Jueves, 30 de junio de 2011

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Video: Adobe Expert Mara Zebest & Dr. Jerome Corsi; Obama's Forged Birth Certificate Explained; Did "Derek" Create the Document?

?

~ Derek Douglas & Barack AKA Barry ~
Video: Peter Boyles Show: Adobe Expert Mara Zebest and Dr. Jerome Corsi; Obama's Forged Birth Certificate Explained - 6/30/11

Revised: Take note of "Larry" who called in about 21 minutes in. He claims the header information on Obama's BC PDF shows it was created by "Darrel"!? Peter Boyles crew confirms the name in the PDF actually is Derek. Derek's White House bio is here.



Flashback: Photoshop Expert And Author Mara Zebest Declares That Obama's Latest Hawaiian Birth Certificate Is A Complete Phony. -Details here.?

Busted: White House Now Claims They Ordered Short-Form COLB From Hawaii Department Of Health In 2008 Yet COLB Is Date Stamped 2007 -Details here.?

Confirmed: Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of President -Details here.?

Notre Dame Professor Charles Rice: Obama's eligibility could be biggest political fraud in the history of the world; time for a new approach -Details here.?

Attorney Mario Apuzzo: All presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur and Barack Obama, met the ?natural born Citizen? criteria. -Details here.?

Commander Charles Kerchner: List of U.S. Presidents - Eligibility under Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) or Natural Born Citizen (NBC) Clause or Seated due to Election Fraud -Details here.?

Jack Cashill Discusses Obama's Fraudulent Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants -Video here.?

Detailed reports on Obama's SS# can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. Visit the Birther Vault for the long list of evidence against Hawaii officials and all of the people questioning Obama's eligibility; [http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/08/video-ltc-terry-lakins-attorney-on-cnn.html].
Mara Zebest Adobe Analysis: Obama Long-Form Birth Certificate Report; Final Draft
We Have a Criminal and Forger in the White House! 20110627 issue Wash Times Natl Wkly pg 5


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 14:07
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Martes, 28 de junio de 2011

?Hostile' L.A. crowd boos U.S. soccer team

Comments 51
?
?

PASADENA ? As the United States faced Mexico in Saturday?s Gold Cup final at the Rose Bowl, a majority of fans booed and jeered the U.S. team.

Spectators chanted obscenities at U.S. team goalkeeper Tim Howard, who was visibly shaken after the entire post match ceremony was conducted in Spanish.

When the American national anthem was played, the crowd blew air horns and bounced beachballs in the stands, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Most of the ?hostile visitors? live in the U.S., according to the Times.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.alipac.us/

June 28, 2011

For National Release

Contact: Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC)
(866) 703-0864 /
[email protected]

The Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is calling for the impeachment of President Barack Obama for his involvement in the Operation Gunrunner scandal, as well as his recent edict instructing federal employees to establish a form of amnesty for illegal aliens in defiance of the Congress, existing federal laws, and the US Constitution.

Obama's ICE Director John Morton issued a memo on June 17th to all ICE Field Office Directors, Special Agents-in-Charge, and all Chief Counsel, authorizing them to decline to remove illegal aliens who meet the qualifications for amnesty under the DREAM Act Amnesty which Congress has rejected many times.

Congressional investigations have determined that Obama's ATF and Justice Department have been supplying assault weapons to the drug cartels that import most of America's cocaine, methamphetamine, and illegal immigrants.

"President Obama is no longer the legitimate President of the United States," said William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. "By arming drug and human smugglers with assault weapons that have been used to kill American and Mexican citizens and police forces, and by ordering Amnesty for illegal aliens which has been rejected by both the Congress and the American public more than eight times, Obama has committed a form of Treason against the United States and must be removed from office by Congress."

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) is a national organization founded on 9/11 of 2004. ALIPAC has over 40,000 supporters, comprised of Americans of every race, party, religion, and walk of life, who represent the over 80% who want America's existing immigration laws enforced.

ALIPAC is sending letters to the 137 current members of Congress whom the group endorsed and supported in the 2010 elections requesting the impeachment process to begin immediately in the interest of public safety and civil stability.

"Obama just made it clear to the American public that he does not care what they think, what the current federal laws are, what the US Constitution says, or what Congress has ratified," said William Gheen. "Congress must take immediate action to stop Obama or the American Republic will fall. What use are elections, candidates, or the Congress, if the Executive Branch rules by decree?"

All ALIPAC supporters and like-minded Americans who oppose Amnesty and illegal immigration are called upon to immediately call and write their members of Congress demanding the impeachment of President Barack Obama for crimes against the people of the United States.

If Congress does not respond by July 15, ALIPAC will move to call for public protests across the nation calling for the ouster of this authoritarian regime which feels it can arm rebel groups invading America with their illegal cargo while forcing an Amnesty on the public.

The self-governance of American citizens and the health of the American Republic must be guarded against this form of Treason.

The Congress will be given an opportunity to act before members of the public take things into their own hands and call for a day of nationwide protests.

For more information, to schedule interviews or to show your support for the impeachment of President Obama, please visit ALIPAC at www.ALIPAC.us

###


DISCUSS THIS NATIONAL PRESS RELEASE WITH ALIPAC's ONLINE ACTIVISTS AT THIS LINK...
http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1239458.html#1239458

?




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:50
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Lunes, 27 de junio de 2011

Patriotic Americans will stand their ground, fight to uphold the Constitution and restore sanity to the country

Obama?s ineligibility: Prepare for martial law

Share?82 | Bookmark and Share
(7) Comments | Subscribe | Print friendly | Email Us
?- Lawrence Sellin??Monday, June 27, 2011

I no longer see how it can be averted. Politics has replaced the rule of law.

The Founding Fathers warned us to preserve a government of laws, and not of men.

Arrogant, lawless and lusting for power, government officials have abrogated their responsibility to the Constitution, the country and its citizens.

?

It was a backroom deal among Congressional Democrats and Republicans, which created our current Constitutional crisis.

Congress and our political leadership always knew that Barack Obama was not a natural born citizen and, therefore, he was never eligible for the Presidency.

Over the last twenty to thirty years, members of Congress, for both personal and partisan reasons, have unsuccessfully attempted to water down the natural born citizen clause by offering potential Amendments to the Constitution.

Political coup d?etat of the Constitution

In the Spring of 2008, however, politicians found an opportunity to create a precedent, whereby they could change the eligibility requirements for the Presidency without an Amendment.

At that time, John McCain?s eligibility according to the natural born clause was being questioned. So, a deal was struck and the bogus and non-binding Senate resolution 511 was passed, which provided cover for both McCain and Obama.

It was a political coup d?etat of the Constitution.

After the inauguration, Congress was given talking points to misinform their constituents about Obama?s eligibility to be President. The conspiracy of silence continues.

Unhappily for the Congressional dupes and scoundrels, Obama, by releasing his alleged Certificate of Live Birth, has made them complicit in the possible commission of a felony. They could now be potentially charged with ?Misprision of felony.?

Never forget, however, that Congress is mostly driven by the fear of losing their lifestyles of the rich and famous. They will usually respond to a crisis with cowardice and subterfuge.

Now that they are caught in Obama?s web of lies, they have chosen the same strategy as they did in 2008 ? stall and hope Obama loses. That way, their cover-up and their shenanigans will be overtaken by events and soon forgotten; at least that is what they hope.

Unfortunately for the Republicans, Obama and his cronies have other ideas. They expect to win in 2012 and complete their destructive transformation of America.

The US is already hemorrhaging from self-inflicted wounds and our liberties are seriously endangered by the Obama agenda.

Although opposed by a majority of Americans and twice defeated in Congress, Obama has implemented by executive order, the DREAM Act, which grants amnesty to illegal aliens.

According to the Obama policy: ?federal immigration officials do not have to deport illegal aliens if they are enrolled in any type of education program, if their family members have volunteered for U.S. military service, or even if they are pregnant or nursing.??

On June 9, 2011, Obama established the White House Rural Council with the participation of 25 executive branch departments. It is an attempt to impose the United Nations Agenda 21 on rural America.

The order from the Oval Office extends unchecked federal control into rural America in education, food supply, land use, water use, recreation, property, energy, in order to regulate the lives of a critical 16% of the U.S. population and place American productivity under UN supervision.

Meanwhile, the Transportation Security Administration administered a 45-minute pat down to a cancer-stricken, 95-year-old American woman, who was forced to remove her adult diaper while going through security.

This federally-imposed, insane political correctness is an affront to our collective liberty. It was designed not to protect us, but to guarantee that Muslim terrorists feel welcome and liberals can wallow in their self-righteousness.

We have frequently heard about union thugs threatening Tea Party activists and New Black Panther Party members menacing voters.

To that, add newer forms of intimidation: ?Pandemonium in Peoria: Mob yells ?kill all white people??; ?Teen Mob Of 50 Hits Chicago Wallgreens?; ?Flash mob of 40 rips off Philly Sears.? (Drudge Headlines June 27, 2011)

It is the fear induced by such events that paralyzes Congress from challenging Obama and the subsequent inaction by authorities that is further degrading the rule of law.

Obama and his followers know this and will use every means possible to intimidate the opposition and sway the 2012 election in his direction.

Obama has already trampled on the Constitution, ruthlessly over-stepped his authority and is rapidly eroding our liberties. He is, in my opinion, an illegal President and, most likely, a multiple felon.

Unlike many of the political elite, patriotic Americans will wait no longer. We will stand our ground, fight to uphold the Constitution and restore sanity to the country.

Time?s up. Let?s roll.


Author
Lawrence Sellin

Lawrence Sellin
Most recent columns

? Canada Free Press 2011

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. receives hate mail at [email protected]

?

?

?

?

?

?


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:58
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
S?bado, 25 de junio de 2011

Congress Shines Light on Chavez?s Iran Connections

On June 24, a Joint House Committee hearing on Venezuela?s Sanctionable Activities made a concerted effort to shed light on President Hugo Chavez?s dangerous ties to Iran. Representative Connie Mack (R?FL) and others expressed a deep-seated concern that the sanctions recently placed on the government-controlled oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), were insufficient.

In May 2010, the Obama Administration placed sanctions on PDVSA for providing at least two shipments of petroleum additives to Iran, a country that is currently sanctioned for its nuclear weapons program and, according to the State Department, is the ?most active state sponsor of terrorism.? The sanctions prohibit PDVSA from competing for U.S. procurement contracts, securing financing from the Import-Export Bank of the U.S., or obtaining a U.S. export license.

The hearing highlighted the fact that despite recent sanctions, the U.S. continues to rely on Venezuela for as much as 10 percent of its oil imports. Mack estimated that the U.S. pays PDVSA $117 million per day, and he was skeptical that the Administration will do little more than give Chavez a light rap on the knuckles.

State and Treasury Department officials argued that no new prohibited shipments to Iran had been detected and that it was too soon to tell what the impact of sanctions will be. Kevin Whitaker of the State Department urged Venezuela to ?pursue a path of cooperation and responsibility rather than further isolation.? Administration officials emphasized that no options for additional sanctioning are currently on the table.

From the hearing, it is once again clear that Chavez is loyal to Iran; expanding economic ties; more circumspect in his ties with terrorists; anxious to cloak the seamy, criminal side of his government; and doing a better job of concealing flights between Caracas and Iran and Syria. Although Congressman Mack and others argue vigorously, putting Chavez and Venezuela where they belong?on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list?still commands little support with the White House or State Department.

Co-authored with Olivia Snow, a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation. For more information on interning at Heritage, please visit: http://www.heritage.org/about/departments/ylp.cfm

------------------------------------------------

SEE VIDEO ON HEARING

?

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 21:59
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Jueves, 23 de junio de 2011

US SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT STATES THAT OBAMA IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO BE?PRESIDENT.

The title of this article is correct.? After having completed a more thorough review of the relevant US Supreme Court cases discussing the Constitution?s natural-born citizen clause, I have discovered precedent which states that a natural-born citizen is a person born in the jurisdiction of the US to parents who are citizens.? Read that again.? I said precedent, not dicta.? The precedent holds that Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States.

Up until the publication of this report today, all discussion of the natural-born citizen issue (from both sides of the argument) agreed there had never been a precedent established by the US Supreme Court, and that the various cases which mentioned the clause did so in ?dicta?.

Dicta are authoritative statements made by a court which are not binding legal precedent.

Black?s Law Dictionary defines ?precedent? as a ?rule of law established for the first time by a court for a particular type of case and thereafter referred to in deciding similar cases?.

Precedent that must be followed is known as binding precedent.? Under the doctrine of stare decisis, a lower court must honor findings of law made by a higher court. ?On questions as to the meaning of federal law including the U.S. Constitution, statutes, and regulations, the U.S. Supreme Court?s precedents must be followed.

It can no longer be denied that there is controlling US Supreme Court precedent concerning the definition of a natural-born citizen according to Article 2 Section 1 of the US Constitution.? I predict satori will overcome those of you who have labored over this issue.? This is not a remote obscure reading.? It is, when revealed, a clear undeniable holding and binding precedent established by the highest Court of our nation which specifically defines an Article 2 Section 1 natural-born citizen as a person born in the US to parents who are citizens.

Therefore, Obama ? according to US Supreme Court precedent ? is not eligible to be President.

PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED BY MINOR V. HAPPERSETT

The direct US Supreme Court precedent is stated in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875).? Furthermore, the precedent stated in Minor is consistent with other US Supreme Court cases ? both before and after Minor ? which discuss the natural born citizen issue.? While that part of the holding in Minor regarding woman?s suffrage was superseded by the 19th Amendment ? which Constitutionally established a woman?s right to vote ? the rest of the case is good law.? And the remaining precedent stated regarding the definition of ?natural-born citizen? ? with regard to Article 2 Section 1 of the US Constitution ? is still binding upon all lower courts.

Therefore, lower court decisions ? such as the holding in Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana ? which have misconstrued the US Supreme Court?s holding in Minor v. Happersett are wrong.? Below, we will review what the Indiana Court of Appeals had to say and explain why they got it wrong.? But first we must revisit Minor v. Happersett.

THE SUPREME COURT IN MINOR V. HAPPERSETT DIRECTLY CONSTRUED THE US CONSTITUTION?S ARTICLE 2 SECTION 1 NATURAL BORN CITIZEN CLAUSE

Before revisiting Minor, we must revisit Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) to review a clearly erroneous statement made by Justice Gray concerning the prior holding in the Minor case:

?In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in question, said: ?The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.? ?? (Wong Kim Ark at 655.)

This unfortunate remark by Justice Gray contains a clearly erroneous statement.? The Supreme Court in Minor did not construe the 14th Amendment as to the issue of citizenship.? Gray is absolutely wrong.? The Court in Minor construed Article 2 Section 1, not the 14th Amendment.? For over a century, it has been wrongly assumed that the Court in Minor did construe the 14th Amendment, and that the holding of Minor was later superseded by Wong Kim Ark.? This is not correct.

A more careful reading of the Supreme Court?s opinion in Minor makes it clear that it did not construe the 14th Amendment with regard to the citizenship of the woman who wished to vote.? The question presented was whether, since the adoption of the 14th Amendment, women had gained the right to vote.? The Supreme Court in Minor held that nowhere in the Constitution, including the 14th Amendment, was anyone, man or woman, granted a right to vote.? And it was only this part of the Minor case which was superseded by the 19th Amendment.

The other issue decided by the Court in Minor required the Supreme Court to determine if the woman was, in fact, a US citizen.? As to this determination, the Court did not construe the 14th Amendment.? In fact, the Court specifically avoided construing the 14th Amendment with regard to her citizenship.? Instead, the Supreme Court in Minor chose to construe Article 2 Section 1:

?There is no doubt that women may be citizens. They are persons, and by the fourteenth amendment ?all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof ? are expressly declared to be ?citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.? But, in our opinion, it did not need this amendment to give them that position ?

?The fourteenth amendment did not affect the citizenship of women any more than it did of men. In this particular, therefore, the rights of Mrs. Minor do not depend upon the amendment. She has always been a citizen from her birth, and entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizenship. The amendment prohibited the State, of which she is a citizen, from abridging any of her privileges and immunities as a citizen of the United States; but it did not confer citizenship on her. That she had before its adoption. If the right of suffrage is one of the necessary privileges of a citizen of the United States, then the constitution and laws of Missouri confining it to men are in violation of the Constitution of the United States, as amended, and consequently void. The direct question is, therefore, presented whether all citizens are necessarily voters.? (Emphasis added.)

There you have it.? The Court stops short of construing the 14th Amendment as to whether the woman in question was a US citizen.? The Court made a certain, direct determination that Mrs. Minor was a US citizen before the adoption of the 14th Amendment and that she did not need the 14th Amendment to be a US citizen.

The Court then, having determined that she was a US citizen, avoided any construction of the 14th Amendment as to her citizenship status. ? Therefore, the holding in Minor is in no way superseded by Wong Kim Ark.

The Court in Minor went on to decide the issue of whether citizens are granted a right to vote by the Constitution, holding that it did not.? Again, this part of the holding was superseded by the 19th Amendment, but the determination that Mrs. Minor was a ?natural-born citizen? is still controlling precedent.

Since the Court in Minor specifically avoided construing the 14th Amendment as to citizenship, it is clear that Justice Gray?s statement ? concerning the citizenship passage by Justice Waite in Minor ? was clearly erroneous.? The Supreme Court in Minor chose to construe Article 2 Section 1 instead of the 14th Amendment.? As such, Minor is the only US Supreme Court case which has directly construed the Article 2 Section 1 natural-born citizen clause. ? Therefore, Minor?s construction below creates binding legal precedent:

?Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that? ?no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,? and that Congress shall have power ?to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.? Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.

?The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.?? (Emphasis added.)

Whether the holding here was influenced by Vattel is not truly important.? Sure, it looks just like Vattel?s definition, but Vattel does not make legal precedent ? the US Supreme Court does.? All that matters here is what the Supreme court held.? So we must carefully examine the actual words stated by the Supreme Court.? We must not allow ourselves to be guided by what the Supreme Court did not say.? What the Court actually said is what makes law.

In the above passage, the Court noted that Mrs. Minor was born in the US to parents who were citizens.? The Court stated that such persons were ?natural-born citizens?.? The Court also stated ? as to such persons ? that their ?citizenship? was never in doubt.

By recognizing Mrs. Minor as a member of the class of persons who were natural-born citizens, they established her citizenship.? Establishing her citizenship was required before they could get to the issue of whether she had the right to vote.? In doing so, the Court in Minor directly construed Article 2 Section 1 of the US Constitution.

The Court also noted that some authorities include as ?citizens? those born in the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of the parents.? The Court refers to these people as a different ?class?.? The Court in Minor refused to comment on the ?citizenship? of such persons since Mrs. Minor was not in that class.? They didn?t need to reach the 14th Amendment to determine if Mrs. Minor was a US citizen since the Court previously established that she was a ?natural-born citizen?.? Read the following again:

?It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.?

This class is specifically defined as ?natural-born citizens? by the Court.? The other class ? those born in the US without citizen ?parents? ? may or may not be ?citizens?. ? But the Minor Court never suggested that this other class might also be natural-born citizens. ?

It?s quite the opposite. ? The Minor Court makes clear that this class are not Article 2 Section 1 natural-born citizens.? If this other class were natural-born there would be no doubt as to their citizenship.

The Minor Court refrained from making a ?citizenship? determination as to that class, but the Court did note that they were a different class.? Later, in 1898, the Court in Wong Kim Ark took the question on directly as to who is a citizen under the 14th Amendment, but that case did not directly construe Article 2 Section 1, whereas Minor did.

In order to avoid construing the 14th Amendment, the Court in Minor had to define those who fit into the class of ?natural-born citizens?.? Mrs. Minor fit into that class.? Mr. Obama does not.

This is so very evident by the fact that the Minor Court specifically states that the ?citizenship? of those who have non-citizen parents was historically subject to doubt.? Whether the 14th Amendment nullified those doubts was irrelevant to the Court in Minor, since Mrs. Minor was a natural-born citizen.

The 14th Amendment specifically confers only ?citizenship?.? In Minor, the US Supreme Court directly recognized that natural-born citizens were a class of citizens who did not need the 14th Amendment to establish citizenship.? The class of natural-born citizens was perfectly defined in the Minor case.

Therefore, we have a direct determination by the US Supreme Court which defines a natural-born citizen as a person born in the US to parents who are citizens.? The citizenship of this class has never been in doubt.? The citizenship of the other class was in doubt.? But even if that doubt was erased ? as to their citizenship ? that they are not natural-born citizens was established as precedent by the Supreme Court in Minor.? In order for that precedent to be reversed, one of two things are necessary:

- a Constitutional amendment which specifically defines ?natural-born Citizen? more inclusively than Minor did , or;

- a Supreme Court case which overrules the definition of natural-born citizen in the Minor case

We have neither.

Minor was decided seven years after the adoption of the 14th Amendment.? The Supreme Court in Minor did not consider anyone but those born of citizen parents on US soil to be natural-born citizens.? Later, in Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court stated that persons born on US soil to (some) alien parents were ?citizens?, but that case specifically construed only the 14th Amendment.

Read again Justice Gray?s statement as to Minor, ?In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in question, said??? Nope.? Not true.? Gray was wrong in that Justice Waite did not construe the 14th Amendment in the quoted passage.? Chief Justice Waite construed Article 2 Section 1.? Whereas, Justice Gray construed the 14th Amendment.? Therefore, the two cases are not in conflict.

ANKENY V. GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA

The Minor case has been severely misconstrued in the Ankeny opinion issued by the Indiana Court of Appeals.? That court quoted Minor?s natural-born citizen language, then stated:

?Thus, the Court left open the issue of whether a person who is born within the United States of alien parents is considered a natural born citizen.?

False.? The Minor Court did not leave that question open.? Nowhere in the Minor opinion does it state that the class of persons who are natural-born citizens is an open question. The Ankeny Court has it backwards.?

The Supreme Court in Minor stated that the ?citizenship? of persons who were not natural born citizens was an open question.?

That is the most important sentence I?ve ever written at this blog.? So please read it again.

The ?citizenship? of those born to non-citizen parents was a question that the Minor Court avoided. ? But they avoided that question by directly construing Article 2 Section 1.? In doing so, the Supreme Court in Minor defined the class of persons who were born in the US to citizen parents as ?natural-born citizens?.

Since Minor, no Amendment has been adopted which changes that definition, and no other Supreme Court case has directly construed Article 2 Section 1.

The Supreme Court in Wong Kim Ark only construed the question of who was a ?citizen? under the 14th Amendment, it did not construe Article 2 Section 1.? Therefore, Minor and Wong Kim Ark do not compete with each other at all.? Minor is the standing precedent for construction of the natural-born citizen clause in Article 2 Section 1, and Wong Kim Ark is the standing precedent as to ?citizenship? under the 14th Amendment.

WONG KIM ARK SPECIFICALLY DEFERRED TO PRIOR PRECEDENT REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

That the majority opinion in Wong Kim Ark limited its holding strictly to the issue of 14th Amendment citizenship ? and did not make any new determination as to Article 2 Section 1 ? is evident from the following statement by Gray regarding the dissent by Justice Curtis in the Supreme Court?s earlier ruling in?Dred Scott v. Sandford:

?In Dred Scott v. Sandford, (1857) 19 How. 393, Mr. Justice Curtis said:

?The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, ?a natural-born citizen.? It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth.?

19 How. 60 U. S. 576. And, to this extent, no different opinion was expressed or intimated by any of the other judges.?

At first glance, Gray?s reliance upon the dissent?s passage in the Dred Scott case would appear to contradict everything I have written above.? But it doesn?t.? It actually confirms my analysis.

Justice Gray chooses his words carefully and so we must examine them carefully.? Note where Gray says, ?And, to this extent, no different opinion was expressed or intimated by any of the other judges.?? Well, if we are talking only about ?citizenship?, then ? to this extent ? Justice Gray is correct.? But if we are talking about the definition of a ?natural-born citizen?, then Gray is grossly mistaken.

The Dred Scott majority may not have expressed a different opinion as to ?citizenship?, but the majority?s definition of a natural-born citizen is vastly different than that of Justice Curtis in his dissent.? The majority opinion in Dred Scott, citing Vattel directly, stated:

?The citizens are the members of the civil society, bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority; they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. As society cannot perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their parents, and succeed to all their rights.?

Again:

?I say, to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen, for if he be born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are foreigners who are permitted to settle and stay in the country.?

Vattel, Book 1, cap. 19, p. 101.

From the views here expressed, and they seem to be unexceptionable??

Unexceptionable is defined as; ? not open to any objection or criticism.?? The Supreme Court majority, in the Dred Scott case, clearly states that a natural-born citizen is a person born in the US to parents who are citizens.? Therefore, Justice Gray?s reliance upon the dissent in the Dred Scott case is strictly limited to its discussion of ?citizenship? by Gray?s very choice of the words, ?to this extent?.

Since Gray stated that none of the other justices in the Dred Scott case expressed a different opinion than Curtis did in his dissent, it is obvious that Gray?s statement only applies to general citizenship, and not to the definition of those who fall into the class of natural-born citizens.? The majority in Dred Scott did, in fact, express a completely different opinion than Curtis on the issue of who was an Article 2 Section 1 natural-born citizen.

Gray?s use of the words, ?to this extent? ? with regard to the dissent by Curtis ? indicates that the extent to which the holding in Wong Kim Ark applies is to the definition of ?citizenship?, not to the definition of who is a natural-born citizen eligible to be President.? The precedent stated by the Court in Minor still stands to this day.

THE US SUPREME COURT DEFINITION OF PRECEDENT

In 1996, the US Supreme Court?s majority opinion by Justice Breyer in Ogilvie Et Al., Minors v. United States, 519 U.S. 79 (1996), stated that when the Court discusses a certain ??reason as an ?independent? ground in support of our decision?, then that reasoning is not simply dictum:

?Although we gave other reasons for our holding in Schleier as well, we explicitly labeled this reason an ?independent? ground in support of our decision, id., at 334. We cannot accept petitioners? claim that it was simply a dictum.?

The Supreme Court in Minor specifically construed Article 2 Section 1 by defining ? as natural-born citizens ? those persons born in the US to parents who were citizens.

Again, the Supreme Court specifically avoided the 14th Amendment, by specifically construing Article 2 Section 1.

In order to determine whether Mrs. Minor had the right to vote, the Court first needed to determine if she was a US citizen.? They determined that she was a citizen because she was in the class of ?natural-born citizens?.? And, in doing so, they made it clear that persons born of non-citizen parents were not natural-born citizens.

The Court left open the question of whether those born of non-citizen parents were ?citizens?.? But the Court did not leave open their specific construction of Article 2 Section 1.? Their definition of a ?natural-born citizen? was the core reason they found Mrs. Minor to be a citizen. ? Therefore, the Minor Court established binding precedent as follows:

??[A]ll children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners...?

Please also note that the Court here makes specific reference to both aliens and foreigners as distinguished from natural-born citizens.? Aliens are just that, aliens.? They are not citizens.? But we have always had many foreigners in this country who were citizens.? Those who came here from foreign lands were foreigners naturalized as citizens.? Some who were born in the US with dual citizenship ? like Obama ? were also citizens of the nation of their parents.? These are citizens, but also foreigners.? The Court in Minor made the careful distinction that a natural-born citizen is not an alien or a foreigner.

CITIZENS MAY BE BORN OR NATURALIZED

A common misconception of those who argue in favor of Obama?s eligibility is that if one is, at the time of their birth, a US citizen, then that person is also a natural-born citizen.? False.? This was unequivocally established by the majority holding in Minor, which states:

?Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it providesthat ?no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,?and that Congress shall have power ?to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.? Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.?

Again, at first glance this appears to provide a neat little soundbite for Obama supporters.? But it doesn?t.? The quote above is taken out of context.? The Court?s opinion goes on to state:

?Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization Congress, as early as 1790, provided?that the children of citizens of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens.? These provisions thus enacted have, in substance, been retained in all the naturalization laws adopted since.?

Here, the Minor Court cites the first naturalization act of 1790 to the effect that persons born of US citizen parents ? outside the jurisdiction of the US ? are ?considered as natural-born citizens?.? So, here we can see that while the Minor Court only recognizes two paths to citizenship, birth and naturalization? it is clear that some persons who, at the time of their birth, are US citizens, require naturalization for such status.

So, it?s clear that while there are only two paths to US citizenship, birth and naturalization, those two paths sometimes merge.? But naturalized citizens are not eligible to be President.? (The Minor Court failed to mention that the words ?natural-born? were repealed from the naturalization act of 1795.)

Additionally, the current US Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual, at ?7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency?, comments on the 1790 act as follows:

?This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.?

This is most likely because the statute did not actually deem such a person to be a natural-born citizen, the act simply stated that such a person was to be ?considered as? a natural-born citizen.

The Minor Court also noted that the ?substance? of the 1790 act, which granted US citizenship at birth via naturalization, had remained as law up until 1875 when the Minor case was decided.? So, clearly, while citizens may either be born or naturalized, some born citizens are simultaneously naturalized at birth.? Naturalized citizens are not natural-born citizens.? Therefore, they are not eligible to be President.

I am not arguing that Obama was naturalized.? But Minor does establish that not all ?born citizens? are ?natural-born?.? Minor also gives an unequivocal definition of who fits into the class of natural-born citizens.? Obama does not fit into that class.? Born in the US to a citizen mother and a British/Kenyan father, Obama was born with dual nationality and dual allegiance, part US citizen, part foreigner.? Minor makes a clear distinction between natural-born citizens and aliens or foreigners.

No Constitutional amendment supersedes Minor by defining natural-born citizen in a more inclusive way.? No US Supreme Court case has overruled it.? Justice Gray?s statement that the Court in Minor construed the 14th Amendment in the passage quoted is wrong.? The Court in Minor directly construed Article 2 Section 1 while directly avoiding construction of the 14th Amendment.

The Supreme Court in Wong Kim Ark directly construed the 14th Amendment and specifically avoided construction of Article 2 Section 1.? The two cases are not in contradiction.? They are consistent.

Wong Kim Ark is specifically limited to determining who is a citizen under the 14th Amendment.

Minor is specifically limited to determining who is a US citizen, natural-born.

According to the US Supreme Court precedent established by Minor, Obama is not eligible to the office of President of the United States.

Leo C. Donofrio, Esq.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:22
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Snopes.com Provides Misleading and Incomplete Information About Obama?s Social Security Number and Incorrect Information About Whether He Is a ?Natural Born Citizen?

Snopes.com Provides Misleading and Incomplete Information About Obama?s Social Security Number and Incorrect Information About Whether He Is a ?Natural Born Citizen?


?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? By: Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? June 22, 2011

Snopes.com has recently published an article in which it says it has debunked the claim that putative President Barack Obama Social Security number of 042 xx-xxxx is false. The article also proclaims that Obama is a ?natural born Citizen.? The article may be read at http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/ssn.asp. There are various problems with Snopes? analysis of the claim that Obama is using a false Social Security number and with its conclusion that Obama is an Article II ?natural born Citizen:?

I. Snopes only addresses the on-line created story of French immigrant, Jean Paul Ludwig, who was born in 1890 and died in Honolulu in 1981. Snopes tells us that Mr. Ludwig's number was 045-26-8722 which is different from Obama's 042-xx-xxxx. How nice for someone to feed false stories into the "news" and then have Snopes debunk them.

II. Snopes does not address the question of whose Social Security number is Obama using. That he is using someone else's Social Security number has been well analyzed by private investigators Neil Sanky and Susan Daniels. For a thorough explanation on Obama using a false Connecticut Social Security number, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZlaIS5o9Vs?in which Ms. Daniels explains that the Connecticut SS number belonged to a person born in 1890 whom she has not yet been able to identify. She also debunks the Jean Paul Ludwig theory. Ms. Daniels explains that the first three digits of the number were based on the location from where someone applied for the Social Security number. She clearly explains that it has nothing to do with one?s place of birth. She also explains that there is no evidence that Obama ever lived in Connecticut and that there is no other explanation that she has found showing why or how a 15-year-old Obama living in Hawaii would have applied for the Social Security number while using a Connecticut address on the application for that number. See also Ms. Daniels and Mr. Sanky?s response to this Snopes article at http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/06/private-investigators-respond-to-snopes.html.

In her video presentation and response, Ms. Daniels explains that based on the record, Obama would have had to obtained that false number in March or April 1977, when he was 15 years old. She arrives at that conclusion because the Social Security number that precedes his by one number was issued on March 21, 1977. She states: ?Obama allegedly got his CT number of 042-68-4425 in March ?77, which can be proven since the person before him -4424 and after him -4429 both got theirs then.? But we should ask ourselves, what is a 15-year-old teenager going to high school in Hawaii in the Spring of 1977 doing obtaining a false Social Security number? Something just does not make sense.

Ms. Daniels explains how she found Obama?s Selective Service registration record which also contains the same Connecticut Social Security number. She believes that the Selective Service registration was fraudulently done in 2008. She explains how someone floated in the public domain a letter allegedly from the Selective Service office in which it acknowledges Obama?s having applied and obtained the registration number in 1980. The problem that she identifies is that the government form which is the acknowledgement itself shows in small print at the bottom that it was not printed until 2007. Hence, the Selective Service letter, along with the Social Security number and Selective Service registration, is fraudulent also.

What is also telling is that Ms. Daniels was not able to find any indication that Obama used his Connecticut Social Security number prior to the appearance of the number on his September 4, 1980 Selective Service registration. Other than this Selective Service registration, the first time Daniels could find Obama using the Connecticut ?042″ number was in 1986 in Chicago. This is very odd given that Obama has stated that he did have employment when he was young. It is reported by PolitiFact.com that Obama?s first job was at a Baskin Robbins in Honolulu and it also provides a complete list of all of Obama?s employments. Here is the entry: ?1975 or 1976 ? ice cream scooper, Baskin-Robbins ? Honolulu ? Obama claims to have lost his taste for ice cream during this, his first job, the duration of which is not publicly known.? http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/apr/15/joe-scarborough/heres-scoop-obama-has-worked-ice-cream-business-am/?;?http://www.usnews.com/news/obama/articles/2007/01/16/ten-things-you-didnt-know-about-barack-obama?(this January 16, 2007 article reports: ?He [Obama] says he hasn't liked ice cream since working at Baskin-Robbins as a teenager?); http://letustalk.wordpress.com/2008/07/20/obama-summer-jobs-used-to-work-at-baskin-robbins/?(this July 20, 2008 article states that Obama was in high school when he had his Baskin Robbins job). ?The workers and manager at the ice cream shop confirmed that Mr. Obama worked there. Unfortunately, no one remembers him because back then they weren't there.? http://www.bluemaumau.org/6621/presidentelect_barack_obamas_first_job?(this December 31, 2008 article implies that Obama first worked there in 1979). What is odd is that while there might be a record of him working there, no actual person has stepped forward to say that he or she actually remembers Obama working there.

On another note, since the Baskin and Robbins workers and managers were able to confirm that Obama worked there, the records that they looked at should also reveal what Social Security number Obama used back then. Snopes should investigate that matter and report back to all of us.

While Snopes is in the investigative mood, it should also find Obama?s first passport and tell us the date of issue and what Social Security number he used on his passport application. Snopes should also find some of Obama?s early school records and tell us which records first show a Social Security number for Obama and what that number is. If Snopes really wants to debunk the claim that Obama is using a false Social Security number, one would think that it, with its vast debunking resources, would take these steps and report back to all of us with its findings.

Ms. Daniels also tells us that Weather Underground member, Bill Ayers, in one of his books brags about how he could easily obtain false Social Security numbers. Jack Cashill writes in World Net Daily: ?Bill Ayers, terrorist and Obama close friend, of his years in the Weather Underground writes: ?We invented all kinds of ways to obtain false identity papers, and got busy building multiple sets of ID for each of us and for every contingency. . . . We soon figured out that the deepest and most foolproof ID had a government-issued Social Security card at its heart.?? http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=275861.

We know of the relationship between Ayers and Obama. According to Jack Cashill, there is a strong probability that Ayers even wrote Dreams from My Father. http://www.cashill.com/natl_general/did_bill_ayers_write_1.htm; http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Decons. Ms. Daniels believes that we can probably look to Ayers as the person who helped Obama get his false Social Security number.

III. Snopes? explanation (relying on Wikipedia) regarding the use of 042 and the claim that the number is "reserved for Connecticut residents" which Obama never was, also does not solve anything. Snopes concedes that before 1973 the first three numbers given to a Social Security number designated the location of the Social Security Office which issued the original Social Security card. It also explains that since 1973 (when all cards began to be issued from one central location in Baltimore), that number "'has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card'" (quoting Wikipedia). It explains that a mailing address does not equate to someone's place of birth or even place of residence. But Snopes provides no explanation how Obama ended up with the Connecticut 042 number, regardless of whether he obtained his number either before or after 1973. Why does Snopes not produce evidence that Obama's original application shows that he provided a mailing address with a zip code that would generate the 042 assignment?

I do not see what the big mystery is. But then with Obama it is par for the course. Orly Taitz has asked the Social Security Administration through the Freedom of Information Act for a copy of Obama's Social Security application documents. The documents, assuming they are real, can easily debunk any claim that Obama is using a false Social Security number. But, Obama, in his Obamaesque style, has not voluntarily provided a copy of those documents. I submit to Snopes that it would better spend its time investigating that and pressing Obama for a copy of those documents so that it can really debunk the claim that Obama is using a false Social Security number.

IV. Finally, we come to Snopes' most incorrect statement. It says that since Obama is a "natural born Citizen," his grandmother would have no reason to appropriate someone else's Social Security number.

First, the veracity of the claim that Obama is using a fake Social Security number does not depend on proving that his grandmother appropriated it.

Second, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, provides: ?No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.? Under this eligibility clause, I have argued since December 2008 that one must show that he or she is not only a ?citizen? of the United States to be eligible to be President, but also a ?natural born Citizen? of the United States. http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2008/12/two-constitutional-obstacles-obama-has.html. I also made this argument in the case of Kerchner v. Obama/Congress. The case was first hear in the New Jersey Federal District Court and reported at Kerchner v. Obama, 669 F.Supp.2d 477 (D.N.J. 2009). Never reaching the merits of the questions of whether Obama conclusively proved that he was born in Hawaii or that he meets the constitutional definition of an Article II "natural born Citizen, the District Court dismissed the case because of standing and political question. I appealed the case to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, whose decision is reported at Kerchner v. Obama, 612 F.3d 204 (3rd. Cir. 2010). The Third Circuit, also not reaching the merits of the case, affirmed the lower court, saying the plaintiffs did not have Article III standing. Probably the most important statement that any court made in all the Obama cases is that made by the Circuit Court in footnote 4 of its decision where it stated: ?We need not discuss Appellants? contention that ?the original common law definition of an Article II ?natural born Citizen? . . . is a child born in the country to a United States citizen mother and father? . . . . That assertion goes to the merits of whether President Obama is in fact eligible to hold office, which we cannot address unless Appellants first establish Article III standing.? I then filed with the U.S. Supreme Court a petition for a writ of certiorari which the Court, again not reaching the merits, denied. The U.S. Supreme Court denial of the petition is reported at Kerchner v. Obama, 131 S.Ct. 663 (2010). In short, no court ever decided the merits of the Kerchner case in which I argued that Obama has yet to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii and that even if he was born in Hawaii, he is not an Article II "natural born Citizen" because when he was born he was born to a non-U.S. citizen father, hence not meeting the original common law definition of an Article II ?natural born Citizen? which is a child born in the country to a United States citizen mother and father. In my briefs to the courts, I cited all the pertinent U.S. Supreme Court case law, Emer de Vattel, and many other historical sources which you will also find discussed by me in my many essays on "natural born Citizen" on this blog. No court has yet reached the merits of the question of whether Obama is an Article II ?natural born Citizen.? Obama must therefore make that showing and Congress and each individual State should compel him to do so.

The text of the Constitution, common law history, legislative history, and U.S. Supreme Court precedent show that an Article II ?natural born Citizen? is a child born in the United States or its jurisdictional equivalent to citizen parents. Let us analyze how I come to this conclusion......

?MORE

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/06/snopescom-provides-misleading-and.html#links


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:03
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Is the FBI Investigating Obama?

By:?Cliff Kincaid??? |? June 22, 2011


?

In a front page story about a major FBI terrorism investigation, The Washington Post has reported that the targets include ?Chicagoans who crossed paths with Obama when he was a young state senator and some who have been active in labor unions that supported his political rise.? The implication is that the trail could lead to the White House.

This is an unusual investigation that does not primarily involve Islamists. Instead, it is focused on elements of the old international communist networks that many people mistakenly thought had faded away with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Those under investigation are suspected of providing support to foreign terrorist organizations such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in the Middle East, a Marxist group. The Post called them ?Colombian and Palestinian groups designated by the U.S. government as terrorists.?

The investigations came into public view last September when the FBI raided the homes of several ?activists,? as the Post called them. Some lived in Chicago.

One of the targets, Tom Burke, was a union organizer for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). He was so confident he would get a fair shake from the Post that he provided the paper with a photo of himself shaking hands with Barack Obama. The other apparent intention was to send a message to the President and Attorney General Eric Holder that any investigation of Burke might lead to Obama.

The Post suggested that investigations of labor union activists might jeopardize their support for Obama?s 2012 presidential run. Indeed, it could therefore threaten his re-election bid, if investigations determine that the activists did more than ?cross paths? with the President.

Deep inside the article, in the 29th paragraph, we find out that some of the ?activists? are associated with a group known as the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), a Marxist-Leninist organization. Burke is a member of the FRSO, which the Post admitted was ?far left.?

The obvious question is why Obama, as a state senator in Illinois, would ever have ?crossed paths? with such people. The answer goes beyond just union support for the candidate. The ?far-left? networks that include the FRSO, the Communist Party USA, the New American Movement, and the Democratic Socialists of America backed and even spawned Obama?s political career. Don?t forget that Weather Underground leaders Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn hosted a fundraiser for his first run for political office. The same networks also backed CIA Director Leon Panetta?s career when he was a congressman from Santa Cruz, California. This helps explain why Obama would pick Panetta, with no intelligence background, to run the intelligence agency. They are cut from the same cloth.

Nevertheless, on Tuesday, the Senate voted 100-0 in favor of Panetta?s nomination as Secretary of Defense. It was a classic case of ?head in the sand? politics, ignoring not only Panetta?s long-time relationship with Communist Party member Hugh DeLacy but his record as a congressman in undercutting then-President Reagan?s pro-defense policies at every turn.

Obama and Panetta were players in the ?progressive? community, which since the days of Henry Wallace, presidential candidate of the Progressive Party, has had a red tint. Obama had his own communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party member under FBI investigation for 19 years, while Panetta gave DeLacy, who had traveled to China to meet with Soviet and Chinese intelligence agents, sensitive reports on U.S. military matters. Any notion that Panetta had no awareness of DeLacy?s Communist affiliation was obliterated when Panetta in 1983 inserted a tribute to DeLacy into the Congressional Record, praising his resistance to ?McCarthyism.?

Former FBI agent Max Noel once told me that the Bureau used to investigate candidates for federal employment by analyzing Character, Associates, Reputation, and Loyalty to the United States. The first letters in those words make up the acronym CARL. By the standard of ?A??Associates?Panetta flunks. But so does Obama.

Another sensitive case involves Huma Abedin, a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and wife of disgraced Rep. Anthony Weiner.? Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack have reported that Arab newspapers have revealed that Huma Abedin?s mother is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group whose goal is to subvert Western civilization. Jamie Glazov of Front Page Magazine asks Robert Spencer, ?There is a remote possibility that Abedin is actually being deceptive in her marriage to Weiner to follow Muslim Brotherhood instructions and to infiltrate the U.S. government, correct?? Spencer replies, ?Certainly. That is a very real possibility, and it should be investigated. But the only ones who have the means to do so are mainstream media journalists who are either clueless or complicit.?

It may also be the case that the FBI never investigated Abedin?s background.

As the FBI does not vet presidential candidates for national security purposes, we know there would have been no FBI investigation into Obama?s own background, associations, loyalty, and overall fitness for office. The FBI only probes those being considered for some federal positions under the president. They should have therefore investigated Panetta. But there is no indication that he was ever properly vetted. Now he is confirmed as Secretary of Defense because conservative Republican Senators were apparently afraid of being accused of McCarthyism for questioning his past associations.

On the other hand, the ?progressives? are raising hell with Obama and want him to rein in the FBI. They want to further emasculate the agency charged with ferretting out subversives and terrorist support networks.

As the Post noted, ?nine members of Congress have written letters to the administration? complaining about the FBI probe of Burke and other activists. The Post even noted that another one of the targets of the investigation, a union organizer named Tracy Molm, managed to arrange a meeting with Holder himself.

One of these congressional members is Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison, the foremost critic of Rep. Peter King?s hearings into radical Islam in America. ?Shortly after the raids,? Ellison said, ?I made inquiries to the FBI field office for more information. FBI Special Agent Boelter confirmed that an investigation was ongoing. He informed me that due to the pending nature of the investigation, he was prohibited from sharing any further information. However he gave me assurance that the purpose of the searches and service of subpoenas was not to punish or to suppress protected First Amendment activity.?

Pro-Marxist activist Medea Benjamin has said she managed to have a few words with Holder as well to complain about the probes. She is with the Code Pink group that travels to Gaza to meet with the terrorist group Hamas. She is also a staunch ally of Adam Kokesh, the ?Russia Today? TV star who openly admits that he functions as a paid Russian agent of the Vladimir Putin regime.

Holder is receptive to this kind of appeal because of his friendship with Obama and record as Deputy Attorney General in the Clinton Administration for facilitating pardons and clemency for terrorists from the Puerto Rican FALN and Weather Underground. It is this record that puts the current investigations by the FBI in serious jeopardy.

The Post article has to be seen as a signal to Holder from those around Obama that he must act quickly to close down these investigations before they get too close for comfort to the Oval Office. First, however, he has to make sure that the congressional investigations don?t get too close to Holder himself. It won?t look good for the Attorney General to be personally implicated in knowledge of the federal gunrunning schemes now under Congressional investigation that provided weapons to Mexican narco-terrorist cartels. The evidence already shows that federal authorities let guns fall into the hands of known criminals.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:43
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Lunes, 20 de junio de 2011
America's Survival, Inc. - http://www.usasurival.org/
Call your Senator at 202-224-3121
Panetta's War on Reagan's Defense Policies

By Cliff Kincaid

A Time for Choosing

VS.


Senate conservatives proudly call themselves ?Reagan Republicans? because of Reagan?s ?Peace Through Strength? military policies. But in Leon Panetta, whose nomination comes up for a full Senate vote for Secretary of Defense on Tuesday, they are being asked to endorse a man whose Congressional career was dedicated to fighting Reagan?s defense build-up and anti-communist policies. That is why the unanimous vote in favor of Panetta in the Senate Armed Services Committee is so mystifying.

Based on the facts about Panetta?s record and curious connections to a major figure in the Communist Party, which are only lately starting to get the attention of the conservative media, a vote for Panetta can only be viewed as trashing the Reagan legacy.

At a time when Reagan had said, ?In virtually every measure of military power the Soviet Union enjoys a decided advantage,? Panetta sought to undermine Reagan?s pro-defense policies at every turn:

  • Panetta in 1983 endorsed the nuclear weapons freeze, a concept backed by the Soviet Union which would have frozen in place a Soviet nuclear advantage in Europe.
  • Panetta supported a ban on the testing and deployment of new nuclear ballistic missiles.
  • Panetta opposed CIA covert operations to undermine the Communist Sandinista regime, calling Reagan?s support for the Nicaraguan freedom fighters a ?dirty war.?
  • Panetta opposed the neutron bomb, an enhanced radiation weapon designed to counter a Soviet tank build-up in Europe.
  • Panetta opposed the B-1 bomber, which was funded under Reagan and is today a key part of the fleet.
  • While most members of Congress were saluting Reagan and our troops for liberating Grenada, Panetta criticized the Reagan action and warned against the dispatch of a U.S. naval task force to the vicinity of Cuba. ?This is not a time to seek out new targets to flex our military muscle,? Panetta said.
  • Panetta opposed the MX ?Peacekeeper? missile, arguing it would jeopardize arms negotiations with the Soviets. Reagan had warned that defunding the system would ?weaken our ability to deter war?

When the Senate approved Panetta?s nomination as CIA director, Senators were denied important information about his relationship with Communist Party figure Hugh DeLacy and DeLacy?s ties to Soviet and Chinese intelligence operatives. It is not clear if Senate investigators or the FBI, or both, failed to investigate Panetta?s background. However, Diana West writes about this sensitive topic in the Washington Examiner. Regarding the lack of attention to this critical matter, she writes, ?Our legislative branch is falling asleep on the job over stories that should be giving them -- and us -- night sweats.?

DeLacy, one of only two Congressmen exposed as a member of the Moscow-funded Communist Party, was under suspicion when he was in the Congress (January 3, 1945-January 3, 1947), having been elected as a Democrat who gave outspoken pro-communist speeches on the House floor. At the time, in response to his remarks in favor of the Chinese Communists, Republican Rep. Clare Boothe Luce had called him ?Communist-fed,? one of the ?Moscow-tuned voices,? a darling of the Communist Party publication the Daily Worker, and source of ?Communist propaganda.? DeLacy, she said, had ?a definite Communist bias,? after citing several cases of him belonging to Communist Party fronts. For his part, DeLacy would sing the praises in the Congressional Record of Harry Bridges, the ?west coast labor leader? who was in fact a member of the Communist Party. He also attacked the House Committee on Un-American Activities, which exposed communists.

To cite just one example of DeLacy?s pro-Communist propaganda, he declared, ?The Chinese Communists stand for a simple program which has long ago been achieved in Western nations, a program of simple land and tax reforms and of free elections.?

Years later, in 1974, DeLacy would cite his pro-Communist speeches on the floor of Congress in a successful bid to have Communist China pay for him to visit the country. There, DeLacy would meet with identified communist spy Solomon Adler, a former U.S. Treasury Department official later identified in Chen Hansheng?s memoirs as working for Chinese intelligence. He also met with another identified communist spy, Frank Coe, and accused spy John Stewart Service.

Eventually, DeLacy would move from Washington State, where he was elected to Congress, to California, settling in Rep. Panetta?s district. The DeLacy papers at the University of Washington feature a series of friendly exchanges between them, including requests for sensitive documents and Panetta?s eager desire to provide the information. Panetta paid tribute to DeLacy at a private party and in the Congressional Record, even hailing DeLacy for standing up to anti-communist ?McCarthyism.? This was apparently a reference to DeLacy?s desire to keep his communist affiliations secret.

If all of this were not bad enough, Obama now wants Panetta to move from his super-sensitive CIA job to take over the Department of Defense. In the same way they overlooked the DeLacy connection, Senators are failing to take a look at what then-Rep. Panetta did to undermine the Reagan defense buildup.

There is also the matter of Panetta dramatically changing his position on the War Powers Act. He recently told Senator John McCain that ?I believe very strongly that the president has the constitutional power as commander in chief to take steps that he believes are necessary to protect this country and protect our national interests. And obviously, I think it?s important for presidents to consult, to have the advice of Congress. But in the end, I believe he has the constitutional power to do what he has to do to protect this country.?

This was in response to McCain?s question: ?Does it worry you if the Congress begins to tell the commander in chief as to exactly what the president can or cannot do in any conflict??

But in 1983, then-Rep. Panetta declared (Congressional Record, September 28, 1983, page 26163) that the War Powers Act was ?the law of the land? and that the Reagan Administration was in ?brazen disregard? of the law by using military force and troops in the Middle East. Panetta said the law ?was designed to provide enough flexibility for a President to respond to attacks, yet limit his ability to use troops abroad in hostilities or in potential hostilities without congressional authorization or a declaration of war.?

?It is incumbent upon this body to protect the integrity of our legislative process by asserting its legal and constitutional role in deciding the extent of our commitment in Lebanon,? Panetta went on. ?Congress must not abdicate its authority to participate in foreign policy decisions.?

Panetta?s flip-flop on the War Powers Act suggests he is more than willing to carry out Obama?s policies, including what are likely to be major defense cuts.

It is tragic that the Senate has not been made aware of Panetta?s record. The record even shows that Panetta was so far to the left that he praised a pro-Soviet ?peace activist,? Lucy Haessler, and asked President Jimmy Carter for clemency for Leonard Peltier, the radical American Indian activist serving life in prison for killing two FBI agents.

There is still time, however, for the Senate to do the right thing and get the facts before taking a reckless vote. A vote on his nomination as Secretary of Defense is scheduled for Tuesday. Any member of the Senate can place a hold on the nomination until the questions about his relationship with DeLacy and his opposition to Reagan?s ?Peace Through Strength? policies are answered. It is a ?Time for Choosing,? as Reagan once famously said.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:47
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Domingo, 19 de junio de 2011

Obama was never eligible to run for the office

Obama will Resign and for Good Reason

Share347 | Bookmark and Share
(6) Comments | Subscribe | Print friendly | Email Us
?- Alan Caruba??Sunday, June 19, 2011

imageI always thought it was creepy the way Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly referred to the likelihood of his being a one-term President. It is as if he knew, even as he campaigned in 2008, that all the loose ends and unanswered questions about his life would eventually disqualify him.

It is now widely acknowledged that the mainstream media ran interference for him, ignoring or disparaging those who questioned his eligibility.

After two and a half years in office, however, his arrogance and incompetence is so manifest that even they can no longer cover for him.


Obama has single handedly generated a mass political movement called the Tea Party and election results for governors and members of Congress have put opposition candidates into office.

On March 31, 1968, then-President Lyndon B. Johnson announced that he would not run for reelection, responding to the massive opposition to the war in Vietnam. On August 9, 1974, Richard M. Nixon announced his resignation in the wake of the Watergate scandal to avoid impeachment.

I predict that Barack Hussein Obama will resign before the end of his first term. He may well do so prior to the September 2012 Democratic Party convention.

Obama was never eligible to run for the office. In his book, ?Where?s the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President?, Dr. Jerome R. Corsi, Phd, devotes 387 pages, complete with appendices and endnotes, to irrefutably make that case.

Anyone who reads Article 2, Section 1, of the Constitution, however, can make that case in less than a minute. Only a ?natural born? individual whose both parents were American citizens can be President. Obama?s father was a citizen of Kenya. There is no dispute regarding what the Founders meant when they said ?natural born.? Further clouding Obama?s eligibility is the time he spent in his youth in Indonesia as the adopted son of that nation?s nationality.

Corsi?s book explores all the other mysteries including a highly suspicious Social Security number, passports, and other documentation that any candidate for office would normally submit to public disclosure. A massive cover up that includes the national press corps, the Democratic Party, Congress and even the U.S. courts, permitted Obama to gain and hold the office.

Indeed, Corsi?s book is not the first to reveal the deceptions. At least three other books have meticulously examined the issue. They include ?The Manchurian Candidate? by Aaron Klein with Brenda J. Elliot, ?The Blueprint: Obama?s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency? by Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski, and ?The Post-American Presidency? by Pamela Geller with Robert Spencer.

Corsi, however, has the benefit of timing. As the nation enters the period following Obama?s announcement he is running for reelection and during the process of selecting a Republican opponent, the issue of his eligibility is gathering momentum.

The polling data is all against him. The failure of his policies, combined with the massive increase in the national debt, rising unemployment, the implosion of the housing market, and a growing perception of incompetence, are coalescing to give weight to the demand that he end his candidacy or resign.

?History has not been kind to U.S. Presidents that have attempted to hide behind a lie,? says Corsi.

When republics begin to ignore their founding documents, they are literally committing suicide and, in Obama?s case, it is an assisted suicide.

The recognized definition of a ?natural born citizen?, a requirement to be President, does not require much more than common sense. In a May article published by Canada Free Press, Lawrence B. Solum, the John E. Cribbett Professor of Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, is quoted as having written in September 2008, ?Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a natural born citizen.?

Ironically, in 2008, his political opponent, Sen. John McCain, whose both parents were Americans when he was born in Panama Canal Zone, was the subject of a Senate Resolution confirming his eligibility to run. The then-Democrat controlled Senate took up no such action regarding Obama. If they had, they would have had to hold a convention to pick a new candidate!

Lawrence Sellin, the author of the Canada Free Press article cited above, warned ?Whether through cowardice or arrogance, both Republican and Democrats fail to appreciate the fact that ordinary Americans are reaching a tipping point. Imagine a Tea Party on steroids.?

?If the Constitutional crisis is not soon addressed, the present political polarization will inevitably lead to political fragmentation. Erosion of the Constitution will inevitably lead to the collapse of the rule of law.?

There is no documentation to support the myths about his life that Obama has carefully devised. Indeed, the President has reportedly spent millions to deny public access to his birth certificate and all other records.

If he resigns, he may be able to assert the legitimacy of every piece of legislation, every executive order, signed into law, but if he is found to have been ineligible, every one of them would become null and void.

The nation can be put right again as a Constitutional Republic. Obama has led an unlawful regime. America has been drunk on socialism since the 1930s. It?s time to sober up.

? Alan Caruba, 2011


Author
Alan Caruba

Alan Caruba
Most recent columns

Alan has a daily blog called Warning Signs. His latest book is Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy.

Alan can be reached at [email protected]
Older articles by Alan Caruba





Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:22
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
S?bado, 18 de junio de 2011

Saturday, June 18, 2011

ACTION ALERT FROM HAWAII...ORYR NEEDS YOUR HELP THIS WEEKEND!...

?

ORYR HAS CHECKED IN FROM HAWAII AND IS ASKING ALL PATRIOTS TO WRITE THIS WEEKEND!...
?
Below is a strategy we can employ right now:?

?
Focus! Follow Devvy's instructions to flood Sen. Slom's mailbox. ?
?

?
Focus! Write that letter now.?

?
Focus! On Douglas Vogt and his evidence. Do not be distracted with opinion blogs.

?
Focus! On shutting down Hawaii Capital switchboard by calling the dishonorable and disgraceful Lt. Gov. Brian Schatz (Howard Dean's good buddy) and doper Gov. Abercrombie?
Hold your fire until Monday 3:00PM Eastern (6-hr. difference).?
Then call the switchboard:
State Operator

808-586-2211

?
?
?
?
DEMAND AN INVESTIGATION OF THE HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR ISSUING A BLATANT FORGERY!! DEMAND AN INVESTIGATION OF ALVIN T. ONAKA, STATE REGISTRAR, FOR SIGNING OFF ON THE FORGERY.!!!
If you cannot get through, contact Schatz and Onaka directly:
Schatz (808) 586-0255

Fax: (808) 586-0231
Web:?
http://hawaii.gov/ltgov
Globalist Alvin T. Onaka (Obama Electronic Records Czar) direct line:
(808) 586-4600?Leave a message. He has NEVER returned a call so say whatever you want in the messag

Sen. Sam Slom
Hawaii State Legislature
?
415 S. Beretania Street, Rm 214
Honolulu, HI 96813


?

?
SPREAD THE WORD AND POST ON ALL SOCIAL MEDIA

?

Be sure to read this great article by Attorney, Mario Apuzzo:


Why Doesn?t Hawaii Senator Sam Slom Investigate the Authenticity of Obama?s Long-Form Certificate of Live Birth?

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
By: Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? June 18, 2011

It appears that Hawaii Senator, Sam Slom, has been interested in finding out the truth about Obama?s birth origins. But why has he not investigated whether Obama?s recently released long-form Certificate of Live Birth is authentic?


Here is what researcher and writer, Devvy, wrote in her recent article: ?Congress - Yes, Obama Is Above The Law:?

?The other thing I urge you to do, which I outlined in my recent column, Force an investigation into Obama's birth certificate criminal fraud, involves a state senator who has been very outspoken regarding Obama/Soetoro's birth certificate. The key to busting this wide open could be the Hawaii State Legislature:

?My second letter went out to Sen. Sam Slom. He serves in the Hawaii State Senate. That document was allegedly generated by a state agency in the State of Hawaii. Their legislature has the authority to conduct an investigation into how that forgery was manufactured, by who and more importantly, who requested it and when? That won't happen unless YOU also write a letter. Hard copy letters (or a fax) is something tangible that can't be ignored. The phones ring all day long at the offices of state and federal lawmakers. Sometimes you can't even get through or you just get voice mail.?

This weekend, YOU need to write and mail off a snail mail letter to Sen. Slom. If his desk is flooded with tens of thousands of letters - and folks in Hawaii make this an issue - the heat will become so great, they have to act. Be sure to continue following up with Slom's office by calling a week after you send your snail mail letter. Thousands of us must keep the heat on his office until something breaks in that legislature. It can happen, but it takes all of us. Sen. Slom needs to man up or shut up.?
http://www.rense.com/general94/cong_dev.htm.

I have reported on this blog about the great amount of existing evidence that the electronic image and the underlying paper document are both forgeries.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/06/congress-investigates-sexual-flings-of.html.? As a Hawaii State Senator, Senator Slom surely has the resources and influence to be able to dispel this evidence and confirm with the Hawaii Department of Health whether the document image that Obama released on the internet on April 27, 2011 is authentic.

We should follow Devvy?s advice and find out why Senator Slom has not done more to seek the truth about Obama?s recently released birth certificate. We need to demand of him that if he is going to do his job and honor his oath to protect and defend the Constitution, he needs to fight this battle all the way and not just make believe that he is.


Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
June 18, 2011
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
####

MORE ACTION ITEMS AT:
OneNationUnderFraud

?





Publicado por Corazon7 @ 16:25
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Obama Not Subject to Charges of Treason?

?

FOR MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND FRAUD

by Sher Zieve, ?2011

Why has this man been allowed to usurp the presidency and commit crimes against the United States?

(Jun. 18, 2011) ? Treason is generally defined as ?betrayal of country: a violation of the allegiance owed by somebody to his or her own country, e.g. by aiding an enemy.?? High treason is defined as ?treason perpetrated by somebody against his or her own country.??? Another apt definition of treason is ?any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well-being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one?s government.?? It is my contention that Barack Hussein Obama has perpetrated all of these.? It is also my assertion that our current Congress and an increasingly leftist court system have allowed?and are continuing to allow?Obama to perpetrate such treachery upon the United States of America and its citizens.

Obama begins immediate attacks against USA and We-the-People

Prior to his announced campaign for President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama was never vetted as to his eligibility to run for the office.? Almost immediately after Barack Hussein Obama?s 2008 election to the most powerful position in the USA and, arguably the world, one of his first?if not the first?Executive fiats issued was that all of his prior records (school transcripts, passport information, his birth certificate etc) were to be sealed and summarily hidden from the American people and the world.?? Since that time, Obama has produced multiple ?birth certificates? that have each been proven to be fraudulent, including the ostensible long-form birth certificate released 27 April 2011.

Almost immediately thereafter and within the first week of his ostensible presidency, Obama issued Executive Orders to fund foreign countries abortions, donate at least $20 Millions to terrorist Hamas (under the guise of ?Palestinian relief?) and began testing his ability to censor and/or end the First Amendment by order via another Executive Order to ban showing or posting the video of his retaking the Oath of Office.? Along with myriad other mysteries, one has to ponder why this was a great concern to Obama.

Shortly thereafter, Obama issued another Executive Order that brought the Census Bureau under his sole jurisdiction and control.? This strongly appears to have been affected by Obama, in order that he?alone?would have the ability to control and skew any and all census results that did not meet with his approval.? After he gained (many say ?usurped?) the Office of the US Presidency, Obama?almost instantly?began attempts to unravel the US Constitution?s First Amendment.? These attempts ranged from banning and refusing to speak with reporters who asked him tough questions to actually locking them in closets!? With no one stopping him the Obama syndicate becomes increasingly bolder and more criminal every day.

Obama?s Dictatorship begins expanding (almost) exponentially

When he discovered?even after the 2010 mid-term elections?that no one from the Establishment Republican side of the House of Representatives would stop him, Obama stepped up his game to establish the USA?s first official dictatorship.? Side note:? Even the new Speaker of the House?Rep. John Boehner?apparently desires and prefers golfing with Mr. Obama to actually saving the country from the ongoing tyrannical takeover being perpetrated by Obama and his minions.? Despite a letter questioning Obama?s authority to wage war against Libya, recently sent to Obama by Boehner, Boehner and the other Republicans-in-name-only continue to embolden Obama toward expanding his growing dictatorship.

Obama has purposefully and with apparently growing malice against the USA and its people caused the US economy to be destroyed, has worked to end jobs for Americans and laughs at us?on video?on an almost daily basis.? The latest slap from Obama?which includes his statement laughing at our expense?is his comment on jobs projects that he had said were supposed to be ?Shovel-ready?:? ?Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected.?

In April of this year, Obama mocked a man who had asked him about the extremely high gasoline prices and laughed at him while he said laughing:? ?I know some o? these big guys, there still drivin? [sic] their big SUVs. You know, they got their big monster trucks and everything. You?re one of ?em? [points to man in audience]. Well now, here?s my point. You know, if you?re complaining about the price of gas, and you?re only getting? [sic] 8 miles a gallon [laughs at man, pauses for audience to laugh at man, mocks the man with facial expression]? You know [laughs] you might have a big family, but it?s probably not THAT big [laughs, audience laughs]? So ? how many you have, 10 kids you say? 10 kids? [mocking facial expression again, encouraging people to laugh at the man] Well? you definitely need a hybrid van then? Like I said, if you?re getting? [sic] 8 miles a gallon you might wanna [sic] think about a trade-in.?

Yet, Obama continues to spend money overseas to our enemies?our money?and give money to his Unions, while partying at the White House as if there?s no tomorrow and spending $$Billions on his and his families increasingly frequent and extravagant vacations.? And now with the lack of any real opposition from either Congress or the growing Socialist/Communist court system, Obama is being given full sway to do whatever her pleases to attack and decimate both We-the-People and our country?and he IS doing it.? No wonder he laughs at and derides us at every opportunity!

Obama gives an indication of our dire future (if he is not removed)

Obama and his (now misnamed) Department of Justice chief Eric Holder have filed suit against Arizona and other States (now to include Georgia) who had the audacity to fight the annihilation of their States due to the US government?s refusal to enforce laws against illegal invasion.? And he has encouraged other countries (Mexico and other Latin American countries) to do the same.? Obama is now siding firmly with foreign countries against the United States of America.? This is called High-treason.? These actions on the part of the US government constitute no less than its attempt to bring down the country, throw out Federalism and end the US Constitution?s protections for both the States and the citizens of our country and establish a dictatorship.? There is no other viable or logical conclusion.

The latest atrocity committed against We-the-People is Obama?s response to Boehner?s letter regarding Obama?s now illegal war in Libya in which Boehner cites the US Constitution?s Article 1, Section 8:?? ?The Congress shall have Power?. To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions??? Obama?s response is that the United Nations now trumps or replaces the US Constitution.? Obama wrote:? ?U.S. forces are playing a constrained and supporting role in a multinational coalition, whose operations are both legitimated by and limited to the terms of a United Nations Security Council Resolution that authorizes the use of force solely to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under attack or threat of attack and to enforce a no-fly zone and an arms embargo.?? Obama has now ?officially? done away with the US Constitution and made the USA subservient to the United Nations.

Virtually?or literally?every day Barack Hussein Obama is committing at least one if not multiple treasons and high-treasons against the United States of America.? And STILL he is allowed to do so with nary a scolding?or a whimper.? Nothing is ever done to stop him.? Isn?t it time for us to do so?? Isn?t it?? Who or what group might be willing to organize a few massive marches on D.C. and especially Congress to stop this insanity and destruction of our country, our lives and all that we have built?? Otherwise, there seems to be no other solution except explosions of violent civil unrest.? Even dyed-in-the-wool Democrat James Carville said:? ?You know, look ? this is a humanitarian ? you know, you?re smart enough to see this. People, you know, if it continues, we?re going to start to see civil unrest in this country. I hate to say that, but I think it?s imminently possible.?

?And all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him??? Revelation 13:3-5.? We-the-People can?if we have both the resolve and the courage to do so.

??

? 2011, The Post & Email. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 16:10
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Why Doesn?t Hawaii Senator Sam Slom Investigate the Authenticity of Obama?s Long-Form Certificate of Live Birth?

?
Kalaupapa Waves, Hawaii - Reimer Gaertner


Why Doesn?t Hawaii Senator Sam Slom Investigate the Authenticity of Obama?s Long-Form Certificate of Live Birth?


????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? By: Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? June 18, 2011

It appears that Hawaii Senator, Sam Slom, has been interested in finding out the truth about Obama?s birth origins. But why has he not investigated whether Obama?s recently released long-form Certificate of Live Birth is authentic?

Here is what researcher and writer, Devvy, wrote in her recent article: ?Congress - Yes, Obama Is Above The Law:?

?The other thing I urge you to do, which I outlined in my recent column, Force an investigation into Obama's birth certificate criminal fraud, involves a state senator who has been very outspoken regarding Obama/Soetoro's birth certificate. The key to busting this wide open could be the Hawaii State Legislature:

?My second letter went out to Sen. Sam Slom. He serves in the Hawaii State Senate. That document was allegedly generated by a state agency in the State of Hawaii. Their legislature has the authority to conduct an investigation into how that forgery was manufactured, by who and more importantly, who requested it and when? That won't happen unless YOU also write a letter. Hard copy letters (or a fax) is something tangible that can't be ignored. The phones ring all day long at the offices of state and federal lawmakers. Sometimes you can't even get through or you just get voice mail.?

This weekend, YOU need to write and mail off a snail mail letter to Sen. Slom. If his desk is flooded with tens of thousands of letters - and folks in Hawaii make this an issue - the heat will become so great, they have to act. Be sure to continue following up with Slom's office by calling a week after you send your snail mail letter. Thousands of us must keep the heat on his office until something breaks in that legislature. It can happen, but it takes all of us. Sen. Slom needs to man up or shut up.?
http://www.rense.com/general94/cong_dev.htm.

I have reported on this blog about the great amount of existing evidence that the electronic image and the underlying paper document are both forgeries.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/06/congress-investigates-sexual-flings-of.html.? As a Hawaii State Senator, Senator Slom surely has the resources and influence to be able to dispel this evidence and confirm with the Hawaii Department of Health whether the document image that Obama released on the internet on April 27, 2011 is authentic.

We should follow Devvy?s advice and find out why Senator Slom has not done more to seek the truth about Obama?s recently released birth certificate. We need to demand of him that if he is going to do his job and honor his oath to protect and defend the Constitution, he needs to fight this battle all the way and not just make believe that he is.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
June 18, 2011
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
####

Copyright ? 2011
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
All Rights Reserved




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:10
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

CDR Kerchner's Blog

June 17, 2011

Speaker Boehner Keeps Saying NYET! Another Letter to U.S. House Speaker Boehner.

We Need More Letters Sent to the Speaker. Boehner is the key Roadblock to getting

Our Constitutional Crisis Resolved. Inaction by the Speaker is Enabling Obama?s Crimes. | by CDR Kerchner?(Ret)

Speaker Boehner Keeps Saying NYET! Boehner is the key Roadblock to getting Our Constitutional Crisis Resolved. Inaction by the Speaker is Enabling Obama?s Crimes.

Another Letter to U.S. House Speaker Boehner ? State Legislators Coming on Board about Eligibility and Government Corruption -??YOU GO GIRL!? SAYS NEW MEXICO LEGISLATOR | @ ThePostEmail.com

Read the Letter Here: http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/06/17/state-legislators-coming-on-board-about-eligibility-and-government-corruption/

A call to action by CDR Kerchner (Ret):? This is a national disgrace that our elected leaders refuse to investigate criminal activities in the White House out of fear of a backlash from Obama and his Chicago mafia and goons threatening violence if they are investigated.? Have we no rule of law left?? Do back channel whispers and threats of violence trump the rule of law? Has political correctness and affirmative action been allowed to go berserk with the controlling legal authorities avoiding confronting Obama over his criminal activities over many decades including SSN fraud by Obama? Are criminal bullies running the country?? We the People sent Washington DC a message in the Nov 2010 election cycle.? We the People enabled a new Speaker of the House to be elected.? We hoped he would investigate the criminal activities of the current Oval Office occupant.? He has not!? It?s past time for him to act.? He must act.? Call or write to him.? When will the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives John Boehner call for an investigation of the criminal act of forging a birth certificate and then placing the forged long from birth certificate document onto the White House servers?? We need to demand he do so. ? Send a letter and/or telephone Speaker John Boehner and demand an investigation of Obama?s criminal activities which include forging a birth certificate, using a stolen or invalid SSN, and filing a back dated and forged draft registration form.? The House of Representatives has the power and duty to investigate the criminal acts perpetrated using government property and servers in the White House. Here is Speaker Boehner?s address in Washington DC. Contact him today: http://www.speaker.gov/Contact/

Keep writing to the Speaker.? Call his office.? Ask him to repeat to himself his oath to the U.S. Constitution while looking at himself in the mirror.? He is betraying his oath of office to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC!? Speaker John Boehner is the roadblock in Congress to resolving the constitutional crisis facing us with an impostor, fraud, and criminal in the Oval Office. ?He and his staff tell people they have more important things to work on.? What is more important than supporting and defending the U.S. Constitution as per the oath he took.? He did not take an oath to support and defend ?more important things to do?.? Can?t Speaker Boehner?s lead People?s House chew gum and walk at the same time! All he has to do is tell the appropriate committee to start an investigation and announce to the world he has so ordered it.?Let him know what you think of his intransigence on this matter. And if he does not listen to the pleas of We the People and act to launch investigations into the criminal activities of Obama, then John Boehner should not be re-elected as a congressional representative from Ohio in Nov 2012, let alone Speaker of the People?s House.

Here is a copy of my letter to Speaker John Boehner and the three attachments I sent him demanding action by him to launch an investigation into the grifter in the White House: http://www.scribd.com/doc/57705409/FAX-Letter-to-Speaker-of-the-U-S-House-John-Boehner-the-U-S-Congressman-from-Ohio-sent-11-Jun-2011

CDR Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:12
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Congress is corrupt and has chosen the path of lawlessness

Obama?s ineligibility: Fighting back I

Share309 | Bookmark and Share
(23) Comments | Subscribe | Print friendly | Email Us
?- Lawrence Sellin??Friday, June 17, 2011

Congress is corrupt and has chosen the path of lawlessness.

Our elected officials continue to ignore the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born citizen and, therefore, ineligible for the Presidency. They have ignored requests by citizens to investigate allegations of felonies associated with Obama.


It is now the responsibility of ordinary Americans to restore the Constitution and the rule of law, which our government officials have willfully disregarded.

The following are the opinions of ordinary Americans.

1. ?The Constitution and the Bill of Rights , as well as the Declaration of Independence clearly states that when a Government through a chain of abuses of power becomes so completely unable to serve the will of the People, then it becomes OUR DUTY and OUR RESPONSIBLITY to abolish such a Government and hold special elections to restore its legality.?

2. ?Our leaders ignore the law to suit their purposes and then contemptuously all-but-dare us to do anything about it, secure in the knowledge that they can charge with crimes and imprison anyone who steps out of line. What we need is a simple act of defiance that can be done by enough everyday Americans that it is impossible to charge all of us, let alone imprison us. We need something symbolically powerful but harmless in and of itself. It would be even better if it was lawful action, because that way we keep the high ground morally and legally.?

3. ?Since our legislators won?t do anything, there is one way to get to the truth.? There are federal grand juries that start every month in every state.? If the people were informed that as a member of a federal grand jury they have the power to start an investigation on any federal office or even the president if they feel there is evidence of wrong doing.? They have the power to compel the release of all records pertaining to their investigation.? I am sure if the people were informed there would be grand jury investigations all over the U S and it wouldn?t be very long before Obama was indicted for fraud and forgery just for starters.? The federal grand jury is the one power that the administration can?t stop.? Maybe if Obama was indicted by one or more grand juries some of the legislators might come out of hiding and do their job and investigate for themselves and get to the truth.?

4. ?If tomorrow, every person of voting age outside of our political class refused to go to work and went on strike ? we could break our political class very quickly ? if we had the fortitude to wait them out long enough to make them truly uncomfortable. A modern-day non-violent ?revolution? could be created by harnessing the incipient power of common Americans. Get enough of us acting in concert and toward a common goal, and you?d be amazed at what can be accomplished by ?ordinary? people.?

5. ?Civil disobedience can be effective in the United States, but it must be used properly. Doing so requires great discipline, enormous self-control on the part of participants, and substantial courage and moral authority on the part of the movement?s leaders. It also requires a willingness to go to jail if necessary for your ?crimes? as Martin Luther King and his supporters did. You asked for legal courses of action; civil disobedience is by definition illegal. Furthermore, none of us really knows which way the armed forces will act once events are underway, as the 1932 World War I bonus marchers incident shows. You and I both hope that the military and law enforcement communities will do the right thing, but orders are orders, and some people follow them even if they are wrong.?

6. ?It sure isn?t the great country my father and friends fought and died for.?

Do you have ideas about legally fighting back? Mail them to me and I will post them confidentially in upcoming articles.


Author
Lawrence Sellin

Lawrence Sellin
Most recent columns

? Canada Free Press 2011

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. receives hate mail at [email protected]




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 8:47
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Viernes, 17 de junio de 2011

Friday, June 17, 2011

American Citizens? Demand for Justice Against

the Overthrow of the U.S. Constitution...


AND THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TO INVESTIGATE OBAMA submitted by Kathleen Gotto


Can the U.S. Constitution be revived after its demolition by Obama, Congress, the courts and the media?

(May 31, 2011) ? PREAMBLE: The following citizen compilation of abuses and constitutional violations will be sent to all U.S. Congressmen.? Additionally, it will be sent to the Federal Elections Commission, Donald Trump, all major media, the foreign press, State campaign headquarters, Tea Party groups, the FBI, the Social Security Administration Commissioner, and the Selective Service System, et al.

This list is by no means exhaustive.? Any citizen may mail it to others not appearing on this list such as state representatives and senators, governors, attorneys general, members of the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts; sheriffs, law enforcement, American Legion Posts, and veterans? organizations.? It can also be sent to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all military officers and constitutional attorneys.

LET IT BE KNOWN that Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, Barry/Barack Soebarkh and variations thereof, attained to the office of the U.S. Presidency in January 2009 without meeting the eligibility requirements of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution, which mandates only a natural born citizen (one born of two U.S. citizen parents) is eligible to hold that office.? Take note:? None of the 535 members of Congress can hide behind the April 3, 2009 and March 18, 2010 propaganda hit pieces written by Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service, which twists and corrupts the natural born citizen definition in a transparent attempt to provide cover for the cowardly congressmen.
LET IT BE KNOWN that the media, including ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, FoxNews, et al, FAILED the American People and abrogated their Fourth Estate responsibilities by turning a deaf ear and blind eye to the nonfeasance, misfeasance, and malfeasance which apparently occurred during the whole of the 2008 election process, from the nomination to the election of the unvetted, ineligible Barack Hussein Obama.
LET IT BE KNOWN that both the Republican and Democratic political parties FAILED in their obligation to vet Barack Hussein Obama prior to his nomination as the Democratic candidate for the office of U.S. President.
LET IT BE KNOWN that Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House and in her official position as Chair of the Democratic National Convention, in 2008 FAILED in her duty to the American People and her sworn oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, by issuing one certification for 49 states, which merely stated that Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden were ?duly nominated? as the Democratic Party candidates for President and Vice President respectively; but for the STATE OF HAWAII, Nancy Pelosi did attest and declare to all by the Democratic Official Certification of Nomination that both Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden were ??legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.?? Why did Nancy Pelosi, in her capacity as the DNC Chair, provide one certification to Hawaii and a different one to the other 49 states?
LET IT BE KNOWN that all 50 Secretaries of State FAILED in their obligation to vet Barack Hussein Obama prior to his nomination as the Democratic candidate for the office of U.S. President.
LET IT BE KNOWN that Vice President Richard Cheney, as President of the Senate, FAILED to request any objection to the electoral vote count on January 8, 2009, as required by U.S.C. Title 3, Section 15;
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/3/usc_sec_03_00000015?-000-.html:? ??Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. ??.
LET IT BE KNOWN that just because there is no clear requirement stating a specific entity must ensure the eligibility of a candidate running for the U.S. presidency, that was no excuse for the 50 individual States, the Congress, or the Judiciary to abrogate their responsibility to American citizens by allowing an unvetted, ineligible person to be nominated, and then elected, to the U.S. presidency.? The argument must be made that since no specific entity was required to ensure a candidate?s eligibility, then any appropriate investigative body could and should have performed that function! All branches of state and federal government FAILED the American people!? Just because there is no specificity as to who should verify a candidate?s eligibility, that does not cancel the constitutional eligibility requirement!? Additionally, LET IT BE KNOWN that the U.S. Senate passed S. Res. 511 declaring John McCain ?a natural born citizen?, yet were totally silent on the more obvious question of Barack Obama?s citizenship status.? Obama?s father was a Kenyan with allegiance to the British Crown and such allegiance passed on to his son, Barack Obama, at birth.? So why didn?t Congress investigate how a man born subject to the British Crown could possibly be considered a requisite natural born citizen of the United States?
LET IT BE KNOWN that U.S. Code, Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 1, Section 4, gives the definition for Misprision of Felony:
?Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.? Every member of Congress, the Supreme Court, and all the judges handling all the Obama eligibility lawsuits were apprised numerous times of Obama?s felonious birth certificates, Social Security number, Selective Service Registration, et al, from American citizens.? None of those officials can say they were uninformed.? We have evidence that they were indeed informed, over and over again.? The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued a report on August 16, 2010, outlining the use of taxpayer funds on government public relations and propaganda.? The report states, ??Under one-party rule in 2009, the White House used the machinery of the Obama campaign to tout the President?s agenda through inappropriate and sometimes unlawful public relations and propaganda initiatives???? Unlawful?? Where is the investigation?? Of course, using taxpayer funds unlawfully should be investigated. But aren?t releasing to the public a fraudulent Certification of Live Birth, misusing a Social Security number, and using a falsified Selective Service Registration felonious crimes?? Where is the investigation, Congress?
WHEREAS, numerous lawsuits were initiated prior and subsequent to Barack Obama?s swearing in as the de facto president of the United States, We The People Demand the judiciary systems from the Circuit Courts, to the District Courts, to the Supreme Court and any pertinent Appeals Courts to adjudicate this matter of national security now and with all discovery, and cease from erecting the artificial ?standing? barrier in the Peoples? pursuit of justice.? The Courts? job is to adjudicate, so do it.? The American People can withstand a Constitutional crisis; we cannot abide a usurper in Our White House!? The ?eligibility? lawsuits lay out the law and facts of this matter?
f.? United States Justice Foundation, http://usjf.net/;
WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama, unable to prove his eligibility under A1S2C5 of the U.S. Constitution to be the president, and having previously released several short-form birth certificates which were deemed fraudulent, released a long form birth certificate on April 27, 2011.? It was examined minutely by numerous people and also declared fraudulent.? We The People Demand the FBI, a Special Prosecutor, Congress, et al, initiate an investigation immediately and forensically examine said long form document!
WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama?s SSN was issued by the State of Connecticut, in which Obama never lived, and appears to be used by him fraudulently, We The People Demand the FBI, Special Prosecutor, Congress, Social Security Administration, et al, initiate an investigation immediately!
WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama?s Selective Service Registration has been examined and deemed to be fraudulent, We The People Demand the FBI, Special Prosecutor, Congress, Selective Service Registration, et al, initiate an investigation immediately!
WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama?s refusal to release documentation substantiating his eligibility to serve as president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, an officer and Army physician, LtCol Terry Lakin, was deprived of justice and liberty, refused discovery and a right to defend himself at his court-martial for refusing to follow an order he had no assurance was legal, and was stripped of his benefits and imprisoned at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.? http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/
WHEREAS, American citizens have had enough of our elected representatives refusing to do their jobs, with every one of the 535 having failed us by ignoring the destruction and overthrow of our Constitutional Republic, know this:? You have lost your mandate to govern us.? You have lost our trust and respect.? You have sold us and our Constitution down the river of political expediency.? You have allowed your own cowardice and self-interest to drown out our concerns and demands.? You have aided, abetted or allowed the looting of our taxpayer dollars from the U.S. treasury, and have allowed our money to be redistributed to bankers under phony programs such as TARP.? You have ignored the Obama eligibility problem.? Not one of you 535 congressional ?leaders? has investigated the unvetted, ineligible poseur in our White House.? Not one!? Every last one of you has turned your back on us.? Now we are turning our backs on you. If you continue to stonewall us and allow the complete destruction of our constitutional republic, know this:? We are many.? We are organized.? We are indignant.? We are angry.? We will no longer be held hostage to your abrogation of duty and responsibility to us and our Constitution.? We are hereby putting all 535 members of Congress on notice that We The People are committed to voting every last one of you out for your collective dereliction of duty in not investigating the many and serious issues about Barack Hussein Obama?s eligibility to hold the office of president!? And when you get back home, defeated and humiliated, you will have to live among those whom you betrayed.? Ponder that.
THEREFORE, WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND Congress call for an outside, non-government Special Prosecutor to immediately initiate an investigation of the man posing as the president, Barack Hussein Obama, in order to protect our national security, and support and defend our Constitution and the rights of the citizens of the United States of America!

MORE ELIGIBILITY NEWS AT GiveUsLiberty1776


MORE IDEAS ON HOW TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND FIGHT BACK AT OneNationUnderFraud

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 13:11
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Closet got your tongue??Resign!

?2011 drkate

Cat got your tongue?? No?the skeletons in your closet do!

In an extremely interesting interview, Major General Paul Vallely opined that Congress knows of Obama?s ineligibility, but is a afraid of ?probing a possible felony and black backlash? and ?treason implications for a black president?.??? Yes, the first ?black? president has committed high treason and the punishment is execution.

These are indeed serious implications. But Obama has punked America, but what the pretend Congress doesn?t see that Obama punked them all and used their ?liberal guilt? and fear of being called racist to get elected in the first place.? Just like Congress and the liberals to blame the victim for their inability to act.

But I don?t find Congress? excuse believable as the people?s response has never been of concern to them ever before.? No, they are? afraid if they stand up, that all of their illegality will be exposed, and that they will face treason and other felony charges for their too long silence and complicit activity.

The disturbing facts emerging about the virulent pathological obots who may have participated in the deliberate harassment of individuals by law enforcement suggests a RICO conspiracy of the first order.? Better lawyer up boys and girls.

Note to Congress.? If you are being silent on Obama?s criminal enterprise because of your own criminality which is safely stuffed in your closet, then you need to resign immediately.? Your selfish goals of preservation of your perks and your weiners is destroying our country.? You have perjured yourselves and have lost any semblance of consent from We the People.

We will not tolerate your silence on the destruction of the Constitution.

It?s 1776. All over again.




Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:32
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Jueves, 16 de junio de 2011

http://www.exposeobama.com/2011/06/16/video-ex-cia-agree-govt-is-covering-up-phony-birth-certificate-to-prevent-black-backlash/

Video: Ex-CIA Agree Govt is Covering Up Phony Birth Certificate to Prevent ?Black Backlash?

Bob Unruh, WND.com

?

?


?

Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, the chief of Stand Up America, a national security expert and Fox News contributor, says the ?Certificate of Live Birth? released in April by the White House as ?proof positive? of President Obama?s Hawaiian birth is a forgery, but the FBI is covering the fraud and no one in Congress is willing to tackle the situation because of fears of a ?black backlash? if the failings of the nation?s first black president are revealed.

In an interview today with Greg Corombos for WND, Vallely, who previously has expressed concerns about whether the Obama administration is in violation of the U.S. Constitution, said, ?His actual birth certificate has never been found in Hawaii nor released from Hawaii hospital there, Kapiolani hospital there, if it in fact did exist.?

?We?ve had three CIA agents, retired, and some of their analytical associates look at it, and all came to the same conclusion, that even the long-form was a forged document,? Vallely said.

?No members of Congress will take this on. The word I get out of Washington is that they don?t want to challenge this because it would be in fact a felony offense and in some cases may be even treasonous and [they are] afraid of a black backlash from some of the urban areas,? Vallely said.

?But that?s a very poor excuse for not taking necessary steps to make sure this president in fact is a legitimate president under Article 2 and he is a born U.S. citizen.?

The departments of government designed to uncover wrongdoing, in this case, are on the wrong side, he said.

?I think they?re (the FBI) covering for this administration. I think the corruption within this administration is so proliferated through the agencies of government now, we?re just in a bad situation here. I think the lack of confidence in our government is growing and many feel that not only all the members of Congress but even our courts are corrupted at this time,? he said.

The questions over Obama?s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office under the requirements in the Constitution that call for a ?natural born citizen? have been raised since before he was elected.

Read more.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 16:49
Comentarios (1)  | Enviar



A QUES?TION OF ELIGIBILITY

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=311433




WND Exclusive
A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY

Ex-CIA: 'Forged document'

released as birth certificate

Gen. Paul Vallely: Congress afraid

to probe 'possible felony' over fears

of 'black backlash'


Posted: June 15, 2011
3:09 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
??2011?WND

?

?

Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, the chief of Stand Up America, a national security expert and Fox News contributor, says the "Certificate of Live Birth" released in April by the White House as "proof positive" of President Obama's Hawaiian birth is a forgery, but the FBI is covering the fraud and no one in Congress is willing to tackle the situation because of fears of a "black backlash" if the failings of the nation's first black president are revealed.

In an interview today with Greg Corombos for WND, Vallely, who previously has expressed concerns about whether the Obama administration is in violation of the U.S. Constitution, said, "His actual birth certificate has never been found in Hawaii nor released from Hawaii hospital there, Kapiolani hospital there, if it in fact did exist."

"We've had three CIA agents, retired, and some of their analytical associates look at it, and all came to the same conclusion, that even the long-form was a forged document," Vallely said.

Get the New York Times best-seller "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President," autographed by Jerome Corsi, Ph.D.

"No members of Congress will take this on. The word I get out of Washington is that they don't want to challenge this because it would be in fact a felony offense and in some cases may be even treasonous and [they are] afraid of a black backlash from some of the urban areas," Vallely said.



Read more: Ex-CIA: 'Forged document' released as birth certificate http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=311433#ixzz1PTNpVMTF

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 16:31
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?

http://www.usasurvival.org/ck06.16.2011.html

June 28 at the National Press Club in the Holeman Lounge from 10-4 p.m.

-------------

A light lunch and refreshments will be served.?
Free and open to the public and the press

Former FBI Agent Rick Hahn on ?Why Eric Holder Must Go??



Richard ?Rick? Hahn?retired from the FBI after a distinguished career that spanned 32 years. He retired in 1999 from the position of Senior Supervisory Agent of the FBI office in Long Beach, California. As an Agent he specialized in investigations of domestic and international terrorist organizations. He organized multi-agencytask forces which brought about the arrest and prosecution of terrorists. He also led a landmark investigation that that located and penetrated the first active terrorist safe house ever found in America. In 1984 he was the recipient of the Attorney General?s Distinguished Service Award for his work in counter-terrorism. He is also the author of the book?American Terrorists The True Story of The FALN, America?s Most Prolific Terror Group,?which is pending publication.

?

?

?Castro?s Terror Plots and Agents of Influence in the U.S.?

Humberto Fontova?is a well-known author and writer who was born in Havana, Cuba, but grew up in New Orleans. He graduated from the University of New Orleans with a degree in Political Science. He received his Masters Degree from Tulane University in Latin American Studies. In 2005, he released his third book which is a departure from his earlier writings into a more political genre,?Fidel: Hollywood's Favorite Tyrant.?In early 2007, his 4th book was released.?Exposing the Real Che Guevara and the Useful Idiots who Idolize Him.

?

The first 50 to register and attend receive a free copy of Humberto Fontova?s book, Fidel: Hollywood's Favorite Tyrant,

and the DVD film, ?Che: The Other Side of an Icon,?

produced by Agustin Blazquez

Contacts:

To register please call Phil Kent? (404) 226-3549? [email protected]

For additional information, please contact Cliff Kincaid 443-964-8208 [email protected]? www.usasurvival.org


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:44
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

Obama is ineligible for the Presidency according to the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution. Congress knows that there is sufficient evidence of felonies to warrant an investigation

Obama?s ineligibility: A willfully ignorant Congress

Share104 | Bookmark and Share

?- Lawrence Sellin??Thursday, June 16, 2011

imageMake no mistake about it. Congress has chosen cowardice and political expediency over honesty and the rule of law.

Congress knows that Barack Hussein Obama is ineligible for the Presidency according to the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution.

They know that there is sufficient evidence of felonies to warrant an investigation.


They will do nothing. They will continue the cover-up. They are afraid for their jobs because they are complicit in the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.

Congress does not seem to understand that willful negligence to uphold the law will eventually lead to chaos.

They don?t care and we need to inform them more forcefully that we will not permit them to destroy our country.

Need an example of their subterfuge?

All you need to do is write a letter to any member of Congress questioning Obama?s eligibility or asking why his alleged felonies have not been investigated.

This week?s willful ignorance award goes to the ever-arrogant Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) from an email dated June 13, 2011:

?As a Senator representing Colorado, I want to speak very clearly on this issue. President Barack Obama is a ?natural born? citizen of America, and he is eligible to be our nation?s Commander in Chief.?

?The legality of his birth certificate has been verified by numerous federal agencies, third party investigative groups, national media outlets, and primary source documentation. The United States Department of State and the Hawaii Department of Health have both verified the legality of the ?Certification of Birth? document provided by President Obama.? In addition, highly regarded ?fact check? websites such as factcheck.org, snopes.com, and politifact.com support the findings of the federal agencies through their own independent investigations.?

It is a shame that Bennet knows so little about the Constitution or the difference between ?citizen? and ?natural born citizen?.

Hawaii?s state health director, Chiyome Fukino, and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have not affirmed that Obama?s Certificate of Live Birth (birth certificate) is genuine.

There has never been any vetting or investigations of Obama?s eligibility by federal agencies. None of the third parties mentioned by Bennet are objective and non-partisan. It?s a sham.

In fact, there is far more evidence from independent third parties demonstrating that Obama?s Certificate of Live Birth, which he presented as his own during the April 27, 2011 press conference, is a forgery.

Honorable Mention in the category of Congressional willful ignorance goes to Trent Franks (R-AZ) and Tom Cole (R-OK) for the content of their constituent letters of January 21, 2011 and May 26, 2011, respectively.

?We determined, based on the information available at the time, that the evidence suggesting that the President was not a natural born citizen was not sufficient to overcome the evidence suggesting that he in fact was a natural born citizen: specifically, legal certification by Hawaiian authorities declaring that Mr. Obama was in fact born in Hawaii, coupled with corroborating birth announcements in the Hawaiian newspapers at the time of his birth.?

Hey Franks, it?s in his book and on his birth certificate. Based on his father?s Kenyan birth, Obama was never eligible to be President.

And newspaper clippings as evidence to be President? Seriously?

?As you know, on December 8, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case filed by a New Jersey voter who questioned whether President Barack Obama was a ?natural born? American, a prerequisite for the White House. As the Supreme Court has considered and rejected this case, I consider the issue to be closed.?

Cole?s response is, quite literally, a ?no-brainer?. Either Cole doesn?t have a brain or he thinks his constituents don?t.

Cole doesn?t seem to grasp the difference between a case being heard and dismissed, and a case not being heard and dismissed.? There has yet to be an adjudication of the law and the facts concerning Obama?s credentials.

To be fair to our distinguished elected officials, the responses of the members of Congress were never meant to be accurate answers. They are cover stories intended to ?blow off? constituents? inquires.

I am not talking about a few rotten apples in the barrel. I am talking about Congress, as an institution, lying to the American people, disregarding the Constitution and flouting the rule of law.

Would Congress start to understand their dereliction of duty, if ordinary Americans began to emulate their behavior?

Do you have ideas about legally fighting back? Mail them to me and I will post them confidentially in upcoming articles.


Author
Lawrence Sellin

Lawrence Sellin
Most recent columns

? Canada Free Press 2011

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. receives hate mail at [email protected]



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:33
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?
This is the first in a series examining the role supporters of Barack Obama have played in forging fraudulent birth certificates..





A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY

Obama forgers admit they

produced phony documents

Radical supporters of president

'punked birthers'


Posted: June 13, 2011
8:00 pm Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
??2011?WND

?

?

This is the first in a series examining the role supporters of Barack Obama have played in forging fraudulent birth certificates..

NEW YORK ? Radical supporters of Barack Obama have openly admitted to forging Obama birth certificates, going so far as to identify themselves by their usernames to claim responsibility on Internet blogs.

They have described their activities as satire, a tactic designed to deflect criminal charges that might otherwise be filed against them for producing fraudulent official government documents.

As WND has reported in a three-part series, published here, here, and here, scanner expert Doug Vogt has filed criminal charges with the FBI, alleging that the Obama birth certificate released by the White House April 27 was fraudulently created.

Get the inside details on what could be the most serious constitutional crisis in the nation's history, in "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President."



Read more: Obama forgers admit they produced phony documents http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=310949#ixzz1PT70kHY6
?
?
This is the second in a series examining the role supporters of Barack Obama have played in forging fraudulent birth certificates..



WND Exclusive
A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY

Meet 'PJ Foggy,' birth

certificate fraudster

Disbarred attorney organized

'birther punking' scheme


Posted: June 16, 2011
1:00 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
??2011?WND

?



This is the second in a series examining the role supporters of Barack Obama have played in forging fraudulent birth certificates..

NEW YORK ? At the center of the network of Obama radical activists who forged and distributed a fraudulent Kenyan birth certificate in August 2009 was former California lawyer William L. Bryan.

Bryan posts as an Obama operative under the username "PJ Foggy" and lives in Raleigh, N.C., where he runs a flower shop.

Under the cover of his username, Bryan and his associates have engaged in an aggressive campaign to disrupt any and all attempts to pursue legal challenges to Obama's eligibility, while seeking to ridicule in vile and abusive terms those who dare advance or support publicly such legal efforts.

In a manner reminiscent of Donald Segretti's dirty tricks during the Watergate era, interfering in the 1970s with the political campaigns of such Democratic Party presidential hopefuls as then-Sen. Edmund Muskie of Maine, Bryan and his associates have utilized the Internet to plan and promote their disruptive name-calling efforts.

Get the inside details on what could be the most serious constitutional crisis in the nation's history, in "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President" - autographed by the author.

Reading Bryan's many Internet posts, there appears to be no concern that advertising their activities to "punk birthers" might draw attention to the various state or federal statutes they may have violated to achieve their aims.



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:25
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

Townhall?Columnists?Victor Davis Hanson

Our Reactionary President

6/16/2011 | Email Victor Davis Hanson | Columnist's Archive

Barack Obama is the most reactionary president in the recent history of the United States. Obama seems intent on turning back the clock to the good old days of the 1960s and 1970s, when rigid political orthodoxy, not an open mind, once guided government.

Take the economy. The 1980s implosion of communism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union proved that state control of the means of production guaranteed poverty and worse. The current insolvent and fragmenting European Union, and the stagnant economics of the exploding Middle East, remind us that state socialism does not work.

Why, then, would Obama, in horse-and-buggy fashion, go back to such fossilized concepts as absorbing the nation's health care system, increasing the federal government's role in the economy by taking over automobile corporations, borrowing $5 trillion to spend on new entitlements, or proposing an array of much higher taxes -- all in a vain effort to ensure an equality of result?

Almost every key indicator of the current economy -- unemployment, deficits, housing, energy -- argues that Obama's reactionary all-powerful statist approach has only made things far worse.

In a bygone era without full workers' compensation, unemployment insurance and overtime pay, big unions ran the United States. Today less than 7 percent of Americans belong to them.

Yet President Obama wants to block the Boeing aircraft company from opening an assembly plant in South Carolina, on the grounds that it is a right-to-work state and new assembly workers might be free to reject union representation. The administration is now allowing union-backed Democrats in Congress to block free-trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea in order to limit competition with domestic unionized industries.

Apparently the decades-old idea that globalized free trade encourages competition, enhances productivity, lowers prices for strapped consumers and helps developing nations never existed.

Obama is still bragging about massive federal subsidies to the wind and solar power industries, while making it nearly impossible to obtain new leases for fossil fuel exploration. Yet for all the billions spent, the percentage of new energy produced by subsidized high-cost "green" projects has not changed much.

Meanwhile, revolutionary breakthroughs in the exploration for and recovery of natural gas, oil, tar sands, shale oil and coal deposits in just a year or two have vastly expanded the nation's fossil fuel reserves and the ability to produce clean energy from them.

It turns out that the U.S. may be the world's new Saudi Arabia when it comes to known reserves of all forms of gas, oil and coal. As our president still harps on solar panels and windmills, private enterprise on its own is exploring new ways of powering industries, homes and cars with cheap and plentiful natural gas -- hoping to free us from dependence on OPEC.

On illegal immigration, the president sounds like he's a calcified relic from the 1960s, as he evokes the southern border in terms of civil rights and racial prejudice. Those blinders explain why he recently suggested that Latinos "punish" their supposed conservative "enemies," and quite falsely claimed that the border fence was completed, despite the wish of his Republican opponents supposedly to add moats and alligators. All that rhetoric sounds like it came from a beads and bell-bottoms '60s campus activist, not the 21st century White House.

In the coming decades, the United States will need new legal immigrants -- those of all races and from all places of origin who are skilled and highly educated, or who have capital. The new critical benchmark to keep America competitive will be an immigrant's merit -- not just his race, family ties, proximity to the border, or his use as a pawn in partisan politics.

The United States is now a multiracial society, one never more intermarried and assimilated. Yet this administration still acts as if particular racial groups are forever ossified in amber, and so deserve particular racial set-aside spoils. The attorney general weirdly talks of "my people." The president himself offered a campaign video in 2010 targeted in part to those defined by their race, as part of a larger strategy to appeal to racial block voting. Promises of more federal entitlement money are still couched in thinly veiled racial terms -- as if there is no awareness that five decades of such Great Society programs have done much to ensure dependency and destroy the traditional inner-city family.

"Hope and change" turned out not to be a liberal call to consider new ways of solving problems. It was not even a conservative slogan to keep all that has worked well in the past.

Instead, Barack Obama proved to be an old-fashioned reactionary. He hoped to change things back to the politically correct 1960s and 1970s way of doing things -- whether it ever worked or not.

Tags: Jobs , Budget and Government , Government Spending , Jobs and Economy , Economy , Barack Obama

?

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:29
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Martes, 14 de junio de 2011

Share on Facebook



WND Exclusive
A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY

Hawaii claims

Obama 'birth

certificate' is

'confidential'

Refuses subpoena

because it requires

disclosure of 'privileged'

matter


Posted: June 14, 2011
8:10 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
??2011?WND

?

?
?

The state of Hawaii claims that the "birth certificate" for Barack Obama in its files ? presumably the document that was copied and distributed by the White House ? remains confidential.

The image released April 27 by the White House was described by administration officials as "proof positive" of Obama's Hawaiian birth.

?


Image released by the White House April 27, 2011

?

At that time, officials in Hawaii's health department and governor's office refused to provide confirmation to WND that the image released by the White House accurately represented the birth documentation in the state's custody.

Get the New York Times best-seller "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President," by Jerome Corsi.

Now, officials have refused to respond to a subpoena requesting the birth record, citing confidentiality.

The request came from California attorney Orly Taitz in her lawsuit against the commissioner of the Social Security Administration over records related to Obama. A judge in Washington, D.C., recently moved the case into the discovery stage, at which point attorneys are allowed to subpoena records that may prove their case.

The case brought by Taitz is seeking the original application for Obama's Social Security number, a document that could reveal information about the president's early life relevant to his eligibility to be president.

? ?

However, in a response dated yesterday, Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill T. Nagamine refused to respond, according to documents obtained by WND.

"These subpoenas would require disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, and there is no exception that applies to allow disclosure to you," she told Taitz. "Vital statistics records, such as birth certificates, are protected by strict confidentiality requirements under state law."

?


President Obama in the Oval Office

?

She also raised the complaint that the subpoena was not "served upon my client in accordance with the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."

"Thus, it is our position that we have no duty to respond."

Taitz wondered to WND just what kind of "privacy" would be under protection since Obama himself has put the document in the public domain. She said she would continue her case.

The subpoena named Lorett Fuddy, the chief of the Hawaii Department of Health, and sought the "original 1961 typewritten birth certificate # 10641 for Barack Obama, II."

The image released by Obama has been challenged by a number of document imaging analysts as a fraud, and it doesn't align with descriptions of it by Obama supporters.

For instance, two weeks before Obama finally released his "long-form birth certificate," Hawaii's former Health Department chief Chiyome Fukino ? the one official who claimed to have examined the original birth document under lock and key in Hawaii ? was interviewed by NBC News' national investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff, who reported that Fukino told him she had seen the original birth certificate and that it was "half typed and half handwritten."

However, the document released by the White House was entirely typed. Only the signatures and two dates at the very bottom were "handwritten." What Fukino described is apparently a different document from what Obama released to the public.




Read more: Hawaii claims Obama 'birth certificate' is 'confidential' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=311113#ixzz1PIOv8Nf5

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 19:31
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Lunes, 13 de junio de 2011

Share on Facebook

Monday, June 13, 2011

LTC Terry Lakin: Congress & Supreme Court Need to Address Obama's Eligibility; Birth Certificate Must be Validated; Hold Media Accountable

?


LTC Terry Lakin Discusses the Future of our Country

LTC Terry Lakin discusses issues concerning the trial, his imprisonment & release, his future, his book, and the future of our country. In 2010 LTC Lakin, a highly decorated army doctor, invited his own court martial in the hope that the facts concerning Constitutional eligibility for the office of the president would be forthcoming. Instead he was denied all discovery and sentenced to six months in Fort Leavenworth with loss of his pay, his pension, and a discharge from the Army. In this video he shares some thoughts about the future of our country. Learn more at: http://www.terrylakin.com



News Release: Legal Proof That pResident Obama?s Certificate Of Live Birth Is A Forgery. -Details here.?

Confirmed: Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of President -Details here.?

Notre Dame Professor Charles Rice: Obama's eligibility could be biggest political fraud in the history of the world; time for a new approach -Details here.?

Attorney Mario Apuzzo: All presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur and Barack Obama, met the ?natural born Citizen? criteria. -Details here.?

Commander Charles Kerchner: List of U.S. Presidents - Eligibility under Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) or Natural Born Citizen (NBC) Clause or Seated due to Election Fraud -Details here.?

Jack Cashill Discusses Obama's Fraudulent Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants -Video here.?

Detailed reports on Obama's SS# can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here,? here, here, and here. Visit the Birther Vault for the long list of evidence against Hawaii officials and all of the people questioning Obama's eligibility; [http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/08/video-ltc-terry-lakins-attorney-on-cnn.html].
LTC Lakin - A Sampling of Common Blunders and Uncorroborated Statements by Members of Congress about Obama?...
Obama's Lack of Eligibility & Document Fraud - The 3 Enablers! Wash Times Natl Wkly 20110516 pg 9

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 18:31
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?

Monday, June 13, 2011

Archive Index Systems News Release: Final Analysis of pResident Obama?s Certificate of Live Birth; The Laws that Have Been Broken

?

News Release of June 12, 2011
Final Analysis of President Obama?s Certificate of Live Birth
By Douglas Vogt

Re: Legal proof that President Obama?s Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery.

It is no longer necessary to prove where President Obama was born. The provable crime is now FORGERY of a government document used for identification, which is a FELONY.

Dear Fellow Americans,

First of all I want to say that it does not matter if you are a Republican or Democrat. What Obama and company did was lie to all of us and was aided by companies in the media who looked the other way, in essence they covered up for him. What I have presented is irrefutable proof that the Certificate of Live Birth that President Obama presented to the world on April 27, 2011 is a fraudulently created document put together using the Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator programs and the creation of this forgery of a public document constitutes a class B felony in Hawaii and multiple violations under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Sec.1028, and therefore an impeachable offense. This whole affair is a serious national security issue and should not be construed as merely partisan politics or a racial issue. When this comes to the public?s attention, it will be the greatest scandal in the country?s history?nothing comes even close. This will surpass all previous scandals including the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration.

Who has been notified:

A formal notice that multiple felonies had been committed under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Section 1028. I mailed the notice to Director Robert Mueller III at the FBI headquarters in Washington DC on May 25th and 26th (RE461679786US and EG410045020US). A copy of that notice was also mailed to Special Agent in Charge Frank Montoya in Honolulu, HI (70103090000164047965 and 9410803699300019474252). They were mailed there because that is where the crimes occurred. I have mailed copies of the full report to Republican members of the Senate on the Homeland Security Committee and on the House side the Congressman on the Ethics and Homeland Security Committees. I have also mailed it to additional Congressman.

What you can do is write to your congressman and ask them to have hearing on this very serious matter. Write to Director Mueller of the FBI and ask him to please do an investigation and secure the evidence as soon as possible. The country is in great danger because of the actions this administration has done.

It does not matter if you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent; Obama has deceived all of us and has lied his way to the top with the help of many leftists in and out of government. This should be a nonpartisan issue and should be examined as a grave national security issue.

The Laws that Have Been Broken

I am not an attorney but was an accountant and worked for three CPA firms before I went into business for myself. I have read and understood the Federal Tax code, so understanding Title 18 is no problem. I have listed in Appendix D the entire section of the Federal Code that directly covers the seriousness of this fraud.

Under Hawaii State code ?708-851, it would be forgery in the first degree which is a Class B Felony (Appendix B).

The Federal charges are much more extensive because of the nature of the crime, and who did it and the ramifications to the country. It would not surprise me that maximum prison sentences were given out but of course a judge and jury would have to determine that. The Federal law is covered under Title 18-Crimes and Criminal Procedures; Part 1-Crimes, Chapter 47- Fraud and False Statements, Section-1028-Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information is the main section that the forgery of a Certificate of Live Birth would be covered under. 1. Forgery of a public document; 2. Conspiracy to commit forgery, because Obama had to have paid someone to create the forgery and it is evident others were involved; 3. Obstruction of Justice if this went to trial; 4 and 5. If the conspirators had bribed a County Clerk(s) to insert this PDF file into the county?s document imaging system, you would have bribery and tampering with government records. All of these are felonies and are impeachable offenses. The penalty for committing document forgery is up to 15 years in prison and for just forging the unique Certificate number is another 5 years. At this point it does not matter if he was born in Kenya or Hawaii. He is now facing forgery charges and the rest.

If Congress does not hold a hearing on this forgery, the vast majority of Americans will lose faith in our country?s legal system and governmental institutions, and you don?t want to go there. As it is, the public poll numbers for Congress are in the low two digits. Congress and the ruling elite have to decide whether we are a country of laws or are the laws only enforced on the little people and those outside of the ruling political party.

My Credentials

I have a unique background for analyzing this document. I owned a typesetting company for 11 years so I know type and form design very well. I currently own Archive Index Systems since 1993, which sells all types of document scanners worldwide and also developed document imaging software (TheRepository). I know how the scanners work. I have also sold other document imaging programs, such as Laser Fiche, Liberty and Alchemy. I have sold and installed document imaging systems in city and county governments, so I know their procedures with imaging systems and everything about the design of such programs. This will be important in understanding what has happened with Obama?s Certificate of Live Birth. -Source. Final report embedded below.
News Release: A Final Long Report - Obama's Certificate of Live Birth - 6/12/2011

Interview: Document & Scanner Expert Douglas Vogt Explains Criminal Complaint Filed with FBI Charging Obama with Document Fraud. -Video here.

Here's three articles explaining the criminal complaint that scanner expert Doug Vogt filed with the FBI. Part 3 here. Part 2 here and Part 1 here.?

Busted: White House Now Claims They Ordered Short-Form COLB From Hawaii Department Of Health In 2008 Yet COLB Is Date Stamped 2007 -Details here.?

Confirmed: Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of President -Details here.?

Notre Dame Professor Charles Rice: Obama's eligibility could be biggest political fraud in the history of the world; time for a new approach -Details here.?

Attorney Mario Apuzzo: All presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur and Barack Obama, met the ?natural born Citizen? criteria. -Details here.?

Commander Charles Kerchner: List of U.S. Presidents - Eligibility under Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) or Natural Born Citizen (NBC) Clause or Seated due to Election Fraud -Details here.?

Jack Cashill Discusses Obama's Fraudulent Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants -Video here.?

Detailed reports on Obama's SS# can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. Visit the Birther Vault for the long list of evidence against Hawaii officials and all of the people questioning Obama's eligibility; [http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/08/video-ltc-terry-lakins-attorney-on-cnn.html].
Yes Virginia-There is a Usurper in the White House-Obama Long Form BC Forged! Wash Times NW 20110516 pg 5

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 18:25
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Jueves, 09 de junio de 2011

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Attorney Takes Aim at Hawaii Department of Health Official: Threatens Legal Action for Aiding & Abetting Obama's Forged Birth Certificate


Attorney Orly Taitz Takes Aim at Hawaii Department of Health Official: Threatens Legal Action for Aiding & Abetting Obama's Terribly Forged Birth Certificate. The full text and UIPA Appeal embedded...

Interview: Document & Scanner Expert Douglas Vogt Explains Criminal Complaint Filed with FBI Charging Obama with Document Fraud...

Video: Dr. Manning interviews Douglas Vogt, CEO of Archive Index. Doug Vogt filed a 22-page criminal complaint with the FBI regarding Obama's online birth certificate posted on the White House server....

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 13:08
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?????
Editorials A Conspiracy to Change the ?natural born Citizen? Requirement

A Conspiracy to Change the ?natural born Citizen? Requirement ?

?IT?S TREASON? by Neil Turner (Jun. 9, 2011) ? If you think that our Congress-members do not know about nor understand the meaning of the ?natural born Citizen? requirements for one to be President and...

June 9 2011 / No comment / Read More ?
Citizen Presses Senator to Investigate Obama?s Long-Form Birth Certificate

Citizen Presses Senator to Investigate Obama?s Long-Form Birth Certificate ?

?A FRAUD AND FORGERY? by jtx June 8, 2011 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510-0504 Subj: Felonious criminal document fraud charges with a detailed analysis of...

June 8 2011 / No comment / Read More ?
Citizen Eligibility Letter Published in Local Mainstream Newspaper!

Citizen Eligibility Letter Published in Local Mainstream Newspaper! ?

?STILL NOT CONVINCED? (Jun. 8, 2011) ? The following letter was published in The Bakersfield Californian on June 1, 2011. The release of Barack Obama?s alleged long-form birth certificate prompted boasts that it proves he...

June 8 2011 / No comment / Read More ?

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 13:03
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Mi?rcoles, 08 de junio de 2011

Share on Facebook

?

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Taitz Files Motion for Default Judgement in FOIA Lawsuit Regarding Obama's Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants

Attorney Orly Taitz files Motion for Default Judgement in the Taitz v. Astrue FOIA lawsuit regarding Obama's never-issued social security number reserved for Connecticut applicants. Full text and Motion...

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

50-Year Typography Expert: Obama Online Birth Certificate is Proof of Fraud; Used Different Birth Certificates to Produce Obama Document

Via WND: - Expert: Obama doc is 'proof' ? of fraud - Typeface analysis shows images come from different machines - Jerome CorsiThe online image of a Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" was trumpeted...

Monday, June 6, 2011

Attorney Taitz Files Motion for Clarification Regarding Obama's Never-Issued Social Security Number Reserved For Connecticut Applicants

Attorney Dr. Orly Taitz Files Motion for Clarification Regarding Obama's Never-Issued Social Security Number Reserved For Connecticut Applicants... The full text and motion filed in the Taitz v Astrue...

LTC Terry Lakin & Dr. Jerome Corsi Interview: Lakin Offered Book Deal By Nationally Known Author; Undocumented Worker In White House

Video: LTC Terry Lakin & Dr. Jerome Corsi interviewed on the Terry Lakin Action Fund Radio Show: Lakin offered a book deal by a nationally known author. The interview aired 6/6/2011. Please visit...

Private Investigator: New Details About Obama's Social Security Number Reserved For Connecticut Applicants; Application Date Narrowed Down

Update: ?IT?S THE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, STUPID!? w/Susan Danielsby Helen TanseyJune 6, 2011Back on April 13, 2011, the T-Room predicted that President Obama would soon post a scanned version of what...

Sunday, June 5, 2011

FBI Criminal Complaint Details Birth Certificate Forgery: Imaging Expert Outlines Case

This is the second of three articles explaining the criminal complaint that scanner-expert Doug Vogt filed last week with the FBI.Via WND: - Criminal complaint details birth-certificate 'forgery' -...

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:25
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

THE PRESIDENCY
Please read this. These are the questions that come up, and they are something to think about.
SOME WILL APPRECIATE THIS AND SOME WILL NOT.
HOWEVER, ALL OF IT IS TRUE.

If George W. Bush had doubled the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years,
would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had criticized a state law that he admitted he never even read,
would you think that he is just an ignorant hot head?

If George W. Bush joined the country of Mexico and sued a state in the United States to force that state to continue to allow illegal immigration, would you question
his patriotism and wonder who's side he was on?
If George Bush had pronounced the Marine Corps like Marine Corpse
would you think him an idiot?

If George W. Bush had put 87,000 workers out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records of any industry because one company had an accident would you have agreed?

If George W. Bush had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87000 American workers unemployed would you support him?

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a TelePrompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics,
would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift,
would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the nonexistent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?


If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States ,
would you have said that he is clueless.

If George W. Bush would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in Texas , would you have thought he was a self important, conceited, egotistical jerk.
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had misspelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoes as proof of what a dunce he is?


If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?

If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?


If George W.. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America , would you have approved.


If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?
So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 24 months -- so you'll have one year and ten months to come up with an answer.

Every statement in this email is factual and directly attributable to Barrack Hussein Obama. Every bumble is a matter of record and completely verifiable.


EVERYONE SHOULD READ THIS...
I WONDER HOW MANY WILL FORWARD THIS ?
_______________________________________________
?

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:20
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?
After two years
of Obama ...
Here's your change!
January 2009
TODAY
% chg
Source
Avg.. Retail price/gallon gas in U.S.
$1.83
$3.44
84%
1
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel)
$43..48
$99..02
127.7%
2
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel)
$38..74
$91..38
135.9%
2
Gold: London (per troy oz.)
$853.25
$1,369.50
60.5%
2
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL
$3.56
$6.33
78.1%
2
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL
$9.66
$13..75
42.3%
2
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. Fob
$13..37
$35..39
164.7%
2
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall
7.6%
9.4%
23.7%
3
Unemployment rate, blacks
12.6%
15.8%
25.4%
3
Number of unemployed
11,616,000
14,485,000
24.7%
3
Number of fed. Employees
2,779,000
2,840,000
2.2%
3
Real median household income
$50,112
$49,777
-0.7%
4
Number of food stamp recipients
31,983,716
43,200,878
35.1%
5
Number of unemployment benefit recipients
7,526,598
9,193,838
22.2%
6
Number of long-term unemployed
2,600,000
6,400,000
146.2%
3
Poverty rate, individuals ?
13.2%
14.3%
8.3%
4
People in poverty in U.S. ?
39,800,000
43,600,000
9.5%
4
U.S.. Rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings
5
9
n/a
10
Present Situation Index ?
29.9
23.5
-21.4%
11
Failed banks ?
140
164
17.1%
12
U.S.. Dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate
89.76
82.03
-8.6%
2
U.S.. Money supply, M1, in billions ?
1,575.1
1,865.7
18.4%
13
U.S.. Money supply, M2, in billions ?
8,310.9
8,852.3
6.5%
13
National debt, in trillions
$10..627
$14..052
32.2%
14
Just take this last item: In the last two years we have accumulated national debt at a rate more than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation's history.
Over 27 times as fast. Metaphorically speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane.
27 times faster, it would be doing 7,555 MPH! ?
Sources:
(1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. Of Labor;
(7) FHFA; (8) Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC;
(13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury
-----------------------------

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:15
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
S?bado, 04 de junio de 2011

Share on Facebook

Texas Citizen Confronts U.S. Congressman about Obama Impeachment Pledge

??
?

IS THERE ONE PERSON IN WASHINGTON, DC WHO WILL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION?

June 4, 2011

Ralph Hall was born on May 3, 1923, and is the oldest member of the U.S. House of Representatives at age 88

Dear Editor:

The following letter was sent to Rep. Ralph Hall of Texas?s Fourth Congressional District:

An Open Letter to the Honorable Ralph Hall
Republican * 4th District, Texas * 16th Term
104 North San Jacinto Street, Rockwall, TX 75087
2405 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515

Following the mid-term election held on November 2nd, 2010, there was an article in our hometown newspaper quoting you as stating you would be doing something I thought was very commendable. You told the reporter you had a file in your office containing 35 offenses by Barack Obama that you felt were probable cause for impeachment, and you would be presenting that file to the new Republican Speaker of the House after January 2011. I remember at the time I sent you an email congratulating you on winning another term, said I was glad I had voted for you,? and thanked you for your good sense in understanding the times.

While the article didn?t mention specifics I can guess what was in the file. It probably had such things as:

  • Election fraud involving Acorn, Obama bypassing campaign finance law by removing all restrictions on his campaign website on credit card payments and receiving over $33.8 million in foreign contributions, using the New Black Panther Party to intimate voters, then the squelching of the investigation, well lets just call it ??all that 2008 election fiasco?.
  • The violation of the Posse Comitatus Act on? March 10, 2009 when 22 military police were sent to the town of Samson, Alabama to act as law enforcement officers, (something of course only permitted by executive order in a state of emergency), also the use of military police at the 135th Kentucky Derby horse race at Churchill Downs on May 2, 2009, in Louisville, Kentucky. ( AP photo you?ll have to follow the link). Both beg the question of whether the President gave the executive order to use the military or if it was done without the Commander-in Chief?s knowledge.
  • The potential job offers floated to Joe Sestak and Andrew Romanoff to try and keep them from running for the Senate.
  • Buying Congressional support for Obama-Care with the ?Cornhusker Kickback?, ?Louisiana Purchase? and etc.

Well, Sir, I could go and on, and so could you, and so could many American citizens. I could write about Obama using the Frances Fox Piven strategy, breaking contracts with Chrysler and GM bondholders? then paying off the unions with the money, closing thousands of independently owned and operated auto dealerships irregardless of state franchise laws, a President of the United States accepting the Chairmanship of the UN Security Council and on and on and on.

I?m sure at least some of the above, if not all were in your file.

I have often wondered what ever happened to that?

In January of this year when you handed over the file what did Speaker Boehner say? Did he tell you it would merely tie the House of Representatives up in knots and there was more important work to be done? Did he say he thought American citizens were suffering from ?impeachment fatigue? after Clinton and all the talk of impeaching Bush over the War Powers Resolution?? Did he suggest that if the Republican majority in the House were to vote for impeachment the Senate would never follow through and so what would be the point? Did he hint that if in 2011 you brought articles of impeachment against Obama , then surely in 2012? IF a? Republican candidate were to win the Presidency, Democrats would try and impeach the new Republican President at the drop of a hat and America would forever be in perpetual impeachment mode? (I could argue exactly the opposite might be the case, but that's beside the point).? Did he say the Republican Party could be just as effective, but appear far more ?gentlemanly?, if they stayed with trying to repeal and de-fund the Obama damage rather than impeach him?

Since I can not find any reference anywhere of you ever mentioning it again, I think I can guess the answer must of been something along those lines. At any rate the answer was ?no, we will not consider it?, was it not? Did he even mention the ?people? or the audacity of a President violating his oath to defend the US Constitution or did he only speak of the grand old Republican Party? Ahh well, no matter, what?s done is done.

So?moving along, I have good news and I have bad news.

First the good news.

The good news is I have no intention of ever writing another letter or email demanding that you impeach Obama, and I?m sure your staff will be relieved to know that. Yes,Sir, this open letter is the last, from now on I?m done badgering you about it, as I?m sure both you and I have much better things to do. I appreciate your efforts and believe you truly do try to represent this staunch conservative district in the northeast corner of Texas and you would if you could put that file to good use, But impeachment would probably never work anyway. So I?ve changed my mind and no longer think you should even try.

Let me be clear?yes, Sir you did read that right, I do NOT think the House of Representatives should ever try to impeach Mr. Obama! Mainly because I have concluded it can not be done and therefore would be a colossal waste of time and effort. For you see, it has become clear to me that the Obama Administration has completely overthrown the Constitutional? principle of the balance of power and both the Congressional and Judicial branches of the government are utterly powerless against him and his Administration.

Based on the following trend?in my opinion?it?s a reasonable conclusion:

  • When Obama-Care was ruled unconstitutional and a Federal Court ordered it to halt, the Obama Administration simply stated it would implement it anyway, (in addition to the Federal Court ruling, it?s ridiculously un-affordable and the American people never wanted it in the first place) and now there is a ?waiver-gate? going on yet?Congress does nothing.
  • When Congress refused to pass the Carbon Cap & Trade Bill, determining it was unconstitutional, the Obama Administration began ordering the hand picked EPA to enact provisions anyway, and ?Congress does nothing.
  • When Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin whose numerous awards and decorations include the Army Flight Surgeon Badge, Combat Medical Badge, the Bronze Star Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal with two Oak Leaf Clusters, the Army Achievement Medal with one Oak Leaf Clusters, the National Defense Service Medal with Bronze Service Star, the Armed Forces Expedition Medal, the Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon sixth award and the NATO service medal, asked his Congressional members to help him confirm his orders were from an eligible Commander-in Chief, ?Congress did nothing, thereby allowing that brave Patriot to go to Fort Leavenworth just because he dared to ask. And oh by the way, it appears the nation of Kenya is completely sold on the idea Barack Obama is both a citizen of Kenya and a citizen of America?(link) but the American Congress believes he has strictly American citizenship. So one of you are wrong. But rather than look into it ?Congress continues to do nothing.
  • When the first two moratoriums on Gulf Coast offshore oil drilling were declared unconstitutional and the ban was lifted by Federal Court, the Obama Administration simply ignored it and continues to ignore it and?Congress does nothing.
  • When Obama unilaterally commenced war against the Republic of Libya without consulting Congress and even the Progressive Caucus talked of bringing articles of impeachment, the Republicans did not seize the moment and so ?Congress did nothing.
  • In spite of the Defense of Marriage Act having been overwhelmingly passed by a vote of 85?14 in the Senate and a vote of 342?67 in the House before being signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, the Obama Administration has recently stated the Justice Department will no longer be enforcing that. In fact I believe Attorney General Eric Holder is on record as saying something, (that when translated into plain English), implies they?ll enforce all laws?when *they* find *them* reasonable! So in other words if they don?t find them reasonable, America is virtually without a Department of Justice in that area! And ?Congress does nothing.
  • Obama completely ignored Congress?s Constitutional obligation to vet Presidential appointees and started creating Czars accountable only to him?and Congress did nothing. Then when Congress made a budget deal that eliminated the funding for the health care, climate change, auto industry and urban affairs Czars, Obama issued a statement saying in effect, he would not be keeping that end of the deal anytime soon -thank you very much-and now I?m learning of a brand new Czar, some ?Director of Progressive Media & Online Response? that has dubbed himself ?the terminator.? And?Congress does nothing.

I?ll stop there but we both know that's only part of the story. I hope I have not misrepresented any of the facts. If I have made any mistakes please understand Sir, like many Americans I find myself living under a banner of ?Hopelessness and It?s Changing For The Worse? and by the time I spend the day helping to keep the proverbial wolf away from the door and?fill my so called ?leisure time? trying to figure out where my country is headed I?m almost too tired and depressed to even research and write a letter like this. But to the best of my ability and my understanding the above are all true and are but a fraction of the abuses of power this Administration has engaged in and the inability of Congress to stop them.

The bottom line is, by now it should be clear repealing, de-funding and depending upon court rulings does not work for people who imagine themselves above the law. And so I can?t help but conclude that its quite probable that the rest of Congress, besides yourself, fears if they ever were to come to their senses and work with you in drawing up articles of impeachment, Obama simply would send a polite little letter over to the House of Representatives informing them he had no intention of going along with that impeachment silliness and if Congress or the Judicial branch of government or anyone else in the nation did not like it?well? they could go fly a kite.

And that could get awkward!

And then if the House voted to impeach and the Senate were to find him guilty and vote to remove him from office, well then it probably would get downright nasty. Oh and there?s more? I suppose then he would be forced to just come right out, get it over with?and declare himself Caesar and our pitiful illusion of a Constitutional Republic would be shattered and we?d all have to face the truth. And that would not be good.

So I promise I won?t bug you about it again and that's the good news.

Now for the bad news.

Unfortunately, if you should decide this next election cycle to run for another term, I won?t be voting for you. It?s nothing personal against you, Sir and don?t worry about it too much because you see, I won?t be voting for any of your opponents either, be they Democrat, Libertarian, Independent, Tea Party, Mickey Mouse Club Party?or what-have-you. I?m just not voting for any candidate for District 4 Representative, nor will I vote for Senators or Presidents from now on.

Oh, I?ll still turn out to vote and try and continue to keep up with the various candidates for state and local offices. As you know we have many fine judges and law enforcement people here in NE Texas who do an excellent job of executing the duties of? their office and those Sheriff?s and Judges?deserve my vote. And on the state level I am very proud of the efforts of?Texas to try and push back the over-reaching Federal government, in spite of the Feds?threats of ?no fly zones? and lack of interest at looking?into the wild-fire damage in West Texas and etc.?Those efforts don?t always work but at least Texas speaks up and refuses to just go along with the herd. I thank the Good Lord Texas?is not the only state fighting off the Federal government, but I believe even if she stood alone, she would continue bravely on. As you well know, that's just kind of what we do down here in the Lone Star State, we see something that is just plain *flat out* wrong, we stand up against it and if it turns out we stand alone, well so be it. Therefore I?ll certainly keep voting for State Election Candidates. They deserve my vote.

But on the Federal level portion of the ballot???Well, unless something changes over there in Washington D.C. and changes big, I intend to start skipping over?several of those boxes on the 2012 ballot. It?s the Constitution, don?t you see? I still can recognize the reason?we call our Federally elected officials things like President and Vice-President of the United States, United States Senator, and United States House of Representative is because that's what the Constitution of the United States?refers to?them as. But that's the only part of the whole mess I can see having it?s basis in the Constitution.

Just their titles.

Have a good day, Sir.

Tracey M. Grissom

? 2011, The Post & Email. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 22:32
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?

German to English translation

Happy Birthday Barack Hussein Obama II Barry Sorento alias alias alias Barak Mounir Ubayd?
Christian or Muslim?
Americans or Africans?


A proverb says: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."I will never forget how the American presidential candidate John McCain by a nice old lady was asked if Obama was a Muslim. McCain simply replied, "No, ma'am, I think he is not a Muslim. He has even denied. "

The name of the U.S. president is Barack Hussein Obama and / or Barry Sorento and / or Barak Mounir Ubayd. He is the son of a Sunni Muslim, a proud member of a Sunni tribe in Kenya, a Kenyan born in Hawaii. The same strain has once massacred Kenyan Christians. Islam says that if the father is Muslim, and his son Muslim. But his parents' marriage did not last, and Obama's mother married a second time, again a Sunni Muslim. The family lived several years in Indonesia. There, Obama attended until the age of 11, a madrasa (Islamic school) and went to the mosque.
New! Click the words above to view alternate translations. Dismiss
The truth is that Obama since his marriage to his wife, Michelle goes to church. The town derives Rev. Jeremy Wright. But in an interview with George Stefanopolous Obama spoke at once of his "Muslim faith", but was immediately interrupted by Stefanopolous: "You my Christian faith ..." What Obama said. "Yes, my Christian faith" in the Quran in Surat IV, Verse 137: "Those who accept the faith (Islam) and then separate, and then take over again and then fall off - that Allah will forgive nor guide them right." (An interpretation says this means that a Muslim which drops from Islam must be killed.) Another passage speaks of the permission to lie to an "infidel" in the service of Allah. In other words, it is permissible for a Muslim to attend a church and pretending to be a Christian in order to achieve a purpose of Islam. (Article from "Israel Today ")


American and Kenyan (click to enlarge)?
New! Click the words above to view alternate translations. Dismiss

?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

?

Dienstag, 4. August 2009

Happy Birthday Barack Hussein Obama II alias Barry Sorento alias Barak Mounir Ubayd alias ???

Christ oder Muslim?
Amerikaner oder Afrikaner?



Ein Sprichwort sagt: ?Sch?nheit liegt im Auge des Betrachters.? Ich werde nie vergessen, wie der amerikanische Pr?sidentschaftskandidat John McCain von einer netten alten Dame gefragt wurde, ob Obama ein Moslem sei. McCain antwortete schlicht: ?Nein, Madam, ich glaube, er ist kein Moslem. Er hat es selbst geleugnet.?

Der Name des US-Pr?sidenten lautet Barack Hussein Obama und/oder Barry Sorento und/oder Barak Mounir Ubayd. Er ist Sohn eines sunnitischen Moslems, stolzes Mitglied eines sunnitischen Stammes in Kenia, als Sohn eines Kenianers in Hawaii geboren. Derselbe Stamm hat einst kenianische Christen niedergemetzelt. Der Islam sagt, wenn der Vater Moslem ist, ist auch sein Sohn Moslem. Doch die Ehe seiner Eltern hielt nicht, und Obamas Mutter heiratete zum zweiten Mal, wieder einen sunnitischen Moslem. Die Familie lebte etliche Jahre in Indonesien. Dort besuchte Obama bis zum Alter von 11 Jahren eine Madrassa (islamische Schule) und ging zur Moschee.

Wahr ist, dass Obama seit der Heirat mit seiner Ehefrau Michelle zur Kirche geht. Die Gemeinde leitet Rev. Jeremy Wright. Doch in einem Interview mit George Stefanopolous sprach Obama auf einmal von seinem ?moslemischen Glauben?, wurde aber gleich von Stefanopolous unterbrochen: ?Sie meinen christlichen Glauben?? Worauf Obama sagte: ?Ja, meinen christlichen Glauben.? Im Koran steht in der Sure IV, Vers 137: ?Diejenigen, die den Glauben (Islam) ?bernehmen und dann sich trennen und dann wieder ?bernehmen und wieder abfallen ? diesen wird Allah weder vergeben noch sie recht leiten.? (Eine Auslegung sagt, dies bedeute, dass ein Moslem, der vom Islam abf?llt, get?tet werden muss.) Eine andere Stelle spricht von der Erlaubnis, einen ?Ungl?ubigen? im Dienste Allahs zu bel?gen. Mit anderen Worten, es w?re einem Moslem gestattet, eine Kirche zu besuchen und vorzugeben, Christ zu sein, um einen Zweck des Islams zu erreichen.(Artikel aus "Israel heute")


Amerikaner oder Kenianer?(anklicken zum vergr??ern)





http://worldcontent.twoday.net/stories/5858313/

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:47
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

Friday, June 3, 2011

Video: Attorney Stephen Pidgeon Found Record of Name Change for Barack Hussein Obama in British Columbia; Discusses The Obama Error

?


Video: Interview with attorney Stephen Pidgeon. Attorney Pidgeon claims he found a record for a name change from "Barak Mounir Ubayd" to "Barack Hussein Obama" on October 14th 1982 in Skookumchuck, British Columbia. Attorney Pidgeon also discusses details in his new book titled "The Obama Error" which can be purchased here. The interview aired 6/3/2011 on TruNews Radio. Hat tip to Dr. Kate. Previous interview with atty. Pidgeon can be found here.



Expanded Analysis: Forged Birth Certificate; Not Necessary to Prove Birthplace; Facing Forgery Charges & Conspiracy to Commit Forgery -Details here.

Busted: White House Now Claims They Ordered Short-Form COLB From Hawaii Department Of Health In 2008 Yet COLB Is Date Stamped 2007 -Details here.?

Confirmed: Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of President -Details here.?

Notre Dame Professor Charles Rice: Obama's eligibility could be biggest political fraud in the history of the world; time for a new approach -Details here.?

Attorney Mario Apuzzo: All presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur and Barack Obama, met the ?natural born Citizen? criteria. -Details here.?

Commander Charles Kerchner: List of U.S. Presidents - Eligibility under Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) or Natural Born Citizen (NBC) Clause or Seated due to Election Fraud -Details here.?

Jack Cashill Discusses Obama's Fraudulent Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants -Video here.?

Detailed reports on Obama's SS# can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. Visit the Birther Vault for the long list of evidence against Hawaii officials and all of the people questioning Obama's eligibility; [http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/08/video-ltc-terry-lakins-attorney-on-cnn.html].
Yes Virginia-There is a Usurper in the White House-Obama Long Form BC Forged! Wash Times NW 20110516 pg 5
Obama's Lack of Eligibility & Document Fraud - The 3 Enablers! Wash Times Natl Wkly 20110516 pg 9
-------------------------
See related??? http://usurpador.blogcindario.com/2011/06/01168-barack-hussein-obama-ii-barry-sorento-alias-alias-alias-barak-mounir-ubayd.html

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:21
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=306873

WND Exclusive
A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY

Obama critic coming

closer to Social Security

records?

Judge advances FOIA dispute

over application for Connecticut number


Posted: June 04, 2011
12:00 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
??2011?WND

?

?

President Barack Obama in the Oval Office April 4, 2011

Much information has been reported ? and much more still is being sought ? about Barack Obama's original birth documentation, and whether it reveals his eligibility to be president under the Constitution's requirement those in the Oval Office be a "natural born Citizen."

But under the radar of most new organizations a case has been moving forward in Washington, D.C., through which California attorney Orly Taitz is seeking the original application for Obama's Social Security number, a document that could reveal a multitude of factors about the president's early life.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge Royce Lamberth this week rejected a defense concern over procedure in the dispute, and Taitz told WND today the case has moved into discovery and she can issue subpoenas to those holding the documentation she is seeking.

Get the New York Times best-seller "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President," by Jerome Corsi.

WND previously has reported on the issue that Obama holds a Connecticut-based Social Security number despite allegedly being born in Hawaii, starting his work career in the Aloha State, and never having lived in Connecticut.

For those who never wondered about how Social Security Numbers are generated, the first three digits represent the state of the recipient's mailing address. In other words, if you live or work in Connecticut, for example, the first three digits of your SSN will correspond to the Connecticut code.

The first three digits of Obama's SSN are 042. That code of 042 falls within the range of numbers for Connecticut, which according to the Social Security Administration has been 040 through 049.

The national news media has been virtually silent on this potentially criminal fact.

Indeed, when Fox News finally attempted to explain it, it broadcast false information and then scrubbed it from its website.

When WND asked the White House about it, then?Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dodged the question.


Taitz' case is against Social Security commissioner Michael Astrue and explains that because of the multitude of questions surrounding Obama's eligibility, his birth certificate and his other records, the Freedom of Information Act request was submitted.

The Social Security Administration rejected it, and that decision was affirmed by a district court ruling that found the administrative procedures still had a course to run. But that now has been completed and the case is before Lamberth again.

He ruled this week that FOIA actions "are exempt" from a local court "meet and confer" requirement and he gave Astrue 30 days to file "any dispositive motions."

The federal government had argued that Taitz' process to subpoena individuals with access to the long-sought documentation was out of order, but the court ruling means it is within procedures.

According to a report in the Post & Email online blog, Taitz reported, "We're now in discovery, so I can issue subpoenas."

That is a level that no other case challenging Obama's eligibility or birth certificate ever has reached.

She said she already has contacted the Hawaii Department of Health, which is custodian of Hawaiian records, about her requests, and she said another recipient very well could be the White House.

She noted that White House Counsel Robert Bauer resigned that post just yesterday, and suggested Bauer might not have wanted to be deposed regarding questions about Obama's "Certificate of Live Birth," a document presented to the nation as genuine when the White House released it on April 27.

However, a multitude of experts have said it is a document assembled on computer and unlikely to be legitimate.

Taitz suggested that Bauer's move back into private practiced may have been speeded by worries over the eligibility dispute.

In fact, Jerome Corsi, Ph.D., and author of "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President," said he's convinced Bauer's move is because he fears the "Certificate of Live Birth" document would not stand up to the scrutiny of any serious investigation.

Corsi believes Bauer "felt compelled" to resign because of the growing substance to worries that the eligibility issue will blow up into a full-scale investigation.

"Bauer sent Perkins and Coie attorneys to Honolulu to pick up from the Hawaii Department of Health what he believed would be two certified copies of Obama's 1961 long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate," Corsi said. "When the White House released to the public the birth certificate in the form of a PDF computer file obviously created on Adobe software and a Xerox copy, Bauer realized the Hawaii DOH had participated in the fraud."

He said he had been tipped off early in February that a long-form birth document for Obama had been forged and that the document was to be released.

"The information came from a mole within the Hawaii DOH who had been examining the vault logbook for months," Corsi explained. "Until just prior to February 24, no Obama long-form hospital-generated birth record could be found in the Hawaii DOH."

As WND has reported, there long have been concerns about the Social Security number.

"There is obviously a case of fraud going on here," says Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels. "In 15 years of having a private investigator's license in Ohio, I've never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly."

Does the Social Security Administration ever re-issue Social Security numbers?

"Never," Daniels told Corsi. "It's against the law for a person to have a re-issued or second Social Security Number issued."

Daniels said she is "staking my reputation on a conclusion that Obama's use of this Social Security Number is fraudulent."

"A person who wants to hide their true identity often picks up the Social Security Number of a deceased person, thinking that nobody would ever look into it," Daniels added. "I think it was sometime in the 1980s that Obama decided to hide who he really is."

There is no indication in the limited background documentation released by the Obama 2008 presidential campaign or by the White House to establish that Obama ever lived in Connecticut.

Nor is there any suggestion in Obama's autobiography, "Dreams from My Father," that he ever had a Connecticut address.

Also, nothing can be found in the public record that indicates Obama visited Connecticut during his high-school years.

An affidavit filed by Colorado private investigator John N. Sampson specifies that as a result of his formal training as an immigration officer and his 27-year career in professional law enforcement, "it is my knowledge and belief that Social Security Numbers can only be applied for in the state in which the applicant habitually resides and has their official residence."

Daniels told WND she believes Obama had a different Social Security Number when he worked as a teenager in Hawaii prior to 1977.

"I doubt this is President Obama's originally issued Social Security Number," she told WND. "Obama has a work history in Hawaii before he left the islands to attend college at Occidental College in California, so he must have originally been issued a Social Security Number in Hawaii."

The published record available about Obama indicates his first job as a teenager in Hawaii was at a Baskin-Robbins in the Makiki neighborhood on Oahu. USA Today reported the ice-cream shop still was in operation one year after Obama's inauguration.

Just last month some 11 months after WND began publicizing Obama's Connecticut-based SSN, Bill O'Reilly of the Fox News Channel briefly addressed the issue while reading his viewer mail on the air.

Unfortunately for O'Reilly, the news anchor falsely asserted the president's father lived in Connecticut.

In his viewer email segment April 13, O'Reilly was asked: "What about Obama having a Connecticut Social Security Number? He never lived there."

"His father lived in Connecticut for several years," O'Reilly claimed, adding that "babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents."

In reality, there is no evidence Barack Obama Sr. ever lived in Connecticut. He left Hawaii in 1962 to study at Harvard in Massachusetts and then returned to his home country of Kenya.

When WND publicized O'Reilly's major error, the information vanished from the Fox News Channel's website, as well as BillOReilly.com.

O'Reilly's full explanation of the "truth" of Obama "myths" is here:

The BirtherReport.com website, responding to complaints by Fox podcast customers that O'Reilly's Social Security claim, broadcast on Fox, had gone missing from the audio archive, trumpeted the headline: "Busted: Fox News scrubbed Bill O'Reilly's 4/13 mailbag segment on Obama's Social Security Number reserved for Connecticut applicants." The site added, "Not only did Fox News scrub the podcast, they also left out the viewer email about Obama's Social Security number at O'Reilly's website. I report, you decide!"


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 10:07
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Viernes, 03 de junio de 2011

Share on Facebook

?
?WND Exclusive
A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY

Author: 'Birth certificate'

?prompts departure of

?White House counsel

Corsi says move 'marks beginning'

?of end of Obama eligibility cover-up


Posted: June 02, 2011
4:21 pm Eastern

??2011?WND

President Obama (White House photo)

The author of the best-selling "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible To Be President" charged today the resignation of White House counsel Bob Bauer is the result of his participation in the release of Barack Obama's "Certificate of Live Birth," which he fears would not stand up to the scrutiny of any serious investigation by the FBI, Congress or the media.

When the announcement about Bauer's departure was made today, the AP said he was returning to private practice and to represent Obama as his personal attorney and as general counsel to Obama's re-election campaign.

Jerome Corsi's new book, "Where's the Birth Certificate?," is now available for immediate shipping, autographed by the author, only from the WND Superstore.

He's being replaced by Kathy Ruemmler, a former assistant U.S. attorney.

The AP reported Obama praised Bauer, who before his White House post had defended Obama against lawsuits that challenged his eligibility to be president.

But Jerome Corsi, Ph.D., who authored the "Where's the Birth Certificate?" book that debuted at No. 6 on the New York Times best-sellers list after reaching No. 1 several weeks earlier at Amazon.com, said, "I think Bauer's resignation marks the beginning of the Obama eligibility cover-up starting to unwind."

Corsi believes Bauer "felt compelled" to resign because of the growing substance to worries that the eligibility issue will blow up into a full-scale investigation.

"Bauer sent Perkins and Coie attorneys to Honolulu to pick up from the Hawaii Department of Health what he believed would be two certified copies of Obama's 1961 long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate," Corsi said.

"When the White House released to the public the birth certificate in the form of a PDF computer file obviously created on Adobe software and a Xerox copy, Bauer realized the Hawaii DOH had participated in the fraud," Corsi charged.

Corsi said he had been tipped off early in February that a long-form birth document for Obama had been forged and that the document was to be released.

"The information came from a mole within the Hawaii DOH who had been examining the vault logbook for months," Corsi explained. "Until just prior to February 24, no Obama long-form hospital-generated birth record could be found in the Hawaii DOH."

Corsi, whose book also has ascended to the upper reaches of other best-seller tabulations, said that when Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie "could not find the Obama birth records he had been searching for and radio journalist Mike Evans said so in a broadcast repeated over a series of radio stations across the nation, a decision was made within the White House to use a forgery that may have been in the works since as early as 2008."

Corsi said he believes the scenario developed this way:

Obama and Valerie Jarrett wanted to continue the stonewalling strategy they had used since 2008, relying on the short-form Certification of Live Birth and having Hawaii DOH claim that long-form birth certificate copies were no longer available, not even to Obama.

Obama and Jarrett had planned to use the forged birth certificate as an October surprise, just prior to the November 2012 election, if the pressure on Obama's eligibility remained an obstacle to his reelection.

But this strategy was overruled by White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley. He determined that a birth certificate, if it existed, had to be released now ? to prevent the issue from gaining momentum.

"I believe both Daley and Bauer believed until recently that Obama was telling the truth and that the birth certificate was really there in the Hawaii DOH," Corsi said. "But when they realized that the date stamp on the computer file of the Obama birth certificate ? put up on the White House website on April 27 ? was that very same morning, it contradicted the idea the file was an earlier scan of the original Obama birth certificate in the Hawaii vault log book. What modifications to the file were being made at the White House? Was the file originally created at the White House? Why wasn't the file made and closed in Hawaii where the scan of the original document was supposedly made? Bauer realized the White House was lying to say a scan of the original document was being released."


Corsi said he's convinced that now top White House operatives such as Daley and Bauer believe there is no document in the Hawaii Department of Health that can withstand forensic analysis.

He said the legal challenges to a specific document that has been made public could be harder to deflect than a lawsuit generally alleging an ineligibility on Obama's part.

Corsi also said he believes top operatives in the Democratic Party "have concluded that if Obama does not kill the birther issue soon, he may have to resign ? with the likelihood that Hillary Clinton will be elevated into the DNC presidential candidate in 2012."

Corsi suggested Republicans also are staying away from the "birther" issue because they have reached the same conclusion ? and the RNC does not want "to have to face Hillary in the 2012 presidential election in the wake of an Obama resignation."

"What forced the release of the birth certificate on April 27 was the coming publication of the [Where's the Birth Certificate?] book," said Corsi.

"Bauer's resignation is the first step in the crumbling of inside support for Obama in the White House."

Corsi said pursuit of the "forger" who created the Obama Certificate of Live Birth already is well under way.

"The forgery consists of a composite of these various Hawaii 1961 legitimate documents, onto which was added Obama-specific information, with the result that the final version was composed in Adobe software," Corsi said.

WND reported when Bauer joined the White House.

Obama announced at that point he was waiving ethics rules for Bauer, his personal and campaign lawyer ? and the same attorney who has defended Obama in lawsuits challenging his eligibility to be president.

But Executive Order 13490, "Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Personnel," prohibits political appointees from participating in any matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to former employers or former clients. The rule typically expires two years after the date of appointment.

According to the ethics waiver posted on the White House website, Bauer was exempted from the requirements of the ethics pledge "solely with respect to his former client the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and with respect to his former employer Perkins Coie LLP (Perkins Coie) in its capacity as counsel to the DNC and to President Barack Obama in his personal capacity."

The waiver suggested the ethics rules would have prevented Bauer from working on Obama's financial disclosure forms or issues related to the Democratic National Committee.

As WND reported, in April 2009, Bauer sent a letter to plaintiff Gregory Hollister of Hollister v. Soetoro, a retired Air Force colonel, threatening sanctions if he didn't withdraw his appeal of the eligibility case that earlier was tossed by a district judge because the issue already had been "twittered."

"For the reasons stated in Judge Robertson's ruling, the suit is frivolous and should not be pursued," Bauer's letter warned. "Should you decline to withdraw this frivolous appeal, please be informed that we intend to pursue sanctions, including costs, expenses and attorneys' fees, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 38 and D.C. Circuit Rule 38."


Bauer also represented Obama and the DNC in Philip Berg's eligibility lawsuit and various other legal challenges.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Bauer functioned as an "attack lawyer," threatening with FEC complaints groups wanting to run anti-Obama television ads.

Also during the 2008 presidential campaign, Bauer as counsel for the Obama campaign wrote letters to television station managers and to Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General John Keeney arguing that airing an anti-Obama ad pointing to the known association between Obama and Weather Underground radical Bill Ayers would violate federal election rules.

Additionally, during the 2008 campaign, Bauer intervened on behalf of Obama to block the California-based American Leadership Project from running a television ad campaign over support from unions, including the Service Employees International Union.

Again, Bauer filed a complaint with the FEC alleging that the union-funded television campaign the American Leadership Project planned to run in Indiana against Obama was illegal under federal election laws.

In addition to representing Obama on eligibility cases, Bauer also served as legal counsel to represent the president in the criminal probe into the activities of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.


If you would like to sound off on this issue, participate in today's WND Poll.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:26
Comentarios (1)  | Enviar
Jueves, 02 de junio de 2011

Share on Facebook

Document Analyst Files Criminal Complaint with the FBI on Obama Long-Form Birth Certificate

?

?THIS IS TREASON?

by Sharon Rondeau

Why was this image created and supplied as a certified copy of Obama's original birth certificate? Why is the Kenyan government investigating Obama's possible birth there?

(Jun. 2, 2011) ? Mr. Douglas Vogt is the author of several books which focus on science and religion as well as owner of Vector Associates, a book publishing company.? He has also worked as an accountant and owned a typesetting company for 11 years.? Regarding the image purported to be Obama?s birth certificate released to the public on April 27, 2011, Vogt states:

I have a unique background for analyzing this document. I owned a typesetting company for 11 years so I know type and form design very well. I currently own Archive Index Systems since 1993, which sells all types of document scanners worldwide and also developed document imaging software (TheRepository). I know how the scanners work. I have also sold other document imaging programs, such as Laser Fiche, Liberty and Alchemy. I have sold and installed document imaging systems in city and county governments, so I know their procedures with imaging systems and everything about the design of such programs. This will be important in understanding what has happened with Obama?s Certificate of Live Birth.

On May 12, Vogt submitted an affidavit which was included in a Motion to Intervene filed by Atty. Orly Taitz with the United States District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana in regard to the case of Hornbeck v. Salazar. The affidavit consisted of a sworn statement and detailed report stating Vogt?s conclusion that the image a purported long-form birth certificate bearing the name of Barack Hussein Obama II is a forgery.

Vogt told The Post & Email that he had written the report for his own purposes prior to its inclusion in Taitz?s Motion to Intervene.

On May 22, 2011, Vogt updated the report, which declares that forgery of a government document would be a felony under U.S. Code, Title 18, and included it in acriminal complaint filed with the FBI.

The Post & Email asked Mr. Vogt how he arrived at his conclusions, and his answers are presented here in great detail.? He referred to the May 22 updated analysis by the number of each subtitled section.? The graphics are referred to as ?Figures.?

MR. VOGT: I have no financial interest in this whatsoever.? But here is what happened:? I heard the presidential announcement on the 27th, and a friend of mine contacted me and said that there were layers in the image.? He sent me a link to the White House blog.? I logged on on the 28th and got another version.? It explains in Subsection 8 of the long (updated) report that people were reporting nine layers.? I decided I was going to write a report of what I found, and it was written independently of Orly?s case.

This is a blatant, obvious forgery.? The thing I had in my mind as I was discovering it was, ?Why did the forger go to such trouble to do these things which were seemingly unnecessary and blatant?? the last one being the stamped signature on the lower right-hand side, supposedly done on the 25th of the month.? Where the words are, ?THE? is deliberately misspelled as ?TXE.?? If you scroll down to page 11, you can see it.? That?s not an ?H.?? The graphic artist who did this thing literally built that ?X? by clicking pixels.? It wasn?t an ?H.?? Also, the ?F? in ?OF? has also been doctored or came from someplace else because it?s closed off on the right-hand side.? It?s not like the stamp that was done about a month before on the bottom of page 10; that stamp is perfectly fine, not crooked.

Those two things gave it away as a fraud:? the ?X? is ?THE? and what they did to the word ?OF.?? But also, the stamp is too straight.? This is hand stamp that someone takes with his hand and slaps it down.? It?s called ?skewing.?? It?s skewed, but this one is off only two pixels over three inches over the length of the thing, which is unusually straight, which I don?t think they could do.? That?s 1/150th of an inch off, and that?s really somebody placing it on the background image of the security paper.

The other thing is that on the ?A? for ?Alvin,? there?s a script ?e? embedded on it, and if you look at the bottom of the previous one, it?s not really there.? The ?A? is smudged because of the rubber stamp, and they must have hit from the right-hand side of the stamp, as it?s darker there.? But the point is that somebody has put something there.

Now the question is, ?Was the ?e? originally there on the original paper and they didn?t erase it before they put this thing down, or is the forger basically screaming at us that this thing is a forgery??? And I?m beginning to think that the forger may actually be the hero here because some of this stuff is so blatant, figuring that when he or she sent the PDF to the White House or to Hawaii and then Hawaii sent the PDF to the White House, they would have just printed it out on a color printer and? scanned that in and presented it to the public.

I know the state of Hawaii has to have it.? Besides, when I saw the image that Obama produced, I knew they had scanned this thing from one of the postbinder books, which is what #1 is, where I describe it.? That?s one of the first things that gave it away:? the typewriter lines were straight, but there was a paralax for the form itself, and I said, ?OK; it?s been overlaid.? That?s impossible.?

MRS. RONDEAU: Could you explain the term ?parallax??? What does that mean?

MR. VOGT: It?s a optic term.? It?s a distortion of the image.? That?s all it means.? It?s because when you put the paper down on the flatbed scanner, which is what they did, where the binder is (known as a gutter), was higher off the glass than the rest of it.? So it looks as if it?s stanched down to the left. That?s an optical distortion, because they never took the pages out of the postbinder.? These are all originally single pages, and the pages were actually printed most likely on letter-press, hot-metal letter-press, which was developed in the 50s and 60s.

The county would print up the birth certificate forms and send them to the hospital, and from the birth certificate, the hospital would type up and fill in the long form that the county gives them.? Then the doctor would sign it, the mother would sign it, and they would mail it to the county.

I tried to explain the whole procedure so that people understood that this is what actually happened in all counties.? This is how the procedure goes.? In the old days, the county would microfilm it like the examples we had there that had been recorded before ? the Nordyke twins.

The stamp that the state of Hawaii has is two and one-quarter inches; that?s larger than normal.? Usually they?re less than two inches.? You?ll notice the stamp on the Nordyke twins? birth certificates are very close to the edge of the paper, and there is another one that was printed and stamped on the right-hand edge near the top.? You can clearly see the embossing of the county seal.? That?s Figure 18 on the latest report.? I know the machine they used; they used an electronic machine, and it?s pretty obvious that the one that Obama presented was a second- or third-generation image of what was originally on the background color that the artist used.

I gave examples where, even on the Nordyke twins?s birth certificates, which is really an inverse of the microfilm copy, you can clearly see the imprint of the embossment seal.? You can?t see it at all on Obama?s, and his is brand new.? Those electronic stampers produce a lot of force.? They?ll emboss three or four pieces of paper at once which can be seen very clearly.? But this thing was just an artifact on the background image, so it?s just a joke.? From that, I know that the whole story is not plausible.

If you open up the file in Wordpad or Notepad, then you?ll actually see the hexadecimal code and the commands within the document. I put the one I have on that page on Vectorpub.com, and that basically showed clearly that objects 13-21 were the parameters, in pixels ? it tells you horizontally and vertically ? where these images are.? So there?s no argument, and they can?t prove it wrong.? I have it from within the document from the White House that the thing is a multi-layered document.? It had XML code on the very bottom of the file.? If you open it yourself, you?ll see it.? It gave a creation date and a modification date.

MRS. RONDEAU: What were those dates?

MR. VOGT: Well, the one I had had a creation date of April 27, 2011 at 12:09 p.m.; modification date of April 28 at 9:58 a.m.? That?s the one I had pulled out.? Dr. Corsi had sent me two more, but his were dated May 9 and 12, and one them didn?t have the XML data.

MRS. RONDEAU: Where did he find those?

MR. VOGT: People sent it to him thinking that was the first one, and it wasn?t.

MRS. RONDEAU: So you did an analysis and found that they were created on yet different dates from the first two?

MR. VOGT: That?s correct.? I have one from at least the second day, but it really doesn?t matter at this point; I have the evidence from the White House.

MRS. RONDEAU: Do you have any thoughts on the short-form certificate which former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs claimed he ?put out on the internet??

MR. VOGT: I don?t know.? I?ve seen it, but they blocked out the serial number on the upper right-hand corner because they probably didn?t have one.? It?s unknown right now.

Let?s go through the eight items so that you understand what they are.

We already talked about the distorted image that?s covered in #1.? If you scroll down just above Subheading #2, you?ll see that the letters ?N,? ?s,? ?H,? and ?al? are grayscale, and the rest are binary, black and white.? Even below it, the ?d? in ?residence? is grayscale.? The document is just loaded with that kind of stuff, where you have letters that are grayscale and the rest are binary, black and white.? At first I asked, ?Well, why did he or she do that?? and I realized that the form is such that he or she needed to establish the baseline of the original form.? That?s why it was done.? Some of the letters were still there from a previous form, in grayscale, because he had to establish the baseline of the type, because if he got that wrong, it would have been really obvious that it was a forgery because the baseline would have been different from what is normally on any of the forms in points or picas.

That gave it away:? the type, the name of the hospital, and the graphic above, ?Male,? which didn?t bend down, but everything on the paper did bend down.? So the typewriter stuff was another layer imposed on top of the form.

Subheading #2 is about the haloing around all the type.? I gave examples of what it?s supposed to look like, both in grayscale, binary or even in color.? With a background security paper, the type is supposed to show through, and his doesn?t at all.? It?s due to a couple of different things.? I didn?t go into it totally because it might be too technical, but basically, if the person was scanning in on grayscale or color, and then did that to the black and white but he had thresholding, what would happen is the boxes around real 100% black would still have a value in it; 256 is totally black, and zero (0) is white.? But if he mistakenly didn?t have the thresholding correct, what would happen is that the boxes around the type would still have a value in it.? It might be 20, 30 or 10; it would still look like white, but it really isn?t.? So when he overlaid it on the color background and he said, ?Type forward,? that it should be above the layer of the security paper, it would then block out the image of the security paper behind it because there was still a value in those little pixels.? That?s the reason for the haloing effect around all the type.

MRS. RONDEAU: So that haloing should not be present on any copy of an original document?

MR. VOGT: That?s correct.? That?s why I gave examples on page 3 and at the top of page 4.? You can clearly see on Figure 6 or 7 that there is no haloing whatsoever, and you see the security paper behind it, both the green or the grayscale one.? Figure 5 is a haloing effect; it should not be there:? period, end of subject.? It just can?t be there.

At the top of the next page, Figure 9, is a blowup of what grayscale letters look like.? What happened when they went to binary, they made a mistake on the thresholding, so those little boxes that look like a faint gray when the program would convert it to a black and white image as with Figure 8, it still had a value around those letters.? The value might have been 10, 20 or 30, but it still looked like white.? But when they overlaid it, it really was a color, so it blacks out the background color, the background layer.? That?s technically how it would happen, but if I did go into it, it would really be over everyone?s head.

MRS. RONDEAU: Is there a way to create a forged document which no one can detect?

MR. VOGT: It depends on the type of document.? With this one, the unusual part is the parallax, or the curved image from the book.? If it?s a flat image, it?s a lot easier.? The curved one makes it much tougher.? It?s really tough.? The ones who are the experts at doing things like that is the CIA, and I can tell you right now that the CIA did not do this or any other intelligence agency.? They would stay so far away from something like this; they never would have touched it.? In fact, it would be the biggest red light to all of them; they?d investigate who is this guy in the White House now?? They wouldn?t tolerate this; they just wouldn?t tolerate it at all.

Figure 10 is an inverted image of the black and white microfilm copy of Susan Nordyke?s birth certificate, and you can clearly see what it looks like and what the inverted image looks like.

Subsection #3:? Obama?s document is loaded with both binary and grayscale.? The person did it because they needed to establish the baseline of the type.? Sometimes he didn?t do such a hot job.? I?m saying ?he,? but it could be a ?she.?? That?s the reason why they left these letters in there; they needed points by which to register the baseline of the forgery.

If you scroll down to Figure 13, which is on page 7, it?s his name:? ?Barack,? and the ?r? is grayscale, visibly, and the rest is binary.? They did that for registration reasons; they had to register the type.? They figured no one would ever see it.

MRS. RONDEAU: What does ?registering the type? mean?

MR. VOGT: The baseline.? The baseline is where the type sits, the bottom of the type; that?s called a baseline, or baseline rule, in the typesetting business.? That?s why my unique experience in typesetting told me immediately that this was a fraud.? I recognize things that other people would not have.

Figure 14 is a separate offense.? Do you see the ?1″ where the number is in #14?? That?s grayscale.? Its baseline is different from the rest of it.

MRS. RONDEAU: So it will always look different if it?s grayscale?

MR. VOGT: Yes, that?s it, because it?s not a white dot or a black dot, which is binary; it?s rather 256 levels of gray to black.? That?s the whole point.? So it?s easy to spot like that.? That told me immediately that we really don?t know what number he is or if he even has a number.? He probably doesn?t at all.? The interesting thing is this:? the way the federal law is written, this is a separate offense that gives you five years in prison:? that alone.

MRS. RONDEAU: Why would someone create something that is such an obvious forgery?? I haven?t heard of one analyst who has vouched for the document except for one on fox News, but even he didn?t declare it authentic.

MR. VOGT: Yes, you?ll read it on the bottom; I answered him.? He knows nothing.? I?m going to send my material off to Fox News, but in my humble opinion, the guy is an idiot for even saying it.

Anyway, let?s go on.? The sequential number is a fraud; that?s #4, and it goes through the law section a little bit and also the fact that even though his was submitted three days earlier than the Nordyke twins?s, who have a lower number, he has a higher number, and it?s just impossible.? In counties, when any document comes in, regardless of department, they open up the mail and they stamp it because that?s the legal requirement.? They wouldn?t have forgotten that; it?s a legal requirement, and they?re forced to do it.? So it is impossible for him to have a number higher than someone?s who was mailed or OK?d three days earlier,? just impossible.? It?s an immediate red flag.

MRS. RONDEAU: From the paragraph which begins ?The facts I have shown you in #3 and 4,? it looks as if you have heard the story of Virginia Sunahara.? Some researchers believe that Obama could have been given her number because she was born on August 4 and died the next day.? It?s possible that they assigned the death certificate before the birth certificate, which might account for the higher number.

MR. VOGT: If you read that paragraph, you?ll see that there are two possibilities.? She was born in one hospital.? They?re the ones who are legally supposed to submit the birth certificate.? They would have mailed it, and they would have assigned a number to her.? Then she was transferred to the other hospital, Kapiolani, where she died the next day.? They would have been legally responsible to file the death certificate, which would have been mailed that next week.? So the point is that she would have had a birth certificate and a death certificate.? The law that the federal government passed in December 2004 said that you had to link the two together; they both had to be in the database.? So they had access to who had died, so it was very convenient.? But it also means, as I have in the third or fourth sentence, that we really don?t know if Obama?s birthday was really the fourth.? We can?t assume anything at all.? Maybe a long lie has been out there for all these years, but it doesn?t mean it?s true.? You have to prove it.? That?s the whole point.? And I don?t think he has; it?s just a joke, the whole thing.

But the security hole is that the Kenyans say that his birth certificate was stolen or destroyed, which means that it probably wasn?t destroyed, but whomever is blackmailing him has the original.? They have the original.? So that?s the problem.

Number 5 is two different colors.? This was really weird.? Actually, it was in three places.? I mention all three.? There are two things here with the rubber stamp; it?s not just one curiosity.? It?s on page 8 and 9, having to do with boxes 22 and 20.? When the document comes into the registrar?s office, it?s the same rubber stamp; they stamp it on the left-hand side; they stamp it on the right-hand side, and the guy signs it off.? The guy?s name in this case is U.K.L. Lee.

MRS. RONDEAU: A lot of people have questioned if that was a real person.

MR. VOGT: The other part that I was suspicious about, even though I?ve seen his name on a 1962 Certificate of Live Birth, he was supposed to legally have signed his whole name; no initials.? That?s the law:? it?s supposed to be his whole name.? But he didn?t do that.

MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think that was a law in 1961?

MR. VOGT: You could see that for the Nordyke twins, the registrar signed his whole name without middle initials.? His whole name was there.? So the person who signed that one knew that he had to sign his whole name with no initials.? So that?s suspicious.

Now, look at #22 and then #20.? This should never have been, because there?s a color value to date ?A? ? August (Aug) and then the sixth, and that can?t be.? This thing is supposed to have been scanned in grayscale or binary.? We can?t have a color here, but we do.? It is a dark green.? I gave the color value on the bottom of page 8. Then we have box #20 at Figure 16, and we have a rubber stamp.? This can?t be.? They used the same rubber stamp the same day:? the guy has a rubber stamp in his hand with the date, and he stamps left and right, and then he signs it.? This can?t be.? So it?s not only just the color, but it?s also the fact that it was two different rubber stamps with two different sizes.? That?s can?t be.

Also, he grabbed the word ?Date? in ?A? because the ?August? touched those letters, so he was stuck having to grab the top part as well as the date part.? When you read the whole report, it is so obvious that this thing is a Frankenstein form.

That?s not the only place.? In the third place it shows up, it?s mentioned just above Figure 16, that in box 17a, it displays the word ?None,? but ?Non? is in dark green, but not the ?e.?? It?s crazy stuff!? That?s why I?m saying that the forger either was paid a lot of money but didn?t like what he was doing or hated what he was doing and was being forced to do it by his boss, and he was going to put enough things in there that a professional who knew this stuff could wind up spotting and say, ?This thing is a forgery.??? So in essence, the forger may actually be the hero.

Why did he insert a color in it?? There are two different color values here.? It?s not the same color.

Subsection 6 is about the seals.? If you scroll down, Figure 19 is really an image under a color filter of the one that Obama submitted through the PDF.? It?s only faintly there.? If you scroll down to the next page, page 10, it?s actually invisible.? In Figure 20, it?s almost not noticeable; it?s really a distortion in the background image.? His first short-form is Figure 17, and you can clearly see that this thing was at least three inches from the bottom of the paper.? I know the machine which embossed it; it was an electronic machine, not a hand stamp.? It does a good job.? You can clearly see it through their photographs.

Figure 18 is the positive ? the inverted image from the microfilm copy of the Nordyke twins ? and even if it was a microfilm, you can clearly see the embossment.? It?s practically at the edge of the paper because the throat on those hand stamps won?t allow for very much distance between the edge of the paper and the edge of a two-and-one-quarter-inch seal.? You can see it even on a microfilm copy.? But we do not see it on his.? That told me immediately that that was a second- or third-generation image from something else.

MRS. RONDEAU: Is there any stamp at all on the April 27 release?

MR. VOGT: No.? There isn?t any, which means it?s not legal.? Figure 21 was interesting:? that was on a hand stamp, again, near the edge of the paper, less than an inch away from the edge, and you can clearly see the embossment.? That?s an original, and it was from 1962.

Subsection 7 is the rubber stamp, which is skewed.? That is normal; it?s a hand stamp, and nobody is trying to place the thing down by the pixel, but the one we have on Obama?s certificate of April 27 is about as straight as you can get with an eyeball.? It?s only two pixels off over three inches.? That?s been electronically leveled.

In Figure 23, the script on the capital ?A? on ?Alvin? in the signature, and the ?X? in the word ?TXE? were literally done by hitting pixels.? They hit pixels to make something that looked like an ?X,? but it?s not.? When you blow it up, you can see it?s not an ?X.?? It?s something else.? Again, it?s someone screaming at us, ?This thing is a fraud!?? That may be the most logical answer here.

Subsection 8 deals with the layers.? This is embedded from within the PDF that the White House put up.? It clearly shows from object 13-21 is the nine layers.? It tells you the horizontal and vertical pixels of each one of the layers.? Under each one of these headings, there?s a bunch of hexadecimal codes.? This is where I pulled them all out and I sorted them, putting them in sequence.? You have to actually open the file up in Wordpad and you?ll see exactly what I mean:? just search for ?style type/image? or something like that, and you?re going to find each one of the layers.? There?s a bunch of layers in there, more than just these.? Each one of the layers means something else.? I could recognize it and know how to read some of the stuff.? I could actually pull out one of these layers from the PDF and save it again, and that layer would disappear.? You have to know how to do it, but it does tell you where the object starts and where the object ends.? It?s something like an HTML, but it?s a different kind of code.

I put the links for videos that were on YouTube which explain the layers pretty well.? I wanted to give these people credit; they deserve it.? In Figure 25, I displayed the layer that has most of the type on it.? As prima facie evidence, this thing is toast.

MRS. RONDEAU: What about the analyst from Canada whom Fox News featured who said that the image could be authentic?

Editor?s Note: The ?leading expert? which Fox News quoted as having said, ?You should not be so suspicious about this,? Jean-Claude Tremblay, states that his professional background includes more than 20 years in teaching Adobe products, Quark, and technical editing.?? It is this writer?s opinion that the title of the Fox News article, ?Expert: No Doubt Obama?s Birth Certificate Is Legit,? is not an accurate reflection of Tremblay?s analysis of the birth certificate image, but rather, conjecture on the writer?s part.

It appears that Tremblay?s is the only analysis which Fox News has presented, despite the many reports and allegations that the image is a forgery.

MR. VOGT: On page 13, I wrote a rebuttal to discovery of the multi-layers found in the PDF.? You?ll see in the last paragraph what my qualifications are for OCR.? This guy knows nothing; he plainly does not know anything about it.? You know something?? Considering he wound up defending it on the 29th, the day after somebody found the layers, he would be my first suspect.? If you looked at his qualifications, certified on a bunch of Adobe?s products, I would say he would be the first candidate I?d have for the one who put the thing together.

Somebody looked it up and said he was a supporter of Obama.? Also, if they found a graphic artist who was sympathetic and was not from the country, there is less chance of his being subpoenaed to give testimony to Congress.? They?re actually wrong about the investigation part; the reason is that there is a security treaty between the United States and Canada concerning national security, which this definitely does, and that means that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police will be investigating this guy to find out.? He can be extradited to the United States to testify.? He is not exempt from prosecution.

MRS. RONDEAU: Why do you think no one from the FBI has gone out to Hawaii to investigate the forgery?

MR. VOGT: If you go to the next section, page 13, I say in the Conclusion section that it is a ?Frankenstein certificate.?? Some guy actually drew a picture of Obama looking like Frankenstein.? They?re selling T-shirts like that; they got the idea from me.

But here?s the answer to your question:? Orly said she has reported things to the FBI and they haven?t done anything with it.? This is the way a law enforcement agency works:? First, the FBI is part of the Justice Department, and the Justice Department is controlled by a guy who is an Obama handmaiden.? Unless a policing agency is notified that a crime has been committed, they?re not going to bother with it.? It?s nothing.? No matter how many YouTube things are out there or things on the web, unless somebody formally notifies a policing agency like the FBI, nothing is going to be done, because they weren?t told a crime has been committed.

For instance, if a bank is robbed, the banker will call the police department, which will in turn call the FBI, because it?s their purview.? The banks are insured by the FDIC; therefore, they robbed the federal government, and the FBI investigates.? They collect the data, hopefully catch the criminal, and then they give it to a federal attorney who prosecutes.? But again, they have to be told that a crime has been committed.? That?s the key thing; no one has ever done it.

I did.? I sent it off to the Director of the FBI and also to the Field Agent in Charge in Hawaii.? I sent it off twice to each one in different ways, all by mail.? Hawaii will probably get it earlier because of the mail screening that occurs in Washington, DC.? However, the crime was committed both in Hawaii and in Washington, DC.? It?s very possible, since I see that the form was modified on the day of its presentation and the day after, that somebody in the White House was modifying it.

MRS. RONDEAU: So they might not have created it, but now they have it and are modifying it.

MR. VOGT: Correct, so the crime has been committed in both places.? When you read the law at the bottom of the report, and I included the sections in red that I want people to understand, you realize that it?s a very, very serious crime.? This comes under the heading of defrauding the United States.? Everybody in the White House who knows this thing, as well as in the Department of Health in Hawaii, is in huge trouble.? They have no idea that just on the face of the document itself, and the security number, is 20 years in prison.? Considering they flagrantly flaunted their arrogance and knew what they were doing was wrong for somebody to become President of the United States who wasn?t even a citizen is treasonous.? If the prosecution goes to the level of treason, which it should be, these people go to prison for the rest of their lives.

Some of those people are going to be talking their heads off not to go to prison for the rest of their lives.? What I?ve done is make it irrelevant where the guy was born.? It?s no longer a case of trying to prove he was born in Kenya, Timbuctu, Manchuria or New York City; it?s now a simple, provable case of forgery in the first degree.

Without question, this is the greatest scandal in American history. Everybody agrees:? nothing comes even remotely close; not the scandals in the Grant administration; in Harding?s Teapot Dome; in Watergate; Clinton was nothing?this tops everything.

? 2011, The Post & Email. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 15:58
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?
?
?
?Citizens Educate Staffers of the Meaning of ?natural born Citizen? and ?Treason?

Citizens Educate Staffers of the Meaning of ?natural born Citizen? and ?Treason? ?

?MISINFORMED, IGNORANT OR WORKING AGAINST THIS COUNTRY? June 2, 2011 Dear Editor: The following email was sent to Brian Kelly, staffer for Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut: Mr. Kelly In response to your statement below...

June 2 2011 / No comment / Read More ?
Citizens Expose the Treachery of Congressmen and Their Staffers

Citizens Expose the Treachery of Congressmen and Their Staffers ?

WHEN WILL THEY BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WILL BE CHARGED IN A CRIMINAL COVER-UP? by Neil Turner June 1, 2011 Dear Editor: The following email was sent to Mr. Brian Kelly, legislative assistant to...

June 1 2011 / 5 comments / Read More ?
?
?
Letter to Rep. Elton Gallegly Lays it Out Straight about Obama?s Fraud and Usurpation of the Presidency

Letter to Rep. Elton Gallegly Lays it Out Straight about Obama?s Fraud and Usurpation of the Presidency ?

?MASQUERADING AS SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE: Dear Editor: The following letter was mailed today to Rep. Elton Gallegly of California?s 24th Congressional District: May 31, 2011 Via U.S. Mail Offices of Congressman Elton Gallegly: 2309...

May 31 2011 / 6 comments / Read More ?

Publicado por Corazon7 @ 9:51
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar
Mi?rcoles, 01 de junio de 2011

Share on Facebook

American Citizens? Demand for Justice Against the Overthrow of the U.S. Constitution

AND THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TO INVESTIGATE OBAMA

submitted by Kathleen Gotto

?

Can the U.S. Constitution be revived after its demolition by Obama, Congress, the courts and the media?

(May 31, 2011) ? PREAMBLE: The following citizen compilation of abuses and constitutional violations will be sent to all U.S. Congressmen.? Additionally, it will be sent to the Federal Elections Commission, Donald Trump, all major media, the foreign press, State campaign headquarters, Tea Party groups, the FBI, the Social Security Administration Commissioner, and the Selective Service System, et al.

This list is by no means exhaustive.? Any citizen may mail it to others not appearing on this list such as state representatives and senators, governors, attorneys general, members of the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts; sheriffs, law enforcement, American Legion Posts, and veterans? organizations.? It can also be sent to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all military officers and constitutional attorneys.

LET IT BE KNOWN that Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, Barry/Barack Soebarkh and variations thereof, attained to the office of the U.S. Presidency in January 2009 without meeting the eligibility requirements of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution, which mandates only a natural born citizen (one born of two U.S. citizen parents) is eligible to hold that office.? Take note:? None of the 535 members of Congress can hide behind the April 3, 2009 and March 18, 2010 propaganda hit pieces written by Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service, which twists and corrupts the natural born citizen definition in a transparent attempt to provide cover for the cowardly congressmen.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/31/presidential-eligibility-part-2/;

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/29/bombshell-second-crs-memo-covering-for-obamas-ineligibility-not-released-to-the-public-until-now/;

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/;

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/catalog-of-evidence-concerned-americans.html;

http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm;

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/05/attorney-dr-herb-titus-born-in-hawaii.html;

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLawsuits.htm.

LET IT BE KNOWN that the media, including ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, FoxNews, et al, FAILED the American People and abrogated their Fourth Estate responsibilities by turning a deaf ear and blind eye to the nonfeasance, misfeasance, and malfeasance which apparently occurred during the whole of the 2008 election process, from the nomination to the election of the unvetted, ineligible Barack Hussein Obama.

http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/12/obama-rapidly-achieving-his-goal.html;

http://drkatesview.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/drkates-platoon-takes-the-hill/;

http://daggle.com/journalist-not-blogger-654.

LET IT BE KNOWN that both the Republican and Democratic political parties FAILED in their obligation to vet Barack Hussein Obama prior to his nomination as the Democratic candidate for the office of U.S. President.

http://bobmccarty.com/2010/11/25/understanding-the-jack-maskell-memorandum/;

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=225561;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcDQ0QaIhuc.

LET IT BE KNOWN that Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House and in her official position as Chair of the Democratic National Convention, in 2008 FAILED in her duty to the American People and her sworn oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, by issuing one certification for 49 states, which merely stated that Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden were ?duly nominated? as the Democratic Party candidates for President and Vice President respectively; but for the STATE OF HAWAII, Nancy Pelosi did attest and declare to all by the Democratic Official Certification of Nomination that both Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden were ??legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.?? Why did Nancy Pelosi, in her capacity as the DNC Chair, provide one certification to Hawaii and a different one to the other 49 states?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/30784035/DNC-Chairperson-Nancy-Pelosi-Issued-Signed-Two-Different-Certification-Forms-for-Obama-in-2008;

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109363;

http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/certificate-of-nomination-summary/;

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/15127;

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2696896/posts;

LET IT BE KNOWN that all 50 Secretaries of State FAILED in their obligation to vet Barack Hussein Obama prior to his nomination as the Democratic candidate for the office of U.S. President.

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/05/south-dakotas-secretary-of-state-obamas.html;

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/texas-bill-birth-certificate-required-for-presidential-candidate-texas-secretary-of-state-obama-birth-certificate-lubbock-avalanche-journal/;

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=80931;

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/.

LET IT BE KNOWN that Vice President Richard Cheney, as President of the Senate, FAILED to request any objection to the electoral vote count on January 8, 2009, as required by U.S.C. Title 3, Section 15;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcGt8hQZzg4;

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/3/usc_sec_03_00000015?-000-.html:? ??Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. ??.

LET IT BE KNOWN that just because there is no clear requirement stating a specific entity must ensure the eligibility of a candidate running for the U.S. presidency, that was no excuse for the 50 individual States, the Congress, or the Judiciary to abrogate their responsibility to American citizens by allowing an unvetted, ineligible person to be nominated, and then elected, to the U.S. presidency.? The argument must be made that since no specific entity was required to ensure a candidate?s eligibility, then any appropriate investigative body could and should have performed that function! All branches of state and federal government FAILED the American people!? Just because there is no specificity as to who should verify a candidate?s eligibility, that does not cancel the constitutional eligibility requirement!? Additionally, LET IT BE KNOWN that the U.S. Senate passed S. Res. 511 declaring John McCain ?a natural born citizen?, yet were totally silent on the more obvious question of Barack Obama?s citizenship status.? Obama?s father was a Kenyan with allegiance to the British Crown and such allegiance passed on to his son, Barack Obama, at birth.? So why didn?t Congress investigate how a man born subject to the British Crown could possibly be considered a requisite natural born citizen of the United States?

http://www.wnd.com/eligibility;

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/;

http://www.americanconservativedaily.com/2010/11/congressional-report-obama-eligibility-unvetted/;

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88566;

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13304;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/17/supreme-court-accountablity/;

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd342.htm;

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-sr511/show.

LET IT BE KNOWN that U.S. Code, Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 1, Section 4, gives the definition for Misprision of Felony:

?Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.? Every member of Congress, the Supreme Court, and all the judges handling all the Obama eligibility lawsuits were apprised numerous times of Obama?s felonious birth certificates, Social Security number, Selective Service Registration, et al, from American citizens.? None of those officials can say they were uninformed.? We have evidence that they were indeed informed, over and over again.? The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued a report on August 16, 2010, outlining the use of taxpayer funds on government public relations and propaganda.? The report states, ??Under one-party rule in 2009, the White House used the machinery of the Obama campaign to tout the President?s agenda through inappropriate and sometimes unlawful public relations and propaganda initiatives???? Unlawful?? Where is the investigation?? Of course, using taxpayer funds unlawfully should be investigated. But aren?t releasing to the public a fraudulent Certification of Live Birth, misusing a Social Security number, and using a falsified Selective Service Registration felonious crimes?? Where is the investigation, Congress?

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/28/misprision-of-felony-report-the-crime/;

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Misprision+of+felony;

http://republicans.oversight.house.gov/images/stories/Reports/20100816obamaadministrationpropagandareport.pdf.

WHEREAS, numerous lawsuits were initiated prior and subsequent to Barack Obama?s swearing in as the de facto president of the United States, We The People Demand the judiciary systems from the Circuit Courts, to the District Courts, to the Supreme Court and any pertinent Appeals Courts to adjudicate this matter of national security now and with all discovery, and cease from erecting the artificial ?standing? barrier in the Peoples? pursuit of justice.? The Courts? job is to adjudicate, so do it.? The American People can withstand a Constitutional crisis; we cannot abide a usurper in Our White House!? The ?eligibility? lawsuits lay out the law and facts of this matter?

a.? Mario Apuzzo, http://puzo1.blogspot.com/; http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-446.htm;

b.? Philip Berg, http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/pennsylvania/paedce/2:2008cv04083/281573/13/0.pdf; http://philjberg.com/; http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?Search=philip+berg&type=Supreme-Court=Dockets;

c.? Leo Donofrio, http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/; http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/08a407.htm;

d.? Stephen Pidgeon, http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84966.; http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/2009/03/obama-eligibility-challenger-stephen.html;

e.? Orly Taitz; http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/; http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?Search=orly+taitz&type=Supreme-Court=Dockets;

f.? United States Justice Foundation, http://usjf.net/;

g.? Cort Wrotnowski, http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/08a469.htm.

?

WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama, unable to prove his eligibility under A1S2C5 of the U.S. Constitution to be the president, and having previously released several short-form birth certificates which were deemed fraudulent, released a long form birth certificate on April 27, 2011.? It was examined minutely by numerous people and also declared fraudulent.? We The People Demand the FBI, a Special Prosecutor, Congress, et al, initiate an investigation immediately and forensically examine said long form document!

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=299705;

http://polarik.blogtownhall.com/2010/05/14/fraud_in_the_usa_the_greatest_birth_certificate_fraud_in_history.thtml;

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/critics-obamas-latest-long-form-birth-certificate-is-a-fake/;

http://www.rightwire.net/2011/05/obamas-long-form-birth-cert-poor_02.html;

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/;

WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama?s SSN was issued by the State of Connecticut, in which Obama never lived, and appears to be used by him fraudulently, We The People Demand the FBI, Special Prosecutor, Congress, Social Security Administration, et al, initiate an investigation immediately!

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20976501/Neil-Sankey-Barack-Obama-Addresses-SS-Numbers;

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/05/calling-all-journalists-obamas-multiple.html;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6tvti9um6k&NR=1;

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/05/obama-guilty-of-at-least-one-felony.html;

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=261033;

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/02/obamas-social-security-number/;

http://www.cashill.com/intellect_fraud/another_look_at_obamas.htm.

WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama?s Selective Service Registration has been examined and deemed to be fraudulent, We The People Demand the FBI, Special Prosecutor, Congress, Selective Service Registration, et al, initiate an investigation immediately!

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/03/08/are-there-multiple-records-of-obamas-selective-service-registration/;

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/4428/exclusive-did-next-commander-in-chief-falsify-selective-service-registration-never-actually-register-obamas-draft-registration-raises-serious-questions/;

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=156573;

http://www.theobamafile.com/_eligibility/DraftRegistration.htm.

WHEREAS, Barack Hussein Obama?s refusal to release documentation substantiating his eligibility to serve as president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, an officer and Army physician, LtCol Terry Lakin, was deprived of justice and liberty, refused discovery and a right to defend himself at his court-martial for refusing to follow an order he had no assurance was legal, and was stripped of his benefits and imprisoned at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.? http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/

WHEREAS, American citizens have had enough of our elected representatives refusing to do their jobs, with every one of the 535 having failed us by ignoring the destruction and overthrow of our Constitutional Republic, know this:? You have lost your mandate to govern us.? You have lost our trust and respect.? You have sold us and our Constitution down the river of political expediency.? You have allowed your own cowardice and self-interest to drown out our concerns and demands.? You have aided, abetted or allowed the looting of our taxpayer dollars from the U.S. treasury, and have allowed our money to be redistributed to bankers under phony programs such as TARP.? You have ignored the Obama eligibility problem.? Not one of you 535 congressional ?leaders? has investigated the unvetted, ineligible poseur in our White House.? Not one!? Every last one of you has turned your back on us.? Now we are turning our backs on you. If you continue to stonewall us and allow the complete destruction of our constitutional republic, know this:? We are many.? We are organized.? We are indignant.? We are angry.? We will no longer be held hostage to your abrogation of duty and responsibility to us and our Constitution.? We are hereby putting all 535 members of Congress on notice that We The People are committed to voting every last one of you out for your collective dereliction of duty in not investigating the many and serious issues about Barack Hussein Obama?s eligibility to hold the office of president!? And when you get back home, defeated and humiliated, you will have to live among those whom you betrayed.? Ponder that.

THEREFORE, WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND Congress call for an outside, non-government Special Prosecutor to immediately initiate an investigation of the man posing as the president, Barack Hussein Obama, in order to protect our national security, and support and defend our Constitution and the rights of the citizens of the United States of America!

? 2011, The Post & Email. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.


Publicado por Corazon7 @ 12:16
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar

Share on Facebook

?
?

?

WND Exclusive
A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY

Criminal complaint

charges Obama birth

record 'forged'

22-page brief filed with FBI

claims 'irrefutable proof'

document a fraud


Posted: May 31, 2011
8:09 pm Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
??2011?WND

?

?
?
President Obama (White House photo)

This is the first of three articles on the criminal complaint that scanner-expert Doug Vogt filed last week with the FBI.

An international expert on scanners and document-imaging software filed a 22-page criminal complaint with the FBI, charging that the long-form birth certificate released by the White House is criminally fraudulent.

"What the Obama administration released is a PDF image that they are trying to pass off as a Certificate of Live Birth Long Form printed on green security paper by the Hawaiian Health Department," Doug Vogt writes, "but this form is a created forgery."

?Get the inside details on what could be the most serious constitutional crisis in modern history, in "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President," autographed by the author!

Vogt's criminal complaint asserts: "I have irrefutably proven that the Certificate of Live Birth that President Obama presented to the world on April 27, 2011, is a fraudulently created document put together using the Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator programs, and the creation of this forgery of a public document constitutes a class B felony in Hawaii and multiple violations under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Sec.1028, and therefore an impeachable offense."

When the Obama birth certificate "forgery" comes to the public's attention, Vogt continues, "It will surpass all previous scandals including the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration."

Since 1993, Vogt has owned Archive Index Systems Inc., in Bellevue, Wash., a company that sells a wide variety of document scanners worldwide and develops document imaging software.

Before that, Vogt owned Nova Typesetting for 11 years.

Curved and non-curved lines of type

Vogt says that the curved surface on the left margin of the Obama birth certificate suggests the county employee who did the original scanning of the document did not take the individual page out of the binder.

"The result is that all the pages in that book display a parallax distorted image of the lines and type," he says.

He claims, however, that the information typed into the form does not curve like the printed text on the form itself.

As seen in Figure 1 below, the word "Sex" on the printed form curves into the binder, while the typed word "Male" does not, Vogt argues.


Vogt observes that the word "Sex" printed on the form slants more to the left than the typed-in word "Male" below it.

He claims to have found another parallax problem in line 6c, "Name of Hospital or Institution."


The word "Name" printed on the form and the lines above and below drop down two pixels while the typed-in hospital name, "Kapiolani," does not, he says.

"The conclusion you must come to is that the typed-in form was superimposed over an existing original Certificate of Live Birth form," Vogt writes.

Vogt contends that the forger placed the typed-in text over the printed copy, creating a composite from a variety of original birth certificate forms.

"In fact, since I found some of the form headings scanned in as binary and grayscale, the form itself is a composite but the person who created it did not flatten the image of the blank form and save it as one file before they started placing the typewriter text on the composite form," he says. "The individual(s) who perpetrated this forgery could not evidently find a blank form in the clerk's imaging database, so they were forced to clean up existing forms and overlay the typewriter type we see here."

'Halo'

A "white-halo effect" around some of the printed and typed-in letters on the form convinced Vogt that the document was a forgery.

If the birth certificate were a scan, as the White House maintained, it should have been a grayscale image in which no haloing effect would be visible, he reasons

Vogt displays the figure below from the document released by the White House, demonstrating the white-halo effect:


He then compares the above example to a grayscale scan in which there is no halo effect:


The next image is a color scan in which there is no halo effect, with the green color of the security paper touching the edge of the type:


The figure below is a black-and-white binary image:



Vogt's argument is that a grayscale scan or a color image scan, as seen above, can be converted to a black-and-white binary image.

However, the presence of grayscale and binary images on the same scan is a clear indication of document manipulation, he contends.

"The important thing to remember is that you cannot have grayscale and binary on the same scan unless the image is a composite," Vogt argues. "This means that different components of the whole image are made up of smaller parts."

What produced the white-halo effect?

"We know that all the original Certificates of Live Birth were microfilmed because we can see the Nordyke certificate (below) was microfilmed," he explains. "Then, some time after 2004, the paper original copies, in post binder books, were scanned using a commercial document scanner with a flat bed, scanned as grayscale images."


Copy of microfilmed original long-form birth certificate of Susan Nordyke, born in Honolulu the day after Obama's reported birthdate.

Vogt concludes that the forger was forced to convert the microfilmed images of original birth certificates to grayscale, as seen below,? before the originals could be used to form a composite.


Susan Nordyke microfilmed birth certificate converted to grayscale

Next, Vogt says, the forger converted the grayscale converted image to a binary image and placed it onto a background form image.

"The problem was that there were still image values for the pixels around the placed type," Vogt observes, "so when he/she placed the type image over the background and instructed the program to bring the type "forward" it blanked out the background image, hence the haloing effect around the type."

'Another smoking gun'

Finally, Vogt contends that the birth certificate released by the White House is loaded with binary and grayscale letters, "which is just another smoking gun that this form is a forgery."

Some of the lines and some of the boxes on the White House birth certificate were scanned using grayscale, but only some of the form headings and some of the letters were grayscale, he said.

Vogt produced the image below to illustrate his point:


Vogt explains:

You will notice the H and al in Hospital, and I in Institution. If and again the h and l in hospital were grayscale images, but the rest of the line is binary. The typewriter line below was scanned in as a binary image. I can also tell you for certainty that the form type was scanned in at a lower resolution (≤200 dpi). This is because of the size of the pixels on the letters were such that the openings on the a and s on the first line are not visible and filled in. This may also further indicate that forger took some of the type images from the microfilmed copies.

As another example of grayscale and binary type on the same line, Vogt selected the name "BARACK" from the form's box "1a," as show below:


"For some reason the 'R' is a grayscale image and the rest is binary," he writes. "That means the 'R' was originally on the form and the rest was not until it was added."

Vogt asks why the forger would leave some grayscale images in the form and not just erase the whole form.

He answer is that the forger needed to leave the grayscale images to re-establish the baseline of the type in order to place the superimposed binary type properly, in line with the other typing on the form.

"This also told me that the forger was an experienced graphic artist," Vogt concludes.

Another example was the birth certificate number itself, as seen below:


"This is just another example of a cut and paste job," Vogt noted. "It also means we do not know what the real birth certificate number is, if there even is one."

Vogt's verdict

Vogt concludes that the Obama birth certificate document released by the White House on April 27 is an "outrageous and obvious" fraud.

"You could truly call this a Frankenstein Certificate of Live Birth," he says in summary.

"It is a logical conclusion," he says, "that since President Barack Obama felt it necessary to have a Certificate of Live Birth forged for himself then we must conclude that there is in fact no birth certificate in Hawaii and therefore he was not born inside the United States, as the Constitution requires, and he knew it and others also knew it but wanted him in office for whatever reason."

?



Publicado por Corazon7 @ 11:57
Comentarios (0)  | Enviar