Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

From: www.alipac.us/ftopict-156779.html ..


MANY links embedded in the above and below articles..!




Birth certificate billboard mania continues
First sign erected in 'truth and transparency' campaign

Posted: May 20, 2009
11:00 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily



WASHINGTON – More than $25,000 has been raised in the first two days of a national billboard campaign to raise awareness of questions surrounding the constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as president – and the first sign, an electronic one, is already up and online.

Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND, said he's calling it "the truth and transparency campaign."

The money is being used to erect billboards around the country that ask a simple question: "Where's the birth certificate?"

The first such sign to be posted under the 2-day-old campaign, a digital, electronic one, is up and online on Highway 165 in Ball, La. – the result of a donation by the owner. In addition, based on the heavy volume of financial donations in the first two days of the campaign, WND was able to commit to leasing two more standard billboards – one in Los Angeles and the other in Pennsylvania. It will take several weeks to get those billboards up because of the vinyl printing and shipping involved.

"I know now, because of the sensational response to this idea from WND viewers, that this national campaign is going to be big and long-lasting," said Farah. "I want to thank all of those who have pitched in and contributed – with either cash donations or, in some cases, space donations. But the need for money continues. The public should know it costs about $2,000 just to print these 15-by-45 foot billboards. Each one is a huge commitment."


Birth certificate question being raised in Ball, La.


Donations are being accepted to defray the costs of a national billboard campaign with the simple message: "Where's the birth certificate?"





While the campaign is off to a great start, many viewers have asked why Obama's name is not included in the billboard. Farah said the matter was carefully considered.

"There are several reasons we chose the message: 'Where's the birth certificate?'" he explained. "There is only one birth certificate controversy in this country today – despite the near-total absence of this issue from coverage in the non-WND media. This is a grass-roots issue that resonates around the country, as our own online petition with nearly 400,000 signers suggests. In addition, I like the simplicity of the message. I like the fact that the message will cause some people to ask themselves or others about the meaning of the message. It will stir curiosity. It will create a buzz. I'm assuming when these billboards are springing up all over the country, it might even make some in the news media curious. And there's one more factor that persuaded me this was the way to go.

"Come 2012, campaign laws will pose restrictions on political advertising mentioning the names of presidential candidates. This one clearly doesn't. I would like to see the federal government make the case that this is somehow a political ad," he said.

Farah said the campaign was born of frustration with timid elected officials in Washington, corrupt judges around the country and a news media that show a stunning lack of curiosity about the most basic facts of Obama's background – especially how it relates to constitutional eligibility for the highest office in the land.

"As Obama transforms this country from self-governing constitutional republic to one governed by a central ruling elite, the simple fact remains that no controlling legal authority has established that he is indeed a 'natural born citizen' as the Constitution requires," Farah said. "Obama's promises of transparency have become a bad joke as he continues to hide simple, innocuous documents like his birth certificate and his student records."

The idea behind the billboard campaign is to make sure Obama cannot avoid this question any longer. He must be asked to produce it at every turn, Farah says. Billboard space is currently being hunted in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Sacramento, San Francisco, New York-New Jersey, Des Moines, Seattle and other metro areas.

"Is it unusual for a news agency to launch such a campaign?" asks Farah. "Yes it is. But we live in very unusual times. The founding fathers built special protections into the First Amendment for the free press. The reason they did that is because they understood a vibrant 'Fourth Estate' was necessary as an independent watchdog on government. It is in that tradition that WND assumes this role – since nobody else in the press will do it."

WND previously launched a petition campaign that has collected more than 370,000 names demanding Obama's eligibility be verified and demonstrated publicly. That campaign continues. That list has been shared with members of the Electoral College and the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

"I wish such a campaign were not absolutely necessary," said Farah. "I wish there were checks and balances in our political and electoral systems to ensure that constitutional eligibility of presidential candidates was established before politicians could assume the highest office in the land. I wish my colleagues in the news media believed the Constitution really means what it says and pressed this issue as hard as we have pressed it at WND. I wish radio talk-show hosts were bold enough to ask this question. But wishing is not enough. It's time to raise the visibility of this issue vital to the rule of law in America. I ask everyone to pitch in and help WND make a simple yet profound statement: The Constitution still matters."

Your donation – from as little as $5 to as much as $1,000 – can be made online at the WND SuperStore. (Donations are not tax-deductible. Donations of amounts greater than $1,000 can be arranged by calling either 541-474-1776 or 1-800-4WND.COM. If you would prefer to mail in your contributions, they should be directed to WND, P.O. Box 1627, Medford, Oregon, 97501. Be sure to specify the purpose of the donation by writing "billboard" on the check. In addition, donations of billboard space will be accepted, as will significant contributions specifically targeted for geographic locations.)

If you are a member of the media and would like to interview Joseph Farah about this campaign, e-mail WND.



Related offers:


Get your "Where's the birth certificate?" bumper sticker here.



Get the most comprehensive special report ever produced on the Obama eligibility issue.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Previous stories:

U.S. bonkers for Obama birth certificate billboard

THE FULL STORY: See listing of more than 200 exclusive WND reports on the eligibility issue


More embedded links at:
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98724

And..

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98589

I received the following in an email. Does anybody know if this is a hoax or if Rhode Island is prepared to officially get involved?

This is a long, but hugely significant piece of information

For those of you who are following the story about President Obama's possible ineligibility to be president by virtue of his inability to present a simple birth certificate, you may want to pay very close attention to what is happening in several states, but most notably in Rhode Island.

As a brief introduction to what is occurring, let me start by reminding anyone who isn't aware of this that there are a multitude of lawsuits filed in several state and federal courts that challenge Obama's right to be president. These challenges are based upon the Constitution's requirement that a person aspiring to be president must be a natural born citizen, which means he/she must be born in the United States.

Exceptions to this have been allowed by the U S Supreme Court when a possible presidential aspirant is the child of a United States military officer who, while stationed overseas or outside the continental United States, had a child born in the location in which they were stationed. This is exactly Senator McCain's story. His father, A United States Naval Commander, was stationed in Panama when John McCain was born. So although John McCain was not born in the continental United States, he was nevertheless eligible to run for president due to that Supreme Court ruling. I think the same is true (I may be incorrect in this) concerning Franklin Roosevelt.

There appear to be valid questions concerning Obama's right to be president due to a variety of factors (such as being an Indonesian student at a time when Indonesia prohibited any non-native born Indonesians from attending their schools - the upshot being that since Obama attended school in Indonesia, he had to be recognized as a valid Indonesian citizen; and the fact that at a time when the United States Department of State was not only not issuing passports or visas for American citizens to travel to Pakistan, they also prohibited all non-government officials from traveling there, yet Barack Obama managed to enter that country - the point being that he could only have done so with a passport or visa issued by another country), but the most compelling question is his inability to provide a simple birth certificate. After all, you can provide yours. Why can't he? All Obama needs to do is present a birth certificate, and the controversy is ended.

Adding fuel to this fire is the fact that a team of Obama lawyers have fought every lawsuit and inquiry in court, thus far managing to stop every effort. It is estimated that at least $600,000 has been spent on attorney fees for Obama's lawyers to fight the lawsuits. Why is that necessary if there is a birth certificate?

The consensus among leading politicians is that this fight has little to no chance of victory, so that is why you never hear about this on talk radio or television newscasts.

Until now.

I personally was totally ignorant of what I am about to relate, but apparently there is an implied provision in the fifth amendment to the Constitution which allows any group of citizens to form a grand jury at will for the purpose of hearing the facts of an issue and, following a vote confirming a consensus that there is sufficient evidence to indict, present their indictment to a state or federal court (this process is called a "presentation"). The officer of the state/federal court must then frame an indictment and present it to the accused so he/she may respond. Since I have no knowledge of law and am therefore on very shaky legal grounds, I think this means that the accused must respond and answer the citizen grand jury indictment.

Apparently I may be right because there are already three citizen grand jury indictments against Obama by three separate groups that have been presented to state courts. They are an Arkansas citizen's grand jury, a Texas citizen's grand jury, and another group calling itself the American Grand Jury. These three groups are acting independently and totally without federal or state guidelines.

Except Rhode island.

And herein lies the significance and power.

A Rhode Island man named Mike Mandeville has taken this process a dramatic step further. He has formed a Citizen's Grand Jury right inside a Rhode Island courthouse and having a state judge swear in the Citizen's Grand Jury for the purpose of deliberating the potential charges concerning Obama's possible ineligibility to be president. They are then going to debate the case before state officials and, if in their opinion, there is a preponderance of evidence that Obama is ineligible for the presidency, to have the state of Rhode Island bring an indictment against him.

That takes the legal case concerning Obama's possible ineligibility into a much higher dimension that cannot be ignored.

Before I stumbled onto this, I didn't know that we, as independent citizens, have the Constitutional right to form a Grand Jury. Like everyone else, I thought a Grand Jury required county, city, state, or judicial authority.

Although embryonic, this has the potential of a political and Constitutional earthquake leading to the most serious Constitutional crisis in our nation's history. If Obama is indeed ineligible for the presidency, then every Congressional bill signed into law by him is invalid. Indeed, every action taken by him is invalid. The banking system takeover, the Chrysler/GM takeover, the Stimulus bill, and all other actions are invalid.

Moreover, if he is ruled ineligible, is Joe Biden also ineligible? Or does he become president? Is the 2008 election invalid? How is the case settled? By the Supreme Court? If the Obama/Biden presidency are invalid, do we have another election, or does Nancy Pelosi become president? There are an almost endless number of Constitutional questions, so this is an extremely serious matter.

For those of you who want to explore this further, go to www.americangrandjury.org. There you will find not only details on this story, but four links to help you understand the history and powers of Citizen Grand Juries. The information contained in these links are long, detailed, and most informative. The links you will see are entitled:

1) Grand Jury History Powers
2) Rules Evidence Indictments
3) Grand Jury Forms Ettiquette
4) The Court: How to File

This is an interesting development.

Dan Hazelwood

Originally Posted by cayla99

I received the following in an email. Does anybody know if this is a hoax or if Rhode Island is prepared to officially get involved?

This is a long, but hugely significant piece of information

For those of you who are following the story about President Obama's possible ineligibility to be president by virtue of his inability to present a simple birth certificate, you may want to pay very close attention to what is happening in several states, but most notably in Rhode Island.

...

This is an interesting development.

Dan Hazelwood

Cayla,

The author appears to be a bit naive, and several of his conclusions we have addressed here and have found them erroneous. So, whether he has accurately described what is going on in RI is QED.

Separate research, directly to Dan Hazlewood and into Rhode Island would be the next step.

Juan

Dan Hazelwood - a top Republicans Strategist and voter mail expert

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dan Hazelwood [mailtoanH@targetedcreative.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 7:12 PM
To: xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Did you originate this e-mail?

Not me.


-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxxxxx
To: Dan Hazelwood <DanH@targetedcreative.com>
Sent: Thu May 21 17:33:07 2009
Subject: Did you originate this e-mail?


Dan,

The following clipped e-mail appears to be from you. Did you originate this e-mail, and is the report accurate?

=======

This is a long, but hugely significant piece of information

For those of you who are following the story about President Obama's possible ineligibility to be president by virtue of his inability to present a simple birth certificate, you may want to pay very close attention to what is happening in several states, but most notably in Rhode Island.

As a brief introduction to what is occurring, let me start by reminding anyone who isn't aware of this that there are a multitude of lawsuits filed in several state and federal courts that challenge Obama's right to be president. These challenges are based upon the Constitution's requirement that a person aspiring to be president must be a natural born citizen, which means he/she must be born in the United States.

Exceptions to this have been allowed by the U S Supreme Court when a possible presidential aspirant is the child of a United States military officer who, while stationed overseas or outside the continental United States, had a child born in the location in which they were stationed. This is exactly Senator McCain's story. His father, A United States Naval Commander, was stationed in Panama when John McCain was born. So although John McCain was not born in the continental United States, he was nevertheless eligible to run for president due to that Supreme Court ruling. I think the same is true (I may be incorrect in this) concerning Franklin Roosevelt.

There appear to be valid questions concerning Obama's right to be president due to a variety of factors (such as being an Indonesian student at a time when Indonesia prohibited any non-native born Indonesians from attending their schools - the upshot being that since Obama attended school in Indonesia, he had to be recognized as a valid Indonesian citizen; and the fact that at a time when the United States Department of State was not only not issuing passports or visas for American citizens to travel to Pakistan, they also prohibited all non-government officials from traveling there, yet Barack Obama managed to enter that country - the point being that he could only have done so with a passport or visa issued by another country), but the most compelling question is his inability to provide a simple birth certificate. After all, you can provide yours. Why can't he? All Obama needs to do is present a birth certificate, and the controversy is ended.

Adding fuel to this fire is the fact that a team of Obama lawyers have fought every lawsuit and inquiry in court, thus far managing to stop every effort. It is estimated that at least $600,000 has been spent on attorney fees for Obama's lawyers to fight the lawsuits. Why is that necessary if there is a birth certificate?

The consensus among leading politicians is that this fight has little to no chance of victory, so that is why you never hear about this on talk radio or television newscasts.

Until now.

I personally was totally ignorant of what I am about to relate, but apparently there is an implied provision in the fifth amendment to the Constitution which allows any group of citizens to form a grand jury at will for the purpose of hearing the facts of an issue and, following a vote confirming a consensus that there is sufficient evidence to indict, present their indictment to a state or federal court (this process is called a "presentation"). The officer of the state/federal court must then frame an indictment and present it to the accused so he/she may respond. Since I have no knowledge of law and am therefore on very shaky legal grounds, I think this means that the accused must respond and answer the citizen grand jury indictment.

Apparently I may be right because there are already three citizen grand jury indictments against Obama by three separate groups that have been presented to state courts. They are an Arkansas citizen's grand jury, a Texas citizen's grand jury, and another group calling itself the American Grand Jury. These three groups are acting independently and totally without federal or state guidelines.

Except Rhode island.

And herein lies the significance and power.

A Rhode Island man named Mike Mandeville has taken this process a dramatic step further. He has formed a Citizen's Grand Jury right inside a Rhode Island courthouse and having a state judge swear in the Citizen's Grand Jury for the purpose of deliberating the potential charges concerning Obama's possible ineligibility to be president. They are then going to debate the case before state officials and, if in their opinion, there is a preponderance of evidence that Obama is ineligible for the presidency, to have the state of Rhode Island bring an indictment against him.

That takes the legal case concerning Obama's possible ineligibility into a much higher dimension that cannot be ignored.

Before I stumbled onto this, I didn't know that we, as independent citizens, have the Constitutional right to form a Grand Jury. Like everyone else, I thought a Grand Jury required county, city, state, or judicial authority.

Although embryonic, this has the potential of a political and Constitutional earthquake leading to the most serious Constitutional crisis in our nation's history. If Obama is indeed ineligible for the presidency, then every Congressional bill signed into law by him is invalid. Indeed, every action taken by him is invalid. The banking system takeover, the Chrysler/GM takeover, the Stimulus bill, and all other actions are invalid.

Moreover, if he is ruled ineligible, is Joe Biden also ineligible? Or does he become president? Is the 2008 election invalid? How is the case settled? By the Supreme Court? If the Obama/Biden presidency are invalid, do we have another election, or does Nancy Pelosi become president? There are an almost endless number of Constitutional questions, so this is an extremely serious matter.

For those of you who want to explore this further, go to www.americangrandjury.org. <http://www.americangrandjury.org./> There you will find not only details on this story, but four links to help you understand the history and powers of Citizen Grand Juries. The information contained in these links are long, detailed, and most informative. The links you will see are entitled:

1) Grand Jury History Powers
2) Rules Evidence Indictments
3) Grand Jury Forms Ettiquette
4) The Court: How to File

This is an interesting development.

Dan Hazelwood

=============

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

Dan Hazelwood - a top Republicans Strategist and voter mail expert

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dan Hazelwood [mailtoanH@targetedcreative.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 7:12 PM
To: xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Did you originate this e-mail?

Not me.


-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxxxxx
To: Dan Hazelwood <DanH@targetedcreative.com>
Sent: Thu May 21 17:33:07 2009
Subject: Did you originate this e-mail?


Dan,

The following clipped e-mail appears to be from you. Did you originate this e-mail, and is the report accurate?

=======

This is a long, but hugely significant piece of information

For those of you who are following the story about President Obama's possible ineligibility to be president by virtue of his inability to present a simple birth certificate, you may want to pay very close attention to what is happening in several states, but most notably in Rhode Island.

As a brief introduction to what is occurring, let me start by reminding anyone who isn't aware of this that there are a multitude of lawsuits filed in several state and federal courts that challenge Obama's right to be president. These challenges are based upon the Constitution's requirement that a person aspiring to be president must be a natural born citizen, which means he/she must be born in the United States.

Exceptions to this have been allowed by the U S Supreme Court when a possible presidential aspirant is the child of a United States military officer who, while stationed overseas or outside the continental United States, had a child born in the location in which they were stationed. This is exactly Senator McCain's story. His father, A United States Naval Commander, was stationed in Panama when John McCain was born. So although John McCain was not born in the continental United States, he was nevertheless eligible to run for president due to that Supreme Court ruling. I think the same is true (I may be incorrect in this) concerning Franklin Roosevelt.

There appear to be valid questions concerning Obama's right to be president due to a variety of factors (such as being an Indonesian student at a time when Indonesia prohibited any non-native born Indonesians from attending their schools - the upshot being that since Obama attended school in Indonesia, he had to be recognized as a valid Indonesian citizen; and the fact that at a time when the United States Department of State was not only not issuing passports or visas for American citizens to travel to Pakistan, they also prohibited all non-government officials from traveling there, yet Barack Obama managed to enter that country - the point being that he could only have done so with a passport or visa issued by another country), but the most compelling question is his inability to provide a simple birth certificate. After all, you can provide yours. Why can't he? All Obama needs to do is present a birth certificate, and the controversy is ended.

Adding fuel to this fire is the fact that a team of Obama lawyers have fought every lawsuit and inquiry in court, thus far managing to stop every effort. It is estimated that at least $600,000 has been spent on attorney fees for Obama's lawyers to fight the lawsuits. Why is that necessary if there is a birth certificate?

The consensus among leading politicians is that this fight has little to no chance of victory, so that is why you never hear about this on talk radio or television newscasts.

Until now.

I personally was totally ignorant of what I am about to relate, but apparently there is an implied provision in the fifth amendment to the Constitution which allows any group of citizens to form a grand jury at will for the purpose of hearing the facts of an issue and, following a vote confirming a consensus that there is sufficient evidence to indict, present their indictment to a state or federal court (this process is called a "presentation"). The officer of the state/federal court must then frame an indictment and present it to the accused so he/she may respond. Since I have no knowledge of law and am therefore on very shaky legal grounds, I think this means that the accused must respond and answer the citizen grand jury indictment.

Apparently I may be right because there are already three citizen grand jury indictments against Obama by three separate groups that have been presented to state courts. They are an Arkansas citizen's grand jury, a Texas citizen's grand jury, and another group calling itself the American Grand Jury. These three groups are acting independently and totally without federal or state guidelines.

Except Rhode island.

And herein lies the significance and power.

A Rhode Island man named Mike Mandeville has taken this process a dramatic step further. He has formed a Citizen's Grand Jury right inside a Rhode Island courthouse and having a state judge swear in the Citizen's Grand Jury for the purpose of deliberating the potential charges concerning Obama's possible ineligibility to be president. They are then going to debate the case before state officials and, if in their opinion, there is a preponderance of evidence that Obama is ineligible for the presidency, to have the state of Rhode Island bring an indictment against him.

That takes the legal case concerning Obama's possible ineligibility into a much higher dimension that cannot be ignored.

Before I stumbled onto this, I didn't know that we, as independent citizens, have the Constitutional right to form a Grand Jury. Like everyone else, I thought a Grand Jury required county, city, state, or judicial authority.

Although embryonic, this has the potential of a political and Constitutional earthquake leading to the most serious Constitutional crisis in our nation's history. If Obama is indeed ineligible for the presidency, then every Congressional bill signed into law by him is invalid. Indeed, every action taken by him is invalid. The banking system takeover, the Chrysler/GM takeover, the Stimulus bill, and all other actions are invalid.

Moreover, if he is ruled ineligible, is Joe Biden also ineligible? Or does he become president? Is the 2008 election invalid? How is the case settled? By the Supreme Court? If the Obama/Biden presidency are invalid, do we have another election, or does Nancy Pelosi become president? There are an almost endless number of Constitutional questions, so this is an extremely serious matter.

For those of you who want to explore this further, go to www.americangrandjury.org. <http://www.americangrandjury.org./> There you will find not only details on this story, but four links to help you understand the history and powers of Citizen Grand Juries. The information contained in these links are long, detailed, and most informative. The links you will see are entitled:

1) Grand Jury History Powers
2) Rules Evidence Indictments
3) Grand Jury Forms Ettiquette
4) The Court: How to File

This is an interesting development.

Dan Hazelwood

=============

Thanks for making me feel stupid lolol...It was so obvious to just find him and ask that it did not even occur to me. Thanks Juan, you are my hero of the day

Originally Posted by Posing as Dan Hazelwood, ???????????

A Rhode Island man named Mike Mandeville has taken this process a dramatic step further. He has formed a Citizen's Grand Jury right inside a Rhode Island courthouse and having a state judge swear in the Citizen's Grand Jury for the purpose of deliberating the potential charges concerning Obama's possible ineligibility to be president. They are then going to debate the case before state officials and, if in their opinion, there is a preponderance of evidence that Obama is ineligible for the presidency, to have the state of Rhode Island bring an indictment against him.

http://americangrandjury.org/
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6043
http://rhodeislandpatriotsforamerica.ning.com
citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/05/14/nc-grand-jury-indictment-of-obama-walter-fitzpatrick-complaint-american-grand-jury-obama-not-eligible-obama-british-citizen-obama-has-committed-treason

Michael Mandeville has filed a motion with the clerk of Providence plantation to be sworn in under oath, and the R.I. Grand Jury has an appointment on a court calendar. I have not found a report of a Rhode Island state judge authorizing or swearing in a Grand Jury. I've requested verification or clarification from Mr. Mandeville.

Originally Posted by cayla99

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

Dan Hazelwood - a top Republicans Strategist and voter mail expert

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dan Hazelwood [mailtoanH@targetedcreative.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 7:12 PM
To: xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Did you originate this e-mail?

Not me.

Thanks for making me feel stupid lolol...It was so obvious to just find him and ask that it did not even occur to me. Thanks Juan, you are my hero of the day

Cayla99, better to "feel" stupid than to actually be stupid. You're a lot wiser than the (purported or claimed) nearly 66 million voters who didn't have the common sense to find out whether they were voting for a Constitutionally eligible candidate.

Oh... pardon me. For most of those 66 million voters (so-called), being Constitutionally eligible was probably not all that important.

Try going to this site. I think that there are several states that are doing a citizens grand jury look up your state and see if they are conducting one.

http://americangrandjury.org/

I know mine either already had one or is about to shortly. The problem I have with this is I don't think they will be recognized by Washington. I feel that they are laughing at this process and that at the end of the day, will ignore any and all findings by these grand juries

Originally Posted by cayla99

I know mine either already had one or is about to shortly. The problem I have with this is I don't think they will be recognized by Washington. I feel that they are laughing at this process and that at the end of the day, will ignore any and all findings by these grand juries.

[quote="Leo Donofrio"][size=117]I have received letters from the people who ran the citizens' grand jury in Georgia, and while I appreciate their frustration in that our Government has failed to protect the Constitution[,] by allowing a President to be sworn in who is not a “natural born citizenâ€