Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Originally Posted by MinutemanCDC_SC

. . . oh, I forgot, the Feds don't enforce laws against this administration.[/size]

MinuteMan,

Your comment support the points about the rule of law I keep raising:

1. In the United States, the people's government is based on the rule of law, and on the federal level, government is based on the articles found in the Constitution for the United States.

2. It is evident the federal government has ceased to operate under the controls and limitations of the Constitution for the United States, while simultaneously enforcing federal regulations on the states and on the people. That's called tyranny.

3. The federal government has in recent years acted unlawfully according to American Constitutional law, and has, instead, acted according to the dictates of the Communist Manifesto and is, therefore, no longer the constitutionally legitimate confederated republic form of government as agreed to by the American states on September 17, 1787.

4. Since the federal government no longer abides by the constraints and controls of the Constitution for the United States, it must be considered a rogue and outlaw government, no longer representative of the states or of the people, and must be legally or otherwise nullified, dissolved, and/or made lawful by the states and by the people.


I am interested in reader response that will show me factual evidence that my comments above are inaccurate, incomplete, or unreasonable.

I am also especially interested in knowing of verifiable areas in which the federal government does conform to the constraints and controls of the Constitution for the United States, signed and dated September 17,1787.

If there are any.

Blogger ladysforest examined copies of Mr. and Mrs. Obama's 1961 birth announcement from the Hawaii state library, the University of Hawaii library, and the Library of Congress. She found several anomalies - a period missing, a word misspelled - and one of the films was cut lengthwise down the middle with a razor. In her blog, she displays evidence of tampering with the 1961 Obama birth announcements.

She also compares the birth announcements published in The Honolulu Advertiser and The Honolulu Star-Bulletin for the 10 days around Barack Obama II's birth date. The two editions which contain Mr. and Mrs. Obama's announcement are the only pair in her 10 day sample in which the lists of births are in the same order, and only for the first 25 births listed for this date.

Extra, Extra, Announcing obama’s Birth

What Happens When The Planets Align

Originally Posted by [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Honolulu_Advertiser

Wikipedia[/url]]On February 25, 2010, Black Press, which owned the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, purchased The Honolulu Advertiser from Gannett Pacific Corporation... On May 3, 2010, a new company setup by Black Press, HA Management, took over operations of [The] Advertiser and merged it with the Star-Bulletin on June 7, 2010, to form the Honolulu Star-Advertiser.

• Approximately 453 jobs were eliminated in the consolidation, leaving a combined staff of 474.

This story verifies the Wikipedia entry.


Blogger Butterdezillion has a long thread about her tangle with the rule-breakers at the Hawaii DoH.
Better she tell it than I mangle it. Red Flags in Hawaii



The Watergate cover-up brought down the Nixon Administration, more so than the break-in itself.

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

Originally Posted by MinutemanCDC_SC

. . . oh, I forgot, the Feds don't enforce laws against this administration.[/size]

MinuteMan,

Your comment support the points about the rule of law I keep raising:

1. In the United States, the people's government is based on the rule of law, and on the federal level, government is based on the articles found in the Constitution for the United States.

2. It is evident the federal government has ceased to operate under the controls and limitations of the Constitution for the United States, while simultaneously enforcing federal regulations on the states and on the people. That's called tyranny.

3. The federal government has in recent years acted unlawfully according to American Constitutional law, and has, instead, acted according to the dictates of the Communist Manifesto and is, therefore, no longer the constitutionally legitimate confederated republic form of government as agreed to by the American states on September 17, 1787.

4. Since the federal government no longer abides by the constraints and controls of the Constitution for the United States, it must be considered a rogue and outlaw government, no longer representative of the states or of the people, and must be legally or otherwise nullified, dissolved, and/or made lawful by the states and by the people.


I am interested in reader response that will show me factual evidence that my comments above are inaccurate, incomplete, or unreasonable.

I am also especially interested in knowing of verifiable areas in which the federal government does conform to the constraints and controls of the Constitution for the United States, signed and dated September 17,1787.

If there are any.

My understanding is that when the Act of 1871 Incorporated the united states it took the Constitution FOR the United States and called the now articles of incorporation the Constitution OF the United States. So yes...we have not had a lawful citizens law or Peoples Constitutional law since. We run under the laws of incorporation and Admiralty law.

The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The
corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original
Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act of 1871, the organic Constitution was defaced -- in effect vandalized and sabotage -- when the title was capitalized and the word "for" was changed to "of" in the title.

http://www.byronwine.com/files/1871.pdf

Black and white voter fraud...
http://www.alipac.us//ftopict-200246.html

The shear audacity of the Democrats and the perfect storm timing of a sick at heart nation is how Obama came to be. The Constitution has been ignored for so long now that this was just a none issue for many in Congress and the "natural born" requirements were not known at all by the populous. But it was very well known by "Constitutional attorney" Obama and Pelosi. The DNC fraud proves beyond reasonable doubt the fraud and conspiracy. Also the McCain eligibility challenge supports congressional knowledge of POTUS requirements and a willful ignoring of those requirements for Obama. Why? Remains the big question..

The Watergate cover-up brought down the Nixon Administration, more so than the break-in itself.

“A naturalized citizen is indeed made a citizen under an Act of Congress, but the Act does not proceed to give, to regulate, or to prescribe his capacities. He becomes a member of the society, possessing all the rights of a native citizen, and standing, in the view of the Constitution, on the footing of a native. The Constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national legislature, is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise Of this power exhausts it, so far as regards the individual. The Constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the Courts of the United States, precisely under the same circumstance under which a native might sue. He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen, except so far as the Constitution makes the distinction. The law makes none.â€

[quote="hardlineconstitutionalist"]“A naturalized citizen is indeed made a citizen under an Act of Congress, but the Act does not proceed to give, to regulate, or to prescribe his capacities. He becomes a member of the society, possessing all the rights of a native citizen, and standing, in the view of the Constitution, on the footing of a native. The Constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national legislature, is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise Of this power exhausts it, so far as regards the individual. The Constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the Courts of the United States, precisely under the same circumstance under which a native might sue. He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen, except so far as the Constitution makes the distinction. The law makes none.â€

[quote="cayla99"][quote="hardlineconstitutionalist"]“A naturalized citizen is indeed made a citizen under an Act of Congress, but the Act does not proceed to give, to regulate, or to prescribe his capacities. He becomes a member of the society, possessing all the rights of a native citizen, and standing, in the view of the Constitution, on the footing of a native. The Constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national legislature, is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise Of this power exhausts it, so far as regards the individual. The Constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the Courts of the United States, precisely under the same circumstance under which a native might sue. He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen, except so far as the Constitution makes the distinction. The law makes none.â€

I just wish I still believed that the general population will wake up

I mean we even have elected officials who now feel safe to openly admit they do not care about the Constitution

Originally Posted by cayla99

I just wish I still believed that the general population will wake up

I mean we even have elected officials who now feel safe to openly admit they do not care about the Constitution

THAT says it all. I have been asked "who do we vote for" my ansewer is "who ever is talking about and standing for a Constitutional Republic...not a democracy.

I could use some help in this string
http://www.alipac.us//ftopict-202095.html

Is it (the troll) gone now? Perhaps this would be a good time to refresh our minds about
the M.O. of The Obama Administration Disinform, Jam, And Mislead (TOADJAM) group.

[quote="Warner Todd Huston"]The Obama Justice Department’s Secret Blogging Team… Is it Illegal?[size=117]

October 7, 2009

-By Warner Todd Huston



Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, has apparently hired a cadre of left-wing, Democrat campaign bloggers to troll through the Internet looking for news stories and blog posts that denigrate the Obama agenda. After such websites are found it is the job of these secret lefty bloggers to leave comments that come to the support of Obamaism in the comments sections. It seems that Eric Holder has created his own little propaganda unit in a valiant effort to become the Bloggi Riefenstahl of the Obama era.

As reported at The Muffled Oar, a blog that first broke the story of Holder’s secretive blogging unit — dubbed the “Blog Squadâ€