Posted by SpitFire on Conservative Talk - ning site
"News for the Rest of Us"
Michele Chang
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is extremely frustrated with orders that the White House is contemplating. According to sources at the Pentagon, including all branches of the armed forces, the Obama Administration may break with a centuries-old tradition.
A spokesman for General James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that the Obama Administration wants to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, and no longer to the Constitution.
"The oath to the Constitution is as old as the document itself." the spokesman said, "At no time in American history, not even in the Civil War, did the oath change or the subject of the oath differ. It has always been to the Constitution."
The back-and-forth between the White House and the Defense Department was expected as President George W. Bush left office. President Obama has already signed orders to close Guantanamo and to pull combat troops from Iraq. But, this, say many at the Defense Department, goes to far.
"Technically, we can't talk about it before it becomes official policy." the spokesman continued. "However, the Defense Department, including the Secretary, will not take this laying down. Expect a fight from the bureaucracy and the brass."
Sources at the White House had a different point of view. In a circular distributed by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the rationale for the change was made more clear.
"The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib."
"We expect a lot of flak over this," ! the clas sified memo continues. "But those that would be most against it are those looking either for attention or control."
keep the fire burning
Keeping alive the burning desire for freedom
Friday, January 30, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Has He No Decency?
Obama’s Bill Hands ACORN $5.2 Billion Bailout
Tuesday, January 27, 2009 7:06 PM
By: David A. Patten Article Font Size
A rising chorus of GOP leaders are protesting that the blockbuster Democratic stimulus package would provide up to a whopping $5.2 billion for ACORN, the left-leaning nonprofit group under federal investigation for massive voter fraud.
Most of the money is secreted away under an item in the now $836 billion package titled “Neighborhood Stabilization Programs.”
Ordinarily, neighborhood stabilization funds are distributed to local governments. But revised language in the stimulus bill would make the funds available directly to non-profit entities such as ACORN, the low-income housing organization whose pro-Democrat voter-registration activities have been blasted by Republicans. ACORN is cited by some for tipping the scales in the Democrats' favor in November.
According to Fox news, Sen. David Vitter, R-La., could appear to be a “payoff” for community groups’ partisan political activities in the last election cycle.
“It is of great concern to me,” Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., tells Newsmax. “I think our government has stayed strong because we’ve had a two-party system, we have had robust debate, people have felt that it was one man-one vote. They are privileged and grateful that they have that ability to cast that vote. And when something is done to belittle or diminish that, it is of great concern to me.”
Regarding ACORN, Blackburn added, “Additional funds going to these organizations that have tried to skew that system, it causes me great concern and I believe that it causes many of my colleagues great concern.”
The three-term congressman stopped short of suggesting the “neighborhood stabilization” money is a power grab by Democrats seeking partisan political advantage. But radio talk giant Rush Limbaugh did not.
Limbaugh warned his listeners Tuesday: “I’ll tell you what’s going on here: We, ladies & gentlemen, we’re funding Obama and the Democrats’ army on the street. We are funding the forces of the Democrat party’s re-election.”
Blackburn echoed the concerns of Republican leaders who object that the bloated package lacks the short-term stimulus a cut in payroll or sales taxes would provide.
According to Matthew Vadum of the Capitol Research Center, the stimulus package now under consideration includes:
$1 billion stashed away in Community Development Block Grant money that ACORN often vies for successfully.
$10 million to develop or refurbish low-income housing, a specialty of ACORN’s.
$4.19 billion to stave off foreclosures via the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Vadum states the current version of the bill would allow nonprofits to compete with cities and states for $3.44 billion of the money. Some $750 million, however, would be exclusively reserved for nonprofits such as ACORN, which is actually an umbrella organization for over 100 progressive organizations.
Regarding the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Vadum writes in American Spectator: “Although ACORN operatives usually get their hands on such funds only after they have first passed through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or state and local governments, the new spending bill largely eliminates these dawdling middle men, making it easier to get Uncle Sam's largess directly into the hands of the same people who run ACORN's various vote fraud and extortion rackets. And the legislative package provides these funds without the usual prohibition on using government money for lobbying or political activities.”
The charges of partisan political payback appear to be resonating in part due to Obama’s longstanding association with partisan get-out-the-vote operations. He was endorsed by ACORN, and during the campaign paid an ACORN affiliate $832,600 to get-out-the-vote assistance. Early in his career, he led a voter drive for an ACORN-affiliated group called Project Vote.
It’s not the first time ACORN has been entangled in a bailout controversy. In September, House Republicans objected that the original $700 billion bailout package included $100 million for ACORN – a tiny fraction of the sums for ACORN now being considered in the stimulus package.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009 7:06 PM
By: David A. Patten Article Font Size
A rising chorus of GOP leaders are protesting that the blockbuster Democratic stimulus package would provide up to a whopping $5.2 billion for ACORN, the left-leaning nonprofit group under federal investigation for massive voter fraud.
Most of the money is secreted away under an item in the now $836 billion package titled “Neighborhood Stabilization Programs.”
Ordinarily, neighborhood stabilization funds are distributed to local governments. But revised language in the stimulus bill would make the funds available directly to non-profit entities such as ACORN, the low-income housing organization whose pro-Democrat voter-registration activities have been blasted by Republicans. ACORN is cited by some for tipping the scales in the Democrats' favor in November.
According to Fox news, Sen. David Vitter, R-La., could appear to be a “payoff” for community groups’ partisan political activities in the last election cycle.
“It is of great concern to me,” Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., tells Newsmax. “I think our government has stayed strong because we’ve had a two-party system, we have had robust debate, people have felt that it was one man-one vote. They are privileged and grateful that they have that ability to cast that vote. And when something is done to belittle or diminish that, it is of great concern to me.”
Regarding ACORN, Blackburn added, “Additional funds going to these organizations that have tried to skew that system, it causes me great concern and I believe that it causes many of my colleagues great concern.”
The three-term congressman stopped short of suggesting the “neighborhood stabilization” money is a power grab by Democrats seeking partisan political advantage. But radio talk giant Rush Limbaugh did not.
Limbaugh warned his listeners Tuesday: “I’ll tell you what’s going on here: We, ladies & gentlemen, we’re funding Obama and the Democrats’ army on the street. We are funding the forces of the Democrat party’s re-election.”
Blackburn echoed the concerns of Republican leaders who object that the bloated package lacks the short-term stimulus a cut in payroll or sales taxes would provide.
According to Matthew Vadum of the Capitol Research Center, the stimulus package now under consideration includes:
$1 billion stashed away in Community Development Block Grant money that ACORN often vies for successfully.
$10 million to develop or refurbish low-income housing, a specialty of ACORN’s.
$4.19 billion to stave off foreclosures via the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Vadum states the current version of the bill would allow nonprofits to compete with cities and states for $3.44 billion of the money. Some $750 million, however, would be exclusively reserved for nonprofits such as ACORN, which is actually an umbrella organization for over 100 progressive organizations.
Regarding the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Vadum writes in American Spectator: “Although ACORN operatives usually get their hands on such funds only after they have first passed through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or state and local governments, the new spending bill largely eliminates these dawdling middle men, making it easier to get Uncle Sam's largess directly into the hands of the same people who run ACORN's various vote fraud and extortion rackets. And the legislative package provides these funds without the usual prohibition on using government money for lobbying or political activities.”
The charges of partisan political payback appear to be resonating in part due to Obama’s longstanding association with partisan get-out-the-vote operations. He was endorsed by ACORN, and during the campaign paid an ACORN affiliate $832,600 to get-out-the-vote assistance. Early in his career, he led a voter drive for an ACORN-affiliated group called Project Vote.
It’s not the first time ACORN has been entangled in a bailout controversy. In September, House Republicans objected that the original $700 billion bailout package included $100 million for ACORN – a tiny fraction of the sums for ACORN now being considered in the stimulus package.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Monday, January 26, 2009
He Wants To Rule The World
Obama Online Team Hired to Help Fight BNP
Matthew Taylor
The Guardian, Monday
January 26, 2009
The firm behind President Barack Obama's online election campaign have been signed up to help anti-racists take on the British National party in the European parliament elections in June.
Blue State Digital (BSD), which used the latest internet technology to mobilise millions of people behind Obama, has been employed to help create a grassroots network across the UK as part of the campaign to stop the BNP leader, Nick Griffin, becoming the far-right party's first MEP. [its not enough to rule America, he wants to rule the world]
The firm began work last week and has already signed up thousands of supporters and donors. As part of the first stage of its campaign BSD and an anti-fascist magazine, Searchlight, has sent thousands of emails asking each recipients to forward it to five friends and make a small donation. The software means campaigners can then track who opens the emails, where they are sent and what happens when they arrive at the other end - tailoring future emails to groups and individuals
"The crucial thing about this campaign is that everybody is given a task so they become activists with a stake in what we are doing," said Nick Lowles, who is leading the Hope not Hate drive. "The software allows us to tailor emails to different groups and get information out there to hundreds of thousands of people.
"We have had more small individual donations in the past two weeks than we have had in three or four years and the technology is already allowing us to build a vibrant, bottom-up activist movement."
The BNP is standing candidates across the country in the European elections and analysts believe they could be on the verge of an important breakthrough.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jan/26/bnp-griffin-obama-election-bsd
Matthew Taylor
The Guardian, Monday
January 26, 2009
The firm behind President Barack Obama's online election campaign have been signed up to help anti-racists take on the British National party in the European parliament elections in June.
Blue State Digital (BSD), which used the latest internet technology to mobilise millions of people behind Obama, has been employed to help create a grassroots network across the UK as part of the campaign to stop the BNP leader, Nick Griffin, becoming the far-right party's first MEP. [its not enough to rule America, he wants to rule the world]
The firm began work last week and has already signed up thousands of supporters and donors. As part of the first stage of its campaign BSD and an anti-fascist magazine, Searchlight, has sent thousands of emails asking each recipients to forward it to five friends and make a small donation. The software means campaigners can then track who opens the emails, where they are sent and what happens when they arrive at the other end - tailoring future emails to groups and individuals
"The crucial thing about this campaign is that everybody is given a task so they become activists with a stake in what we are doing," said Nick Lowles, who is leading the Hope not Hate drive. "The software allows us to tailor emails to different groups and get information out there to hundreds of thousands of people.
"We have had more small individual donations in the past two weeks than we have had in three or four years and the technology is already allowing us to build a vibrant, bottom-up activist movement."
The BNP is standing candidates across the country in the European elections and analysts believe they could be on the verge of an important breakthrough.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jan/26/bnp-griffin-obama-election-bsd
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Maybe, Obama Did Us a Favor
Sometimes I think Obama did us a favor. It’s like getting a glass of cold water thrown in our face while sleeping on the job. We have been awakened.
Obama and his entire nefarious gang is a lessor problem than the Supreme Court, Congress, Senate, electoral college, all the judges who dismissed Obama cases on technicalities and MSM. Most and many have been in power for years prior to Obama and his thugs’ malicious activities. They have had a lot of time to master their art of deception, manipulation of the laws that protect the people from injustice, and make the public think they are acting on behalf of public good.
I have been saying it for a week. The Supreme court must be made accountable for the crimes it just committed against the American public. It must be terminated. Then charged with treason and more. Then taken to trial–regardless the trial ourcome.
Dr. Orly, Donofrio, Philip Berg, et al, who filed various documents in the Supreme court created public documents that will become the actual proof of the Supreme Courts’ miscreance. Those documents, the now infamous January 14, 2009 tea party Obama & Biden had with the Supreme court, and disgusting shithead Roberts two time swearing in of Obama are absolute proof of the willingess our government has had to betray the public. These are major indictments against them. The Supreme court has the arrogance to think they are untouchable. Sooner or later they will be defeated. Nothing reveals their criminal characters more than how they have behaved this paast six months.
Had Obama been a natural born citizen, the public would have never had the opportunity to see the depths of the evil of the people we elected who claim to be representing us.
How to make them accountable and where are we the people going to go that is higher than the mighty power they yield is going to be the challenge. It is going to take creativity, money, great courage, amazing persistence and a beginning with a good leader and organization. Maybe it is all germinating on the web sites and the blogs. It is my profound feelings the inter net seem to be the only place to get honest news.
The goals will have to be clearly defined.
1. Terminate all involved (they know who they are) (Because whole groups of did so, doesn’t remove guilt.)
2. Charge all involved with the crimes they committed (every way possible and persistently their names with their crimes posted next to them should be broadcasted)
3. Make them stand trial. It isn’t enough to be terminated. They must be accountable. This must be done for;
a. Satisfaction of all who have been hurt by their wrongful actions (all of us)
b. It is holding them accountable–justice in action–it really does exist
c. A deterrant to future elected officials & judges tempted to betray public trust
We The People Foundation, Donofrio’s Grand Jury suggestion, Dr. Orly Taitz, Philip Berg, Donorio, Dr. Vieira, Team Sarah, Jeffrey Schrieb, CUSC.org,many great web sites and more are the beginners of this effort. We need to use the courts–even though we know how criminal they are. We need to continue finding ways to motivate MSM to tell the real story about these crimes of sedition by the government. We must begin now and be really loud about it. WE must let every one of those guilty traitors we know who they are and neither their position, their money, their numbers, nor time will permit them to escape. We will find you. You will be accountable.
We must find new leadership to replace that which we terminate. We must make glamorous, desirable, and wonderful following the rule of the US Constitution as written by our fore fathers. We must define our position and never falter from it. We must commit to this with our lives. It is our lives that are now on the line.
Obama must be arrested and if need be taken out by the military. It all must happen within the next three months. If it doesn’t happen within this time period, it will never happen. All of us will be hunted and silenced one way or another.
Obama and his entire nefarious gang is a lessor problem than the Supreme Court, Congress, Senate, electoral college, all the judges who dismissed Obama cases on technicalities and MSM. Most and many have been in power for years prior to Obama and his thugs’ malicious activities. They have had a lot of time to master their art of deception, manipulation of the laws that protect the people from injustice, and make the public think they are acting on behalf of public good.
I have been saying it for a week. The Supreme court must be made accountable for the crimes it just committed against the American public. It must be terminated. Then charged with treason and more. Then taken to trial–regardless the trial ourcome.
Dr. Orly, Donofrio, Philip Berg, et al, who filed various documents in the Supreme court created public documents that will become the actual proof of the Supreme Courts’ miscreance. Those documents, the now infamous January 14, 2009 tea party Obama & Biden had with the Supreme court, and disgusting shithead Roberts two time swearing in of Obama are absolute proof of the willingess our government has had to betray the public. These are major indictments against them. The Supreme court has the arrogance to think they are untouchable. Sooner or later they will be defeated. Nothing reveals their criminal characters more than how they have behaved this paast six months.
Had Obama been a natural born citizen, the public would have never had the opportunity to see the depths of the evil of the people we elected who claim to be representing us.
How to make them accountable and where are we the people going to go that is higher than the mighty power they yield is going to be the challenge. It is going to take creativity, money, great courage, amazing persistence and a beginning with a good leader and organization. Maybe it is all germinating on the web sites and the blogs. It is my profound feelings the inter net seem to be the only place to get honest news.
The goals will have to be clearly defined.
1. Terminate all involved (they know who they are) (Because whole groups of did so, doesn’t remove guilt.)
2. Charge all involved with the crimes they committed (every way possible and persistently their names with their crimes posted next to them should be broadcasted)
3. Make them stand trial. It isn’t enough to be terminated. They must be accountable. This must be done for;
a. Satisfaction of all who have been hurt by their wrongful actions (all of us)
b. It is holding them accountable–justice in action–it really does exist
c. A deterrant to future elected officials & judges tempted to betray public trust
We The People Foundation, Donofrio’s Grand Jury suggestion, Dr. Orly Taitz, Philip Berg, Donorio, Dr. Vieira, Team Sarah, Jeffrey Schrieb, CUSC.org,many great web sites and more are the beginners of this effort. We need to use the courts–even though we know how criminal they are. We need to continue finding ways to motivate MSM to tell the real story about these crimes of sedition by the government. We must begin now and be really loud about it. WE must let every one of those guilty traitors we know who they are and neither their position, their money, their numbers, nor time will permit them to escape. We will find you. You will be accountable.
We must find new leadership to replace that which we terminate. We must make glamorous, desirable, and wonderful following the rule of the US Constitution as written by our fore fathers. We must define our position and never falter from it. We must commit to this with our lives. It is our lives that are now on the line.
Obama must be arrested and if need be taken out by the military. It all must happen within the next three months. If it doesn’t happen within this time period, it will never happen. All of us will be hunted and silenced one way or another.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Day 4 of Obama's Usurpation
Here it is day 4 of Obama’s usurpation.
Here it is day 4 of Obama’s usurpation. He’s giving executive orders out like jelly beans. Where is the injunction? Where is the military? Where are “WE The People” to stop this man from the illegal orders he is making? This is what is happening before the eyes of the world and not one living soul will stop him.
According to Edwin Vieira, Jr. from Obama needs to stand down. . . .
Fifth, as nothing but an usurper (if he becomes one), Obama will have no conceivable authority “to make Treaties”, or to “nominate, and * * * appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not * * * otherwise provided for [in the Constitution]” (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2). And therefore any “Treaties” or “nominat[ions], and * * * appoint[ments]” he purports to “make” will be void ab initio, no matter what the Senate does, because the Senate can neither authorize an usurper to take such actions in the first place, nor thereafter ratify them. One need not be a lawyer to foresee what further, perhaps irremediable, chaos must ensue if an usurper, even with “the Advice and Consent of the Senate”, unconstitutionally “appoint[s] * * * Judges of the Supreme Court” whose votes thereafter make up the majorities that wrongly decide critical “Cases” of constitutional law.
Edwin Vieira, Jr.
Time is of the essence. If—which will never happen—Obama is stopped how are all these jelly bean orders and damage the monster has done be undone!
It’s over, America. The American Constitutional love affair is over.
Usa patriots-shout
Here it is day 4 of Obama’s usurpation. He’s giving executive orders out like jelly beans. Where is the injunction? Where is the military? Where are “WE The People” to stop this man from the illegal orders he is making? This is what is happening before the eyes of the world and not one living soul will stop him.
According to Edwin Vieira, Jr. from Obama needs to stand down. . . .
Fifth, as nothing but an usurper (if he becomes one), Obama will have no conceivable authority “to make Treaties”, or to “nominate, and * * * appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not * * * otherwise provided for [in the Constitution]” (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2). And therefore any “Treaties” or “nominat[ions], and * * * appoint[ments]” he purports to “make” will be void ab initio, no matter what the Senate does, because the Senate can neither authorize an usurper to take such actions in the first place, nor thereafter ratify them. One need not be a lawyer to foresee what further, perhaps irremediable, chaos must ensue if an usurper, even with “the Advice and Consent of the Senate”, unconstitutionally “appoint[s] * * * Judges of the Supreme Court” whose votes thereafter make up the majorities that wrongly decide critical “Cases” of constitutional law.
Edwin Vieira, Jr.
Time is of the essence. If—which will never happen—Obama is stopped how are all these jelly bean orders and damage the monster has done be undone!
It’s over, America. The American Constitutional love affair is over.
Usa patriots-shout
Thursday, January 22, 2009
It's The Jews Stupid
In her powerful new commentary, Joan Swirsky writes:
"The virulence of the Islamic agenda – toward Jews, Christians, the United States, Israel, and all of Western Civilization – is well-known to media people and others who continue to vilify only the Jews."
Read Joan's stunning retrospective explaining how anti-semitism is an age-old poisonous element in our world - one that not only persists to this day, but is being alarmingly promoted in the media. Who will stand up for the Jews?
It’s The Jews, Stupid
Joan Swirsky
January 22, 2009
For many decades after World War II, Eastern Europe was completely Judenrein, a Nazi term meaning free of – actually rid of – Jews. Small wonder, given that the region’s concentration camps and crematoria – Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Sobibor, Auschwitz-Birkenau, Dachau, Majdanek, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, Flossenburg, Mauthausen, Ravensbruck, et al.– had incinerated millions of Jews in the Nazi’s reign of terror. But even in the utter absence of Jews, anti-Semitism flourished!
And let’s not forget that even after the Holocaust, this intractable hatred persisted – in France, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine, Russia, Hungary, the list goes on and on. Even today, this age-old venom thrives and in many places has grown to monstrous proportions. The same can be said of countless places on earth where no Jews have ever lived and no inhabitants of those places have ever met a Jew.
When it comes to anti-Semitism, no first-hand experience is necessary. All that is required is the need to vent an existential rage that seems to reside in the hearts and minds of those who desperately need a handy scapegoat for whatever pathology ails them– rationality, facts, logic and compassion be damned. Jew hatred is a virus of unknown origin that has mutated over time into a contagious, malignant and incurable pathology, reaching its apotheosis during the Holocaust but still alive and pernicious as ever to this day.
Why is this? Why, through millennia of worldwide crises and conflicts, has the microscopic population of Jews always been the bête-noire of public opinion? Why, for instance, are the 1.3-billion Muslims who inhabit every continent in huge numbers so threatened by a mere 13-million Jews who live in small numbers primarily in tiny Israel and the United States?
Theories abound – this is the short list:
▪ The Jews killed Christ (who even Jew-haters acknowledge was a Jewish rabbi), a canard removed from the canons of the Vatican (…not “guilty of deicide”) through the initiation of Pope John Paul XXIII in the early 1960s. But this fails to explain why so many millions of Christians are today among the most passionate friends and supporters of both Israel and the Jewish people.
▪ The Jews “stole” the land of Israel from the so-called Palestinians, a “people” invented in the late 1960s by the terrorist Yasir Arafat. But this fails to explain the virulent Jew-hatred that existed in every century that preceded the twentieth.
▪ The shame factor Jew haters feel that they are less resilient, less intelligent, less productive than their Semitic counterparts, and can’t explain why the vast number of Islamists – 20 percent of the world’s population – have won only seven Nobel Prizes, while the infinitesimal Jewish population – 0.02 percent – has won 129 Nobel Prizes. But this fails to explain the spectacular accomplishments of every ethnic group that has contributed to the betterment of mankind...
▪ The refusal of Jews to worship any God but their own, the God that gave the world the Ten Commandments and a Code of Ethics that, to this day, all civilized nations subscribe to.
▪ Both rage and envy at the notion, expressed in the Bible, that the Jews are God’s “Chosen People,” even though it fails to explain the competing claim of Muslims that Allah’s people are the chosen ones.
In her article, “Hating the Jews,” Kyle-Anne Shiver finds this last reason irresistibly compelling: “What if that tale spun in the Bible is actually true?” she asks. “What if this one God, creator of all that is seen and all that is unseen, took it upon Himself, unbidden by humanity, to pick a people, call them His own, and then set about to reveal His own nature to them little by little, over centuries, through dire punishments and heavenly rewards and provident manna…what if these people this One God picked were the Jews?”
Shiver says what she loves about her Christian faith is that it gives her “the advantage of seeing through tangled webs of deceit, woven through many centuries and seemingly different ideologies. My faith tells me simply that there is only one reasonable assumption on the matter of Jew hate. It stems from God-hate…because as long as there is God, there will be Jew hatred.”
Who Hates the Jews?
Among them are the many Jews who are also on the Jew-hatred bandwagon. Without discussing self-loathing Jews like Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, George Soros and legions of others, how to explain those other American, mostly liberal, Jews?
These are the appeasers of anti-Semites who believe – as Winston Churchill said about all appeasers – that “the crocodile will eat them last.” While these Jews once supported Israel, their conversion from Judaism to their new religion of Liberalism – with its inflexible commitment to perceived victims – has made them look at Israel in the same negative way they look at America.
Strength is bad, these anti-establishment, anti-war leftovers from the ‘60s believe, as do older leftists. If people suffer, it’s the fault of the establishment. If the establishment is attacked, the attackers are always right. After all, it’s not “fair” that some people are stronger than others, even if the stronger people strive for democracy and their opponents strive for a draconian theocracy.
Having embraced not only multiculturalism and political correctness but also a perverse egalitarianism, it’s impossible for this ilk to make a value judgment about who is right or wrong, good or bad. To them, people who seek to spread freedom and democracy and benefit the entire world by developing life-saving medicines and displaying unparalleled generosity are equal to those who strap shrapnel-laden belts on their children and burn the flags of foreign nations. “Who are we to judge?” they bleat.
Of course, not all liberals are Jewish. A worldwide media, comprised of non-Jews of every race, religion, and political affiliation from left to right, almost invariably militate – in their exquisitely non-objective way – against Israel, no matter the circumstances or history that compels the beleaguered state to defend itself. Although the same media embraced the straggling remnants of the Holocaust when they landed, half dead, in the land of their ancestors and Israel became a state in 1948, their support was short-lived.
Indeed, the support from the Victims R Us media steadily diminished as Israel turned barren deserts into flourishing orchards, constructed gleaming cities featuring the world’s most dazzling universities and research, art and medical centers, and built a military capable of fending off – and defeating – the relentless aggression waged by Arabs in the wars of 1948-49, 1956, 1967, 1973-74, and 1982. And that is not to omit the two intifadas – in 1987-1993 and 2000 to the present – in which terrorists from Hamas and Hezbollah have sent multi-thousands of rockets and mortars into civilian centers, and also refined the art of suicide bombing.
Same Old, Same Old
In Israel’s latest defensive action against Hamas – after the terrorist group launched upwards of 10,000 rockets and mortars into Israel’s southern, civilian-populated towns and cities – we see the same predictable scenario playing out on the world’s stage.
▪ Once again, Israel accommodates her enemies by giving up land in the name of peace, as it did in 2005 by unilaterally withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and uprooting 8,000 of its residents.
▪ Once again, instead of using the houses, physical-fitness facilities, fish farms, nurseries, orchards, and factories the Israelis left behind, the Arabs destroy them, showing the utter contempt they have for their own citizens.
▪ Once again, instead of honoring their agreement to live in peace, the Arabs break their word and launch unprovoked acts of aggression.
▪ Once again, Israel withstands years of terror before striking back.
▪ Once again, Israel targets terrorist havens, underground tunnels used for smuggling deadly weapons, and military targets.
▪ Once again, the craven cowards who run the terrorist organization hide among their women, children, and hospitalized patients, guaranteeing that civilians – whose lives, to them, are meaningless and dispensable – will die.
▪ Once again, the terrorists use their useful idiots in the media to capitalize on what Professor Alan Dershowitz has described as their immoral “dead baby strategy.”
▪ Once again, the media invoke their “proportionality” mantra – not once about the 10,000 rockets that have targeted Israel, but relentlessly about Israel’s response.
▪ Once again, the Islamic bloc and the other thugs that comprise the 47-member United Nations Security Council adopt a resolution that “condemns” Israel and accuses her of “aggression” but omits any mention of – surprise, surprise! – Hamas!
▪ Once again, the worldwide media pretend to be “outraged” on behalf of the “victims,” having studiously ignored the real victims in Israel who have been under assault for years.
▪ Once again, other “outraged” anti-Semites throughout the world join protest marches to rally against…who? Why Israel, of course, and the United States. But most of all against the Jews!
Make no mistake about it. The outrage, protests, U.N. resolutions and biased media coverage are not about the latest Israeli-Arab conflict. Rather, they are symptoms of the greatest pandemic of hatred the world has ever known – plain, old-fashioned anti-Semitism.
Selective “Victim” Worship
As writer and author Victor Sharpe has noted, the media and the protestors “ignore horrors when Israel can’t be blamed.”
Where, he asks, was their outrage when Arab Islamist governments killed 400,000 people in Darfur and Sudan, and drove two-million from their homes? When 75,000 Hindus and Buddhists died in the Sri Lanka war? When nearly four-million people died in the war in the Republic of Congo? And where was the outrage in the “Second Chechen war with up to 90,000 dead, the Islamic insurgency in the Philippines with 160,000 casualties, an ethnic conflict in Nagaland with the loss of 43,000 lives, the Turkish- Kurdish struggle with 37,000 dead and wounded and…the Islamic insurgency in Kashmir with another 60,000 lives lost”?
“Can you remember seeing street demonstrations or lurid pictures flashed across your TV screen?” Sharpe asks. “The answer is no because they are not Palestinians. As soon as Israel could no longer bear the Palestinian provocations and finally retaliated, the world strangely woke up and ended its deafening silence.”
Sharpe attributes “much of the world's hypocrisy [and] pro-Palestinian bias” to the fact that “the world hated the stateless Jews and now hates the State of the Jews.”
Whither This Hatred?
Whether Jew haters learned their animus through mother’s milk, personal mentors, or religious teachings, they all believe that somehow – magically, even – their lives would be better if Jews were not among them – if Jews, in fact, were dead, and Israel wiped off the map.
According to Itamar Marcus and Barbara, Cook of PalestinianMediaWatch.org, “Hamas considers itself an Islamic supremacist movement” and its Charter dictates that Jews be exterminated. The Charter also states: "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." Then there is the Hamas poster that says, “Kill a Jew, Go to Heaven.”
But the virulence of the Islamic agenda – toward Jews, Christians, the United States, Israel, and all of Western Civilization – is well-known to media people and others who continue to vilify only the Jews. Some try to hide their bias, but increasing numbers don’t, as evidenced by the savagely anti-Semitic slogans and chants that “protestors” displayed against Israel and on behalf of Hamas in suspiciously well-organized and well-financed demonstrations in Toronto, London, New York City, Los Angeles, Fort Lauderdale, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Germany, the list goes on.
Of course, our politically correct culture dictates that anti-Semites talk in code:
▪ The word “proportionality” is reserved solely for Jews when they are triumphing over their enemies.
▪ The rationale about liking Israel but not liking Zionism is code for anti-Jewish feeling
▪ The word “realist” that describes the “policies” of U.S. Cabinet appointees, presidential advisors, and foreign-policy “experts” in our State Department is code for preferring Arab oil to Israeli democracy.
▪ The accusation that Israelis are racists is, without exception, the rant of anti-Semites who project their own rabid racism onto Jews.
Jew Hatred for Dummies
Make no mistake about it – we Jews are onto you Jew haters.
We see, with crystal-clear clarity, the media pretend to present “the news” but unable to conceal their anti-Semitism – their racism.
We hear DNA anti-Semites like the liberal racist Bill Moyers – on the taxpayer-funded Public Broadcasting System – say that the “Israeli violence” in Gaza is a consequence of "genetic encoding."
We witness the so-called diplomats at the U.N. extort multimillions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers every year to spread their anti-American, anti-Semitic agenda and to support third-world dictatorships that are, above all things, dedicated to annihilating the Jews.
We watch, with 20-20 vision, the choices of Cabinet members and advisors that our own American presidents have made and we invariably detect the rank odor of systemic Jew hatred.
And we know, as surely as night follows day, that the premier subject that obsesses the entire world is the Jews, Stupid!
Here’s a heads-up to all you Jew haters! We Jews are here to stay. The Bible has told us so, and to this date – 5.000 years later – it’s never been wrong! Get used to it. We’re not going away, your toxic racism notwithstanding!
Deal with it!
Contact: JoanSharon@aol.com
"The virulence of the Islamic agenda – toward Jews, Christians, the United States, Israel, and all of Western Civilization – is well-known to media people and others who continue to vilify only the Jews."
Read Joan's stunning retrospective explaining how anti-semitism is an age-old poisonous element in our world - one that not only persists to this day, but is being alarmingly promoted in the media. Who will stand up for the Jews?
It’s The Jews, Stupid
Joan Swirsky
January 22, 2009
For many decades after World War II, Eastern Europe was completely Judenrein, a Nazi term meaning free of – actually rid of – Jews. Small wonder, given that the region’s concentration camps and crematoria – Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Sobibor, Auschwitz-Birkenau, Dachau, Majdanek, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, Flossenburg, Mauthausen, Ravensbruck, et al.– had incinerated millions of Jews in the Nazi’s reign of terror. But even in the utter absence of Jews, anti-Semitism flourished!
And let’s not forget that even after the Holocaust, this intractable hatred persisted – in France, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine, Russia, Hungary, the list goes on and on. Even today, this age-old venom thrives and in many places has grown to monstrous proportions. The same can be said of countless places on earth where no Jews have ever lived and no inhabitants of those places have ever met a Jew.
When it comes to anti-Semitism, no first-hand experience is necessary. All that is required is the need to vent an existential rage that seems to reside in the hearts and minds of those who desperately need a handy scapegoat for whatever pathology ails them– rationality, facts, logic and compassion be damned. Jew hatred is a virus of unknown origin that has mutated over time into a contagious, malignant and incurable pathology, reaching its apotheosis during the Holocaust but still alive and pernicious as ever to this day.
Why is this? Why, through millennia of worldwide crises and conflicts, has the microscopic population of Jews always been the bête-noire of public opinion? Why, for instance, are the 1.3-billion Muslims who inhabit every continent in huge numbers so threatened by a mere 13-million Jews who live in small numbers primarily in tiny Israel and the United States?
Theories abound – this is the short list:
▪ The Jews killed Christ (who even Jew-haters acknowledge was a Jewish rabbi), a canard removed from the canons of the Vatican (…not “guilty of deicide”) through the initiation of Pope John Paul XXIII in the early 1960s. But this fails to explain why so many millions of Christians are today among the most passionate friends and supporters of both Israel and the Jewish people.
▪ The Jews “stole” the land of Israel from the so-called Palestinians, a “people” invented in the late 1960s by the terrorist Yasir Arafat. But this fails to explain the virulent Jew-hatred that existed in every century that preceded the twentieth.
▪ The shame factor Jew haters feel that they are less resilient, less intelligent, less productive than their Semitic counterparts, and can’t explain why the vast number of Islamists – 20 percent of the world’s population – have won only seven Nobel Prizes, while the infinitesimal Jewish population – 0.02 percent – has won 129 Nobel Prizes. But this fails to explain the spectacular accomplishments of every ethnic group that has contributed to the betterment of mankind...
▪ The refusal of Jews to worship any God but their own, the God that gave the world the Ten Commandments and a Code of Ethics that, to this day, all civilized nations subscribe to.
▪ Both rage and envy at the notion, expressed in the Bible, that the Jews are God’s “Chosen People,” even though it fails to explain the competing claim of Muslims that Allah’s people are the chosen ones.
In her article, “Hating the Jews,” Kyle-Anne Shiver finds this last reason irresistibly compelling: “What if that tale spun in the Bible is actually true?” she asks. “What if this one God, creator of all that is seen and all that is unseen, took it upon Himself, unbidden by humanity, to pick a people, call them His own, and then set about to reveal His own nature to them little by little, over centuries, through dire punishments and heavenly rewards and provident manna…what if these people this One God picked were the Jews?”
Shiver says what she loves about her Christian faith is that it gives her “the advantage of seeing through tangled webs of deceit, woven through many centuries and seemingly different ideologies. My faith tells me simply that there is only one reasonable assumption on the matter of Jew hate. It stems from God-hate…because as long as there is God, there will be Jew hatred.”
Who Hates the Jews?
Among them are the many Jews who are also on the Jew-hatred bandwagon. Without discussing self-loathing Jews like Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, George Soros and legions of others, how to explain those other American, mostly liberal, Jews?
These are the appeasers of anti-Semites who believe – as Winston Churchill said about all appeasers – that “the crocodile will eat them last.” While these Jews once supported Israel, their conversion from Judaism to their new religion of Liberalism – with its inflexible commitment to perceived victims – has made them look at Israel in the same negative way they look at America.
Strength is bad, these anti-establishment, anti-war leftovers from the ‘60s believe, as do older leftists. If people suffer, it’s the fault of the establishment. If the establishment is attacked, the attackers are always right. After all, it’s not “fair” that some people are stronger than others, even if the stronger people strive for democracy and their opponents strive for a draconian theocracy.
Having embraced not only multiculturalism and political correctness but also a perverse egalitarianism, it’s impossible for this ilk to make a value judgment about who is right or wrong, good or bad. To them, people who seek to spread freedom and democracy and benefit the entire world by developing life-saving medicines and displaying unparalleled generosity are equal to those who strap shrapnel-laden belts on their children and burn the flags of foreign nations. “Who are we to judge?” they bleat.
Of course, not all liberals are Jewish. A worldwide media, comprised of non-Jews of every race, religion, and political affiliation from left to right, almost invariably militate – in their exquisitely non-objective way – against Israel, no matter the circumstances or history that compels the beleaguered state to defend itself. Although the same media embraced the straggling remnants of the Holocaust when they landed, half dead, in the land of their ancestors and Israel became a state in 1948, their support was short-lived.
Indeed, the support from the Victims R Us media steadily diminished as Israel turned barren deserts into flourishing orchards, constructed gleaming cities featuring the world’s most dazzling universities and research, art and medical centers, and built a military capable of fending off – and defeating – the relentless aggression waged by Arabs in the wars of 1948-49, 1956, 1967, 1973-74, and 1982. And that is not to omit the two intifadas – in 1987-1993 and 2000 to the present – in which terrorists from Hamas and Hezbollah have sent multi-thousands of rockets and mortars into civilian centers, and also refined the art of suicide bombing.
Same Old, Same Old
In Israel’s latest defensive action against Hamas – after the terrorist group launched upwards of 10,000 rockets and mortars into Israel’s southern, civilian-populated towns and cities – we see the same predictable scenario playing out on the world’s stage.
▪ Once again, Israel accommodates her enemies by giving up land in the name of peace, as it did in 2005 by unilaterally withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and uprooting 8,000 of its residents.
▪ Once again, instead of using the houses, physical-fitness facilities, fish farms, nurseries, orchards, and factories the Israelis left behind, the Arabs destroy them, showing the utter contempt they have for their own citizens.
▪ Once again, instead of honoring their agreement to live in peace, the Arabs break their word and launch unprovoked acts of aggression.
▪ Once again, Israel withstands years of terror before striking back.
▪ Once again, Israel targets terrorist havens, underground tunnels used for smuggling deadly weapons, and military targets.
▪ Once again, the craven cowards who run the terrorist organization hide among their women, children, and hospitalized patients, guaranteeing that civilians – whose lives, to them, are meaningless and dispensable – will die.
▪ Once again, the terrorists use their useful idiots in the media to capitalize on what Professor Alan Dershowitz has described as their immoral “dead baby strategy.”
▪ Once again, the media invoke their “proportionality” mantra – not once about the 10,000 rockets that have targeted Israel, but relentlessly about Israel’s response.
▪ Once again, the Islamic bloc and the other thugs that comprise the 47-member United Nations Security Council adopt a resolution that “condemns” Israel and accuses her of “aggression” but omits any mention of – surprise, surprise! – Hamas!
▪ Once again, the worldwide media pretend to be “outraged” on behalf of the “victims,” having studiously ignored the real victims in Israel who have been under assault for years.
▪ Once again, other “outraged” anti-Semites throughout the world join protest marches to rally against…who? Why Israel, of course, and the United States. But most of all against the Jews!
Make no mistake about it. The outrage, protests, U.N. resolutions and biased media coverage are not about the latest Israeli-Arab conflict. Rather, they are symptoms of the greatest pandemic of hatred the world has ever known – plain, old-fashioned anti-Semitism.
Selective “Victim” Worship
As writer and author Victor Sharpe has noted, the media and the protestors “ignore horrors when Israel can’t be blamed.”
Where, he asks, was their outrage when Arab Islamist governments killed 400,000 people in Darfur and Sudan, and drove two-million from their homes? When 75,000 Hindus and Buddhists died in the Sri Lanka war? When nearly four-million people died in the war in the Republic of Congo? And where was the outrage in the “Second Chechen war with up to 90,000 dead, the Islamic insurgency in the Philippines with 160,000 casualties, an ethnic conflict in Nagaland with the loss of 43,000 lives, the Turkish- Kurdish struggle with 37,000 dead and wounded and…the Islamic insurgency in Kashmir with another 60,000 lives lost”?
“Can you remember seeing street demonstrations or lurid pictures flashed across your TV screen?” Sharpe asks. “The answer is no because they are not Palestinians. As soon as Israel could no longer bear the Palestinian provocations and finally retaliated, the world strangely woke up and ended its deafening silence.”
Sharpe attributes “much of the world's hypocrisy [and] pro-Palestinian bias” to the fact that “the world hated the stateless Jews and now hates the State of the Jews.”
Whither This Hatred?
Whether Jew haters learned their animus through mother’s milk, personal mentors, or religious teachings, they all believe that somehow – magically, even – their lives would be better if Jews were not among them – if Jews, in fact, were dead, and Israel wiped off the map.
According to Itamar Marcus and Barbara, Cook of PalestinianMediaWatch.org, “Hamas considers itself an Islamic supremacist movement” and its Charter dictates that Jews be exterminated. The Charter also states: "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." Then there is the Hamas poster that says, “Kill a Jew, Go to Heaven.”
But the virulence of the Islamic agenda – toward Jews, Christians, the United States, Israel, and all of Western Civilization – is well-known to media people and others who continue to vilify only the Jews. Some try to hide their bias, but increasing numbers don’t, as evidenced by the savagely anti-Semitic slogans and chants that “protestors” displayed against Israel and on behalf of Hamas in suspiciously well-organized and well-financed demonstrations in Toronto, London, New York City, Los Angeles, Fort Lauderdale, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Germany, the list goes on.
Of course, our politically correct culture dictates that anti-Semites talk in code:
▪ The word “proportionality” is reserved solely for Jews when they are triumphing over their enemies.
▪ The rationale about liking Israel but not liking Zionism is code for anti-Jewish feeling
▪ The word “realist” that describes the “policies” of U.S. Cabinet appointees, presidential advisors, and foreign-policy “experts” in our State Department is code for preferring Arab oil to Israeli democracy.
▪ The accusation that Israelis are racists is, without exception, the rant of anti-Semites who project their own rabid racism onto Jews.
Jew Hatred for Dummies
Make no mistake about it – we Jews are onto you Jew haters.
We see, with crystal-clear clarity, the media pretend to present “the news” but unable to conceal their anti-Semitism – their racism.
We hear DNA anti-Semites like the liberal racist Bill Moyers – on the taxpayer-funded Public Broadcasting System – say that the “Israeli violence” in Gaza is a consequence of "genetic encoding."
We witness the so-called diplomats at the U.N. extort multimillions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers every year to spread their anti-American, anti-Semitic agenda and to support third-world dictatorships that are, above all things, dedicated to annihilating the Jews.
We watch, with 20-20 vision, the choices of Cabinet members and advisors that our own American presidents have made and we invariably detect the rank odor of systemic Jew hatred.
And we know, as surely as night follows day, that the premier subject that obsesses the entire world is the Jews, Stupid!
Here’s a heads-up to all you Jew haters! We Jews are here to stay. The Bible has told us so, and to this date – 5.000 years later – it’s never been wrong! Get used to it. We’re not going away, your toxic racism notwithstanding!
Deal with it!
Contact: JoanSharon@aol.com
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Constitutional Crisis Permitted by the Supreme Court
Constitutional Crisis Permitted by the Supreme Court
The holy of holiest nine guardians of the Constitution knew last summer. They had it in their power to prevent this hideous “CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS” staring America and before the world write smack in the face. Officially they knew with Philip Berg’s case filed August 21, 2008. Time was of an essence. They could have and should have prevented what America is now facing. They had it in their power to postpone or stop the election until America was assured the man who would win conformed with the three requirements of the Constitution. It was their sworn duty to do so. This wasn’t about Obama. It was about upholding and protecting the US Consitution.
These nine sacred pillars of justice looked the other way. They turned their backs on America and hung it out to dry. Knowing “time is of an essence”, they took their good old time to respond. Then at the 11th hour they denied motions of injunctions to stop or at least post pone various stages of the election until the candidates were proven to meet the only three Constitutional requirements to serve as President of the United States.
After a period of “great silence” by the Supreme court. They simply fooled around and made denials without comment. They are so arrogant they didn’t even think they owed America an explanation. The public who loved and wholeheartedly believed in the nine great protectors, were confused, shocked. Eventually we began awakening. It was unbelievable to think with America’s national security at stake, these guys wouldn’t make the issue of a potential presidents “natural born citizen” rule a first priority.
More suits followed Philip Berg’s suit. Donofrio, Dr. Orly Taitrz filed excellent cases. Some of these are still being knocked around in the Supreme Courts procedurals process. It isn’t hard to predict how these will be decided. Except for some denials of some motions, the Supreme Court simply ignored that Time is of an essence. Slowly the public began to ask what was wrong with this picture.
The greatest revelation as to the Supreme Court’s thinking and attitude regarding the Obama suits was the secret meeting on January 14, 2009 Justice Shithead Roberts instigated with a defendant and his cohort in the many lawsuits before the court. Imagine a judge sitting down to tea with a defendant in a case he must be making decisions upon? Unheard of, and never to be done! This was a real eye opener for me. I was certain after that meeting, no justice on a white horse was going to appear to save America.
The final and last finale was Justice Shithead Robert’s swearing in Barry Sotoero—who never produced one document to prove is he is or is not qualified to be president. Before the whole world Justice Roberts violated his SACRED OATH and installed a USURPER INTO THE WHITHOUSE. The minute he did that he became a traitor to the United States, a criminal, and committed treason. Now the whole world knows what Justice Shithead Roberts conspired with an imposter to sell America to the highest bidder. Now Justice Roberts, and the other eight Justices must be charged with Treason, Conspiracy, being Traitors and brought to trial. This will not be tolerated.
What more information does America need to know about the moral turpitude of the nine men of the Supreme Court? Their actions have more than telegraphed to the world they have breached their fiduciary duties, broken the oath to uphold and protect the Constitution. They flaunted their acts of Constitutional violations as if they were pearls of glory. It doesn’t take a Steven Hawking to know it will be a waste of time and money to bring any more cases before the Supreme Court in hopes of justice being served. Justice doesn’t exist there. So from hence forward look elsewhere to find justice.
Finally, the untouchable Supreme Holies need to be made accountable for the conspiracy to commit crimes against America. At this stage, it makes no difference if they hear and rule on any of the Obama cases still before them. So what is they now claim Obama is not qualified. The damage already done by their manipulation, fooling around, and actually going so far as to swear this flim-flam man into the Whitehouse is already done. It is in the billions of dollars, a compromised American security, the loss of our Constitution as Rule for America and a major world wide loss of respect for America. (It is one thing to hate America. It is quite another to no longer respect America.)
These nine judges need to be terminated for breach of fiduciary duty, for failure to honor their oath, for conspiracy and treason against America, perjury, failure to do their job when asked by the public, placing America in the greatest crisis since 1776, and for knowingly installing a usurper into the Whitehouse. The Constitutional Crisis America now faces could have been prevented had it not for the fact the Supreme Court was part of the conspiracy. Now it is time for WE The People to put the Supreme Court, Congress, Senate, Electoral College, and every one else who knowingly chose to ignore the facts and support a Usurper.
They think because they are so many, they will not have to be accountable for their actions. Wrong. We will publicly expose them persistently for as long as it takes to terminate their positions.
Therese Daniels
Copyright Jan.21, 2009
USA Patriots Shout
The holy of holiest nine guardians of the Constitution knew last summer. They had it in their power to prevent this hideous “CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS” staring America and before the world write smack in the face. Officially they knew with Philip Berg’s case filed August 21, 2008. Time was of an essence. They could have and should have prevented what America is now facing. They had it in their power to postpone or stop the election until America was assured the man who would win conformed with the three requirements of the Constitution. It was their sworn duty to do so. This wasn’t about Obama. It was about upholding and protecting the US Consitution.
These nine sacred pillars of justice looked the other way. They turned their backs on America and hung it out to dry. Knowing “time is of an essence”, they took their good old time to respond. Then at the 11th hour they denied motions of injunctions to stop or at least post pone various stages of the election until the candidates were proven to meet the only three Constitutional requirements to serve as President of the United States.
After a period of “great silence” by the Supreme court. They simply fooled around and made denials without comment. They are so arrogant they didn’t even think they owed America an explanation. The public who loved and wholeheartedly believed in the nine great protectors, were confused, shocked. Eventually we began awakening. It was unbelievable to think with America’s national security at stake, these guys wouldn’t make the issue of a potential presidents “natural born citizen” rule a first priority.
More suits followed Philip Berg’s suit. Donofrio, Dr. Orly Taitrz filed excellent cases. Some of these are still being knocked around in the Supreme Courts procedurals process. It isn’t hard to predict how these will be decided. Except for some denials of some motions, the Supreme Court simply ignored that Time is of an essence. Slowly the public began to ask what was wrong with this picture.
The greatest revelation as to the Supreme Court’s thinking and attitude regarding the Obama suits was the secret meeting on January 14, 2009 Justice Shithead Roberts instigated with a defendant and his cohort in the many lawsuits before the court. Imagine a judge sitting down to tea with a defendant in a case he must be making decisions upon? Unheard of, and never to be done! This was a real eye opener for me. I was certain after that meeting, no justice on a white horse was going to appear to save America.
The final and last finale was Justice Shithead Robert’s swearing in Barry Sotoero—who never produced one document to prove is he is or is not qualified to be president. Before the whole world Justice Roberts violated his SACRED OATH and installed a USURPER INTO THE WHITHOUSE. The minute he did that he became a traitor to the United States, a criminal, and committed treason. Now the whole world knows what Justice Shithead Roberts conspired with an imposter to sell America to the highest bidder. Now Justice Roberts, and the other eight Justices must be charged with Treason, Conspiracy, being Traitors and brought to trial. This will not be tolerated.
What more information does America need to know about the moral turpitude of the nine men of the Supreme Court? Their actions have more than telegraphed to the world they have breached their fiduciary duties, broken the oath to uphold and protect the Constitution. They flaunted their acts of Constitutional violations as if they were pearls of glory. It doesn’t take a Steven Hawking to know it will be a waste of time and money to bring any more cases before the Supreme Court in hopes of justice being served. Justice doesn’t exist there. So from hence forward look elsewhere to find justice.
Finally, the untouchable Supreme Holies need to be made accountable for the conspiracy to commit crimes against America. At this stage, it makes no difference if they hear and rule on any of the Obama cases still before them. So what is they now claim Obama is not qualified. The damage already done by their manipulation, fooling around, and actually going so far as to swear this flim-flam man into the Whitehouse is already done. It is in the billions of dollars, a compromised American security, the loss of our Constitution as Rule for America and a major world wide loss of respect for America. (It is one thing to hate America. It is quite another to no longer respect America.)
These nine judges need to be terminated for breach of fiduciary duty, for failure to honor their oath, for conspiracy and treason against America, perjury, failure to do their job when asked by the public, placing America in the greatest crisis since 1776, and for knowingly installing a usurper into the Whitehouse. The Constitutional Crisis America now faces could have been prevented had it not for the fact the Supreme Court was part of the conspiracy. Now it is time for WE The People to put the Supreme Court, Congress, Senate, Electoral College, and every one else who knowingly chose to ignore the facts and support a Usurper.
They think because they are so many, they will not have to be accountable for their actions. Wrong. We will publicly expose them persistently for as long as it takes to terminate their positions.
Therese Daniels
Copyright Jan.21, 2009
USA Patriots Shout
Saturday, January 17, 2009
We No Longer Have A Congress to Write To
We No Longer have a Congress to Write To
This is my response to any one who ever asks me to write another letter the existing Congress, Senate or Supreme Court. NOT UNTIL EVERY ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIAL IN THIS CURRENT SLATE IS REMOVED WILL I WASTE MY INTEGRITY WRITING TO ANY OF THEM. THEY ARE TRAITORS—EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. I WILL IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM ACKNOWLEDGE OR VALIDATE ANY ONE OF THEM AS MY REPRESENTIVES IN THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AS THE US CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN. EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM FAILED TO KEEP THEIR OATH TO UPHOLD AND PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION OF AMERICA!
(Though I wrote this to one very well intentioned lady, we will all find ourselves forgetting American is no more.)
You are in as much of a fog of confusion as all of us. On one hand you readily acknolwedge that our Congress and Senate has failed us by refusing to hear the calls and letters we sent them regarding Obama's "natural born citizen" status. On the other hand you are asking us to write to our Congress regarding a new bill to be voted upon. It is apparent reality hasn't hit us yet.
If Congress failed America on the most important issue in American history--the installation of a Usurper as President,-- what on earth makes you think it is still OUR CONGRESS? We no longer have a Congress, Senate, or Supreme Court that gives a rats tail about us. I will never again write to a dead government.
The only issue left is terminating all our elected officials before their terms expire. WE must concentrate on finding every way to publicly expose them for the treason they committed against America and terminate them for breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentation, conspiracy, and treason. These elected officials are not politicians in office. They are criminals! They should be behind bars. We should be doing every thing in our power to indict all of them. We must constantly remind the public of Congress, Sennate and The Supreme Court’s betrayal of America! There no longer is a Congress that exists for the people!
Usa Patriots Shout
This is my response to any one who ever asks me to write another letter the existing Congress, Senate or Supreme Court. NOT UNTIL EVERY ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIAL IN THIS CURRENT SLATE IS REMOVED WILL I WASTE MY INTEGRITY WRITING TO ANY OF THEM. THEY ARE TRAITORS—EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. I WILL IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM ACKNOWLEDGE OR VALIDATE ANY ONE OF THEM AS MY REPRESENTIVES IN THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AS THE US CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN. EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM FAILED TO KEEP THEIR OATH TO UPHOLD AND PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION OF AMERICA!
(Though I wrote this to one very well intentioned lady, we will all find ourselves forgetting American is no more.)
You are in as much of a fog of confusion as all of us. On one hand you readily acknolwedge that our Congress and Senate has failed us by refusing to hear the calls and letters we sent them regarding Obama's "natural born citizen" status. On the other hand you are asking us to write to our Congress regarding a new bill to be voted upon. It is apparent reality hasn't hit us yet.
If Congress failed America on the most important issue in American history--the installation of a Usurper as President,-- what on earth makes you think it is still OUR CONGRESS? We no longer have a Congress, Senate, or Supreme Court that gives a rats tail about us. I will never again write to a dead government.
The only issue left is terminating all our elected officials before their terms expire. WE must concentrate on finding every way to publicly expose them for the treason they committed against America and terminate them for breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentation, conspiracy, and treason. These elected officials are not politicians in office. They are criminals! They should be behind bars. We should be doing every thing in our power to indict all of them. We must constantly remind the public of Congress, Sennate and The Supreme Court’s betrayal of America! There no longer is a Congress that exists for the people!
Usa Patriots Shout
Thursday, January 15, 2009
GOD BLESS YOU, DR. ORLY TAITZ
*With the economic crisis sabotage of America and the world, this entire 2008 election farce, the exorbitant legal bills chalked up by Obummer refusing to produce a single document about himself, the cost of the inauguration itself, the 9 balls, and the rest of the entire performances, this is a gigantic flaunting of wasteful spending by the government to cover up actions that are going to "throw the bum out."
The irony of it all people are stupid enough to think Obama is going to fix our economy!
Therese
Here it is. This document is far too important to wait for you to look up. You need to read it now. This is both a public document and one of major historical significance. It is and will be the greatest indictment against The Supreme Court of the United States, the Senate and Congress for breach of fiduciary duty to the American Public, failure to honor their oath to uphold and protect the US Constitution, conspiracy to install a Usurper into the Whitehouse, and placing America into the great national security threat since 1776.
This document is a matter of public record and should be on the front pages of every newspaper in America. It should be the major news story of every television news station, and should be boradcast as a NATIONAL EMERGENCY AND BROADCAST ON RADIO AND TV AS AN ALERT TO AMERICANS. AMERICA HAS BEEN DEFEATED AND LOST IN AN INVISIBLE BUT VERY REAL WAR. WE HAVE JUST FOUR DAYS LEFT BEFORE A TRAITOR TAKES OFFICE.
TEAM SARAH MEMBERS CAN PASTE AND SEND THIS DOCUMENT TO EVERY NEWS PAPER, RADIO STATION, AND TV STATION IT CAN AND ASK THEM TO PLEASE BROADCAST THIS EVENT. THIS IS THE BIGGEST EVENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND MSM ARE IGNORING OR REFUSING TO TELL THE PUBLIC. ARE THEY, TOO PART OF THE DEFEAT OF AMERICA?
RLY FILES THIS TODAY !! OBAMA NOT QUALIFIED BY DEFAULT !! Exellent.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Important, This motion was filed today
No. 08A524
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
GAIL LIGHTFOOT, NEIL B. TURNER, KATHLEEN FLANAGAN,
JAMES M. OBERSCHAIN, CAMDEN W. MCCONNELL,
PAMELA BARNETT, & EVELYN BRADLEY
Petitioners;
v.
DEBRA BOWEN, Secretary of State of California
Respondent.
On Petition For A Write Of Certiorari
Before Judgement To The
Supreme Court of California
Case Nos. :( S168690)
MOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT,
THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENT
BARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFY
UNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II §1, &
AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)
Attorney of Record
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
26302 La Paz
Mission Viejo CA 92691
949-683-5411
January 15, 2009
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Question I: Does the burden of proof lie with the Petitioner to prove standing and evidence lack of qualification by a candidate/President elect, where election officers rely on a candidate’s declaration? OR Does the CONSTITUTION amend. 20 place the burden of proof on the President elect to provide objective government certified witnessed proofs, with election officers under oath to challenge, examine and declare that the President elect has or has not qualified, enforceable by petition for redress of grievances?
Question II: Should the “natural born citizen” presidential qualification be interpreted expansively to expand civil rights under the 14th Amendment? OR Should it be interpreted restrictively as an essential guard against tyranny by ensuring the Commander in Chief has only had undivided allegiance to the U.S.A., to safeguard the Constitution and the Republic?
MOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT, THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENT BARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFY UNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II §1, & AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)
I. Motion to file Under Rule 21 (2) (b), and 21(4).
The Petitioner requests leave of this Court to file this Motion under Rule 21, (2) (b) which empowers Petitioner submit “any motion the granting of which would dispose of the entire case or would affect the final judgment to be entered”. By Rule 21 (4), “the Court may act on a motion without waiting for a response.”
To the Petitioner’s knowledge, the following two questions have not been brought to the attention of this Court by the parties or have not been adequately discussed:
Question I: Does the burden of proof lie with the Petitioner to prove standing and evidence lack of qualification by a candidate/President elect, where election officers rely on a candidate’s declaration? OR Does the CONSTITUTION amend. 20 place the burden of proof on the President elect to provide objective government certified witnessed proofs, with election officers under oath to challenge, examine and declare that the President elect has or has not qualified, enforceable by petition for redress of grievances?
Recent events strongly changed the circumstances relating to the Respondent relative to the Petition.
A. Respondent declared President elect
Congress in joint session recorded the Electoral College votes on January 8, 2009. It declared Respondent Barack Hussein Obama II to be the President elect. This event now brings to bear U.S. CONST. Amendment 20.
B. Burden of Proof on Respondent
The clause “have failed to qualify” in U.S. CONST. Amend. 20, place the burden of proof directly on the President elect, the Respondent in this case.
C. Respondent has failed to submit proofs
Per the Petitioner’s petition and to his belief and knowledge, the Respondent has to date failed to present to any constitutional election officer, any government certified proofs attested to by reliable witnesses, for any of the qualifications required under U.S. Const. Art II §1.
D. Respondent has hindered discovery
Respondent has actively hindered election officers and We the People from obtaining and examining proofs of his qualifications for President comprising government certified proofs attested to by reliable witnesses, and certified copies of military, public and educational records.
Per the Petitioner’s petition and to her belief and knowledge, the Respondent has, at great cost, systematically opposed in court every effort to require him to provide such proofs, including those presented before this Court by the Petitioner.
E. President elect has failed to qualify, by default and by opposition.
The Petitioner submits that, both by default and by active hindrance to officers and to petitioners seeking that evidence, Respondent, Barack Hussein Obama II, the President Elect, has “failed to qualify” as per U.S. Constitution Amendment 20.
F. Immediate Constitutional Remedy
In light of the importance of upholding the CONSTITUTION as supreme law, these changed circumstances bring Amendment 20 to bear, and because of the very high pubic importance of this matter, Petitioner prays that this Court provide the following immediate constitutional remedy to better satisfy the prayer of the Petitioner:
Find that the President elect has failed to qualify by default, under U.S. CONST. Article II §1 & Amendment 20.
This remedy would rely on observation of the Respondents actions of not supplying proofs that he qualifies, both by omission and commission, rather than on the merits of the Petitioner’s case.
The Petitioner’s previous and present prayers may then be molded to communicate that finding to Congress, which then would have constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect a President who does qualify.
G. Presidential candidates can then qualify.
This constitutional remedy would then return to the Electoral College and to Congress the constitutional duty to elect a President who did qualify from all the available candidates.
Question II: Should the “natural born citizen” presidential qualification be interpreted expansively to expand civil rights under the 14th Amendment? OR Should it be interpreted restrictively as an essential guard against tyranny by ensuring the Commander in Chief has only had undivided allegiance to the U.S.A., to safeguard the Constitution and the Republic?
Petitioner submits an underlying constitutional principle of undivided loyalty to distinguish the stringent qualifications of “natural born citizen” essential for the Commander in Chief for the common defense in time of war, and preserving domestic tranquility, versus upholding civil rights of “citizens”.
Petitioner appeals to the primacy of upholding the Constitution as invoilable supreme law, and preserving the essential protection of presidential qualifications to preserve the Republic.
Petitioner prays that the Court provide clear guidance on this question of interpreting this critical qualification of the President elect before the Inauguration on January 20th. This would enable election officers to examine proofs submitted by the President elect, or on lack thereof, to properly conduct their constitutional duty to declare that the President elect has qualified, or has failed to qualify, before the date of the Inauguration.
The Petitioner’s prayer could then be molded to communicate that finding to Congress, which then would have constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect a President who does qualify. The Petitioner comes bearing the burden of upholding our Constitution and protecting our Republic against tyranny, on behalf of We the People in this and future generations. Standing before the Judge of all the world for the rectitude of her ways:
“I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject
to punishment.” ___________________________, January 15, 2009
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ, 949-683-5411
26302 La Paz, Mission Viejo CA 92691
MOTION FOR WAIVER OF RULE 37(2)(A) OF THIS COURT
The Petitioner humbly requests waiver of Rule 37(2)(a) of this Court, requiring timely filing of a motion with specified notice to all parties. Petitioner appeals to the unique over riding change in circumstances created by the formal election by the Electoral College of the Respondent, Barack Hussein Obama II, and his delayed declaration on Thursday, Jan. 8th, 2009, by Congress in joint session, to be the President elect. This uniquely brings to bear the constitutional actions prescribed by U.S. CONST. Amend. 20.
Per the Petitioner’s case, the motion, and to her belief and knowledge, to date the Respondent has failed to submit to constitutional election officers the necessary government certified witnessed proofs verifying that he qualifies to be President. He has further opposed all efforts by election officers and by We the People to obtain such certified proofs.
Furthermore, to date, all State and Federal election officers appear to have committed misprision of their duties under U.S. CONST. amend. 20, by failing to examine the qualifications of the President elect, and thence by failing to declare that the President elect has qualified, or has failed to qualify.
The delayed declaration of the President elect left but five (5) working days to observe this misprision, prepare this Motion, and to submit it, before this Court meets in conference on Friday January 16th to consider the Petitioner case After that conference this Court has no (0) working days before the inauguration of the Respondent as President on Tuesday January 20th. That event without word from this Court would give the impression of fait accompli creating such enormous political barriers as to possibly prevent effective redress by the Petitioner.
Inauguration of the President elect having a popular majority while preventing his qualifications from being examined would nullify U.S. art. II §1. Conversely, declaration that the President elect had qualified or failed to have qualified would be of very high public import.
Were this Court to provide the recommended remedy, of declaring that the President elect had failed to qualify, that would provide obvious immediate constitutional relief for the Petitioner. This would cause far less political trauma by clearly upholding constitutionally defined procedures than any redress by granting existing prayers after the inauguration.
Petitioner presents analysis regarding critical safeguards to the Constitution that could be of existential importance to preserving the Republic. The constitutional principle of sole allegiance underlying the restrictive qualification of “natural born citizen” for Commander in Chief to protect the Constitution rather than civil rights of citizens, does not appear to have been so identified in the Petitioner’s case nor in other petitions to the Court.
The Motion would further support the cause of numerous subsequent Petitioners including Berg v. Obama No. 08-570 distributed for the Court’s conference on January 16th, who are committed to submitting petitions for similar issues.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on January 15, 2009. ______________________________
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUESTIONS PRESENTED I
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES iii
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 1
ARGUMENT 3
I.The CONSTITUTION Places The Burden Of Proof On the President Elect, Who Has Failed To Qualify 3
A. The 20th Amendment qualification process 3
1. Burden of proof on the President elect 3
2. Qualification candidate 3
3. Constitutional qualifications exist 3
4. Officers competent to judge qualifications 3
5. Challenging Respondent’s qualifications 3
6. Venues for qualification 4
7. Period for qualification 4
8. Opportunity for qualifying 4
9. Time and Actors for remedy 4
10. Verification of proofs of qualifications 4
11. Electoral College 5
12. State Election Officers 5
13. Declaration of qualification/failure 5
14. Proofs for explicit qualification criteria 5
15. Inauguration would not remedy defects 6
B. Respondent’s refusal to supply proofs 6
1. No certified documents provided 6
2. Birth records sealed 6
3. Educational records sealed 6
II. Undivided allegiance to the U.S. underlies the restrictive “natural born citizen” qualification for Commander in Chief to preserve the Republic. 7
A. Stringency of qualifications 8
1. Increasing Responsibility 8
2. Increasing Maturity 8
3. Increasing Citizenship/Residency Duration 8
4. More Stringent Citizenship 8
Table 1: Stringency of Leadership Qualifications 8
5. Founders all U.S. citizens 9
6. Founders exception as not “natural born citizens” 9
B. Contemporary definitions: “native born citizen” 10
1. Emmerich de Vattel, Law of Nations (175 8) 10
2. William Blackstone, Commentaries (1765) 10
C. Primary allegiance passes through fathers 10
D. Birth to Colonials not U.S., “natural born” 10
E. RPE Obama born of a British Colonial 10
F. Birth to two citizens overseas 11
G. Commander in Chief in time of war 11
1. Foreigners excluded for Commander in Chief 11
2. Undivided Allegiance for Commander in Chief 12
3. International conflict over divided loyalties 12
4. Danger of Traitors with Foreign Allegiance 12
5. Avoid dual nationality through a parent 13
6. Avoid dual nationality through birth place 13
7. Power to Exclude Aliens 13
H. Natural Born under Amendment 14 14
1. Citizenship rights 14
2. Bingham affirms narrow “natural born 14
3. Reviews of “natural born citizen” 14
III. CONCLUSION 14
IV. APPENDIX A-1
A. Petition for redress of President elect’s failure to qualify A-1
C. Civilians killed by 20th Century Tyrants A-2
D. The Rule of Law, collective ‘unalienable rights’ and ‘ancient liberties’
A-3
E. Oaths Secure the CONSTITUTION & and Rule of Law A-4
F. CONSTITUTION of the United States of America A-5
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CASES
231 U.S. 9, 22 (1913) 10
322 U.S. 665, 673 (1944) 10
377 U.S. 163, 165 (1964) 10
Chae Chan Ping v. United States 130 U.S. 581, 603, 604 (1889) 13
Perkins v. Elg 307 U.S. 325 13, 14
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - (U.S. 1787)
U.S. CONST. pmbl 7, A-5
U.S. CONST., amend. XX passim
U.S. CONST., amend I. 7
U.S. CONST., amend. IX A-6
U.S. CONST., amend. X A-6
U.S. CONST., amend. XIV § 1 A-6
STATUTES: Organic Laws of U.S.A. & States
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (U.S. 1776) passim
DECLARATION (U.S. 1776) 9
DECLARATION para. 2. A-3
DECLARATION para. 32 A-5
Massachussetts Constitution §XXX (1780) A-3
STATUTES: Organic Laws - Common Law
1 Blackstone Commentaries(1765) Ch. 1 § 3 (1765) 10, A-3
BILL OF RIGHTS secs. 16, 17, 18. 1, W. & M., 2d sess., c. 2 , 16 Dec. 1689 (U.K.) 7,A-4
Blackstone, Commentaries, 152-154 (1765) 10
DOOMS (Code) of Alfred “the Great” (880). A-4
MAGNA CARTA, 17 John (1215); 1 Henry 3 (1225). 6, 7, A-4
Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393, 476 (1856) 10
U.S. CONST., art. VI ¶2 6, 7
Washington, Writings (1932), Vol. XI, pp. 342-343, General Orders of May 2, 1778 12
STATUTES: Other, Bills, Proclamations, & Resolves
5 U.S.C. 3331 Oath of Office. A-5
10 U.S.C. 312. Militia duty: exemptions. A-4
28 U.S.C. 453. Oaths of justices and judges. A-4
29 U.S.C. 169 Employees with religious convictions[]fees A-4
Naturalization act of 1795, 1 Sess. II Ch. 21 414, 415 (1795) 11
BIBLE
Bible. A-3
Matthew 5:33-37. Affirmation. A-4
Ruth 4:6 10
TREATISES
Courtois, Stéphane et al. The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, 912 pp, ISBN 0-674-07608-7 (1999). 7
de Vattel, Law of Nations (1758), Bk. 1, Ch. 19, p 101 10, 14
John Locke 2nd Treatise of Civil Govt. ch. 4 § 22 (1690) A-4
Rushdoony (1973), Inst. Biblical Law, Craig Press 10
Story, Joseph Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. 2 Vols. xxxiii, 735, 702pp. (Reprint ed. Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. 2001 ISBN 1-58477-193-3) (1858). A-5
OTHER AUTHORITIES
4 Elliott’s Debates p. 196 (30 July 1788). A-4
British Nationality Act (194 8) §5(1) 10, 11, A-1
Continental Congress, Declaration and Resolves 14 Oct. 1774 Tansill 1–5 #2 A-3
Rec. Fed. Conv. 1787 CCLXXXVIII p 385, 387 (March 28, 1800) 12, 13
Rec. Fed. Conv. 1787 LXVIII. John Jay to George Washington.3 (NY Jul. 25)
1, 12, 13
Trial of the Seven Bishops for Publishing a Libel. 12 How. St. Tr. 183, 415, (1688).
A-4
Washington, George Farewell Address (Sept. 17, 1796). A-5
MISCELLANEOUS
Samuel Rutherford Lex Rex (1644). A-26
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
1. The Petitioner submits that the U.S. CONST’s 20th Amendment places the burden of proof directly on the President elect to demonstrate that he qualifies to become President, and on government officers to evaluate and report on those proofs. It negates the lower court’s assumption that the burden of proof lies with the Petitioner.
The Respondents, President elect Barack Hussein Obama II (herein RPE Obama) et al., have failed to submit to election officers the requisite objective government certified proofs attested to by multiple reliable witnesses, as evidence that the President elect qualifies per U.S. CONST. Art. 2 §1 and §2. Furthermore, they have systematically acted to withhold from State and Federal election officers, and from We the People, the evidence necessary to evaluate the qualifications of the President elect.
Having thus failed to qualify by default, U.S. CONST. amend. 20 requires election officers to declare that the President elect has “failed to qualify”. Congress then has constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect a President who does qualify.
By misprisions of State and Federal election officers to perform these duties, Petitioner has the constitutional right and duty to challenge the qualifications of the President elect by redress petition preserved under U.S. CONST. amend. 1, by rights reserved by We the People, under U.S. CONST. amend. 1, 10 and 20, and by each government officer’s oath of office to uphold the CONSTITUTION as inviolable supreme law, U.S. CONST. art. VI.
2. The core issue underlying the Petitioner’s motion, this case before this Court, and to all similar cases is the constitutional interpretation of the restrictive “natural born citizen”qualification for President.
Prior cases with other issues have brought issues of individual civil rights of citizenship to the attention of this Court. The Petitioner brings the issue of the restrictive constitutional qualifications for President. This addresses the essential safeguard provided by the Founders to preserve the Republic and upholding the inviolability of Constitution as supreme law.
The intent of the Founders is clearly seen in John
II. The CONSTITUTION Places The Burden Of Proof On the President Elect, Who Has Failed To Qualify The 20th Amendment qualification process The U.S. CONST. amend. 20 prescribes that:
“. . . if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified;. . .”
The Constitution does not guarantee inauguration of a President elect. It requires that he first “qualify”.
The Petitioner has observed that the Constitution nowhere delegates the power and method of qualifying. Thus, the Petitioner appealed to powers reserved under the 14th Amendment. However, common principles may still identify methods by which the President elect may qualify, or fail to have qualified.
1. Burden of proof on the President elect By the past tense verb “have failed to qualify”, the CONSTITUTION places the burden of proof directly on the President elect to lay objective proofs before competent officers necessary to demonstrate that he has met the constitutional qualifications for President.
2. Qualification candidate Respondent Barack Hussein Obama II was declared the constitutional President elect by Congress in joint session on Jan. 8th, 2009. RPE Obama is thus the active subject of U.S. CONST., amend 20.
3. Constitutional qualifications exist The verb “qualify” indicates that the Constitution establishes objective criteria that the President elect must satisfy. See explicit restrictive qualifications in U.S. CONST. Art II, §1 and implicit qualifications listed below.
4. Officers competent to judge qualifications The verb “has failed to qualify” implies that there are election officers to whom those constitutional proofs of qualifications must be submitted. The electoral votes are submitted to the President of the Senate presiding over Congress in joint session with tellers appointed from the Senate and House. At least those constitutional officers are competent to receive evaluate the qualifications. The Chief Justice of this Court, and the President are other constitutionally defined officers before whom the President elect could submit his proofs for qualification.
5. Challenging Respondent’s qualifications All Executive, Legislative and Judicial officers, being on Oath to uphold the CONSTITUTION, have the power and duty to challenge the Respondent President elect Obama to show cause by date certain why he should not have failed to qualify.
a. Objections to reading Electoral votes
When Congress tabulates votes of the Electoral College in joint session, law explicitly requires the President of the Senate to ask for Objections after the reading of each State’s electoral certificates. 3 U.S.C. Ch. 1, §15. Objections to electoral votes may be filed if signed by one Senator and one Representative. Electing a candidate for President who would not qualify would violate the Constitution and justify raising a formal objection on reading each State’s votes. On reading the electoral votes, Senate President Dick Cheney failed to ask for objections on reading of each State’s votes on Jan. 8th, 2009. See also 3 U.S.C. Ch. 1,§17, §19(a) (1), and §19 ©) (1)
b. Point of Order on declaring President elect Obama has failed to qualify
Officers on oath to uphold the Constitution bear the high privilege to raise a Point of Order or Question of Order over any breach thereof, as well as over any breach of the Rules of each House. Senate Rule XX. When an appointed election officer fails to uphold the duties required by U.S. CONST. Art II §1 and amend. 20, any Member of Congress has the power and duty to raise a Point of Order.
Failing that, citizens, including the Petitioner, have the unalienable right of petition for redress of grievances, to petition their State or Congress with a prayer to raise a Point of Order over breach of Constitution. U.S. CONST. amend. I
Reporting the tallied electoral votes provided an opportunity to raise the Point of Order that the President elect has not qualified. However, no Member of Congress raised that Point of Order requested by numerous citizens by redress petition. See Appendix A. Every time any House is in session provides an opportunity for Members of Congress to raise a Point of Order that the President elect has failed to qualify.
6. Venues for qualification The joint session of Congress, held to count electoral votes and announce the President elect, is one venue in which the President elect could have submitted his qualifications. Thereafter, the President elect could submit his qualifications to the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, the Chief Justice of this Court, or the President as constitutionally recognized officers being under oath to uphold the Constitution.
7. Period for qualification By the classification “President elect”, Amend. 20 establishes at least the qualification period between the constitutional “election” of tabulating electoral college votes before Congress on January 6th (January 8th in 2009) and the inauguration on January 20th when the President elect is sworn in as “President”.
8. Opportunity for qualifying By “have failed to qualify”, the President elect will have been given the opportunity to submit proofs showing that he does qualify. By January 16th, RPE Obama will have had five business days during which to submit proofs of his qualification.
9. Time and Actors for remedy Were this Court to determine and find the President elect has failed to qualify by default, there would still be time to notify Congress, for Congress to appoint the Vice President as Acting President, and for the Electoral College and Congress to proceed with electing another President who does qualify, per U.S. CONST. amend. 20. This urgent constitutional business would have privilege over other business.
10. Verification of proofs of qualifications By “have failed to qualify”, the competent election officers must examine the proofs submitted by the President elect against the constitutional qualifications. The CONSTITUTION grants all powers necessary to perform constitutional duties including obtaining government certified documents from any Federal or State repository, and to subpoena other records as needed.
11. Electoral College By U.S. CONST. amend 12, Electors in the Electoral College are election officers with the duty to elect the President. Electors, and the Electoral College have the privileges and duty to evaluate the qualifications of all candidates for President, and the President elect. By their oath to uphold the Constitution, they have a duty to demand and evaluate proofs and to find that the Presidential candidate or President elect has or has failed to qualify.
12. State Election Officers Each State has the equivalent privileges and opportunities to evaluate the qualifications of all candidates for President and for the President elect. As the Petitioner has sought relief, the Secretary of State can communicate RPE Obama’s failure to qualify to the Governor, the State’s Senators and President of the Senate, and to its Representatives, and the Speaker of the House. Each State’s Senators, Representatives and Governor have the Privilege of the Floor in the respective House, and may communicate that failure, or raise a Point of Order. Senate Rule XXIII
13. Declaration of qualification/failure By “have failed to qualify”, the election officers have the constitutional power and duty to declare that the President elect has met or has failed to meet the restrictive constitutional requirements for President. They have the power and duty to communicate that determination to the authorities responsible to elect the President. I.e. to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House.
14. Proofs for explicit qualification criteria Objective evidence of qualifications must be commensurate with the level of proof required. Certified copies of original birth certificates are commonly required by citizens to obtain government photo ID, marriage certificates, driver’s licenses, and to register to vote.
To obtain security clearance, military officers must provide increasingly exhaustive evidence that they qualify. As Commander in Chief, the President commands the Chiefs of the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force bearing Top Secret clearance. Common sense requires that the President elect provide objective proofs commensurate with the higher constitutional office of Commander in Chief, and the Top Secret clearance required of those he must command. To verify constitutional qualifications, election officers should require the President elect to provide the following, and to verify their validity.
a. Age 35 years
Government certified copies of original full (“long form”) birth certificates attested to by two reliable witnesses, and all revisions thereof. U.S. CONST. art. II, §1.
b. 14 years residency in the US
Evidence of residence within the U.S., with certified copies of all passports held to confirm time within versus without the U.S., being more thorough than that required for naturalization, or documenting U.S. births abroad. U.S. CONST. art. II, §1.
c. Natural born citizen with sole allegiance
By the underlying constitutional principle of sole allegiance to the U.S.A. the Commander in Chief should have all biological and adoptive parents holding allegiance to the US, the President elect be born in U.S. jurisdiction, and have had only had sole allegiance to the U.S. CONST. art. II, §1.
(1) President Elect’s Citizenship
Government certified copies of the original (“long form”) birth certificates of the President elect, showing original place and date of birth, and both biological parents.
(2) Citizenship of Biological Father
Government certified copies of the original birth certificates or naturalization certificates, evidencing US Citizenship of the biological father at the birth of the President elect.
(3) Citizenship of Biological Mother
Government certified copies of the original birth certificates or naturalization certificates, evidencing US Citizenship of the biological mother at the President elect’s birth.
(4) Citizenship of Adoptive Parents
Government certified copies evidencing citizenship of every adoptive parent of the President elect.
(5) Change of Name
Government certified copies of every legal change of name since birth.
(6) Declarations of allegiance
Certified copies of each document wherein the President elect has sworn allegiance, or declared his citizenship or allegiance, whether as a youth or adult, including applications for higher education and financial aid.
(7) Military & Public Service
Certified copies of any registration for military service, and of each and every military and/or public service.
15. Inauguration would not remedy defects Official inauguration of a President elect do not remedy failure to constitutionally qualify. The US Constitution is inviolable, founded on the security of the U.S. CONST., art. VI ¶2 No certified documents provided Per the Petitioner’s application and current belief and knowledge, none of these documents having been submitted to election officers in Congress, in the Electoral College, or in any State, by RPE Obama, that are government certified with reliable witnesses. Upcoming petitioners including Gail Lightfoot have similarly found no evidence of such positive action by RPE Obama to qualify.
2. Birth records sealed The RPE Obama has refused to submit certified copies of any of his original long form “vault” birth certificates in Hawaii to any public officer or to any Petitioner. Relevant records in Kenya have also been officially restricted.
3. Educational records sealed The RPE Obama has sealed all educational records which might reveal his stated citizenship. These include Punahou High School, Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard Law School.
III. Undivided allegiance to the U.S. underlies the restrictive “natural born citizen” qualification for Commander in Chief to preserve the Republic. When King and Parliament breached their rights with arbitrary laws, the Founders fought to restore the Rule of Law claiming ‘unalienable rights’ and ‘entitle[ment]’ by the ‘laws of God.’ DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (U.S. 1776) (herein “DECLARATION”). The inviolability of the Magna Carta (1215) was preserved in the U.S. Constitution (1787) as “supreme law.” Magna Carta (1215) §61. This security was restored by theU.S. CONST., amend I.U.S. CONST. pmblU.S. CONST., art. I §3 para. 5. The “natural born citizen” allegiance qualification was strictest of these, to protect against treason and tyranny.
Democracies Descending into Tyranny: Thirty three democracies descended into tyranny during the 20th century by failing to uphold constitutional protections. These included Germany, Russia, and China.
Secularist States Murdered Millions: States establishing Secularism caused the most extrajudicial deaths in the 20th Century. Courtois et al. (1999) detail the consequent horrors of atheistic communist governments killing more than 125 million - more than three times the 38 million killed in all 20th Century wars. See Appendix C, Hagen & Irish (2000).
The greatest threat to Domestic tranquility is not war but descent into mob rule and dictatorship. Preserving protections of the Constitution and Republic are critically important. The restrictive “natural born citizen” qualification for President, is a critical constitutional guard against tyranny. Petitioner applies the unalienable right of redress petition and security of Oaths to preserve the US. CONST. in face of misprision of failing to enforce presidential qualifications by election officers.
Petitioner humbly prays this Court evaluate the Petitioner’s case in context of how best to enforce restrictive qualifications for President to preserve the Constitution and Republic from tyranny, rather than its prior cases on protecting individual civil rights.
A. Stringency of qualifications The U.S. CONSTITUTION explicitly requires a progressively increasing stringency in qualifications for higher levels of officers of government. See Table 1.
1. Increasing Responsibility Representatives represent a portion of a State (< 30,000 citizens per U.S. CONST. art. I, §2 para 3). Senators have greater responsibility to represent a State and the Nation’s interests. The President is responsible for the entire Nation. In light of their increasing responsibilities, the CONSTITUTION imposes increasingly stringent qualifications for Congressional offices, with the greatest stringency for the President.
2. Increasing Maturity The minimum age increases from 25 to 30 to 35 years for Representatives, Senators and the President. After coming of age at 21, this requires from 4 years to 9 years to 14 years of maturity. The President must have 350% the adult maturity of Representatives.
3. Increasing Citizenship/Residency Duration The qualification of citizenship increases from 7 years to 9 years for Representatives, and Senators (no residency). ( U.S. CONST. art. I, §3 para. 3U.S. CONST. art. II, §1 para. 5 Each Member of Congress must be a “citizen” U.S. CONST. art. I, §2 para. 2; U.S. CONST. art. II, §1 para. 5. The features distinguishing “natural born citizen” from “citizen” are critical to this and other cases contesting respondent Obama’s qualifications.
Table 1: Stringency of Leadership Qualifications
Member of Congress President
Repre-sentative Senator Commander in Chief
Responsi-bility Part State State All States
Minimum Age years 25* 30** 35***
Citizen/
Resident 7 years citizen* 9 years citizen** 14 years a resident ***
Citizen Type Any * Any ** Natural born ***
US allegiance Sole or divided Sole or divided Undivided
Father a citizen Option Option Yes
Mother a citizen Option Option Yes
Naturalized Option+ Option+ No+
Born in US jurisdiction Option+ Option+ Yes (or Residency)+
*U.S. CONST. art. I, §1; **U.S. CONST. art. I, §3; ***U.S. CONST. art. II, §1; +U.S. CONST. amend. XIV §1 with statutory citizenship requirements
Petitioner submits that the qualification of “natural born citizen” for the President must be more stringent than “citizen”, both by logic, and by inference from the gradation of constitutional qualifications for Representatives, Senators and the President.
However, “citizen” is a binary qualification. As “natural born citizen” is not defined within the Constitution, what are the constitutional criteria for establishing for this greater stringency? The “jurisdiction” of birth, allegiance or citizenship of each parent at an individual’s birth, and the individual’s own actions regarding allegiance on coming of age create multiple subcategories of “citizen”. Following are distinctions between “naturalized”, “native”, and “natural born” citizens as shown in the CONSTITUTION, by the Founders, and by contemporary authorities.
6. Founders all U.S. citizens By U.S. CONST., art. VII para. 3, the U.S.A. is dated by “the independence of the United States of America the twelfth” codifying that it was established by the Declaration of Independence, (U.S. 1776). On adoption of the U.S. CONST. numerous candidates for Representatives and Senators satisfied the requirements of “citizen”, having 7 or 9 years of citizenship, and age per & §3. If Respondent Obama had been a U.S. “citizen” for 9 years and was at least 30 years age he would have qualified on his election to the Senate.
7. Founders exception as not “natural born citizens” However, DECLARATION (U.S. 1776)377 U.S. 163, 165 (1964)322 U.S. 665, 673 (1944)231 U.S. 9, 22 (1913) " Emmerich de Vattel, Law of Nations (175 8)
de Vattel’s Law of Nations widely quoted by the Founders. de Vattel stated:
"The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. ..” Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations (1758), Bk. 1, Ch. 19, Citizens and Nations, p 101 para 212; cited in Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393, 476 (1856).
2. " William Blackstone, Commentaries (1765)
Blackstone in reviewing the Common Law stated:
“Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England, . . . aliens, such as are born out of it. . . .
. . .every man owes natural allegiance where he is born, and cannot owe two such allegiances, . . .” Commentaries 154-57 (Dean Gait ed., 1941)
Both de Vattel and Blackstone thus state that children born of two citizens in that nation are natural-born citizens. RPE Obama has not shown evidence that both his biological parents were U.S. citizens.
D. Primary allegiance passes through fathers In the Judeo-Christian legal tradition, allegiance flows through the father. Bible Ruth 4:6; de Vattel and Blackstone affirm this principle:
“ . .the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . .The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children.” de Vattel, Law of Nations (1758), Bk. 1, Ch. 19, Citizens & Nations, p 101 para 212.
“ . . .so that all children, born out of the king’s licence, whose fathers were natural-born subjects, are now natural-born subjects themselves, to all intents and purposes,. . .” William Blackstone, Commentaries 154-57 (Dean Gait ed., 1941)
RPE Obama has not shown evidence his father was a natural-born US citizen.
E. Birth to Colonials not US, “natural born” George Washington was born to colonials of Virginia, and John Adams to colonials of Massachussetts. Both were born “native” to those Colonies, and “overseas” to Britain. Yet by the exception clause, the Founders implied that the restriction to U.S. “natural born citizen” disqualified both from becoming U.S. President. The CONSTITUTION’S exclusion clause by application disqualifies all U.S. citizens born to colonial fathers subject to the British sovereign.
F. RPE Obama born of a British Colonial RPE Obama has posted:
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children. Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.” http://www.Fightthesmears.org
(Technically the British East African Protectorate of Zanzibar until Kenya gained independence in 1963.)
The divorce decree for RPE Obama’s parents has recently been posted. (http://www.plainsradio.com).
“That one child has been born to said Libelant and Libeled as issue of said marriage, to wit: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II, a son, born August 4, 1961.” HI, 1st Cir. Domestic Relations, divorce decree D. No. 57972 Stanley Ann D. Obama v. Barack H. Obama p 2 §IV.
The Hawaii court thus confirms RPE Obama’s statements.
RPE Obama acknowledged that he had foreign allegiance, being a British citizen at birth through his Kenyan father (per British law provided exceptions for children born overseas to ambassadors, merchants, and citizens:
“Yet the children of the king’s ambassadors born abroad were always held to be natural subjects: . . .all children born abroad, provided both their parents were at the time of the birth in allegiance to the king, and the mother had passed the seas by her husband’s consent, might inherit as if born in England:” Blackstone Commentaries 154-57.
After adoption of the Constitution, Congress adapted this common law distinguishing between children born overseas vs those within the jurisdiction of the US, describing them as “citizen” rather than natural born citizen. Naturalization act of 1795, 1 Sess. II Ch. 21 414, 415 (1795), (with variations in 1790 and 1798.)
If born overseas, RPE Obama has not submitted proofs that he was born to two US citizens.
I. Commander in Chief in time of war The U.S. CONST. art II §2 provides:
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several States when called into the actual service of the United States;”
Petitioner submits that this unique constitutional duty of Commander in Chief provides a critical constitutional principle differentiating the qualifications of “national born citizen” for president vs “citizen” for Members of Congress.
1. Foreigners excluded for Commander in Chief John Jay, the first Chief Justice, wrote George Washington:
“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check on the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the commander in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.”Records Federal Conv. 1787 LXVIII. John Jay to George Washington.3 (New York, July 25, 1787)
Jay expressly defined the qualification of “natural born citizen” for the “commander in chief of the American army” as excluding all “Foreigners” with allegiance to foreign sovereigns. Washington acknowledged his “hint” and this qualification of “natural born citizen” was included in the Constitution without further discussion.
2. Undivided Allegiance for Commander in Chief Senator Charles Pickney affirmed Jay’s restrictive qualification, stating:
“It was intended to give your President the command of your forces, . . . to insure experience and attachment to the country, they have determined that no man who is not a natural born citizen, or citizen at the adoption of the Constitution, of fourteen years residence, and thirty-five years of age, shall be eligible….” Rec. Fed. Conv. 1787 CCLXXXVIII p 385, 387 (March 28, 1800)
Petitioner respectfully submits that the underlying constitutional principle on the restrictive qualification of “natural born citizen” to become President is that of requiring undivided allegiance to the U.S.A. for the Commander in Chief to “insure attachment to the country” and exclude “Foreigners”.
On adopting the CONSTITUTION, the United States was just recovering from an existential war with the superpower Britain. The US endured ongoing conflict with Britain impressing US citizens for its ships, over this issue of the allegiance of native or naturalized citizens “natural born citizens”. Britain demanded the allegiance of all US citizens born in the colonies, or whose father was a British citizen, and who thus were not “natural born” with both parents being US citizens. In 1812 the US was forced to go to war with Britain to resolve this festering issue of allegiance to Britain.
5. Danger of Traitors with Foreign Allegiance “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” US Const. Art. III, §3. As Commander in Chief, the President must guard against Treason.
During the War for Independence, General Greene reported: “Treason of the blackest dye was yesterday discovered. General Arnold who commanded at West Point . . . was about to deliver up that important post into the hands of the enemy. Such an event must have given the American cause a deadly wound if not a fatal stab.” Washington, Writings (1932), Vol. XI, pp. 342-343, General Orders of May 2, 1778.
Though a U.S. citizen and war hero, Benedict Arnold had been born under allegiance to Britain and his wife has strong allegiance to Britain. In light of the Founders’ painful experience during their recent War of Independence, the Treason section reinforces the principle that “natural born citizen”as qualification for Commander in Chief is to exclude citizens having any foreign allegiance. I.e., to select Presidents having only ever had sole allegiance with both biological parents and adoptive parents being US citizens.
Since the attack on New York’s World Trade Center on “9/11", the US has been at “war on terrorism”. This enemy is not a nation state but radical Islamic religious faction bent on imposing its religious views through force. Indonesia is the largest Islamic country.
Similarly, Petitioner submitted affidavits detailing how relatives of RPE Obama in Kenya have used violence to subjugate Christians, coerce elections, coerce the government into granting political power (establishing a Prime Minister without constitutional amendment.) Petitioner documented RPE Obama as having aided and abetted this coercive effort.
RPE Obama has failed to show that he is free of foreign influence as necessary for a Commander in Chief in time of war.
6. Avoid dual nationality through a parent Tories retaining allegiance to the British sovereign were a major part of the “enemy” during the US War of Independence. The Founders’ experience directs an explicit avoidance of citizens having near relatives with foreign allegiance as a threat of direct opposition or of becoming traitors. This infers that “natural born citizen” should be interpreted to mean that both parents of the Commander in Chief should be U.S. citizens. Adoptive parents should also be U.S. citizens.
Petitioner documents that RPE Obama had Indonesian citizenship evidenced by school records and parents divorce decree. Petitioner submits that the core purpose of “natural born citizen” is that of allegiance to safeguard against tyranny. The issue is thus whether RPE Obama retained sole allegiance to the USA per requirements for a Commander in chief in time of war, rather than his personal civil rights of citizenship or if he lost his citizenship (cf Perkins v. Elg 307 U.S. 325).
7. Avoid dual nationality through birth place Foreign birth establishes foreign allegiance (dual citizenship). During World War II, Hitler recalled US citizens with dual nationality or German parentage. Pierce O’Donnell, In Time of War: Hitler’s Terrorist Attack on America, 2005. Some were trained sent back to sabotage the US war effort. By the sovereignty of the U.S., Congress has the absolute power
“to exclude aliens from the United States and to prescribe the terms and conditions on which they come in. . . .The United States, . . . are one nation, invested with powers which belong to independent nations, the exercise of which can be invoked for the maintenance of its absolute independence and security throughout its entire territory.” Chae Chan Ping v. United States 130 U.S. 581, 603, 604 (1889)
Making an Alien the Commander in Chief would incur the danger of the US losing “its absolute independence and security”by descent into tyranny. Pickney restricting the President from foreigners applies this power to exclude aliens and applies it to excluding any citizen with foreign allegiance, by birth or adoption, from becoming Commander in Chief, lest they endanger the U.S.’s “absolute independence and security.”
J. Natural Born under Amendment 14 Citizenship rights In ” John A. Bingham, appointed Union Army Judge Advocate by Lincoln, crafted the 14th Amendment (final April 28, 1866.) Bingham himself affirmed the narrow interpretation of “natural born citizen” clause stating:
“[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…. .” Rep. John A. Bingham, re S 61 Bill, March 9, 1866.
He confirmed de G. J. Chin, reviews U.S. SC cases finding that in Insular Cases, “persons born in unincorporated territories are not Fourteenth Amendment citizens.” Why Senator John McCain Cannot Be President Mich. Law. Rev. 1st Impressions, Vol. 107, No. 1, 2008,
S.H. Duggin & M. B. Collins (Feb. 2005) provide a detailed review, arguing that “natural born citizen” is unfair. ‘Natural Born’ in the USA’ Boston Univ. Law Rev. However, they omitted the key contemporary definition of Petitioner submits that the Constitution places the burden of proof to qualify on the President elect. All officers sworn to uphold the Constitution including election officers in Congress, the Electoral College and all States have the duty to challenge and test those qualifications, and to declare that the President elect (or candidate) has qualified or failed to qualify.
The Petitioner and public record indicate explicit active refusal by the RPE Obama to submit any government certified witnessed proofs that he qualifies for President.
The restrictive qualification “natural born citizen” is essential to preserve the Constitution and the Republic from descending into tyranny. It should be guided by the underlying constitutional principle of enforcing sole allegiance to the United States and to exclude all candidates with any foreign allegiance through the allegiance of either birth parent or by any adoptive parent, or by the President elect’s own actions.
Petitioner humbly submits that this Court should therefore affirm the Petitioner’s Motion and find that the Respondent, President Elect Barack Hussein Obama II has failed in his constitutional burden of proof to qualify for President.
“I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.”
___________________________, January 15, 2009
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
No. 08A524
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
*
twe // January 15, 2009 at 6:35 pm
The irony of it all people are stupid enough to think Obama is going to fix our economy!
Therese
Here it is. This document is far too important to wait for you to look up. You need to read it now. This is both a public document and one of major historical significance. It is and will be the greatest indictment against The Supreme Court of the United States, the Senate and Congress for breach of fiduciary duty to the American Public, failure to honor their oath to uphold and protect the US Constitution, conspiracy to install a Usurper into the Whitehouse, and placing America into the great national security threat since 1776.
This document is a matter of public record and should be on the front pages of every newspaper in America. It should be the major news story of every television news station, and should be boradcast as a NATIONAL EMERGENCY AND BROADCAST ON RADIO AND TV AS AN ALERT TO AMERICANS. AMERICA HAS BEEN DEFEATED AND LOST IN AN INVISIBLE BUT VERY REAL WAR. WE HAVE JUST FOUR DAYS LEFT BEFORE A TRAITOR TAKES OFFICE.
TEAM SARAH MEMBERS CAN PASTE AND SEND THIS DOCUMENT TO EVERY NEWS PAPER, RADIO STATION, AND TV STATION IT CAN AND ASK THEM TO PLEASE BROADCAST THIS EVENT. THIS IS THE BIGGEST EVENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND MSM ARE IGNORING OR REFUSING TO TELL THE PUBLIC. ARE THEY, TOO PART OF THE DEFEAT OF AMERICA?
RLY FILES THIS TODAY !! OBAMA NOT QUALIFIED BY DEFAULT !! Exellent.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Important, This motion was filed today
No. 08A524
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
GAIL LIGHTFOOT, NEIL B. TURNER, KATHLEEN FLANAGAN,
JAMES M. OBERSCHAIN, CAMDEN W. MCCONNELL,
PAMELA BARNETT, & EVELYN BRADLEY
Petitioners;
v.
DEBRA BOWEN, Secretary of State of California
Respondent.
On Petition For A Write Of Certiorari
Before Judgement To The
Supreme Court of California
Case Nos. :( S168690)
MOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT,
THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENT
BARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFY
UNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II §1, &
AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)
Attorney of Record
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
26302 La Paz
Mission Viejo CA 92691
949-683-5411
January 15, 2009
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Question I: Does the burden of proof lie with the Petitioner to prove standing and evidence lack of qualification by a candidate/President elect, where election officers rely on a candidate’s declaration? OR Does the CONSTITUTION amend. 20 place the burden of proof on the President elect to provide objective government certified witnessed proofs, with election officers under oath to challenge, examine and declare that the President elect has or has not qualified, enforceable by petition for redress of grievances?
Question II: Should the “natural born citizen” presidential qualification be interpreted expansively to expand civil rights under the 14th Amendment? OR Should it be interpreted restrictively as an essential guard against tyranny by ensuring the Commander in Chief has only had undivided allegiance to the U.S.A., to safeguard the Constitution and the Republic?
MOTION TO DECLARE THAT BY DEFAULT, THE PRESIDENT ELECT RESPONDENT BARACK OBAMA HAS FAILED TO QUALIFY UNDER US CONSTITUTION ARTICLE II §1, & AMENDMENT 20, PER RULE 21 (2)(B) & (4)
I. Motion to file Under Rule 21 (2) (b), and 21(4).
The Petitioner requests leave of this Court to file this Motion under Rule 21, (2) (b) which empowers Petitioner submit “any motion the granting of which would dispose of the entire case or would affect the final judgment to be entered”. By Rule 21 (4), “the Court may act on a motion without waiting for a response.”
To the Petitioner’s knowledge, the following two questions have not been brought to the attention of this Court by the parties or have not been adequately discussed:
Question I: Does the burden of proof lie with the Petitioner to prove standing and evidence lack of qualification by a candidate/President elect, where election officers rely on a candidate’s declaration? OR Does the CONSTITUTION amend. 20 place the burden of proof on the President elect to provide objective government certified witnessed proofs, with election officers under oath to challenge, examine and declare that the President elect has or has not qualified, enforceable by petition for redress of grievances?
Recent events strongly changed the circumstances relating to the Respondent relative to the Petition.
A. Respondent declared President elect
Congress in joint session recorded the Electoral College votes on January 8, 2009. It declared Respondent Barack Hussein Obama II to be the President elect. This event now brings to bear U.S. CONST. Amendment 20.
B. Burden of Proof on Respondent
The clause “have failed to qualify” in U.S. CONST. Amend. 20, place the burden of proof directly on the President elect, the Respondent in this case.
C. Respondent has failed to submit proofs
Per the Petitioner’s petition and to his belief and knowledge, the Respondent has to date failed to present to any constitutional election officer, any government certified proofs attested to by reliable witnesses, for any of the qualifications required under U.S. Const. Art II §1.
D. Respondent has hindered discovery
Respondent has actively hindered election officers and We the People from obtaining and examining proofs of his qualifications for President comprising government certified proofs attested to by reliable witnesses, and certified copies of military, public and educational records.
Per the Petitioner’s petition and to her belief and knowledge, the Respondent has, at great cost, systematically opposed in court every effort to require him to provide such proofs, including those presented before this Court by the Petitioner.
E. President elect has failed to qualify, by default and by opposition.
The Petitioner submits that, both by default and by active hindrance to officers and to petitioners seeking that evidence, Respondent, Barack Hussein Obama II, the President Elect, has “failed to qualify” as per U.S. Constitution Amendment 20.
F. Immediate Constitutional Remedy
In light of the importance of upholding the CONSTITUTION as supreme law, these changed circumstances bring Amendment 20 to bear, and because of the very high pubic importance of this matter, Petitioner prays that this Court provide the following immediate constitutional remedy to better satisfy the prayer of the Petitioner:
Find that the President elect has failed to qualify by default, under U.S. CONST. Article II §1 & Amendment 20.
This remedy would rely on observation of the Respondents actions of not supplying proofs that he qualifies, both by omission and commission, rather than on the merits of the Petitioner’s case.
The Petitioner’s previous and present prayers may then be molded to communicate that finding to Congress, which then would have constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect a President who does qualify.
G. Presidential candidates can then qualify.
This constitutional remedy would then return to the Electoral College and to Congress the constitutional duty to elect a President who did qualify from all the available candidates.
Question II: Should the “natural born citizen” presidential qualification be interpreted expansively to expand civil rights under the 14th Amendment? OR Should it be interpreted restrictively as an essential guard against tyranny by ensuring the Commander in Chief has only had undivided allegiance to the U.S.A., to safeguard the Constitution and the Republic?
Petitioner submits an underlying constitutional principle of undivided loyalty to distinguish the stringent qualifications of “natural born citizen” essential for the Commander in Chief for the common defense in time of war, and preserving domestic tranquility, versus upholding civil rights of “citizens”.
Petitioner appeals to the primacy of upholding the Constitution as invoilable supreme law, and preserving the essential protection of presidential qualifications to preserve the Republic.
Petitioner prays that the Court provide clear guidance on this question of interpreting this critical qualification of the President elect before the Inauguration on January 20th. This would enable election officers to examine proofs submitted by the President elect, or on lack thereof, to properly conduct their constitutional duty to declare that the President elect has qualified, or has failed to qualify, before the date of the Inauguration.
The Petitioner’s prayer could then be molded to communicate that finding to Congress, which then would have constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect a President who does qualify. The Petitioner comes bearing the burden of upholding our Constitution and protecting our Republic against tyranny, on behalf of We the People in this and future generations. Standing before the Judge of all the world for the rectitude of her ways:
“I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject
to punishment.” ___________________________, January 15, 2009
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ, 949-683-5411
26302 La Paz, Mission Viejo CA 92691
MOTION FOR WAIVER OF RULE 37(2)(A) OF THIS COURT
The Petitioner humbly requests waiver of Rule 37(2)(a) of this Court, requiring timely filing of a motion with specified notice to all parties. Petitioner appeals to the unique over riding change in circumstances created by the formal election by the Electoral College of the Respondent, Barack Hussein Obama II, and his delayed declaration on Thursday, Jan. 8th, 2009, by Congress in joint session, to be the President elect. This uniquely brings to bear the constitutional actions prescribed by U.S. CONST. Amend. 20.
Per the Petitioner’s case, the motion, and to her belief and knowledge, to date the Respondent has failed to submit to constitutional election officers the necessary government certified witnessed proofs verifying that he qualifies to be President. He has further opposed all efforts by election officers and by We the People to obtain such certified proofs.
Furthermore, to date, all State and Federal election officers appear to have committed misprision of their duties under U.S. CONST. amend. 20, by failing to examine the qualifications of the President elect, and thence by failing to declare that the President elect has qualified, or has failed to qualify.
The delayed declaration of the President elect left but five (5) working days to observe this misprision, prepare this Motion, and to submit it, before this Court meets in conference on Friday January 16th to consider the Petitioner case After that conference this Court has no (0) working days before the inauguration of the Respondent as President on Tuesday January 20th. That event without word from this Court would give the impression of fait accompli creating such enormous political barriers as to possibly prevent effective redress by the Petitioner.
Inauguration of the President elect having a popular majority while preventing his qualifications from being examined would nullify U.S. art. II §1. Conversely, declaration that the President elect had qualified or failed to have qualified would be of very high public import.
Were this Court to provide the recommended remedy, of declaring that the President elect had failed to qualify, that would provide obvious immediate constitutional relief for the Petitioner. This would cause far less political trauma by clearly upholding constitutionally defined procedures than any redress by granting existing prayers after the inauguration.
Petitioner presents analysis regarding critical safeguards to the Constitution that could be of existential importance to preserving the Republic. The constitutional principle of sole allegiance underlying the restrictive qualification of “natural born citizen” for Commander in Chief to protect the Constitution rather than civil rights of citizens, does not appear to have been so identified in the Petitioner’s case nor in other petitions to the Court.
The Motion would further support the cause of numerous subsequent Petitioners including Berg v. Obama No. 08-570 distributed for the Court’s conference on January 16th, who are committed to submitting petitions for similar issues.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on January 15, 2009. ______________________________
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUESTIONS PRESENTED I
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES iii
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 1
ARGUMENT 3
I.The CONSTITUTION Places The Burden Of Proof On the President Elect, Who Has Failed To Qualify 3
A. The 20th Amendment qualification process 3
1. Burden of proof on the President elect 3
2. Qualification candidate 3
3. Constitutional qualifications exist 3
4. Officers competent to judge qualifications 3
5. Challenging Respondent’s qualifications 3
6. Venues for qualification 4
7. Period for qualification 4
8. Opportunity for qualifying 4
9. Time and Actors for remedy 4
10. Verification of proofs of qualifications 4
11. Electoral College 5
12. State Election Officers 5
13. Declaration of qualification/failure 5
14. Proofs for explicit qualification criteria 5
15. Inauguration would not remedy defects 6
B. Respondent’s refusal to supply proofs 6
1. No certified documents provided 6
2. Birth records sealed 6
3. Educational records sealed 6
II. Undivided allegiance to the U.S. underlies the restrictive “natural born citizen” qualification for Commander in Chief to preserve the Republic. 7
A. Stringency of qualifications 8
1. Increasing Responsibility 8
2. Increasing Maturity 8
3. Increasing Citizenship/Residency Duration 8
4. More Stringent Citizenship 8
Table 1: Stringency of Leadership Qualifications 8
5. Founders all U.S. citizens 9
6. Founders exception as not “natural born citizens” 9
B. Contemporary definitions: “native born citizen” 10
1. Emmerich de Vattel, Law of Nations (175 8) 10
2. William Blackstone, Commentaries (1765) 10
C. Primary allegiance passes through fathers 10
D. Birth to Colonials not U.S., “natural born” 10
E. RPE Obama born of a British Colonial 10
F. Birth to two citizens overseas 11
G. Commander in Chief in time of war 11
1. Foreigners excluded for Commander in Chief 11
2. Undivided Allegiance for Commander in Chief 12
3. International conflict over divided loyalties 12
4. Danger of Traitors with Foreign Allegiance 12
5. Avoid dual nationality through a parent 13
6. Avoid dual nationality through birth place 13
7. Power to Exclude Aliens 13
H. Natural Born under Amendment 14 14
1. Citizenship rights 14
2. Bingham affirms narrow “natural born 14
3. Reviews of “natural born citizen” 14
III. CONCLUSION 14
IV. APPENDIX A-1
A. Petition for redress of President elect’s failure to qualify A-1
C. Civilians killed by 20th Century Tyrants A-2
D. The Rule of Law, collective ‘unalienable rights’ and ‘ancient liberties’
A-3
E. Oaths Secure the CONSTITUTION & and Rule of Law A-4
F. CONSTITUTION of the United States of America A-5
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CASES
231 U.S. 9, 22 (1913) 10
322 U.S. 665, 673 (1944) 10
377 U.S. 163, 165 (1964) 10
Chae Chan Ping v. United States 130 U.S. 581, 603, 604 (1889) 13
Perkins v. Elg 307 U.S. 325 13, 14
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - (U.S. 1787)
U.S. CONST. pmbl 7, A-5
U.S. CONST., amend. XX passim
U.S. CONST., amend I. 7
U.S. CONST., amend. IX A-6
U.S. CONST., amend. X A-6
U.S. CONST., amend. XIV § 1 A-6
STATUTES: Organic Laws of U.S.A. & States
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (U.S. 1776) passim
DECLARATION (U.S. 1776) 9
DECLARATION para. 2. A-3
DECLARATION para. 32 A-5
Massachussetts Constitution §XXX (1780) A-3
STATUTES: Organic Laws - Common Law
1 Blackstone Commentaries(1765) Ch. 1 § 3 (1765) 10, A-3
BILL OF RIGHTS secs. 16, 17, 18. 1, W. & M., 2d sess., c. 2 , 16 Dec. 1689 (U.K.) 7,A-4
Blackstone, Commentaries, 152-154 (1765) 10
DOOMS (Code) of Alfred “the Great” (880). A-4
MAGNA CARTA, 17 John (1215); 1 Henry 3 (1225). 6, 7, A-4
Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393, 476 (1856) 10
U.S. CONST., art. VI ¶2 6, 7
Washington, Writings (1932), Vol. XI, pp. 342-343, General Orders of May 2, 1778 12
STATUTES: Other, Bills, Proclamations, & Resolves
5 U.S.C. 3331 Oath of Office. A-5
10 U.S.C. 312. Militia duty: exemptions. A-4
28 U.S.C. 453. Oaths of justices and judges. A-4
29 U.S.C. 169 Employees with religious convictions[]fees A-4
Naturalization act of 1795, 1 Sess. II Ch. 21 414, 415 (1795) 11
BIBLE
Bible. A-3
Matthew 5:33-37. Affirmation. A-4
Ruth 4:6 10
TREATISES
Courtois, Stéphane et al. The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, 912 pp, ISBN 0-674-07608-7 (1999). 7
de Vattel, Law of Nations (1758), Bk. 1, Ch. 19, p 101 10, 14
John Locke 2nd Treatise of Civil Govt. ch. 4 § 22 (1690) A-4
Rushdoony (1973), Inst. Biblical Law, Craig Press 10
Story, Joseph Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. 2 Vols. xxxiii, 735, 702pp. (Reprint ed. Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. 2001 ISBN 1-58477-193-3) (1858). A-5
OTHER AUTHORITIES
4 Elliott’s Debates p. 196 (30 July 1788). A-4
British Nationality Act (194 8) §5(1) 10, 11, A-1
Continental Congress, Declaration and Resolves 14 Oct. 1774 Tansill 1–5 #2 A-3
Rec. Fed. Conv. 1787 CCLXXXVIII p 385, 387 (March 28, 1800) 12, 13
Rec. Fed. Conv. 1787 LXVIII. John Jay to George Washington.3 (NY Jul. 25)
1, 12, 13
Trial of the Seven Bishops for Publishing a Libel. 12 How. St. Tr. 183, 415, (1688).
A-4
Washington, George Farewell Address (Sept. 17, 1796). A-5
MISCELLANEOUS
Samuel Rutherford Lex Rex (1644). A-26
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
1. The Petitioner submits that the U.S. CONST’s 20th Amendment places the burden of proof directly on the President elect to demonstrate that he qualifies to become President, and on government officers to evaluate and report on those proofs. It negates the lower court’s assumption that the burden of proof lies with the Petitioner.
The Respondents, President elect Barack Hussein Obama II (herein RPE Obama) et al., have failed to submit to election officers the requisite objective government certified proofs attested to by multiple reliable witnesses, as evidence that the President elect qualifies per U.S. CONST. Art. 2 §1 and §2. Furthermore, they have systematically acted to withhold from State and Federal election officers, and from We the People, the evidence necessary to evaluate the qualifications of the President elect.
Having thus failed to qualify by default, U.S. CONST. amend. 20 requires election officers to declare that the President elect has “failed to qualify”. Congress then has constitutional business of the highest privilege to elect a President who does qualify.
By misprisions of State and Federal election officers to perform these duties, Petitioner has the constitutional right and duty to challenge the qualifications of the President elect by redress petition preserved under U.S. CONST. amend. 1, by rights reserved by We the People, under U.S. CONST. amend. 1, 10 and 20, and by each government officer’s oath of office to uphold the CONSTITUTION as inviolable supreme law, U.S. CONST. art. VI.
2. The core issue underlying the Petitioner’s motion, this case before this Court, and to all similar cases is the constitutional interpretation of the restrictive “natural born citizen”qualification for President.
Prior cases with other issues have brought issues of individual civil rights of citizenship to the attention of this Court. The Petitioner brings the issue of the restrictive constitutional qualifications for President. This addresses the essential safeguard provided by the Founders to preserve the Republic and upholding the inviolability of Constitution as supreme law.
The intent of the Founders is clearly seen in John
II. The CONSTITUTION Places The Burden Of Proof On the President Elect, Who Has Failed To Qualify The 20th Amendment qualification process The U.S. CONST. amend. 20 prescribes that:
“. . . if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified;. . .”
The Constitution does not guarantee inauguration of a President elect. It requires that he first “qualify”.
The Petitioner has observed that the Constitution nowhere delegates the power and method of qualifying. Thus, the Petitioner appealed to powers reserved under the 14th Amendment. However, common principles may still identify methods by which the President elect may qualify, or fail to have qualified.
1. Burden of proof on the President elect By the past tense verb “have failed to qualify”, the CONSTITUTION places the burden of proof directly on the President elect to lay objective proofs before competent officers necessary to demonstrate that he has met the constitutional qualifications for President.
2. Qualification candidate Respondent Barack Hussein Obama II was declared the constitutional President elect by Congress in joint session on Jan. 8th, 2009. RPE Obama is thus the active subject of U.S. CONST., amend 20.
3. Constitutional qualifications exist The verb “qualify” indicates that the Constitution establishes objective criteria that the President elect must satisfy. See explicit restrictive qualifications in U.S. CONST. Art II, §1 and implicit qualifications listed below.
4. Officers competent to judge qualifications The verb “has failed to qualify” implies that there are election officers to whom those constitutional proofs of qualifications must be submitted. The electoral votes are submitted to the President of the Senate presiding over Congress in joint session with tellers appointed from the Senate and House. At least those constitutional officers are competent to receive evaluate the qualifications. The Chief Justice of this Court, and the President are other constitutionally defined officers before whom the President elect could submit his proofs for qualification.
5. Challenging Respondent’s qualifications All Executive, Legislative and Judicial officers, being on Oath to uphold the CONSTITUTION, have the power and duty to challenge the Respondent President elect Obama to show cause by date certain why he should not have failed to qualify.
a. Objections to reading Electoral votes
When Congress tabulates votes of the Electoral College in joint session, law explicitly requires the President of the Senate to ask for Objections after the reading of each State’s electoral certificates. 3 U.S.C. Ch. 1, §15. Objections to electoral votes may be filed if signed by one Senator and one Representative. Electing a candidate for President who would not qualify would violate the Constitution and justify raising a formal objection on reading each State’s votes. On reading the electoral votes, Senate President Dick Cheney failed to ask for objections on reading of each State’s votes on Jan. 8th, 2009. See also 3 U.S.C. Ch. 1,§17, §19(a) (1), and §19 ©) (1)
b. Point of Order on declaring President elect Obama has failed to qualify
Officers on oath to uphold the Constitution bear the high privilege to raise a Point of Order or Question of Order over any breach thereof, as well as over any breach of the Rules of each House. Senate Rule XX. When an appointed election officer fails to uphold the duties required by U.S. CONST. Art II §1 and amend. 20, any Member of Congress has the power and duty to raise a Point of Order.
Failing that, citizens, including the Petitioner, have the unalienable right of petition for redress of grievances, to petition their State or Congress with a prayer to raise a Point of Order over breach of Constitution. U.S. CONST. amend. I
Reporting the tallied electoral votes provided an opportunity to raise the Point of Order that the President elect has not qualified. However, no Member of Congress raised that Point of Order requested by numerous citizens by redress petition. See Appendix A. Every time any House is in session provides an opportunity for Members of Congress to raise a Point of Order that the President elect has failed to qualify.
6. Venues for qualification The joint session of Congress, held to count electoral votes and announce the President elect, is one venue in which the President elect could have submitted his qualifications. Thereafter, the President elect could submit his qualifications to the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, the Chief Justice of this Court, or the President as constitutionally recognized officers being under oath to uphold the Constitution.
7. Period for qualification By the classification “President elect”, Amend. 20 establishes at least the qualification period between the constitutional “election” of tabulating electoral college votes before Congress on January 6th (January 8th in 2009) and the inauguration on January 20th when the President elect is sworn in as “President”.
8. Opportunity for qualifying By “have failed to qualify”, the President elect will have been given the opportunity to submit proofs showing that he does qualify. By January 16th, RPE Obama will have had five business days during which to submit proofs of his qualification.
9. Time and Actors for remedy Were this Court to determine and find the President elect has failed to qualify by default, there would still be time to notify Congress, for Congress to appoint the Vice President as Acting President, and for the Electoral College and Congress to proceed with electing another President who does qualify, per U.S. CONST. amend. 20. This urgent constitutional business would have privilege over other business.
10. Verification of proofs of qualifications By “have failed to qualify”, the competent election officers must examine the proofs submitted by the President elect against the constitutional qualifications. The CONSTITUTION grants all powers necessary to perform constitutional duties including obtaining government certified documents from any Federal or State repository, and to subpoena other records as needed.
11. Electoral College By U.S. CONST. amend 12, Electors in the Electoral College are election officers with the duty to elect the President. Electors, and the Electoral College have the privileges and duty to evaluate the qualifications of all candidates for President, and the President elect. By their oath to uphold the Constitution, they have a duty to demand and evaluate proofs and to find that the Presidential candidate or President elect has or has failed to qualify.
12. State Election Officers Each State has the equivalent privileges and opportunities to evaluate the qualifications of all candidates for President and for the President elect. As the Petitioner has sought relief, the Secretary of State can communicate RPE Obama’s failure to qualify to the Governor, the State’s Senators and President of the Senate, and to its Representatives, and the Speaker of the House. Each State’s Senators, Representatives and Governor have the Privilege of the Floor in the respective House, and may communicate that failure, or raise a Point of Order. Senate Rule XXIII
13. Declaration of qualification/failure By “have failed to qualify”, the election officers have the constitutional power and duty to declare that the President elect has met or has failed to meet the restrictive constitutional requirements for President. They have the power and duty to communicate that determination to the authorities responsible to elect the President. I.e. to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House.
14. Proofs for explicit qualification criteria Objective evidence of qualifications must be commensurate with the level of proof required. Certified copies of original birth certificates are commonly required by citizens to obtain government photo ID, marriage certificates, driver’s licenses, and to register to vote.
To obtain security clearance, military officers must provide increasingly exhaustive evidence that they qualify. As Commander in Chief, the President commands the Chiefs of the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force bearing Top Secret clearance. Common sense requires that the President elect provide objective proofs commensurate with the higher constitutional office of Commander in Chief, and the Top Secret clearance required of those he must command. To verify constitutional qualifications, election officers should require the President elect to provide the following, and to verify their validity.
a. Age 35 years
Government certified copies of original full (“long form”) birth certificates attested to by two reliable witnesses, and all revisions thereof. U.S. CONST. art. II, §1.
b. 14 years residency in the US
Evidence of residence within the U.S., with certified copies of all passports held to confirm time within versus without the U.S., being more thorough than that required for naturalization, or documenting U.S. births abroad. U.S. CONST. art. II, §1.
c. Natural born citizen with sole allegiance
By the underlying constitutional principle of sole allegiance to the U.S.A. the Commander in Chief should have all biological and adoptive parents holding allegiance to the US, the President elect be born in U.S. jurisdiction, and have had only had sole allegiance to the U.S. CONST. art. II, §1.
(1) President Elect’s Citizenship
Government certified copies of the original (“long form”) birth certificates of the President elect, showing original place and date of birth, and both biological parents.
(2) Citizenship of Biological Father
Government certified copies of the original birth certificates or naturalization certificates, evidencing US Citizenship of the biological father at the birth of the President elect.
(3) Citizenship of Biological Mother
Government certified copies of the original birth certificates or naturalization certificates, evidencing US Citizenship of the biological mother at the President elect’s birth.
(4) Citizenship of Adoptive Parents
Government certified copies evidencing citizenship of every adoptive parent of the President elect.
(5) Change of Name
Government certified copies of every legal change of name since birth.
(6) Declarations of allegiance
Certified copies of each document wherein the President elect has sworn allegiance, or declared his citizenship or allegiance, whether as a youth or adult, including applications for higher education and financial aid.
(7) Military & Public Service
Certified copies of any registration for military service, and of each and every military and/or public service.
15. Inauguration would not remedy defects Official inauguration of a President elect do not remedy failure to constitutionally qualify. The US Constitution is inviolable, founded on the security of the U.S. CONST., art. VI ¶2 No certified documents provided Per the Petitioner’s application and current belief and knowledge, none of these documents having been submitted to election officers in Congress, in the Electoral College, or in any State, by RPE Obama, that are government certified with reliable witnesses. Upcoming petitioners including Gail Lightfoot have similarly found no evidence of such positive action by RPE Obama to qualify.
2. Birth records sealed The RPE Obama has refused to submit certified copies of any of his original long form “vault” birth certificates in Hawaii to any public officer or to any Petitioner. Relevant records in Kenya have also been officially restricted.
3. Educational records sealed The RPE Obama has sealed all educational records which might reveal his stated citizenship. These include Punahou High School, Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard Law School.
III. Undivided allegiance to the U.S. underlies the restrictive “natural born citizen” qualification for Commander in Chief to preserve the Republic. When King and Parliament breached their rights with arbitrary laws, the Founders fought to restore the Rule of Law claiming ‘unalienable rights’ and ‘entitle[ment]’ by the ‘laws of God.’ DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (U.S. 1776) (herein “DECLARATION”). The inviolability of the Magna Carta (1215) was preserved in the U.S. Constitution (1787) as “supreme law.” Magna Carta (1215) §61. This security was restored by theU.S. CONST., amend I.U.S. CONST. pmblU.S. CONST., art. I §3 para. 5. The “natural born citizen” allegiance qualification was strictest of these, to protect against treason and tyranny.
Democracies Descending into Tyranny: Thirty three democracies descended into tyranny during the 20th century by failing to uphold constitutional protections. These included Germany, Russia, and China.
Secularist States Murdered Millions: States establishing Secularism caused the most extrajudicial deaths in the 20th Century. Courtois et al. (1999) detail the consequent horrors of atheistic communist governments killing more than 125 million - more than three times the 38 million killed in all 20th Century wars. See Appendix C, Hagen & Irish (2000).
The greatest threat to Domestic tranquility is not war but descent into mob rule and dictatorship. Preserving protections of the Constitution and Republic are critically important. The restrictive “natural born citizen” qualification for President, is a critical constitutional guard against tyranny. Petitioner applies the unalienable right of redress petition and security of Oaths to preserve the US. CONST. in face of misprision of failing to enforce presidential qualifications by election officers.
Petitioner humbly prays this Court evaluate the Petitioner’s case in context of how best to enforce restrictive qualifications for President to preserve the Constitution and Republic from tyranny, rather than its prior cases on protecting individual civil rights.
A. Stringency of qualifications The U.S. CONSTITUTION explicitly requires a progressively increasing stringency in qualifications for higher levels of officers of government. See Table 1.
1. Increasing Responsibility Representatives represent a portion of a State (< 30,000 citizens per U.S. CONST. art. I, §2 para 3). Senators have greater responsibility to represent a State and the Nation’s interests. The President is responsible for the entire Nation. In light of their increasing responsibilities, the CONSTITUTION imposes increasingly stringent qualifications for Congressional offices, with the greatest stringency for the President.
2. Increasing Maturity The minimum age increases from 25 to 30 to 35 years for Representatives, Senators and the President. After coming of age at 21, this requires from 4 years to 9 years to 14 years of maturity. The President must have 350% the adult maturity of Representatives.
3. Increasing Citizenship/Residency Duration The qualification of citizenship increases from 7 years to 9 years for Representatives, and Senators (no residency). ( U.S. CONST. art. I, §3 para. 3U.S. CONST. art. II, §1 para. 5 Each Member of Congress must be a “citizen” U.S. CONST. art. I, §2 para. 2; U.S. CONST. art. II, §1 para. 5. The features distinguishing “natural born citizen” from “citizen” are critical to this and other cases contesting respondent Obama’s qualifications.
Table 1: Stringency of Leadership Qualifications
Member of Congress President
Repre-sentative Senator Commander in Chief
Responsi-bility Part State State All States
Minimum Age years 25* 30** 35***
Citizen/
Resident 7 years citizen* 9 years citizen** 14 years a resident ***
Citizen Type Any * Any ** Natural born ***
US allegiance Sole or divided Sole or divided Undivided
Father a citizen Option Option Yes
Mother a citizen Option Option Yes
Naturalized Option+ Option+ No+
Born in US jurisdiction Option+ Option+ Yes (or Residency)+
*U.S. CONST. art. I, §1; **U.S. CONST. art. I, §3; ***U.S. CONST. art. II, §1; +U.S. CONST. amend. XIV §1 with statutory citizenship requirements
Petitioner submits that the qualification of “natural born citizen” for the President must be more stringent than “citizen”, both by logic, and by inference from the gradation of constitutional qualifications for Representatives, Senators and the President.
However, “citizen” is a binary qualification. As “natural born citizen” is not defined within the Constitution, what are the constitutional criteria for establishing for this greater stringency? The “jurisdiction” of birth, allegiance or citizenship of each parent at an individual’s birth, and the individual’s own actions regarding allegiance on coming of age create multiple subcategories of “citizen”. Following are distinctions between “naturalized”, “native”, and “natural born” citizens as shown in the CONSTITUTION, by the Founders, and by contemporary authorities.
6. Founders all U.S. citizens By U.S. CONST., art. VII para. 3, the U.S.A. is dated by “the independence of the United States of America the twelfth” codifying that it was established by the Declaration of Independence, (U.S. 1776). On adoption of the U.S. CONST. numerous candidates for Representatives and Senators satisfied the requirements of “citizen”, having 7 or 9 years of citizenship, and age per & §3. If Respondent Obama had been a U.S. “citizen” for 9 years and was at least 30 years age he would have qualified on his election to the Senate.
7. Founders exception as not “natural born citizens” However, DECLARATION (U.S. 1776)377 U.S. 163, 165 (1964)322 U.S. 665, 673 (1944)231 U.S. 9, 22 (1913) " Emmerich de Vattel, Law of Nations (175 8)
de Vattel’s Law of Nations widely quoted by the Founders. de Vattel stated:
"The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. ..” Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations (1758), Bk. 1, Ch. 19, Citizens and Nations, p 101 para 212; cited in Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393, 476 (1856).
2. " William Blackstone, Commentaries (1765)
Blackstone in reviewing the Common Law stated:
“Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England, . . . aliens, such as are born out of it. . . .
. . .every man owes natural allegiance where he is born, and cannot owe two such allegiances, . . .” Commentaries 154-57 (Dean Gait ed., 1941)
Both de Vattel and Blackstone thus state that children born of two citizens in that nation are natural-born citizens. RPE Obama has not shown evidence that both his biological parents were U.S. citizens.
D. Primary allegiance passes through fathers In the Judeo-Christian legal tradition, allegiance flows through the father. Bible Ruth 4:6; de Vattel and Blackstone affirm this principle:
“ . .the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . .The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children.” de Vattel, Law of Nations (1758), Bk. 1, Ch. 19, Citizens & Nations, p 101 para 212.
“ . . .so that all children, born out of the king’s licence, whose fathers were natural-born subjects, are now natural-born subjects themselves, to all intents and purposes,. . .” William Blackstone, Commentaries 154-57 (Dean Gait ed., 1941)
RPE Obama has not shown evidence his father was a natural-born US citizen.
E. Birth to Colonials not US, “natural born” George Washington was born to colonials of Virginia, and John Adams to colonials of Massachussetts. Both were born “native” to those Colonies, and “overseas” to Britain. Yet by the exception clause, the Founders implied that the restriction to U.S. “natural born citizen” disqualified both from becoming U.S. President. The CONSTITUTION’S exclusion clause by application disqualifies all U.S. citizens born to colonial fathers subject to the British sovereign.
F. RPE Obama born of a British Colonial RPE Obama has posted:
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children. Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.” http://www.Fightthesmears.org
(Technically the British East African Protectorate of Zanzibar until Kenya gained independence in 1963.)
The divorce decree for RPE Obama’s parents has recently been posted. (http://www.plainsradio.com).
“That one child has been born to said Libelant and Libeled as issue of said marriage, to wit: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II, a son, born August 4, 1961.” HI, 1st Cir. Domestic Relations, divorce decree D. No. 57972 Stanley Ann D. Obama v. Barack H. Obama p 2 §IV.
The Hawaii court thus confirms RPE Obama’s statements.
RPE Obama acknowledged that he had foreign allegiance, being a British citizen at birth through his Kenyan father (per British law provided exceptions for children born overseas to ambassadors, merchants, and citizens:
“Yet the children of the king’s ambassadors born abroad were always held to be natural subjects: . . .all children born abroad, provided both their parents were at the time of the birth in allegiance to the king, and the mother had passed the seas by her husband’s consent, might inherit as if born in England:” Blackstone Commentaries 154-57.
After adoption of the Constitution, Congress adapted this common law distinguishing between children born overseas vs those within the jurisdiction of the US, describing them as “citizen” rather than natural born citizen. Naturalization act of 1795, 1 Sess. II Ch. 21 414, 415 (1795), (with variations in 1790 and 1798.)
If born overseas, RPE Obama has not submitted proofs that he was born to two US citizens.
I. Commander in Chief in time of war The U.S. CONST. art II §2 provides:
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several States when called into the actual service of the United States;”
Petitioner submits that this unique constitutional duty of Commander in Chief provides a critical constitutional principle differentiating the qualifications of “national born citizen” for president vs “citizen” for Members of Congress.
1. Foreigners excluded for Commander in Chief John Jay, the first Chief Justice, wrote George Washington:
“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check on the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the commander in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.”Records Federal Conv. 1787 LXVIII. John Jay to George Washington.3 (New York, July 25, 1787)
Jay expressly defined the qualification of “natural born citizen” for the “commander in chief of the American army” as excluding all “Foreigners” with allegiance to foreign sovereigns. Washington acknowledged his “hint” and this qualification of “natural born citizen” was included in the Constitution without further discussion.
2. Undivided Allegiance for Commander in Chief Senator Charles Pickney affirmed Jay’s restrictive qualification, stating:
“It was intended to give your President the command of your forces, . . . to insure experience and attachment to the country, they have determined that no man who is not a natural born citizen, or citizen at the adoption of the Constitution, of fourteen years residence, and thirty-five years of age, shall be eligible….” Rec. Fed. Conv. 1787 CCLXXXVIII p 385, 387 (March 28, 1800)
Petitioner respectfully submits that the underlying constitutional principle on the restrictive qualification of “natural born citizen” to become President is that of requiring undivided allegiance to the U.S.A. for the Commander in Chief to “insure attachment to the country” and exclude “Foreigners”.
On adopting the CONSTITUTION, the United States was just recovering from an existential war with the superpower Britain. The US endured ongoing conflict with Britain impressing US citizens for its ships, over this issue of the allegiance of native or naturalized citizens “natural born citizens”. Britain demanded the allegiance of all US citizens born in the colonies, or whose father was a British citizen, and who thus were not “natural born” with both parents being US citizens. In 1812 the US was forced to go to war with Britain to resolve this festering issue of allegiance to Britain.
5. Danger of Traitors with Foreign Allegiance “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” US Const. Art. III, §3. As Commander in Chief, the President must guard against Treason.
During the War for Independence, General Greene reported: “Treason of the blackest dye was yesterday discovered. General Arnold who commanded at West Point . . . was about to deliver up that important post into the hands of the enemy. Such an event must have given the American cause a deadly wound if not a fatal stab.” Washington, Writings (1932), Vol. XI, pp. 342-343, General Orders of May 2, 1778.
Though a U.S. citizen and war hero, Benedict Arnold had been born under allegiance to Britain and his wife has strong allegiance to Britain. In light of the Founders’ painful experience during their recent War of Independence, the Treason section reinforces the principle that “natural born citizen”as qualification for Commander in Chief is to exclude citizens having any foreign allegiance. I.e., to select Presidents having only ever had sole allegiance with both biological parents and adoptive parents being US citizens.
Since the attack on New York’s World Trade Center on “9/11", the US has been at “war on terrorism”. This enemy is not a nation state but radical Islamic religious faction bent on imposing its religious views through force. Indonesia is the largest Islamic country.
Similarly, Petitioner submitted affidavits detailing how relatives of RPE Obama in Kenya have used violence to subjugate Christians, coerce elections, coerce the government into granting political power (establishing a Prime Minister without constitutional amendment.) Petitioner documented RPE Obama as having aided and abetted this coercive effort.
RPE Obama has failed to show that he is free of foreign influence as necessary for a Commander in Chief in time of war.
6. Avoid dual nationality through a parent Tories retaining allegiance to the British sovereign were a major part of the “enemy” during the US War of Independence. The Founders’ experience directs an explicit avoidance of citizens having near relatives with foreign allegiance as a threat of direct opposition or of becoming traitors. This infers that “natural born citizen” should be interpreted to mean that both parents of the Commander in Chief should be U.S. citizens. Adoptive parents should also be U.S. citizens.
Petitioner documents that RPE Obama had Indonesian citizenship evidenced by school records and parents divorce decree. Petitioner submits that the core purpose of “natural born citizen” is that of allegiance to safeguard against tyranny. The issue is thus whether RPE Obama retained sole allegiance to the USA per requirements for a Commander in chief in time of war, rather than his personal civil rights of citizenship or if he lost his citizenship (cf Perkins v. Elg 307 U.S. 325).
7. Avoid dual nationality through birth place Foreign birth establishes foreign allegiance (dual citizenship). During World War II, Hitler recalled US citizens with dual nationality or German parentage. Pierce O’Donnell, In Time of War: Hitler’s Terrorist Attack on America, 2005. Some were trained sent back to sabotage the US war effort. By the sovereignty of the U.S., Congress has the absolute power
“to exclude aliens from the United States and to prescribe the terms and conditions on which they come in. . . .The United States, . . . are one nation, invested with powers which belong to independent nations, the exercise of which can be invoked for the maintenance of its absolute independence and security throughout its entire territory.” Chae Chan Ping v. United States 130 U.S. 581, 603, 604 (1889)
Making an Alien the Commander in Chief would incur the danger of the US losing “its absolute independence and security”by descent into tyranny. Pickney restricting the President from foreigners applies this power to exclude aliens and applies it to excluding any citizen with foreign allegiance, by birth or adoption, from becoming Commander in Chief, lest they endanger the U.S.’s “absolute independence and security.”
J. Natural Born under Amendment 14 Citizenship rights In ” John A. Bingham, appointed Union Army Judge Advocate by Lincoln, crafted the 14th Amendment (final April 28, 1866.) Bingham himself affirmed the narrow interpretation of “natural born citizen” clause stating:
“[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…. .” Rep. John A. Bingham, re S 61 Bill, March 9, 1866.
He confirmed de G. J. Chin, reviews U.S. SC cases finding that in Insular Cases, “persons born in unincorporated territories are not Fourteenth Amendment citizens.” Why Senator John McCain Cannot Be President Mich. Law. Rev. 1st Impressions, Vol. 107, No. 1, 2008,
S.H. Duggin & M. B. Collins (Feb. 2005) provide a detailed review, arguing that “natural born citizen” is unfair. ‘Natural Born’ in the USA’ Boston Univ. Law Rev. However, they omitted the key contemporary definition of Petitioner submits that the Constitution places the burden of proof to qualify on the President elect. All officers sworn to uphold the Constitution including election officers in Congress, the Electoral College and all States have the duty to challenge and test those qualifications, and to declare that the President elect (or candidate) has qualified or failed to qualify.
The Petitioner and public record indicate explicit active refusal by the RPE Obama to submit any government certified witnessed proofs that he qualifies for President.
The restrictive qualification “natural born citizen” is essential to preserve the Constitution and the Republic from descending into tyranny. It should be guided by the underlying constitutional principle of enforcing sole allegiance to the United States and to exclude all candidates with any foreign allegiance through the allegiance of either birth parent or by any adoptive parent, or by the President elect’s own actions.
Petitioner humbly submits that this Court should therefore affirm the Petitioner’s Motion and find that the Respondent, President Elect Barack Hussein Obama II has failed in his constitutional burden of proof to qualify for President.
“I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.”
___________________________, January 15, 2009
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
No. 08A524
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
*
twe // January 15, 2009 at 6:35 pm
End of the American Dream
End of the American Dream
My heart breaks for those wonderful optimists who are still holding hope for a last minute deliverance from the crime about to be committed upon America. Somehow, some way, justice riding a white horse will stop the inauguration proceedings of President Elect Obama and American will be saved from the horrendous disaster! If wishing made it so, then I too wish the same.
The reality is slapping America in the face! It ain’t gonna happen! America has been betrayed! The power grabbers are not going to give up without a bloody fight. We the people were caught unprepared for the fight. The dream is over. The nightmare has begun.
Start thinking about how you are going to survive under the new America. Start planning how to save your own lives. It’s a new dawn. It’s a new day. I’m feeling scared!
Usa patriots shout
My heart breaks for those wonderful optimists who are still holding hope for a last minute deliverance from the crime about to be committed upon America. Somehow, some way, justice riding a white horse will stop the inauguration proceedings of President Elect Obama and American will be saved from the horrendous disaster! If wishing made it so, then I too wish the same.
The reality is slapping America in the face! It ain’t gonna happen! America has been betrayed! The power grabbers are not going to give up without a bloody fight. We the people were caught unprepared for the fight. The dream is over. The nightmare has begun.
Start thinking about how you are going to survive under the new America. Start planning how to save your own lives. It’s a new dawn. It’s a new day. I’m feeling scared!
Usa patriots shout
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
We Can No Longer Trust the Electorial Process
We Can No Longer Trust the Electorial Process
The worst has already happened. A usurper is entering the White house January 20, 2009 aided and abetted by Congress, Senate, Supreme who are all conspirators in treason against the US Constitution and the American public.
Our work is cut out for us. We are no where near ready. We are just beginning.
While we were in a naive state of trust all was well in America, our enemies were doing their due diligence. Obama's journey to the Whitehouse was a well planned fraud. Let no one tell us he was elected through "democratic process.'' He was not. This entire election was a fraud. This is a God awful wake up call for us.
The fight to take back America is now. The idea of taking back America through the election process is ridicules. It was through the election process America was betrayed. Therefore, we must seek other methods of taking back America.
Time is of the essence. WE must begin now.
This will be the greatest challenge the American public will face since 1776. First we must be aggressive and diligent in disclosing facts and truth about Obama, MSM, and the elected officials who betrayed us. This won't be easy since most people who believe in Obama are experts at denial and avoidance. Persistence is on are side.
Second, slowly and firmly Americans are uniting. We must continue to do so as openly as time permits. Then when the Obama secret thugs start their oppression against us, we must continue secretly. We must find new leaders of integrity, loyalty to the Constitution and America to replace the traitors who are misrepresenting us. This will take time and courage.
Third we must take back control of MSM to report the facts truthfully and openly. I don't know how. I am sure we will find a way. We must create our own system of public communication that will supersede MSM. The inter net in itself is not sufficient.
Fourth, we must enlist the help of other free countries. Other free countries can be very helpful in disclosing the facts suppressed by MSM. They can also be helpful in many other ways. We will need all the help we can get.
Fifth we must take every action in our power without violence to win back America. This means supporting Dr. Douglas W. Schell's plan. The military may be almost our last hope. If we the people fail to win the military on our side, I fear Obama will not hesitate to use the military to shoot any one who opposes him down in the streets. You have only to look at Obama's cousin Raille Odinga to see the methods approved by Obama.
Sixth we must know our enemy. It is my observation we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg regarding the plans, the depth of penetration into our government, the money Obama supporters have, and the numbers elected officials who are part of this coup d’état. WE must ferret out every invisible power and money source that promoted Obama and expose them. Then we must some how diminish their power. If we are to win, we must know every thing about these invisible characters. We must learn their techniques and read their books. Then use their tecniques against them. At this stage, we don't know enough.
The above suggestions are not in any way solutions to the enormous problems we are facing. They are meant only as a point of departure for all loyal Americans to begin to come to grips with the horror that has come upon us.
I am merely saying in order to solve a problem, we must first identify the problem.
The worst has already happened. A usurper is entering the White house January 20, 2009 aided and abetted by Congress, Senate, Supreme who are all conspirators in treason against the US Constitution and the American public.
Our work is cut out for us. We are no where near ready. We are just beginning.
While we were in a naive state of trust all was well in America, our enemies were doing their due diligence. Obama's journey to the Whitehouse was a well planned fraud. Let no one tell us he was elected through "democratic process.'' He was not. This entire election was a fraud. This is a God awful wake up call for us.
The fight to take back America is now. The idea of taking back America through the election process is ridicules. It was through the election process America was betrayed. Therefore, we must seek other methods of taking back America.
Time is of the essence. WE must begin now.
This will be the greatest challenge the American public will face since 1776. First we must be aggressive and diligent in disclosing facts and truth about Obama, MSM, and the elected officials who betrayed us. This won't be easy since most people who believe in Obama are experts at denial and avoidance. Persistence is on are side.
Second, slowly and firmly Americans are uniting. We must continue to do so as openly as time permits. Then when the Obama secret thugs start their oppression against us, we must continue secretly. We must find new leaders of integrity, loyalty to the Constitution and America to replace the traitors who are misrepresenting us. This will take time and courage.
Third we must take back control of MSM to report the facts truthfully and openly. I don't know how. I am sure we will find a way. We must create our own system of public communication that will supersede MSM. The inter net in itself is not sufficient.
Fourth, we must enlist the help of other free countries. Other free countries can be very helpful in disclosing the facts suppressed by MSM. They can also be helpful in many other ways. We will need all the help we can get.
Fifth we must take every action in our power without violence to win back America. This means supporting Dr. Douglas W. Schell's plan. The military may be almost our last hope. If we the people fail to win the military on our side, I fear Obama will not hesitate to use the military to shoot any one who opposes him down in the streets. You have only to look at Obama's cousin Raille Odinga to see the methods approved by Obama.
Sixth we must know our enemy. It is my observation we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg regarding the plans, the depth of penetration into our government, the money Obama supporters have, and the numbers elected officials who are part of this coup d’état. WE must ferret out every invisible power and money source that promoted Obama and expose them. Then we must some how diminish their power. If we are to win, we must know every thing about these invisible characters. We must learn their techniques and read their books. Then use their tecniques against them. At this stage, we don't know enough.
The above suggestions are not in any way solutions to the enormous problems we are facing. They are meant only as a point of departure for all loyal Americans to begin to come to grips with the horror that has come upon us.
I am merely saying in order to solve a problem, we must first identify the problem.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Obama:Deciever, Cheat, Swindler, Liar, Fraudster, Con Artist
Obama: Deceiver, Cheat, Swindler, Liar, Fraudster, Con Artist
08.01.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru URL: http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/106908-obama-0
By Mark S. McGrew
We know that Obama is a liar about so many things.
The question of whether or not he is in fact, a Natural Born Citizen and eligible to be President of The United States of America, has no importance anymore. The question of eligibility has evolved far beyond that simple question, with such a simple solution, that Obama refuses to provide. The government of Kenya has put a Gag Order on his family not to talk to reporters.
What we don’t know, what there is absolutely no proof of, is his place of birth, his true father or his mother. Without a verifiable Birth Certificate, none of this, including his actual date of birth can be proven or believed.
He shows no loyalty to America and in fact publicly displays his contempt for America . On youtube.com, you can type in the search bar: “Obama refuses to salute flag” and see a video of him refusing to pledge allegiance to the flag and acting as if he is making a point that he has no respect for the American flag.
Michelle Obama is just as arrogant and insulting as the man she calls her husband and has not been a lawyer since 1993 when she was put on inactive status by court order. The State of Illinois says so on their website. Click here then on the top right click on “Lawyer Search” and then type in “Obama” and you’ll find her.
In Hawaii , you can read here: United States Marines and Navy servicemen have no respect for Obama. In an ABC News story, Sunlen Miller says, “ The diners were polite, staying seated at their respective tables and waited for the president-elect to come to them to stand up”.
The photo in the article shows that there is nobody standing up to shake hands with him and some have their backs turned to Obama. If those people, trying to enjoy their meal in peace, had thrown their food in that stinking bum’s face with disgust, ABC News could have reported it as, “The soldiers were so overjoyed to catch a glimpse of their Commander In Chief Elect, that like true Marines, they all chipped in to share their Holiday meal with him.”
Obama’s website Change.gov is a fraud, administered by a fund raising company Blue State Digital, an Internet fund-raising company that presided over the Obama campaign site . The “dot gov” is designated and assigned by the United States General Services Administration to be used only for genuine government activities. It is not for political campaigning or non-profit organizations which is exactly and soley what Change.gov is for. The only reason Obama has the dot gov designation is by harassing the GSA and thereby obtaining the dot gov designation illegally against Federal Law.
With Obama’s total disrespect for America and laws in general, it is highly suspect as to why he is not already in jail for the rest of his life. Even stupid crimes, he has no conscience about. He, just last year, paid off 17 outstanding parking tickets from when he was in Cambridge, supposedly going to school at Harvard.
Some of the stories about Obama defy belief. And there are plenty of unfounded rumors about him.
I hear so many "Internet rumors" and see so many News sites, web sites and blogs that it makes it very difficult to know what is true and what isn't. That is why I try to limit what I write to things that can be verified fairly easily. Some of the emails and phone calls and personal visits I get force me to not believe anything unless I can prove it. Some "hot tips" are things I've known for years and some seem to be someone's idea of writing a fantasy spy novel.
Besides an atmosphere of arrogance and hostility surrounding his supporters, an unexplainable, incredible amount of controversy permeates every thing about him.
Rumors turn more and more bizarre every day.
Then there is the knowledgeable, open source or occasionally “gray” source, of intel tidbits that hit my desk, from so far, reliable sources that defy reality.
For instance, I was told the other day that it was not really necessary for me to publicize events about Obama because a complete dossier with statements, photos, tape recordings and video recordings of Obama's secret backers has been compiled with the help of over 200 high profile international lawyers, military men, politicians and businesspeople and has been distributed to the intel agencies of some 38 different countries, s ome of which had contributed to the compilation effort.
These "secret backers" of Obama have been under intense investigation for over two decades without any initial focus on Obama and a major world wide sweep is going to happen as soon as Obama makes the wrong move.
The backers consider Obama “their puppet” but a major world wide sweep is scheduled to happen as soon as Obama makes a clear wrong move against the national interests of those who have put this compilation together.
I'm sure he is going to make that "wrong move" as soon as Martians land at the White House. Maybe, though, as I am urged, since it's all under control now, I should take a vacation.
These are the kinds of dead ends that any investigator has to decipher.
But sticking to the facts, what we actually do know, what is documented and verifiable, is enough to convince the American public and World leaders that a major mistake has been made in voting for Obama.
158 of Obama’s lies are documented, on record.
But who is to show that record to the voting public and World leades who will be affected by Obama’s deceit?
If the American media would unite as strongly to divulge the truth, as they have to bury it, every person in America would vomit where they sit, in realizing what they have been conned into voting for.
There is still, after six weeks, not one shred of proof that his grandmother died the day before the election or two days before the election, whichever date given by Obama that you choose to believe. No death certificate has been produced. No authority has confirmed the date of death. We have only Obama’s campaign photo-ops of him wiping away a tear.
The recent photo-op of him dropping what he says are the ashes of Madelyn Payne Lee Dunham into the sea is phony. Human ashes are not snow white. Human bones do not burn and are not turned to ash when cremated. The bones are ground up to the consistency of sand and small pebbles. The color is a gray/tan, like weathered pine wood. The container he is pouring from is half the size necessary for human remains. The container he is pouring from is about the size of a container for a medium sized dog’s ashes. Obama is pouring flour or sugar, not human ashes.
What Obama and Rahm Emanuel have told us they are going to institute for American citizens - mandatory community service and to transport people by bus or train to work sites, is defined as nothing less than, Crimes Against Humanity, according to the International Criminal Court.(Scroll down to International Criminal Court, see c. and d.)
Regardless of the rumors, the non-existent birth certificate and his purported crimes, just reading 1/10 of 158 of Obama’s lies would be enough to convince any reasonable person that this man is not someone that you would buy a used car from or let cook your food. Reading one half of these documented lies will make an honest person sick to his stomache.
Obama, his wife and his backers have no morals, no integrity and no respect for anything except what they want at the time. They have no more conscience than a hungry lizard in the desert coming upon a beetle in the sand.
Any non-active military service members who have seen enough, sign this Military Consent Form and get on board like the Marines in Hawaii.
Many people have speculated that Obama may be a “Manchurian Candidate” a planted enemy, masquerading as an American, for the purpose of taking over the United States . Speculations have pointed to the Middle East and terrorist organizations. That does seem to be a possibility as there are so many anti-American statements and activities by Obama and his supporters. It may sound like more fantasy spy novel dreams.
But if the speculation can be considered, in some degree of seriousness, the question to be asked first is: Who, what organization, has had the time and the resources, to move throughout our political system, convincing Congressmen, Senators, both Federal and State, 50 Governors, Attorney Generals, Secretaries of State, hundreds of State legislators, thousands of local, county, State and Federal political party hacks, FBI, CIA and various State and Federal agencies, Federal Courts, even the US Supreme Court……..who has that ability to keep all these people silent? Who has the ability to force the entire Republican Party, Nationwide, Statewide and even local politicians into stone cold silence without a peep being uttered against Obama? Would it not make sense for the Republican Party to expose him, or at least pose questions?
It is absolutely preposterous to believe that this has all been planned for 40 years and perpetrated by some outside group of super secret elites. It makes more sense to consider that all the mysteries and lies about Obama have only one single purpose which is to throw us off the trail, divide us in our investigative efforts. The countless lies and unavailable documentation sends us up one blind alley after another, only to find another lie to chase to nowhere. Eliminate the enormous complexities and concentrate on the simplest of clues, the most obvious suspects that our mind does not want us to see, and we may just discover that in reality, the culprits are hiding in plain sight, right under our noses.
With that in mind, I can think of only two organizations that have proven that they can hide, and have hidden, their actions against us in plain sight. Only two organizations can organize and corrupt the thousands of players involved in this “Master of the Game” endeavor. And rather than risk their wrath by exposing them in writing, I will only say that the name of one organization starts with the letter “D” and rhymes with Emocrat and the other starts with “R” and rhymes with Epublican.
Mark S. McGrew has a weekly Radio Talk Show Saturday thru Thursday at 8pm EST on http://blogtalkradio.com/mommaeradiorebels Email him at McGrewMX@aol.com
© 1999-2006. «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors.
08.01.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru URL: http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/106908-obama-0
By Mark S. McGrew
We know that Obama is a liar about so many things.
The question of whether or not he is in fact, a Natural Born Citizen and eligible to be President of The United States of America, has no importance anymore. The question of eligibility has evolved far beyond that simple question, with such a simple solution, that Obama refuses to provide. The government of Kenya has put a Gag Order on his family not to talk to reporters.
What we don’t know, what there is absolutely no proof of, is his place of birth, his true father or his mother. Without a verifiable Birth Certificate, none of this, including his actual date of birth can be proven or believed.
He shows no loyalty to America and in fact publicly displays his contempt for America . On youtube.com, you can type in the search bar: “Obama refuses to salute flag” and see a video of him refusing to pledge allegiance to the flag and acting as if he is making a point that he has no respect for the American flag.
Michelle Obama is just as arrogant and insulting as the man she calls her husband and has not been a lawyer since 1993 when she was put on inactive status by court order. The State of Illinois says so on their website. Click here then on the top right click on “Lawyer Search” and then type in “Obama” and you’ll find her.
In Hawaii , you can read here: United States Marines and Navy servicemen have no respect for Obama. In an ABC News story, Sunlen Miller says, “ The diners were polite, staying seated at their respective tables and waited for the president-elect to come to them to stand up”.
The photo in the article shows that there is nobody standing up to shake hands with him and some have their backs turned to Obama. If those people, trying to enjoy their meal in peace, had thrown their food in that stinking bum’s face with disgust, ABC News could have reported it as, “The soldiers were so overjoyed to catch a glimpse of their Commander In Chief Elect, that like true Marines, they all chipped in to share their Holiday meal with him.”
Obama’s website Change.gov is a fraud, administered by a fund raising company Blue State Digital, an Internet fund-raising company that presided over the Obama campaign site . The “dot gov” is designated and assigned by the United States General Services Administration to be used only for genuine government activities. It is not for political campaigning or non-profit organizations which is exactly and soley what Change.gov is for. The only reason Obama has the dot gov designation is by harassing the GSA and thereby obtaining the dot gov designation illegally against Federal Law.
With Obama’s total disrespect for America and laws in general, it is highly suspect as to why he is not already in jail for the rest of his life. Even stupid crimes, he has no conscience about. He, just last year, paid off 17 outstanding parking tickets from when he was in Cambridge, supposedly going to school at Harvard.
Some of the stories about Obama defy belief. And there are plenty of unfounded rumors about him.
I hear so many "Internet rumors" and see so many News sites, web sites and blogs that it makes it very difficult to know what is true and what isn't. That is why I try to limit what I write to things that can be verified fairly easily. Some of the emails and phone calls and personal visits I get force me to not believe anything unless I can prove it. Some "hot tips" are things I've known for years and some seem to be someone's idea of writing a fantasy spy novel.
Besides an atmosphere of arrogance and hostility surrounding his supporters, an unexplainable, incredible amount of controversy permeates every thing about him.
Rumors turn more and more bizarre every day.
Then there is the knowledgeable, open source or occasionally “gray” source, of intel tidbits that hit my desk, from so far, reliable sources that defy reality.
For instance, I was told the other day that it was not really necessary for me to publicize events about Obama because a complete dossier with statements, photos, tape recordings and video recordings of Obama's secret backers has been compiled with the help of over 200 high profile international lawyers, military men, politicians and businesspeople and has been distributed to the intel agencies of some 38 different countries, s ome of which had contributed to the compilation effort.
These "secret backers" of Obama have been under intense investigation for over two decades without any initial focus on Obama and a major world wide sweep is going to happen as soon as Obama makes the wrong move.
The backers consider Obama “their puppet” but a major world wide sweep is scheduled to happen as soon as Obama makes a clear wrong move against the national interests of those who have put this compilation together.
I'm sure he is going to make that "wrong move" as soon as Martians land at the White House. Maybe, though, as I am urged, since it's all under control now, I should take a vacation.
These are the kinds of dead ends that any investigator has to decipher.
But sticking to the facts, what we actually do know, what is documented and verifiable, is enough to convince the American public and World leaders that a major mistake has been made in voting for Obama.
158 of Obama’s lies are documented, on record.
But who is to show that record to the voting public and World leades who will be affected by Obama’s deceit?
If the American media would unite as strongly to divulge the truth, as they have to bury it, every person in America would vomit where they sit, in realizing what they have been conned into voting for.
There is still, after six weeks, not one shred of proof that his grandmother died the day before the election or two days before the election, whichever date given by Obama that you choose to believe. No death certificate has been produced. No authority has confirmed the date of death. We have only Obama’s campaign photo-ops of him wiping away a tear.
The recent photo-op of him dropping what he says are the ashes of Madelyn Payne Lee Dunham into the sea is phony. Human ashes are not snow white. Human bones do not burn and are not turned to ash when cremated. The bones are ground up to the consistency of sand and small pebbles. The color is a gray/tan, like weathered pine wood. The container he is pouring from is half the size necessary for human remains. The container he is pouring from is about the size of a container for a medium sized dog’s ashes. Obama is pouring flour or sugar, not human ashes.
What Obama and Rahm Emanuel have told us they are going to institute for American citizens - mandatory community service and to transport people by bus or train to work sites, is defined as nothing less than, Crimes Against Humanity, according to the International Criminal Court.(Scroll down to International Criminal Court, see c. and d.)
Regardless of the rumors, the non-existent birth certificate and his purported crimes, just reading 1/10 of 158 of Obama’s lies would be enough to convince any reasonable person that this man is not someone that you would buy a used car from or let cook your food. Reading one half of these documented lies will make an honest person sick to his stomache.
Obama, his wife and his backers have no morals, no integrity and no respect for anything except what they want at the time. They have no more conscience than a hungry lizard in the desert coming upon a beetle in the sand.
Any non-active military service members who have seen enough, sign this Military Consent Form and get on board like the Marines in Hawaii.
Many people have speculated that Obama may be a “Manchurian Candidate” a planted enemy, masquerading as an American, for the purpose of taking over the United States . Speculations have pointed to the Middle East and terrorist organizations. That does seem to be a possibility as there are so many anti-American statements and activities by Obama and his supporters. It may sound like more fantasy spy novel dreams.
But if the speculation can be considered, in some degree of seriousness, the question to be asked first is: Who, what organization, has had the time and the resources, to move throughout our political system, convincing Congressmen, Senators, both Federal and State, 50 Governors, Attorney Generals, Secretaries of State, hundreds of State legislators, thousands of local, county, State and Federal political party hacks, FBI, CIA and various State and Federal agencies, Federal Courts, even the US Supreme Court……..who has that ability to keep all these people silent? Who has the ability to force the entire Republican Party, Nationwide, Statewide and even local politicians into stone cold silence without a peep being uttered against Obama? Would it not make sense for the Republican Party to expose him, or at least pose questions?
It is absolutely preposterous to believe that this has all been planned for 40 years and perpetrated by some outside group of super secret elites. It makes more sense to consider that all the mysteries and lies about Obama have only one single purpose which is to throw us off the trail, divide us in our investigative efforts. The countless lies and unavailable documentation sends us up one blind alley after another, only to find another lie to chase to nowhere. Eliminate the enormous complexities and concentrate on the simplest of clues, the most obvious suspects that our mind does not want us to see, and we may just discover that in reality, the culprits are hiding in plain sight, right under our noses.
With that in mind, I can think of only two organizations that have proven that they can hide, and have hidden, their actions against us in plain sight. Only two organizations can organize and corrupt the thousands of players involved in this “Master of the Game” endeavor. And rather than risk their wrath by exposing them in writing, I will only say that the name of one organization starts with the letter “D” and rhymes with Emocrat and the other starts with “R” and rhymes with Epublican.
Mark S. McGrew has a weekly Radio Talk Show Saturday thru Thursday at 8pm EST on http://blogtalkradio.com/mommaeradiorebels Email him at McGrewMX@aol.com
© 1999-2006. «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
