Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Originally Posted by TexasBorn

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

With everything good, there is often some bad. The Tim Adams video found in this WND article says Obama was not born on U.S. soil, but the discussion about Obama's eligibility is that 1) Obama was NOT born in Hawaii (probably accurate), and 2) the legal issue about Obama NOT being a natural born citizen (not accurately answered).

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=175013

Too bad Tim Adams didn't seek Alipac help before his interview.

Will be interesting to see if this article by Globe gets any traction. Wasn't it a tabloid (forgot which one) that blew the John Edwards scandal wide open?

Actually, the Globe has broached this subject of Obama's eligibility many months in the past. I don't read the Globe (or any of the other tabloids) so I can't tell you if they did a piece on Edwards.

It was the National Enquirer. It looks like at first their entry was denied for the Pulitzer and then later accepted. So...will watch the Globe story and see what happens. Enquirer has set a precedence.



Pulitzer Committee Says National Enquirer 'Ineligible' for Top Journalism Prize
Eligibility Rather Than Ethics Cast Doubts on Tabloid's Chances for Top Prize

http://abcnews.go.com/US/national-enqui ... ?id=962722



IT'S OFFICIAL! ENQUIRER ACCEPTED INTO PULITZER PRIZE COMPETITION

Photo by: a doc_furious illustration

The BIG secret is out of the bag as mainstream media trumpets the historic news that the NATIONAL ENQUIRER has been accepted into the Pulitzer Prize competition for its exhaustive investigation of the John Edwards Conspiracy and Cover-Up.

The scoop was broken by Emily Miller at Huffington Post as rumors of our acceptance into the competition by the prestigious journalism committee ignited the blogosphere.

"The Pulitzer Prize Board has officially accepted The National Enquirer's submissions for breaking the John Edwards scandal, according to sources close to the Board. In a historic move, the Pulitzer Board conceded that the self-proclaimed tabloid is qualified to compete with mainstream news outlets for journalism's most prestigious prize.

"The Enquirer is in the running for the Pulitzer in two categories: "Investigative Reporting" and "National News Reporting" for The National Enquirer staff," Ms. Miller announced exclusively at HuffPo.

Quickly The New York Times - for many THE Paper of record - made it even more official with their elegant headline: "Enquirer Is Eligible for Pulitzer". Writer Richard Perez-Pena analyzed the Pulitzer committee's turn-around in accepting the ENQUIRER entry after initially dismissing the very notion.

The Times reported: Sig Gissler, administrator of the prizes, says he and his colleagues never publicly discuss the eligibility of any specific publication. "We apply our criteria, and if publications meet them, we allow them to participate."

But with a grassroots effort steamrolling the viral landscape, Gawker.com analyzed the situation point by point in their historic article: "There's NO Good Reason the National Enquirer Shouldn't Win a Pulitzer Prize"

And MediaBistro even has a poll (yes, you can vote in it) on whether or not the Pulitzer Committee should award The ENQUIRER investigation into John Edwards' alleged abuse of campaign funds to fund a conspiracy of silence:

Ms. Miller concluded in her Huffington Post exclusive: "The massive grassroots campaign by the public to push the Pulitzer Board to recognize the national importance of The Enquirer's reporting of John Edwards shows the best of Americans' core values - hard work, fairness and equality for all - even for tabloids."

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/nationa ... rity/68188

When is the Constitution like a Crocodile?

Apparently it is when you are a federal judge with lifetime (taxpayer-paid) tenure on either the District Court of New Jersey or the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, as is clearly demonstrated by case 09-4209, Kerchner et al v. Obama & Congress, et al. If you remember in the District Court, Judge Simandle took it upon himself at the behest of the DOJ lawyers striving to defend Obama (who was initially sued before he took the Oath of Office and while still a private person) by repeatedly violating his judicial oath (meaning violating the Constitution that he swore to uphold).

See the Post & Email/Scribd doc here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/33966624/JTX- ... -Crocodile

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

When is the Constitution like a Crocodile?

Apparently it is when you are a federal judge with lifetime (taxpayer-paid) tenure on either the District Court of New Jersey or the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, as is clearly demonstrated by case 09-4209, Kerchner et al v. Obama & Congress, et al. If you remember in the District Court, Judge Simandle took it upon himself at the behest of the DOJ lawyers striving to defend Obama (who was initially sued before he took the Oath of Office and while still a private person) by repeatedly violating his judicial oath (meaning violating the Constitution that he swore to uphold).

All these legal cases strike me as so much wasted effort any more. Taking this to court is like taking a toothache or a ruptured disk to a G.P. or family doctor.

THE COURT SYSTEM IS BROKEN, PEOPLE!!!



THE SYSTEM IS DOWN; USE ALTERNATE PROCEDURES.

First we pray. Rendering this case through a lawyer gets a lawyer's results;
rendering it through a Congressman or a Senator likewise goes nowhere;
submitting it to the lamestream media gets the truth totally squelched.

Now where else are you going to take it? To your mommy?

The following scenario is only my opinion, but to me, it makes much more sense than anything the LSM have to say.

As long as Mr. Obama has the armed forces under his command, he can laugh at the facts and thumb his nose at the people of the United States. If his ineligibility for office is ever really challenged, he can declare martial law with the stroke of a pen (assuming that the H1N1 National Emergency continues indefinitely, which serves his purposes).

But if the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who know that Mr. Obama is ineligible, decide that he is a clear and present danger to the United States - which he has been since arriving in Washington in 2004, but the JCS haven't declared it yet - the JCS will oust him from office in a banana republic replay of the ouster of Honduras Pres. Manuel Zelaya on June 28, 2009.

The difference in Honduras was that the army, the Supreme Court, and the Congress all wanted Zelaya out and gone. In the U.S. now, the military is largely disgusted with the Obama usurpation, but the Supreme Court is on the fence. Meanwhile, the Congress has a large Democrat majority in the House and the Senate. Without Congressional approval, the JCS lack the legal authority to act in defense of the U.S., even though they have the power of armed force.

So the JCS are biding their time until the sea change on Nov. 2 or the Turkey-Syria-Iran(-Libya?) attack on Israel, whichever comes first. If Mr. Obama (raised as a Mus|im) sides with the Mus|ims, as he indicated he will do (The Audacity of Hope, p. 261), and against Israel, the military will have to restrain him for treason for not defending our only ally in the Middle East.

Is|am's political operatives in the U.S. surely recognize that the Democrats may well lose either the House or the Senate, or even both, on Nov. 2. Therefore, leaders of Mus|im Brotherhood-connected organizations in the U.S. will keep the pressure on Turkey, Iran, and Syria to provoke a war with Israel before the Democrats lose control of Congress, where the Constitutional authority to declare war resides (Art. I, § 8, ¶ 11).

But that's just my opinion and not a "prophecy" of any kind. Anything could happen. PRAY.

MinuteMan, one veteran believes the military is being destroyed at the same time.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/33854024/RC-M ... fect-Storm

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

MinuteMan, one veteran believes the military is being destroyed at the same time.

HighlanderJuan, Einstein said that the only things that are infinite are the universe and human stupidity, and he was not sure about the universe. But I cannot attribute the actions of this usurpation entirely to stupidity. There's not that much stupidity concentrated in any one place, even if stupidity is infinite.

Never imagine a conspiracy to account for what can be explained by stupidity. But neither should we blame stupidity for any bad outcome which a malevolent conspiracy actually caused.

Remember that we're talking about outlaws in government posts... very capable and competent outlaws.

I cannot read anyone's mind to determine his or her motives. But some of what appears to be incompetence has to be intentional malevolence. Why? Because over and over again, the results of apparent incompetence are what would result from intentional malevolence. If it looks like incompetence but causes bad outcomes like sabotage, it is not blind justice but just blindness to automatically, every time, blame incompetence for those destructive consequences.

Obama “Kenyan-Bornâ€

Originally Posted by On Sunday, June 27, 2004, the Eastern Standard of Nairobi, Kenya,

"Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat..."



http://web.archive.org/web/200406271427 ... 060403.htm

No, no, no, April, you've got it all wrong! See the escape terminology, "appeared set to take over"? As in, "alleged"?

That is "Barrack Obama" - the famous Kenyan-born double of The One (pbuh), Anointed Potentate and Ruler, etc. etc..



Although, given the truly remarkable family resemblance, it's easy to see how so much confusion has come to be.

/ SARC

Yea I know it's the Globe but interesting pic of barry and his kenyan family...hmmm


http://tinyurl.com/28telqo

Originally Posted by TexasBorn

Originally Posted by BetsyRoss

With all due respect to the researchers, who've put a lot of time and energy into this, I feel like things are about to get so bad in this country that the citizenship issue will barely count. What if we - and I mean including a bunch of his former supporters - get serious about trying to impeach him for his mishandling of [fill in the blank].

Betsy, IMO pursuing the citizenship issue and those who successfully perpetrated the fraud are central to what is going on in this country. You can't cure the disease if you don't know the cause.

Our courts turned against us and created a dictatorship.

The courts in 1937 decreed that treaties, known as executive agreements, signed by presidents Executive Orders do not require consensus or approval by either the legislative (Congress) or judicial (U.S. Supreme Court) branches of the government.

http://vactruth.com/2010/06/14/fourth-s ... ve-orders/