Page 520 of 573 FirstFirst ... 20420470510516517518519520521522523524530570 ... LastLast
Results 5,191 to 5,200 of 5729
Like Tree97Likes

Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #5191
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    Quote Originally Posted by sacredrage View Post
    His being a sharp-left liberal is the danger I believe he presents to America-the idea of him possibly bringing us closer to a socialist or communist state. Muslims don't agree with gay marriage or abortion, plus he orchestrated the death of Khadafi and bin Ladin, so I don't believe he's really a Muslim.
    Quote Originally Posted by kathyet
    I do
    I think that Mr. Obama is an atheist, because he was raised as a Communist.

    I think that his associating with Mus|ims, reciting the Qu'ran and the Mus|im call to prayer, bowing low to Saudi King Abdullah, siding with Dar al'Is|am against Israel,
    sometimes practicing Ramadan and other customs and traditions of Is|am - for example, taking off his shoes when entering a mosque for a prayer service, etc., are a "bad boy" black identity thing rather than an article of faith.

    What I think is, of course, irrelevant to what the Lord Jesus Christ will think of Barack Hussein Obama II at the judgment.

    But I think that kathyet will find this interesting. So, for kathyet . . .


    Wedding ring is in for repair?

    Since when does a plain wedding band need repairs, along with your watch, for a whole month?

    Another piece falls into place.
    In a press conference last week Obama was not wearing his
    wedding ring nor was he wearing his watch.

    When noticed, his staff said his ring was out for repairs. No reason was given for the missing watch.

    So it's just a coincidence that Muslims are forbidden from wearing jewelry during the month of
    Ramadan. Can't possibly be that, because although he hasn't gone to a Christian church service since entering the White House, we know he's a committed Christian "cause he said so during his campaign!" ...........And I've got a bridge to nowhere to sell you also.

    This is the same president that spent the Christmas holidays in Hawaii to avoid religious obligations
    as PRESIDENT at the White House. His children do not receive Christmas presents.

    Let's just face the facts and quit trying to distort the truth, we have a Muslim for president in
    the White House, and he has no knowledge of American history[, that is, America's Christian heritage].

    Please pass this on to those who are aware what is happening to our Great Nation, and to those who
    are still in denial.

    [anonymous, by email]
    To be charitable, it could be that Mr. Obama, as a committed Christian, is voluntarily imposing upon himself the Mus|im restriction upon jewelry during Ramadan, so that exercising his Christian liberty not cause his Mus|im associates to stumble about the faith.

    "It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak." - Romans 14:21

    "Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble." - 1 Corinthians 8:13


    It could be that. /sarc. I think it is dhimmitude, or fear of offending against Shari'a, or just being politically correct for his Mus|im homies.
    Last edited by MinutemanCDC_SC; 09-22-2012 at 02:56 PM.
    kathyet likes this.
    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

  2. #5192
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    An Israeli-Iran war may well bring to the fore the politicization of U.S. military flag officers (generals and admirals), forcing some resignations.

    Rutherford B. Hayes, 19th President of the U.S. (1877 - 1881), wrote:

    "Our partisanship about generals is now rebuked. General McClellan has serious faults or defects, but his friends can truly claim that if he had retained command, this disaster would not have occurred. The people and press would perhaps do well to cultivate patience. It is a virtue so needed in a struggle so equal as this. If the people can hold out, we shall find the right man after [a] while."
    December 20, 1862

    From the "Scripture Out of Context" version:
    "For you have need of patience..."
    "that in due season you may reap, if you do not lose heart."

    Partisan policies which change every 4 or 8 years cannot effectively change the course of a war which has continued for nearly 1400 years. The expectation of victory within a 4 to 8 year timeframe can only result in failure, causing an unending oscillation in policy and military strategy.
    Last edited by MinutemanCDC_SC; 09-25-2012 at 02:10 AM.
    cayla99 likes this.
    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

  3. #5193
    Senior Member cayla99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indiana, formerly of Northern Cal
    Posts
    4,889
    I have believed he was Muslim since he visited all 57 states
    Proud American and wife of a wonderful LEGAL immigrant from Ireland.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing." -Edmund Burke (1729-1797) Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #5194
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    Have most people just accepted as a settled fact that the U.S. has been overtaken by a malevolent and totalitarian foreign dictator, and they are just making the best of a bad situation by going along to get along?

    Most people I know realize that some evil thing has taken over Washington, D.C.. But they seem to be reciting Reinhold Niebuhr's Serenity Prayer, "Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change," without ever reaching the second line, "courage to change the things I can," and therefore, they have no need of wisdom to know the difference.

    There really does seem to generally be a resignation to the coup d'état and usurpation of the federal government, nullification of the U.S. Constitution, and the communist/
    anti-American/Is|amist takeover, as an accomplished work. People realize that no totalitarian government has ever been unseated by a public election. Since there is nothing, short of bloodshed, that they can do about it, they do a cognitive disconnect and pretend the usurpation of the federal government by America's enemies has never happened.

    I don't think that ignorance of the facts accounts for the blinders and earplugs that the sheeple wear. They know; they have written their Congresscritters; but beyond that, they just can't deal with it, so they imitate the ostrich with its head in the sand, waiting for the inevitable end.
    Last edited by MinutemanCDC_SC; 09-24-2012 at 12:06 AM.
    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

  5. #5195
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    I highly respect Butterdezillion's legal reasoning. She may not have every detail perfectly, but considering the web of deceit Mr. Obama has woven, her version is probably as accurate as anyone else's. Some of her links I hadn't seen before.

    Quote Originally Posted by Butterzillion
    Wheel of Fortune v Family Feud: A Tale of Two Games

    The Hawaii Department of Health, in an official verification, has indirectly confirmed that Barack Obama’s birth certificate is not legally valid. That fact reveals the very, very dangerous games multiple bureaucracies have been playing with America’s security. Though the results resemble Russian Roulette, the particulars are best illustrated by two popular game shows.

    On Wheel of Fortune, contestants take turns guessing what letters are in a mystery word or phrase. If a guess is correct, all the tiles having that letter light up, Vanna [White] flips the tiles to show the letters, and the contestant is closer to solving the puzzle.

    That’s also how a Hawaii verification of birth works too. An applicant fills out a form, “guessing” the true facts of a person’s birth, and the HI registrar writes back verifying as true whichever “guesses” match what is on a legally-valid record. If the lights don’t go off on a particular “guess”, it’s either because it doesn’t match the record, or because the record it matches isn’t legally valid, so the true birth facts cannot be legally known. The statute does not allow discretion for the Department of Health to simply ignore some items that were requested to be verified (emphasis mine):

    §338-14.3 Verification in lieu of a certified copy.

    (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

    (b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

    Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett filled out that web form (Exhibit A, attached at end of this report, or all exhibits can be seen here), guessing that Barack Hussein Obama II’s true birth facts are what Obama’s posted birth certificate claims: gender = male; date of birth = Aug 4, 1961; city of birth = Honolulu, HI; island of birth = Oahu; mother = Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama; father = Barack Hussein Obama.

    HI State Registrar Alvin Onaka sent back a letter (Exhibit C) verifying that they have a birth certificate for Obama, but the lights didn’t go off for any of those birth facts Bennett guessed on the application. In an attached additional request (Exhibit B), Bennett asked Onaka to verify that an attached copy of Obama’s posted long-form
    [Certificate of Live Birth] was a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”. Onaka wouldn’t verify that either but did verify that the birth facts claimed on the posted long-form matched the birth facts claimed on the original record at the HDOH.

    Even though the claims matched, none could be verified as the true facts because the record on file is not legally valid. That is the logical conclusion. Dr. Onaka indirectly confirmed that Obama’s birth record is not legally valid.

    Bennett additionally requested that Onaka “please verify the following items from the record of birth” (file #, time of birth, hospital, etc). That could be interpreted to mean either “verify as legally true” or “verify that these claims are ON the record of birth”. Since Onaka’s response to the application indirectly confirms that the record is non-valid, it is clear that he could only verify that the additional listed claims were ON the record, and not that the claims are legally true.

    About a week later, the lawyers for the Mississippi Democratic Executive Committee (MDEC) sought help in refuting a RICO lawsuit filed by Orly Taitz implicating them in the Obama birth certificate fraud uncovered by Sheriff Arpaio’s posse. The veracity of Obama’s posted long-form
    [Certificate of Live Birth] and the truth of its claims were vital, they said. Rather than fill out a verification application (and have Obama’s long-form claims fail the test for legal truth again), they decided to play by Family Feud rules.

    In Family Feud, there are no right or wrong answers. Contestants simply try to give a response that matches what other people said in response. If a response/claim matches one of the most popular claims then the tile with that response lights up and gets flipped over.

    So the MDEC lawyers never asked HI to verify the true facts of birth. They simply asked if the HDOH had a birth certificate for Obama and if the birth facts claimed on Obama’s posted long-form match the birth claims on the birth certificate filed at the HDOH. The answers – even for a legally non-valid birth certificate as Onaka had just indirectly confirmed Obama’s to be – would be yes and yes. And those answers wouldn’t legally mean a thing.

    The Family Feud request could never accomplish what the MDEC lawyers claimed they wanted to accomplish. All it could do is deceive those who wrongly assume that Obama’s record at the HDOH is legally valid. If the person they intended to deceive is a federal judge, they are walking dangerously close to perjury and fraud.

    Two possible reasons for non-validity are a late filing and a major amendment:

    §338-17 Late or altered certificate as evidence.
    The probative value of a "late" or "altered" certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. [L 1949, c 327, §21; RL 1955, §57-20; HRS §338-17; am L 1997, c 305, §4]

    Such birth certificates must be marked with LATE and/or ALTERED stamps on the face of the original and any birth certificate copy, including abbreviated birth certificates (short-forms), and they must note what documents were filed in support of the claims. Those elements are not “birth facts”; they are graphic signs of the record’s legal validity.

    Those marks on Obama’s certificate would explain why both Obama’s COLB and long-form
    [Certificate of Live Birth] had to be forged, even though the claims made on the forgeries matched the claims in the record. It would also explain why Onaka would not verify that the long-form was a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file.” A true representation would have to show the markings revealing the legal non-validity. Anybody who knew Obama’s BC was amended knew instantly that both the COLB and long-form were forgeries. [Because of his adoptions(s) in 1966 and/or 1971, the posted counterfeit forms should have been superceded or papered over by supplemental forms naming the adoptive parent(s) instead. Again, because he amended his birth records between 9-3-06 and 1-5-07 - probably to change "Mombasa, Kenya" to "Honolulu, Hawaii" - they should be stamped or marked "Altered" or "Amended".] No Hawaii official has ever described Obama’s birth record as “legally valid”.

    Obama’s legally non-valid birth certificate would also explain why the HDOH altered their 1960-64 birth index to include non-valid records – the only way to get Obama’s name listed in that index.

    It would also explain why a COLB for Virginia Sunahara, who was born on Aug. 4, 1961, and died the next day, was disclosed to her brother, and yet no record under her name was found in the database when queried. At that point somebody else’s name must have been on her BC#’s record. If HDOH Communication Director Janice Okubo’s BC numbering claims are correct, the details suggest it was Obama. Those claims were refuted by 1961 local registrar Verna K L Lee (as reported in the 2nd press conference of Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse), but according to both claimed numbering methods, there is no way that the BC numbers that the HDOH has for Obama and at least 3 other people could have been on their birth certificates in 1961 – suggesting that the HDOH itself has been altering BC#’s on multiple birth certificates, including Mr. Obama’s.

    The apparent deception and fraud by Hawaii officials is appalling. Their statements suggest that they knew of the amendment and affidavit(s).

    Former DOH Director [Dr.] Chiyome Fukino referred to plural “vital records”, though index lists show only a birth record for [Mr. Obama]. And though certificates are in bound volumes, she said she looked in the “files” and found his birth “record” was half-written and half-typed. She never referred to any record as being “legally valid” and never said that SHE verified that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Janice Okubo, through official open-records responses, indirectly confirmed that Obama’s birth certificate was amended during the time that Obama was considering a run for the Presidency.

    Former OIP Director Paul Tsukiyama indirectly confirmed that there was evidence filed to support the claims on Obama’s BC, and his legal citation was tailored to address late and amended birth certificates. (And when the long-form
    [Certificate] was presented, Obama himself said, “People filed affidavits saying they had seen the birth certificate” – though no such affidavits exist anywhere; apparently affidavits were on his mind…)

    Gov. Neil Abercrombie publicly told a Star-Advertiser columnist [that] there was something “actually written down,” but that only “anybody who is honest about it” would be convinced. And when his friend, Mike Evans, called him to ask about it, Abercrombie - according to Evans’ interviews on multiple radio stations - told him that he had gone to the hospitals and couldn’t get any records for Obama, that there wasn’t any birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii, and that the first time he ever saw Obama Jr. was at t-ball age. Evans later claimed he had not claimed to hear any of those things from Abercrombie, but the audio recordings show otherwise.

    Conclusion: There is much to distract people in the two verifications that [Hawaii State Registrar Alvin T.] Onaka made. Just a closing picture to solidify what is important here. Imagine that you go to a wedding. The setting is beautiful, the music lovely, the place jam-packed. The officiant asks the couple if they love each other, and they both say they love each other. But when the officiant asks the bride whether she will take this man as her lawfully-wedded husband, she refuses to answer. At that point, none of the glitter of the moment matters, only the substance: in spite of all the appearances of a wedding, no vow was made.

    The verification application was Onaka being asked point-blank to say that the stated birth facts are legally true – an act he is required to do if he truthfully can. His silence to that unequivocal legal question is deafening. If a prosecutor in a crime show had asked and received that response, the show would have been over.

    Form: http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/pdf/birth.pdf
    Legally-valid: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscur...-0014_0003.htm
    Statute: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscur...-0014_0003.htm
    Web form: Arizona official pursues Obama birth issue | obama, official, phoenix - YumaSun
    Here: http://butterdezillion.files.wordpre...d-response.pdf
    Letter: http://www.azcentral.com/12news/Obama-Verification.pdf
    Additional request: How Hawaii Stiffed Arizona Secretary Of State Ken Bennett’s Birther Investigation | TPMMuckraker
    Uncovered: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Obama Eligibility Investigation Result - Full Video
    Said: 2012-06-06 - MDEC Motion to Supplement Response to Motion for Sanctions (S.D. Miss.)
    Reasons: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscur..._0338-0017.htm
    must: http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/...in%20Rules.pdf
    COLB: Did Factcheck Help Forge the COLB? « Butterdezillion's Blog
    Include: 1960-64 Birth Index Includes Legally Invalid Records « Butterdezillion's Blog
    Claims: Confirmation that Certificate Number Given by State Registrar
    Details: Virginia Sunahara and HDOH Fraud « Butterdezillion's Blog
    referred: http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf
    said: Ex-Hawaii official denounces 'ludicrous' birther claims - politics - More politics | NBC News
    amended: Amendment Confirmation for Dummies « Butterdezillion's Blog
    time: Amendment While Deciding to Run « Butterdezillion's Blog
    evidence: http://butterdezillion.files.wordpre...submitte11.pdf
    said: Obama Birth Certificate Released By White House (PHOTO)
    told: 'This is a collaborative endeavor' - Hawaii Editorials - Honolulu Star-Advertiser
    interviews: Evans: Abercrombie Hospital Search Warrant « Butterdezillion's Blog
    told: Evans: Abercrombie Says No Proof of HI Birth « Butterdezillion's Blog


    http://butterdezillion.files.wordpre...feud-final.pdf
    The "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution empowers verifications by a couple of Hawaii Dept. of Health employees to cover a multitude of sins.

    Plainly, Mr. Obama is not subject to the rule of law. Rather, he is above the law
    . . . even above the Constitution.
    Last edited by MinutemanCDC_SC; 09-23-2012 at 10:47 PM.
    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

  6. #5196
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    Atty. Larry Klayman sent this letter to DNC General Counsel Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, with, enclosed, Arizona SOS Ken Bennett's request for verification, and in reply, Hawaii State Registrar Alvin T. Onaka's verification, with which he included a copy of the counterfeit Certificate of Live Birth (long form). Mr. Klayman also sent copies to the Attorney General and Secretary of State (or Lt. Governor where no SOS) of each of the 50 states. He has the returned receipt from each one, so none can claim ignorance.



    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

  7. #5197
    Guest
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,266
    An Impeachment Warning To Obama
    Saturday, September 22, 2012 19:16


    September 22, 2012 “Information Clearing House” – Congressman Walter B. Jones (R-NC) held a press conference, Sept. 21, in Rayburn B-318, to discuss House Concurrent Resolution 107. Rep. Jones was joined by a group of senior retired military officials, constitutional lawyers, and congressional co-sponsors, to discuss HCR 107 (the bill to send an impeachment warning to Obama), which currently has 11 cosponsors.


    This bi-partisan resolution, introduced in March of this year, reasserts the power of Congress to declare war, and states that any President who circumvents Congress, unless the United States is attacked, will face an article of impeachment.



    Speakers at the press conference included:
    Congressman Walter B. Jones (R-NC)
    Bruce Fein, specialist in constitutional and international law, Associate Deputy Attorney General under President Reagan, author, “American Empire: Before the Fall”.
    Lt. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson (USA.Ret), former Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell (2002-05) Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer, author of “Operation Dark Heart”, exposed the Pentagon data mining program known as Able Danger, and uncovered two terrorist cells involved in 911.
    A statement of support from Gen. Joseph P. Hoar (USMC-ret.), who served as the Chief of Staff and later as the Commander-in-Chief of the Central Command, was also read.
    ======
    Bill Text
    112th Congress (2011-2012)
    H.CON.RES.107.IH


    H.CON.RES.107 — Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high… (Introduced in House – IH)


    HCON 107 IH
    112th CONGRESS
    2d Session

    H. CON. RES. 107
    Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
    March 7, 2012
    Mr. JONES submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

    CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
    Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
    Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it

    • Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

    Click here to read, "An Impeachment Warning To Obama"...


    Also this is what prompted it...

    Senate Votes 90-1 Declaration Of War: “A De-Facto Declaration Of War” Against Iran – Rand Paul
    Saturday, September 22, 2012 22:12



    Advertisement<a href='http://opx.beforeitsnews.com/delivery/ck.php?n=aa00448f&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_ HERE ' target='_blank'><img src='http://opx.beforeitsnews.com/delivery/avw.php?zoneid=20&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_ HERE &n=aa00448f' border='0' alt='' /></a>Privacy | Remove Ads


    Hattip: A BIN reader. This article may be freely reproduced in its entirety provided a link is provided back to the original BIN story.

    Isn’t it nice that our Senate ‘leaders’ have decided upon a “de-facto declaration of war” against Iran, according to Senator Rand Paul. We’ve been warned over and over again by knowledgeable sources such as the LA Times and Family Security Matters that Iran has sleeper cells thoughout the US just waiting to unleash un-holy Armageddon upon Americans should we launch an attack against them. From the LA Times story linked above:

    ” Iranian terrorist cells inside the U.S. have weapons, explosives, money and safe houses; they use contacts with Mexican and Latin American drug cartels to smuggle explosives and weapons into the U.S.”

    “They have very detailed information about sensitive sites such as bridges, railroads, airports, military bases, power plants, nuclear sites, water plants, railway stations,” he says.

    “If the U.S. or Israel attacked Iran, he says, sleeper cells inside the U.S. would launch suicide bombings and sabotage. Iran would attack Israel and U.S. bases in Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf.”


    We’ve learned that Iran practices shooting off EMP missiles on a regular basis. In fact, should they do this to the US after being attacked, over 90% of Americans would likely be dead within 10 months because of the widespread loss of what we depend upon most, electrical power. What a failure of National Security that would be. In the meantime, our own DHS has been shown to NOT have a plan to deal with an EMP attack. How many millions of dollars have these “people” wasted worrying about the trivial while neglecting potential attacks that could leave 90% of our country dead? This doesn’t pass the smell test.


    How is it that these Senate ‘leaders’ of our once great nation don’t take into account the potential loss of lives of hundreds of millions of Americans should we do something so insane as to launch an attack against a nation that hasn’t attacked another foreign nation in over 250 years?How does America rate in comparison to that? We seem to start another war every few years against some country’s dictator that we previously installed that the global elitists want to run out of town. Meanwhile, Iran’s own neighbor secretly owns enough nuclear weapons to wipe out Iran and all the rest of the Middle East along with it. Any attack upon Iran should be thought out a whole lot more before we just go charging full steam ahead like we’ve done far too many times in the last 50 years. The lives of 9 out of the 10 people you see around you right now could very well be at stake with another disastrous US military decision. Or, is that what they want?

    The story below from YouTube reporter Mary Greeley.





    Published on Sep 22, 2012 by Marygreeley1954

    Thank you for you donations.
    mary240qgreeley@hotmail.com http://www.jpost.com/International/A...aspx?id=285853
    “Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.”


    http://beforeitsnews.com/war-and-con...l-2443528.html

    Last edited by kathyet; 09-24-2012 at 11:18 AM.

  8. #5198
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    kathyet, I must respectfully disagree with Sen. Rand Paul and Marygreeley1954. We cannot stand aloof from our ally Israel while madmen perform warlike provocations - even acts of war - and prepare to kill as many Jews as they can.

    (I'm not telling you anything you don't know when I write this:

    Iran declared war against the U.S. in 1979 and has never called a truce since. Through Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Mus|im Brotherhood affiliates, Iran has been waging a terrorist campaign of war against Israel and the Jews for at least 25 or 30 years. Iran is supplied and supported by Russia and Communist China, armed with Russian military hardware, defended by advanced Russian anti-aircraft systems, and mentored by working relationships with Russia's nuclear program. Just as North Korea is Red China's military proxy, Iran is Russia's military proxy.)

    Why does the United States have standing armies, in conflict with the Founders' expressed intent to the contrary? Is it not because, ever since Imperial Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941, we can no longer defend our country by just calling up the militia like a volunteer fire department. We sacrifice thousands of young lives, lives filled with promise, and spend trillions of dollars... not to force the blessing of freedom upon the billions enslaved by despots and malignant ideologies, not to spread the employee wages and consumer benefits of capitalism around the globe, not to set up constitutional republics governed by democratically elected representatives, not even to compel the heathen nations to come into God's family by trusting the blood sacrifice of His Son for salvation from sin and death, the devil and hell. It is nothing so idealistic as all that.

    We have armed forces to defend our country and ourselves:

    • because evil is loosed upon the world and loose in the world system;
    • because millions of people envy us, hate us and want to kill us or enslave us, taking for themselves the blessings God has so richly bestowed upon us - our families, our homes and our native land, our health care, education, and welfare safety net systems, our pleasures, privileges, lifestyles and cellphones, and our position at the top of the heap;
    • because entire nations are stirred up to violent hatred by toxic ideologies, false religions, and the lusts and ambitions of powerful and persuasive men;
    • because America is "a city set on a hill" and "a lamp put on a lampstand," which makes other nations look bad, and "because their deeds are evil," they would rather bury the truth - and us with it - than be shown up as wrong.

    The mad moolahs are possessed by a Satanic religious insanity, and they will steal, kill, and destroy the Jews and America to the extent of their capabilities... until Jesus returns and sees that insane ideology cast into the lake of fire, along with the Eurocentric, communist, atheistic, one world government. Those two kingdoms will no longer exist when Messiah, enthroned in Jerusalem, rules and reigns over all the earth for a thousand years.

    Quote Originally Posted by marygreeley1954


    Isn’t it nice that our Senate ‘leaders’ have decided upon a “de-facto declaration of war” against Iran
    Nothing is nice about war. War is "all-out ugly." If all-out war could be any dirtier, it would be.

    This recent Senate bill is hardly an article of aggression, since Iran declared war upon the U.S. in November of 1979 and has never withdrawn that declaration of war. Need someone to blame for the Senate "war declaration"? Point your finger at Iran. The Senate is merely responding with an acknowledgement that Iran's standing declaration of war against the U.S. can no longer be ignored, and that nµclear weapons cannot be allowed to fall into the hands of madmen who have openly declared their intent to destroy Israel, and who are also threatening the U.S. through the invasion by hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Hezbollah cell members, all over the U.S.
    .


    We’ve been warned over and over again by knowledgeable sources such as the LA Times and Family Security Matters that Iran has sleeper cells thoughout the US just waiting to unleash un-holy Armageddon upon Americans should we launch an attack against them. From the LA Times story linked above:

    ” Iranian terrorist cells inside the U.S. have weapons, explosives, money and safe houses; they use contacts with Mexican and Latin American drug cartels to smuggle explosives and weapons into the U.S.”

    “They have very detailed information about sensitive sites such as bridges, railroads, airports, military bases, power plants, nuclear sites, water plants, railway stations,” he says.

    “If the U.S. or Israel attacked Iran, he says, sleeper cells inside the U.S. would launch suicide bombings and sabotage. Iran would attack Israel and U.S. bases in Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf.”
    So, if Marygreeley1954 were to find rattlesnakes living under her house, she would let them be, in hopes that they would understand her inaction and return the favor. The book of Proverbs has a name for people like that; I'm just not allowed to use it. (But I can still think it.)



    And somehow, this is the reason why we should NOT defend Israel from Iran?

    The illegal alien invasion, specifically, the invasion by Iranian illegal aliens and their reunitings in Hezbollah cells around the nation, are all the more reasons to put an end to the Iranian threats, not cause to give in to them.


    We’ve learned that Iran practices shooting off EMP missiles on a regular basis.
    An EMP attack at 300 mile altitude, or even at 30 mile altitude, by high-altitude balloon would be unworkable, nonguidable, and indefensible. Iran could launch an intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) attack from Venezuela or from a submarine purchased from Russia. However, that would be a "brick-and-mortar" based attack, which would provoke an automatic, immediate, and overwhelming retaliatory response against the launching nation and its infrastructure. MAD doctrine makes such an attack by an identifiable nation a thing of the past. Thermonuclear fusion weapons became so powerful and deadly that using them became morally and existentially objectionable. MAD pushed their use off the table except as the "doomsday" option. At that point in the history of warfare, terrorism - flexible, portable, and untraceable - became the weapon delivery system of choice.

    In fact, should they do this to the US after being attacked, over 90% of Americans would likely be dead within 10 months because of the widespread loss of what we depend upon most, electrical power. What a failure of National Security that would be. In the meantime, our own DHS has been shown to NOT have a plan to deal with an EMP attack. How many millions of dollars have these “people” wasted worrying about the trivial while neglecting potential attacks that could leave 90% of our country dead? This doesn’t pass the smell test.
    Horsefeathers. Loss of electrical power would kill 90% of Americans within ten months? Puh-l-l-e-e-a-s-s-e! That's an insult to the Boy Scouts and Royal Raangers, not to mention active-duty and reserve military personnel. Those alarmists need to take a month-long wilderness camping trip.

    How is it that these Senate ‘leaders’ of our once great nation don’t take into account the potential loss of lives of hundreds of millions of Americans should we do something so insane as to launch an attack against a nation that hasn’t attacked another foreign nation in over 250 years?
    Liar, liar, pants on fire. Four Pinnochios.

    Student revolutionaries took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran
    for 444 days, from Nov. 4, 1979, until Pres. Ronald Reagan was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 1981.

    After Iraq invaded Iran in 1980, in 1983, Iran invaded Basrah in Iraq.

    That's just in 3 particularly bad years. Do we really need to look up the history of Iran's "religion of peace" all the way back to 1762?

    Iran has been threatening to "wipe Israel off the map" for years, but its quest for atomic bσmbs now makes that a serious threat, not to be ignored. Iran is enriching uranium to a U-235 concentration of 20% or higher, for which the
    atomic bσmb
    is the only application (at 90+%): .

    Iran’s own neighbor secretly owns enough nµclear weapons to wipe out Iran and all the rest of the Middle East along with it.
    Would that neighbor be Pakistan? I don't expect that the Middle East is particularly threatened by Pakistani nµkes, which were manufactured to counter India's nµkes.

    But Marygreeley1954's anti-semitic tone leads one to believe she is taling about Israel. If Israel's nµclear arsenal is a secret, how does she know about it, and how does she have a count of warheads on hand?

    Israel has made no nµclear weapon threats against anyone, even as retaliation in kind. Any perceived threat to Is|amic states would appear to be mere projection. Just because enemies of Israel want to blow it out to sea doesn't mean that Israel has any such desires in return.

    Any attack upon Iran should be thought out a whole lot more before we just go charging full steam ahead like we’ve done far too many times in the last 50 years. The lives of 9 out of the 10 people you see around you right now could very well be at stake with another disastrous US military decision. Or, is that what they want?
    It's not the U.S. military decision that would be disastrous.

    If Iran were to choose to openly attack the U.S. with an IRBM EMP attack, that would truly be INSANE. Of course, the Shi'ites believe that igniting World War IV would somehow cause the 12th Imam to show up or the Shi'ite Mahdi to stand up and take over the world (just as the Antichrist will do at some point during the seven year tribulation period before the 2nd Coming of Christ).

    And that is undoubtedly what the Shi'ites want.

    Last edited by MinutemanCDC_SC; 09-26-2012 at 03:41 AM.
    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

  9. #5199
    Super Moderator Newmexican's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    35,723
    FLORIDA DEM ASKS FOR 'DISCOVERY' INTO OBAMA ELIGIBILITY

    President 'conspicuously offered no evidence' of status

    September 21, 2012 by BOB UNRUHEmail |

    A Florida Democrat who went to court to determine whether Barack Obama is qualified for the office of president is asking the First District Court of Appeal there to order legal “discovery” in the case, a process in which each side examines evidence held by the other.

    “Appellant submitted multiple sworn affidavits setting forth the fraudulent nature of Appellee Obama’s birth certificate and other identifying documents,” said the appeal of a decision by Judge Terry Lewis, who said Obama is eligible and the case shouldn’t go forward.

    The arguments were filed by attorney Larry Klayman, founder of both Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch. The case is on behalf of Michael Voeltz, a registered member of the Democratic Party of Florida.

    “Appellee Obama conspicuously offered no evidence to the contrary and instead asked for a stay of discovery in order to avoid a proper determination of his citizenship. With only appellant’s affidavits in front of him as no contra-affidavits were put forth by appellee Obama, Judge Lewis ignored this sworn evidence and incorrectly determined that appellee Obama was a natural born citizen,” the filing explains.

    It continues: “A question of fact such as this cannot be determined without the parties having been given the opportunity to take discovery. Appellant was not permitted to investigate through discovery or even observe the underlying documents that allegedly establish appellee Obama’s natural born citizenship.

    “If appellee Obama was born outside of the United States then he is not a natural born citizen, or even a citizen. In addition to being born within the United States, as noted above, a natural born citizen must be born to two U.S. citizen parents. If it is shown through discovery that Barack H. Obama Sr., appellee Obama’s father, was not a U.S. citizen at the time of appellee Obama’s birth, then appellee Obama is clearly not a natural born citizen as required by the U.S. Constitution.”

    The case seeks to exclude Obama from the 2012 ballot. Klayman and Voeltz claim that Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by Article 2, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, because he was born a British subject.

    The case cited the evidence produced by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s special investigative unit, which has asserted that the birth documentation from Hawaii that Obama claimed was “proof positive” of his Hawaiian birth is not real.

    As WND reported, Voeltz, a voter and taxpayer in Broward County, challenged Obama’s eligibility, arguing that the “natural born citizen” clause was rightly understood in historical context to mean a child not only born in the U.S., but born to two American-citizen parents, so as not to have divided loyalties. Obama, however, readily admits to being born a dual citizen because of his father’s British citizenship.

    But Lewis rejected the evidence before him and ruled that Obama is eligible.

    “The United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States,’” Lewis wrote.

    Not exactly, Klayman explained.

    “The judge equated being a ‘citizen’ with a ‘natural born citizen’ and cited no authority to conclude the two terms are the same,” Klayman said. “He quotes other state’s cases, where judges reached that conclusion, but that’s not precedent for him. What other courts said in lower cases means nothing to him.”

    Is Obama constitutionally eligible to serve? Here’s WND’s complete archive of news reports on the issue

    Lewis also said the case had to be dismissed because Obama, the only candidate offered by the Democratic Party, actually was not “nominated” as a candidate for president because at that time the nominating convention had not been held.
    Lewis also said his court lacked jurisdiction in the case.

    Klayman argued in the appeal brief that Lewis is wrong on several counts.

    “Lewis’ ruling bars any elector contest of eligibility in a presidential primary, or in any unopposed primary, and is clearly contrary to the plain wording of the well crafted and crystal clear Florida statutes,” he wrote. “Appellant rightfully has standing, and the judiciary is obliged to make a determination as to eligibility of ‘any candidate,’ including presidential candidates.”

    He continued: “By his own birth story, well told, he is not an eligible natural born citizen, due to foreign citizenship at birth. Appellant also asks for a determination of current citizenship that would require examination of all of Mr. Obama’s passport and other relevant records.

    “If it is found that Barack Obama Sr. is indeed the father of Barack H. Obama II, then appellant also seeks an injunction, preventing the placement of the name Barack H. Obama on the Florida General Election Ballot by order of the Florida judiciary, since he would not be an eligible natural born citizen.”

    Florida Dem asks for ‘discovery’ into Obama eligibility
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  10. #5200
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    “Obama” is ABSOLUTELY NOT a “natural born Citizen”….
    by Yoel

    Liberals, moles, and trolls, and those without souls,
    all telling us the story has been told.
    Sell outs, and hacks, and government spies,
    spreading falsehoods with their tricks and their lies.

    They like to use labels to distract us from hope,
    they say we are crazy, they say we’re on dope.
    "Where is your proof?" they scream to the sky,
    when the proof is right here, right in front of their eyes.

    They cannot know freedom, for they are bound in their hearts;
    stuck to their masters and stuck to their lies…
    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •