Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Originally Posted by hardlineconstitutionalist

This thing is so ridiculous... we either go by the constitution or we don't... What is the argument about...????

It has been argued that we are no longer a nation based on the rule of law, rather we are now a nation ruled by man.

That's tyranny.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/28178876/Publ ... ule-of-Men

[quote="FedUpinFarmersBranch"]New investigation into Obama background spells trouble ahead
April 28, 12:24 PM
Anthony G. Martin
165 comments

A brand new, in-depth investigation into the background of Barack Obama may spell big trouble ahead regarding the issue of Presidential eligibility.

The investigation was conducted by Northeast Intelligence Network--a team of experienced, professional private investigators whose services have been utilized by Fortune-500 companies. The director, Douglas J. Hagmann, is a 23-year veteran in high-level investigations and is a member of the International Counter-Terrorism Officers Association.

Hagmann's investigation into the background and Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as President of the United States is extensive and thorough. His conclusions are stunning.

For example, neither of Obama's parents were citizens of the United States at the time of his birth. Therefore, Obama would have to have been born on U.S. soil in order to qualify as a 'natural born citizen' according to the qualifications specified in the Constitution.

But Hagmann's investigation reveals that, contrary to the notion of those who point to a short-form birth certificate in Hawaii, and 2 birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers, neither of these factors proves anything at all about Obama's status or citizenship:

the Certification of Live Birth is consistently cited by individuals, the media and others to prove the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA. Nonetheless, even an authenticated and genuine Certification of Live Birth is legally insufficient for the purpose of proving eligibility, as it merely represents that OBAMA’s birth record is on file in the state of Hawaii. It falls short of providing the information necessary to determine constitutional eligibility in at least two areas: it does not offer any information regarding who supplied the information, nor does it confirm the authenticity of the information provided. Again, it merely indicates that the information is “on file.â€

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

Originally Posted by hardlineconstitutionalist

This thing is so ridiculous... we either go by the constitution or we don't... What is the argument about...????

It has been argued that we are no longer a nation based on the rule of law, rather we are now a nation ruled by man.

That's tyranny.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/28178876/Publ ... ule-of-Men

"We are no longer a Nation based on Equal Justice. We are a nation based on social justice. "EQUAL JUSTICE" was what all the immigrants fled from their countries of social justice for. They were fleeing to equal justice found only in America..."

Guess who said these prophetic words...

Originally Posted by hardlineconstitutionalist

Although this article is very good and about as good as anything you will find... it fails on the most important point: Defining "native" "natural" and "citizen"...

The research done by Stephen Tonchen seems to provide the best available research and definition right now. At some point in the future we may see a second chapter by the Undead Revolution. Both articles are here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/27240350/Step ... ligibility

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20106729/Unde ... tural-Born

I should also note that Obama can never be a natural born citizen because his father was a British subject.

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

Originally Posted by hardlineconstitutionalist

Although this article is very good and about as good as anything you will find... it fails on the most important point: Defining "native" "natural" and "citizen"...

The research done by Stephen Tonchen seems to provide the best available research and definition right now. At some point in the future we may see a second chapter by the Undead Revolution. Both articles are here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/27240350/Step ... ligibility

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20106729/Unde ... tural-Born

I should also note that Obama can never be a natural born citizen because his father was a British subject.

That is the point I have been attempting to make since day one... All these stupid arguments are moot!!! He absolutely does not qualify under the definition of "natural born."

BUT>>> The legal questions have been raised and we have BO already seated. There are legal questions testing the wording of the Constitution and it's validity. There are those that claim... "all words and meanings are the same...all make a citizen..." And of course PC and social justice demand that anyone should be able to be the POTUS to disregard raciest bigotry.

SOooo...we wait. No court will take jurisdiction on this hot potato. But IT WILL make it to the courts someday. It will have to with states like Arizona passing laws that require validation for POTUS. They will have to review and accept the interpretation or usurp the Constitution. Very interesting from a legal perspective.

Now...this is really interesting...I think I have posted it before...Wait till you get to exhibit 6 and 7... It will make blood shoot out of your eyes...

http://americangrandjury.org/public/

OH...BTW...great links...thanks...

OMG...did you watch the full clip @ 1:30min he said:

"I know my approval ratings have gone down. That is politics and I don't worry about it. But I happen to know that my approval ratings are still very quite high in the country of my birth..."

This guy actually thinks he is funny...and to make it worse...people are laughing like it is a big joke.

There are no words for this guy...

Full video but watch at about 1:30:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... inner.html

Originally Posted by hardlineconstitutionalist

OMG...did you watch the full clip @ 1:30min he said:

"I know my approval ratings have gone down. That is politics and I don't worry about it. But I happen to know that my approval ratings are still very quite high in the country of my birth..."

This guy actually thinks he is funny...and to make it worse...people are laughing like it is a big joke.

@ 4:25
"There are few things in life that are harder to find and more important to keep than love . . . well, love and a birth certificate."

I thought it was funny. Of course, I had to learn to laugh at myself long ago, so this sounded funny too.

Mr. Obama closed by saying, "God bless you. And God bless the United States of America."

Why Congressional Republicans avoid the Obama Eligibility Issue

DID THE REPUBLICAN PARTY PURPOSELY ALLOW AN INELIGIBLE CANDIDATE TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008?

Author: John F. Sweeney
Republished with permission of The Post & Email
Date: May 2, 2010
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/05/02/ ... ity-issue/

(May 2, 2010) — In discussions concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barrack Hussein Obama II for the office of President of the United States, many point out that if there were a real issue, the Republicans would have leveraged it in 2008 to retain control of the White House. But it was well-documented at the time, and additional documentation and analysis have established, that John McCain’s eligibility was in question as well. With that being the case, why would the Republicans nominate a candidate who might not be constitutionally eligible to serve in the office?

The answer may be a simple one – the 2008 race was going to the Democrats and the Republicans did not want a leading candidate for 2012 to lose or be roughed up during the campaign. So the solution – let the man who needed to win in 2008, if he was ever going to be president, run – even if he might not be constitutionally eligible. Was this a grand conspiracy by the Republican Party? No, it was just simple pragmatic political strategy.

The Republicans had few things going for them in 2007 and 2008. They had lost the Congress in the 2006 elections, and they had a president who was losing popularity as an unpopular war dragged on. Even if things had been going relatively well, history was against a third straight term in the White House. Since 1953, only once had the White House been occupied by a party more than eight consecutive years, and that was when George H. Bush rode Ronald Reagan’s popularity to take the 1988 election.

Clearly, 2008 was not like 1988, and it was unlikely the Republicans were going to keep the White House. They knew it, and they knew it early.

So when John McCain showed some strength in the primaries, the other front-runners backed off. They knew the odds of winning in 2008 were long. So they avoided going into the 2008 Presidential buzz saw. John McCain had no choice but to make a final and gallant run for the office. The year 2008 was his last stand as a presidential candidate. He was 71 years old. No president has ever been elected for his first term after his 70th birthday. Stories and articles were popping up about McCain’s age in 2008, and polls showed it was a negative factor. If it was a negative issue at age 71 in 2008, it will be a killer issue in 2012 when John McCain will be 75 years old.

So for the Republican Party, the setup in the presidential race looked straightforward in 2008. There was almost no chance to win, no matter who the nominee was. So they nominated the only guy who cannot run in future races: John McCain.

Was the Republican Party aware of John McCain’s potential eligibility issue? Of course it was. The issue was written about by major news organizations – The New York Times, The Washington Post. They wrote about it in 1998. They again wrote about it in 2008. In February of 2008 the Panama issue was written about by these and other major news outlets. And unlike the mocking and sarcastic tone used when writing about Obama’s eligibility issues, these articles are written in serious journalistic fashion and raise the possibility of a constitutional crisis should McCain be elected.

But then the issue disappeared from view after the passing of the Democrat-led Senate Resolution 511 that declared John McCain a “natural born Citizen.â€

You may have seen this already, and I repost it in light of the Arizona situation. Once again I ask - how long until we have Americans firing on Americans?

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

The Power Bush gave to Obama to become Dictator for life

2007 LAW UNDID 200 YEARS OF TRADITION, WHICH PROTECTED CITIZENS AGAINST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S USE OF MILITARY AGAINST THEM

Author: John Charlton
Republished with permission of The Post & Email
Date: October 29, 2009
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30885570/John ... e-to-Obama

(Oct. 29, 2009) — It’s the power Bush gave to Obama, by which the latter can install himself as Dictator for life, now that he has usurped the Presidency and pressured the Courts to dismiss challenges to his eligibility and fraud.

Hidden away in H.R. 5122 , of the 109th Congress, the “John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007″ — Signed into law by G. W. Bush on Oct. 17th of that year — there is a section which reads thus:

Sec. 333 . Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law

(a) Use of Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies-

(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to--

(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--

(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--

(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

(b) Notice to Congress- The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.'

(2) PROCLAMATION TO DISPERSE- Section 334 of such title is amended by inserting `or those obstructing the enforcement of the laws' after `insurgents'.

(3) HEADING AMENDMENT- The heading of chapter 15 of such title is amended to read as follows:

This law, obviously has nothing to do with terrorism and everything to do about suppressing State sovereignty in the case of secession from the Federal Government.

Why would Bush and Congress be thinking of that in 2007, if they had already not planned to install Obama?

The Federal Government has no authority to suppress individual rights and State Sovereignty: this is expressly denied in the 9th and 10th Amendments!

Nor does the President have the constitutional authority to determine who is breaking the law by his own ipse dixit decree. Notice that he can call in armed forces even in the eventuality of what he judges is a conspiracy against public order! That’s pretty much a carte blanche to arrest any group of citizens he does not like.

Seeing that Obama’s usurpation of the Presidency has caused the deprivation of the rights of all Citizens to have a legitimate President, born on U.S. soil of 2 U.S. citizen parents, the powers granted in the above law should rather be invoked to arrest him and his supporters, if sanity reigned in this country!