“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” George Washington
That is exactly what the leftists they are doing, taking it away, freedom of speech to them is 
'counter-progressive' because it allows for dissent and scepticism confronting their utopist fantasies, except when it concerns terrorists and psychopathic ideologies spewing hatred, then the leftists are wailing in their defense in the name of freedom of speech.
The condescending arrogance of the leftists is despicable.
As is the case of their newly found 'messiah'.
By Amil Imani
I am not going to talk about how Mr. Obama stole the nomination from Hillary Clinton. I am not going to talk about widespread voter fraud involving Acorn in the Obama camp, both in the primaries and general election. I am not going to talk about how all the Obama's men either had influence in his life or helped him to his meteoric rise to power. I am not going to talk about Obama’s pre-paid Credit Card Fraud problem. I am not going to talk about how Radical Muslims paid Obama’s way through college. I am not going to talk about Obama's Middle East Studies Mentors. I am not going to talk about Obama's Voodoo Economics. I am not going to talk about the Logan Act when Mr. Obama did not speak responsibly when he went to Europe, Iraq and also a trip in 2006 to Kenya to meet with Odinga.
No, I am not going to talk about any of them, since none of those issues apparently mattered to those who voted for him. They elected him despite knowing those facts. So, I concede he won the election by receiving more votes than Senator McCain who seemed to desperately want to wrap things up and throw in the towel.
However, I am truly disturbed. I do want to talk about the fears that are rampantly mounting, concerning the question of Mr. Obama being a natural born U.S. citizen, as required by the Constitution, to run for the office of the presidency of the United States.
This issue led Philip J. Berg, a long time Democrat and attorney, to file suit against Barack H. Obama, challenging Senator Obama’s lack of "qualification" to serve as President of the United States. He filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting a review of Judge Surrick's decision to dismiss his lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants.
According to Berg, Obama is not eligible to be president. He says Obama was born in Kenya and he carries an Indonesian passport and became an Indonesian citizen when his stepfather adopted him while going to school in Indonesia. In addition, Mr. Obama's paternal grandmother in Kenya, has publicly stated that she attended his birth at a hospital in Mombosa, Kenya, in 1961.
Ironically, Linda Lingle, the Governor of Hawaii, issued an order to seal his birth records shortly after Mr. Obama’s recent trip to Hawaii. That begs the question: What is he hiding? Why not just open his records if there is nothing to hide? In an extraordinary gesture, the honorable U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick tossed out the suit claiming citizens do not have any standing to challenge the constitutionality of this issue.
"This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution,” Berg said in a statement. “If I don’t have standing, if you don’t have standing, if your neighbor doesn’t have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States - the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does? So, anyone can just claim to be eligible for congress or the presidency without having their legal status, age or citizenship questioned."Berg argued, "We the people have no right to police the eligibility requirements under the U.S. Constitution? What happened to …Government of the people, by the people, for the people…?” Apparently Mr. Obama’s credential at Columbia University is SEALED. His year at Harvard is SEALED. His Certificate of Live Birth, or COLB (a COLB is a completely different document, one that can be registered much later than at the time of birth) is in the possession of the Hawaii Department of Public Health and is also SEALED.
Berg stressed the urgency of his case, arguing that “we” the people are heading to a "Constitutional Crisis" if this case is not resolved quickly.
Utah Senator, Orrin Hatch, once said, “Judges who take the law into their own hands, who make up constitutional 'rights' in order to strike down laws they oppose, undermine the people's right to have their values shape public policy and define the culture.” James Madison said, “The people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power is derived.”
Freedom is a principle that must be applied indiscriminately. Once the constitutional laws are in place, they must be applied and practiced to their fullest. After living in America for 30 years, I have come to believe the Americans, of all people, understand the importance of a good, legal and sound constitutional framework as the foundation of political life.
Here is the question in the minds of many American citizens now: Is Barack Obama a United States Natural Born Citizen, and is he eligible to become the President of the United States, or did he present a forged government document to verify a citizenship he does not possess?
I am a recent "shareholder" in this magnificent "company" -- United States of America. The charter that lights the path of this country is the Constitution. I vehemently disagree with those who are more than willing to violate the Constitution and call it little more than a body of suggestions that can be disregarded when expedient. To me, the Constitution is our nation's most sacred document. It is the document that binds its vastly diverse constituents as equal loyal members.
I strongly feel that Mr. Obama and his supporters have not abided by the explicit provisions of the Constitution. For this reason, I am launching my protest and am demanding that the truth about Mr. Obama's eligibility to be the president of this great nation be conclusively established so that we can function as one nation and without the nagging question about Obama's eligibility that deeply troubles me and millions of my fellow Americans.
1 comment:
Baloney!
It was expensive to travel from Hawaii to Kenya in those days, so it is unlikely that the Obama family did it. It is particularly unlikely that they did it before the birth, when Obama’s mother was pregnant. It is difficult to travel when you are pregnant (and in those days the planes were not as good as today), and there is and remains a statistical chance of stillbirth. Yet you say that somehow they raised the money, and although they could have traveled after the birth, you say that they traveled before the birth. Well, what is the evidence?
If Obama had been born in Kenya, there would be a record of his mother arriving in Kenya in the archives of the Kenya government.
The critics of Obama, who allege that he was born in Kenya, have not shown anything like this. All they would have to do is to go to those files in Kenya and show that Obama’s mother had been in Kenya in 1961. But they have nothing.
I listened to the tape, and it is not clear that Obama's grandmother understood the question. The translator (who is also apparently a relative) says repeatedly that Obama was born in Hawaii. In any case, it is not evidence. She could be referring to Barak Obama senior, Obama’s father, who certainly was born in Kenya.
The officials in Hawaii say he was born in Hawaii. They have seen his birth certificate in his file.
The certificate (or certification, whatever) of live birth has been accepted as legal proof of Obama's birth in Hawaii by a court in Virginia. (Monday. See: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2123806/posts)
After Berg, several other cases against Obama on the natural born citizen issue were brought in other states.
While most of them just did what the Berg case did, which was to rule that Berg had no standing to sue, some of the others looked at the “evidence” - and concluded that the stuff was absurd.
In Ohio, for example the judge (magistrate) said:
“(Neal) presented no witnesses but himself. From that testimony, it is abundantly clear that the allegations in [Neal]’s complaint concerning “questions” about Senator Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen” are derived from Internet sources, the accuracy of which has not been demonstrated to either Defendant Brunner or this Magistrate … Given the paucity of evidence… this Magistrate cannot conclude that Defendant Brunner has abused her discretion in failing to launch an investigation into Senator Obama’s qualifications to hold the office of President of the United States. ” See:
http://www.oxfordpress.com/hp/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/10/31/ws103108obamasuit.html
In Virginia, which was just ruled on Monday, the judge went further and said that the certificate of live birth was good proof that Obama was born in Hawaii, and there was NO proof presented that he was born anywhere else.
Here is a report from a web posting that is not official, of course, but it seems accurate mainly because the fellow who posted it was AGAINST Obama. He is disappointed, but accepts the ruling. You can find this post at : (
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2123806/posts)
(Note that sometimes the author correctly puts COLB correctly and sometimes he types it as CLOB, but he means certificate of live birth throughout.)
Quotes:
The Court made the following findings:
1. The Certification of Live Birth presented to the court is unquestionably authentic.
The court noted that the certification had a raised seal from the state of Hawaii, had a stamp bearing the signature of the registrar of vital statistics. The court found “wholly unpersuasive” any of the internet claims that the birth certificate was altered in any way. Furthermore, the document itself was accompanied by an affidavit from the State Health Director (of Hawaii) verifying that the document is an authentic certification of live birth. The court held that there could be no doubt that the document was authentic unless one believed that the state of Hawaii’s health department were in on an elaborate and complex conspiracy – and that there is not a shred of evidence that this is the case.
2. The Certification of Live Birth establishes that Mr. Obama is a natural born citizen.
The affidavit of the State Health Director states that the information on the CLOB is identical to the information on the “vault” copy of the birth certificate, and that both documents establish that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu. The Court noted that the CLOB is valid for all citizenship purposes. The court noted our argument that the COLB is not valid for determining citizenship, but referred us to Hawaiian law that states otherwise. “There is no difference between a certificate and a certification of live birth in the eyes of the state. For instance, either can be used to confirm U.S. citizenship to obtain a passport or state ID.” The court found that Hawaiian law makes the COLB valid for all purposes with the exception of determining native Hawaiian heritage for certain state and federal benefits. The court held that if Mr. Obama were born elsewhere and the birth registered in Hawaii, the “place of birth” line on the COLB would reflect that fact. The court stated that there could be no doubt that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii and that any argument to the contrary was fanciful and relied on completely unsubstantiated internet rumors.
3. For that reason, 8 U.S.C. §1401(g), which at the relevant time provided as follows:
“The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: ***(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:…..
is irrelevant to this matter, as Mr. Obama was conclusively born in Hawaii.
4. Mr. Obama did hold dual citizenship in the U.S. and Kenya until he became an adult. When Barack Obama Jr. was born Kenya was a British colony. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children: “British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.” In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UK. Obama’s UK citizenship became an Kenyan citizenship on Dec. 12, 1963, when Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. The court noted that Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:
1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963…
2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.
Thus the court held that as a citizen of the UK who was born in Kenya, Obama’s father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UK status at birth and given that Obama’s father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), thus Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship in 1963.
However, the court further held that the Kenyan Constitution prohibits dual citizenship for adults. Kenya recognizes dual citizenship for children, but Kenya’s Constitution specifies that at age 21, Kenyan citizens who possesses citizenship in more than one country automatically lose their Kenyan citizenship unless they formally renounce any non-Kenyan citizenship and swear an oath of allegiance to Kenya. The court held that there was no evidence that Mr. Obama has ever renounced his U.S. citizenship or sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4, 1982.
The court held that there was no legal requirement that Mr. Obama renounce his Kenyan citizenship or affirm his U.S. citizenship in order to maintain his status as a natural born citizen.
5. Mr. Obama did not lose his U.S. Citizenship based on the acts of his parents, including adoption by an Indonesian citizen. The Court held that no action taken by the parents of an American child can strip that child of his citizenship. The court cited to the 1952 Immigration & Nationality Act, Title III, Chapter 3, Sections 349 and 355, which was in effect in the late 1960s when Obama went to Indonesia, and which stated that a minor does not lose his US citizenship upon the naturalization of his parents or any other actions of his parents, so long as the minor returns to the US and establishes permanent US residency before the age of 21. Thus the adoption of Obama did not serve to strip him of his U.S. citizenship. The fact that Indonesian law does not allow dual citizenship is irrelevant, as U.S. law controls. Furthermore, the Court held that traveling on a foreign passport does not strip an American of his citizenship. The Court noted first that there was no evidence that Mr. Obama traveled on an Indonesian passport (Mr. Berg and others we reached out to for evidence never provided any evidence of this claim or any other of the claims we could have used some proof of.) Nonetheless, the court held that such travel does not divest an American of his citizenship.
The Court makes other holdings and findings that I won’t bother you with here. Needless to say, the decision is wholly against us. The court finds the claims against Mr. Obama’s citizenship “wholly unpersuasive and bordering on the frivolous, especially in light of the complete absence of any first-hand evidence on any critical issue” and further classifies it as “conspiracy theory of the lowest sort, fueled by nothing than internet rumor and those who truly want to believe egging each other on.”
I like the part about “conspiracy theory of the lowest sort.”
Repeat: “The court held that if Mr. Obama were born elsewhere and the birth registered in Hawaii, the “place of birth” line on the COLB would reflect that fact. The court stated that there could be no doubt that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii and that any argument to the contrary was fanciful and relied on completely unsubstantiated internet rumors
Post a Comment