Tuesday, May 31, 2011

22 Page Criminal Complaint Filed With FBI Claims Irrefutable Proof Obama's Online Birth Document A Fraud...

Via WND: - Criminal complaint charges Obama birth record 'forged' - 22-page brief filed with FBI claims 'irrefutable proof' document a fraud - Jerome Corsi This is the first of three articles on the...

New Strunk Filing in New York Supreme Court: Take Note Obots; Grab the Popcorn Patriots!

Take note Obots: This issue is not about race. It is about the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution. All others, I encourage you to read the complete Response embedded below. You might learn some things...

Revealed: Obama Propaganda Report; White House Inappropriately Leveraging Relationships to Unlawfully Generate Support for Agenda

More Revelations: Obama Administration Propaganda Report – Aug 2010: U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Darrell Issa, Ranking Member. As revealed with the CRS...

Understanding ‘The Jack Maskell Memorandum’ (Update)

Originally published November 25th, 2010 · 56 Comments

By Paul Hollrah, Guest Blogger
Paul R. Hollrah
By far the most frequently asked question in America since August 28, 2008, the closing day of the 2008 Democratic National Convention, is this: “Does Barack Hussein Obama meet the constitutional qualifications to serve as President of the United States?”  With every reason to believe that he does not, the second most-asked question has been, “How could every single member of Congress… all 535 of them… fail in their constitutional obligation to properly vet Obama’s qualifications before certifying the vote of the 2008 Electoral College?”
For the past two years Americans have been flooding congressional offices with demands for answers to these questions.  And now we know.  The answer to the first question is, “No, Obama is not eligible to serve as president because he is not a ‘natural born’ U.S. citizen.”  The answer to the second question is, “The Jack Maskell Memorandum.”
But before we approach the question of who Jack Maskell might be, and the role he plays in what history will doubtless record as the greatest single crime of all time, let’s first review the facts surrounding Obama’s eligibility.  Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that, “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”
We know that Obama was not a citizen of the United States at the time the Constitution was adopted, we know that he was at least thirty-five years of age when he took office in January 2009, and we know that he had been a U.S. resident for at least fourteen years at the time he was nominated.  But is he a “natural born” citizen?  What is a “natural born” citizen, and how do we prevent someone who is not a natural born citizen from becoming president or vice president?
When the Founding Fathers met in Philadelphia in September 1787 to sign the final draft of the U.S. Constitution, the physical scars of the War of Independence from Great Britain were still visible all around them and a deep-seated animosity toward all things British colored every aspect of their daily lives.  So is it even conceivable that, just five years and eleven months after Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown, the Founders would have affixed their signatures to a document that would allow an individual with divided loyalties – e.g., an individual with dual US-British citizenship – to serve as president or vice president of the United States?  Not likely.
That is precisely why the Framers found it necessary to include the words, “or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this constitution…”  At the time the Constitution was adopted, every citizen of the thirteen colonies was a British subject, or a citizen of some other country.  And since the founders wished to exclude all those with dual citizenship (divided loyalties) from serving as president or vice president at any time in the future, they provided an exemption of limited duration for those who were officially U.S. residents at the time and who might wish to serve as president or vice president after reaching the age of thirty-five.
For example, George Washington was 57 years of age when he was inaugurated as our first president.  But Washington, born and raised in Virginia, had been a British subject during all of his 57-plus years.  Hence, as a means of qualifying a class of men for the presidency during the first thirty-five years of our nationhood, while preventing any man with dual or naturalized citizenship from ever serving as president, after a pool of “natural born” men had reached the age of thirty-five… limiting access to those offices only to those born to parents, both of whom were U.S. citizens… the founders included the words, “or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this constitution…”
Few Americans, not even our distinguished members of Congress, have ever stopped to consider what those sixteen simple words mean, or, more importantly, who they exclude from presidential consideration.  That is why, after sitting silently in their chairs while the names of 365 Obama electors were read from the Speaker’s rostrum, not a single member of Congress rose to object… preferring instead to hide behind the legal skirts of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and their Legislative Attorney, Jack Maskell.
In the days immediately following Barack Obama’s unlikely election in November 2008, members of Congress began flooding the CRS with questions about Obama’s eligibility.  Jack Maskell, a CRS Legislative Attorney drew the “short straw” and was assigned to provide members of Congress with legal cover.  Maskell’s recently-discovered memorandum, dated April 3, 2009 and distributed to all members of Congress, contains the following words:
“Many of the inquiries have questioned why then-Senator, and now President, Obama has not had to produce an original, so-called ‘long’ version of a ‘birth certificate’ from the State of Hawaii, how federal candidates are ‘vetted’ for qualifications generally, and have asked for an assessment of the various allegations and claims of non-eligibility status…
“Concerning the production or release of an original birth certificate, it should be noted that there is no federal law, regulation, rule, guideline, or requirement that a candidate for federal office produce his or her original birth certificate, or a certified copy of the record of live birth, to any official of the United States government; nor is there a requirement for federal candidates to publicly release such personal record or documentation.  Furthermore, there is no specific federal agency or office that ‘vets’ candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility prior to return.”
Clearly, Mr. Maskell overlooked the words of the 20th Amendment, which reads in part, “If a president shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified…”
When members of Congress swear that they will “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” and that they will “bear true faith and allegiance to the same… so help me God,” they take upon themselves, by direct implication, the obligation to rule on the qualifications of those who emerge from the Electoral College as President and Vice President-elect… in spite of what Jack Maskell’s opinion might be.
Under the U.S. system for selecting our president and vice president, there are three distinct vetting opportunities.  The first occurs when the political parties certify their candidates to the state election boards so that ballots can be printed.  And although it is customary for the parties to certify the eligibility of their candidates under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, the Democratic Party made that certification in 2008 only to the State of Hawaii, which has a statutory requirement that such certification be made.  The remaining 49 states received no such certification in support of the eligibility of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
The second vetting opportunity occurs when the members of the Electoral College meet on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December.  It is the obligation of all members of the Electoral College to cast their votes for individuals who are qualified, under Article II, Section 1. However, in spite of the clear knowledge that Obama had been born in 1961 with dual US-British citizenship, Democratic electors in December 2008 ignored that solemn responsibility.
The third and final vetting opportunity occurs during the first week in January following a presidential election when the Congress meets in joint session to certify the votes of the Electoral College.  It is the third and final fail-safe vetting opportunity.
So the question arises, can the Congress simply ignore its obligation to fully vet those selected as president and vice president-elect by the Electoral College?  The answer to that question, in spite of Jack Maskell’s advice to Congress, is a resounding “no.”  As Edwin Viera, Jr., Ph.D., J.D., a leading authority on the Constitution, argues, “… the question of Obama’s eligibility vel non is not within the discretion of Congress to skirt or decide as its Members may deem politically or personally expedient…  Even by unanimous vote, Congress cannot constitutionally dispense with the requirement that Obama must be ‘a natural born citizen,’ by simply assuming that he is such…”
But what if the members of Congress, on the advice of CRS counsel, fail in that responsibility?  Dr. Viera argues that, if no objection is made on the basis that Obama is not a “natural born” citizen… “the matter cannot be said to have been settled to a ‘constitutional sufficiency’ (emphasis added),” because Congress has no power to simply waive the eligibility requirement… Maskell memorandum or no Maskell memorandum.
When we consider the difficulties involved in reversing the effects of two years or four years of an illegitimate presidency, it is difficult to imagine any single written document in recorded history that has had, or will have, the devastating effect on freedom and the rule of law that the Jack Maskell Memorandum will ultimately have.  When Maskell drafted his memorandum and affixed his signature, it is unlikely that he had any concept of the terrible consequences of his words.  If only he had folded it into a paper airplane and tossed it out the window…
To read previous posts by Paul Hollrah, click here.

Criminal complaint charges Obama birth record 'forged'--Charges Filed With The FBI

Criminal complaint charges Obama birth record 'forged'
22-page brief filed with FBI claims 'irrefutable proof' document a fraud

Posted: May 31, 2011
8:09 pm Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2011 WND

This is the first of three articles on the criminal complaint that scanner-expert Doug Vogt filed last week with the FBI.

An international expert on scanners and document-imaging software filed a 22-page criminal complaint with the FBI, charging that the long-form birth certificate released by the White House is criminally fraudulent.

"What the Obama administration released is a PDF image that they are trying to pass off as a Certificate of Live Birth Long Form printed on green security paper by the Hawaiian Health Department," Doug Vogt writes, "but this form is a created forgery."

Get the inside details on what could be the most serious constitutional crisis in modern history, in "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President," autographed by the author!

Vogt's criminal complaint asserts: "I have irrefutably proven that the Certificate of Live Birth that President Obama presented to the world on April 27, 2011, is a fraudulently created document put together using the Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator programs, and the creation of this forgery of a public document constitutes a class B felony in Hawaii and multiple violations under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Sec.1028, and therefore an impeachable offense."

When the Obama birth certificate "forgery" comes to the public's attention, Vogt continues, "It will surpass all previous scandals including the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration."

Since 1993, Vogt has owned Archive Index Systems Inc., in Bellevue, Wash., a company that sells a wide variety of document scanners worldwide and develops document imaging software.

Read more:



The Door is About to Shut for Americans

Anyone aware of the US Government's real financial situation knows that time is running out.  The Government has $15.5 trillion in admitted debts but those debts, when calculated under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), or 'honest accounting', is over $70 trillion.  $70 trillion divided by 300 million+ Americans works out to $233,000 per person in US Federal Government debt and obligations.  Or nearly $1 million per family of four.

That does not included personal debt, state debt or municipal debt.
This debt plus an economy that has been completely hollowed out by the Federal Reserve system ensures that there is no way the US Government can ever pay off this debt.  And, everyone knows it.
The indications that the US Government is moving very quickly to enact any legal measure or fine against Americans and to make it nearly impossible for any American to escape payment to pay for their sins are everywhere.

We recently commented on how It Is now Easier to Enter the US Than It Is To Leave.  Customs agents and cash sniffing dogs stand on guard at most international US airports checking to make sure no one has more than $10,000 in cash without declaring it.  The standard response to this is: "They are only making it difficult for criminals to move about and to transfer money".
Well, the problem is, the US Government is moving very quickly to make it so almost everyone is seen as a criminal in the eyes of the US legal system.

Now We Are All Criminals
It is already said that there are so many laws, rules and regulations in the US that each person in the US breaks at least one law per day, if not much more - without even knowing it.  But the US Government is becoming more obvious in how it will go about making everyone a criminal and fining them ridiculous amounts of money in doing so.

This week, an American family who said they were just trying to teach their son about responsibility and entrepreneurship was fined $90,000 by the USDA because the teenager sold $4,600 worth of bunnies in one calendar year without a license.  Not only were they demanded to pay $90,000, but if they did not pay within a short period of time the fine could increase to as high as $4 million.
This one case only goes to show how easy it is, within the system, to take any small transgression and to blackmail someone for, for all intents and purposes, every penny they have - or more.

Students to be Forced into the Military to Repay Debts
We also recently commented on how the US college system draws people into large debts (Debtucation) and how student debt is now larger than credit card debt in the US.  It is the US Government itself that has made college education so expensive by offering student loans to anyone who can fog a mirror but again they have shown their intentions by making student loan debt the only debt which can not be forgiven.  A 2005 decree from the Bush Administration stated that student loan debt could not be dissolved through bankruptcy proceedings. The only other scenario where this “no-escape” clause exists is debt from criminal acts and debt from fraud.  In other words, student loan debt is seen, by the US Government, as being similar to proceeds from crime!

What will this mean with more young Americans in student loan debt than any other time?  It's anyones guess but it would not be out of the realm of possibility to force students who can not pay off their debt into the military to repay their debt.

And with the US military with 800 military bases worldwide with US military personnel in 156 countries and US Military bases in 63 countries and currently occupying or attacking Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and with other drone operations in places like Yemen and Pakistan, the US is all but ensuring that it is screwing around in enough places to eventually draw in one of the big boys.  Russia, China or Iran.
And, hey, we Gotta Support the Troops, right?

US Government Eyeing Pensions and Retirement Funds
On the other end of the spectrum, seniors and those in retirement, the US Government recently made it very obvious that funds held in retirement accounts are going to be the first to be taken when times get tough.
In the recent scuffle over raising the debt ceiling, the US Government was short of some funds after reaching the United States' $14.3 trillion debt ceiling last Monday.  Where was the very first place the US Government went to find new sources of funds?  Last week they dipped into state pension funds in order to make payments.
It is no great leap to think that as things worsen in the US Government's financial situation, which is all but guaranteed, that the first thing that will be nationalized will be all tax sheltered retirement accounts.  After all, we all have to do our part to pay for the debts of the Government, right?
Anyone living off of US pensions should be very worried.  And anyone with significant funds in retirement accounts should be running, not walking, to get any funds they can outside of the direct control of the US Government.  We recommend looking at "Unleash Your IRA", a great program for diversifying your IRA internationally.
Get a 2nd Passport
There are two ways to look at the upcoming battle between the US Government and US citizens.  You can stay and fight or you can run and hide.
If you plan to stay and fight we wish you good luck and will try to support your efforts in any way we can.
If you would rather run and hide then one of the first things you should be looking to do at this time is to at least get a second passport.  This is still legal for Americans and there are many options.  We discuss many of them, regularly in our newsletter.

As well, if you have the financial capability, we highly recommend buying some foreign real estate - preferably somewhere you like to live.  Our favorite place, at the moment, is La Estancia de Cafayate in Argentina (email them for more information at tdv@lec.com.ar).

2011 Last Year to Get Out
Most things are still legal in the US.  It is still legal to have foreign bank accounts - although you are required by law to report them to the Government.  It is still legal to get a second passport.  It is still legal to move assets in your IRA outside of the country.  It is still legal to move money outside of the country and buy foreign real estate.

The window of opportunity is closing.  If you live in the US and still have all your assets inside of the US, you likely have months, not years, to internationally diversify your assets and to get your affairs in order.  Anything much after 2011 is taking a big risk of losing it all.

The Government Can
After all, we, as individuals have to live within our means and it is considered a crime if we forcibly take money from others to pay for our debts.  The Government, on the other hand?  The Government Can.

This is Barack Hussein Obama's legal name. The meaning of it disqualifies him from the White House and exposes him as criminal fraud, as this child had it explained to him completely what this name meant in adoption, Islam and Indonesia, that he was no longer American.


from lamecherry 

There has been so much written and conjecture on the forced out into the open Obama passport documents that I have not had much interest in exploring them in the name Soebarkah which appears on the document as one of the listed names of Barack Hussein Obama.

As an exclusive as only found here though, the name Soebarkah is a confirmation of adoption, Obama's Muslim status and a sort of strange Islamic prophecy of the day Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro in that it was not in the stars to last.

Soetoro in the name, in the prefix of SOE links the name to Javanese roots and not Indonesian alone. Why this matters is that Indonesian names reflect region, family and often religion. It is quite obvious or should have been by now in no one has noted it, that the name Soebarkah is a combination and not one word.
The name is Soe Bar Kah.

Soetoro signifies the adoptive father as Lolo Soetoro. Bar is obvious in Barack, but also links to the Islamic Aramic in bar means SON. So we have confirmation of this is the Son of Soetoro.

The Kah is interesting in Indonesian, KAH translates as WAS. In names, KAH is added as a suffix to form a question of "Who?"

So what SOE BAR KAH means is literal, and I'm genuinely surprised with even Indonesian "experts" asked to explain all of this, that none of them had any comprehension of the language of their own nation.

Soe Bar Kah means literally Who is this, but the son of Soetoro.

This name is the actual legal title of Barry Soetoro, his bona fides, that he has been legally adopted, is a Muslim and is an Indonesian from the Javan region.

Just as Johnson in Scandinavian means Son of John, and Johnsen in Dutch means the same in different dialect. What this name on a legal document filed in America as a passport for Barack jr. is his legal manifestation that he is Indonesian, not American, as he has renounced his entire ties which bind to these United States.

If this was American English, it would be I, Barack, am a foreigner, as a name means everything in explaining who the individual is. In Indonesian, this name is telling every person there, on the street or in government, that this tan kid is the adopted son of Lolo Soetoro and a certified Muslim............he is one of the Indonesian clan.

This name Soebarkah is the legal document which would hold up in Indonesian courts as it requires no other documentation. It appearing on a US document signifies it was in use as Obama's defining name outside these United States.

This is Barack Hussein Obama's legal name. The meaning of it disqualifies him from the White House and exposes him as criminal fraud, as this child had it explained to him completely what this name meant in adoption, Islam and Indonesia, that he was no longer American.
This is why this kid wanted to be "president of some country" as he knew damn well even then that America was off limits due to his being British and Indonesian, but the Empire had many colonies he could be president of one day if he slummed around far enough.

What is troubling in this, is Maya Soetoro knows very well what this all means and she has been covering all of this up as a co conspirator.

I find it hard to believe that this blog is the only forensics linguistics expert in all of this, but there you have for the first time someone pulling apart this tri part name in explaining what the prefix, base name and suffix mean for the total legal adopted name.

It has come to that time for someone to say, enough said..........and it might as well be me.

nuff said.


The illegal Social Security number of Obama

Why an illegal needs a Connecticut SSN

Soebarkah's American passport for Indonesian illegals

Indonesian forming names

An Indonesian stab at Obama adoption

Indonesian Suffixes

-kah : adding this suffix indicates that the expression is a question. The suffix -kah is added to the word in the sentence that is the main focus of the question.
examples: siapakah {siapa+kah} = who?
bolehkah {boleh+kah} = may I?


Russia Says IMF Chief Jailed For Discovering All US Gold Is Gone
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers
A new report prepared for Prime Minister Putin by the Federal Security
Service (FSB <http://www.fsb.ru/> ) says that former International Monetary
Fund (IMF <http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm> ) Chief Dominique
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Strauss-Kahn>  [photo
with Putin top left] was charged and jailed in the US for sex crimes
on May 14th after his discovery that all of the gold held in the United
States Bullion Depository

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bullion_Depository>  located at
Fort Knox [photo 2nd left] was 'missing and/or unaccounted' for.
According to this FSB secret report, Strauss-Kahn had become "increasingly
concerned" earlier this month after the United States began "stalling" its
pledged delivery to the IMF of 191.3 tons of gold
<http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/goldfaqs.htm>  agreed to under the
Second Amendment of the Articles of Agreement signed by the Executive Board
in April 1978 that were to be sold to fund what are called Special Drawing
(SDRs <http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/sdr.htm> ) as an
alternative to what are called reserve currencies.
This FSB report further states that upon Strauss-Kahn raising his concerns
with American government officials close to President Obama he was
'contacted' by 'rogue elements' within the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA
<https://www.cia.gov/> ) who provided him 'firm evidence' that all of the
gold reported to be held by the US 'was gone'.
Upon Strauss-Kahn receiving the CIA evidence, this report continues, he made
immediate arrangements to leave the US for Paris, but when contacted by
agents working for France's General Directorate for External Security (DGSE
<http://www.defense.gouv.fr/dgse> ) that American authorities were seeking
his capture he fled to New York City's JFK airport following these agents
directive not to take his cell-phone because US police could track his exact
Once Strauss-Kahn was safely boarded on an Air France flight to Paris,
however, this FSB report says he made a 'fatal mistake' by calling the hotel
from a phone on the plane and asking them to forwarded the cell-phone he had
been told to leave behind to his French residence, after which US agents
were able to track and apprehend him. 
Within the past fortnight, this report continues, Strauss-Kahn reached out
to his close friend and top Egyptian banker Mahmoud Abdel Salam Omar to
retrieve from the US the evidence given to him by the CIA. Omar, however,
and exactly like Strauss-Kahn before him, was charged yesterday
<http://www.cnbc.com/id/43221009>  by the US with a sex crime against a
luxury hotel maid, a charge the FSB labels as 'beyond belief' due to Omar
being 74-years-old and a devout Muslim.
In an astounding move puzzling many in Moscow, Putin after reading this
secret FSB report today ordered posted to the Kremlin's official website a
defense of Strauss-Khan becoming the first world leader to state that the
former IMF chief was a victim of a US conspiracy
ique-Strauss-Khan-victim-conspiracy-force-out.html?ito=feeds-newsxml> .
Putin further stated, "It's hard for me to evaluate the hidden political
motives but I cannot believe that it looks the way it was initially
introduced. It doesn't sit right in my head."
Interesting to note about all of these events is that one of the United
States top Congressman, and 2012 Presidential candidate, Ron Paul [photo
bottom left] has long stated his belief that the US government has lied
about its gold reserves held at Fort Knox.  So concerned had Congressman
become about the US government and the Federal Reserve hiding the truth
about American gold reserves he put forward a bill in late 2010 to force an
audit of them
-to-audit-us-gold-reserves> , but which was subsequently defeated by Obama
regime forces. 
When directly asked by reporters if he believed there was no gold in Fort
Knox or the Federal Reserve, Congressman Paul gave the incredible reply, "I
think it is a possibility."
Also interesting to note is that barely 3 days after the arrest of
Strauss-Kahn, Congressman Paul made a new call for the US to sell its gold
reserves by stating, "Given the high price it is now, and the tremendous
debt problem we now have, by all means, sell at the peak."
Bizarre reports emanating from the US for years, however, suggest there is
no gold to sell, and as we can read as posted in 2009 on the ViewZone.Com
news site:
"In October of 2009 the Chinese received a shipment of gold bars. Gold is
regularly exchanges between countries to pay debts and to settle the
so-called balance of trade. Most gold is exchanged and stored in vaults
under the supervision of a special organization based in London, the London
Bullion Market Association
(or LBMA). When the shipment was received, the
Chinese government asked that special tests be performed to guarantee the
purity and weight of the gold bars. In this test, four small holed are
drilled into the gold bars and the metal is then analyzed.
Officials were shocked to learn that the bars were fake. They contained
cores of tungsten with only a outer coating of real gold. What's more, these
gold bars, containing serial numbers for tracking, originated in the US and
had been stored in Fort Knox for years. There were reportedly between 5,600
to 5,700 bars, weighing 400 oz. each, in the shipment!"
To the final fate of Strauss-Kahn it is not in our knowing, but new reports
coming from the United States show his determination not to go down without
a fight as he has hired what is described as a 'crack team'
-ahead.html>  of former CIA spies, private investigators and media advisers
to defend him.
To the practical effects on the global economy should it be proved that the
US, indeed, has been lying about its gold reserves, Russia's Central Bank
yesterday ordered the interest rate
fts-deposit-interest-rate/2011/05/30/AGg4ZiEH_story.html>  raised from 0.25
to 3.5 percent and Putin ordered the export ban on wheat and grain crops
lifted by July 1st
cOcA?docId=CNG.699dc08a5f873f53071a317e008a7a5b.711>  in a move designed to
fill the Motherlands coffers with money that normally would have flowed to
the US.
The American peoples ability to know the truth of these things, and as
always, has been shouted out by their propaganda media organs leaving them
in danger of not being prepared for the horrific economic collapse
ish-enough-to-believe-the-economic-crisis-is-over>  of their nation now
believed will much sooner than later.   
(c) May 31, 2011 EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this
report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to
its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com.

What No Oil Revenue?

G8 pledges $20 billion to foster Arab Spring.

Not bad for a Friday afternoon's vacation spending spree by a usurper.
As a 16% member of the World Bank, the USA's  G8 share is $3.2 billion of the overall $20 billion. More  Obama deficit spending increases, inflation hiking, borrowed dollars; given to the Arabs no less, the OPEC oil price fixing Arabs.

50% favorability approval rating? Yeah right, there can't be that many village idiots. Impossible.


Compare and Contrast

George W. Bush speech after capture of Saddam Hussein:
The success of yesterday's mission is a tribute to our men and women now serving in Iraq .
The operation was based on the superb work of intelligence analysts who found the
dictator's footprints in a vast country. The operation was carried out with skill and precision by
a brave fighting force. Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many
dangers in the hunt for members of the fallen regime, and in their effort to bring hope and
freedom to the Iraqi people. Their work continues, and so do the risks. Today, on behalf of the
nation, I thank the members of our Armed Forces and I congratulate 'them.

Barack Hussein Obama speech, Sunday, May 1, 2011:
And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the
killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued
our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.
Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on
a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread
to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information
about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of
Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and
authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.
Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in
Abbottabad, Pakistan.

It ain't about speech writers......


States Must Unify To Stand Against The Federal Government

Last week was not a proud moment in Texas history. The state senate buckled under pressure from Washington D.C.

I want a do over.

The issue was a 4th Amendment infringement by the Dept of Homeland Security's TSA, air traffic passenger pat down methods. According to some, Lt Governor Dewhurst arm twisted members of the state senate to kill the bill which would have made TSA procedures illegal in Texas.

The pressure brought to bear by Washington, was the threat to declare an air traffic embargo against the state of Texas, if such a law was passed by the Texas legislature.

It didn't. And the 4th amendment was tossed into the dirt. Texas stood alone for a while on this issue, sadly, before getting on it's knees. This state doesn't have to stay there though. There is something that can be done. The time for respecting the whims of Washington are over.

What is needed is legislative coordination amongst the states. Whenever the need to confront the Feds arises in the future, 10 states, 20 states,... need to unify against the unconstitutional laws coming out of a corrupted central government.

Could the Federal government shut down air traffic, if 20 states had said no more TSA gropings? Nullification. Coordinated Nullification.

These states seeking justice and the rule of law, that attempt to go it alone, are going to be quickly isolated and overwhelmed by the Feds. Every state legislature needs to remember this past week, as a lesson learned.



Barack Obama has played golf 70 times (Photo: AFP)
Barack Obama has played golf 70 times (Photo: AFP)
Can you imagine David Cameron enjoying a round of golf on Remembrance Sunday? It would be inconceivable for the British Prime Minister to do so, and not just because of the usually dire weather at that time of the year. Above all, it would be viewed as an act of extremely bad taste on a day when the nation remembers and mourns her war dead. I can’t imagine the PM even considering it, and I’m sure his advisers would be horrified at the idea. And if the prime minister ever did play golf on such a sacrosanct day he would be given a massive drubbing by the British press, and it would never be repeated.
Contrast this with President Obama’s decision to play golf yesterday, Memorial Day, for the 70th time during his 28-month long presidency. For tens of millions of Americans, Memorial Day is a time for remembrance of the huge sacrifices made by servicemen and women on the battlefield. The president did pay his respects in the morning, laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery, but later in the day traveled to Fort Belvoir to play golf. The story has not been reported so far in a single US newspaper, but was made public by veteran White House correspondent Keith Koffler on his blog. Here’s Koffler’s report:
The business of memorializing our war dead done, President Obama headed out to the Fort Belvoir golf course today, finding his way onto the links for the ninth weekend in a row.
Obama earlier today laid a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and met with families of those killed in battle. But he emerged from the day’s solemnity to go golfing for the 12th time this year and the 70th time of his presidency.
The decision to golf on Memorial Day invites comparison with President George W. Bush, who gave up the game early in his presidency and said he did it out of respect for the families of those killed in Iraq.
Does it matter if the president chooses to play golf on Memorial Day, and for the second time in his presidency (he did so as well in 2009)? I think it does, and it displays extraordinarily bad judgment, not only by Obama himself but also by his advisers. His chief of staff for example should have firmly cautioned against it. President Obama is not just any American but Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. The United States is currently engaged in a major war in Afghanistan with over 100,000 troops on the ground, and more than 1,500 have already laid down their lives for their country.
The least the president can do on Memorial Day is spend the whole day with veterans and servicemen’s families while acknowledging their sacrifice. As Koffler points out above, President George W. Bush stopped playing golf out of respect for the families of Iraq War dead. This demonstrated not only good judgment but humility and respect for the men and women who keep America safe. It is little wonder that, as Gallup reveals in a new poll, US military personnel and veterans give Barack Obama lower marks for his job performance than members of the general public. The president’s actions smack of poor taste, as well a lack of empathy and support for the US military, hardly the kind of leadership the White House should be projecting at a time of war.

What About The 9th and 10th Amendments ????

Excerpts from:
Obama’s ineligibility: Prepare for the fall
By Lawrence Sellin

Andrew Napolitano once asked South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, where in the Constitution it authorizes the federal government to regulate the delivery of health care.
Clyburn replied: “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says that the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do.” Then he shot back: “How about [you] show me where in the Constitution it prohibits the federal government from doing this?” ......

Basically, the permanent political class is saying to the American people: “we’ll do whatever we want and you prove that we can’t do it.”
That is exactly how Barack Obama has been operating and why no one in Washington, D.C. will challenge him


A drunk Texan walks into a bar. In no time at all, the Texan gets into a fight. The bartender, happened to own a trained gorilla that he used as his bouncer. He orders the primate to stop the fight. The melee spills outside, Texan, gorilla and crowd. A few minutes later the Texan comes back in and orders another drink-
"Damn! You give a black guy a fur coat, and the next thing, he thinks he's King Kong."

James Clyburn, the 3rd highest democrat in the House needs to take off his fur coat.


Monday, May 30, 2011

WND Exclusive
Kenya probed claim Obama born in Africa Breaking News
Internal intelligence reports indicate government investigation

Barack Obama for President – of Kenya!

May 30th, 2011 · 2 Comments

By Paul R. Hollrah, Guest Blogger
Barack Hussein Obama will be 51 years, five months, and 16 days old when he completes his Frank Abagnale impersonation on Jan. 20, 2013.  That will be the day when he walks out of the White House for the last time, having played the role of president of the United States for four years, and having brought the greatest, freest, most-prosperous nation on Earth to the very brink of disaster.
So what will we do with such a man… a man who promised a bedazzled electorate in 2008 that his goal was to totally transform the United States of America, a constitutional republic, into a European-style socialist state? Will he be arrested for his crimes and sentenced to spend the rest of his days behind bars?  Or will the members of his party insulate him, insisting that his sham presidency was just their way of having a little fun with us…“water under the bridge”?
I suggest that Barack Obama may have his long-term future already planned… assuming that he will be allowed to leave the country in 2013, a free man. As a man whose boundless narcissism has led him to “sweet-talk” his way into the presidency of the United States… the least qualified man ever to have his finger on the nuclear button… would it be too much of a stretch to imagine him returning to his beloved Kenya, the land of his fathers, to serve as president of that country?
If that sounds a bit farfetched, consider this:  With little notice by the U.S. media, the people of Kenya have paved the way for Obama to do just that.  Dr. Jerome Corsi, in his newly released bestseller,  “Where’s the Birth Certificate?  The Case that Barack Obama is Not Eligible to Be President,” cites evidence developed by three Republican congressmen showing that the Obama administration has spent some $23 million in USAID funds in Kenya, much of it urging a “yes” vote in support of a new constitution.  The new constitution was adopted by national referendum on Wednesday, August 4, 2010… coincidentally, Obama’s 49th birthday.  Consider these facts:
Obama tells us that he was born in Hawaii on Aug. 4, 1961, to an American mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, and to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., of Kenya, a British colony.  Part 2, Section 5(1) of the British Nationality Act of 1948, the controlling legal authority on who is British and who is not, reads, in part, as follows:
“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…”
Obama’s father, a Luo tribesman from Kenyan, was a British subject at the time of his birth.  Therefore, under British law, it is an indisputable fact that Obama was born with dual US-British citizenship “by descent” from his Kenyan father and his American mother.  However, following Kenya’s independence from Great Britain on Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya’s newly-adopted constitution went into effect.  Chapter VI, Section 87[3] of the 1963 constitution provides as follows:
“(1)  Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (Barack Obama, Sr,)… 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 (Barack Obama, Jr.)… 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.”
In other words, on Dec. 12, 1963, through automatic operation of Kenyan law, Obama became a citizen of Kenya, giving him, at least temporarily, dual U.S.-Kenyan citizenship.  Obama did not actively seek British or Kenyan citizenship; they were his by “automatic operation” of British and Kenyan law and “by descent” from his Kenyan father.
However, at the time of their independence in 1963, Kenyans were not too keen on the idea of adults holding dual nationality.  Chapter VI, Section 97[1] of the 1963 constitution provided that:
“A person who, upon the attainment of the age of twenty-one years, is a citizen of Kenya and also a citizen of some country other than Kenya (Barack Obama, Jr.) shall, subject to subsection (7), cease to be a citizen of Kenya upon the specified date unless he has renounced his citizenship of that other country, taken the oath of allegiance and, in the case of a person who was born outside Kenya, made and registered such declaration of his intentions concerning residence as may be prescribed by or under an Act of Parliament.”
Subsection 7, referenced above, gave the Kenyan parliament the authority to allow a two year grace period during which time dual citizens could make their choice of nationality.  And since there is no known evidence that Obama ever took steps to renounce his American citizenship or his Indonesian citizenship… assuming he was granted Indonesian citizenship when adopted by his Indonesian stepfather in 1967… he automatically lost his Kenyan citizenship under the above Section 97 provision on Aug. 4, 1984, his 23rd birthday.  From that day forward, until August 2010, Obama has held either U.S. or Indonesian citizenship, exclusively.
However, the newly adopted 2010 Kenyan constitution brought Obama back into the fold by creating a category of Kenyan citizenship called a “citizen by birth.”  Chapter 3, Section 14 of the 2010 constitution provides as follows:
“(1) A person is a citizen by birth if on the day of the person’s birth, whether or not the person is born in Kenya, either the mother or father of the person is a citizen (of Kenya)”; and
“(5) A person who is a Kenyan citizen by birth and who, on the effective date, has ceased to be a Kenyan citizen because the person acquired citizenship of another country, is entitled on application to regain Kenyan citizenship.”
In other words, Chapter 3, Section 14, Subsections 1 and 5, invest Obama with status as a Kenyan “citizen by birth” and allow him to apply for reinstatement as a citizen of Kenya. The 2010 constitution also reverses the Kenyan policy on dual citizenship in Obama’s favor.  Chapter 3, Section 16 of the new constitution provides that, “A citizen by birth does not lose citizenship by acquiring the citizenship of another country.”
What this tells us is quite disturbing.  It tells us that, since Aug. 4, 2010, Barack Obama has been a citizen of Kenya “by birth,” a dual citizen of the United States and Kenya. Under current policy of the U.S. government, even though he serves as President of the United States, he is obliged to obey the laws of both countries.  It is precisely the reason why the Founding Fathers insisted that only “natural born” citizens should ever serve as president or vice president.  Having been born with dual US-British citizenship, Barack Obama does not qualify as “natural born.”
Chapter 9, Section 137 of the 2010 Kenyan constitution, regarding qualifications for President, provides that:
“(1) A person qualifies for nomination as a presidential candidate if the person… is a citizen by birth”
However, in order to prevent a person with divided loyalties from ever becoming President of Kenya, Chapter 9, Section 137 also provides that:
“(2) A person is not qualified for nomination as a presidential candidate if the person… owes allegiance to a foreign state;”  In short, Chapter 9, Section 137 informs us that, upon completion of his four years in the White House, Obama will be eligible  to serve two five-year terms as President of Kenya… so long as he first renounces his U.S. citizenship.
To suggest that Obama may wish to avail himself of this opportunity, when he is finished with the deconstruction of the American political and economic system, is not so farfetched because seeking the Kenyan presidency will solve two or three very major problems he will have.
First, he will not be forced to endure the massive come-down that all presidents experience when they yield the reins of power to their successors. Obama’s unbridled narcissism will demand that he find another international spotlight, with all adoring eyes focused on him.
Secondly, once Obama has left the White House the mainstream media will no longer feel obliged to protect him from scrutiny by those who are convinced that he was not eligible, at any time, to serve as President of the United States. Investigative journalists, seeking Pulitzers and Woodward-and-Bernstein-style notoriety, can be expected to dig deeply into his personal history, finally exposing the charlatan that he is.  By renouncing his American citizenship and immersing himself in the public life of Kenya and sub-Saharan Africa, he can put himself beyond the reach of American law enforcement.
And finally, renouncing American citizenship and acquiring Kenyan citizenship will give the Obamas something that Michelle has always longed for… a country she can be truly proud of.
As for Obama himself, he will have yet another distinction in addition to receiving the Nobel Peace Prize… after having done absolutely nothing in the interest of world peace.  He will serve as president in a country where they’ve erected a statue of him before… not after… he served as president of the country.  He will finally have achieved something truly remarkable.
Barack Hussein Obama, President of Kenya? Who knows?  When a man of his limited ability can work his way into the U.S. presidency, we should not be surprised at anything he might do.

Paul R. Hollrah

Hollrah is a senior fellow at the Lincoln Heritage Institute and a contributing editor for Family Security Matters and a number of online publications.  He resides in northeast Oklahoma.
If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!


Comment from the blogosphere: Downside? Obama gives downside a whole new meaning. It’s Memorial Day for crying out loud. How about visiting some wounded warriors at Bethesda? Invite the Gold Star Mothers to a White House BBQ? Maybe do something nice for kids orphaned by war? I could go on, but it would be useless.

Obama Goes Golfing on Memorial Day

by Keith Koffler on May 30, 2011
The business of memorializing our war dead done, President Obama headed out to the Fort Belvoir golf course today, finding his way onto the links for the ninth weekend in a row.
Obama earlier today laid a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and met with families of those killed in battle. But he emerged from the day’s solemnity to go golfing for the 12th time this year and the 70th time of his presidency.

The decision to golf on Memorial Day invites comparison with President George W. Bush, who gave up the game early in his presidency and said he did it out of respect for the families of those killed in Iraq.
Obama is out with the three younger aides he typically has in tow on his golf excursions, junior White House staffer Ben Finkenbinder, White House Trip Director Marvin Nicholson, and Energy Department staffer David Katz.
In a sign of his determination to play no matter what, Obama is golfing even though it is currently 95 degrees at Fort Belvoir and it “feels like” it’s 98 degrees, according to The Weather Channel.

Media Ignore Obama’s “Criminal” SS Numbers

Originally published May 24th, 2011 WND.com

If former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin had a Social Security Number issued to her in Hawaii – a state she never lived in – would that raise suspicions among those in the national news media?
Well, the situation is the similar with President Barack Obama, who holds a Connecticut-based Social Security Number, despite allegedly being born in Hawaii, starting his work career in the Aloha State, and never having lived in Connecticut.
Yet the national news media is virtually silent on this potentially criminal fact.
When Fox News finally attempted to explain it, it broadcast false information and then scrubbed it from its website.
When WND asked the White House about it, then–Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dodged the question.
Obama’s mysterious and suspicious Connecticut Social Security Number is a focus of the brand-new No. 1 best-selling book, “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama Is Not Eligible to be President,” by Jerome Corsi, who digs up information far beyond birth certificates.
For those who never wondered about how Social Security Numbers are generated, the first three digits represent the state of the recipient’s mailing address. In other words, if you live or work in Connecticut, for example, the first three digits of your SSN will correspond to the Connecticut code.
The first three digits of Obama’s SSN are 042. That code of 042 falls within the range of numbers for Connecticut, which according to the Social Security Administration has been 040 through 049.

Financial Hocus Pocus

May 30th, 2011
By Aaron Cantor (USAF ret)
I read an article by John Stossel, a business and financial reporter whom I respect a lot, who posed the question: Since America is on the road to bankruptcy, and we have to make some changes, WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
The Peter G. Peterson Foundation gave $200,000 to six think tanks to write budget proposals.
The six are:
American Enterprise Institute
The Heritage Foundation
Center for American Progress
Economic Policy Institute
Roosevelt Institute Campus Network
The Bipartisan Policy Center
All of these organizations have varying ideas on how to handle the problem (boy do they ever).
Have any of these supposed think tanks ever publicly disclosed just where they get their normal funding from?
American Enterprise Institute would reduce the debt-to-gross-domestic product ratio to 60 percent. It is 68 percent now. They would preserve most military spending, but cut social security by giving every retiree an $850 monthly check and not letting 62-65 year olds collect benefits early. The payroll tax would be eliminated on people 62 and older to encourage them to stay in the work force. The age for Medicare would rise to 67 and the program would be revamped into a government subsidy for private insurance. AEI would eliminate farm subsidies and the child tax credit. AEI would replace all current taxes with a consumption tax like the “Fair Tax.”
Most of these outfits are somewhere in the same pasture sidestepping the obvious cow pies under foot., but the one thing that all of them left out of their various plans, is any mention of cutting Congressional or Senatorial Pay or Perks how about making the bums who created this almost insurmountable pile of manure OWN up and PAY up.
According to Mr. Stossel, our government will spend $3.8 TRILLION dollars this year, and he further said (which I agree with), we need to eliminate entire agencies and departments and missions.
The Heritage Foundation comes closest, with the idea of replacing all taxes with a simple flat tax but they would keep deductions for higher education, charitable deductions/gifts and mortgage insurance.
With a flat tax there should be no deductions, one simple form, and everybody pays the same (no wiggle room).
What we need is LESS government, not more.
Cut off Foreign Aid, withdraw from the United Nations, start drilling our own oil, over and above the objections of the tree huggers, and most of all we need to hold all the morons in black robes sitting on judicial benches all full of their own self importance accountable for legislating (making up law as they go along) from the bench starting with the Supreme Court, who in its’ infinite stupidity just ruled 8-1 in Kentucky v. King to give law enforcement the authority to enter your home without a warrant.
The purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to protect citizens’ privacy and property rights; but the Supreme Court’s decision now allows authorities to violate those rights, and to stage a search and seizure of property without obtaining a warrant from a judge.
The “government has denied property and privacy rights in deference to making the job of the police easier, “Judge Napolitano said on Fox News. “Why would we let our own government do to us, what we fought a revolution against 230 years ago?”
Shakespeare’s play Henry the 6th, act 4, scene 2, the character Dick’s line in this scene expresses a sentiment held by many to this very day: “The first thing we do, We will kill all the lawyers.”
I do not advocate that kind of violence but the scary thing is, there are many who do, but most of the politicians ( who for the most part are lawyers by education) seem to be oblivious to the fact that when a pressure cooker reaches a certain temperature, there will be a catastrophic explosion, and a whole lot of people will be burned and/or injured ( and they are the ones who are closest to it).


Listen to internet radio with urbaninfidel on Blog Talk Radio
Wong Kim Ark Revisted

Wong Kim Ark was decided on the Law of Nations
and not English common law!

Wong Kim Ark

Many believe the case of Wong Kim Ark (pictured above) codified English common law as our defacto guide for citizenship. For Sir William Blackstone in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 of his Commentaries of the Laws of England says that, “the children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such.

The US Supreme Court ruled in the case of Wong Kim Ark as follows,

"A child born in the United States, of parent[s] of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil[e] and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States." Justice Horace Gray ( U.S. v. WONG KIM ARK, 169 U.S. 649 (1898))

Justice Horace Gray

Although the Court discussed Blackstone and English common laws concept of legiance and the only exception of birth right citizenship found under English common law which is children born to Ambassadors of a foreign country are excluded from citizenship this ruling looks as though it was constructed under English common law.

Yet the children of the king's embassadors born abroad were always held to be natural subjects: for as the father, though in a foreign country, owes not even a local allegiance to the prince to whom he is sent; so, with regard to the son also, he was held (by a kind of postliminium) to be born under the king of England's allegiance, represented by his father, the embassador. Sir William Blackstone ( Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 of his Commentaries of the Laws of England )

But is this ruling based upon English Common Law or is it based upon the Law of Nations. In researching this eleven words seemed out of place with Blackstone, “but have a permanent domicil[e] and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business.” This condition of residency is not present in Blackstone's commentaries. Yet it is found in Vattel's Law of Nations.

It is asked whether the children born of citizens in a foreign country are citizens? The laws have decided this question in several countries, and their regulations must be followed.(59) By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights (§ 212); the place of birth produces no change in this particular, and cannot, of itself, furnish any reason for taking from a child what nature has given him; I say "of itself," for, civil or political laws may, for particular reasons, ordain otherwise. But I suppose that the father has not entirely quitted his country in order to settle elsewhere. If he has fixed his abode in a foreign country, he is become a member of another society, at least as a perpetual inhabitant; and his children will be members of it also. Emmerich Vattel (Law of Nations, Book One, Section § 215. Children of citizens born in a foreign country.)

Vattel also says that the children born to ministers in a foreign country are excluded from citizenship.

For the same reasons also, children born out of the country, in the armies of the state, or in the house of its minister at a foreign court, are reputed born in the country; for a citizen who is absent with his family, on the service of the state, but still dependent on it, and subject to its jurisdiction, cannot be considered as having quitted its territory. Emmerich Vattel (Law of Nations, Book One, Section § 215. Children of citizens born in a foreign country.)

The ruling has more in common with the Law of Nations than of the Laws of England. Clearly Blackstone's commentaries were used in the arguments and premise of Wong Kim Ark, especially in trying to equate the terms allegiance and subject to the juristiction, but it was Vattel's observations that formed the logic of the court's ruling.

The INS records show that Obama's father had never taken up or even applied for a permanent residence in the United States, his actions show that he had no intention to quit his native country. As such his original allegiance to the British crown were preserved and this allegience was transferred to his son, Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. at his birth.

Even if one was to pass on 14th Amendment citizenship and an obligation of allegiance to the United States to Obama via the citizenship and permanent residency of his mother, he is still a creature of dual allegiances at birth. It is this division of allegiances at birth that disqualifies him as a natural born citizen of the United States.