Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

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?

Originally Posted by PatriotofPast

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.

[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 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."

Obama to Avoid Father's Kenyan Homeland on Trip to Africa
The President says Kenya, plagued by political violence,
still has a long way to go in becoming a free and open democracy

By Wendell Goler
FOXNews.com
Friday, July 03, 2009

President Obama says his first trip to Sub-Saharan Africa won't include a stop in his father's Kenyan homeland because of his view that the violence-plagued country still has a long way to go in becoming a free and open democracy.

Obama will make a stop in Ghana next week at the end of a trip to Russia and Italy. In an interview with allafrica.com, he said Kenya's leaders "do not seem to be moving into a permanent reconciliation that would allow the country to move forward."
________________________________________

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 isolation 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.

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.â€

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

On YouTube, tizawiza makes a valid point.

Originally Posted by tizawiza

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.

It begins, "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen..."

(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.

Originally Posted by Amendment XIV

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).

From Carl Swensson:
http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com

*** BREAKING NEWS*** July 6, 2009

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.

Originally Posted by Carl Swensson of patriotsforamerica.ning.com

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.

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?

Originally Posted by PatriotofPast

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 fifth column anti-American 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".

In a two-day delivery zone, it took twenty-two working days and a mail theft complaint just to get a confirmation card back with an unidentifiable signature from recipient unknown at address unknown. 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 or whether it got to the addressee in the DOJ or not.