Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:19 pm Post subject: Please PRAY FOR PROTECTION for InspectorSmith
07-11-09 2:50 AM EDT - Another week with no video posted and no birth certificate revealed. Sad.
Some are suggesting that Mr. Smith belongs at the notorious African Press International.
07-07-09 12:09 AM From InspectorSmith:
RE: Please make haste to release the B.C..
"Hi, thanks for writing. Point taken. I admire your passion. I've been in talks with news outlets since July 3rd. They've asked me to not release the Youtube video just yet. Please be patient.
"Thank you and please keep in touch."
07-04-09 8:20 AM EDT - InspectorSmith has logged in to his Myspace page, so he is alive, somewhere.
So now eBay removes my listing for selling a picture? That doesn't sound bizarre to anyone? And I read that people are finding information about Smith posted on the internet which supposedly discredits him? Smith is a scammer? Give me a break.
And now when we go to log into InspectorSmith's Youtube account our password is not recognized. All this for a scam, huh, a good laugh?
Just the other day I noted that I was thankful for freerepublic. Reminds me of a bunch off lukewarm turncoats. Change your opinion every time that the wind blows in a different direction. Here's another quote, “Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.” - Alexander Hamilton. And what, what will be your opinion tomorrow? You've now concluded that "O" was born in the USA? Or better yet, now you'll be reporting my listing to eBay and demanding that it be pulled?
Make up your minds, have a little backbone.
Does everyone want to know a little more about "O"s bc?
A. Contains name of both the mother and the father.
B. Contains name of the physician that was present. Signed by this doctor.
C. Is an exact copy of the original 1961 Mombasa hospital birth certificate. Includes 2009 embossed seal of the hospital in Mombasa. Contains a 2009 signature from staff that issued this copy with embossed seal.
07/02/09 6 PM EDT - At http://www.youtube.com/user/InspectorSmith , we await the video which InspectorSmith promises before he turns over to WorldNetDaily the certified copy of the Kenyan birth certificate. But he has left no comment there since 07/01/09 11PM EDT. eBay has removed six of his auctions in the past two days, some for specious reasons. (But why would they cancel his sale of his picture with Andylenny in Kenya?) At the moment, he has no items for sale on eBay under his id, colmado_naranja ("overwhelmed orange").
Half of the comments are skeptical or insulting. But for the purported certified copy of Barack Obama II's Kenyan birth certificate, with a forensic examination allowed before the sale, the bidders were anything but skeptical. That auction was at $900,200.00 ($0.9 million) when eBay removed it.
If this story is true, InspectorSmith is in mortal danger, with his name, address, and phone number out in the open. If it is a hoax or a stunt to destroy our credibility, then he is either suicidal or crazy to risk getting murdered, especially with his identity publicized. It is only 250 miles on I-80 from downtown Chicago to his house. Not too far for a late night run, a 3AM hit and ransack, and back to Chicago for breakfast and an alibi.
07/02/09 3:35 PM EDT - http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=102854 WorldNetDaily has not been able to contact InspectorSmith about his document. Some are concerned about his health and safety. Others claim he has a history of scamming as "colmado_scarlette," although his present eBay id shows a perfect record. He seems to be a "Rainbow" person, so he may change his id again to "colmado_amarilla," then "colmado_verde," "colmado_azul," and finally "colmado_púrpura."
07/02/09 3AM EDT - InspectorSmith (pen name) claims to have in his possession a copy of Barack Obama II's birth document from Mombasa, Kenya.
Autographed photo of Smith and Andylenny, abroad. In airport.
I want to thank all of the eBay community for their support in my last five auctions. Thank you for taking the time to write to me (I still haven't had time to answer everyone) and for your bids. I also want to thank everyone at WorldNetDaily for their continued coverage of my five previous auctions. I want to thank freerepublic.com, as well. I want to thank everyone that forwarded news of my auctions to others, digitally or by spoken word. I want to thank all the attorneys as well as paralegals (Denise) that have written to me. Lastly I would like to thank all military personnel that have written to me with their support, opinions and offers as hired guns.
There won't be anymore eBay auctions for documents, stories or dissertations.
I'm happy to report that most (what I'd guess to be above 95%) of the mail that I have received was filled with support and praise for my efforts. Some of these notes also included concern for my safety and well being. Your mail was, is and will be appreciated.
I plan to upload a video to Youtube. My user name is InspectorSmith. I've had the account for some time. I have never uploaded anything. I mostly use Youtube to search for help, e.g., how to remove the battery (after it wont hold a charge for long) from the 1st generation iPhone or how to lay an English bond brick wall. So this will be the first time that I've ever uploaded anything. So you'll get your document yet, up close and personal.
After the Youtube video I will be heading over to WorldNetDaily to talk with Joseph Farah. I will disclose everything to them.
A quick note to Jerome Corsi, I read that you were very skeptical of my story and any document that I might have. I want to first say that I hold you in high esteem, I have great respect for you. You're not just a talker but, a doer as well. While many have talked of O's birth, you actually went abroad to get something tangible. Congrats. However.............., just because you couldn't pull it off doesn't mean that I wasn't able to. Your ground plan and course of action were doomed from the beginning. First, you made your intentions known from the onset. You were going to go to Africa, get to the bottom of things, and bring back some kind of proof. Second, you made a declaration of your intentions every step of the way. That's like planning to rob a bank, in say, Los Angeles. Then calling all the banks in LA and stating, "Hey, I coming to rob you. I'll be there at 12 noon sharp." Then on the way to one of the banks you stop at a parked police cruiser and ask, "Hey police man, I'm on my way to rob the bank on Flowers Street, can you give me directions on how to get to the bank?"
Back to my story now. I want to make clear that this whole endeavor to obtain information on O's birth was a three man job (more accurately 2 men and 1 lady). Andylenny. Smith. Dawnella Wilson.
Smith and Andylenny are do the credit for actually getting their hands on the proof. Dawnella Wilson is due credit for financing the whole undertaking.
The photo in this listing is up for auction. On the left is Smith and on the right is Andylenny. This photo will be signed by Smith, as Smith. This will be the only autographed photo put up for auction. One auction, one winning bidder, one photo. No more. There wont be duplicate photos or other photos for auction later. (Though I might try a relist if eBay kicks this auction off before enough people have had the chance to see this photo.)
You are welcome to copy and paste, or save, the digital photo in this listing. This auction is not so much for $$$ gain. It's meant to give a face or two to the O proof story. If anyone comes forward with our O proof other than one of the two faces that you see in this auction then you'll know that it wasn't the proof offered in our five previous auctions. Also this picture will vouch for the credibility of the soon coming Youtube video. If you don't see one of the two faces that you see in this auction then you'll know that it's not our Youtube video. Again, the Youtube user name is InspectorSmith.
It should be noted that Smith is the author of several books. Anyone interested in these books may contact Dawnella Wilson at dawnella_wilson@yahoo.com . Mark the email's subject as SMITH - BOOKS.
For the record I want to state that this auction is for an autographed photo of Smith and Andylenny. Signed by Smith, as Smith. You are not bidding on anything other than that, there will be no accompanying documents. There will be no meeting at the Iowa Capitol Building. This is not an attempt to circumvent eBay policies.
In closing I'd like to add two notes. First. I received many eBay messages informing me of the $25 million dollars reward that is advertized at http://www.rewardforobamasbirthcertificate.com . Many eBayers were puzzled as to why I hadn't seized the opportunity to take this offer. I will explain now. This reward is only available to President Obama if he himself will come forward with his real bc. Thus far the President has not taken them up on their offer.
Second. I'd like to add a quote by a well known past democratic US President. It reads: “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” Theodore Roosevelt.
This photo will be shipped USPS Priority Mail. It will be shipped free of charge (domestic addresses) to the winning bidder.
International bidders are welcome. International shipping will be a flat fee of $30.
[I believe this account, because no one would claim to have a document that could get him killed unless he actually had it in his possession. - MinutemanCDC_SC] _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!
Last edited by MinutemanCDC_SC on Sat Jul 11, 2009 3:05 am; edited 2 times in total
Joined: Apr 01, 2007 Posts: 658 Location: Sturgis S Dakota
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:28 pm Post subject:
I have tried to view the Video...BUT seems my YouTube is Blocked
Apache Server Port 80..Browser sent Request Server could not Understand.
Now this is a First, I wonder whats Up? _________________
MY eyes HAVE seen the GLORY... And that GLORY BELONGS to US... We the PEOPLE!
Joined: Nov 29, 2008 Posts: 624 Location: Portland, ME
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:35 pm Post subject:
PatriotofPast wrote:
I have tried to view the Video...BUT seems my YouTube is Blocked
Apache Server Port 80..Browser sent Request Server could not Understand.
Now this is a First, I wonder whats Up?
Google & YouTube are strong Obama supporters. They have severely redacted Internet content and have generally not allowed any anti-Obama media to exist after it has been identified as such.
We need a conservative Internet service. Soon. _________________ 'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:32 am Post subject: Berg: AG Eric Holder violated code in dismissing his suit.
[At least Mr. Berg still believes the checks and balances are still functioning in the tripartite government.]
Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
philjberg@obamacrimes.com
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder;
his Staff; and the United States Department of Justice to which he OverSees Violated the Code of Federal Regulations
as well as Federal Criminal Laws Pertaining to their Conflict-of-Interest
in
Berg’s Qui Tam Case [False Claims Act] against
Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama
and Berg has filed a Motion for Reconsideration
(Washington, DC – 07/02/2009) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama's lack of Constitutional "qualifications/eligibility" to serve as President of the United States and his cases that are still pending in Federal Court, Berg vs. Obama [Third Circuit Court of Appeals No. 08 – 4340]; this case - Berg as Relator v. Obama; [U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia No. 08-cv-01933]; and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, et al [U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, No. 09-5080]; announced today that he filed a Motion for Reconsideration in the Qui Tam [False Claims Act] Case filed in the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia as United States Attorney General Eric Holder and his Office have a Conflict-of-Interest and inasmuch violated both the Federal Regulations as well as Federal Criminal Codes. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, his Office, his Staff and the United States Department of Justice are required to uphold and ensure our laws; the laws of the United States are upheld and enforced.
Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution states:
“The Constitution entrusts the Executive with duty to take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Berg said, “The request of the Government to Dismiss his Qui Tam action against Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama is in clear violation of the U.S. Attorney General’s duties pursuant to Article II, Section 3 and should ‘NOT’ be allowed”.
Berg continues, “I furnished the Government and the Court with the information as to Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama’s legal name, which is Barry Soetoro and his citizenship status as Indonesian; I furnished sworn Affidavits showing Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama was born in Mombosa, Kenya; I presented evidence that the Certification of Live Birth [COLB] presented on the internet by Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama has been deemed a forged and altered document; I presented evidence that the birth announcement filed in the Hawaiian newspapers regarding Barack H. Obama on or about August 13, 1961 could not be verified; I presented evidence Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama never resided in the address on the birth announcement; and I raised the genuine issues pertaining to Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama’s college records wherein Berg is informed, believes and therefore alleges Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama attended Occidental College in California and Columbia University in New York and Harvard Law School as a foreign student. None of which have been refuted by the Government”.
“Instead of investigating the true issues, the Government through the United States Attorney General Eric Holder, his staff and the United States Department of Justice, who U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder also over-sees moved to Dismiss the Qui Tam action instead of upholding our United States Constitution and the very laws stated to protect 'we the people' from any individual usurping the Office of the President of the United States”.
Berg’s Qui Tam was regarding the U.S. Senator Position from Illinois held by Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama and the salary and benefits Obama drew based on fraudulent claims. This is a very unique situation as Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama is now our acting President of the United States. President Obama appointed Eric Holder for the position of the United States Attorney General and Mr. Holder reports directly to President Obama. This creates a huge Conflict-of-Interest with anyone from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s Office having any association with the Qui Tam matter against, now, President Obama.
There are Federal Statutory prohibitions and related regulations addressing Conflicts-of-Interest on the part of present officers or employees of the Federal (and in some instances of the District of Columbia) government.
The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 5 CFR § 2635, et seq. and 5 CFR § 2640, et seq. governs Governmental Employees, including U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and his staff.
5 CFR § 2635.101 states in pertinent part,
Quote:
(a) Public service is a public trust. Each employee has a responsibility to the United States Government and its citizens to place loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical principles above private gain.
In addition to the standards of ethical conduct set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, there are Conflict-of-Interest statutes that prohibit certain conduct. Criminal Conflict-of-Interest statutes of general applicability to all employees, 18 U.S.C. §§ 201, 203, 205, 208, and 209, are summarized in the appropriate subparts located in these chapters and must be taken into consideration in determining whether conduct is proper.
As to the restrictions on Conflicts-of-Interest during government service, only Section 208 is illuminated by formal regulations, which are found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
5 CFR. § 2640.103 “Prohibition” states:
Quote:
“(a) Statutory prohibition. Unless permitted by 18 U.S.C. 208(b) (1)–(4), an employee is prohibited by 18 U.S.C. 208(a) from participating personally and substantially in an official capacity in any particular matter in which, to his knowledge, he or any other person specified in the statute has a financial interest, if the particular matter will have a direct and predictable effect on that interest. The restrictions of 18 U.S.C. 208 are described more fully in 5 CFR 2635.401 and 2635.402.
Berg stated, “U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has a financial interest as does his staff as they draw their income from the Government who is over-seen by Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama”.
“Eric Holder joined President Obama’s presidential campaign as senior legal advisor and also served as one of three [3] members on Obama’s vice-presidential selection committee. In December 2008, then President-elect, Obama asked Eric Holder to serve in his cabinet as the U.S. Attorney General. Mr. Holder was appointed by President Obama and now serves as the United States Attorney General; is the head of the United States Department of Justice and United States Attorney General’s Office. Eric Holder is paid by the United States Government and reports directly to President Obama. Eric Holder has a direct financial interest in that he draws a salary based on his position as United States Attorney General. This Conflict-of-Interest goes beyond financial. The United States Attorney General is the Chief Law enforcement officer of the Federal Government and represents the United States in legal matters and gives advice and opinions to the President of the United States”.
Conflicts-of-Interest include but are not limited to a financial interest; a personal interest; improper business practices; etc. Berg continued, “It is clear U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the staff in which he supervises have a huge Conflict-of-Interest as they have financial interests as well as personal interests which limits them from doing their job as required pursuant to the United States Constitution and therefore, Attorney General Eric Holder should recuse himself and/or designate Relator Philip J. Berg to proceed.
Berg concluded, "I am not giving up and am continuing my legal fight to prove Obama is not constitutionally qualified/eligible to be President of the United States. I am proceeding for the 305 + million people in 'our' U.S.A., for 'our' forefathers and for the 1.5 million men and women that have died defending our Constitution in the many wars over the years and the 1.5 million men and women who were injured in those wars,"
* * *
For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:
obamacrimes.com
Proud member of the Defend Our Freedoms Community Network _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Mr. Obama, your avoidance of Kenya wouldn't have anything to do with your birth in Mombasa that invalidates your occupation of the office of the Presidency? You can't go home... wouldn't want to let the world see that everyone in Kenya knows you were born there. How about Uganda? It is at least a bit more of a free and open democracy than Kenya. . . no, everyone there also knows that you were born in Kenya.
How about a visit to North Korea? The people there are kept in isolatation from the world. You have nothing to lose from people who don't know anything about you. Or is the People's Paradise still too far from being a free and open democracy? Maybe your proposed visit to Iran would qualify. / sarc off
Join the long list of up-and-outers who shun their roots once they make it on the outside. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 8:31 am Post subject: Top Ten Things That You Should,Barry Soetoro U.S. Citizenshi
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Top Ten Things That You Should Know About Barack H. Obama’s (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) U.S. Citizenship
1. He may not be a natural born citizen qualified to serve as President under Article II of the Constitution.
He admits he was born to an American mother and a British subject, suggesting dual citizenship at best. [1]If he was not born on U.S. soil, and his mother was a minor, she was ineligible to convey US citizenship.[2] Under the British Nationality Act of 1948, he was born a British Citizen.[3] His paternal grandmother claims to have attended his birth in Kenya.[4] Kenya memorializes his place of birth.[5]
2. He is a suspected illegal alien for two possible reasons.
At age 3, his mother and father divorced. His mother remarried and his step-father enrolled him in school in Indonesia as “Barry Soetoro.”[6]
At age 10, after his mother’s second divorce,[7]he reentered the US by casually and illegally assuming his birth name. Later still, he ran for and won elected office under his birth name without disclosing his legal name or his prior use of alternative names.[8]
3. He took elected office and was admitted to the Illinois Bar under an alias.
No record of any legal name change from ‘Barry Soetoro’ to ‘Barack Obama’ has ever been found.
4. He probably lost his citizenship.
An Indonesian citizen at age 6[9], having been adopted by a national, he may be in the US illegally.[10] USC §1481(a)(2) provides loss of nationality by natural born citizens upon “taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state … after having attained the age of eighteen years,” in violation of 8 U.S.C. §1401(a)(1). Indonesia did not allow for dual citizenship. If Obama got an Indonesian passport in 1981, when he was 20 years old, he effectively renounced any U.S. citizenship he may have had.
5. He is suspected of secretly holding a foreign passport.
When he traveled to Pakistan ‘in college’,[11] Americans were not allowed into that country.[12] If he traveled on an Indonesian passport in 1981 at age 20, he was and remains an Indonesian citizen.
6. He posted an illegitimate birth record to deflect questions and allegations.
The “Certification of Live Birth” shown on FightTheSmears.com is not a birth certificate, but an image of an abstract that was invalidated by alteration. As indicated on that same image, the blacked out certification number invalidates the document. Document analysis shows it to be a suspected forgery.
7. The Certification of Live Birth is a suspected forgery.
The border is one that is used in 2007 COLBs. As a security measure, Hawaii changes their borders every year. This is when the Obama campaign claims the certificate was obtained. However, the seal and signature stamp are from a 2008 COLB. As revealed by a process called edging, the Hawaiian seal and signature stamp on the back of the document are revealed to be from the wrong year. Document experts have analyzed other aspects and find forgery.
8. He refuses to release relevant records.
Since matters available in the public domain raise these issues, the burden rests on Obama/Soetoro to explain. He declines to release college applications, transcripts, his birth record, or addresses of where he has lived.
9. His selective service registration may be falsified.
A FOIA document shows a 2008 sequence number for a supposed 1980 registration, an incorrect date of signature, an obsolete postal stamp and other discrepancies. Did he register at age 18 like everyone else?[13]
10. Not a single cause of action has been won by Obama on the merits.
All pending suits attempting to get Obama/Soetoro to produce simple documents have been dismissed on technical grounds such as the standing of the plaintiff. Therefore, the courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States have never ruled on the merits of his citizenship.
FOOTNOTES (see bottom of post)
Posted by lgstarr at 5:06 PM
Labels: Article II, Barry Soetoro, birth certificate, citizenship, eligibility, forgery, Hawaii, illegal aliens, Kenya, natural born citizen, President Barack Hussein Obama, U.S. constitution
After the forty years of wandering in the wilderness, when the children of Israel were about to cross the Jordan and drive out the inhabitants of Canaan, Moses charged the people, saying,
"When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, 'I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,' you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman." - Deuteronomy 17:14,15
My whole angle is something different & it has to do with our constitution & the founders. They knew the Bible, knew that you can't raise a king (or leader) up over you that is not one of your brothers. This is per the Scriptures...
The text from Deuteronomy applies only to the people, Israel, but the scriptural pattern corroborates the original intent of the Framers. They took the Holy Scriptures as the pattern for the founding documents: the Mayflower Compact, the Articles of Confederation, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They intended to restrict the Presidency to those born in the country of parents who were citizens, that is, to those with no other loyalties but to the United States. The "Oath of Allegiance for Naturalized Citizens" confirms their intention.
(As an aside, that would seem to disqualify Christians for the office of the President as well. Christians are aliens and strangers here. Our citizenship is in heaven, and we are but pilgrims passing through. Although we honor the king and submit to every institution of government, we fear God alone and serve Jesus as Lord. That stance has cost many a Christian his life at the Emperor's stake, gibbet, or chopping block.)
The jurisdiction clause of Amendment XIV codifies the requirement for undivided loyalty.
Amendment XIV wrote:
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.
A person born in the U.S. with a foreign parent or parents has dual citizenship and is born subject to the jurisdiction of the foreign sovereignty as well. He is therefore only partially subject to U.S. jurisdiction, being equally subject to another sovereignty, to which he may flee from the authority of the United States. On the other hand, a natural born citizen has no other homeland to which to flee or appeal. That makes him fully responsible to the United States as his only sovereign (in an earthly, temporal sense). _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Following Patriot’s Heart Network’s trip to Washington DC along with American Grand Jury representatives, Dr. Penny Kelso, Mack Ellis and Carl Swensson, Chalice reports the following:
Patriot’s Heart Network contacted Chief Magistrate Judge Royce Lamberth’s office this morning. The following information was provided:
1) A case number will be assigned to the American Grand Jury presentments served to the District Court on Monday July 13th, 2009. The number will be provided to Carl Swensson shortly.
2) Chief Magistrate Judge, Royce Lamberth will make a decision on the American Grand Jury presentment.
3) Citizens can file petitions with the court once a number is provided. Further information will be forthcoming.
4) A Lawyer is needed who can instruct on the process of petition filing in the US District Court.
Send a letter to the Judge encouraging him to act favorably on the Grand Jury Presentments.... also call his office.
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Clerk's Office
333 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
Chief Magistrate Judge of the U.S. District Court,
Royce Lamberth
202-354-3380 (Chambers)
This is it, everyone.... THE GRAND JURY INDICTMENTS WILL BE HEARD!
================
After so many judicial disappointments, I am cautious about the success of this action. But let's wait and see what happens.
Could be good news after all. _________________ 'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:24 pm Post subject: INDICTMENTS WILL BE HEARD if not deep-sixed.
Carl Swensson of patriotsforamerica.ning.com wrote:
Send a letter to the Judge encouraging him to act favorably on the Grand Jury Presentments.... also call his office.
United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Clerk's Office
333 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
Chief Magistrate Judge of the U.S. District Court,
Royce Lamberth
202-354-3380 (Chambers)
That would be a good idea under normal circumstances. But these are perilous times and anything but normal.
Calling the judge would be a good idea if you could speak to the judge personally, without having to give your message to a gatekeeper like U.S. Supreme Court stay clerk Danny Bickell.
Dr. Orly Taitz, HighlanderJuan, and I have established, and reported to the authorities, that mail going into Washington, D.C., is being diverted away from persons who might cause problems for the usurper or his administration.
ANY MAIL GOING INTO DC SHOULD BE PHRASED GUARDEDLY SO AS TO NOT ENDANGER THE RECIPIENT. One example is former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeffrey Taylor, whose mail from the "Constitution camp" was diverted to the White House, and who "resigned" or was fired a couple of days later.
Please share with us if you have access to a carrier besides the USPS, UPS, FedEx, Airborne, or Western Union - a secure courier which is not a union shop and where sensitive mail is not filtered by persons acting on behalf of the usurper. We need a trustworthy patriot in the District who will hand deliver sensitive mail, not for a fee but for a cause - the preservation of the nation. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Joined: Apr 01, 2007 Posts: 658 Location: Sturgis S Dakota
Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:18 am Post subject:
Minuteman, just a suggestion on who to get to deliver those documents. I would request that you contact YOUR STATE Senator or Represenative, they DO WORK FOR THE PEOPLE dont they?
_________________
MY eyes HAVE seen the GLORY... And that GLORY BELONGS to US... We the PEOPLE!
Minuteman, just a suggestion on who to get to deliver those documents. I would request that you contact YOUR STATE Senator or Represenative, they DO WORK FOR THE PEOPLE dont they?
Good idea, PoP. Now, if I can just figure out how to get the documents to my U.S. Senator personally . . . He tops the anti-American hit list. If you really meant my State Senator or Rep, I could hand-carry it to him for him to hand deliver on his next visit to Washington, D.C..
A week after submitting a mail theft complaint, I finally received my return receipt on July 6 from the packet that I sent to the USDOJ on June 12, restricted delivery, return receipt required. It should have been delivered no later than June 16, but the date of delivery was June 26. "Received by (printed name)," "Signature", and the "Agent/Addressee" check boxes were all left blank. In a blank space, there is a scribbled signature which looks like "A Urler".
It took twenty-two working days to get a confirmation card back, in a two-day delivery zone. Whether that proves anything to a court, it proves to me that snoopy eyes (not spooks) are tampering with certified mail.
In plain English, I have no idea who received it and whether it got to the DOJ or not. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Why do both Obama’s State Department and the Senate require two US citizen parents for those born abroad to attain natural born citizen status? Posted in Uncategorized on June 24, 2009 by naturalborncitizen
Ed. 7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency
(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)
a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
The State Department is part of the Executive Branch. The Foreign Affairs Manual is hosted at “State.gov” (see URL). Please note that the analysis of eligibility by the State Department – now controlled by Obama – requires two US Citizen parents.
Many have argued that Senate Resolution 511 – which served to falsely sanitize John McCain’s POTUS eligibility – states that a natural born citizen is a person born abroad to “American citizens” – plural.
[UPDATED: 9:07AM] – The actual language of the resolution reads as follows:
Quote:
Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.
Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen.
And finally, the testimony of Secretary Cherthoff who was a Federal Judge was also made part of the official record. He stated:
Quote:
My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.
The argument has merit to the Obama eligibility issue in that Senate Resolution 511 – co-sponsored by Obama – does not state that a person is a natural born citizen if born abroad to only one citizen parent.
The magic question is:
Why was it important to all who co-sponsored Senate Resolution 511 that both parents be citizens?
What was their logic? The question is certainly not the same as to Obama because McCain was born abroad and not on US soil. Assuming Obama was born in Hawaii, his supporters argue birth on US soil alone makes him a natural born citizen. I recognize there is a difference in circumstance.
However, the important point to be made with regard to Senate Resolution 511 concerns the policy that appears to prohibit a person from natural born citizen status if born abroad to only one citizen parent.
Why does it require two citizen parents? What is the policy behind the language requiring two US citizen parents? This is where the issue can be further supported by your questioning of Senators. Policy as used with regards to the drafting of laws is a legal term of art. It’s analogous to concern. What legal concern is acknowledged by requiring two citizen parents? Get the Senate and Obama to answer that question.
Obama eligibility supporters have argued that back when the framers drafted the Constitution women couldn’t vote and therefore a preference for acknowledging the father’s citizenship prevailed as to the son. These Obama supporters argue that if the Constitution ever required two citizen parents for natural born citizenship such requirement is not relevant any longer since women can now vote by Constitutional amendment.
To that argument I will now ask why Senate Resolution 511 doesn’t state that a person born abroad to one citizen parent is a natural born citizen?
WHY DOES THE SENATE REQUIRE TWO CITIZEN PARENTS FOR NATURAL BORN CITIZEN STATUS OF THOSE BORN ABROAD?
What is so important and relevant to natural born citizen status that both parents must be citizens if the child is born abroad? How would Obama, who co-sponsored Senate Resolution 511, answer this question? This is the question you need to now ask your Senators who agreed unanimously to Senate Resolution 511. Get a quote on the record answering this question.
I’m trying to imagine their answers in light of the Obama dual nationality issue and the arguments which claim he is not eligible according to the framer’s intent and Vattel’s definition of natural born citizen. They would have no other reason to argue both parents be citizens other than the safety of the nation and the framers intent.
Ask them specifically how they have determined their level of concern requiring two US citizen parents. It will not be easy for them to craft a response which doesn’t also acknowledge the very same concerns for person’s born on US soil to a parent who was never a US citizen.
But more important is that the very same question now needs to be asked of Obama’s own State Department which to this day also acknowledges the necessity of citizen parents on the same issue in their continued publication of the Foreign Affairs Manual at 7 FAM 1131.6-2.
Again, that section states:
Quote:
“It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.”
Why does the Obama State Department’s continued publication of the Foreign Affairs manual acknowledge that the issue requires two US citizen parents?
What is the policy requiring both parents be US citizens as opposed to just one?
Please also note that Senate Resolution 511 does not discuss ordinary “citizenship”. This is a fine distinction which needs to be noted clearly. In Senate Resolution 511 they acknowledged that natural born citizenship is not the same as citizenship. Since one can become a citizen by naturalization, neither parent would need to be a US citizen.
In Senate Resolution 511, the Senate has acknowledged that “citizens” are not the same for Constitutional purposes as “natural born citizens”. This is confirmation, even signed on by Obama, that it takes something more to be a “natural born citizen” of the US rather than just a “citizen” of the US. Those who argue they are the same for purposes of POTUS eligibility must be confronted by Obama’s own admission in both co-sponsoring Senate Resolution 511 and publishing the Foreign Affairs manual that they are not one in the same thing.
I do not agree at all with the Senate’s definition of “natural born citizen” in Senate Resolution 511, but I do agree with the Senate and Obama that all citizens are not natural born citizens for purposes of satisfying the rigid requirements to be President in Article 2 Section 1 of the US Constitution.
____________________________________________________________________________
World Net Daily Drops The POTUS Ineligiblity Ball…
Posted in Uncategorized on June 23, 2009 by naturalborncitizen
World Net Daily White House Correspondent Les Kinsolving recently had the chance to ask Obama’s Press Secretary Gibbs a question about the eligibility issue and he fumbled at the golden goal.
Whether they know it or not, WND is causing massive distraction by feeding the birth certificate smokescreen more and more fire while consistently failing to concentrate national focus on the core legal issue - Obama admits to being a British citizen at birth and therefore could not have been a “natural born citizen” of the United States as is required by the Constitution.
Phil at Right Side of Life has the most in depth coverage and actual video footage of the WND-White House Experience.
Fox News and the London Times also covered the eligibility issue and Phil has all of that at the link above.
I am very concerned that the amount of serious media attention the birth certificate issue is currently generating is NOT due to some mass awakening of citizens but rather a calculated device put in place by the powers that be as a set up for crushing the eligibility movement once and for all.
One of these days the Obama administration might serve up for your culinary consumption the most perfect long form birth certificate you could ever imagine. Hawaii officials will vouch for its authenticity under oath if need be. And numerous forensic experts will substantiate its veracity.
Then the POTUS eligibility movement is going to look like a vast nutjob right wing conspiracy.
And the ineligible one will be so much stronger and more powerful for it.
The BC thing is a side dish, not the main course. Any discussion of the BC issue should be subordinate to the dual nationality issue.
The false BC theory is – without a doubt - a conspiracy theory of epic proportions. Nobody can deny that it’s a textbook conspiracy theory. Regardless of whether he has a genuine long form BC saying he was born in Hawaii, the concept that the COLB is a forgery would certainly concern a vast conspiracy to defraud the American people. Conspiracies do exist, but they have a very bad reputation and the media can spin them as kookery with ease.
The dual nationality issue is NOT a conspiracy theory. It’s a genuine legal question. Obama admits he was a dual citizen at birth. Eligibility advocates have simply questioned whether that makes him ineligible to be President under Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the US Constitution.
BC = Conspiracy theory
DUAL NATIONALITY ADMISSION = legal question
Now doesn’t it make sense that they would rather focus ridicule on the conspiracy theory by allowing broad discussion of it rather than face a genuine legal question to which the great body of law and precedent stands to threaten their power grip?
But you just keep believing in false legal prophets. Go on. See where it gets you America.
Let me make this perfectly clear – below is the question that must be asked of White House Press Secretary Gibbs should anyone ever have the chance again. It’s been crafted with razor sharp precision so that slippery tongued vixens can’t slither out of the truth nexus without exposing themselves to even the most sleepy of audiences.
Make this question your mantra. Don’t be distracted from it.
THIS IS WHAT YOU ASK GIBBS NEXT TIME, WND:
During the election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was “governed” by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell the American people how a natural born citizen of the United States can be governed – at birth – by British law?
___________________________________________________________________________
Obama Presidential Eligibility – An Introductory Primer
Posted in Uncategorized on June 16, 2009 by naturalborncitizen
One of my readers by the name of Stephen Tonchen has created an introductory primer on Obama POTUS eligibility. Much of the substance of the primer has been culled from my blog and helpfully supplemented by Mr. Tonchen’s own research. This is by far the most clear, concise and powerful document created to help educate your friends and family on the eligibility issue. I strongly urge my readers to download it and to link to it wherever possible.
I will just reprint its discussion about the important and still controlling SCOTUS case – Minor vs. Happersett:
* In 1797 (a decade after the Constitution was adopted), the English translation of Emmerich de Vattel’s Law of Nations was revised to include the term “natural born citizen”. The revised English translation helps to clarify the meaning of “natural born citizen”, as English-speaking people generally understood it towards the end of the 18th Century:
Quote:
The natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. … I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. ([de] Vattel, Law of Nations, Book 1, Chapter 19)
* In 1874, in the Minor v. Happersett case, the Supreme Court affirmed the definition of natural born citizen which had appeared in the 1797 English translation of [de] Vattel’s Law of Nations:
…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. (Minor vs. Happersett, 1874)
* In Minor v. Happersett, the Supreme Court expressed “doubts” regarding the citizenship of U.S.-born children whose parents were not U.S. citizens. In Wong Kim Ark, 1898, the Supreme Court examined these “doubts”, but did not render any decision or ruling pertaining to natural born citizenship. The Court ruled that Mr. Ark was a citizen; it did not rule that he was a natural born citizen. To date, the Supreme Court has never answered the question as to whether natural born citizenship extends to children of non-citizen parents.
It is those same doubts discussed so openly in the Minor case that need to be discussed in open court today. If SCOTUS expressed such doubts then, then our current SCOTUS ought to enlighten us now. As I’ve stated over and again, this is a legal question already considered by our highest court in 1874 – a full six years after the 14th Amendment was adopted. This is an important time reference which should be wielded at all who state the 14th Amendment is controlling as to nbc status. It is not. SCOTUS expressed their doubts clearly six years later in the Minor case which has never been over-ruled.
The issue is not a conspiracy theory, it is a legal question, a legal question that SCOTUS precedent admits to not having cleared up yet. It is not settled law, and until it is, our country and the Presidency are not legitimate. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:06 am Post subject: Leo Donofrio's letter to Congress (in bold)
Dear Hon. Sen. or Rep. ______,
When Barack Obama II was born in 1961, his father was a British protected citizen. During the election, then Sen. Obama published on his website a statement from his book, which correctly stated that his birth status was “governed” by the British Nationality Act of 1948.
Can you please tell the American people how a person governed – at birth – by British law could be a natural born citizen of the United States? Could you justify your answer to the authors of Article II, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution?
Quote:
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;
Mr. Obama's usurpation of the Presidency could only have been more obvious had he been from Manchuria rather than Kenya.
Thank you for reconsidering this most urgent and critical issue of paramount national importance. I eagerly await your well-thought-out personal reply. (No form letter, please; I already received your form letter about this.)
Sincerely in Christ, _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 3:14 am Post subject: FighttheSmears.com scrubbed, even from Google cache
[They must be worried that Dr. Orly Taitz's case in California on Monday morning could result in discovery,
and thus expose their own false testimony and obstruction of justice at FighttheSmears.com.]
A website aimed at combating so-called Internet "smears" about President Obama has disappeared from the Internet – including an alleged certification of live birth posted during his campaign – and archives for the website have been thoroughly scrubbed.
As The Obama File notes [I haven't found that note], even the Internet Archive Way Back Machine appears to have lost its archived copies of Obama's "Fight the Smears" website.
WayBackMachine fails to produce archives for "Fight the Smears" website
A Google cache of the website still shows many of the "smear" topics the website addresses, but content for each posting is no longer available. The snapshot of the page from July 2, 2009, lists the following topics:
* Obama's campaign was funded by foreigners
* Obama sought endorsement from the New Party
* Obama has connections to Bill Ayers
* Jerome Corsi's research on Obama and Kenya's Raila Odinga
* Jerome Corsi's research on Obama in "new hit book"
* Obama is a Muslim
* Obama has not shown a long-form birth certificate and may not have been born in America
Obama's campaign posted a "Certification of Live Birth" on the "Fight the Smears" website that has been widely touted as "Obama's birth certificate" – though it does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same "short-form" document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true "long-form" birth certificate – which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician – is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.
Nonetheless, that posting has vanished along with the website. A screenshot image of the original page can be seen below.
Obama "Fight the Smears" website posted response to eligibility issue
The statement read, "Smears claiming Barack Obama doesn't have a birth certificate aren't actually about that piece of paper – they're about manipulating people into thinking Barack is not an American citizen."
It continued, "The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America. Next time someone talks about Barack's birth certificate, make sure they see this page."
The White House did not respond to a WND request for comment.
As WND reported, another main issue addressed by Obama's "Fight the Smears" site was the contention he was once a Muslim.
"Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim, and is a committed Christian," stated the site.
The following is a screenshot of that topic.
Screenshot of "Fight the Smears" website statement on Obama's faith
Obama launched his "Fight the Smears" website in June 2008 to stop "ideologues" from "spreading a 'pack of lies' about Barack."
Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the Obama campaign, told the New York Times at the time of launch that the campaign sought to confront "lies" and "false rumors" with the "Fight the Smears" website.
"Whenever challenged with these lies we will aggressively push back with the truth and help our supporters debunk the false rumors floating around the Internet," he said. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Joined: Jul 30, 2008 Posts: 1518 Location: Fort Worth
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 3:24 am Post subject:
Oh man!! If I could only focus the attention that I have toward Obama's birth toward illegal immigration! Maybe I could actually make a difference, instead of supporting a lost cause!!
Where are we at on this, 50 some-odd pages of this nonsense rather than outrage when an American is killed by an illegal immigrant? Wow guys, I am so happy that you care MORE about the eligibility of a president that will NEVER be proved than the actual cause of the website!! Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there 50 some odd pages dedicated to "Frankie Blue Eyes" when he was killed by an illegal immigrant? Let me guess, that's not the point, right? _________________ We see so many tribes overrun and undermined
While their invaders dream of lands they've left behind
Better people...better food...and better beer...
Why move around the world when Eden was so near? -Neil Peart from the song Territories&
Joined: Nov 29, 2008 Posts: 624 Location: Portland, ME
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:34 am Post subject:
jshhmr wrote:
Oh man!! If I could only focus the attention that I have toward Obama's birth toward illegal immigration! Maybe I could actually make a difference, instead of supporting a lost cause!!
Where are we at on this, 50 some-odd pages of this nonsense rather than outrage when an American is killed by an illegal immigrant? Wow guys, I am so happy that you care MORE about the eligibility of a president that will NEVER be proved than the actual cause of the website!! Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there 50 some odd pages dedicated to "Frankie Blue Eyes" when he was killed by an illegal immigrant? Let me guess, that's not the point, right?
Wow. Where to begin...
Our wonderful republic is being destroyed before the eyes of the world and you're concerned with Frankie Blue Eyes?
I guess you haven't been paying attention to the legal questions raised on this forum, and until you do, there is not much anyone can say that will change your mind.
BTW, MinuteMan - great posts recently. You are clearly on a roll. I found the article "Obama Presidential Eligibility - An Introductory Primer" by Stephen Tonchen especially interesting. _________________ 'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan
Last edited by HighlanderJuan on Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:58 pm; edited 1 time in total
Mr. Tonchen wrote it "for the rest of us," but it still requires focused attention. His writing style is interesting enough, but his subject suffers from the difficulty of the Constitutional concepts, the legal arguments, the history, and the fine print that distinguish a natural born citizen from other citizens. Grab a cup of coffee first, but by all means, GET A WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF AS MUCH OF IT AS YOU CAN. Most judges just don't get it. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Much of the answers lie in history and correspondence and one hopes that will be fully developed before a case finally is granted standing ...
Interesting development reported here about the Advertorial in the Times. A few things in the write-up are probably off-track as pointers, but overall not a bad effort. Client Kerchner paid for the ad.
Oh man!! If I could only focus the attention that I have toward Obama's birth toward illegal immigration! Maybe I could actually make a difference, instead of supporting a lost cause!!
Where are we at on this, 50 some-odd pages of this nonsense rather than outrage when an American is killed by an illegal immigrant? Wow guys, I am so happy that you care MORE about the eligibility of a president that will NEVER be proved than the actual cause of the website!! Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there 50 some odd pages dedicated to "Frankie Blue Eyes" when he was killed by an illegal immigrant? Let me guess, that's not the point, right?
2010 will roll around and the best "defense" on illegal immigration would be a strong "offense" in ridding DC of the Disease of Over-ripened Incumbency. POTUS gave away the store in Russia
Joined: Nov 29, 2008 Posts: 624 Location: Portland, ME
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:51 pm Post subject:
FreedomFirst wrote:
Much of the answers lie in history and correspondence and one hopes that will be fully developed before a case finally is granted standing ...
Interesting development reported here about the Advertorial in the Times. A few things in the write-up are probably off-track as pointers, but overall not a bad effort. Client Kerchner paid for the ad.
From your comments, it would seem that you are optimistic that one or more cases will actually land in court. That's a good sign. I was about given up that any court would want to touch this subject.
The Kerchner ad was nice to see. I'm not certain a Monday was the best day to place it, but everything counts, and that ad counts for the good guys. _________________ 'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan
Interesting development reported here about the Advertorial in the Times. A few things in the write-up are probably off-track as pointers, but overall not a bad effort. Client Kerchner paid for the ad.
For the purpose of maintaining documentation inline... http://www.yannone.org/BlogDocs/KerchnerAdvertorial.pdf
11 / MONDAY, JULY 6, 2009 // THE WASHINGTON TIMES
ADVERTISEMENT Obama is NOT an Article II Natural Born Citizen
and therefore is NOT Eligible to be President
The President and CINC of the USA Must be a "Natural Born" Citizen ---
U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5
"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;"
The Law of Nations, Vattel, 1758, Chapter 19, Section 212:
"natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens"
Obama's Father Was Not a U.S. Citizen, nor Was He an Immigrant
to the USA, nor Was He Even a Permanent Resident of the USA
Article II "Natural Born Citizen" Means
Unity of Citizenship At Birth
Article II of our Constitution has a lot
to say about how a would-be President
is born. .Natural born Citizen. status
requires not only birth on U.S. soil but also
birth to parents who are both U.S. citizens
by birth or naturalization. This unity of
jus soli (soil) and jus sanguinis (descent)
in the child at the time of birth assures
that the child is born with sole allegiance
(obligation of fidelity and obedience to
government in consideration for protection
that government gives (U.S. v. Kuhn, 49
F.Supp.407, 414 (D.C.N.Y)) and loyalty to
the United States and that no other nation
can lay any claim to the child's (later an
adult) allegiance and loyalty. Indeed,
under such birth circumstances, no other
nation can legally or morally demand
any military or political obligations from
that person. The child, as he/she grows,
will also have a better chance of not
psychologically struggling with conflicted
allegiance and loyalty to any other nation.
Unity of citizenship is based on the
teachings of the law of nature (natural law)
and the law of nations, as confirmed by
ancient Greek and Roman law; American,
European, and English constitutions,
common and civil law, and statutes;
and Vattel's, The Law of Nations, all of
which the Founding Fathers read and
understood. These sources have taught
civilizations from time immemorial that
a person gains allegiance and loyalty
and therefore attachment for a nation
from either being born on the soil of the
community defining that nation or from
being born to parents who were also born
on that same soil or who naturalized as
though they were born on that soil. It is
only by combining at birth in the child
both means to inherit these two sources
of citizenship that the child by nature and
therefore also by law is born with only one
allegiance and loyalty to and consequently
attachment for only the United States.
Our Constitution requires unity of U.S.
citizenship from birth only for the Of ce
of President and Commander in Chief of
the Military, given the unique nature of
the position, a position that empowers
one person to decide whether our national
survival requires the destruction of or a
nuclear attack on or some less military
measure against another nation or group.
It is required of the President because such
a status gives the American people the
best Constitutional chance that a wouldbe
President will not have any foreign
influences which because of conflict of
conscience can most certainly taint his/
her critical decisions made when leading
the nation. Hence, the special status is
a Constitutional eligibility requirement
to be President and thereby to be vested
with the sole power to decide the fate
and survival of the American people.
Of course, the status, being a minimum
Constitutional requirement, does not
guarantee that a would-be President will
have love and fealty only for the United
States. Therefore, the final informed and
intelligent decision on who the President
will be is left to the voters, the Electors,
and Congress at the Joint Session, to
whom hopefully responsible media and
political institutions will have provided
all the necessary vetting information
concerning the candidate's character and
qualifications to be President.
Through historical development, unity of
citizenship and sole allegiance at birth is
not required for U.S. born citizen Senators,
Representatives, and regular citizens under
the 14th Amendment and Congressional
enactments. In contradiction and which
confirms the Founding Fathers. meaning
of what a .natural born Citizen. is,
naturalized citizens, since 1795, before
becoming such must swear an oath that
they renounce all other allegiances to
other nations. During the Washington
Administration, the First Congress
passed the Naturalization Act of 1795 in
which it provided that new citizens take
a solemn oath to support the Constitution
and .renounce. all .allegiance. to
their former political regimes. This is
during the time that most of the Framers
were alive and still actively involved in
guiding and forming the new national
government and Constitutional Republic.
Today, we still require that an alien upon
being naturalized must give an oath that
he/she renounces all former allegiances
and that he/she will .support and defend
the Constitution and laws of the United
States of America against all enemies,
foreign and domestic.. Hence, allegiance
is not simply a thing of the past but very
much with us today. It is important to
also understand that naturalization takes
an alien back to the moment of birth and
by law changes that alien.s birth status.
In other words, naturalization, which by
legal de nition requires sole allegiance to
the United States, re-creates the individual
as though he were a born Citizen but only
does it by law and not by nature. This
is the reason that the 14th Amendment
considers a naturalized person to be a
.citizen. of the United States and not
a .natural born Citizen. of the United
States. This recreation of birth status
through naturalization which also existed
under English common law also probably
explains why John Jay underlined the
word .born. when he recommended to
General Washington that only a .natural
born Citizen. (as to say born in fact, by
nature, and not by law) be allowed to
be President. Consequently, naturalized
citizens stand on an equal footing with
born Citizens (who are so recognized and
con rmed by the 14th Amendment or by
an Act of Congress and who can be but
not necessarily are also .natural born
Citizens.) except that they cannot be
President or Vice President, for they were
born with an allegiance not owing to the
United States and acquire that allegiance
only after birth. Surely, if a naturalized
citizen, even though having sole allegiance
to the United States, is not Constitutionally
eligible to be President, we cannot expect
any less of someone who we are willing
to declare so Constitutionally eligible.
The Founding Fathers emphasized
that, for the sake of the survival of the
Constitutional Republic, the Office of
President and Commander in Chief of the
Military be free of foreign influence and
intrigue. It is the .natural born Citizen.
clause that gives the American people the
best fighting chance to keep it that way for
generations to come. American people do
not have the Constitutional right to have
any certain person be President. But for
the reasons stated above, minimally they
do have a Constitutional right to protect
their liberty by knowing and assuring
that their President is Constitutionally
qualified to hold the Office of President
and Commander in Chief of the Military.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
If you would like to help with
this lawsuit, please contact
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg NJ 08831
Email: apuzzo@erols.com
TEL: 732-521-1900
FAX: 732-521-3906
BLOG: http://puzo1.blogspot.com
Paid for by: Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., CDR USNR Retired, Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner et al vs. Obama & Congress et al. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
Big mistake to claim that naturalization takes a person's citizenship "back in time" to the moment of birth "as if" he was always a citizen. Legally, it's not the case. Not sure if the ad had sloppy writing or sloppy thinking.
Meanwhile, a new case with some urgency as a military officer asks for a Temporary Restraining Order on his own orders to report for Afghanistan.
Interesting. I've been waiting to see greater involvement against Obama from the military, and this appears to be one more log on that fire.
But I'm also wondering why the major didn't file a quo warranto with AG Holder at the same time. I recognize that the filing prayer includes the statement:
(3) such time as the constitutional qualifications and eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as President and Commander and Chief have been established by clear and convincing evidence (which standard of proof benefits a constitutional requirement, especially in light of the confusing and conflicting circumstantial evidence set forth in Exhibits B and C).
Is the strategy to get the Columbus, Georgia District Court to make a ruling on eligibility disclosure, rather than rely on the DC court? Maybe because there is a greater chance of success in Georgia?
What would Donofrio say about this tactic? Would he agree? _________________ 'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan
Can anyone confirm or verify the following "Travel Advisory?"
An Obot claimed the following was a State Dept. Travel Advisory from the summer of 1981, around the time that Barack Obama II traveled to Pakistan.
"Wahington, D.C. 205__" is obviously incorrect, but that could be a typo from key entry of hard copy.
"NO. 81-33A
Travel Advisory
Passport Services/Bureau of Consular Affairs
Department of State/Wahington. D.C. 205__
August 17, 1981
Travel to Pakistan
Before traveling to Pakistan, American citizens should be aware of the following updated visa requirements: 30 day visas are available at Pakistani airports for tourists only. As these visas are rarely extended beyond the 30 day time period, tourists planning to stay longer should secure visas before coming to Pakistan. Any traveler coming into Pakistan overland from India must repeat must have a valid visa, as 30 day visas are not repeat not issued at the overland border crossing point at Wagha.
Any non-official American who is in Pakistan for more than 30 days must register with the government's foreigner registration office. Exit permits are required for those who have stayed longer than 30 days before they are allowed to leave the country. All Americans traveling to Pakistan on official business or for private employment are required to have a visa before arrival, and, as the government of Pakistan's clearance process is often quite lengthy, we would urge those coming to apply at the nearest Pakistani embassy or consulate as far in advance of their scheduled arrival as possible.
This superseded requirements set forth in Department Publication M-264, "Visa Requirements of Foreign Governments."
Expiration date: indefinite. _________________ One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.
Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
tomorrow we may wake up as illegals.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Contribute/Join
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[/img]
