Monthly Archives: January 2009

TO THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA – A PRETEND PRESIDENT OBAMA PLACES THE CITIZENS OF THE WORLD IN PERIL

Memo: To the International Media

Re: Constitutional Crisis/President Elect Obama not Eligible to Serve as United States President

Date: January 14, 2009

In one week, Barack Obama will place his hand on the Lincoln bible to be sworn in as the 44th President of the United States (POTUS). When he places his hand on the Lincoln bible and swears to uphold the Constitution of the United States he may knowingly be committing fraud and usurping the most powerful office in the world.

The United States of America is faced with a Constitutional crisis of gigantic proportions; one that remains avoidable if Obama would simply release the growing list of documents that would verify that he indeed is a natural born citizen, a requirement for office of POTUS under the U.S. Constitution. Most of the people in our country and the world do not know what is happening because the mainstream media in our country has failed to do their jobs. The MSM have steadfastly refused to investigate any story that possibly reflects in a negative manner on Obama’s candidacy and his eligibility under the Constitution.

Outlets one would think would at least give the story a cursory glance like FOX News and the Drudge Report have remained conspicuously silent. The cable networks, venerable institutions like the New York Times and the Washington Post having been playing a game of “if we don’t report it, it doesn’t exist!”

obamacolblockkey3Our Constitution requires that any person running for the office of president meet three qualifications; he/she must be at least 35 years of age, must live in the United States for at least 14 years and be a natural-born citizen. Mr. Obama has refused to provide any information that verifies he meets this requirement. In fact, it has been reported that Obama and his legal teams have spent close to one million dollars to keep his birth certificate and the truth hidden. A partial list of hidden Obama documents include; a vault copy of his birth certificate (under seal in Hawaii), college records, copy of his college thesis, records of his clients when practicing law in Illinois, explanation of his travel to Indonesia when Americans were not allowed to travel there, etc.

Mr. Obama’s own website states he was born with dual citizenship. That is an automatic disqualification. Actually, his citizenship was determined by his father who was Kenyon and a British citizen, since his mother was 17 (and under age) her citizenship was moot. Further complicating the situation is Obama’s step-father was Indonesian. The evidence (that hasn’t been scrubbed from the Internet) shows that Obama went to school in Indonesia at a time when only Indonesian citizens were allowed this privilege and further that Obama traveled to Indonesia in the 80’s when American citizens were not allowed to travel to this country. What this means is that under this story of who Obama’s birth father was, he is not a “natural born citizen” as defined by our Constitution (born on U.S. soil of two parents both of whom are U.S. citizens) and therefore ineligible to hold the office of POTUS.

The reason why you should care should be self-evident. It has been said that when American catches a cold the rest of the world should watch out for pneumonia. The world wide financial recession is a case in point. If it is discovered that Mr. Obama was never eligible to run and hold the office of POTUS we, our country and the interconnected world, will be thrown in a state of disorder and turmoil. That is because any law, any treaty, any action taken under the Obama administration would be illegal. For a further explanation see Dr. Edwin Vieira detailed analysis.

There are (over 17) lawsuits that have already been brought across the country including several before the Supreme Court . . . all dismissed thus far on legal issues of “standing” and the like, but not on the merits of the lawsuits! See Donofrio v Wells, Berg v Obama for the most prominent lawsuits.

Let me point out that while the MSM in this country have abdicated its responsibility to voters here and Obama supporters abroad, the blogs on the Internet have been tracking this for months. Those blogging are not on the fringes or carry any animus towards Obama. There are thousands and thousands of us who love our country and are simply asking for the truth. We are moderates, former Obama supporters, conservatives, independents, Democrats, Republicans, and persons of every stripe who believe in placing our country before any individual man or party.

Finally, it should be noted that there have been a few stories written by sources outside the U.S. in Canada and elsewhere asking about Obama’s eligibility. The most disturbing is a recent article that appeared in Pravda RU which detailed Obama’s problems and which called him an outright fraud and which leads me to the most serious consideration. It is an embarrassment that Pravda is covering what our own media has purposely ignored.

Quoting from Dr. Vieira:

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.

Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, Congress can pass no law while an usurper pretends to occupy “the Office of President.” The Constitution provides that “[e]very Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States” (Article I, Section 7, Clause 2). Not to an usurper posturing as “the President of the United States,” but to the true and rightful President. If no such true and rightful President occupies the White House, no “Bill” will or can, “before it become a Law, be presented to [him].” If no “Bill” is so presented, no “Bill” will or can become a “Law.” And any purported “Law” that the usurper “approve[s]” and “sign[s],” or that Congress passes over the usurper’s “Objections,” will be a nullity. Thus, if Obama deceitfully “enters office” as an usurper, Congress will be rendered effectively impotent for as long as it acquiesces in his pretenses as “President.”

If Pravda RU is calling Obama a fraud before his inauguration, how long before enemies of this country figure out this can be used as a reason not to cooperate with the U.S. or sign a treaty, or do anything that moves negotiations forward on any front because an illegally elected/ineligible Obama’s actions would be null and void . . . unenforceable . . . worthless. How long before Iran, or Hamas, or Russia, for that matter, figures this out and refuses to deal with the U.S.because of the Pretend President?

All of our institutions, have let us down. We are all in peril until this has been straightened out!

Advertisements

19 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Congress, Culture, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

WILL THE MILITARY SERVE OBAMA IF HE CANNOT PROVE HIS ELIGBILITY FOR POTUS?

Both Oil for Immigration & Citizen Wells are reporting the following contact to the Joint Chiefs of Staff written by Dr. Douglas W. Schell.

Dr. Schell was a commissioned officer in the USAF and is speaking from that perspective. His email to the JCS details the Constitutional crisis that will ensue if an ineligible Obama takes office. He states:obamaistoast

[...] could well split the military between those who will stand by the Constitution vs. those who stand by traitors in order to keep their military offices.

[…] A RECENT SURVEY TAKEN BY THE ARMY TIMES INDICATED THAT OVER 60% OF ACTIVE MILITARY ARE NOT SURE WHETHER THEY CAN FOLLOW THE ORDERS OF MR. OBAMA. THIS IS UNHEARD OF.

Here’s my question.

What happens if you serve in the military and believe that Obama is not legitimately POTUS . . . that he is a usurper or worse? You are sworn to uphold the Constitution of our Republic. Your obligation & loyalty is to the country and not to any individual man or woman.

Further, is there any possibility that the military would consider/or act on removing a person that has fraudulently obtained the office and is ineligible? I would not want to be faced with this dilemma.

29 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, Uncategorized

NOT ANOTHER BERG V. OBAMA UPDATE – OPPOSING VIEWS – NEW INFO

When I first brought the What’s Your Evidence site to your attention, I did so because unlike most of the MSM, I felt it was important to show an opposing view and let you the reader decide for yourself. I received a message from Ron Polarik, the man who has shown through extensive research, that the Obama COLB is a phony . . . a very bad one, at that. His message was that he has debunked the WHATS YOUR EVIDENCE site.

You can read his information here. Below is a snippet from his blog, The Greater Evil, at Townhall.com.

WHATSYOUREVIDENCE.COM: Nothing like the truth
Posted by Polarik on Thursday, October 30, 2008 8:53:55 PM

WHATSYOUREVIDENCE.COM: The TRUTH, the WHOLE TRUTH, and NOTHING LIKE the TRUTH!

Overview

This is the follow-up to my last post, WHATSYOUREVIDENCE: Retractions and Restatements, and contains all of the information that appeared in my original post, WHATSYOURSHYSTER, except for deleting two statements that were in error, and replacing a few words that were not appropriate. It is no longer a secret to FReepers that Ms. Teresa La Loggia is the owner and operator of the website, WHATSYOUREVIDENCE.COM. However, even after I outted her in my first post (and second post), and even after she wrote her “cease and desist” letter, Teresa La Loggia is still keeping her identity hidden from the public. This fact begs the question, “How much of her indignation was due to my statements incorrectly linking herself and her law firm to the Obama/DNC defense team, and how much of it was due to identity being discovered?”

After reading this post, and especially her letter, I’ll let you be the judge.

4 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

THE SUPREME COURT GETS IT WRONG TWO ELECTIONS IN A ROW

I voted for Gore in 2000 and watched with disbelief when the Supreme Court decided to take on Bush v Gore . . . disbelief because the method Florida decided to use to count the 2000 election votes should have remained with Florida. Federal intervention was not necessary, period.

It was an unprincipled decision that the Supremes in their “infinite wisdom” decided should apply solely to this case … that it could not be used as precedent for future cases. Cute, right? The majority of the court acted improperly (States rights, anyone?) and politically (5 Republican Justices) and some would say corruptly.

I still remember the number of people who questioned whether Scalia’s vote was because he wanted to position himself to be the next choice as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

What was shattered, along with the Constitution, was our belief in the incorruptibility of the Supreme Court justices. We witnessed, first hand, that the Supremes are as political as the rest of the hacks in this country that pretend to be fair and impartial and whose actions show the opposite reality. Legions of Americans have hoped that the Supremes would, once again behave with honor and dignity . . . alas as Donofrio,Berg, etal have witnessed, that will not take place.

The following is from an excellent article in Salon (written in 2000) . . . back when Salon was a source one could trust. It is a superior article that reviews several books written by legal authorities, including Alan Dershowitz, Vincent Bugliosi, Richard H. Pildes, and Cass R. Sunstein and Richard A. Epstein.

I urge anyone that has been fighting the good fight, trying to get our legislators, elected officials, and the courts to take an intellectually honest look at Obama and the Constitutional crisis brought on because Obama will not (cannot) present any documentation (exception the forged COLB on the Internet) proving he meets the eligibility requirements for POTUS as a natural born citizen to read the article. It may give you additional insight as to how to proceed. The article begins:

Supreme Court to democracy: Drop dead

With a single rash, partisan act, the high court has tainted the Bush presidency, besmirched its own reputation and soiled our nation’s proudest legacy.

By Gary Kamiya

Dec. 14, 2001 | Tuesday, Dec. 12, is a day that will live in American infamy long after the tainted election of George W. Bush has faded from memory. With their rash, divisive decision to dispense with the risky and inconvenient workings of democracy and simply award the presidency to their fellow Republican, five right-wing justices dragged the Supreme Court down to perhaps its most ignominious point since the Dred Scott decision.

supreme-idiots1

With this as a back drop, should anyone really be surprised that the Supremes are, again, turning backs on the Constitution? Are we really so surprised that there isn’t a single backbone among them? Is it really so surprising ?

Why, when we have legitimate Constitutional questions will the Supremes not act? Self interest, perhaps? Lack of integrity, courage, intellectual honesty, impartiality? Some of these . . . all of these?

The far reaching impact of the Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the cases brought thus far on technical issues (standing, wrong format, didn’t cross a “t” or an “i” was missing) is monumental. We have witnessed numerous people run for the office of POTUS we know are ineligible because they are not “natural born citizens” Obama (until he proves he is), Bill Richardson, Roger Calero and still the Supremes remain silent on an issue that effects every citizen of this country!

obamacolblockkey2

There is an element of power and, perhaps inevitably, self-interest in all judicial decisions. As Sunstein remarked, “We’ve tended to have too idealized a view of the court.” But the idea that justice must be blind, that the most powerful court in the world — and arguably the most powerful institution in the country — must not sink into brazen partisanship, is a bedrock principle . . . ( change & emphasis mine )that they have failed to live up to!

We must stand by it, and those justices who violate it must be held accountable. By failing to live up to their judicial oath, by allowing political motivations to sway them, by besmirching democracy itself, the five members of the (change and emphasis mine) 2009 Supreme Court majority will have disgraced themselves forever.

From history’s judgment, there will be no appeal.



5 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

OBAMA, MALCOLM X, and MICHELLE’S RED & BLACK DRESS

I continue to be surprised by what fires people’s imaginations and passions. I have blogged about a wide variety of issues and topics, some serious, some not so much. The post that continues to draw the most interest is the one on Michelle Obama’s decision to wear that red & black dress with the X in the front … the decision to dress her entire family in those colors the night Barack won the 2008 election for president. You can read about it here.

My visceral reaction to the pictures each and every time I view them has not abated when seen through the prism of rebellion or defiance. But what if there was another way of viewing these pictures of the Obama’s all dressed up in red and black? What if the garb worn by the Obama’s was a silent tribute to Barack’s real father, Malcolm X?

I know anyone that has followed this blog and my positions on BHO’s ineligibility to hold the office of POTUS will find the following to be surprising. If the truth be known, I would be relieved to find out Obama’s real father is Malcolm X. Why? Because the alternative is many times worse.

Having a fraud become president is unthinkable. Having a man who is knowingly ineligible to hold the office because he never met the eligibility requirements as detailed in the Constitution will harm this country in ways that cannot tolerated. The consequences are far reaching and potentially devastating.

The evidence against his being eligible to hold the office of POTUS continues to accumulate on a daily basis. Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Dunham is not a “natural born citizen” regardless if he was born in Hawaii (as he alleges) or he was born in Kenya which multiple lawsuits contend and which his paternal grandmother say is the truth.

The story Team Obama continues to foist on the world is that his father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., was a Kenyan. His father was also British citizen thus making Barry a British citizen as well, because his citizenship would have been determined by the father’s nationality. Since Barack’s mother was 17 and underage at the time of his birth, her nationality was moot. Like it or not, that was the law of the land in 1961. Even if his mother’s age could be discounted, because Barack would have held a dual citizenship at the time of birth, he would still be ineligible. Complicating all of this, is his mother’s second marriage to Lolo Soetoro and Barack’s adoption by his step-father. Lolo was Indonesian; now we’ve got yet a third country that impacts on Barry’s citizenship.

What if this entire story isn’t true and what does this have to do with Michelle Obama’s red & black dress, the one she worn in Grant Park the night Barack became the President Elect? Well, plenty if I’m right.

The supreme irony is that if Malcolm X is Obama’s father then Obama meets the eligibility requirements of the Constitution! Malcolm X was a natural born citizen thus making Barack (Barry?) a natural born citizen. The worst case scenario is that if Barack were born in Kenya he would face (essentially) the same issues that John McCain faced! But back to Michelle’s red & black dress.

red-black


I know I am not the first to suggest that Obama’s father may be Malcolm X. This connection has been brought up before at Atlas Shrugs, Oil for Immigration, and on Polarik’s site using (as best I can determine) information that originated with Israel Insider. Other than idle curiosity, there hasn’t been much else to tie Obama to Malcolm. But then we’ve got that image of Obama’s in Grant Park, the red and black dress and that X that hits you between the eyes . . . an insult to the senses because the dress is so entirely out of place. It hard not to shout, “America’s next First Family shouldn’t be dressed these colors of defiance! Where are the various shades of red, white, and blue?”

Then suddenly it smacks you in the face . . . that X is for Malcolm. That X on the front of Michelle’s dress and those colors are for Malcolm. What other reason can there be? Sudden bad taste or a horrendous lack of sensitivity to the historical significance of the colors chosen for the very first photos of the Obama’s? In a campaign this carefully orchestrated and staged with the deliberate associations to the Kennedy’s how does it suddenly become feasible that a faux pas of this magnitude would be allowed?

shapeimage_1

Let’s cobble a few more interesting notes about Malcolm’s name.

In 1952, after he was released from prison, Malcolm changed his last name from Little toX, a designation that denotes “a certain mystery, a certain possibility of power in the eyes of one’s peers and one’s enemies …The ‘X’; announced what you had been and what you had become: Ex-smoker, Ex-drinker, Ex-Christian, Ex-slave.” and is also intended as a rejection of slave names.


X is also a brand that many slaves received on their upper arms. Though likely the most famous Black Muslim to change his name to X, Malcolm was one of many who eventually adopted this practice.

He was tall and handsome and when he walked into a room, he took it over. These things were important. And when he spoke, he could talk our talk in a way that made people understand right off.” Remind you of anyone? Barack, perhaps?

_obamax-763738

obamax_5-785893obamax_1-771789


If you are under 30 you probably have very little idea who Malcolm X was. For more complete understanding of his life see additional video here.

Make no mistake the 60’s were a violent time. The black revolution was beginning . . . this was a time of conflict where most black leaders were looked at in a negative manner. Malcolm X, although very controversial, was not an extremist like Farrakhan was and remains to this day. Malcolm could rightly be called an extremist initially, but he came to believe that the races could live and work together.

Malcolm left the Nation of Islam as a matter of principle. It cost him his life.

Like many of us who change and grow into maturity, Malcolm at the end of his life was much different than the Malcolm of his youth. During this time, Malcolm became a guest of Muhammed Faisal (son of then Prince Faisal), and Malcolm made a pilgrimage to Mecca, an event that changed his life. He believed, through Muslim teachings, that all racial barriers could be overcome.

Malcolm returned from Mecca a Sunni Muslim, a changed man. He also bore a new name, El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. This is from Lessons from Malcolm X

Below is an excerpt of a powerful speech Malcolm gave upon his return:

“Human rights are something you were born with?.In the past, yes I have made sweeping indictments of all white people. I will never be guilty of that again (emphasis mine) as I know now that some white people are truly sincere, that some truly are capable of being brotherly toward a black man…Since I learned the truth in Mecca, my dearest friends have come to include all kinds, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Agnostics, even Atheists My friends today are black, brown, red, yellow and white While in Mecca, for the first time in my life, I could call a man with blond hair and blue eyes my brother.”

Ok, so what’s the truth? Is Malcolm X or Barack Hussein Obama Sr. BHO’s father? I don’t know. Is Barack really a Muslim . . . the Freudian slip with George Stephanopoulos indicates he is. I really don’t know. There is a mountain of compelling evidence that supports several positions on Barack’s birth father and his religion.

Here’s what I do know. Stanley Ann Dunham was a complicated woman, a woman with a past more interesting than what we’ve been led to believe, regardless who Barack’s father really is. This is a family whose lives are clothed in secrets.

Something else I know is that this is a tragedy of epic proportions if Malcolm X really was BHO’s father. Imagine having to deny your real identity on a daily basis because somewhere along a line a decision was made that it was better to be known as the “son” of Barack Obama Sr. than to acknowledge that you are the son of Malcolm X.

In the desire to become president, was this denial born out of expediency because Malcolm X was a Muslim. America might tolerate a multi-cultural man as president . . . but after 9/11 does anyone think a Muslim would have any chance at the office? Again, I don’t know. I do know that the truth has a way of always coming out . . . that secrets kept in the dark have a way of finding the light of day.




13 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, John McCain, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

NOT ANOTHER BERG V. OBAMA UPDATE – OPPOSING VIEWS

If you have been following the Obama “natural born citizen” drama since August, when I first posed the question of whether or not BHO could hold the office of POTUS, you are most certainly aware of the numerous sites, that detail the multitude of lawsuits filed to discover the truth about Obama’s identity… his birth father and place of birth.

obamainside2-300x2341

For those on the chase, I’m recommending you look at a pro Obama site called What’s Your Evidence? This is the first site I’ve found that analyzes the Berg complaint, as well as, the collateral issues surrounding this epic journey into whether or not Barack Hussein Obama II is eligible to hold the office of POTUS under our Constitution from an opposing view of those of us who believe that Obama is not a natural born citizen or eligible to hold the office of POTUS.

Clearly, someone has taken a great deal of time to “debunk” the Berg claim. Make no mistake, the site is pro-Obama. If you haven’t stumbled across the site already, I am recommending this site for a number of reasons. The writer keeps insisting on evidence to support claims against Obama’s status as a natural born citizen, at the same time he/she either glosses over or omits evidence that supports Berg and others.

Agree or disagree with the legal conclusion here, it is an interesting compendium of the issues that many may find useful on their quest for the truth.

A quick read will show that the writer believes Factcheck.org is a reliable source, that Obama didn’t lie on his Illinois lawyer registration form, and that the Obama COLB posted on the Factcheck.org is a reliable record for determining Obama’s birth. No mention is made as to whether the Tooth Fairy is considered a reliable source. (Ok, cheap shot! So what!)

The following is from the site’s front page:

Berg v. Obama Citizenship Lawsuit: Status & Summary as of December 29

This blog is in the process of evaluating the allegations set forth in the complaint brought by Mr. Philip Berg against Senator Obama, alleging that he is not qualified to serve as President, on multiple different grounds.

The case was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, by Mr. Philip Berg. Mr. Berg has published a website, www.obamacrimes.com, with copies of the pleadings and some materials related to the case. Mr. Berg’s lawsuit was dismissed by the District Court, on October 24, 2008. See Memorandum and Order. However, Berg is appealing this decision to both the Third Circuit (registration required) and the Supreme Court.

This birth certificate is real.obama-birth-cert-real

Should anyone still question the import to this Constitutional issue please review the following article from the American Thinker website.

[…] Obama has refused to disclose the vault copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate. This raises the question whether he himself has established that he is eligible to be President. To date, no state or federal election official, nor any government authority, has verified that he ever established conclusively that he meets the eligibility standard under the Constitution. (emphasis mine)

For those tracking this story on a daily basis, visit Oil for Immigration, Citizen Wells, TD Blog, Obama Crimes, America’s Right . . . etc.


7 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized