslims who do not agree with Islamic supremacy and sincerely champion secularism and respect for all people. Some even find verses or fragments of such to support their independent beliefs. But, for these people, the Quran as a whole will always be a constant challenge, since it explicitly teaches the distinct and inferior status of non-Muslims.

Obama and the Burden of Exceptionalism

2011-09-02T02:24:00.000-07:00

If I've heard it once, I've heard it a hundred times: President Obama is destroying the country.

Some say this destructiveness is intended..; most say it is inadvertent, an outgrowth of inexperience, ideological wrong-headedness and an oddly undefined character.

Indeed, on the matter of Mr. Obama's character, today's left now sounds like the right of three years ago.

They have begun to see through the man and are surprised at how little is there.

Yet there is something more than inexperience or lack of character that defines this presidency: Mr. Obama came of age in a bubble of post-'60s liberalism that conditioned him to be an adversary of American exceptionalism. In this liberalism America's exceptional status in the world follows from a bargain with the devil—an indulgence in militarism, racism, sexism, corporate greed, and environmental disregard as the means to a broad economic, military, and even cultural supremacy in the world.

And therefore America's greatness is as much the fruit of evil
as of a devotion to freedom.

Mr. Obama did not explicitly run on an anti-exceptionalism platform. Yet once he was elected it became clear that his idea of how and where to apply presidential power was shaped precisely by this brand of liberalism. There was his devotion to big government, his passion for redistribution, and his scolding and scapegoating of Wall Street—as if his mandate was somehow to overcome, or at least subdue, American capitalism itself.

Anti-exceptionalism has clearly shaped his "leading from behind" profile abroad—an offer of self-effacement to offset the presumed American evil of swaggering cowboyism. Once in office his "hope and change" campaign slogan came to look like the "hope" of overcoming American exceptionalism and "change" away from it.

So, in Mr. Obama, America gained a president with ambivalence, if not some antipathy, toward the singular greatness of the nation he had been elected to lead.

But then again, the American people did elect him. Clearly Americans were looking for a new kind of exceptionalism in him (a black president would show America to have achieved near perfect social mobility). But were they also looking for—in Mr. Obama—an assault on America's bedrock exceptionalism of military, economic and cultural pre-eminence?

American exceptionalism is, among other things, the result of a difficult rigor: the use of individual initiative as the engine of development within a society that strives to ensure individual freedom through the rule of law. Over time a society like this will become great. This is how—despite all our flagrant shortcomings and self-betrayals—America evolved into an exceptional nation.

Yet today America is fighting in a number of Muslim countries, and that number is as likely to rise as to fall. Our exceptionalism saddles us with overwhelming burdens. The entire world comes to our door when there is real trouble, and every day we spill blood and treasure in foreign lands—even as anti-Americanism plays around the world like a hit record.

At home the values that made us exceptional have been smeared with derision. Individual initiative and individual responsibility—the very engines of our exceptionalism—now carry a stigma of hypocrisy. For centuries America made sure that no amount of initiative would lift minorities and women. So in liberal quarters today—where historical shames are made to define the present—these values are seen as little more than the cynical remnants of a bygone era. Talk of "merit" or "a competition of excellence" in the admissions office of any Ivy League university today, and then stand by for the howls of incredulous laughter.

Our national exceptionalism both burdens and defames us, yet it remains our fate. We make others anxious, envious, resentful, admiring and sometimes hate-driven. There's a reason al Qaeda operatives targeted the U.S. on 9/11 and not, say, Buenos Aires. They wanted to enrich their act of evil with the gravitas of American exceptionalism. They wanted to steal our thunder.

So we Americans cannot help but feel some ambivalence toward our singularity in the world—with its draining entanglements abroad, the selfless demands it makes on both our military and our taxpayers, and all the false charges of imperial hubris it incurs. Therefore it is not surprising that America developed a liberalism—a political left—that took issue with our exceptionalism. It is a left that has no more fervent mission than to recast our greatness as the product of racism, imperialism and unbridled capitalism.

But this leaves the left mired in an absurdity: It seeks to trade the burdens of greatness for the relief of mediocrity. When greatness fades, when a nation contracts to a middling place in the world, then the world in fact no longer knocks on its door. (Think of England or France after empire.) To civilize America, to redeem the nation from its supposed avarice and hubris, the American left effectively makes a virtue of decline—as if we can redeem America only by making her indistinguishable from lesser nations.

Since the '60s we have enfeebled our public education system even as our wealth has expanded. Moral and cultural relativism now obscure individual responsibility. We are uninspired in the wars we fight, calculating our withdrawal even before we begin—and then we fight with a self-conscious, almost bureaucratic minimalism that makes the wars interminable.

America seems to be facing a pivotal moment: Do we move ahead by advancing or by receding—by reaffirming the values that made us exceptional or by letting go of those values, so that a creeping mediocrity begins to spare us the burdens of greatness?

As a president, Barack Obama has been a force for mediocrity. He has banked more on the hopeless interventions of government than on the exceptionalism of the people. His greatest weakness as a president is a limp confidence in his countrymen. He is afraid to ask difficult things of them.

Like me, he is black, and it was the government that in part saved us from the ignorances of the people. So the concept of the exceptionalism—the genius for freedom—of the American people may still be a stretch for him. But in fact he was elected to make that stretch. It should be held against him that he has failed to do so.

Thx: SHELBY STEELE

Mr. Steele is a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. Among his books is "White Guilt" (Harper/Collins, 2007).

'Against all Enemies'

2011-08-26T04:16:00.000-07:00

Michael Oberndorf says if I recall correctly -- which I do -- the federal oath of office binds employees thus:

"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

I would like to take a look at that word "domestic" as it applies to what has and is occurring in America.

As most of you are aware, the fascist and Marxist Left has, over the years, infiltrated and virtually taken over middle and upper management of our government agencies. Land and environmental management agencies, especially, have been infested with radicals and extremists. The way the Democrat-run inner cities keeps them infested with rats, cockroaches, and criminals.

As early as 1946, the Left began a strategy to use people’s concern for the environment to impose government control over land use. They tricked people into accepting laws that on the surface appeared designed to protect some aspect of the environment, but vague or ambiguous language in hidden clauses gave government the power to regulate and control our property, our businesses, and our lives. Today, we see this manifest in the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the totally misnamed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The EPA, wielding these laws like battle axes aimed at our heads, has been unleashed by the Obama-Soetoro administration with orders to attack our last source of affordable power. This should surprise no one. On November 2, 2008, Obama-Soetoro told the nation that he intended to bankrupt the coal industry and the coal-fired producers of electricity. In fact, he told us we couldn’t keep using air conditioning and heat. The insane reporting requirements for "greenhouse gas emissions," which will cost consumers tens of millions of dollars, are just the beginning. What the American people stopped by defeating cap-and-trade, the Democrats are now trying to impose through administrative rules and executive orders.

Obama-Soetoro and his environmentalist henchmen seem determined to lower Americans to the same level as the his brother, George, living in mud huts with no electricity or running water.

What concerns me just as much as this socialist onslaught is the lack of response from the supposed opposition. Where are the outraged calls for Congress to take back its usurped authority? Where are the demands to abolish the unconstitutional, rogue EPA? Where are the voices insisting that genuine, unequivocal scientific proof be required for each and every claim of harm to the environment? Where are the patriots in government standing up to the domestic enemies of America? Our misleaders are ominously silent.

Over and over, the eco-fascists on the environmental Left have been shown to be deceptive revolutionaries whose only aim is the destruction of capitalism and the United States. Yet the Ministry of Propaganda (the "mainstream" media) remains complicit in this, eagerly publishing or parroting every press release of every conceivable Green group as if it were a message sent directly from God.

And now, without proof or provocation, the radical zealots at the EPA are moving to destroy our ability to produce the electricity we need to survive as anything other than a Third World nation.

We the People need to stop worrying about being so polite, so tactful. The moronic Marxist minions of the Democratic Party have no problem telling us to go to Hell, calling us racists and terrorists, and threatening us with bodily harm. We need to stop using euphemisms. These people are totalitarians, fascists, and Marxists, out to enrich themselves and their cronies while they destroy our country. They need to be stopped cold, removed from office, and jailed where appropriate.

We are under attack, from within.

Let’s fight back!!.

Thx: The Obama File

The Federal Beast is not what our Founding Fathers intended.

It is time to put the Federal Beast back in the coral!

Obstruction of Justice..treason!!!

2011-08-21T09:27:00.000-07:00

Eric Holder caught lying to Darrell Issa ,commits Perjury -

Operation Gun Runner Fast and Furious ..Obama is a warmonger, murderer, terrorist and pathological liar.

Impeach, convict and execute!!!

Weapons from the failed federal operation "Fast and Furious" have reportedly been linked to 11 more violent crimes in the U.S., including in places like Arizona and Texas where a total of 42 weapons were seized.

As early as January 2010, guns tied to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosions were found at crime scenes in cities like Phoenix, Glendale and El Paso, the Los Angeles Times first reported.

On May 3rd, under oath before the House Judiciary Committee, Attorney General Eric Holder testified he had only known about Operation Gunrunner for “about 3 weeks” prior to his testimony.

This, despite various media reports on the operation, as well as internal questions being asked by high ranking members of Congress months prior to Holder’s May 3rd testimony.

Now adding to the growing evidence that Eric Holder lied to Congress is the most recent release of DEA administrator Michele Leonhart’s letter to Darrell Issa that greatly expands the federal government’s role in the tragic operation – a letter that further indicates that Holder’s Department of Justice had to have been involved as well, a fact further supported by ATF Director Ken Melson’s secret Fourth of July interview with members of Congress in which he indicated Attorney General Holder’s DOJ was obstructing the Congressional investigation into Operation Gunrunner.

The information provided by Melson was so powerful it initiated an equally powerful letter from Congressman Issa to Eric Holder stating the following:

“If his account is accurate, then ATF leadership appears to have been effectively muzzled while the DOJ sent over false denials and buried its head in the sand. That approach distorted the truth and obstructed our investigation.”

It now appears high ranking federal agency heads are pointing collective blame for the failed operation directly at Barack Obama’s Department of Justice. A looming question yet unanswered is why would Attorney General Eric Holder make such an obvious and easily provable lie under oath to Congress? Why risk both his career, reputation, and personal freedom in doing so?

>> His motivation to protect someone even higher up than himself in the Obama administration must have been significant..and Impeachable! <<

Read more: http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/the-ulsterman-report-dea-pointing-gunrunner-blame-toward-eric-holder/#ixzz1VgPBorzL

Under the program, 1,418 firearms were circulated though the number of disappeared guns is still unknown.

In a letter obtained by Fox News, Justice Department officials said last month they are cooperating with congressional investigations and the Justice Department inspector general's office.

It also acknowledged that ATF Acting Director Kenneth E. Melson "likely became aware" of the operation as early as December 2009.

But Republicans leading the congressional probe into Fast and Furious replied to Attorney General Eric Holder in a letter Tuesday, saying that many of his answers to their inquiries were "non-responsive."

"We are disappointed that the Department has chosen to play word games rather than simply responding with as much detail as possible about these additional 11 cases," wrote Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and Sen. Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee.

Meanwhile, three supervisors in charge of the program are being transferred to Washington for new management positions at the agency's headquarters. The decision to promote William Newell and David Voth, both field supervisors who managed the program out of the agency's Phoenix office, and William McMahon, who was the ATF's deputy director of operations in the West, earned criticism from U.S. Sen. John Cornyn.

"Until Attorney General (Eric) Holder and Justice Department officials come clean on all alleged gun-walking operations, including a detailed response to allegations of a Texas-based scheme, it is inconceivable to reward those who spearheaded this disastrous operation with cushy desks in Washington," Cornyn, R-Texas, wrote to Holder.

To paraphrase President Dwight Eisenhower, the country is governed by a powerful and coordinated political-media complex, which is determined to maintain the status quo regardless of the wishes of the American people.

Their lust for power is so great and their greed so boundless that Washington, D.C. is willing to accept and protect an illegal and criminal President.

To retain their privileged positions, they are prepared to violate their oaths of office, illegally circumvent the Constitution, erode the rule of law and ignore their constituents.

Identity & Eligibility

2011-07-31T05:55:00.000-07:00

51 Bullet-Pointed Facts That Dispute Barack Obama’s Identity & Eligibility to be President of The USA! Share This

1. The Unenforced Definition of “Natural-Born Citizenship”
The U.S. Constitution requires that a presidential candidate be a natural-born citizen in order to be eligible for the office of President.

In seeking to define the meaning of “natural born citizenship”, those who blindly support Obama desperately seek a minimalist’s definition of the term. They desire that a natural-born citizen is one to whom may be ascribed as few requirements as possible in order that a candidate, with whom they share ideological fetishes, can be president regardless of his actual fitness for the office. They seek to assume jurisdiction over the declaration of being “natural born” in the minds of as many as possible while contending that “natural born citizenship” means the fewest, most remedial natal circumstances possible, which will allow their politigod, Barack Obama, just enough legitimacy to squeak by and be eligible.

Their definition allows Obama to merely meet what they consider the most easily argued, though obviously unverifiable characteristics of Obama’s obscure citizenry, in this case, his birth place.

However, unfortunately for Obama supporters, the purposed intent of our founders was not so slight in this matter. They sought to make the meaning of being a natural born citizen the highest, most laudable position of all forms of citizenry. After witnessing the corruption and inbreeding and treasons of monarchal rule, America’s founders desired that becoming President of the United States to be as difficult as possible…politically, socially and biologically.

All arguments seeking to diminish this truth are reprobate and defamatory, made in the interest of serving one’s own political lust, not defending the sovereignty of our Constitution or upholding the value of the blood ransom paid by our people.

Hence, logically, our founders induced that the highest form of eligibility for the highest office would be a lawful mandate.

Consider the following:
Taking survey of all possible circumstances which, therefore, lend credibility to one’s claim to legitimacy, and thereby, eligibility to lead, there is much more to consider than simply one’s location of birth. In order to meet the highest standard intended by our founders, we must also consider that biology must also meet this standard. Not only is it essential that a presidential candidate be born under the sovereign geographic protection of our Constitution, he must also be conceived by two parents of native citizenry, possessing U.S. citizenship.

Moreover, let’s consider further extension of this ideal by commanding that a presidential candidate also be conceived legitimately within the bounds of legal marriage of their parentage. Having been measured and found wanton, those subservient to bias for persons over their respect for the office would not embrace this noble ideal. For them, uplifting the standard of the presidency remains an inferior cause to diminishing the requirements in order to provide access for their inferior candidate. Therefore, they seek to minimize the standard, not maximize the person.

Of course, this would disqualify many from being the President…as so it should!

However, let’s not even stop there. We should also assume that our founders sought to ensure that a presidential candidate had also preserved their natural-born citizenship from “conception to election”, never having allowed it to be revoked, or never having it revoked even against their will. For, even those who lose their eligibility to no fault of their own should bear up in faith that this is the intention of higher power, sacrificing for the sake of sovereignty of the office rather than opportunity for the man!

Let all of these metrics define the standards of natural-born citizenship in America. Bannish minimalism and seek the highest mark in the spirit of exceptionalism forged by our forefathers! Hold this mantle lest that crown be stolen by any upon the earth without seeking the interests of God and country first! Daringly and boldly, let these marks serve as the highest definition of humanity’s advanced citizenship and the prescribed metrics for eligibility to be President of the U.S.!

We should set a higher bar, not lower it. It is impossible to choose one’s own natural-born citizenship because it is preeminent and incumbent to one’s birth. Historical writings, along with related legal precedents strongly suggest this form of citizenship is achieved when natural circumstances make it impossible for that individual to have any citizenship or allegiances other than with the United States at the time they are elected as President. Research of America’s founding culture reveals that a very heavy emphasis was placed on legitimacy at birth.

Therefore, it is probable that one’s most authentic degree of natural born identity does not occur at birth, but at conception. With this in mind, we must consider that the framers of the Constitution assumed it was commonly understood that the definition of “natural-born citizenship” for a presidential candidate to mean a citizenship status that was not just acheived by the event of birth but that it was a maintained status from “conception to election” in order to qualify a sovereign candidate. This is the most complete definition of natural born citizenship possible. There is no other degree of more complete natural circumstances which can establish the status of one’s existence.

Therefore, theoretically, natural-born citizenship, in its purest, ineradicable form, could be measured by three metrics:

1) Biological conception by two U.S. citizen parents

2) Birth in a geographic region under the protection of the U.S. Constitution

3) Maintenance of that citizenship status without any unnatural interruption of parentage, legal process or administrative procedure.

This means that their citizenship has never been achieved by any legal or administration process at or after birth. Dual citizens and expatriates are not natural-born citizens. Those who lose their natural-born status by taking the citizenship of another country or denouncing their natural born U.S. citizenship cannot regain it. A natural-born citizen is one who was born within a geographic region under the protections of the U.S. Constitution AND to two U.S. citizen parents, they being either natural-born or legally naturalized through immigration or repatriation.

Despite ongoing, unanswered questions about his geographic origins, Obama does not meet the requirements to be a natural-born citizen for two possible other reasons:

1) His alleged biological father, Barack Obama Sr., was not a U.S. Citizen

2) He was adopted by his muslim, Indonesian step-father, Lolo Soetoro, in the mid 1960s thereby taking Indonesian citizenship, thus forfeiting natural-born status.

“Preventing an individual with plural loyalties, whether by biological, political or geographic origins, which may present lawful or perceptable doubt as to his allegiances thereof, other than one with the fullmost sovereignty of advanced citizenry, which is that of one who remains natural-born from conception to election, from assuming the great power of this fragile office, was, without tolerance or vulnerability, the exaction of purpose of our fathers to induce the mandate of presidential eligibility upon our blood-ransomed Constitution…”

2. The Suddenness of Obama
The American public was essentially made nationally aware of Barack Obama following his 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention. Obama’s emergence into national politics was not a gradual inception. It was a sudden, covert ascendance to power seemingly assisted by foreign-like forces as an assault on vintage American conscience.

Obama was elected to the U.S. Congress as a Democratic Senator from Illinois in November, 2004, after his candidacy was promoted in the state by a vastly corrupt, liberal, Chicago-based political cartel and a conglomeration of burned-out, 1960′s, radicals like Bill Ayers and Madeline Talbott. Then despite his lack of executive experience, in February, 2007, after only two years of serving at the federal level, Obama announced his candidacy for the 2008 Presidential election defeating Hillary Clinton, a 17-year veteran of federal politics and former First Lady, for the Democratic Party Nomination.

Obama went on to then defeat John McCain, a decorated war veteran and a 34-year seasoned expert in federal politics as a longstanding Arizona senator, having been elected by a bowing consensus of ashamed white liberals, Bush-hating radicals and angry, racist minorities seeking reparative justice.

By all observable metrics, Obama should have been considered nothing but a long shot to contend for the DNC nomination. Instead, he defied these odds and even his own advice when, in 2005, he said,

“In order to run for president, a person needs to know what they are getting into…I am not confident I have that experience yet.”

3. The Foundations of Natural Born Citizenry
When the founders of America wrote the Constitution, they included the “natural-born” mandate in order to ensure that no President would be subject to, or exercise, a plurality of political interests in their international relationships. Having experienced the corruption of a monarchy in Great Britain for generations, the founders of America, after declaring and defending their right to freedom from that corruption during the Revolutionary War, wrote the constitution within the legal framework of empowering inalienable rights and protection of the American people, not empowering the government.

Upon declaring independence from the crown, after seeing the destructive consequences of an intermingling of international loyalty through forced Royal intermarriage, in-breeding, monarchal polytheism, power sharing, birthright subversion and support of covert insurrections of inferior nations, the founders made it a law that any President had to be a natural-born citizen.

4. Logan Act Violated By Obama
With this mind, we learned, in October, 2008, that American author and columnist, Jerome Corsi was arrested while visiting Kenya during an investigation which revealed that Barack Obama had actively campaigned for and contributed money to Kenya’s Democratic Socialist Orange Party candidate, Raila Odinga, from 2006 to 2008. Corsi had traveled to Kenya and acquired correspondence and documented evidence showing that Odinga, a fellow Luo tribe descendant and alleged paternal cousin of Obama, had entered into a written agreement with the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF), a highly influential and radical Kenyan Islamic foundation, seeking Odinga’s support for, among other things, Sharia Law, in exchange for the Islamic group’s support of Odinga’s candidacy.

The evidence acquired by Corsi also shows that Obama was aware of this agreement even while he was raising more than a million dollars of American money to support Odinga’s campaign. The Orange Party Movement is the communist opposition party to President, Mwai Kibaki’s Party of National Unity (PNU).

Obama’s involvement in the Kenyan election, while an elected official of the U.S., was clearly a violation the Logan Act which prohibits American politicians from influencing or participating in foreign elections. The Obama Administration’s U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, has refused to pursue any investigation of Obama’s activities with Odinga in Kenya in 2006 until 2008. In 2008, video of Obama’s speeches on behalf of Odinga surfaced on YouTube and several other websites which clearly show Obama stumping for Odinga.

In the aftermath of the December, 2007 election, which Odinga lost, the Orange party leadership and members of Kenya’s Luo tribe incited violence among his radical constituents. Kenyan Muslims engaged in a week long violent demonstration in which they burned nearly 1000 Christian churches and murdered almost 1000 of Odinga’s political opposition which are members of the predominantly Christian, Kikuyu tribe. Under the threat of this violence, with the support of Obama and the Bush administration, the Kenyan majority PNU Party was forced to take an unprecedented action in the history of its government by artificially amending its constitution in order to create a leadership position for Odinga who was ensconced as the country’s first Prime Minister in April, 2008.

The tragic events and violence of the 2007 Kenyan election were the exact consequences the founders of America were trying to prohibit U.S. government officials from instigating or being influenced by.

Obama’s geopolitical connections, along with his probable biological relationship with the Kenyan Communist Party, now an active part of the Kenyan government, creates a relationship vulnerable to illicit influence. Obama has now brought that illicit relationship, and all of its consequences, with him into the office of the U.S. Presidency. The founders wisely understood that the mandate of Natural born citizenry for a President is the best possible protection against such vulnerability.

5. Suspicious Nomination Certifications
In July, 2009, documents were revealed showing that Obama was never officially certified to run for president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, by the Hawaiian Democratic Party. On August 27, 2008, the Hawaiian Democratic Party created a customized Nomination Certification document for Obama containing the following words:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado.”

In comparison, unlike the 2008 Hawaiian OCON for Obama, in every other previous Presidential election, the Hawaiian Democratic Party has certified the nomination of their state’s Democratic candidate with the following words:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the United States Constitution…”

Notice that the wording of HDP’s 2008 Official Certification of Nomination omits the words “…under the provision of the United States Constitution…”

Upon receiving Hawaii’s State Nomination Certification for Obama, which omits the reference to the Constitutional legality of Obama’s nomination, the National Democratic Party Office created two separate documents with the same header title, “Official Certification of Nomination”, both versions were signed by Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Democratic National Convention, and Alicia Travis Germond, Secretary of the Democratic National Convention and notarized by a Denver notary. One of these versions was sent from the National Democratic Party headquarters to each of the 49 states’ Democratic Party headquarters.

However, only the State of Hawaii received an Official Certification of Nomination from the DNC containing the words:

“…the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution…”

The document then lists Barack Obama and Joe Biden as the candidates. However, the rest of the 49 states received a different Official Certification of Nomination containing the words:

“…the following were duly nominated as candidates of said party for President and Vice President of the United States, respectively…”

Why was the state of Hawaii’s local Democratic Party headquarters sent a different OCON document from the National Party headquarters than the other 49 states?

There is strong evidence suggesting that Hawaii’s local Democratic Party officials refused to certify Obama’s nomination as being Constitutionally eligible. As a result, Hawaii’s Election Commission, headed by Kevin Cronin, jockeying behind closed doors, refused to place Obama on the Hawaiian ballot under Hawaiian Election laws mandating that every candidate seeking placement on the Hawaiian presidential election ballot must be certified as “Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States”.

Since the DPH refused to place this language in its Official Certification of Nomination, Obama, therefore, required that the National Party Committee, headed by none other than Nancy Pelosi, take responsibility for declaring the constitutional eligibility of his nomination under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, even though his eligibility had never been vetted or verified as legal.

This has never happened in the history of America’s vetting endorsement process and indicates that the Democratic National Party leadership, including Nancy Pelosi, was made aware that there was a legal problem with Obama’s candidacy. However, the DNC certified it anyway and, in doing so, committed federal election fraud.

6. State Ballot-Fail!
It is the responsibility of each states’ party head office to certify that their candidate is Constitutionally eligible to serve in coordination with their state’s laws. Since Obama was not Constitutionally certified to run in the state of Hawaii in 2008, no other Secretary of State, in any state, ever confirmed that Obama was vetted by federal or party authorities in their state prior to being placed on the 2008 Presidential ballot there.

In fact, nearly a dozen Secretaries of State, including Hawaii’s, have officially refused to reveal any information about the vetting of Barack Obama in their state because they simply cannot even show that he was actually proven to be eligible there.

7. PUMA: The First Birthers
In early summer, 2007, the so called “Birther” conspiracy theory was first created by renegade members of an ultra leftist group known as the PUMAs. (That’s right! They were leftists). They were a splinter group of hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters who did not want to surrender the Democrat party nomination to Obama after a hard fought campaign leading to the 2008 Democratic nomination. In June, 2008, PUMAParty.com began promoting the idea that their party’s nomination of Barack Obama could be overturned on constitutional grounds that he was not eligible to be president based on the fact that he may not be a natural born citizen.

Thus, the Birther movement actually began in the minds of liberals, not “right-wing nuts” as Obama zealots love to claim.

8. Hawaiian Certi-Fiction
Shortly after PUMAparty.com began clamoring for a more thorough review of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility, the image of a document containing sparse information about Obama’s alleged birth was posted on the internet by undisclosed sources, from an unknown origin. The image appeared on extreme leftwing websites like the Daily Kos, The Huffington Post and later on two websites claiming to be non-partisan reviewers, Factcheck.org and politifact.com.

One of the fact checking sites is sponsored by the Annenberg Foundation from which the Chicago Annenberg Project received a large educational grant. Obama served as the chair on the board of directors for the Chicago Annenberg Project in 2002.

9. Certification of Identity, not Natural Birth
The 2008 document image was determined to be created by an unknown source from a digital template form of a Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” which is a surrogate, independently published, municipal cover document issued to those applying for copies of birth certificates in the state of Hawaii since 2000. In response to Y2K system updates the State of Hawaii began migrating from paper copies of original birth records to digitally created printed documents. The state of Hawaii openly admits to changing its document format under the guise of preventing identity theft.

10. Cartoon Fun
In 2009, it was demonstrated by three separate document specialists that an image of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was easily constructed and falsely authenticated using two different medical imaging software programs. This demonstration discredited the State of Hawaii’s claims that its “Certification of Live Birth” provided better protection against identity theft than old paper copies of the Certificate of Live Birth.

11. Department of Hawaiian Native Homelands
The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was found to be so unreliable in clarifying the bearer’s legal and demographic identity that the State of Hawaii’s own Department of Native Homelands refused to accept it as a primary source of identification for its applicants seeking to purchase Hawaiian land reserved for genealogically native Hawaiians. Before 2010, the agency’s website stated:

“In order to process your application for identification as a native Hawaiian, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands utilizes information that is found only on the Original (Long Form) Vault Birth Certificate (‘Certificate of Live Birth’, not ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’), which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of birth than the ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Long Form Birth Certificate will save you time and money since the computer-generated ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ requires additional verification…”

Only after it was determined that the Department of Hawaiian Homeland’s policy against the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” conflicted with another Hawaiian state agency, the Department of Health’s, political endorsement of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, was the policy changed and the wording against the credibility of the document scrubbed from its website. This led many to accuse the State of Hawaii government of selling out to protect against exposing the ineligibility of Obama rather than upholding the eligibility of thousands of potential native land owners in Hawaii. Some actually accused Hawaii’s land management of selling out to a liar while native Hawaiians were at risk of being deprived of their right to purchase native lands because non-natives could now use a less credible version of identification when applying for a land purchase.

12. Hawaii Denies COLB Image
After all was said and done, the State of Hawaii has refused to ever confirm that it issued the 2008 document image. In light of sophisticated, digitally based document imaging technology, the authenticity of the image remains highly questionable, especially without the official endorsement of the Hawaiian Health Department. Some independent reviewers have, unequivocally, determined the image to be a forgery.

13. The Million Dollar Birth Cerificate
On August 21, 2008, Philadelphia based attorney, Philip Berg, filed the first of several high profile cases attempting to force Obama to show authentic, legal, original documentation proving that he is eligible to be president of the U.S. Berg is a lifelong, registered Democrat with a history of running for Democratic office in Philadelphia. Following Berg’s case, other plaintiffs have filed similar suits including Alan Keyes and several military officers, all of which have been dismissed by irresponsible judges refusing to weigh the merits of evidence in the cases.

Some judges have even gone on record as saying the reason they dismissed their case was because “Questions about Obama’s eligibility had already been answered on Twitter.”

Since then, Obama has paid more than 1.6 million dollars to the Washington law firm, Perkins Coie to prevent the release of his original birth certificate, which costs about 20 dollars to order from the State of Hawaii.

14. Executive Order No. 13489
Obama was ensconced as President on January 20, 2009. Just one day after his inauguration, he signed Executive Order No. 13489 which essentially violates the Freedom of Information Act and prohibits the release of Obama’s personal and presidential records, during and after his presidency, by the National Archives without first being consulted by the National Archives Director and the Attorney General. Seven days later, Obama gave his famous “Transparency Will Be the Touchstone of This Administration” speech in which he hypocritically admonished previous administrations for what he feels are “too many secrets kept by government in Washington”. Obama vowed to change how government deals with secret information by making his administration more open.

Since this dishonest, landmark speech, the Administration has fought to keep Obama’s past secret more than any other President in American history.

15. Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin
In April, 2008, after the fraudulent dismissal of more than two dozen civilian court cases which had been filed against Obama attempting to force him to produce original documented evidence of his natal identity, a highly decorated officer with more than 17 years of unblemished service in the U.S. Army brought the Obama eligibility into the active military ranks. Lieutenant Colonel, Dr. Terrence Lakin, an active duty flight surgeon serving the President’s Chief of Staff and working as a commanding ranked physician of a critical care facility, refused to deploy for duty in Afghanistan under his legal right to refuse orders that he, as an officer, believes are illegal.

According to Lakin, Barack Obama has not demonstrated provable, documented evidence that he is eligible to hold the office of President and is, therefore, not legally qualified to issue orders to the United States military as Commander In Chief. Lakin’s oath upon becoming an officer is to defend the constitution, not the president. His duty, as an officer to refuse deployment orders he believes are illegal, are legitimate based on clear and concise legal grounds. Despite this fact, however, Lakin pleaded guilty to a circus court under the command of the Obama administration’s military staff, and was sentence to six months in prison and dismissal from the service.

He has since been lauded and exalted for his sacrifice and commitment to his duty to defend the Constitution. Supporters may contribute to his fund at TerryLakinActionFund.com

16. The History Of Standard U.S. Certificates of Live Birth
As census and vital statistics documentation methods evolved, the U.S. Department of Health has utilized a document template with the header title, “Certificate of Live Birth” since the early 1900’s. The U.S. National Vital Statistics Division, since its first published data report in 1915, refers to the U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” as “The standard ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, issued by the National Vital Statistics Division, has served for many years as the principal means of attaining uniformity in the content of the documents used to collect information on this vital event.” This document has evolved throughout a 110 year process with input from the National Conference on Vital Records and Statistics, the National Vital Statistics Division, The Census Bureau and the municipal state agencies are assigned with the responsibility of gathering, storing and reporting natal statistics to the U.S. Department of Health. Although it has undergone state specific revisions to support municipal laws and identity protection, it is important to note that it has never undergone a reduction in vital data content.

17. Hawaii’s Rogue Document
The standard, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document template has been slightly revised by various states for the purpose of meeting identification and formatting needs, such as concealing the social security numbers of the parents. However, no state, except one, has ever reduced the overall quantity of information contained about the bearer’s natal identity, such that it is now impossible to determine their natural-born status, and then used that reduction of vital information in an endorsed document form. Only the State of Hawaii has created this form of independently published, digital documentation.

18. Hawaii Violates Federal Guidelines
In the entire 110 year history of the standard, official, federal, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document’s existence, only the state of Hawaii has gone astray from the standard version to such a degree that it actually conceals one’s full natal identity rather than reveals it. When comparing document forms, the use of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” is an unauthorized reduction of content otherwise prescribed to confirm the bearer’s natal identity and, essential to verifying one’s eligibility to be a candidate for president, the bearer’s natural born status.

19. Exploitation of Hawaii’s Lost Culture
Because of its remote, water-locked, geographic characteristics; its tumultuous indigenous history; and a vulnerable culture altered by a transference of sovereignty in the late 1800’s, the Hawaiian islands gained a reputation for maintaining a vague process for documenting immigration, vital events and indigenous population. Historical archives dating between 1890 and 1941 reveal that the Hawaiian Islands served as an unofficial, but widely pursued, sanctuary for thousands of foreign expatriates seeking protection from political persecution in China, Japan, Southeast Asiatic nations, the Middle East and, later, the United States.

This multicultural instability resulted in the implementation of less than thorough procedures for recording and differentiating native born, immigrant and indigenous populations.

One example of this surrogate nativity was granted to a Mr. Sun Yat Sen, a Chinese expatriate who received an official Certificate of Hawaiian Birth in 1904 stating that his birth had taken place in Hawaii in November, 1870. However, later evidence revealed that Mr. Sun’s birth had actually occurred in China in 1866. Archives reveal that the state of Hawaii has provided similar documentation to thousands of immigrants over the years without ever confirming their age, the birth place or their actual identity.This murky process was further complicated when Hawaii became a state of the U.S. which demanded that it begin implementing the federal documentation standards for U.S. citizens as well, in 1959.

Vulnerabilities in Hawaii’s documentation process created passive conditions which allowed unidentified inhabitants to later proclaim any identity, or multiple identities, they desired to serve their individual interests.

20. Hawaii’s Communist Past
Based on investigations in the 1950’s and 1960’s, a disproportionate concentration of pro-communist activity was found to have become a part of Hawaiian culture. This is substantiated by an increase in the population and activity of communist sympathizers identified by the House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings conducted after WWII, during the beginning of the cold war between the U.S. and communist Russia. Evidence of pro-communist presence in Hawaii can be found in publications like the Honolulu Record in which one of Obama’s communist mentors, Frank Marshal Davis was a columnist.

Obama Sr. would later return to Kenya sometime in the mid 1960’s to promote his communist economic theories and work in government with his friend and leader of Kenya’s communist KANU party, Tom Mboya.

21. Hawaiian Document Proven Deficient
In August, 2008, a former U.S. Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics Registrar stated that the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” cannot be considered an original birth certificate created at the time of occurrence of the birth because

“…it does not contain the signature of the licensed medical professional qualified to determine the characteristics of a live birth in accordance with administrative requirements established by the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division, and it does not contain the name and location of the hospital which issued the original record, which would be a U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” if the child was born in the United States.”

Further investigation of Hawaii’s revised statutes reveal that the Hawaiian Department of Health not only contends with federal law, it also contradicts its own self-declared authority to issue falsified birth nativity under HRS 338-17.

22. Hawaii’s Self-endowed Permission To Violate Federal Law
Hawaii Revised Statute HRS 338-17.8 states:

“Certificates for children born out of State.(a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]”

The law permits anyone born to parents who claimed Hawaii as their residence within one year of their birth, at any time before or after the enactment of the law, regardless of the actual location of the birth, to receive an original birth record which states that the location of birth is Hawaii, and, therefore, occurred in the U.S. Hawaiian lawmakers have confirmed that the law is not constrained to the date of birth. It is applicable to the date of application for the certificate.

This means this law would enable Obama, anytime after the age of 21 to apply for and receive a newly created original Hawaiian birth certificate after providing evidence that his mother or father merely resided in Hawaii for one year prior to his birth. He could have applied for this certificate any time since is parents are known to have resided in Hawaii since 1960. He could have been born outside of the U.S., however, the State of Hawaii is obligated by law to grant him an original birth certificate stating that Hawaii is his birth place simply because he was able to show that his parents claimed Hawaii as their residence.

Moreover, the evidence provided with Obama’s application may not be reviewed by any third party under this law. Only the Director of the Department of Health is granted with the authority to determine the validity and deadlines required in providing such evidence. In essence, under Administrative Rule 91, the state of Hawaii has empowered a state-level, municipal employee to determine the federal, natural-born status and therefore, the Constitutional eligibility, of any individual, even a sworn enemy of the United States, seeking the most powerful office in the world.

23. Obama’s Own Words
On page 26 of his 1995 Autobiography, Dreams From My Father, Barack Obama admits to possessing a copy of his original birth certificate in the late 1970’s. This document was an official copy of an original vital record assumed to still be filed with the office of Vital Statistics in the city where Obama was born, wherever that is. Why does Obama not still possess this copy and where is the original used to produce it? Where is the official, original birth record used to produce the document which Obama himself admits to having more than thirty years before being issued a fake document from Hawaii?

Why is Obama lying about this document? What information does this document contain?

24. Obama Loses Natural-Born U.S. Citizenship By Adoption
Barack Obama claims to have lived in Indonesia with his mother from approximately 1967 to 1971 where he assumed the surname of his step father, Lolo Soetoro and became a citizen of Indonesia. Since Obama became a citizen of Indonesia, he forfeited any claim he may have had to Natural-born citizenship in the U.S. Recall, a Natural-born citizen is one whose citizenship is achieved by natural circumstances which, if unrevoked, make it impossible for them to have citizenship loyalties to any other governing power. If a Natural-born citizen becomes a citizen of another country at any time prior to running for the office of the president, he or she is no longer eligible.

Because of this forfeiture, Obama is not eligible to be president because his Natural-born status cannot be reclaimed once legal or administrative procedures are employed to repatriate him in the U.S.

Also, despite Obama’s claims that he remained in Indonesia during this time, there is photographic evidence placing him in Hawaii in 1969. Questions remain how and why Obama may have traveled to Hawaii at this time, including any documentation he used, which raises doubts about the validity of his origins narrative, and therefore, doubts about his identity.

25. What’s In a Name?
Barry or Barack, Soetoro or Obama, or Subarkah? Records from his time in Indonesia reveal that Barack Obama has used at least one other alias and possibly two. He was registered for school under the name Barry Soetoro as a muslim student. When Obama applied for state bar license in 1992 to practice law in Illinois, the application asked if he had ever used an alias. He stated that he had not at that time.

There is evidence that suggests Obama was not honest about his use of other names throughout his life. Recent passport application information submitted by his mother in the 1960’s reveals that Obama may have had a third surname of “Subarkah” which his mother had written on the application.

26. Dunham’s Secret Absence
Many records exist confirming Ann Dunham’s presence in Hawaii from late summer of 1960 until February of 1961. However, from February until September, 1961, there are no records or eyewitness accounts of her presence in Hawaii. In fact, the void is quite stark. Obama was allegedly born during this void of time in Dunham’s documented life. The next record indicating her possible location is a class registration record showing that she had enrolled in classes for fall term of 1961 at the University of Washington, just two weeks after allegedly giving birth to Obama in Hawaii.

27. Dunham Too Young To Confer Citizenship
Ann Dunham turned 19 years old in November, 1961, almost four months after Obama was allegedly born in August, 1961. Citizenship laws in effect in the U.S. in 1961 required the mother of a child born outside the U.S., to a foreign father, to have lived in the U.S. for 14 consecutive years, five of which had to be after the age of 14. Since Dunham had not yet turned 19, she was not legally able to confer citizenship to Obama if the birth occurred outside the U.S.

Therefore, Obama is, at a minimum, a citizen of Great Britain. The founding fathers, in writing the eligibility mandate, having fought a Revolutionary War against Great Britain, would have rejected Obama as a presidential candidate for this reason.

28. Hospital Mystery
No official records have ever been provided from any authoritative source to prove that Barack Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children. Not one administrative authority from Kapi’olani has ever verified or provided original patient records showing that Ann Dunham was ever a maternity patient there. As a testament to the longstanding controversy over Obama’s birth hospital, in the original ‘Early Life’ section of Barack Obama’s Wikipedia biography, beginning on March 3, 2004, it was stated that he was born in Queens Hospital. It was later clarified as Queens Medical Center.

In 2006, it was omitted and remained blank until June, 2008 when editors stated that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center. On January 24, 2009, Kapi’olani Medical Center, on the occasion of the hospital’s centennial celebration, allegedly received a letter in which Obama wrote, “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center – the place of my birth – I am pleased to add my voice to your voice of supporters.” It was later admitted by administrators at Kapi’olani that the letter was a facsimile created in a digital format.

To date, no administrator, or official of the Obama administration has ever confirmed that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center.

To date, Obama’s operatives have failed to identify the identity of Obama’s actual birthing doctor.

29. Obama’s Use of Multiple Social Security Numbers
In 2010, Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels and Colorado private investigator John Sampson revealed that President Obama is using a Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state. In addition, the records indicate the number was issued between 1977 and 1979, not 1961 at the time of Obama’s birth. Moreover, Obama’s earliest employment reportedly was around 1975 at a Baskin-Robbins in Oahu, Hawaii. The Social Security website confirms the first three numbers in his SSN are reserved for applicants with Connecticut addresses and start with 040 through 049.

“Since 1973, Social Security numbers have been issued by our central office,” the Social Security website explains, “The first three (3) digits of a person’s social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number.”

In April, 2011, further investigation by ex-CIA personnel confirmed that Obama’s social security number was fraudulently issued after the original owner of the number, who had once resided in Connecticut, died in Hawaii in 1977. As a result, it is now supported by evidence that Barack Obama is committing social security fraud and that his number was issued through channels possibly provided by his grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, who worked in the financial and banking industry and who had ties to communist support organizations and international interests.

It is highly likely that Obama, when issued his current social security number, was not a legal citizen of the U.S. and, having access to records through his grandmother, was allowed to use the number after its original owner had died. It has been shown that the original owner of Obama’s social security number had opened at least one account at the bank where Madelyn Dunham was employed in Hawaii in 1965.

30. Obama’s Father Not a U.S. Citizen
Obama’s alleged father was a Kenyan national with citizenship in Great Britain. His birth registration is recorded in the British National Archives, General Register Office “Registers and Returns of Births, Marriages and Deaths in the Protectorates of Africa and Asia, 1895-1965″. Obama’s children are also contained in these registers. He attended the University of Hawaii from 1959 to 1961 before abandoning Obama Jr. and Dunham to attend graduate school at Harvard in 1962.

Since Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, it is impossible for Obama to be a natural-born citizen.

The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” which has been misrepresented as the federally accepted, official document issued by the state of Hawaii for Barack Obama’s birth shows Obama’s father’s race as “African”. Unfortunately, this term violates the U.S. Department of Health’s acceptable classifications of race for official birth certificates. According to NVSD protocols, Obama Sr. is classified as a “Negro” in 1961, not “African”. The term “African” is not even an option in the NVSD manual. Africa is a continent not a race. For example, there are white people from Africa, but they would not be categorized as “African”. Using this premise, we could argue that Obama’s Certification of Live Birth should also list his mother’s race as “North American”?

If using geographic association in describing Obama’s mother’s race is so ridiculous, why is it acceptable to explain his father’s?

The use of the term “African” to describe the race of Obama’s father is yet another diminishment to the credibility and authenticity of Obama’s natal records. The inclusion of such a non-specific, vague, unclassifiable, misrepresentative term to describe an individual’s demography only raises yet more doubts about the ability of the Hawaiian Health Department to convey accurate vital statisics documentation.

31. Obama Marriage Mystery
To date, no documented evidence exists proving that a legal marriage between Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham ever occurred in the U.S. The two were allegedly married in Hawaii in early 1961, after Obama Jr. was allegedly conceived sometime in November, 1960. However, no public announcement, or eyewitness of the marriage or marriage license has ever been found.

In Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams From My Father”, he states,

“In fact, how and when the marriage occurred remains a bit murky. A bill of particulars I have never quite had the courage to explore. There is no record of a real wedding, a cake, a ring, a giving away of the bride. No family members were in attendance. It is not even clear that people back in Kansas were even informed.”

Obama’s admission that ‘There is no record of a real wedding’, raises yet another doubt about his long disseminated, life biography with regard to the status of the relationship between his parents. The unanswered questions about his parents marriage contradicts the accuracy of testimony and records declaring Obama’s identity, such as his birth announcements in two Honolulu newspapers which undeniably state that his parents were married, and divorce documents which do not contain any reference to a legal marriage license.

There are fundamental questions about the relationship between Obama’s parents which no one has been able to answer. If they were married in Hawaii, what is the name of the officiate presiding at the wedding? Where did it take place? Does the Hawaiian Vital Statistics office possess a copy of the Obama’s marriage license which they used to determined their marital status for the birth announcements? If so, why was the Obama marriage never announced in those same papers? Why was the wedding kept secret?

Was the marriage even legal given the evidence that Obama Sr. was already married to a woman in Kenya?

32. Divorce Decree and Custody Documents
In 2009, a set of what appears to be authentic document images of a Divorce Decree shows that Stanley Ann Dunham was awarded an uncontested divorce from Obama Sr. in March, 1964. The Divorce was granted in a Hawaiian civil Court on March 5, 1964 after a hearing to determine custody rights of the parents of Barack Obama Jr. According to the document images, Dunham had filed for divorce in January, 1964. The set of documents posted on the internet in 2009 are suspiciously missing the official birth certificate of Barack Obama Jr. which was requested by the court in order to confirm parentage.

33. Obama Sr. Already Married
Obama’s father was apparently a bigamist. He was allegedly already married to a woman in Kenya when he allegedly married Barack Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. Obama’s other wife’s name was Kezia Aoko (also found as other spellings). This would nullify any marriage to Dunham because it is illegal in the U.S. to be married to more than one person.

34. Suspicious Death
Obama Sr. died in 1982 after an alleged car accident. Recent investigations into his death reveal unanswered questions about his declining professional status and his strained relationship with Tom Mboya after he published a scathing report called, “The Problem with Our Socialism”, criticizing Mboya’s economic development plan for Kenya.

35. Birth Announcements
In early 2009, researchers discovered announcements of Obama’s birth in two separate Honolulu-based news papers. An investigation of the procedures used to publish birth announcements reveals that the information used by the news papers came directly from the Hawaiian Department of Health’s bi-weekly birth registration lists. These birth announcements are typically published for registrations over a two week period and do not contain the location of the birth. The announcements always assume, without exception, that the parents are married, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” reveals that of the 17,616 births in Hawaii in 1961, there were 1044 illegitimate births in which the father was not identifiable. An average of three per day!

In every case, without exception, both papers publish all announcements with the surname of the father as if they are always married and with the assumption that two parents always exist at the time of birth, even when the father is dead. The announcements do not publish the first names of the parents or child, nor do they identify the name of the registrant. They publish the sex of the child, the address of the registrant and the day and month of the birth. The announcements do not print the location of the birth, the name of the attending physician, the name of the hospital, the time of birth or the given name of the child.

36. The Paper Chase
An analysis of all of the birth announcements published along with Obama’s announcements in both newspapers reveals that both papers published the exact same announcements, including quantity of birth announcements, in the same exact order and in the same exact contextual format in both papers. The announcements are not published in alphabetical or chronological order which begs the question: What system was used to determine their order? They are obviously not randomly ordered since they appear in the same order in both papers. The possible answer: Geographic birth registration numbering. An investigation of the U.S. Department of Health’s archived natal data reports reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on the location of the registration office they are received in.

37. Obama’s Other Address
The birth announcements were published containing the registrant’s address at 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., Honolulu, HI. This address has been proven by investigators to be the residence of Obama’s grandparents, Stanley and Madeline Dunham, as well as Obama’s mother. Directory records available in 1961 show that Obama’s father, Obama Sr., resided in an apartment at 625 11th Avenue, near the University of Hawaii. Why would a married man list an address for the birth of his son that was not his address?

38. Birth Registration Protocols
An investigation reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on their associated location to the regional vital statistics registration office in which the vital event is recorded. There were four such offices available in Hawaii in 1961, two of which served immigration processing and vital events originating outside the Hawaiian Islands. Obama’s alleged birth registration number, 151-1961-010641, indicates that his birth was registered in one of these regional offices.

39. Non-Sequential Birth Registration
Obama’s birth registration number appears to be non-sequential with other births recorded at the time of his birth. One example cites the standard “Certificate of Live Birth” records of twins born to Eleanor Nordyke, whose births occurred 19 hrs after Obama’s alleged birth in Kapi’olani Medical Center. The twins were assigned birth registration numbers ending in 037 and 038, respectively. Obama’s birth was assigned number 041 despite the fact that his birth allegedly occurred before the twins in the very same hospital. If no other births occurred between Obama’s and the Nordyke’s, one would expect that Obama’s birth registration number would end in 036, not 041. If other births did occur in the 19 hours between Obama’s and the Nordykes’, Obama’s registration number would be expected to be even lower.

40. Chiyome Fukino, Hawaii’s Reluctant Accomplice
On October 31st, 2008, and, again on July 27th, 2009, the Director of the Hawaiian Department of Health released the only two official statements by the government of the State of Hawaii about Obama’s natal records. In her October, 2008 statement she release the following:

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record. Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawaii.”

The statement does not specify the type of original birth certificate on record and directly contradicts statements made by an official of the Hawaiian elections Office that the State of Hawaii does not possess an original birth certificate for Obama. Fukino further clarified her statement eight months later with the following:

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

The problem with this second statement is, first, she, again, does not identify the title of the “original vital records” documents she has seen. Notice she uses the word “records”, plural. Whether they are a U.S. Certificate of Live Birth, a Delayed Certificate of Live Birth or a Certificate of Foreign Birth accompanied with testimonial documents, medical records or other evidence is not disclosed by Fukino.

Second, she violated Hawaii’s identity protection law, the very same HRS 338-18 she cited in her first statement, by disclosing information from the vital records about Obama’s unverified birth place. If she is so willing to provide this private information, why not disclose the rest of it? Answer: Because this information serves the bias of the State of Hawaii’s endorsement of Obama’s legitimacy. Otherwise, Fukino would also disclose the other information that perhaps is NOT so favorable to Obama, as well, such as the title of the ‘original vital records’ or whether the certificate had been amended.

Third, and most grievous, as a state-level, municipal employee way out in the State of Hawaii, Fukino neither has the federal authority, nor the qualifications to determine the Natural-born status of a candidate for federal office. In fact, Fukino’s audacious, bizarre proclamation is laughable and only exposes the State of Hawaii’s fragile confidence in their documentation procedures, let alone its ability to declare the historical meaning of Natural-born citizenship. That job falls under the federal authority of the Secret Service, the State Department in coordination with the state Elections Offices.

41. Hawaii’s Amazing Legitimate Birth Rate
Both papers also published the nearly two dozen announcements assuming that every child was born to married parents living at the same address, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” shows that there were 1044 illegitimate births in Hawaii in 1961 in which the father was not identifiable. This is an average of three illegitimate births per day! Over the nine day period of births covered by the announcements in these two issues, one would expect to see at least one single mother, or unmarried couple, giving birth among the more than two dozen announcements surrounding Obama’s birth from late July to early August, 1961.

In fact, a review of every issue of the newspapers in the entire year of 1961 shows that all birth announcements were published by “married parents”. If the newspapers indeed printed accurate announcements based on testimony from the actual parents or family members there should be some information which does not conform to this cookie-cutter identical format when comparing each announcement between newspapers. However, the rigidity of the format, and the possibility of inaccuracies, led investigators to conclude that the originating information used to publish birth announcements in 1961 was not conveyed from the parents or family directly to the newspapers, but instead was first processed by a single municipal source, before being provided to the news papers.

Therefore, since we know Hawaii registers foreign births as being native births, the announcements would be published without the location of the birth, or marital status of the parents, as a consideration. This then would suggest that if there is any inaccuracy originating with the source information, which occurs in the transference between the registrant and the municipal authority, the newspapers would never see the necessity to confirm the accuracy of the information. Why would a newspaper take official information certified from a government agency in the form of a list and then expend resources to get a second opinion about its accuracy from the original registrant? They wouldn’t.

The newspapers print announcements without ever knowing if they are accurate or not when the information comes from the local municipal authority.

Therefore, since the municipal authority does not create its birth list discerning between native birth and foreign birth registrations it employs the policy of only publishing the address of the registrant, not the location of the birth. Since the municipal authority treats all births as legitimate, by default, it would construct the birth registration list as though the parents are married in every announcement and submit the list to the newspapers who would publish what appears to be all local, native births to married couples. The problem with this flawed procedure is that the announcements are not an accurate account of the actual facts of the natal event.

Unfortunately, there is no legal requirement that a birth announcement in a newspaper must match the metrics of an official birth certificate.

42. The Welfare of Baby Obama
Upon analyzing the procedures used to publish birth announcements, we discover vulnerabilities in the assumptions about the accuracy and content of the birth announcements. With a simple explanation, it becomes much more reasonable to assume that Obama’s birth announcements were never a part of some crazy-minded conspiracy but, instead, were simply the result of being included in the Hawaiian Health Departments birth registration lists after Obama’s birth was registered by Obama’s grandparents, more than likely, for the simple reason of making sure their daughter and grandson could receive state benefits as resident citizens of the U.S. Obama’s grandparents were indeed residing at the published address found in the announcements.

However, ignorant, hostile Obama supporters enjoy the opportunity to claim that so-called “birthers” believe a conspiracy of such magnitude that Obama’s birth announcements were planted in the Hawaiian papers in 1961 just in case Obama might run for president some day. This is a ridiculous canard. Only a blind ideologue would fail to realize that birth announcements do not verify Constitutional eligibility in the first place.

Therefore, both sides of the argument, either lauding birth announcements or ridiculing them, as a viable part of any conspiracy to promote the legitimacy of Obama is idiotic. If Obama’s birth announcements were not automatically conveyed by the registrar, they were more than likely submitted in collaboration with his mother or grandparents as a practical matter in order to simply share the news of Obama’s birth with the community and to, possibly, act to secure Obama’s eligibility for welfare and baby formula, not a nomination to the presidency.

However, without publishing the identity of the registrant, the editors of the newspapers printed all of the week’s announcements based on typically practiced protocols after receiving the official birth lists from the Hawaiian Department of Health. There was nothing premeditated or fraudulent about this. Municipal laws were followed and journalistic standards were correctly assumed considering the official source in the newspapers’ view. The possible breakdown in accuracy occurred as a result of the Department of Health’s legal ability to include foreign births in the Hawaiian birth registration lists and the registrant omitting birth location information, while the papers did not print it any way.

43. Obama’s Secret Natal Data
According to the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of theU.S. Volume 1 – Natality”, natal statistics were harvested using a “50% sampling method” and, furthermore, statistics were taken only from “even-numbered birth records” in 1961. Since Obama’s birth registration was allegedly an odd number, his unique natal statistics would remain ureported by the State of Hawaii, and unpublished as part of the U.S. Department of Health’s annual natal data report.

This is relative in the fact that, since Obama was a bi-racial, (categorized as non-white) baby allegedly born to an 18-year old, white mother and a non-white, non-citizen father, in an urban hospital in Hawaii in August of 1961, his natal statistics would be extremely notable and rare for this time and place. In fact, statistics show that less than 1 in 20,000 births occurred under these circumstances within the demographic classifications used by the National Vital Statistics Division in 1961.

The unconventional circumstances surrounding Obama’s birth are very conspicuous.

44. No Witnesses of Obama’s Birth Still Alive
To date, no living eyewitness of Obama birth exists. It is assumed that his birth was witnessed by at least three people including his doctor and his mother. However, no documentation of the birth has been provided containing the name of the doctor or eyewitnesses.

45. Obama’s Radicalism
Obama has lived a life wrought with radicalism. In his book, “Dreams From My Father”, Obama writes,

“…I chose my friends carefully, the more politically active black students, the foreign students, the Chicanos, the Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.”

In the late 1970’s a teenaged Barack Obama met Frank Marshall Davis while the two were both living in Hawaii. Davis, an avowed member of the Communist Party and one of the era’s poetic pioneers of fierce anti-American radicalism, developed a paternal-like relationship with Obama, which Obama acknowledges in his book, “Dreams From My Father”. The 1951 report of the Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified him as a Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA) member.

Obama has maintained lasting relationships with radicals throughout his entire life. He worked with ACORN activist and chapter leader, Madeline Talbott in 1992. He had a close personal relationship with domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers and served with Ayers on the board of the Woods Foundation, a radical Chicago-based education activism organization. Obama attended a church for 20 years where radical pastor, Jeremiah Wright, still maintains an anti-American ministry under the guise of Black Liberation Theology.

As the Obama presidency rampaged through its first year, Senior Environmental Advisor, Van Jones, resigned in early September, 2009 amidst a firestorm of controversy over his criminal and communist past. Then, in November, Anita Dunn resigned her position as White House Communications Director when video surfaced which exposed her as being in favor of the communist philosophy of Chinese dictator and mass murderer, Mao Tse Tung. Dunn admitted her communist inclinations in a speech to a group of high school students.

46. The Deaths of Lt. Quarles Harris and Donald Young
Quarles Harris was a key witness in a federal probe into charges that Obama’s passport information was stolen from the State Department, when he was fatally shot in front of a Washington D.C. church. Harris had been working as a contractor at the State Department and was cooperating with federal investigators when he was murdered.

In December, 2007, Donald Young was a choir leader at Obama’s church, First Trinity Baptist, and school teacher, who many believe had carnal knowledge of Obama’s past. Young was found shot to death in his Southside Chicago apartment.

47. Larry Sinclair’s Bizarre, But Probable Story
Of all the sordid stories circulating about Obama’s past, the one told by Larry Sinclair is the darkest. Sinclair posted a YouTube video alleging that he and President Barack Obama engaged in sexual acts and drug use together in 1999, when Obama was an Illinois State Senator. He claims that then-State Senator Obama procured powdered cocaine for Sinclair, and crack cocaine for himself, which Obama allegedly smoked.

Sinclair also alleges that their drug use was followed by sex acts that included Sinclair performing fellatio on Obama. These acts were alleged to take place in a limousine from which Sinclair provided cell phone records to prove his location on the dates in question. Testimony from the limosine driver has never been publicly published. Sinclair was asked to provide “intimate details” about Obama’s physical features which would prove Sinclair’s claims. His testimony has never been published or made public. Sinclair confesses openly that he is a convicted felon having served time for check fraud and drug possession.

Sinclair repeated his claims about his relationship with Obama in a highly publicized press conference at the National Press Club on June 18, 2008.

48. Passport Documents Released
Documents released in July, 2010, and posted on the Scribd.com website, show that Barack Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, applied for a passport in 1981, the same year Obama traveled to Pakistan. Dunham’s applications show that she had applied for and received three separate passports and a renewal between 1965 and 1981. However, in yet another example of convenient government complicity to obscure Obama’s actual past, the Hillary Clinton-led State Department claims that a General Services Administration directive in the 1980s resulted in the destruction of passport applications and other “non-vital” passport records, including Dunham’s 1965 passport application and any other passports she may have applied for, or held, prior to 1965. The released records also document that on Aug. 13, 1968, Ann Dunham applied to have her 1965-issued passport renewed for two years, until July 18, 1970.

The documents also reveal yet another possible name used to identify Barack Barry Hussein Obama Soetoro. According to the application for Dunham’s 1976 passport she uses the parenthetical name of (saebarkah), or perhaps “Subarkah”, which is a surname commonly found among Indonesian citizenry.

The existence of records of a passport or travel documents prior to 1965 would reveal information on Dunham’s circumstances at the time of Obama’s birth. Therefore, we can now add Ann Dunham’s original passport to the litany of records and documents now missing from Obama’s biographical history.

49. Tim Adams
In July, 2010, Tim Adams, a senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu Elections Office in 2008, made the stunning claim Barack Obama definitely was not born in Hawaii as the White House maintains, based on information he was told by the Vital Statistics Office in Hawaii that there is no original birth record on file for Barack Obama. In a televised interview, Adams reported that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama does not even exist in the Aloha State. Adams’ statements conflicted directly with repeated affirmations by public officials in Hawaii that they had seen or had inspected Obama’s birth records that would document his representations that he was born in the state.

“There is no birth certificate,” said Adams after leaving his position with the Elections Office and now teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green.

“It’s like an open secret. There isn’t one. Everyone in the government there knows this. I managed the absentee-ballot office. It was my job to verify the voters’ identity.”

50. Hawaiian Governor Offended
In December, 2010, newly elected Hawaiian Democratic governor, Neil Abercrombie proclaimed that he is undertaking an effort, in consultation with the Hawaiian Attorney General, to make Obama’s original birth documentation available to the public. In making his proclamation, Abercrombie claims that since he was a friend of the Obama’s during their attendance at the University of Hawaii and thereafter, he is personally offended by accusation from doubters that the Obama’s were involved in nefarious dealings with regard to Obama’s natal identity. Abercrombie said he also feels it is disrespectful to the office of the presidency to question Obama’s eligibility.

Despite being an alleged friend of the Obama family, Abercrombie was not invited to the couple’s alleged Hawaiian wedding in 1961, nor was he present at the alleged 1961 Hawaiian birth of Obama.

In response to Abercrombie’s proclamations, both Fox and MSNBC, while reporting on the story, admitted for the first time that Obama had not yet released an original version of his official, 1961, federal, U.S. Certificate of Live Birth signed by the attending physician bearing the name and seal of the hospital.

After exercising all of his gubernatorial power, Abercrombie later admitted to media that he could not find any official, original standard Certificate of Live Birth for Obama. Four months later, Hawaii released the image of the very document Abercrombie allegedly could not find.

51. Caught In the Lie
The Forgery of Obama’s “Long Form Certificate of Live Birth”. On April 27, 2011, the Obama White House confirmed the release of a digital image of a purported document claimed by White House officials and Obama himself as his official, original Long Form Certificate of Live Birth issued by the Hawaii Health Department.

In the months following the image’s release, multiple document analysts and computer experts have denounced the image as a forgery stating that it exhibits “…blatant and poorly concealed artifacts and characteristics which make it impossible to have been created in the 1960’s before printing and typographic technologies existed”… which are shown to have been used to produce the document.

One expert, with more than 30 years of experience with Adobe called the image a “literal joke”.

Among many of the document’s failures at authenticity are the artifacts revealing it was produced by a computer printer, not a typewriter, technology which did not exist in the State of Hawaii’s Health Department in 1961.

"You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however long and hard the road may be. For without victory there is no survival. Nothing less than....Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat."

"This is the lesson: never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."

~ Sir Winston Rally cry

Citizens4Freedom

OBAMA NATURAL BORN CONSPIRACY

2011-07-21T07:58:00.000-07:00

Evidence that we have a fraud and a usurper currently residing in the people’s White House is overwhelming, despite the overt lack of journalistic investigating on the part of the American press. But now new evidence indicates that the conspiracy to carry out that fraud was much broader than originally thought.

The story of whom and what Barack Hussein Obama II really is – is a forty-year story that requires a book, not a column, to tell. Strong evidence suggests that he was being groomed from a very young age for the moment in history that would end American supremacy in the world, and usher in a new era of Global Marxist Governance.

But there was a major hurdle that had to be overcome - the U.S. Constitution, in this case, Article II – Section I – Clause V specifically, which requires that “no person except a natural-born citizen of the United States” can hold the office of President. – Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States…and may not even be a legal citizen of the United States. So, how can he be President?

This column focuses upon the period 2003-2008 and the political maneuvers that took place in order to make way for America’s first unconstitutional resident of the White House.

Efforts to Eliminate the Natural Born Requirement (2003-2005)

Proving that the players involved knew the correct definition of natural born citizen borrowed from the Law of Nations by our founders - 1) those born in the country, of parents who are citizens; 2) those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights; 3) The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; 4) in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen. – that they knew Barack Hussein Obama II did not meet that definition as a foreign or dual citizen via his father’s British citizenship and that they worked feverishly to find a way around this constitutional requirement for office, as Obama was about to become president…

The effort to remove the natural-born citizen requirement from the U.S. Constitution actually began in 1975 – when Democrat House Rep. Jonathon B. Bingham, [NY-22] introduced a constitutional amendment under H.J.R. 33 which called for the outright removal of the natural-born requirement for president found in Article II of the U.S. Constitution – “Provides that a citizen of the United States otherwise eligible to hold the Office of President shall not be ineligible because such citizen is not a natural born citizen.”

Bingham’s first attempt failed and he resurrected H.J.R. 33 in 1977 under H.J.R. 38, again failing to gain support from members of congress. Bingham was a Yale Law grad and member of the secret society Skull and Bones, later a lecturer at Columbia Law and thick as thieves with the United Nations via his membership in the Council on Foreign Relations.

Bingham’s work lay dormant for twenty-six years when it was resurrected again in 2003 as Democrat members of Congress made no less than eight (8) attempts in twenty-two (22) months, to either eliminate the natural-born requirement, or redefine natural-born to accommodate Barack Hussein Obama II in advance of his rise to power. The evidence is right in the congressional record…

1. On June 11, 2003 Democrat House member Vic Snyder [AR-2] introduced H.J.R 59 in the 108th Congress - “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsors: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14]; Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10]; Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4]; Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49]; Rep LaHood, Ray [IL-18]; Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4].

2. On September 3, 2003, Rep. John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 67 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]

3. On February 25, 2004, Republican Senator Don Nickles [OK] attempted to counter the growing Democrat onslaught aimed at removing the natural-born citizen requirement for president in S.2128 - “Natural Born Citizen Act - Defines the constitutional term “natural born citizen,” to establish eligibility for the Office of President” – also getting the definition of natural born citizen wrong. – Co-sponsors Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK]; Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA]

4. On September 15, 2004 – as Barack Obama was about to be introduced as the new messiah of the Democrat Party at the DNC convention, Rep Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] introduced H.J.R. 104 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.” – No co-sponsors.

5. Again on January 4, 2005, Rep John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 2 to the 109th Congress – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the Office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]

6. Rep Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] tries again on February 1, 2005 in H.J.R. 15 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.” – No Co-Sponsor

7. On April 14, 2005, Rep Vic Snyder [AR-2] tries yet again with H.J.R. 42 – “Constitutional Amendment - Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4]

8. All of these efforts failing in committee and the 2008 presidential election looming with an unconstitutional candidate leading the DNC ticket, Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO] tries to attach the alteration to a military bill in S.2678 on February 28, 2008 – “Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act - Declares that the term “natural born Citizen” in article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution, dealing with the criteria for election to President of the United States, includes any person born to any U.S. citizen while serving in the active or reserve components of the U.S. armed forces.” – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] – (This was the first effort to also assure that GOP Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain [AZ] would be cleared to run against the DNC primary victor.)
From June 11, 2003 to February 28, 2008, there had been eight (8) different congressional attempts to alter Article II – Section I – Clause V - natural born citizen requirements for president in the U.S. Constitution, all of them failing in committee—All of it taking placing during Barack Obama’s rise to political power and preceding the November 2008 presidential election.
In politics, there are no coincidences… not of this magnitude.

Finally on April 10, 2008, unable to alter or remove the natural born citizen requirement to clear the way for Barack Obama, the U.S. Senate acts to shift focus before the election, introducing and passing S.R.511 – declaring Sen. John McCain a “natural born citizen” eligible to run for and hold the office of president. There was never any honest doubt about McCain, the son of a U.S. Navy Commander. The Sponsor of the resolution is Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO]

S.R.511 States that John Sidney McCain, III, is a “natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States. S.R511 passed by a 99-0 unanimous consent of the Senate, with only John McCain not voting. The basis was – “Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens;” – a condition not met by Barack Hussein Obama II. – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT]; Sen Webb, Jim [VA]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (They had made certain that John McCain would run against Barack Obama)

However, in the McCain resolution is also this language – “Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the United States; - Whereas the term ‘natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;”

The U.S. Constitution is not a dictionary. The definition of “is” is not in the constitution either. Yet this is the text that would later be issued in Congressional Research Service talking points memos distributed to members of congress, to protect an individual that all members of congress know and understand to be an “unconstitutional” resident of the people’s White House – Barack Hussein Obama II.

Once again, as the political left was unable to alter the U.S. Constitution by way of legitimate constitutional process, they resorted to altering the constitution via precedent setting, in short, knowingly electing and getting away with seating an unconstitutional president in order to alter Article II requirements for the office via breaking those constitutional requirements.

The press would not ask any questions and the American people were already too ill-informed of their constitution to know or too distracted by daily life to care. The press would provide the cover, swearing to the lies of an unconstitutional administration put in power by criminal actors focused only on their lofty political agenda of forever altering the American form of government.

The people would be caught up in a steady diet of daily assaults on their individual freedom and liberty and overlook the most obvious constitutional crisis in American history, the seating of an unconstitutional and anti-American president.

Evidence of What?

· Barack Obama is an unconstitutional resident of the people’s White House
· He did not become America’s first unconstitutional president alone, he had help
· While most of the criminal cabal are Democrats, some are Republicans
· Every member of congress knew Obama was ineligible for the office of president
· Every member of the U.S. Supreme Court knows that Obama is unconstitutional
· Every intelligent member of the press knows the truth, but won’t dare tell this story
· Numerous people tried to remove natural born citizen from the constitution
· They all know the correct definition of natural born citizen and applied it to John McCain
· None of these people wants to apply the same definition to Barack Obama
· Nobody in the Federal Government is going to do anything about the greatest constitutional crisis in American history, because all of them are complicit on one level or another

As a result, the DNC was forced to remove the “constitutionally eligible” language from the 2008 DNC certification of the Obama-Biden ticket, omitting from the certification the following language –
“and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.”
Instead, the DNC only certified that the Obama-Biden ticket was duly nominated for the offices of President and Vice President, using the following language –

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively:” (Note that the word “through” is misspelled in both DNC versions, indicating that it is an alteration from the same document.)
Later, adding insult to injury, responding to endless public demands for documentation that would prove Obama eligible for the office he currently holds, the Obama White House issued not one but at least two (2) blatant forgeries, the first in the form of a Hawaiian COLB (Certification of Live Birth – not to be confused with a common birth certificate), and then a forged (so-called long form) Birth Certificate, otherwise known as an actual birth certificate.

Meanwhile, the entire U.S. Press has been blatantly complicit or terminally derelict in their total lack of interest in investigating or reporting these facts. The fourth estate had become a fifth column.

The Greatest Fraud Ever Perpetrated

The Obama conspiracy to seat an unconstitutional president is the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people and it has drastically altered the American system of self-governance from a constitutional republic to a corrupt democracy of frauds elected by fools.

Obama did not do this alone - he had a lot of help, including from an ignorant electorate.

But these wheels were set in motion in the late ‘90s and placed in overdrive in 2003. Numerous government officials were involved in the conspiracy to defraud the American people out of their government, including key Republicans like Darrell Issa and Tom Coburn. Every member of congress, the courts and the press, have been given the cover-up talking points by the Congressional Research Service and so far, not one individual has the honor or decency to break from those talking points and tell the American people the truth. Their government had been stolen…

Where was Obama while the Path was being cleared?

1992
· Barack Obama begins working at the firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Gallard as a junior lawyer, hoping to work on civil rights cases.
· Barack Obama is teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School.
· 1992 is an election year. Barack Obama becomes the director of Illinois Project Vote, an organization focused on registering minority voters. Obama registers approximately 100,000 new voters, primarily in the African-American community.
1995
· Before achieving a single significant accomplishment in life, Barack Obama releases his first memoire, Dreams from My Father. The creation of the Barack Hussein Obama II story begins.
· November 7, 1995 - Barack Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, dies of ovarian cancer.
1996
· Barack Obama wins the Democratic nomination for the seat, and is elected to the Illinois State Senate.
1998
· After failing to accomplish anything in the Illinois Senate for two years, Barack is re-elected to the Illinois Senate.
1999
· Barack Obama runs for U.S. Congress and loses due to his record of not showing up for key votes in Illinois.
2002
· Barack Obama is re-elected to the Illinois Senate. Politically, his stock is rising, not due to a record of accomplishments, but rather due to his increasing circle of influential friends including Rev. Wright and William Ayers.
2003
· Despite the title of Illinois most absent Senator, Barack Obama becomes chairman of the Illinois Senate’s Health and Human Services Committee.
· In January 2003, Barack Obama formally enters the race for the United States Senate. Team Obama destroys Democratic rival, Blair Hull, by exposing his domestic abuse allegations.
2004
· Barack Obama wins the Illinois primaries with 53 percent of the vote. In the general election, Barack Obama faces Republican candidate Jack Ryan.
· Team Obama pushes Jack Ryan out of the race with reports of a sex scandal.
· July 7, 2004 - Boston, Massachusetts: The Democratic National Convention introduced the new messiah of the Democrat Party to the world when 42 year old Barack Obama, who had yet to accomplish anything, becomes the hit of the John Kerry convention by the handy work of Sen. Ted Kennedy. [MA]
· November 2, 2004 - Barack Obama, 43, is elected for the U.S. Senate.
2005
· January 4, 2005 - Barack Obama is sworn in as a U.S. senator.
· Barack’s first law is passed with Republican Tom Coburn.
2007
· February 10, 2007 - Barack Obama announces his candidacy for President of the United States in the 2008 U.S. presidential election.
2008
· June 3, 2008 - After defeating Senator Hillary Clinton in the primaries, Barack Obama becomes the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party for the 2008 presidential election.
· November 3, 2008 - Barack Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, age 86, dies of cancer, just one day before the Presidential Election.
· November 5, 2008 - Barack Obama wins the US Presidential Election and becomes the first UNCONSTITUTIONAL President of the United States

In short, as Obama was rising through the ranks of Democrat Party power and being systematically groomed as the new messiah of the party, friends of the movement were busy making way by trying repeatedly to remove Article II – Section I – Clause V from the U.S. Constitution. When they failed to do it legitimately, they did it via setting precedent.

Despite a total lack of significant accomplishment, Obama was clearly fast-tracked by Democrat Party powers and even the massive Clinton War Machine was no match for the people behind Obama’s unparalleled rise to power.

Now you know how this nobody from nowhere came to power in almost no time at all with a completely blank résumé, and if you follow the names attached to the flood of initiatives to eliminate natural born citizenship as a requirement for the office, you can see some of the folks behind that effort.

Since many of the key figures in the three branches of the Federal government were involved in this conspiracy, we know that we cannot rely on anyone at the Federal level to address this crisis, and since we have watched the U.S. press run cover for it, we know not to expect any help from them in returning America to her people.

Only the People Can End this Crisis

From 2003 through 2008, member of congress worked to eliminate Article II – Section I – Clause V of the U.S. Constitution, requiring that all presidential candidates be natural born citizens of the United States.
In 2008, fifty state Secretaries allowed the name Barrack Hussein Obama to appear on their state ballot for the president, despite the known fact that Barrack Hussein Obama did not meet the constitutional conditions for the office sought, and that the Democrat Party had intentionally failed to certify Barrack Obama as constitutionally eligible for office.

On January 20, 2009, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Roberts administered the presidential oath of office to an individual and every member of the Supreme Court had knowledge that Barrack Hussein Obama failed to meet constitutional requirements for the office he was about to take.

The Chief Law enforcement officer in our country is head of the Department of Justice, Eric Holder. A long-time leftist comrade of Barrack Obama who uses the power of the office to silence the vice of American dissenters, while protecting all who intend America harm.

The voting fraud is so prevalent in America today that it is almost impossible to rely upon the election system as a means of correcting anything and even if you could rely on the system, decent honest qualified leaders do not run for political office in this cesspool we call a country today.

Only 25% of the nation strongly supports this White House resident, which means 75% have great doubts, with more than 35% strongly opposed.

Only the people can put this nation back on track to freedom and liberty, the rule of law and our beloved constitutional republic and they cannot do it in the election booth.

The people must rise up, stand together and hold these criminal actors accountable for the theft of our government which has become the greatest threat to the American way of life in history.

The people must wake up, stand up, come together and put this evil down and they must do it while they still have the power to do so. TAKE ACTION TODAY!

The name Barrack Hussein Obama II cannot appear on the 2012 President ballot and neither can the name of any co-conspirator. Every citizen who wants to live in freedom tomorrow must contact the appropriate officials today!

1) CLICK HERE to demand that your State Officials take immediate action to investigate the crimes of the 2008 Election, and make certain that this can never happen again by holding those responsible fully accountable. Barrack Obama should not have been on the ballot in 2008 and he cannot be allowed to appear on the ballot again in 2012.

2) CLICK HERE to send a letter to editor notifying the press of the most serious constitutional crisis in American history!

3) A list of co-conspirators will be served for their direct involvement in the effort to subvert and remove Article II of the U.S. Constitution. (More information on this effort will be forthcoming)
Government Communication software is made available to the general public at no charge, by The United States Patriots Union of Sheridan Wyoming. It’s up to the American people to demand proper solutions, take this action and follow-up until elected servants begin to act in the best interest of the people.

Thx : JB Williams

Also :
http://theobamafile.com/_BogusPOTUS/200907July.htm

The United States Library of Congress has selected
TheObamaFile.com
for inclusion in its historic collection of Internet materials

“Dear Mr. Speaker,

2011-07-15T05:43:00.000-07:00

A Common Sense Guide to What Needs to Be Done...

When the Founders at the Constitution Conventional in 1787 created the House of Representatives, it was fashioned to act as the voice of the people within the institutional checks and balances of the Federal Government.

That’s why the entire House faces reelection every 2 years. That’s why Constitutionally, you don’t have to even be a member of Congress to serve as speaker. And that’s why the Constitution allows for thousands of members of the House for our current population.

It is the people’s house, and the people spoke last November. They cried out against a government completely out of control.

After President Bush grew the U.S. debt by $7 trillion dollars in 8 years in office, and President Obama added $4 Trillion in just 2 years in office, the people cried out against big-government policies that are sabotaging the economy and taking over our lives. And because they cried out, you are no longer just John Boehner from Ohio. You are now the second in line to succeed to the presidency. You are the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives has just 8 working days left before the August 2nd debt ceiling deadline, and by wide margins in whatever way the question is asked, Americans do not want to see the debt ceiling raised. They’re sick and tired of paying interest on borrowed money; money borrowed in their name.

The Federal Government borrows so much money from so many sources, Mr. Speaker, that no-one knows for sure just how much it owes to its lenders. It already appears that it has exceeded the legal limit set by the congress at $14.294 trillion, and they actually at this moment in time are closer to $14.5 trillion.

The White House is putting intense pressure on you and on Congress to raise that limit. The President’s apologists have even suggested invoking the 14th amendment to bypass the will of Congress and borrow money without legal authority. Given the way the White House has run roughshod over your House in the matter of the “not-war“ in Libya that our military is still ”not” engaged in, the word of the President’s lawyers that there is no presidential power in the 14th amendment to borrow money on his own can hardly be trusted.

This is a president who does not regard the Constitution as a limit on the exercise of governmental power. But the President can only get away with violating the Constitution, Mr. Speaker, if you let him do so.

If you stand up for the will of the people, you will restrain him. This is the moment of truth for the Congress, Mr. Speaker. The scare-mongers and the chicken-littles in DC will tell you that the sky will come tumbling down if the debt ceiling isn’t raised, even though your colleagues, Senator Pat Toomey and Rep. Tom McClintock, have introduced legislation that would prevent the United States from defaulting on its debt obligations.

I have two words for you, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. That’s right, just stop it. For too long our government has spent beyond its means and in our names, sinking us and generations as yet unborn into deeper and deeper debt. And you, Mr. Speaker, can stop it. The President stands with the big-business, big-banks, big-government complex, and against the American people. He’s even prepared to defy the laws of economics. But the American people are not ignorant as he thinks they are, and you know that.

Mr. Speaker, you have the opportunity to do something that no standard bearer of small government has ever been able to do in our modern era; get the government to live within its means. You can do it by standing firm with your colleagues in the Congress who are leading the call for change. You can stop it. You can force the Federal Government to make the difficult decisions to bring itself within its means and begin to loosen the chains of debt that have been foisted on our country by a centuries worth of progressive big-government architects. End it this summer, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. Tell the President, “not a penny more.” Stand up for the American people, bring government within its means, and begin the restoration of our republic.

If you do this Mr. Speaker, if you restrain the federal beast, you will become one of history’s great champions and heroes of freedom. If you don’t, we‘ll all go through this again the next time a president wants to spend beyond the government’s means and chain us all down to more debt.

Mr. Speaker, don’t let us down.

-Judge Andrew P. Napolitano”

THX : http://www.theblaze.com/

Obama’s Watergate

2011-07-12T07:06:00.000-07:00

America is now facing its greatest crisis since the Civil War.

The Obama Administration, Democrats in Congress and the left-wing media are in the process of shredding the Constitution and undermining the rule of law in order to transform America into a Third World one-party state, where the only organization that works well is the secret police.

The Republican Party is hopelessly impotent and the legal authorities remain willfully ignorant.

Barack Obama is an illegal President according to Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the Constitution and the binding precedent of Minor vs. Happersett (1875). There is no ambiguity, although those complicit in the fraud have deliberately provided information to mislead the American people.

Members of Congress will not investigate allegations that Obama boldly presented, on national television, a forged Certificate of Live Birth as an official record of his birth. They will not respond to evidence that Obama’s Selective Service registration is also a forgery and that his Social Security Number is illegal.

Congress does not act because it has succumbed to political blackmail.

For the same reasons, there is a conspiracy of silence that has spread throughout the federal government, the political establishment, the judicial system, the media and law enforcement agencies.

Members of our government have condoned a clear violation of the Constitution, ignored probably felonies and lied to the American people.

We have a gangster government.

Obama must not be permitted to enter another election cycle withouthis ineligibility and his alleged felonies being properly addressed.

If not, both the Constitution and the rule of law will be rendered meaningless.

Abraham Lincoln said that the American people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow those who pervert the Constitution.

It is now the responsibility of ordinary American citizens to act, if we want to preserve the Constitution, upon which our liberties depend.

Constitutional Conservatives should adopt the words of Samuel Adams:

“It does not take a majority to prevail… but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”

A nationwide political insurgency must be launched to counter the corruption in the political establishment.

Liberal strongholds like major US cities should be, for now, ceded to the opposition.

We should concentrate on gaining political control of areas containing the water supply, food production, power generation, transportation hubs and those areas close to military bases.

If law enforcement is not available and there is a need to defend homes and families, extra food and water should be stockpiled as well as the weapons and ammunition that the law will permit.

Every effort needs to be made to funnel political funding away from candidates who are not Constitutional Conservatives.

A national communications and information system free from the control of the main stream media must be established.

Regional political command and control centers will provide small expert teams to inform and train dispersed political units, which will have the capability of operating independently. Already-existing religious networks could provide a starting point.

We have petitioned our government for the redress of grievances, but we have been ignored and misled.

We have not yet begun to fight.

That's not a joke. That's a serious question. Consider:

Exhibit A: The Obama-Holder Justice Department is suing Arizona for its enforcement of federal immigration law. Arizona's SB1070 is modeled directly after the immigration law passed by Congress and signed by President Roosevelt in 1940. In other words, Mr. Obama is siding with the Mexican government and its criminal elements against American citizens. Or, in the words of Professor Terry Lovell, "Mr. Obama is on the side of the Mexican drug cartels."

Exhibit B: The Justice Department's "Operation Fast and Furious" supplied more than 2,000 military-grade weapons -- many of them purchased with taxpayer dollars by government informants -- to the Mexican drug cartels. Among the weapons purchased for the cartels by the American people: Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifles, AK-47 assault rifles, and FN assault pistols. Put simply, Eric Holder was arming the Mexican drug cartels and lying to Congress about it.

Exhibit C: The Justice Department is also requiring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to free illegal aliens even if they are caught committing serious crimes. Because a significant percentage of illegals caught committing crimes are members of Mexican drug cartels and other gangs, Mr. Obama is literally issuing "Get Out of Jail Free" cards to the most vicious criminals imaginable.

This is not a joke. This isn't funny.

President Obama is doing his level best to support the Mexican drug cartels. And, if that's "over-the-top", prove it. Can you show me one shred of evidence that Mr. Obama supports the American people over the drug cartels?

UPDATE:
Issa seeks DNC records of White House meeting

11 July 2011: Just after 10:00 a.m. on March 23rd, 1973, John Dean, White House counsel to former President Richard M. Nixon advised Nixon of a “a cancer within-close to the presidency, that’s growing. It’s growing daily.” Within the same breath, he advised Nixon that “people are going to start perjuring themselves very quickly that have not had to perjure themselves to protect other people and the like.” That cancer became known as “Watergate,” and eventually led to Nixon’s resignation.

Nearly forty years later, another “scandal,” exponentially larger than Watergate, has the potential to bring down the occupant of the oval office along with other high ranking officials. While no one was murdered as a result of Watergate, two law enforcement officers are dead because of the current “scandal” that is leading closer and closer to the highest levels of the Obama administration, including the Department of Justice and the U.S. State Department.

Obama’s “war on guns”

After taking office, Barack Hussein Obama began a coordinated effort with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to control the purchases and ownership of guns in the United States. To justify the implementation of tougher gun control laws and in a direct assault on the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, this administration cited a statement made to Congress by William Hoover, Assistant Director for Field Operations for the BATFE on February 7, 2008. According to that report, 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels were purchased from or originated from the U.S.

That stunning revelation empowered the Obama administration to solicit public support for banning so-called assault weapons in the U.S., and calling for tougher gun control laws. The problem, however, is that the 2008 statement is disingenuous at best.

First and perhaps most transparent, it has been noted that only 1 in 5 guns that have been recovered in Mexico actually underwent any form of tracing, leaving 80% untraced. Accordingly, the 90 percent figure is already factually inaccurate.

Secondly and perhaps the most scandalous of all is that all figures of cited by this administration pertaining to weapons tracing include weapons sold to the Mexican military via U.S. arms-trading policies under programs such as Direct Commercial Sales (DCS) initiatives. The fact is that the bulk of the arms used by the Mexican drug cartels did not – and do not originate from gun shop sales in the U.S., but from U.S. government sponsored programs that sell weapons and ammunition to the Mexican military as well as other third-world nations.

Many of the weapons used in Mexico and counted in border violence statistics actually arrived in that area from Central American countries involved in U.S. government sanctioned programs administered by the Pentagon and with the knowledge and imprimatur of the U.S. State Department.

Interestingly, confirmation of the government’s programs and knowledge by government officials, particularly Hillary Clinton was made public by the recent release of State Department cables published by Wikileaks. The cables prove that the U.S. State Department and Hillary Clinton knew the origins of the bulk of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels, although kept this information secret for the greater agenda of U.S. gun control.

Meanwhile, it appears that the Obama administration via Eric Holder, used various weapons tracking programs already implemented to inflate the statistics involving guns originating in the U.S. to advance even tougher gun control measures.

Research and investigation indicates that a series of programs implemented under the umbrella of a government sanctioned program known “Project Gunrunner” were purposely exploited with the knowledge and consent of government officials at the highest of levels.

Project Gunrunner

Part of the Southwest Border Initiative (SBI), Project Gunrunner was an operation that was started under the Bush administration. Ostensibly, the program was established to conduct surveillance, identify and stop the flow of weapons from the U.S. into Mexico and eventually into the possession of drug cartels. The pilot project was initiated in Laredo, Texas by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) in 2005.

In April of 2006, the program was expanded to a national level as a weapons interdiction program under the BATFE, formerly known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF).. Project Gunrunner also involved the use of an Internet based weapon tracking system known as eTrace, a program that would permit participating law enforcement agencies to track the origin of confiscated or questionable guns, through their serial numbers, to their point of origin.

On April 10, 2008, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey briefed the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations on the status of the project. At that time, Mukasey stated that the “ATF has approximately 148 special agents…and 56 industry operation investigators (IOI) responsible for conducting regulatory inspections.” Mukasey also stated that the ATF “is also expanding its presence at the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC) which serves as the central repository and “clearinghouse” for all weapons related intelligence collected and developed by ATF’s field personnel and attaches in Mexico as well as by all other Federal, State and local law enforcement entities involved in narcotics interdiction and investigation along the U.S./Mexico border.”

By 2009, Project Gunrunner resulted in approximately 650 criminal cases being filed against about 1400 defendants. These cases involved about 12,000 firearms.

It is relevant to point out here that “Project Gunwalker” is not the name of any ATF operation, but a satirical moniker attached to Project Gunrunner.

Operation Fast & Furious

Under the Obama administration, “Operation Fast and Furious” was launched in early 2009. Under the umbrella of Project Gunrunner, The BATFE commissioned gun shops in the U.S. to sell weapons to known criminal suspects. Ostensibly, this operation was for interdiction purposes, but the agents involved were ordered not to interdict the weapons. What resulted was a mass amount of weapons that actually and genuinely originated in the U.S., with the knowledge and approval of the BATFE, being permitted to “walk” unmolested across the southern border (hence the satirical name “gunwalker”).

From early 2009 through December 2010, this process was repeated over and over in the southern U.S. despite the objections of numerous BATFE agents and gun shop owners. During this time, several agents began to notify congress and became “whistleblowers” about the stand-down orders.

On December 14, 2010, the inevitable happened. U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was gunned down in Rio Rico, Arizona by an AK-47 that was “walked” across the U.S. Mexican border with the knowledge and allowance of the BATFE.

In addition to Agent Terry, Immigration Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata was also killed in a separate incident by a weapon allowed to “walk” into Mexico from the U.S.

With the tragic death of agents Terry and Zapata, the blame began to shift to those knowledgeable about the operation, including the acting director of the BATFE Kenneth Melson.

Much bigger than being reported

Unfortunately, the arguably illegal and certainly ill advised methodology implemented by the BATFE is not limited to the Project Gunrunner offshoot of “Operation Fast & Furious.” Other similar operations, each with the apparent knowledge and approval of the U.S. Justice Department, began to spring up elsewhere. There was also Operation Castaway in Tampa, which mirrored the methods of lack of interdiction as Operation Fast & Furious.

According to several agents who are now ready to offer testimony, each operation where weapons were allowed to “walk” into Mexico from the U.S. was approved at the highest levels of the United States Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of State. Some believe that operations of this magnitude could not have been possible without the knowledge and approval of Obama himself.

Almost 40 years after the biggest scandal to rock the nation, it is again time to ask the question to Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama under oath and in front of congress: What did you know and when did you know it?

And one more question: are traditional Democrats so cynical that they can support these activities?

I pray not.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. receives hate mail at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com

Also thanks to : Northeast Intelligence Network

http://homelandsecurityus.com/archives/5045