[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

FBI seizes Diddy tape showing Hillary Clinton killing a child at a 'Freak Off' party Numbers of dairy cow deaths from bird flu increasing to alarming rates Elites Just Told Us How They'll SILENCE US! Reese Report: The 2024 October Surprise? Americans United in Crisis: Mules Carry Supplies to Neighbors Trapped by Hurricanes Devastation in NC NC STATE POLICE WILL START ARRESTING FEDS THAT ARE BLOCKING AIDE FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES France BANS ARMS SALES To Israel & Netanyahu LASHES OUT At Macron | Iran GETS READY CNN Drops Bomb on Tim Walz, Releases Blistering Segment Over Big Scandals in His Own State EU concerned it has no influence over Israel FT How Israels invasion of Lebanon poses risks to Turkiye Obama's New Home in Dubai?, Vaccine Skeptics Need To Be Silenced! Bill Gates Hillary Clinton: We Lose Total Control If Social Media Companies Dont Moderate Content Cancer Patients Report Miraculous Recoveries from Ivermectin Treatment Hurricane Aid Stolen By The State Of Tennessee? The Pentagon requests $1.2bn to continue Red Sea mission US security officials warn of potential threats within two weeks, ramped-up patrols. Massive Flooding Coming From Hurricane Milton How the UK is becoming a ‘third-world’ economy What Would World War III Really Look Like? It's Already Starting... The Roots Of The UK Implosion And Why War Is Inevitable How The Jew Thinks “In five years, scientists predict we will have the first ice-free Arctic summer" John Kerry in 2009 Jewish FEMA disaster relief handbook actually mandates prioritising non-Whites for disaster relief A Comprehensive Guide To Choosing The Right Protein Powde 3-Time Convicted Violent Criminal Repeatedly Threatened to Kidnap and Kill Judge Cannon and Her Family Candace Owens: Kamala Harris is not Black Â… Prof. John Mearsheimer: Israel NOT Going To Win In Lebanon Iran to destroy all Israel gas fields, power plants at once if Tel Aviv makes mistake: Deputy IRGC chief Army Vet Calls Out FEMA for Prioritizing Migrants Over Hurricane Victims, Takes Matters Into His Own Hands

(s)Elections
See other (s)Elections Articles

Title: SPACE RESERVED FOR NEWS ON COURT ORDER (BERG Vs. OBAMA)
Source: America's Right
URL Source: http://www.americasright.com/
Published: Oct 22, 2008
Author: Jeff Schreiber
Post Date: 2008-10-22 21:26:17 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 6224
Comments: 102

I have, from good and reliable sources, information suggesting that the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick will come down with an order and memorandum either on Thursday or Friday. (Phil Berg moved for a summary judgment in his case against Obama and the DNC which among other things demand Obama produce his birth certificate.)

This space is reserved for news on that order. Therefore, unless something monumental occurs over the next two days, I will not be reporting anything further so as to reserve this spot for news regarding the decision in the Berg v. Obama case. It should be easier for everyone that you can simply check this part of the page for news of the order without having to wade through anything else.

As luck would have it, Thursday and Friday represent the only two days this entire fall that I will not be at the courthouse. However, I will have a laptop--and at the very least a BlackBerry--and will receive the order and memorandum as soon as it is handed down. Immediately, I will relate word as to the general disposition of the case in this spot, with details to follow at some point later. If the order does not, for some reason, come down in the next two days, rest assured that it will be covered here prominently when it does.

Common sense, for the past two months, has told me that Philip Berg's case will be eventually dismissed on grounds of lack of standing. Nevertheless, I have had a gut feeling that Judge Surrick may very well just surprise us all -- the information I have been getting over the past 24-36 hours reinforces that gut feeling.

Please refrain from calling the courthouse, as I am told that the phone calls are coming in at the rate of several dozen each day. And, as always, keep checking here at America's Right for updates, especially this crucial one. America's Right was the first to report on this lawsuit when it was filed on August 21, and I have no reason to believe that America's Right will not be the first to report on the judge's decision.

Thank you, and keep your fingers crossed for not only a decision, but a favorable one.

Obama & DNC Admit All Allegations of Federal Court Lawsuit - Obama’s “Not” Qualified to be President

Obama Should Immediately Withdraw his Candidacy for President For Immediate Release: - 10/21/08 - Complete contact details and pdfs of this press release and motions filed by plaintiff Berg today are at the end of this article

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/21/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that Obama and tbe DNC “ADMITTED”, by way of failure to timely respond to Requests for Admissions, all of the numerous specific requests in the Federal lawsuit. Obama is “NOT QUALIFIED” to be President and therefore Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President and the DNC shall substitute a qualified candidate. The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.

Berg stated that he filed Requests for Admissions on September 15, 2008 with a response by way of answer or objection had to be served within thirty [30] days. No response to the Requests for Admissions was served by way of response or objection. Thus, all of the Admissions directed to Obama and the DNC are deemed “ADMITTED.” Therefore, Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President.

OBAMA - Admitted:

1. I was born in Kenya. 2. I am a Kenya “natural born” citizen.

3. My foreign birth was registered in the State of Hawaii. 4. My father, Barrack Hussein Obama, Sr. admitted Paternity of me.

5. My mother gave birth to me in Mombosa, Kenya. 6. My mother’s maiden name is Stanley Ann Dunham a/k/a Ann Dunham.

7. The COLB [Certification of Live Birth] posted on the website “Fightthesmears.com” is a forgery. 8. I was adopted by a Foreign Citizen.

9. I was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia. 10. I was not born in Hawaii.

11. I was not born at the Queens Medical Center in Hawaii. 12. I was not born at Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Hawaii.

13. I was not born in a Hospital in Hawaii. 14. I am a citizen of Indonesia.

15. I never took the “Oath of Allegiance” to regain my U.S. Citizenship status. 16. I am not a “natural born” United States citizen.

17. My date of birth is August 4, 1961. 18. I traveled to Pakistan in 1981 with my Pakistan friends.

19. In 1981, I went to Indonesia on my way to Pakistan. 20. Pakistan was a no travel zone in 1981 for American Citizens.

21. In 1981, Pakistan was not allowing American Citizens to enter their country. 22. I traveled on my Indonesian Passport to Pakistan.

23. I renewed my Indonesian Passport on my way to Pakistan. 24. My senior campaign staff is aware I am not a “natural born” United States Citizen.

25. I am proud of my Kenya Heritage. 26. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my first name.

27. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my last name. 28. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my place of birth.

29. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my first name. 30. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my last name.

31. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my place of birth. 32. The document identified as my Indonesian School record from Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia is genuine.

33. I went to a Judge in Hawaii to have my name changed. 34. I went to a Senator and/or Congressman or other public official in Hawaii to have my name changed.

35. I had a passport issued to me from the Government of Indonesia. 36. The United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.

37. I am ineligible pursuant to the United States Constitution to serve as President and/or Vice President of the United States. 38. I never renounced my citizenship as it relates to my citizenship to the country of Indonesia.

39. I never renounced my citizenship as it relates to my citizenship to the country of Kenya. 40. I am an Attorney who specializes in Constitutional Law.

41. Kenya was a part of the British Colonies at the time of my birth. 42. Kenya did not become its own Republic until 1963.

43. I am not a “Naturalized” United States Citizen. 44. I obtained $200 Million dollars in campaign funds by fraudulent means.

45. I cannot produce a “vault” (original) long version of a birth certificate showing my birth in Hawaii. 46. My “vault” (original) long version birth certificate shows my birth in Kenya.

47. The only times I was to a Hospital in Hawaii was for check-ups or medical treatments for illnesses. 48. Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii does not have any record of my mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to me.

49. Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu, Hawaii does not have any record of my mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to me. 50. I was born in the Coast Province Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

51. I represented on my State Bar application in Illinois that I never used any other name other than Barack Hussein Obama. 52. I went by the name Barry Soetoro in Indonesia.

53. My Indonesian school records are under the name of Barry Soetoro. 54. I took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when admitted to the State Bar of Illinois to practice Law.

55. I took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when I was Sworn into my United States Senate Office. 56. I hold dual citizenship with at least one other Country besides the United States of America.

DNC - Admitted:

1. The DNC nominated Barrack Hussein Obama as the Democratic Nominee for President. 2. The DNC has not vetted Barrack Hussein Obama.

3. The DNC did not have a background check performed on Barrack Hussein Obama. 4.The DNC did not verify Barrack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States.

5. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya. 6. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama is not a “natural born” United States citizen.

7. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama was not born in Hawaii. 8.The DNC admits they have not inquired into Barrack Hussein Obama’s citizenship status.

9. The DNC admits they have a duty to properly vette the Democratic Nominee for President. 10.The DNC admits Lolo Soetoro, M.A., an Indonesian citizen adopted Barrack Hussein Obama.

11. The DNC admits the Credentials Committee has been aware of this lawsuit since August 22, 2008 as the lawsuit was faxed to our Washington D.C. Office on August 22, 2008.

12. The DNC admits their Credentials Committee failed to verify and/or inquire into the credentials of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as the President of the United States.

13. The DNC admits their Credential Committee’s Report failed to address the issues of Barack Hussein Obama’s ineligibility to serve as President of the United States. 14.The DNC admits Howard Dean, Chair Person has and had knowledge Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya and ineligible to serve as the President of the United States.

15. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all Democratic citizens of the United States have been personally injured as a result of not having a qualified Democratic Presidential Nominee to cast their votes upon. 16. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States have a Constitutional Right to vote for the President of the United States and to have two (2) qualified candidates of which to choose from.

17. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States have a Constitutional right to have a properly vetted Democratic Presidential Nominee of which to cast their vote. 18. The DNC admits an FBI background check is not performed on the Presidential or Vice Presidential Candidates.

19. The DNC admits the United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen. 20. The DNC admits they collected donations on behalf of Barack Hussein Obama for his Presidential campaign.

21. The DNC admits Plaintiff and Democratic citizens donated money based on false representations that Barack Hussein Obama was qualified to serve as the President of the United States. 22. The DNC admits if Barack Hussein Obama is elected as President and allowed to serve as President of the United States in violation of our Constitution, it will create a Constitutional crisis.

23. The DNC admits Barack Hussein Obama took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution. 24. The DNC admits allowing a person who is not a “natural born” citizen to serve as President of the United States violates Plaintiff’s rights to due process of law in violation of the United States Constitution.

25. The DNC admits allowing a person who is not a “natural born” citizen to serve as President of the United States violates Plaintiff’s rights to Equal Protection of the laws in violation of the United States Constitution. 26. The DNC admits the function of the DNC is to secure a Democratic Presidential Candidate who will protect Democratic citizen’s interests, fight for their equal opportunities and fight for justice for all Americans.

27. The DNC admits the Democratic National Committee has been promoting Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidential election knowing he was ineligible to serve as President of the United States. Our website obamacrimes.com now has 50.7 + million hits. We are urging all to spread the word of our website – and forward to your local newspapers, radio and TV stations. Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith. Philip J. Berg, Esquire 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531 Cell (610) 662-3005 (610) 825-3134 (800) 993-PHIL [7445] Fax (610) 834-7659 philjberg@obamacrimes.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Poster Comment:

Whatever happens this case will be appealed to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court. Talk radio could get this into the news. Of coiurse next year Obama and Pelosi will ban talk radio from the air. The Internet will be next.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

How about a link to your alleged comment please.

Here's the problem with Hawaii's birth certificate procedures and also why Obama's mother's status at the time would not give her the right to automatically pass on US citizenship to Obama if he were born in Kenya per State Department rules - this is all explained rather nicely by another person on another forum,"The Swamp", discussing this very matter:

According to information from the U.S. State Department, Obama cannot be a natural-born citizen if he we born outside the US. Here is quote from the U.S. State Department's website:

www.travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html :

"Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child."

The problem for Obama is that his American mother was only 18 at the time of his birth. It was impossible for her to meet the requirement of living the US for 5 years after the age of 14 because she was too young. According to the information from the State Department, the original requirements are in effect and there is not retroactive change in the law for people born between 1952 and 1986.

Regarding the Hawaiian birth certificate that Obama has shown a few select reporters as evidence of being a natural-born citizen. While some question the authenticity of this document, even if it is a real document it does not prove that Obama was born in Hawaii. According to the state of Hawaii, birth certificates can be issued for foreign births. See:

hawaii.gov/health/vital-r.../vital-records/index.html

Here is the quote from that webpage:

"Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country."

The only way to verify Obama's claim to be a natural born citizen is to see his full birth records, but Obama refuses to release this information.

scrapper2  posted on  2008-11-03   11:42:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

A legitimate Kenyan birth certificate is not going to save Barry Sotoro, I mean Barrack H. Obama.

It's ok to type it. Today anyway. ;-)

Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein. Hussein.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams

Rotara  posted on  2008-11-03   11:47:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

The only way to verify Obama's claim to be a natural born citizen is to see his full birth records, but Obama refuses to release this information.

Barry Hussein Obamalamadingdong the Illegal Alien Soetoro is the perfect stooge.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams

Rotara  posted on  2008-11-03   11:48:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Razzmatazz Killed Mother Wit... and Now He is Going After Our Constitution

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-03   13:54:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Justice Souter denies injunction for stay of predidential election (Obama)

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-04   13:38:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Will Supreme Court have say in presidency?

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-07   1:34:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Press Release 11-07-08: US Supreme Court awaits response to Berg Writ of Certiorari from Obama, DNC and co-defendants

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-09   13:28:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

'Constitutional crisis' looming over Obama's birth location

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-16   12:58:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Allen Keyes Files Lawsuit in Obama Birth-gate Case

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-16   16:51:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-17   19:19:59 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama

Secrecy

The Democratic party feels it necessary to keep all questions about Obama at a safe distance. It is an unprecedented move to keep secrets about a presidential candidate. The following questions remain sealed from the public. [103]

1. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate

2. Columbia College records

3. Columbia Thesis paper

4. Campaign donor analysis requested by 7 major watchdog groups

5. Harvard College records

6. Illinois State Senate records

7. Illinois State Senate schedule

8. Law practice client list and billing records/summary

9. Locations and names of all half-siblings and step-mothers

10. Medical records (only the one page summary released so far)

11. Occidental College records

12. Parent's Marriage Certificate

13. Record of baptism

14. Selective Service Registration

15. Trips schedules for trips outside of the United States before 2007

16. Scholarly articles

17. Access to his Grandmother (Obama's Grandmother has since passed away from cancer [58])

18. List of all campaign workers that are lobbyists

Obama keeps donations secret by exploiting a loophole that allows campaigns to refuse to divulge donations under $200.00. This is useful to the candidate because many of his contributions are from dubious foreign or illegal sources. It is described as the "largest pool of unidentified money that has ever flooded into the U.S. election system, before or after the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reforms of 2002." [104]

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-17   22:31:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Supremes to review Barack's citizenship - Case challenging his name on ballot set for 'conference'

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-21   1:56:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: SPACE RESERVED FOR NEWS ON COURT ORDER (BERG Vs. OBAMA)

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-21   1:57:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

maybe the sob is a reptilian? ;-P

Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth.
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

Artisan  posted on  2008-11-21   2:11:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

maybe the sob is a reptilian? ;-P

Obama (or whatever/whoever) it is appears to be a very mysterious creature.

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-21   2:16:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

I cant get interested in them. believe it or not i've never watched a single speech or interview of obama., other than a few brief clips in passing online.

Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth.
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

Artisan  posted on  2008-11-21   2:37:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

BO's website

he is a 32 degree Mason

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/elleanamccants/gGgHY2

real-debt-elimination

Itisa1mosttoolate  posted on  2008-11-21   5:52:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Wtf.. why am i not surprised?? i hadnt heard this before, thank you very much for the info.

Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth.
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

Artisan  posted on  2008-11-21   8:10:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

“There is No Law that Will Stop Him from Becoming the President!” October 24, 2008

Hillary Clinton was right! Barack Obama is in so far over his unqualified head that he is getting caught up in his own tangled web of deceit before he can reach Election Day! And wife Michelle Obama just might be the person who ends his bid for the White House! Had Howard Dean’s DNC not cheated Hillary Clinton out of her nomination by silencing Florida and Michigan Clinton supporters to advance Barack Obama, we might not have the biggest story in presidential political history! Michelle Obama finally let her anger get the best of her and as she put it, “enough is enough!” “Enough Is Enough” In a recent phone tirade with African Press International , Mrs. Obama launched into a rabid verbal assault upon yet another press outlet that dared to print anything the least bit investigative about her husband, presidential candidate Barack Obama. The conversation was apparently recorded and API promises to release that tape before the November election. In that audio taped phone interview, Michelle Obama lit into API writers and editors. In a fit of unbridled rage, Michelle said more to disqualify her husband than all the right-wing bloggers in the universe could have come up with combined. Here’s her statement in full context, as reported by African Press International: “African press International is supposed to support Africans and African-American view” -“it is strange that API has chosen to support the racists against my husband. There is no shame in being adopted by a step father. All dirt has been thrown onto my husband’s face and yet he loves this country. My husband and I know that there is no law that will stop him from becoming the president, just because some American white racists are bringing up the issue of my husband’s adoption by His step father. The important thing here is where my husband’s heart is at the moment. I can tell the American people that My husband loves this country and his adoption never changed his love for this country. He was born in Hawaii, yes, and that gives him all the right to be an American citizen even though he was adopted by a foreigner; says Michelle Obama on telefon to API.” Three Pending Law Suits Democrat former Assistant Attorney General of Pennsylvania Philip J. Berg filed a law suit charging that Barack Hussein Obama is not a U.S. Citizen and therefore, is not fundamentally qualified to run for the office of President. Berg’s claim was based upon two fundamental assertions... 1) Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii 2) Obama was adopted by Indonesian step father and enrolled in Indonesian school as an Indonesian citizen who never formally changed his legal status back to American citizen Although Michelle Obama stated, “there is no law that will stop him from becoming the president,” she might be very wrong about that arrogant assumption. It’s called the U.S. Constitution... Berg has since recently updated the status of his case to “admission by default” after the Obama campaign filed requests for dismissal or stay until after the election, but failed to respond to the demand for admission within the thirty day time window allowed by the court. When you refuse or fail to properly answer the demand for admissions in a timely manner, you lose by default and all charges are instantly admitted by default. A second suit was filed in Washington State and yet a third has now been filed in Hawaii... Michelle Provides the Answers “He was born in Hawaii, yes, and that gives him all the right to be an American citizen even though he was adopted by a foreigner,” stated Michelle Obama... Not so fast Michelle... This statement openly confirms Berg’s second foundation for asserting that Obama is not a U.S. citizen. He gave up any U.S. citizenship he might have once held when he was legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia. Obama’s Indonesian school records also confirm his status as the adopted son of Soetoro and a citizen of Indonesia. Indonesian law did not allow dual citizenship at that time, which means in order to become a citizen of Indonesia; Barry Obama (aka Barry Soetoro) had to give up his American citizenship. This is exactly what Berg asserted in his suit, which the Obama main stream press continues to cover up today. But Michelle Gave Up Much More Accusing API of colluding with American internet bloggers in an effort to bring down her husband, Mrs Obama said, “African press International is supposed to support Africans and African-American view,” - “it is strange that API has chosen to support the racists against my husband.” In other words, the press is not supposed to seek or print truth, it’s supposed to “support Africans and African-American view,” according to Mrs. Obama. “...it is strange that API has chosen to support the racists against my husband.” Yes, that is quite strange actually, isn’t it... Why would the African Press International run allegedly untrue unflattering stories about the first African-American presidential candidate? Equally Odd Is API Reaction to Mrs. Obama’s Phone Tirade... From the ongoing API conversation with Mrs. Obama - “This is a very interesting turn of events. The American man Dr Corsi was recently reported to have been arrested in Kenya because there was fear that he might reveal information on Obama when he wanted to hold a press conference inNairobi.” API “The question now is why he was arrested and who ordered his arrest. Was Obama’s hand in this in any way? We will never know the truth but what is clear is that Dr Corsi was seen as a threat while in Kenya.” API I understand the potential political motivations of Corsi and World Net Daily, both political opponents of Barack Obama. But how do you explain the position of API? API Reports:

“When API asked Mrs. Obama to comment on why Dr Corsi was arrested by the Kenyan government and whether she thought Kenya’s Prime Minister Mr. Raila Odinga was involved in Dr Corsi’s arrest, she got irritated and simply told API not to dig that which will support evil people who are out to stop her husband from getting the presidency.” API Reports:

“When asked who she was referring to as the evil people, she stated that she was not going to elaborate much on that but that many conservative white people and even some African Americans were against her husband, but that this group of blacks were simply doing so because of envy.” According to API:

Mrs. Obama told API that “it was unfortunate that Mr Farakhan came out the way he did supporting her husband openly before the elections was over.” He should have waiting until after the election... “Even if my husband was able to prove that he is not a Muslim, he will not be believed by those who have come out strongly to destroy his chances of being the next President. Do real people expect someone to deny a religion when 80 percent of his relatives are Muslims?” Mrs. Obama asked API towards the end of the call. How to Make it all Well? In closing, API reports than Mrs. Obama offered a means of reconciliation to API editors, - “Mrs. Obama asked API to write a good story about her husband and that will earn API an invitation to the inauguration ceremony when, as she put it , her husband will be “installed” as the next President of the United States of America next year.” Mrs. Obama does not seem to understand that we “elect” leadership in the United States. We do NOT “install” dictators who think they are above the law in some third world coup d'etat, like her husband’s cousin pulled off in Kenya... Case Closed! Michelle Obama not only confirmed Philip Berg’s claims than her husband is not even fundamentally eligible to run for President, she confirmed much more! That Leaves the Subject of the American Press Blackout on Obama! Barack Hussein Obama has been campaigning for president of the United States for two years now. ACORN is clearly committing voter registration fraud on his behalf. Millions in untraceable foreign campaign donations have poured in from God knows who in record setting volume. He has a twenty five year history of hanging out with some of the world’s most corrupt and dangerous friends and for two years the American press has established a full scale media blackout on all topics relative their chosen messiah, Barack Hussein Obama... Americans know what to do about the seemingly fraudulent Obama campaign. But who do we see at ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR and FOX about how in the hell a story of this magnitude was blacked out entirely by the so-called main stream press? First the election... Then it’s time to deal with an anti-American press! Thank You Michelle! NOTE: Due to massive international interest in this story, API has established a telephone hot-line to answer related queries. To verify this story,visit API here – For verification, API can be reached on 00-479-329-9739

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-21   18:59:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

That was a succinct post that summarizes the questions and concerns that many of us have.

It's not a question of race or "Hussein." It's a question of law regarding a man who wants to be president and who is playing his cards much too close to his chest.

randge  posted on  2008-11-21   19:14:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Obama’s Birth Certificate Challenger Keeps Going

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-21   19:36:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Alex Jones: Phil Berg: Berg vs Obama (11/14/08)

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-23   23:22:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Trouble in Paradise: Obama’s Kenyan Birth Record on it’s Way to US (Video)

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-11-25   21:37:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Constitution? What Constitution?

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-01   22:23:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: 2008: THE YEAR OF OBAMA -- & THE STOCK MARKET CRASH!

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-01   22:43:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: New Video: Dr. Ron Polarik on the authenticity of Obama's COLB

New Video: Dr. Ron Polarik on the authenticity of Obama's COLB

Monday, 24 November 2008 20:18 Webmaster Main – News

This video provides an analysis of Obama's Certificate of Live Birth by Dr. Ron Polarik detailing the factors contributing to his conclusion that the document is not authentic. "Dr. Polarik" is a pseudonym and his identity is obscured in this video.

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-01   23:04:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Obama Citizenship Accusations Come to a Head

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-02   23:06:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Berg asks Supremes to halt electors / Obama lets deadline slip by without responding to petition

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-02   23:16:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Obama Vs. Constitution (60 Sec. TV Ad) (Video)

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-04   11:11:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Will Supreme Court take case on Obama's citizenship?

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-04   14:25:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Obama Vs. Constitution (60 Sec. TV Ad)

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-04   14:25:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Mr. Obama's Eligibility to be Aired Monday at the National Press Club

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-04   18:56:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Found at RMN.

It's long, but in a nutshell it explains that we have been operating under 'choice of law'. Where the Law of the Land was set aside by using a funny money currency system, and adopting the Law of the Sea in it's place by doing so. (at least that's my take on this) It's a meaty piece.

TO CLARIFY MATTERS A LITTLE BIT MORE: B.H. OBAMA IS WELL-QUALIFIED TO BE MASTER OF THE PIRATE SHIP CALLED 'THE U.S.A.'

www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?#137109

TO CLARIFY MATTERS A LITTLE BIT MORE: B.H. OBAMA IS WELL-QUALIFIED TO BE MASTER OF THE PIRATE SHIP CALLED 'THE U.S.A.'

Posted By: Patriotlad Date: Thursday, 4 December 2008, 4:19 p.m. FOR THOSE WHO ARE READY AND WILLING TO SEE WITH DISCERNMENT:

the municipal corporation of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a pirate Company that is operating under the Law of the Sea.

"The Sorrow & The Pity" is a documentary about the NAZI conquest of France in World War II, and the years of German Occupation.

The following essay by Harmon Taylor is lengthy but worth the effort required to read, and understand, why things are the way that they are right now -- for those with the courage --

the designation of our United States as a pirate vessel is my construction and interpretation of Taylor's arguments.

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

Harmon L. Taylor Legal Reality Dallas, Texas

4 December A.D. 2008

"Court bashing" may forever be something that "gets my goat." Those who should know better and still engage in this reprehensible, America-hating line of activity add all the more reason for me to address this.

There is no "treachery" in or by the Supreme Court. To say that there is, is to say that the law itself is treacherous. That's nuts on its face.

To be upset about a ruling is fine. To be upset about the procedural handling of the case is fine. That'll happen to just about everyone, even those who understand the reality. To have to apply the reality is not necessarily an enjoyable task. But, one's horrifically uniformed and undisciplined emotional response to the legal reality is not a legitimate basis for hurling such epithets as "treachery" against the Supreme Court!

The Supreme Court are going to do what they always do, and that is apply all of the law that applies en route to making their decision. And, when that decision is that the dismissal of "Berg's case," which is just one of what WND reports as being some two dozen or so similar cases around the nation, is the correct ruling, all this brouhaha about this "citizenship" requirement may very well produce some consequences that these "Court bashers" will have shared greatly in creating.

Since the "Court bashers" refuse to tell their audiences the legal reality, always encouraging them, instead, to continue to buy into the lies, one can't help but wonder about their agenda. Why do that rely on the popular lies, which they also promote, as leverage to hurl against the Supreme Court, who have been teaching us our legal reality for some 200+ years now? So, what the "Court bashers" continue to prove is one of two things: (A) they know the legal reality and intentionally mislead their audiences for anti-American purposes, or (B) they haven't the first clue what the legal reality is, and they use the "First Amendment" not so much as "free speech" and "free press" but rather as "Let me confirm to the world what else I don't understand!"

This particular "Court-bashing" idiocy champions the Leo Donofrio case(s). Donofrio challenges the Secretary of State for New Jersey alleging failure to perform her statutory duty to insure the integrity of the ballot, in particular by allowing the obama-nation to be on the New Jersey ballot, due to the "citizenship" issue arising out of Art. II.

I've familiarized myself with the Donofrio case(s) via materials available on the internet. While there are clerks and staff attorneys who deserve to be charged criminally, none of those people work with or for the Supreme Court. So, where Donofrio launches off against the Supreme Court personnel, he proves mightily just exactly how little he understands of this issue, in particular, and of the system, in general. The point is that the "Court bashers" who "Hail!" Donofrio's efforts and activities self-confess knowing even less about the matter than Donofrio.

The patience exhibited by the Court and its staff is a gift from God Almighty.

Let's start here. Is the "funny money" scam still confusing to the "Court bashers?" Is it totally beyond their intellectual capability to focus on the obvious? Is it completely beyond them to see that where what circulates as legal tender is not gold and silver Coin that we're dealing with a completely different fundamental "choice of law?" Apparently so.

Totally and purely for the sake of argument, let's presume a Constitution of 1787-1791 ("as amended") into existence. Now, given that there are THREE places for events to occur, namely relative to (1) the land, (2) the water, and (3) the air, and given that there are TWO fundamental "choices of law" covering those THREE places, namely (1) the Law of the Land, for matters that accrue relative to the Land, and (2) the Law of the Sea, for matters that accrue relative to either the water or the air, let's come to terms very, very quickly on which "choice of law" the Constitution (that we just presumed into existence) is based. That document looks where? Obviously, and by its very own language, it looks to the Law of the Land.

What is the recognized form of Money (currency) for that system? It's gold and silver Coin.

Gold stopped circulating generally in the 1930s, and silver stopped circulating generally in the 1960's. Thus, we haven't had either in general circulation since the mid 1960's. The key time that proved to be the intended death-knell for the legitimate Money system (gold and silver Coin) varies by "state," for it will be the time of the adoption of the "Uniform Commercial Code" (UCC), which exists to justify and legitimize the "funny money" scam. But, somewhere between the late 1960s and the early 1970s, all vestiges of attachment to a Law of the Land system ended. In its place came the Law of the Sea system that depends on "funny money" as "legal tender."

So, to keep all the views expressed by the "Court bashers" in context, anyone who has ever spent a "federal reserve note" in any transaction has contributed to the current problems we face as a nation. Any business person who has allowed only "federal reserve notes" in payment of amounts due has contributed to the current problems we face as a nation. How so? Because by buying into the "funny money" scam, we have all "Hailed!" the transition away from the Law of the Land system and to the Law of the Sea system.

Yes, it's true that this is so subtle that "no one" knew what was happening. That's all well and fine and good, but nothing about our collective ignorance changes the fact that the use of the "federal reserve notes," in the face of the language that prohibits States from coining Money, emitting Bills of Credit, or making any Thing but gold or silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt. Just about everyone alive today actively pursing the where these officials may be helped back off the present train have "inherited" these problems. They have been created for us at a time of national naivete. The seeds of thought, hence the seeds of the problems, on which the current federal system operates were planted more than 200 years ago. The transition has come in small steps over a long time.

The "funny money" scam, and the UCC, both depend greatly on the fact that neither exists or intends to exist under the Law of the Land. That part of the UCC which purports to allow "federal reserve notes" to qualify as "legal tender" flies in the face of the fundamental Law of the Land, meaning that if the Law of the Land were the law used to analyze that statutory scheme, that scheme would have been ruled a violation of the fundamental laws of commerce a long time ago, because it's a Ponzi-scheme on its face. The "funny money" scam, which borrows the "money" into existence, and which prints only the "principal" amount of that loan, leaving the "interest" amount unprinted, has been discussed in numerous ways and places. The details of how we know it to be a fraudulent system, when evaluated under the Law of the Land, is left for those other discussions. The point here is that once we come to terms with the reality that no one is going to jail for running the "funny money" scam, we HAVE to come to this conclusion, and the sooner the better: that "funny money" scam IS NOT operating under the Law of the Land.

So, under what "choice of law" IS it operating? And, the obvious answer is this: The Law of the Sea.

There is no other explanation as to why that system, which is fraudulent on its face, hasn't been prosecuted out of existence.

What does that mean? It means that the governmental system that operates on the "funny money" system is not one that looks to the Law of the Land. And, since the Law of the Land is the only "choice of law" that could ever recognize the Constitution as "admissible evidence of law," those who think that the Constitution has anything whatsoever to do with the "federal government" are one a distant planet, somewhere.

This misunderstanding is more than understandable. I was there, myself. I could argue the Constitution better than "anyone." And, then I was cured from my blindness via The Terre Haute Litigation. These materials are still fully available for review and discussion as they have been since not terribly long after that case ended, which was in June, 2001.

See -- www.apfn.org/apfn/okc_coverup.ht < /a> m

In that case, the position asserted is that the "federal" court in Colorado had no jurisdiction. First, there's nothing legal about a transfer of a criminal case across the State line. Art. III, § 2, Art. IV, § 2, and the Sixth Amendment. Secondly, there's nothing about this homicide case that justifies Art. III jurisdiction, for there was no ambassador or consul involved.

As happens with "pure Constitution" cases, the federal trial court in Terre Haute, Indiana, dismissed the case. Upon appeal, the 7th Circuit described the 100% pure "constitutional" case this way. After recognizing that the petitioners did, in fact, have standing, and that the discovery rules were quite relevant, in particular those regarding "perpetuation of testimony," the appellate court described the case this way, and in this sequence: (1) frivolous, (2) without merit, (3) of no authority, and (4) ludicrous. What did the appellate court teach us as being the jurisdictional basis for the case against McVeigh? 18 USC § 7, "Special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States defined."

If part (3), here, along with 18 USC § 7, don't register, yet, then there's nothing more than anyone can say that can provide any type of assistance to the general understanding of the problem(s) we're dealing with, here. I was as bad on making this adjustment as anyone. No one other than a respected judicial officer would ever have been able to cure my blindness. That's just to say that I may not be the "voice" that comes with sufficient "authority" that it starts to motivate anyone's taking another look into these realities. However, once these two realities hit, you'll know it, because you'll get sick to your stomach, and your head will ache. This condition may last for several days. It's not the flu. It's "withdrawal." Those who go through that process will say, "I used to be a constitutionalist, but I am now cured of my blindness."

The Constitution was not drafted to operate under a Law of the Sea system, but rather a Law of the Land system. We don't have a Law of the Land system, anywhere, as is self-proved by the non-circulation of either silver or gold Coin. To make, then, the immediate connection in the context of the obama- nation's "citizenship," if the only place that requirement is found is in a document that is irrelevant to the current Law of the Sea addicted system, then there is no such requirement. Period.

Now, that's NOT a problem that the Supreme Court caused, and neither is it a problem that the Supreme Court can solve. It's a political question, and that means that it's completely beyond their authority to address.

"No one" has standing to raise that objection, for there is no such requirement for the "office" of "president" for the "federal government." And no Secretary of State violates a duty by allowing the obama-nation on the ballot. If we were dealing with a Law of the Land system, I'd give you additional reasons why this requirement wouldn't exist under that system, either, but we're not dealing with a Law of the Land system, so that analysis is not relevant, here.

"Federal" means "federal."

"Federal" does not mean "national," and it most certainly doesn't mean "constitutional." "Federal" means "federal."

At the level of a "state," "federal" means "by compact" or "by treaty."

At the level of the individual, "federal" means "by private obligation."

Why was Kennedy assassinated? Because he opposed the "funny money" scam. He would have circulated "United States Notes," not a private banking system's "federal reserve notes," as the paper currency, and he had just requested that the Mint make a fresh batch of the silver-based quarters. There's no way to get the American people sucked into a different "choice of law" for so long as legitimate Money remain in circulation.

So, Kennedy "had to go" in order to keep the seduction of this nation on the schedule that the internationalists planned for that phase of the operation.

So, we've had that piece of the puzzle staring us in the face since November 22, 1963.

Why was OJ Simpson never indicted for both counts of homicide? If the Fifth Amendment applied, that trial court never had the authority to reach the merits of that case, whether "guilty" or "not guilty."

We've already addressed the issue of transfer of a criminal case across the State line. If the Constitution were relevant to the Murrah Building bombing case(s), not only would there have been no "federal" court activity, but also all the "state" court activity would have remained in Oklahoma, as was the case for the second trial, i.e., the state court trial, of Nichols.

Those obvious deviations from "constitutional standards" may still be too subtle even for the "Court bashers," which is just to say that what is obvious to us here at Legal Reality is rarely obvious to "constitutionalists."

However, what is so shockingly beyond the intellectual capability of these "Court bashers" regarding this obama-nation "citizenship" issue is the fact that the "citizenship"-questioning litigants, and the "Court bashers" who are championing those cases tolerate a "popular vote" process at all!

When those people show us at Legal Reality where there is ANY remote mention in the Constitution of ANY "popular vote," THEN we'll discuss this "citizenship" issue.

The "Court bashers" are invited to go back and read the history for themselves. There were NINE, count them, NINE, not one, not two, but NINE elections that followed the "constitutional" Electoral College process for the election of the president.

Then, in 1824, something changed, and "we've" never gone back.

In 1824, there was the first "popular vote" for the "office" of "president." If the "popular vote" WERE EVER part of the "constitutional" plan, WHY were there NINE, count them, NINE, elections without any "popular vote" component, at all?! (Ooops! say the magnificently uninformed "Court bashers!").

At the end of the day, we've been so separated from the "constitutional" plan for so long that we wouldn't recognize a "constitutional" system if it clobbered us in the nose.

And, buying into 99% of the lies, the "Court bashers" now want to blame the Supreme Court, who have been telling us about these distinctions, i.e., between the language on the page and the actual events going on, for some 200+ years, now.

"Court bashing" will NEVER sell, here. What the "Court bashers" do, repeatedly, is prove beyond any reasonable doubt that they have no stinkin' clue what the law is; hence, no stinkin' clue what they're talking about!

And, where they go so far as to use the term "treachery" to describe the Supreme Court, I pray to God Almighty, the Maker of Heaven and Earth, for swift and pronounced Divine Judgment against such "Court bashers." May those "Court bashers" experience a personal hell on earth that terminates upon their formal repentance to the very same audience to which they spew forth their venomous, America-hating idiocy. May they confess the reality that the Supreme Court ARE the ones who know the reality and that the "Court bashers" are the ones who are clueless on the point.

To address some specifics in this particular "Court bashing" atrocity, Justice Ginsberg is NEVER asleep to any of these matters, and may the Supreme Court ALWAYS prefer the anthrax testing, given the circumstances that created that issue in the first place. ( We'll talk about S-11 some other time. )

If there's an insanity at issue, here, then where the shoe fits, it should be worn by those "Court bashers" who think they have any clue, at all, what the legal reality is.

They are so removed from the reality as to have the concept of insane apply perfectly.

There is NO interference by any Clerk with the Supreme Court. They are as bound to the applicable law as are those Justices. They have more knowledge of the law and the legal reality in their pinky toes than the "Court bashers" have in their entire bodies!

While the quote of Donofrio in this "Court bashing" episode is unquestionably accurate, the problem is that the American people have NOT been studying the law for at least the past 50 years, the foundation for which concepts started circa 1791. So, no, Ginsberg is not the one who is asleep here! The "Court bashers" are not only asleep, but also addicted to a fantasy world of make believe. They truly cannot handle the real world, and so they use the Supreme Court as a whipping boy rather than taking personal responsibility for studying into the reality, which they are distant from as not even to realize just how nuts their position is.

The "prostitute media" are that, but, this time, they've also got the right idea. Not only do the editors of the "prostitute media" know the legal reality sufficiently well enough not to touch this issue, but also they may also realize the danger that exists from making the deal out of this issue that is being made by the "independent" news sources.

There's got to be a reason that the "new world order" forces are cramming this "citizenship" issue down our throats, by running a candidate that doesn't satisfy the "constitutional" requirement.

If that purpose is to divide the nation, then won't it be poetic irony that the "constitutionalists," i.e., those who are still blind to the reality, are the very catalyst of the demise of the nation?!

What this particular "Court basher" calls "a mockery of everything this country has stood for and what we will stand for in the future" is exactly the OPPOSITE of that. What we're seeing is the unswerving commitment to the law that applies to us today, in Amerika. If it takes this issue to get those of us who are called to understand the legal reality motivated to go back to the law library and do some soul-searching research, then, Ok, this may be both the issue and the timing. But, we'll never understand a word that the Supreme Court are teaching us until we come to terms with why the language of the Constitution hasn't meant "a damn thing" for as long as any of us have studied into the problems that exist at this level. There IS a reason for that, and the Supreme Court have taught us that reason, VERY diplomatically, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, ad nauseam, for more than 200 years, now. And, out of unsurpassed ignorance, the "Court bashers" turn right around and blame the Supreme Court, calling the following of the law the act of "treachery." That sounds VERY Nazi-communo-fascist to those of us at Legal Reality. ANYtime it's "sanctionable" or "treacherous" to follow the law, the advocates of such a position are actually God-hating, America-hating Nazi- communo-fascists. And, if they don't want to be that, maybe they would do better to invest that time in law research and finding the consistency in what the Supreme Court are teaching us rather than in their mindless "Court bashing."

Nothing governmental is as it appears to be. Nothing. Those who are animated by this "citizenship" issue SURELY are at the top of the list of those who realize this fact. So, why is that reality abandoned here? Because they think they know more than they really know. Because they actually believe as true the lies they've been told all their lives, and now that they are experiencing the first head-on train wreck that their lie-consumed perspectives are allowing them to wrestle with, among the thousands of such train wrecks that the Supreme Court have brought to our attention during the past 200+ years, they're angry that their lie-permeated world is not providing them the prevailing legal analysis. And, of course, the student's refusal to do his/her homework is the professor's fault!

So, all this time, "money," and energy invested in this "in our face" slam of the difference between the Law of the Land system and the Law of the Sea system is a total and complete waste of time. Now, it's NOT that, IF we'll come to terms with the duality of "choice of law" that we're facing, here. But, if all that one gets out of the study of this issue is anger, and there's no epiphany of understanding as to the reality that the Supreme Court are applying, THEN all of efforts will be nothing but a complete waste of time.

There is a mailing address in the "Court basher's" idiotic discussion, and if you use it to send something to the Supreme Court, be sure to include your heart-felt gratitude for their unswerving commitment to the legal reality, as well as your continuing prayers that they never feel inclined to vary from the path of legal reality in the slightest. We would have been shackled and owned by the British banksters a long time ago if it had not been for the Supreme Court's God-inspired wisdom to see many decades into the future of the plans made to destroy this nation. The Supreme Court have taught us everything we need to know in order to defend ourselves against that system that is so "in our face" with its slam against "constitutional" principles.

At the end of the day, those who "get it" realize that it doesn't make a hoot or a holler's bit of difference "who" the "president" is. And, it may very well be that this insane, lawless, anti-American, God-hating "Court bashing" will serve The Lord's purpose in awakening a few more minds to the difference between the Law of the Land system, which is evidenced by a currency that is an honest system of weights and measures, e.g., gold and silver Coin, and the Law of the Sea system, i.e., the "federal government" system, which is evidenced by the "funny money" scam.

With the "money" goes the default "choice of law."

Applying, in the context of the legal reality, the language regarding "qualifications" for the "office" of "president" for the "federal government" that presently exist, I will go on Record, again, saying that the trial court decisions in these obama-nation "citizenship" cases are correct. I can't tell you whether a "no standing" policy will be confirmed, or whether it will be supplemented with or replaced with a "political question" analysis. But, unless a very undisciplined analysis occurs in these cases, there'll be no judicial statement disqualifying the obama-nation for "office" in the "federal government" under Art. II. Art. II applies, if at all, to a Law of the Land system, which the "funny money"-based "federal government" system IS NOT.

And, when that result is announced, namely that the obama-nation is not disqualified, feel free to praise God Almighty that the law that applies to us today is not subject to whim or fancy of any jurist, especially those who serve us as Supreme Court Justices, who the "Court bashers" teach us to hate.

As a final note, the name of the Court is correctly stated in the address provided in the "Court basher's" idiotic piece. That is to say that if these "Court bashers" did any homework at all, they'd call the Court by its correct name at all times, namely the "Supreme Court of the United States." It is not the "United States Supreme Court," which name does appear a few places in the statutes, but not in 28 USC § 1. That's just to say that where the "Court bashers" can't even get the name right, what else do they have no clue about?!

May The Lord continue to guide, encourage, and bless the Supreme Court and all related staff members.

May The Lord curse and judge the "Court bashers" until they repent of their "Court bashing" to the same audience to which they have spewed forth their venomous, America-hating idiocies.

< end of Taylor's essay >

KINDA WHAT I FIGURED :) - BUT IT DOES BEG A FEW QUESTIONS...

Posted By: hobie Date: Thursday, 4 December 2008, 5:31 p.m.

In Response To: TO CLARIFY MATTERS A LITTLE BIT MORE: B.H. OBAMA IS WELL- QUALIFIED TO BE MASTER OF THE PIRATE SHIP CALLED 'THE U.S.A.' (Patriotlad) Hi, P'lad -

Thanks for that. :) Not sure why Taylor wanted to expend so much energy picking on the "Court bashers" except perhaps he's unhappy with himself for once having been one. (?)

So, however, the bottom line proves to be that no matter where Obama was born, it's not a problem - except that the issue itself stirs some Americans awake to wonder, "Why is it NOT a problem?" and perhaps the powers-who-thought-they-were still prefer we not awaken to that degree.

This would also mean there's nothing to prevent Schwarzenegger from running for President (except for all the Americans who would go, "What?!" if he did :).

Taylor defends the Court and honors the Court for its ongoing integrity in addressing the reality of the law. That's fine, and I get that.

At the same time, he identifies the "funny money" scam as inextricably linked with the "choice of law" we find ourselves presently operating under.

I infer that he's implying our acceptance and utilization of Federal Reserve Notes has been the positive indication of our quiet willingness to accept the Law of the Sea as our operational system. In short, we 'voted' for the Law of the Sea by accepting the offer to use FRNs. Therefore, it could be argued, no one's put anything over on us. We agreed to it. It's all legal. It's all on the up-and-up.

But is it?

In my understanding, the (first) Constitution creates a Trust, and that Trust is "the government". The (second) Constitution is a contract, one that limits what government can and cannot do.

The begged question is, "Where is the authority to move the United States from the Law of the Land to the Law of the Sea?" Or is it just, somewhat as TeamLaw suggests, that the Law of the Land is still in operation, and the Law of the Sea is in operation within a separate layer on top of it?

Is it all about contracts? Are we on board the pirate ship because in some way or ways, we "signed on" to be there?

--hobie

OliviaFNewton  posted on  2008-12-04   19:07:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Court won't review Obama's eligibility to serve

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2008-12-08   10:50:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Title: Analyst warns Obama's eligibility could become flashpoint

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2009-04-08   10:19:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder Refuses to Prosecute President Obama

Press Release

For Immediate Release: - 06/11/2009

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder Refuses to Prosecute President Obama

Under False Claims Act whereby Obama was accused of Defrauding the U.S. Treasury by Illegally being a U.S. Senator from Illinois as Obama is an Illegal Alien, not a U.S. Citizen

Berg brought action against Obama and after months of delay Holder’s Staff refused to investigate

Berg raised issue of “Conflict of Interest” and why Discovery was “not” turned over

and Judge Roberts Dismissed case against Obama on June 9th

obamacrimes.com is the web site for the truth about Obama

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2009-06-14   11:30:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Good.

Now Berg can focus all of his attention on his suit against the California dentist.

This one ought to be quite entertaining.

IDon'tThinkSo  posted on  2009-06-14   11:42:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

As I understand the issue, nobody in authority has seen his BC except two? Hawaiian bureaucrats and the document they've seen isn't a BC. Got it, I'm moving on.

Holocaust museum security at work.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2009-06-14   12:00:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

As I understand the issue, nobody in authority has seen his BC except two? Hawaiian bureaucrats and the document they've seen isn't a BC. Got it, I'm moving on.

TwentyTwelve  posted on  2009-07-28   0:59:42 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]