See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Obama Citizenship Accusations Come to a Head
Source:
The New American
URL Source: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/562
Published: Dec 2, 2008
Author: Written by Kurt Williamsen
Post Date: 2008-12-02 22:57:52 by TwentyTwelve
Keywords: Obama, Berg, Citizenship Scandal, Birth Certificate Fraud
Views: 4505
Comments: 225
Obama Citizenship Accusations Come to a Head Written by Kurt Williamsen Tuesday, 02 December 2008 20:54 As we have reported earlier in our article "Barack Obama and the Citizenship Scandal," it has been alleged that Barack Obama is ineligible to become president for two reasons: evidence has come forward that Obama was born in Kenya, not the United States as required by the Constitution (because only one of Obama's parents is an American); and even if he was born here, his mother relinquished his citizenship by marrying an Indonesian and becoming a naturalized Indonesian citizen. This story has gained credence, separating it from Internet rumors, because Obama has reputedly hired three law firms (firms, not lawyers) to make sure that no one gets access to his birth records in Hawaii or his college transcripts from Occidental College and Harvard. (It is speculated that the transcripts will show he applied for aid to foreign students.) Philip J. Berg, a lifelong Democrat, sued to see Obama's original birth certificate, but a court ruled that because Berg was not in some way harmed by Obama — monetarily, physically, or reputation-wise — he was not a plaintiff in good standing. This action by the court put a temporary end to the belief that we would ever know the answer to the accusations. But now the claim is flaring up again for several reasons: • Alan Keyes, a presidential candidate of the American Independent Party, and Markham Robinson, a California elector, have now sued to see Obama's birth certificate (these men would definitely have legal "standing" to sue as plaintiffs in this case). • The We the People Foundation took out a full-page ad in the Chicago Tribune about the scandal. • On Friday, December 5, the Supreme Court will have a "conference" on the question of Obama's citizenship. (If four out of the nine justices vote to hear the case, oral arguments may be scheduled.) Obama supporters have derided attempts to challenge Obama's citizenship as merely sour grapes by sore losers, and they point to the website FactChect.org, as well as a statement by Hawaii's Department of Health Director who said Obama has a legitimate birth certificate, as proof of their rightness. (Various quotes by Obama's supporters also make it clear that they don't care whether or not he was born in the United States, or whether or not the Constitution is upheld.) Those pressing the issue note that FactCheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and that Obama was on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. They note also that Hawaiian Health Department officials did not state that Obama has an original birth certificate from Hawaii. In fact, what Obama has given to FactCheck.org to prove his citizenship is not a birth certificate, but a certificate of live birth, something that would not ordinarily be accepted as legal proof of citizenship. Also, it is suspicious that no doctors or nurses have come forward and said that they were at Obama's birth in Hawaii, but Obama's grandmother in Kenya has been taped saying that she was at his birth in Kenya. Is Obama hiding something? Most likely yes. A person just doesn't spend something on the order of hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep one's birth records a secret unless one has something to hide. I personally have had to provide my birth certificate to several employers before they would agree to hire me. For a normal person, showing one's birth certificate is not a big deal. I've also had to give out my college records — again, not a big deal. But that leads to important questions: should this be pursued, and will it succeed? Yes, it should be pursued because to ignore it is to say that the Constitution is no longer the law of the land and is instead just an old piece of paper. Will it succeed? In my opinion, no. Neither the Supreme Court, nor the electors who will soon cast their votes for president, are impartial bodies. But that is not an argument for not pursuing it. — AP Images
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 22.
#12. To: TwentyTwelve (#0)
Why didn't the RNC bring this issue up? They were trying to find anything they could to discredit Obama. Why didn't the McCain/Palin campaign bring this issue up? Why didn't the current president (moron bush) bring this issue up? Why didn't roody julieannie or any of the others campaigning for the Republican party nomination bring this issue to the attention of the public? Why didn't the Dept. of Justice address this issue? Why didn't Ron Paul directly address this issue? Is he part of the conspiracy? Oh and by the way, did you see these? Lawsuit blames the September 11 attack on a RICO conspiracy involving, among others, the first President Bush, Condoleeza Rice, the Council for Foreign Relations, and Kenneth Feinberg. News Conference – Wednesday - 11/26/03 – 12 Noon 5th & Ranstead Streets, Philadelphia [corner of Bourse Building with Independence Hall in background] 911 Victim’s Wife, Ellen Mariani, files RICO Act [Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act] Federal Court Complaint against President Bush and Cabinet Members (Philadelphia, PA – 11/26/03) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, announced today that he, attorney for Ellen Mariani, wife of Louis Neil Mariani, who died when United Air Lines flight 175 was flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Center on 9-11 at a news conference regarding the filing of a detailed Amended Complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on 11/26/03 in the case of Mariani vs. Bush et al that he is alleging President Bush and officials including, but not limited to Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld and Feinberg that they: 1. had knowledge/warnings of 911 and failed to warn or take steps to prevent; 2. have been covering up the truth of 911; and 3. have therefore violated the laws of the United States; and 4. are being sued under the Civil RICO Act. Berg stated: “I will be detailing the charges against Bush and others and handing out copies of the: 1. Amended Complaint; 2. a Letter from Ellen Mariani to President Bush that sets forth her beliefs that President Bush knowingly and willfully failed to act and prevent the murder of her husband on 911 and the ongoing obstruction of justice; and 3. a Sworn Affidavit that the United States government twenty-eight [28] years ago undertook a study to prevent the very events of 911. Mrs. Mariani was the first victim family member to bring civil action regarding the events of 911 against United Airlines. Since then, the “truth” of 911 has not been forthcoming and Mrs. Mariani, for the good of her country, now seeks the truth via this courageous action under the RICO Act. Berg said: “The events surrounding "911" to date have yet to be uncovered. While America was under attack, for approximately the next seven (7) to eighteen (18) minutes Defendant GWB continues to listen to the goat story while Plaintiff's husband was just murdered and does not immediately assume his duties as Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Plaintiff, with her amended complaint intends to expose the truth to remember the dead and to prevent continued deaths of American military personnel due to President Bush's "failure to act and prevent" the worst attacks on our nation since Pearl Harbor. Plaintiff hereby asserts Defendants, officially and individually are exclusively liable to answer the Counts in this Complaint under the United States Constitution and provisions of the 18 U.S.C. § 1964(a) and (c), Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (hereinafter "RICO Act") for "failing to act and prevent" the murder of Plaintiff's husband, Louis Neil Mariani, for financial and political reasons and have "obstructed justice" in the aftermath of said criminal acts and omissions. Defendant GWB has purported to the American People and the Plaintiff that the infamous attacks of "911" were directly masterminded by Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda Network terrorists (hereinafter "OBL"), almost immediately after the attacks. Yet, Defendant GWB has not been forthright and honest with regard to his administration's pre-knowledge of the potential of the "911" attacks and Plaintiff seeks to compel Defendant GWB to justify why her husband Louis Neil Mariani died on "911.' Plaintiff believes Defendant GWB is invoking a long standard operating procedure of invoking national security and executive privilege claims to suppress the basis of this lawsuit that Defendant GWB, et al., failed to act and prevent the "911" attacks. Plaintiff asserts, contrary to Defendant GWB's assertion that OBL is responsible for "911," the compelling evidence that will be presented in this case through discovery, subpoena power by this Court and testimony at trial will lead to one undisputed fact, Defendant GWB failed to act and prevent "911" knowing the attacks would lead to our nation having to engage in an "International War on Terror (IWOT)" which would benefit Defendants both financially and for political reasons. There are significant business ties that will be proven between Defendants and OBL's family which raise serious conflict of interest and other matters wherein "failing to act and prevent" the "911" attacks have benefited Defendants. Reports have emerged and will be confirmed through discovery that the Carlyle Group, the giant U.S. defense contractor until recently employed Defendant and former President GHB. Hence, the "Bush Family" and other Defendants financial profiting by war goes to the heart of Plaintiff's RICO Act claim. Plaintiff asserts, in the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's, Defendants were allies with OBL and Saddam Hussein during the former Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan and Iran-Iraq war respectively, wherein, personal and political deals were made and it is believed upon discovery, these dealings hold the truth about "911." In sum, Plaintiff will call to trial former federal employees with firsthand knowledge and expertise with military intelligence and other duties to support the underlying RICO Act foundational basis to prove Defendants have engaged in a "pattern of criminal activity and obstruction of justice" in violation of the public trust and laws of the United States for personal and financial gains. Plaintiff will prove, Defendants have engaged our nation in an endless war on terror to achieve their personal goals and agendas. /////// ** Copy of sixty-one [61] page Amended Complaint available by e-mail” – contact Phil Berg at PJBLAW@aol.com /////// [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and U.S. Senate; an attorney with offices in Montgomery County and an active practice in Philadelphia, PA.] www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0311/S00261.htm PHILADELPHIA ATTORNEY PHIL BERG DEMANDS DISBARMENT OF (3) U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICES - O'CONNOR, SCALIA and THOMAS ON THE ONE (1) YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF BUSH vs. GORE, THE CASE THAT "ANOINTED" BUSH AS PRESIDENT (Philadelphia, PA - 12/12/01) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania and political activist, an attorney with offices in Montgomery County, PA and an active practice in Philadelphia, PA today, on the 1st anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bush vs. Gore which "anointed" Bush as President writes to three (3) U.S. Supreme Court Justices, Justices O'Connor, Scalia and Thomas requesting that they agree to "Voluntary Disbarment" for failing to "recuse" themselves in said case and other violations. Berg said: "The attached letter is self explanatory requesting three (3) U.S. Supreme Court Justices to agree to voluntary disbarment from the practice of law. It is the appearance of impartiality not the reality of bias or prejudice that dictates and in this case, there was not only appearance but also actual conflict of interest. They violated the rules of conduct and must accept the consequences of their partisan action. The three (3) Justices of The Supreme Court of the United States should voluntarily turn in their licenses in their respective states or we will ask that disciplinary action be undertaken including disbarment as well as summary suspension in their respective states for violating the Rules of Court and not 'recusing' themselves in the case of Bush vs. Gore and other violations Specifically, Justices O'Connor, Scalia and Thomas. groups.google.com/group/phl.media/msg/2e1564f62484903f Pictures of the Phillip Berg Team and those who buy into this wacko conspiracy theory
Would someone please delete this spam. It's obvious this moonie poster doesn't want all points of view discussed.
What is obvious is that I am not stupid enough to spend all my time on conspiracy theories created by wackos like Berg. The guy is a nut. And again, if there was any validity to this the RNC and all the other politicans would have jumped all over it. But I guess some people are so desperate they will believe anything including brainless conspiracy theories while our country is destroyed because they ignore the important issues and focus on these.
If there wasn't any validity to it Obama would produce a birth certificate instead of wasting millions in court fighting it. Calling people stupid for using their brains while you are not using yours is very stupid.
You really believe that don't you? You have no idea what politicians really are or why they do this kind of crap do you?
Berg has filed an emergency motion for immediate injunction, America's Right blogger and legal writer Jeff Schreiber reports. Berg is asking the court to stop state certification of electors to keep the Electoral College from meeting Dec. 15 and casting votes for Obama. He is also seeking to postpone the official vote count Jan. 6 until the court reaches a decision on his appeal. Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. and thus a "natural-born American" as required by Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution? "It is my firm belief, my one thousand percent firm belief," Berg told Schreiber, "that he does not meet the natural born qualifications, that he should not be voted for by the electors, and that he should not be sworn in this January unless he shows his credentials ... which he of course cannot, simply because he does not have them."
There are no replies to Comment # 22. End Trace Mode for Comment # 22.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest.jpg)
#15. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#12)
#16. To: Disgusted (#15)
#18. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#16)
And again, if there was any validity to this the RNC and all the other politicans would have jumped all over it.
#21. To: RickyJ (#18)
If there wasn't any validity to it Obama would produce a birth certificate instead of wasting millions in court fighting it.
#22. To: bush_is_a_moonie, all (#21)
Replies to Comment # 22.