Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
51 Bullet-Pointed Facts That Dispute Barack Obamas Identity & Eligibility to be President of The USA! Share This
http://www.citizens4freedom.com/Articles/tabid/1387/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/5576/51 -Bullet-Pointed-Facts-That-Dispute-Barack-Obamas-Identity-Eligibility-to-be-President-of-TheUSA-Share-This.aspx
Their definition allows Obama to merely meet what they consider the most easily argued, though obviously unverifiable characteristics of Obamas obscure citizenry, in this case, his birth place. However, unfortunately for Obama supporters, the purposed intent of our founders was not so slight in this matter. They sought to make the meaning of being a natural born citizen the highest, most laudable position of all forms of citizenry. After witnessing the corruption and inbreeding and treasons of monarchal rule, Americas founders desired that becoming President of the United States to be as difficult as possiblepolitically, socially and biologically. All arguments seeking to diminish this truth are reprobate and defamatory, made in the interest of serving ones own political lust, not defending the sovereignty of our Constitution or upholding the value of the blood ransom paid by our people. Hence, logically, our founders induced that the highest form of eligibility for the highest office would be a lawful mandate.
We should set a higher bar, not lower it. It is impossible to choose ones own natural-born citizenship because it is preeminent and incumbent to ones birth. Historical writings, along with related legal precedents strongly suggest this form of citizenship is achieved when natural circumstances make it impossible for that individual to have any citizenship or allegiances other than with the United States at the time they are elected as President. Research of Americas founding culture reveals that a very heavy emphasis was placed on legitimacy at birth. Therefore, it is probable that ones most authentic degree of natural born identity does not occur at birth, but at conception. With this in mind, we must consider that the framers of the Constitution assumed it was commonly understood that the definition of natural-born citizenship for a presidential candidate to mean a citizenship status that was not just achieved by the event of birth but that it was a maintained status from conception to election in order to qualify a sovereign candidate. This is the most complete definition of natural born citizenship possible. There is no other degree of more complete natural circumstances which can establish the status of ones existence. Therefore, theoretically, natural-born citizenship, in its purest, ineradicable form, could be measured by three metrics: 1) Biological conception by two U.S. citizen parents 2) Birth in a geographic region under the protection of the U.S. Constitution 3) Maintenance of that citizenship status without any unnatural interruption of parentage, legal process or administrative procedure. This means that their citizenship has never been achieved by any legal or administration process at or after birth. Dual citizens and expatriates are not natural-born citizens. Those who lose their natural-born status by taking the citizenship of another country or denouncing their natural born U.S. citizenship cannot regain it. A natural-born citizen is one who was born within a geographic region under the protections of the U.S. Constitution AND to two U.S. citizen parents, they being either natural-born or legally naturalized through immigration or repatriation. Despite ongoing, unanswered questions about his geographic origins, Obama does not meet the requirements to be a natural-born citizen for two possible other reasons: 1) His alleged biological father, Barack Obama Sr., was not a U.S. Citizen 2) He was adopted by his muslim, Indonesian step-father, Lolo Soetoro, in the mid 1960s thereby taking Indonesian citizenship, thus forfeiting natural-born status. Preventing an individual with plural loyalties, whether by biological, political or geographic origins, which may present lawful or perceptible doubt as to his allegiances thereof, other than one with the fullmost sovereignty of advanced citizenry, which is that of one who remains natural-born from conception to election, from assuming the great power of this fragile office, was, without tolerance or vulnerability, the exaction of purpose of our fathers to induce the mandate of presidential eligibility upon our blood-ransomed Constitution
Party candidate, Raila Odinga, from 2006 to 2008. Corsi had traveled to Kenya and acquired correspondence and documented evidence showing that Odinga, a fellow Luo tribe descendant and alleged paternal cousin of Obama, had entered into a written agreement with the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF), a highly influential and radical Kenyan Islamic foundation, seeking Odingas support for, among other things, Sharia Law, in exchange for the Islamic groups support of Odingas candidacy. The evidence acquired by Corsi also shows that Obama was aware of this agreement even while he was raising more than a million dollars of American money to support Odingas campaign. The Orange Party Movement is the communist opposition party to President, Mwai Kibakis Party of National Unity (PNU). Obamas involvement in the Kenyan election, while an elected official of the U.S., was clearly a violation the Logan Act which prohibits American politicians from influencing or participating in foreign elections. The Obama Administrations U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, has refused to pursue any investigation of Obamas activities with Odinga in Kenya in 2006 until 2008. In 2008, video of Obamas speeches on behalf of Odinga surfaced on YouTube and several other websites which clearly show Obama stumping for Odinga. In the aftermath of the December, 2007 election, which Odinga lost, the Orange party leadership and members of Kenyas Luo tribe incited violence among his radical constituents. Kenyan Muslims engaged in a week long violent demonstration in which they burned nearly 1000 Christian churches and murdered almost 1000 of Odingas political opposition which are members of the predominantly Christian, Kikuyu tribe. Under the threat of this violence, with the support of Obama and the Bush administration, the Kenyan majority PNU Party was forced to take an unprecedented action in the history of its government by artificially amending its constitution in order to create a leadership position for Odinga who was ensconced as the countrys first Prime Minister in April, 2008. The tragic events and violence of the 2007 Kenyan election were the exact consequences the founders of America were trying to prohibit U.S. government officials from instigating or being influenced by. Obamas geopolitical connections, along with his probable biological relationship with the Kenyan Communist Party, now an active part of the Kenyan government, creates a relationship vulnerable to illicit influence. Obama has now brought that illicit relationship, and all of its consequences, with him into the office of the U.S. Presidency. The founders wisely understood that the mandate of Natural born citizenry for a President is the best possible protection against such vulnerability.
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado. In comparison, unlike the 2008 Hawaiian OCON for Obama, in every other previous Presidential election, the Hawaiian Democratic Party has certified the nomination of their states Democratic candidate with the following words: THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the United States Constitution Notice that the wording of HDPs 2008 Official Certification of Nomination omits the words under the provision of the United States Constitution Upon receiving Hawaiis State Nomination Certification for Obama, which omits the reference to the Constitutional legality of Obamas nomination, the National Democratic Party Office created two separate documents with the same header title, Official Certification of Nomination, both versions were signed by Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Democratic National Convention, and Alicia Travis Germond, Secretary of the Democratic National Convention and notarized by a Denver notary. One of these versions was sent from the National Democratic Party headquarters to each of the 49 states Democratic Party headquarters. However, only the State of Hawaii received an Official Certification of Nomination from the DNC containing the words: the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution The document then lists Barack Obama and Joe Biden as the candidates. However, the rest of the 49 states received a different Official Certification of Nomination containing the words: the following were duly nominated as candidates of said party for President and Vice President of the United States, respectively Why was the state of Hawaiis local Democratic Party headquarters sent a different OCON document from the National Party headquarters than the other 49 states? There is strong evidence suggesting that Hawaiis local Democratic Party officials refused to certify Obamas nomination as being Constitutionally eligible. As a result, Hawaiis Election Commission, headed by Kevin Cronin, jockeying behind closed doors, refused to place Obama on the Hawaiian ballot under Hawaiian Election laws mandating that every candidate seeking placement on the Hawaiian presidential election ballot must be certified as Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States. Since the DPH refused to place this language in its Official Certification of Nomination, Obama, therefore, required that the National Party Committee, headed by none other than Nancy Pelosi,
take responsibility for declaring the constitutional eligibility of his nomination under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, even though his eligibility had never been vetted or verified as legal. This has never happened in the history of Americas vetting endorsement process and indicates that the Democratic National Party leadership, including Nancy Pelosi, was made aware that there was a legal problem with Obamas candidacy. However, the DNC certified it anyway and, in doing so, committed federal election fraud.
6. State Ballot-Fail!
It is the responsibility of each states party head office to certify that their candidate is Constitutionally eligible to serve in coordination with their states laws. Since Obama was not Constitutionally certified to run in the state of Hawaii in 2008, no other Secretary of State, in any state, ever confirmed that Obama was vetted by federal or party authorities in their state prior to being placed on the 2008 Presidential ballot there. In fact, nearly a dozen Secretaries of State, including Hawaiis, have officially refused to reveal any information about the vetting of Barack Obama in their state because they simply cannot even show that he was actually proven to be eligible there.
8. Hawaiian Certi-Fiction
Shortly after PUMAparty.com began clamoring for a more thorough review of Obamas Constitutional eligibility, the image of a document containing sparse information about Obamas alleged birth was posted on the internet by undisclosed sources, from an unknown origin. The image appeared on extreme leftwing websites like the Daily Kos, The Huffington Post and later on two websites claiming to be non-partisan reviewers, Factcheck.org and politifact.com. One of the fact checking sites is sponsored by the Annenberg Foundation from which the Chicago Annenberg Project received a large educational grant. Obama served as the chair on the board of directors for the Chicago Annenberg Project in 2002.
duty in Afghanistan under his legal right to refuse orders that he, as an officer, believes are illegal. According to Lakin, Barack Obama has not demonstrated provable, documented evidence that he is eligible to hold the office of President and is, therefore, not legally qualified to issue orders to the United States military as Commander In Chief. Lakins oath upon becoming an officer is to defend the constitution, not the president. His duty, as an officer to refuse deployment orders he believes are illegal, are legitimate based on clear and concise legal grounds. Despite this fact, however, Lakin pleaded guilty to a circus court under the command of the Obama administrations military staff, and was sentence to six months in prison and dismissal from the service. He has since been lauded and exalted for his sacrifice and commitment to his duty to defend the Constitution. Supporters may contribute to his fund at TerryLakinActionFund.com
reduction of content otherwise prescribed to confirm the bearers natal identity and, essential to verifying ones eligibility to be a candidate for president, the bearers natural born status.
Moreover, the evidence provided with Obamas application may not be reviewed by any third party under this law. Only the Director of the Department of Health is granted with the authority to determine the validity and deadlines required in providing such evidence. In essence, under Administrative Rule 91, the state of Hawaii has empowered a state-level, municipal employee to determine the federal, natural-born status and therefore, the Constitutional eligibility, of any individual, even a sworn enemy of the United States, seeking the most powerful office in the world.
1992 to practice law in Illinois, the application asked if he had ever used an alias. He stated that he had not at that time. There is evidence that suggests Obama was not honest about his use of other names throughout his life. Recent passport application information submitted by his mother in the 1960s reveals that Obama may have had a third surname of Subarkah which his mother had written on the application.
To date, no administrator, or official of the Obama administration has ever confirmed that Obama was born in Kapiolani Medical Center. To date, Obamas operatives have failed to identify the identity of Obamas actual birthing doctor.
The Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth which has been misrepresented as the federally accepted, official document issued by the state of Hawaii for Barack Obamas birth shows Obamas fathers race as African. Unfortunately, this term violates the U.S. Department of Healths acceptable classifications of race for official birth certificates. According to NVSD protocols, Obama Sr. is classified as a Negro in 1961, not African. The term African is not even an option in the NVSD manual. Africa is a continent not a race. For example, there are white people from Africa, but they would not be categorized as African. Using this premise, we could argue that Obamas Certification of Live Birth should also list his mothers race as North American? If using geographic association in describing Obamas mothers race is so ridiculous, why is it acceptable to explain his fathers? The use of the term African to describe the race of Obamas father is yet another diminishment to the credibility and authenticity of Obamas natal records. The inclusion of such a non-specific, vague, unclassifiable, misrepresentative term to describe an individuals demography only raises yet more doubts about the ability of the Hawaiian Health Department to convey accurate vital statistics documentation.
Was the marriage even legal given the evidence that Obama Sr. was already married to a woman in Kenya?
were never a part of some crazy-minded conspiracy but, instead, were simply the result of being included in the Hawaiian Health Departments birth registration lists after Obamas birth was registered by Obamas grandparents, more than likely, for the simple reason of making sure their daughter and grandson could receive state benefits as resident citizens of the U.S. Obamas grandparents were indeed residing at the published address found in the announcements. However, ignorant, hostile Obama supporters enjoy the opportunity to claim that so-called birthers believe a conspiracy of such magnitude that Obamas birth announcements were planted in the Hawaiian papers in 1961 just in case Obama might run for president some day. This is a ridiculous canard. Only a blind ideologue would fail to realize that birth announcements do not verify Constitutional eligibility in the first place. Therefore, both sides of the argument, either lauding birth announcements or ridiculing them, as a viable part of any conspiracy to promote the legitimacy of Obama is idiotic. If Obamas birth announcements were not automatically conveyed by the registrar, they were more than likely submitted in collaboration with his mother or grandparents as a practical matter in order to simply share the news of Obamas birth with the community and to, possibly, act to secure Obamas eligibility for welfare and baby formula, not a nomination to the presidency. However, without publishing the identity of the registrant, the editors of the newspapers printed all of the weeks announcements based on typically practiced protocols after receiving the official birth lists from the Hawaiian Department of Health. There was nothing premeditated or fraudulent about this. Municipal laws were followed and journalistic standards were correctly assumed considering the official source in the newspapers view. The possible breakdown in accuracy occurred as a result of the Department of Healths legal ability to include foreign births in the Hawaiian birth registration lists and the registrant omitting birth location information, while the papers did not print it any way.
that there is no original birth record on file for Barack Obama. In a televised interview, Adams reported that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama does not even exist in the Aloha State. Adams statements conflicted directly with repeated affirmations by public officials in Hawaii that they had seen or had inspected Obamas birth records that would document his representations that he was born in the state. There is no birth certificate, said Adams after leaving his position with the Elections Office and now teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green. Its like an open secret. There isnt one. Everyone in the government there knows this. I managed the absentee-ballot office. It was my job to verify the voters identity.
One expert, with more than 30 years of experience with Adobe called the image a literal joke. Among many of the documents failures at authenticity are the artifacts revealing it was produced by a computer printer, not a typewriter, technology which did not exist in the State of Hawaiis Health Department in 1961.