No Christmas for ObamaLand

Over the past few weeks I have posted additional material concerning the COLB forgery. I have posted one minor piece a bit  off key to keep one person off track. But I had a reason for this. While he has been  chasing his tail, I have been distributing material and statements to lawyers and other people.  As mentioned in my previous post, about this person and what steps I have taken. But as they say on tv “But wait there’s more”

Here is the Christmas present to all of ObamaLand and this lawyer.  

I have updated my previous post to include the origional image that was to be posted, but swapped to keep Loren Christopher Collins, Obot lawyer and George Soros little hack’s panties in a wad. When in reality the only thing that he did was to now push all the evidence into other peoples hand including my relatives who are personal  friends of Chuck and Sally Heath. I will leave it to the readers to find out who Chuck and Sally Heath are.

So all in ObotLand, you can thank Loren Christopher Collins for the information about the COLB forgery, including a much more detailed analysis and statements being in the hands of those who can really use it.

Obot Lawyer misrepresents the facts – what else is new

A lawyer claiming to know ’something’ about images is pawning himself as a legitimate authority on the Obama COLB forgery. 

In my previous posts I have indicated that FactCheck #2 the one with out the SEAL is forged. Here is an image that he has posted upon his site.  Here is his claim ‘Seriously, to illustrate just how much Steve shrunk the image to suit his purposes, and how ridiculously small his image is compared to FactCheck’s original photo, here’s a side-by-side comparison of how Steve’s image compares to the size of the original FactCheck image it’s derived from:”

In reality, I resized the image for posting only a reference image only and allowed the readers to judge for themselves by downloading the FactCheck image off FactCheck’s own web-site. So there would no confusion and accusation of altering their image. This way the people could judge for themselves, unlike a Lawyer manipulating  and twisting facts. This blog host only allows for a maximun size of 575 x 478 within the posts. The origional size as mentioned is 2304 x 3072, so his claim of 3% is again showing his lies and ignorance, and stupidity.

Update: An Obot lawyer, who is too stupid and arrogant to realize that the image above, has been resized, by this blog hosting. Has decided to post a comparison image. The image below demonstrates that the FactCheck people used to verify the COLB were not only inexperienced, but were deceptive as well. They were not qualified to even photograph the document and took every effort to decieve anyone looking at it, just like the questionable lawyer. Regardless of the level of focus that the deranged lawyer is pawning, there are no defects from the embossing that are visible in other images. Since he can’t explain that away, he’s throwing a temper tantrum, besides it’s great watching him take the bait. 

However just to prove the lawyer wrong again and show his lies.

Again proving my point that the FactCheck images are large in size and would indicate any defects of embossing as they show clearly all the other defects, lettering, ect.

Only one question needs to be asked; why is every other item and defect detected in this image with the exception of the SEAL. Why is ALL the lettering, including the date indicated, but no evidence of the SEAL.

Or under various filters the same, every letter and defect is dected, with the exception of ANY evidence of an embossed seal, and that is a fact.

Once again, Obot lawyer caught in lies, fraud, and deciet.  But just as important as his attempting to lie about the facts. The fact remains that the embossed seal on the FactCheck forgery does not contain what the State of Hawaii declared what a state issued document contains. There is no way around that. 

Here are some other Birth certificates, in every instance you can detect evidence of the embossing.

So why is the embossing defects clealy visible in other peoples COLB, but not Obama’s and more importantly nowhere on FactCheck #2?

Even the  Nordyke twins’s seal is apparent. On both of them.

Or this on from the back, where not only the seal is visible, but both date and signature stamps also. Contrast increased in seal area.

Here is the same area off the FTS COLB, note that there is no breakage or defects where the FactCheck #3 is.

Every defect, all the lettering, the fake date stamp is visible, but no where is there an indication, breakage, defect of any embossed seal.

See for yourself;

http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/prove-it-to-yourself-so-easy-anyone-can-do-it/

http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/prove-it-to-yourself-%e2%80%93-so-easy-anyone-can-do-it-pt-2/

http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/13/prove-it-to-yourself-pt-3/

Prove it to yourself – Pt 3

In the first and second part of this series, we have looked at the forged COLB as presented and shown the irregularities between an actual one issued by the State of Hawaii and the ones presented by TheDailyKos, Fight the Smears [FTS], and FactCheck. Now for the blank template itself and the simple question. How or why would a blank ‘Certification of Live Birth’ be showing any indications of a SEAL present on it.  Here is the original Blank Hawaiian template that has been circulating on the internet. Notice that the blanked out certificate number is identical to the one posted on FTS.  The process for the issuance of a Birth Certificare or Certification of Live Birth, is that the data is printed out on via a printer, the information checked and verified and then a Seal from the issuing authority and signiture is applied. So the question remains, how does a blank certification of live birth exist with anomolies exist.  Here is a Hawaiian Blank Template with filters applied to bring out the anomolies in the area where an embossed seal is normally applied and the date stamp. Note this is also the same date that appears on the Obama COLB.  Here is the Hawaiian Blank COLB. Note that the Certificate number is blacked out and the date stamp is visible Jun 6 2007. I recieved several comments that asked me to post the Hawaiian Blank template.

Here are three different images showing the anomalies in the area that a SEAL would be applied.  All on the blank template.

Now we look at an what an Obama supporter claims as false representation on the FactCheck image.

To quote his lies; “Now a real expert, or even just a person of reasonable common sense, would chalk this up to factors like how the photo isn’t in focus, making it difficult to see a pressure seal, or how it might be obscured somewhat by the shadow. Here, for instance, is how one portion of this JPEG looks, without any modification”

The is attempting to take a portion, at the furthest point of the image and state that, ‘that area represents the entire image’. Here is another image of the FactCheck forged document.

Here is the comparison in relation to his section.

An Obot lawyer, who is too stupid and arrogant to realize that the image above, has been resized, by this blog hosting. Has decided to post a comparison image. The image below demonstrates that the FactCheck people used to verify the COLB were not only inexperienced, but were deceptive as well. They were not qualified to even photograph the document and took every effort to decieve anyone looking at it, just like the questionalbe lawyer. Regardless of the level of focus that the deranged lawyer is pawning, there are no defects from the embossing that are visible in other images. Since he can’t explain that away, he’s throwing a temper tantrum.

UPDATE 12/24/2009 As I have posted a new post today I am inserting the origional image that was to go here. Here is the one that I changed from to keep the Obot’s off-guard. The original was to have stated ‘Some degree of being in focus’ and an cropped section showing that even the date was visible.

Now even with the image above, there is no indication of anything in the area where there should be.

Now here is where is mis-representing the facts. He is openly pawning the DailyKos image as proof that there is a seal and that makes it legit. Now to destroy all myths about the Obama COLB being a legitimate State issued Certification of Live Birth.

Here is an inverted image of the DailyKos COLB. There are defects that indicate in the area [region] of where a seal should be that there are something a miss. He attempted to use ‘Edge Detection’ as a means of bringing out the edges of the breakage from the embossing. I will his own image and prove him wrong. Here is the image that he has posted ‘claiming that a seal is present.’ Note the indications of a supposed seal and date stamp with the first four images above, they are identical.

The original sixe of the DailyKos image was 2427 x 2369 – 16 million colors, over 17 megs in size.

The silver stake in the forgery that we are gong to expose is that the ‘Date Stamp’ is actually a layer superimposed on the image and is not actuall a stamp as indicated by the State of Hawaii.

Here is a crop of the image posted on the debuker’s web-site.

Notice the lines under the date stamp [here the date is reversed, as the stamp is supposed to be applied to the back of the document.]  There is no indication that any of the lines under the date stamp have been altered by the application of the stamp.  Now let’s look the same area on the Hawaiian Blank template. Also note that where there is supposed to be an ‘embossed seal’ shows the same anomolies as in the Blank Hawaiian Template also.

Lets invert the DailyKos crop again and see the entire crop area.

Now for a close-up of just the ‘Date Stamp’ area

Now compare the above to the Obama COLB Date Stamp region [below] and see if you can see any line breakage from a stamp being applied to the document. Notice the ‘bleed-through’ of the date stamp being aver-layed on top of the image versus being applied to the back.

The Date Stamp was applied as a layer to the Blank Hawaiian Template and they used that image to create the Barack Obama DailyKos COLB, that image was used again on Fight the Smears ‘FTS’ website.

As even State of Hawaii’s Department of Health, Director of Communications Janice Okubo, stated “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”

The same anomolies and marking across the ‘Blank Hawaiian Template’, The DailyKos image, indicating that the same image was used to create them.  That the indications that they claim are an embossed seal and date stamp are nothing more then a layer applied to the image to make it appear that it was real.

There has been no proof that the signiture that FactCheck posted was even on the Obama COLB. Bottom line, the Blank Hawaiian template was used to create the DailyKos image and that it was never issued by the State of Hawaii. The FactCheck forgery used a non-State of Hawaii SEAL as indicated by the following e-mail.

Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it Pt 2

In an ongoing effort to educate those about the COLB fogery. I have been holding some cards back. Now it’s time to ”Cry Havoc! And slip the dogs of war”.

There are those that claim, that the COLB off “FTS’ Fight the Smears is scanned and therefore defects and other items are not going to be picked up. Or that the high resolution images off FactCheck are just as deceptive. Well lets take a look at these. First off the image off The DailyKos is (w) 2427 x (h) 2369 to compare this to the average users desktop which currently is (w) 1280 x (h) 1024 – hence this document the DailyKos posted is over two (2) times the size, the even higher resolution images off FactCheck come in at a whopping (w) 2304 x (h) 3072 or close to three (3) times the size of the standard desktop resolution, some of the FactCheck images are rotated to the side and therefore some are (w) 3072 x (h) 2304 respectfully.

There is a filter that can be applied to digital images called Statistical Image Enhancement [We will refer to this as SEI].  Which is defined as ‘The present invention relates to image enhancement by exploiting statistical properties of reference images. In particular, images may be sharpened by reconstructing missing frequency components in accordance with statistical constraints that are determined from higher order statistical properties of a reference image that corresponds to the difference of the original image and a lowpass filtered version thereof. This form of statistical image enhancement may also be applied to image and video coding in order to achieve superior image qualities at higher compression gains by transmitting statistical properties of the coding error together with the encoded images.’ 

Digital enhancement is routinely done in the field of astronomy. With the advent of CCD imaging, and software that allows even the basic amateur astronomers, to capture and enhance images caputred in with the  basic of telescopes.  Go to the Meade Telescope web-site and browse through the gallery section, or a simple google search of the same. Here is a good resource, http://www.willbell.com/aip/index.htm

Now this leads us to the images posted on the internet refered to the the previous “Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it”  Some comments that I recieved complained that MS Paints is to basic a program, that is the point, without any special software, it is possible to detect the forgery.  Now let’s move on to further establish the forgery is self-evident.

There is a nifty freeware program called ‘Image Analyzer’. This program will be a treat for most computer users as it can manipulate pictures from the net or digital cameras. 

Now we are going to take the next stair up the forgery staircase. If you have downloaded and kept the images off the original “Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it” you can use the same ones for this exercise. Off my blog are some additional images. Download the following images. The Decosta Birth Certificate, The Tomoyasu Birth Certificate, The Covered 1990 Certificate, The Edith Rear images.  Then after installing Image Analyzer, open the individual images and then go to the menu bar and select the ‘Operations’ – ‘Color Correction’ – ‘Statistical image enhancement…’ option, a pop-up will appear with the mathematical equation and the default entry of 0.5.  You can change this or keep it and then click on ‘OK’, at this point the process will begin and depending on the size of the image, your compter’s processing power it might be a few seconds to even a minute.

Notice that in the above images and the original ones in the previous exercise, you can clearly see the indications of the SEAL being applied to the certificates and certifications with the exceptions of FactCheck #2. WHY? Is this not supposed to be the same document as the DailyKos document (which again, HAS NO SEAL, but that was apparently scanned), or ‘FTS’ Fight the Smears (again another scanned image that has no SEAL), or the FactCheck #3 that clearly shows an embossed SEAL (but not the type defined by the State of Hawaii), so how does FactCheck #2 account for it’s existence?

Here is an original Hawaiian Certification and the SEI version;

Even this one that is NOT scanned shows evidence of the embossed SEAL.

So why doesn’t the following images show any evidence of an embossed SEAL?

FTS – Fight The Smears

The DailyKos supposed scanned imaged [resized from the original]

Or FactCheck #2

So in reality we are not talking about ONE image or document that does not contain the SEAL, we are talking about the DailyKos image that was posted in mid-June 2008 [that is a high resolution image], the FTS image posted in Aug 2008 and the FactCheck # 2 document [another high resolution] image posted after that. Now, just to be fair, here is the FactCheck #3 that does show embossing of a non-State of Hawaii issued SEAL applied. [Image resized, and area enlarged to see embossing visible]

Now I would like to remind you what the State of Hawaii has stated.

The SEAL is applied by machine and there is lettering, that lettering being “Department of Health” and “State of Hawaii”. So how does the Seal disappear and reappear and disappear off the same document?

Part 3 will also explore another aspect of digital enhancement.

“Cry Havoc! And slip the dogs of war”.

Unethical Lawyer – FBI, BAR, and Local Authorities Contacted

Is anonymous speech a right?

Yes. Anonymous speech is presumptively protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Anonymous pamphleteering played an important role for the Founding Fathers, including James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, whose Federalist Papers were first published anonymously. And the Supreme Court has consistently backed up that tradition, ruling, for example, that an Ohio law requiring authors to put their names on campaign literature was a violation of the First Amendment. Indeed, the Supreme Court has ruled that protecting anonymous speech has the same purpose as the First Amendment itself: to “protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ­ and their ideas from suppression.”

Was Loren violating my 1st Amendment Constitutional rights when he posted his blog entry?

The U.S. Supreme Court characterized in 1995 as “an honorable tradition of advocacy and dissent.” Accordingly, Steele wrote, a court should not order the unmasking of an anonymous Internet poster unless a plaintiff offers strong proof of defamation.

“We are concerned that setting the standard too low will chill potential posters from exercising their First Amendment right to speak anonymously,” Steele wrote. “The possibility of losing anonymity in a future lawsuit could intimidate anonymous posters into self-censoring their comments or simply not commenting at all.”

DEFAMATION

A statement is defamatory if it “tends to injure the plaintiff’s reputation and expose the plaintiff to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, or degradation.” Phipps v. Clark Oil & Ref. Corp., 408 N.W.2d 569, 573 (Minn. 1987).

Anonymous Speech

First, the First Amendment protects anonymous speech. See Buckley v. Am.Constitutional Law Found., 525 U.S. 182, 200 (1999). The Supreme Court has noted that “Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.” McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Common, 514 U.S. 334, 357 (1995). Indeed, “Under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent.”

Second, the protections of the First Amendment extend to the Internet. See Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 870 (1997). Courts also recognize that anonymity is a particularly important component of Internet speech.

“Internet anonymity facilitates the rich, diverse, and far ranging exchange of ideas [;] … the constitutional rights of Internet users, including the First Amendment right to speak anonymously, must be carefully safeguarded.” Doe v. 2 The Mart.com, Inc., 140 F.Supp.2d 1088, 1092, 1097 (W.D.Wash.2001).

Why is anonymous speech important?

There are a wide variety of reasons why people choose to speak anonymously. Many use anonymity to make criticisms that are difficult to state openly ­ to their boss, for example, or the principal of their children’s school. The Internet has become a place where persons who might otherwise be stigmatized or embarrassed can gather and share information and support ­ victims of violence, cancer patients, AIDS sufferers, child abuse and spousal abuse survivors, for example. They use newsgroups, Web sites, chat rooms, message boards, and other services to share sensitive and personal information anonymously without fear of embarassment or harm. Some police departments run phone services that allow anonymous reporting of crimes; it is only a matter of time before such services are available on the Internet. Anonymity also allows “whistleblowers” reporting on government or company abuses to bring important safety issues to light without fear of stigma or retaliation. And human rights workers and citizens of repressive regimes around the world who want to share information or just tell their stories frequently depend on staying anonymous ­ sometimes for their very lives.

Anonymous communications have an important place in our political and social discourse. The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A much-cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads:

Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.

This lawyer, in an attempt to VERIFY my credentials, has accessed my personal information, which is none of his damn business and posted my identity on the internet, without my permission and fully knowing to incite vindictive action and personal bodily harm.  Therefore I will post his to expose his unethical action, in violating my 1st Amendment Constitutional Right.

Unlike myself Loren aka LorenC posts links from his blog to his web-site and biography, therefore in no way attempting to blog anonymously or protect his or his family’s identify, based on the sensitive nature of my research and material.

I have been in contact with the local authorities, the FBI, and am in the process of filing with The Georgia Bar Association.

I have also forwarded all e-mails, blog posting that reference anything relation to the unethical action by Loren Collins.  Most of the information that he has is wrong. 

INTERNET LAW – Employee Blogs Pose Potential Problems for Businesses

http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1629

 
Georgia Bar Assoc search has the following information posted on Loren Collins
 
Mr. Loren Christopher Collins
Law Office of W Bryant Green III PC
Atlanta, GA 30308
 
Here is what Loren has to state about himself;

www.lorencollins.net

Loren has divulged  personal information without my consent or permission.

I have screenshots of his posts from other blogs that have been sent by others;  wherehe boasts about ‘oust’ing’  me.

Loern Collins is a member of the Georgia Bar Association

http://www.gabar.org/directories/member_directory_search/?formsubmit=yes&FIRST_NAME=Loren&LAST_NAME=Collins&section=&COMPANY=&lawschool=&CITY=&STATE=GA&ZIP=&submit=Search+Directory
 
 

Google has the following information on 

Loren Christopher Collins

maps.google.com

260 Peachtree Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 522-5330

Loren was a write in candidate for Independent write-in candidate campaign http://voteloren.com/ I guess this explains his ethics. He wants to part of the DC cesspool.

 In light of the current political situation, if anything happens to me or my family.  I wanted  some to be able to see where this Obot was involved.  

I have contacted the local FBI office and local authorities am forwarding any and all threats recieved to both them and the local authorities.  I  have filed a complaint with the local Police Department and have contacted his employer listed and have sent three messages, to this end. I have not hear back.  

I have also sent copies of his information and actions to the local news, both TV and paper.

I will be expanding this entry.

Updated; Additional information and references added. Layout changed and text revised.

Prove it to yourself – So easy ANYONE can do it

So easy ANYONE can do it

For over 15 months I have been stating that the Obama COLB posted on Fight the Smears and FactCheck are forgeries. The Obama supporters have attempted to ridicule and misrepresent the facts, of those who question the validity of a single document, the Certification of Live Birth posted on Fight the Smears and FactCheck.

Here lies the challenge to everyone that wants to see for themselves, by their own hand evidence of document forgery.

Here are the files that you will need, please note that these image are HIGH Resolution images with the exception of the FTS one, all the others are large images.

 COLB #2 without SEAL

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_3.jpg

size 2304 x 3072

Date Signature

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_9.jpg

size 3072 x 2304

 Raised seal

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_1.jpg

size 2304 x 3072

Veritcal #3 with SEAL

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg

2304 x 3072

 COLB #3 in its side

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_2.jpg

size 3072 x 2304

 FTS

http://www.fightthesmears.com/images/28.jpg

size 585 x 575

DailyKos

http://palabre.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/bo_birth_certificate-kos.jpg

size 2427 x 2369

All you need to do is the following;

1. Download the files and save to your hard drive.
2. Browse to the folder that you saved the files to.
3. Right click on the file and in the menu select ‘Open with’ and choose ‘Paint’
4. This will open the selected file in Microsoft Paint.
5. You don’t have to resize the image, as it would be better if you viewed if  full size.
6. With the image opened, you have 2 options. Go to the Menu bar and select ‘Image’ and then ‘Invert colors’ or use the Ctrl + I keys.
7. Save that file as xxxxInv, where xxx is the original file name and INV stands for Inverted.
8. Now compare the images.
9. Note the following;
10. 28.jpg has no SEAL applied to it
11. birth_certificate_1.jpg shows CLEAR indications of an embossed SEAL.
12. birth_certificate_2.jpg shows CLEAR indications of an embossed SEAL.
13. birth_certificate_3.jpg shows NO indications of an any line breakage and paper perforation by anything let alone an embossed SEAL.
14. birth_certificate_5.jpg shows CLEAR indications of an embossed SEAL.
15. birth_certificate_9.jpg is the
16. bo_birth_certificate-kos.jpg shows NO indications of an any line breakage and paper perforation by anything let alone an embossed SEAL.

There you have your evidence, three different COLB posted. Using only your operating system, and a very simple graphics program with nothing else you have been able see with your own eyes the evidence of document forgery. Without having to adjust the brightness or contrast, hue and saturation, you can plainly see the evidence. How can indentations and perforations be clearly seen on one image and totally absent the next?

Obama’s Birth Certificate Forgery Proven

I have been looking into the Obama Birth Certificate.  Here’s what can be said.

Currently there are two different Birth Certificates. One off Obama’s web-site and the other on FactCheck. Here is the one on His web-site.

Notice that it does not have three items, Date stamp, signiture, or seal. The seal is embossed. Hence would clearly be visible.

It COULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED BY THE STATE OF HAWAII.

Even if it was sent in a flat box, it is still missing the requied items, from the State. Nor would the Sate release the document electronically as some Obama supporters have suggested.

If the BC on his website was released by any official State Dept, it would have been notorized with the embossed SEAL, signed, and dated before it was released to ANYBODY. Including Obama himself.
If it was printed out by the Dept of Health via computer, it would have to have checked, verified, and Sealed, dated, and signed, before it was released to ANYBODY. Precaution to ANY official document.

The dept official stated that it should have the seal and date. Janice Okubo.

No let’s go to the FactCheck Birth Certificate.

Although this looks like a “Certified” Birth Certificate it is a forgery.  It does appers to have the date stamp, and signiture, however the SEAL is the give away to forgery.

Here is an actual Hawaii Birth Certificate;

Notice the embossed SEAL. Now we will look at the seal. We cropped the seal, flipped it, increased the contrast and look what we have. Below is the cropped/enlarged SEAL off a known good Hawaii Birth Certifcate.

Clearly able to read the following: “Department of Health” and “State of Hawaii”

[The above SEAL is NOT on Obama's]

Now lets do the same with the embossed Sael off the FactCheck Birth certificatem, and see what we get.

again, another shot

Whats that, NO lettering stating where it was “Certified” from:

There IS NO lettering in the embossed SEAL.  There is NO “Department of Health” and “State of Hawaii” Some have e-mailed me claiming they can see the lettering… Sorry folks, the State of Hawaii confirmed that it is NOT their seal used. You can clearly see the difference between the two, and one is a fake seal. The fake seal is on Obama’s.

Below is a side by side comparison between the two seals. For all the Obama supporters out there who claim they see things on the seal that is not there. The one on the left is from an actual Hawaiian Birth Certificate and the one on the right is from the Obama Birth Certificate from FactCheck. OK, here it is again, the one on the left is REAL, the one on the right is Obama’s. Sorry if you tell the difference between right and left.

Here is an e-mail that I recieved from the State of Hawaii.

Do you understand what it says.  The official State seal used by the Department of Health, has lettering embedded into the seal.

Obama’s does not have any lettering and is not an official seal from the State of Hawaii.

It’s a forgery.  Obama can’t porduce a valid Birth Certificate, nor can he prove Natural Born Citizenship.

Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetor when he moved to Indonesia and the following is his “Official” registration at school in Indonesia.

Notice the name: Barry Soetoro Nationality: Indonesian Religion: Muslim

There it is folks. Obama busted!

I have been swamped with people saying that comparing Birth Certificates from two different states is not a valid comparison.  Here is an official US Guide for Birth certificates. There are standards for Birth Certificates, and the information contained therein.  The short form is limited in data, hence the long form or “Vault” copy prefered.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/techap99.pdf

 

 

 

Standard certificate of live birth

The U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth, issued by the Public Health Service, has served for many years as the principal means of attaining uniformity in the content of the documents used to collect information on births in the United States. It has been modified in each State to the extent required by the particular State’s needs or by special provisions of the State’s vital statistics law. However, most State certificates conform closely in content to the standard certificate.

The first standard certificate of birth was developed in 1900. Since then, it has been revised periodically by the national vital statistics agency through consultation with State health officers and registrars; Federal agencies concerned with vital statistics; national, State, and county medical societies; and others working in public health, social welfare, demography, and insurance. This procedure has assured careful evaluation of each item for its current and future usefulness for legal, medical, demographic, and research purposes. New items have been added when necessary, and old items have been modified to ensure better reporting or, in some cases, dropped when their usefulness appeared to be limited.

1989 revision

 

–Effective January 1, 1989, a revised U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth (figure 4-A) replaced the 1978 revision. This revision provided a wide variety of new information on maternal and infant health characteristics, representing a significant departure from previous versions in both content and format. The most significant format change was the use of check boxes to obtain detailed medical and health information about the mother and child. It has been demonstrated that this format produces higher quality and more complete information than do open-ended items.

 

 

Obama’s COLB is forged

The Hawaiian COLB contains security features that some might be be aware of. The lines on the paper are designed to prevent forgery and fraud. I will post several images of real Hawaiian Birth Certifications and Obama’s which can be seen as a forgery and a fake.

Here we have an actual Hawaiian Birth Certification.

I have adjusted the contrast and brightness and flipped the image to be able to read the SEAL and Date

Notice the impression of the embossed SEAL and Date stamp.

Here is another Hawaiian BC found on the internet

This one we will use to again, compare the Obama forgery. Notice that the SEAL’s are in the same general area on both.

Now here is the Obama “COLB” posted on “Fight the Smears”

Notice that there is NO indications of a date stamp, or embossed SEAL.

We will now compare the area were the SEAL should be. Here is the SEAL for the 1990 COLB above. It has been cropped tp cover the bottom righthand section. We will now, adjust the contract and brightness to the area

Notice the security line [vertical and horizontal] are broken where the SEAL is embossed. Below is a close-up of the embossed SEAL area.

again, clearly showing the security lines broken, due to the SEAL. Here is the section and area used

Now here is the same bottom righthand section on the Obama “COLB”.

Notice there are NO lines broken or anything indicating that a stamp or SEAL was ever applied to the document. Here is a comparison of the same areas togather.

This is proof that the “COLB” posted on Fight the Smears is a computer generated forgery that could in no way be an Official document from the State of Hawaii, as they could not ever release a COLB without the SEAL or Date Stamp.

Obama and his campaign fabricated a forged document.

Here is what a REAL Hawaiian Long Form Birth certificate looks like.

and another Long Form

Notice the following the 1962 Long Form has the same security lines and you can see the embossed seal.

Even the 1963 Long Form has the same security lines.

Reverse showing the back

Even the 1962 Long Form that was taken by hand and NOT scanned can you see the embossed seal. WHY CAN”T YOU SEE IT ON Obama’s? Because it’s FAKE!

Natural Born Citizen legally defined

There has been much debate as to whether the term “Natural Born Citizen” has ever been legally defined or will some court have to finally define it, such as the Supreme Court of the United States.  The term “Natural Born Citizen” is a requirement for only two positions within our government, President and Vice-President.  What did the Founding Father’s and Framers of the United States Constitution mean to do or accomplish by placing this requirement for the highest office?

First off, let us look at what the Framer’s used as a guide.

The Founding Fathers of the United States, used Vattel’s Laws of Nations as their guide and reference to meanings and definitions within our Constitution. 

The myth that the founding of American Republic was based on the philosophy of John Locke could only have been maintained, because the history of Leibniz’s influence was suppressed. The American Revolution was, in fact, a battle against the philosophy of Locke and the English utilitarians. Key to this struggle, was the work of the Eighteenth-century jurist, Emmerich de Vattel, whose widely read text, The Law of Nations, guided the framing of the United States as the world’s first constitutional republic. Vattel had challenged the most basic axioms of the Venetian party, which had taken over England before the time of the American Revolution, and it was from Vattel’s The Law of Nations, more than anywhere else, that America’s founders learned the Leibnizian natural law, which became the basis for the American System.

Benjamin Franklin’s (a signer of our Constitution) letter to Charles W.F. Dumas, December 1775
“I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the Law of Nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept (after depositing one in our own public library here, and send the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author”?

I am sure most reading this will know who Benjamin Franklin was. However one reference will not squell the unbelief that Vattel’s Laws of Nations, is not clear enough. So do a search on Laws of Nations and you will get HUNDREDS of responses. http://rs6.loc.gov/ammem/hlawquery.html This from the Library of Congress.  Another excellent post is the following; The concept of judicial review, which Hamilton had championed in Rutgers v. Waddington, was included in the U.S. Constitution. In {The Federalist Papers,} No. 78, “The Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,” circulated as part of the debate over the new Constitution, Hamilton developed a conception of constitutional law which was coherent with Vattel’s conception. Hamilton stated that it is a “fundamental principle of republican government, which admits the right of the people to alter or abolish the established Constitution, whenever they find it inconsistent with their happiness.” However, the Constitution can only be changed by the nation as a whole, and not by the temporary passions of the majority or by the legislature. Both to protect the Constitution, but also to ensure just enforcement of the law, the independence of the judiciary from the legislature and the executive branch is essential. The judiciary must be the guardians of the Constitution, to ensure that all legislative decisions are coherent with it. This idea championed by Hamilton, that the courts ensured that the Executive and Legislative branches followed the Constitution, was later established as a principle of American jurisprudence by Chief Justice John Marshall

Again proving the Constitution, it’s meaning, it’s wording , and it’s definitions were clearly a result of being referenced to Vattel’s Laws of Nations. So what does the Laws of Nations say about a “Natural Born Citizen”?

Vattel in Bk 1 Sec 212, states the following. 

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

As I have stated before and will state here again.  Barack Obama, he has admitted being a British citizen at birth. From his own web-site,  “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. 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.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

How can a British subject at birth, be free from any foreign influence as described by John Jay in the following; 

The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 [Farrand's Records, Volume 3]
LXVIII. John Jay to George Washington.3
[Note 3: 3 Documentary History of the Constitution, IV, 237.]
New York 25 July 1787

Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.

Again Alexander Hamilton (a signer of our Constitution) in the Gazette of the United States, published in Philadelphia, on June 29, 1793 “The second article of the Constitution of the United States, section first, establishes this general proposition, that “the EXECUTIVE POWER shall be vested in a President of the United States of America…The executive is charged with the execution of all laws, the law of nations, as well as the municipal law, by which the former are recognized and adopted.”

“The Law of Nations” provides the Constitutional definition of a “natural born citizen, historical records reveal that Vattel’s work was quoted at the Federal Constitutional Convention of 1787, various State Constitutional Conventions, and was also referenced in a 1785 letter by John Jay regarding a diplomatic matter.

Should any court finally decide that there IS ample evidence that Barack Obama is not qualified to hold the Office of the President of the United States, they will have to rely on Vattel as the defining definition and argument, and stare reality in the face that not only is Barack Obama unqualified, but that he is not even a US Citizen.

As a final note concerning the Supreme Court and Laws of Nations, I direct you to the following;

The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution [Elliot's Debates, Volume 3]
Saturday, June 21, 1788.

Page 564

There is to be one Supreme Court–for chancery, admiralty, common pleas, and exchequer, (which great eases are left in England to four great, courts,) to which are added criminal jurisdiction, and all cases depending on the law of nations–a most extensive jurisdiction. This court has more power than any court under heaven. One set of judges ought not to have this power–and judges, particular, who have temptation always before their eyes. The court thus organized are to execute laws made by thirteen nations, dissimilar in their customs, manners, laws, and interests. If we advert to the customs of these different sovereignties, we shall find them repugnant and dissimilar. Yet they are all forced to unite and concur in making these laws. They are to form them on one principle, and on one idea, whether the civil law, common law, or law of nations. The gentleman was driven, the other day, to the expedient of acknowledging the necessity of having thirteen different tax laws. This destroys the principle, that he who lays a tax should feel it and bear his proportion of it. This has not been answered: it will involve consequences so absurd, that, I presume, they will not attempt to make thirteen different codes. They will be obliged to make one code. How will they make one code, without being contradictory to some of the laws of the different states?

Allow me to make one more reference;

The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution [Elliot's Debates, Volume 4]
Seamen’s Bill.–For the Regulation of Seamen on Board the Public Vessels, and in the Merchant Service of the United States.
House of Representatives, February, 1813.

Mr. SEYBERT. The Constitution of the United States declares, Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies, throughout the United States.” Sir, the rule only relates to the mode; it is only operative during the nascent state of the political conversion, and it ceases to have effect the moment after the process has been completed. Your Constitution only recognizes the highest grade of citizenship that can be conferred. The alien is thus made a native, as it were, and is fully vested with every eight and privilege attached to the native, with the exception impressed on the Constitution Your statutes cannot deprive any particular species of citizens of the right of personal liberty, or the locomotive faculty, because the Constitution does not characterize the citizens of the United states as native and naturalized. Our great family is composed of a class of men forming a single genus, who, to all intents and purposes, are equal, except in the instance specified–that of not being eligible to the presidency of the United States. The only exception to the rule is expressed in the Constitution. If other exceptions had been contemplated by the framers of that instrument, they would also have been expressed. None other having been expressed, he said, it followed that your legislative acts could not make individual exceptions touching the occupation of a citizen. All freemen, citizens of the United States, may pursue their happiness in any manner and in any situation they please, provided they do not violate the rights of others. You cannot deny to any portion of your citizens, who desire to plough the deep, the right to do so, whilst you permit another portion of them the enjoyment of that right.

 

Mr. ARCHER. The framers of our Constitution did not intend to confine Congress to the technical meaning of the word naturalization, in the exercise of that power–the more especially when the comprehensive word rule was made use of. The principle upon which the power was to be exercised was left to the judicious exercise of Congress; all that was required was, that the rule should be uniform throughout the states. In the grant there is no other specification, as to the exercise of it, than that of its uniformity. The term naturalization was borrowed from England. It must be understood here in the sense and meaning which was, there attached to it. Whether it was absolute or qualified, it was still a naturalization. But the grant of a power in general terms necessarily implied the right to exercise that power in all its gradations. It Was in the political as it was in the natural world: the genus included the species. Besides, the power to naturalize was an attribute to sovereignty. It was either absolute or qualified; and if the grant to Congress only implied a power of unlimited naturalization, the power to qualify existed in the states or in the people, for what was not specifically granted was reserved.

In treating of the executive power, the Constitution defines the qualifications of the President. It declares that he should be a natural-born citizen, or a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution. This article is unquestionably no limitation of the power of Congress upon the subject of naturalization. It was impossible to abridge a specific grant of power without a specific limitation, and the article alluded to could not be tortured, by the most ingenious mind, to diminish, even by implication, the authority of Congress upon a subject to which it was totally irrelevant.

Natural Born Citizen- Visual Guide

Here is the Natural Born Citizen. explained visually.

A Blog Response

Recently on another blog: The Right Side of Life posted the following;   Rep. Deal Wants Obama’s Birth Certificate; Let the Blowback Begin!

Apparently Rep. Deal knew he was going to stir up quite the proverbial hornet’s nest by seriously suggesting that he was going to ask the President to see his birth certificate. So, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (h/t PeachPundit), the castigations are now beginning.

As you read through what I post from the article, below, I’m going to interject my own commentary into what the included public figures say, because I think most of them are seriously full of it; the idea that somehow someone is considered to be, essentially, other than rational for daring to question the President is, itself, asinine:

“I have looked at the documentation that is publicly available and it leaves many things to be desired,” Deal said in an interview Friday.

Deal’s statement came a day after he noted in an online chat that he would join other U.S. House members in writing the president and asking that he release a copy of his birth certificate.

a poster that goes by siseduermapierdra posted again the flawed Wong Kim Ark decision in his rantinmgs. I posted the follwing reply. Posted here for you all to read.

I hate to break the news to you, but I have been saying the following LONG before Leo.

Quote; Barack Obama has admitted that he is a British subject [CITIZEN] at birth, was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 [JURISDICTION] and followed the condition of his father, a foreign national from Kenya [ALLEGIANCE] to the British Crown.

The 14th Amendment and Title 8 state that NOT only being born in country, but that you have to have the Jurisdiction.

You attempt to solve a math problem with only half the equation, it does not work.

Citizenship + Jurisdiction + Allegiance = Natural Born Citizen

Even SR511 that allowed McCain, was flawed as it clearly stated the requirements for NBC status.

 Senate Resolutions is a resolution is often used to express the body’s approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution.

Again, I will note: being protected by a constitution.
What Constitution are they refering to that protects the NBC requirement.

“”"Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it…”"”

Note BORN TO TWO (2) US CITIZEN Parents, but OUTSIDE the Country.
Which we know McCain was NOT born in a US Military hospital on base, as there WAS no hospital on base.

Please state who are Barack Obama TWO (2) US Citizen parents?

Now, lets take a look at John Bingham, ‘author’ of the 14th Amendment of which you attempt to use a flawed decision of KWA.

I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen -Rep. John Bingham, framer of the 14th Amendment, before The US House of Representatives ((Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291, March 9, 1866 ) http://grou.ps/zapem/blogs/3787

Note: that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty.

Barack Obama has admitted that he is a British subject [CITIZEN] at birth, was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 [JURISDICTION] and followed the condition of his father, a foreign national from Kenya [ALLEGIANCE] to the British Crown.

I believe Obama fails, based on John Bingham

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.
-Chief Justice Waite in Minor v. Happersett (1875)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0088_0162_Z…

Now Justice Waite;
it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

Again born in country to parents who are citizens

Please state the US Parent(s) of Barack Obama, both of them.
Oh, that’s right his father was a foreign national, or ‘as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.’

“My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied.
“That is mine, too,” said Leahy
-Homeland Security SecretaryMichael Chertoff and Senator Patrick Leahy, (April 03, 2008) http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200804/041008c.html

Again, please provide the names of both the United States citizen Parent(s) of Barack Obama.

that’s right, his father was a foreign national. He was from a foreign country.

Since you like to use KWA, here is another
“In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the fourteenth amendment now in question, said: ‘The constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.’ And he proceeded to resort to the common law as an aid in the construction of this provision.”
-Justice Grey, in US v Wong Kim Ark (1898) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=1…

Where is this other resort that the Supreme Court and other cases used to determine.

E. Vattel, the Law of Nations.

 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

It’s hard for Obama supporters to face facts.

A picture is worth…

In Russia, during the Russian anthem

In America, during the American anthem

again in America again

TREASONERS DON’T SALUTE! THEY SPIT! On Veterans Day, 11 November 2009, during ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery B. Hussein Obama chose not to salute, or place his hand over his heart, to honor the fallen and the Veterans of our great country.  Barack Obama is a national disgrace to every man and woman that has ever served this country in uniform.

But who does he show honor to…

Obama Bows Before Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao

Kenyan historian Ali Mazrui states Obama Kenyan Citizen

Here is an interesting article and audio.

http://www.archive.org/details/OtunnuOnLuoTribeMemberBeingElectedPresidentOct.252008

Otunnu on Luo Tribe Member Being Elected President, Oct. 25, 2008

Olara Otunnu (Harvard Law, 1978) relating the remark of Kenyan historian Ali Mazrui on the oddity that a member of Kenya’s Luo tribe (Barack Obama, a Kenyan citizen and Luo tribe member from birth) may become president of the United States before a Luo tribe member becomes president of Kenya. “Town Hall Forum: An Examination of Race, Age, Gender & Religion in the 2008 Election,” Harvard Law School Reunions, Oct. 25, 2008, 9:15 a.m. (Austin Hall, 1st Floor, West), at 60:17 mark.

Notice that it is a Kenyan historian that states Barack Obama is a Kenyan citizen and Luo tribe member from BIRTH!

US Natural Born citizen = US Citizen + US Allegiance + US Jurisdiction

Obama is a British subject, allegiance to the British Crown, under the British Nationality Act of 1948

Remember this was done BEFORE the election, but after numerous requests during the primary for Barack Hussein Obama to PROVE his eligibility per the United States Constitution. After the election the Kenyan Parliment stated the following;

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT

Wednesday, 5th November, 2008

The House met at 9.00 a.m.

Dr. Khalwale: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. You have heard none other than the Leader of Government Business acknowledge that because of Obama’s win in the United States of America (USA), the House is crippled.

Could we allow him to move a Motion for Adjournment so that we could also continue the celebrations of having a Kenyan ruling the USA? I humbly request!    *****[note - "having a Kenyan ruling the USA"!]

Read the entire article I posted here:

 http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/obama-is-a-foreign-national-and-kenya-knows-it/

Vattel’s Law of Nations and the Founding Fathers

Vattel was the key in the United States Constitution in determining the Article 2 Natural Born Citizen clause. Here is a list of the references used by John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington in regards to Vattel’s Law of Nations.  This should dispel any notion that the Founding Fathers did not use the Law of Nations as their guide.

 Vattel – John Adams

 http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=GEWN-search-1&mode=TOC

From Edmund Randolph, 6 May 1793

… refusal of him may bring war upon the U.S., because they cannot, without very particular reasons decline his admission—(See Vattel book. 4. section 65) That the expulsion of the prince is not one of those particular reasons will appear …

 Thomas Jefferson’s Notes on a Cabinet Meeting, 6 May 1793

… valid. E.R. declared himself of the same opinion, but on H’s undertaking to present to him the authority in Vattel (which we had not present) & to prove to him that, if the authority was admitted, the treaty might …

 Memorandum from Henry Knox, 16 May 1793

… against our sovereignty even to such a degree as to justify a declaration of War unless satisfactory reparation be made—Vattel is explicit upon this subject he says—in Book 3. Chapter 2d Section 15. “As the right of levying soldiers …

 From John Jay, 28 August 1790

… comprized within two Classes vizt cases of urgent necessity, and cases of convenience—The present case belongs to the latter. Vattel who well understood the Subject, says in the 7th chapter of his 3d Book— That an innocent Passage is …

 To the Cabinet, 3 August 1793

… United States signed with France in 1778, see Miller, Treaties, 3–44. An authority on international law was Emmerich de Vattel’s three-volume work Le Droit des gens: ou, Principes de la loi naturelle, appliqués à la conduite & aux affaires …

 To Thomas Jefferson, 4 August 1793

… had with France, Great Britain, and other nations, see Miller, Treaties, 3–244. The other reference is to Emmerich de Vattel’s three-volume work The Law of Nations; or Principles of the Law of Nature: Applied to the Conduct and to …

 To Robert Cary & Company, 6 October 1773

… the Nature and Immutability of Truth; Thomas Reid, Inquiry into the Human Mind; Adam Ferguson, Institutes of Moral Philosophy; Vattel, Laws of Nations; Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli au Paces; George Turnbull, Principles of Moral Philosophy; David Fordyce, Elements …

 Enclosure Questions for the Supreme Court, 18 July 1793

… all with France, see Miller, Treaties, 3–47, 228–44. This is probably a reference to principles contained in Emmerich de Vattel’s three-volume work, The Law of Nations; or the Principles of the Law of Nature: Applied to the conduct and …

 Enclosure: Answers to Questions proposed by the President of the United States to the Secretary of the Treasury., 15 September 1790

… Law of War and Peace through Barbeyrac’s work, cited in n.3 above (see Syrett, Hamilton Papers 7:39, n.5). For Vattel’s Law of Nations, see John Jay to GW, 28 Aug. 1790, n.2. Hamilton’s footnote, “Puffendorfs Law of Nature & …

 Memorandum from Alexander Hamilton, 15 May 1793

… 26:197–99; see also JPP, 156–57, 159. Throughout the debates over U.S. neutrality policy, cabinet members referred to Emmerich de Vattel’s The Law of Nations, first published in French in 1758 and in English in 1760. Although the Treaty of …

 http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=ADMS-search-1&mode=TOC

12th.

… with the other volumes. In the afternoon I took up Vattels’ law of nature and of nations. Emmerich de Vattel, Le droit des gens; ou, principes de la loi naturelle, appliqués à la conduite et aux affaires des nations …

 15th.

15th. Dined with Townsend and Thomson at Mr. Parsons’s. I finished this day the first volume of Vattel. The first book treats of the duties of a nation with respect to itself: the second of its obligations …

 22d.

22d. This forenoon I finish’d Vattel. The third book treats of War, and the fourth of Peace; much in the same manner as he treats …

 I. Reply of the House to Hutchinson’s First Message, 26 January 1773

… June 1680, Henings Statutes, 2:466–469. In his address of 6 Jan., Hutchinson had quoted this passage from Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations, or, Principles of the Law of Nature, applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations …

 III. Reply of the House to Hutchinson’s Second Message, 2 March 1773

… Mass., Province Laws, 3:118. For the background of this legislation, see Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, ed. Mayo, 2:298–300. That is, Vattel. See No. I, note 12, above. These passages are taken from the second of John Locke’s Two Treatises of …

 From James Lovell, 1 January 1778

… been greatly wanted upon a most important transaction. We have had a call for your stores of Grotius Puffendorf Vattel &c. &c. &c. to support reason and commonsense or to destroy both, just as your Honour and Da– and …

 Editorial Note

… absolute. In a passage strongly reminiscent of his writs of assistance argument, Otis cited the Swiss publicist Emmerich de Vattel, as well as Bonham’s Case and other common law precedents, for the proposition that Parliament could not make a …

 To Richard Henry Lee, 15 March 1780

… I, f. 211–217; Morison, John Paul Jones, p. 355– 356). In support of his position Franklin cited Emmerich de Vattel’s The Law of Nations, or Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations …

 To the President of Congress, No. 40, 10 April 1780

… on the law of nations, but it did no more than explicitly state what was already implied (Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations, or Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations …

 Jean Henri David Uhl to John Adams: A Translation, 1 July 1782

… it was contraband, was free or not subject to seizure wherever found, even on an enemy ship (Emerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations or the Principals of Natural Law, bk. 3, ch. 7, § 115–116). Thus when a …

 Editorial Note

… a specialized approach to the questions of prize: R. Lee, Treatise of Captures in War (London, 1759); Emmerich de Vattel, Law of Nations (London, 1760). See Minutes, 13 Sept. 1783, DNA Microcopy 162, Case 30. No authorities appear in …

 Vattel – Thomas Jefferson

 http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=TSJN-search-1&mode=TOC&#match

 To George Hammond, 29 May 1792

… choses dont le Traité ne dit rien, doivent demeurer dans l’etat où elles se trouvent lors de sa conclusion. Vattel. L. 4. §. 21. ‘De quibus nihil dictum, ea manerit quo sunt loco,’ Wolf. 1222. No alterations then are …

 Editorial Note: Jefferson’s Opinion on the Treaties with France

… But Randolph wavered when Hamilton offered to produce a citation from that formidable authority on international law, Emmerich de Vattel’s Le Droit des Gens (1758), in support of his position that a treaty might under certain circumstances be suspended …

 I. Notes on Washington’s Questions on Neutrality and the Alliance with France, [before 28 April 1793]

… free goods et econtre. free commerce to places not besieged. certificate of officer of convoy prevents searches. contraband defined. Vattel. 2. 157. the validity of treaties / 158. lezion does not annul them. / 159. duties of nations in …

 II. Notes for Opinion on the Treaty of Alliance with France, [before 28 April 1793]

… self-libern without just cause or compensn gives cause of war to France. Examine Authorities.—how far they weigh.—danger of understg. Vattel witht restrn. Grotius—Puff.—Wolf— Vattel Vattel . 2. 160.        158. <159.> 163. 219. 220. <233.> [Lengthwise in the ...

 IV. Opinion on the Treaties with France, 28 April 1793

... Certainly not when merely useless or disagreeable, as seems to be said in an authority which has been quoted. Vattel. 2.197. And tho he may under certain degrees of danger, yet the danger must be imminent, and the degree ...

 List of Books Sold to James Monroe, [10 May 1784]

… Oeuvres de Mably. 4.v. 1. 1. / Entretiens de Phocion 4. / Recherches sur les Americains. 3.v. 16. / Vattel 1. 16. / Epoques de la nature 2. v. 11. / Maniere de jouer aux echecs 6. / Oeuvres …

 From Edmund Randolph, with a Memorandum by Jefferson, 9 February 1781

… a Memorandum by Jefferson Sir February 9. 1781. As your excellency and the council probably have not access to Vattel, on whose doctrines this hasty answer is founded, I shall inclose the paragraph from his work, which treats of …

 Report on Negotiations with Spain, 18 March 1792

… and without having declared any: but on the contrary, conducting herself in other respects as a friend and associate. Vattel. L. 3. 122. It is an established principle that Conquest gives only an inchoate right, which does not become …

 To James Madison, 28 April 1793

… have been seriously proposed to declare our treaties with France void on the authority of an ill-understood scrap in Vattel 2.§.197. [‘toutefois si ce changement &c—gouvernement’] and that it should be necessary to discuss it?—Cases are now arising which …

 From Edmund Randolph, 9 February 1781

… made by the unarmed countrymen, I am inclined to think, that I was inaccurate. As well as I recollect, Vattel was said to be against their claim; but that daily usage was in favor of it. So far perhaps …

 http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=TSJN-search-2&mode=TOC&#match

 To Thomas Newton, Jr., 8 September 1791

… 202–3). In laying down general principles only, TJ had the support of three wellknown authorities—Abraham de Wicquefort, Emmerich de Vattel, and Wyndham Beawes—among whom only Vattel argued that consuls “must be accorded, to a certain extent, the …

 II. Arguments by James Wilson and William Samuel Johnson before the Court of Commissioners, [14–23 December 1782]

… made to the Dutch possessions. We must discover the thoughts of those who make Contracts 2 Blacstone 295. 2 Vattel §270. 2 Hutchinson history Massa. 387. Interpretation must be rational 2 Rutherford—chapter Interpretation. 1 Blacstone 59. 2 Bacon abrid. …

 From Thomas Pinckney, 27 August 1793

… Court of Admiralty’s dismissal of Wilson’s suit against the Centurion’s captain was presumably based on the principle expressed by Vattel that the captain had acted in ignorance of the cessation of hostilities, even though Vattel maintained that …

 Alexander Hamilton’s Notes on Jefferson’s Letter to George Hammond, with Jefferson’s Response, [20–27 May 1792]

… have a knowledge of the transaction from it’s first embryon to it’s perfection. They are the ‘parties contractantes’ of Vattel and the ‘paciscentes’ of Wolf cited §. 48. Tho’ they do not transact the business in person, but by …

 Edmund Randolph’s Opinion on the Grange, 14 May 1793

… a country in order to settle there, it possesses every thing included in it, as lands, lakes, rivers” &c. Vattel. b.1.c.22. §.266. To this list might be added Bynkershoek and Selden. But the dissertation of the former de dominio …

 To Edmond Charles Genet, 17 June 1793

… what that law and usage is. Let us appeal to enlightened and disinterested Judges. None is more so than Vattel. He says L. 3. §. 104. “Tant qu’un peuple neutre veut jouïr surement de cet état, il doit montrer …

 To Edmond Charles Genet, [ca. 16 July 1793]

… unfortunate in your estimation. You are pleased to consider us as bringing forward diplomatic subleties, and the aphorisms of Vattel, to justify infractions of positive treaties. I shall agree with you that reason is the only rightful umpire between …

 XII. Opinion of the Chief Justice, 28 August 1790

… within two Classes vizt. cases of urgent necessity, and Cases of Convenience. The present case belongs to the latter. Vattel, who well understood the subject, says in the 7th: chapter of his 3d. Book: That an innocent Passage is …

 XV. Opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury, 15 September 1790

… Peace Book II Chap II § xiii No. 1.2.3.4. Book III Chap: VII § 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. Vattel Book III Chap VII Section 127. France has made us one loan since the peace. MS (DLC: Washington Papers). …

 Notes on Washington’s Questions on Neutrality and the Alliance with France, [6 May 1793]

… valid. E.R. declared himself of the same opinion, but on H’s undertaking to present to him the authority in Vattel (which we had not present) and to prove to him that, if the authority was admitted, the treaty might …

http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=TSJN-search-3&mode=TOC&#match

  From James Madison, 8 May 1793

… at the time have been put on them. The attempt to shuffle off the Treaty altogether by quibbling on Vattel is equally contemptible for the meanness and folly of it. If a change of Government is an absolution from …

 To William G. Munford, 27 February 1799

… in the catalogue [you sent me] as could be found here. these are Stewart’s philosophy of the human mind. Vattel’s law of nations. Smith’s wealth of nations. Nicholson’s philosophy {}to these I have added Chipman’s sketches on government Condorcet’s …

 Notes on John Jay’s Mission to Great Britain, [1797 or after]

… He says also that in conformity to what was mentioned by Mr. Jay he has used the words of Vattel. As to the article about impressment he says ‘he sees no reason whatever to object to this article.’ / …

 To James Madison, 3 August 1793

… vulnerable points, well struck, stab the party vitally.—3. lights from the law of nations on the constructions of treaties. Vattel has been most generally the guide, Bynkershoeck often quoted, Wolf sometimes. 4. no call was made by any power …

 IV. Thomas Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, 16 August 1793

… law of nations, founded on the general sense and usage of mankind, we have produced proofs, from theJune 17. Vattel L.3.§.104. most enlightened and approved writers on the subject, that a neutral nation must, in all things relating to …

 To Ferdinando Fairfax, 25 April 1794

… to discuss the opinions of Home and Young, than my friend Genet did the worm-eaten aphorisms of Grotius and Vattel. In the mean time I have the honor to be with sentiments of great esteem Dear Sir your most …

 Enclosure II: Considerations on a Convention with Spain, 22 March 1792

… One writer extends the exception to atrocious criminals, too imminently dangerous to Society. Namely to Pirates, Murderers, and Incendiaries. Vattel. L. V. § 233. The punishment of Piracy, being provided for by our law, need not be so by …

 From Edmund Randolph, 30 January 1784

… be convinced of Hancock’s guilt before they could deliver him up. This scruple originated from the 76th. section of Vattel’s 2d. book. But the quotation of a practice in Switzerland which deprives the canton, within whose reach an offender …

 To John Garland Jefferson, 11 June 1790

… Spirit of laws. / Blackstone. / Virginia laws. Smith’s wealth of nations. / Beccaria. / Kaim’s moral essays. / Vattel’s law of nations / Should there be any little intervals in the day not otherwise occupied fill them up …

 From Thomas Pinckney, 5 July 1793

… was justifiable when there was a hope of reducing an enemy by famine (for a translation, see Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations, or, Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations …

 http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=TSJN-search-4&mode=TOC&#match

 Course of Reading for William G. Munford, [5 December 1798]

… Practice in Chancery / Wythe’s reports. Schomberg’s hist. of [Civ. 1.] / Washington’s reports. Molloy de Jure [Mar.] / Vattel. / [Fine Arts] from [XII.] to II. Moral Philosophy [from?] […]& [night?] / Lowthe’s grammar Condorcet’s Progress of the …

 A Course of Reading for Joseph C. Cabell, September 1800

… human life. 12mo. Gregory’s legacy. 12mo. Gregory’s comparative view. 12 mo. Ld. Bacon’s essays. 12 mo. L. of nations. Vattel. Droit des gens. 4to. Droit des gens moderne par martens. 2 v. {12mo. Religion. Paley’s evidences. 8vo. Middleton’s Miscelli …

 From James Madison, 9 January 1785

… contended that such surrenders were unknown to the law of nations, and were interdicted by our declaration of Rights. Vattel however is express as to the case of Robbers, murderers and incendiaries. Grotius quotes various instances in which great …

 To John Jay, 21 June 1787

… sang répandus pour venger l’injure faite a quelqu’un de ces hommes revêtus d’un ministere national.” Grotius, Bodin, Montesquieu, and Vattel were appealed to in support of the view that the ambassador, representing his sovereign in a foreign state, must …

 To Edmond Charles Genet, [15–22 November 1793]

… are worm-eaten, or hired. It will be acknoleged that you have never troubled us with quotations from Grot. Puff. Vattel or any other authority antient or recent. Had you endeavored to learn from these respected authors what the rest …

 Vattel – George Washington

 http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=GEWN-search-1&mode=TOC&#match

From Edmund Randolph, 6 May 1793

… refusal of him may bring war upon the U.S., because they cannot, without very particular reasons decline his admission—(See Vattel book. 4. section 65) That the expulsion of the prince is not one of those particular reasons will appear …

 Thomas Jefferson’s Notes on a Cabinet Meeting, 6 May 1793

… valid. E.R. declared himself of the same opinion, but on H’s undertaking to present to him the authority in Vattel (which we had not present) & to prove to him that, if the authority was admitted, the treaty might …

 Memorandum from Henry Knox, 16 May 1793

… against our sovereignty even to such a degree as to justify a declaration of War unless satisfactory reparation be made—Vattel is explicit upon this subject he says—in Book 3. Chapter 2d Section 15. “As the right of levying soldiers …

 From John Jay, 28 August 1790

… comprized within two Classes vizt cases of urgent necessity, and cases of convenience—The present case belongs to the latter. Vattel who well understood the Subject, says in the 7th chapter of his 3d Book— That an innocent Passage is …

 To the Cabinet, 3 August 1793

… United States signed with France in 1778, see Miller, Treaties, 3–44. An authority on international law was Emmerich de Vattel’s three-volume work Le Droit des gens: ou, Principes de la loi naturelle, appliqués à la conduite & aux affaires …

 To Thomas Jefferson, 4 August 1793

… had with France, Great Britain, and other nations, see Miller, Treaties, 3–244. The other reference is to Emmerich de Vattel’s three-volume work The Law of Nations; or Principles of the Law of Nature: Applied to the Conduct and to …

 To Robert Cary & Company, 6 October 1773

… the Nature and Immutability of Truth; Thomas Reid, Inquiry into the Human Mind; Adam Ferguson, Institutes of Moral Philosophy; Vattel, Laws of Nations; Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli au Paces; George Turnbull, Principles of Moral Philosophy; David Fordyce, Elements …

 Enclosure Questions for the Supreme Court, 18 July 1793

… all with France, see Miller, Treaties, 3–47, 228–44. This is probably a reference to principles contained in Emmerich de Vattel’s three-volume work, The Law of Nations; or the Principles of the Law of Nature: Applied to the conduct and …

 Enclosure: Answers to Questions proposed by the President of the United States to the Secretary of the Treasury., 15 September 1790

… Law of War and Peace through Barbeyrac’s work, cited in n.3 above (see Syrett, Hamilton Papers 7:39, n.5). For Vattel’s Law of Nations, see John Jay to GW, 28 Aug. 1790, n.2. Hamilton’s footnote, “Puffendorfs Law of Nature & …

 Memorandum from Alexander Hamilton, 15 May 1793

… 26:197–99; see also JPP, 156–57, 159. Throughout the debates over U.S. neutrality policy, cabinet members referred to Emmerich de Vattel’s The Law of Nations, first published in French in 1758 and in English in 1760. Although the Treaty of …

Vattel – Ratification

http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=RNCN-search-1&mode=TOC

 Convention Debates

… a confederation of states. (8) Sovereignty is in the states and not in the people in its exercise. (9) Vattel’s description of sovereignty—it belonged originally to the body of the society (Vat. page 9. of the Sovereign). (10) …

 Convention Debates, A.M.

… marginal notes] Sovereignty Vat. p. 5. s. 2 Lock, p. 2, s. 149, 227. Bl. 245. 161. 162. Confederacy, Vattel p. 11. s. 10 Mont. b. 9. c. 1. A general inconsistency between this reasoning and that against the …

 Convention Debates, A.M.

… 2. [Montesquieu, I, 11–18.] “The People, in whom the Supreme Power resides.” (51) Vat. b. 1. s. 1. 2. [Vattel, 15–16.] “Sovereignty.” (52) The sovereignty is essentially in the people; but is vested in a senate or a monarch. …

 Convention Debates, A.M.

… closed his arguments in opposition to the proposed federal system. [Dallas’ Debates, Pennsylvania Herald, 15 December] Findley: Sovereignty. Vat. [Vattel] p. 9. 19. Locke, on Gov. [II] c. 13 [chapter XIII]. There is but one supreme power, viz., the …

 Symbols

… Ithaca, N.Y., 1930–1971). Thorpe Francis N. Thorpe, ed., The Federal and State Constitutions … (7 vols., Washington, D.C., 1909). Vattel Emerich de Vattel , The Law of Nations … (Dublin, 1792). Cross-references CC Commentaries on the Constitution: Public …

 George Clinton’s Remarks Against Ratifying the Constitution, 11 July 1788

… persons, having a will of their own and equal rights—that these rights are freedom, sovereignty, and independence. The celebrated Vattel treating on this subject, observes “that power or weakness does not in this respect produce any difference. A dwarf …

Trek OBAMA

The followers of Barack Obama have taken a nose dive off the deep end of reality and entered into the hopeless pit of denial and wonderment of the science fiction era known as Trek Obama. Anyone breathing and an IQ higher then 60 (which barely includes most Obama supporters) has seen, heard of, or been part of Star Trek. Star Trek is the fictional reality of the future, again like Obama’s fictional past, where everyone’s needs are magically meet and no personal needs are ever denied, along and no costs ever being mentioned, because this is a fictional utopia.

 In the original series, an episode called “And the children shall lead”, featured what appears to be a benevolent alien that a group of children could call upon, but discovered almost to late that in reality he was evil. Here is the episode synopsis:

 When the U.S.S. Enterprise finds that all the adults in the Starnes Expedition to Triacus have killed themselves, they beam to the planet’s surface to investigate. The children, however, are alive and well and strangely oblivious to their parents’ fates.

They are beamed aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise while Kirk searches for an answer to the strange occurrences. The children summon their “friendly angel” Gorgan, who tells them to take the U.S.S. Enterprise to a planet he can control. By garbling Kirk’s words and deceiving Spock, the children are able to take control of the starship. Finally, seeing Kirk’s anxiety at the loss of his ship, Spock realizes that something is wrong and helps the Captain regain control.

Kirk shows the children tricorder tapes of their parents … and their graves, demonstrating to them that Gorgan is not a “friendly angel” but an evil force. The loss of his believers renders Gorgan impotent and he fades into oblivion.

 Now bear in mind that this benevolent helper of the children remind us of another benevolent  alien, Barack Obama. Barack Obama came along and promises everything for everyone, with no mention of the cost. How many times were his followers seen clamoring “I won’t have to worry about my mortgage”, “I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car”, ‘he said if I help him, he would help me.”

 In mere months the façade has fallen off the Obama gorgon, and exposed the inner layers, just as Captain Kirk, exposed the true nature of the original gorgon. As more of the layers are peeled back, with the exposure of ACORN corruption, the charade of the public Terrorist trials, the Court Martial of Navy SEALs for given a known terrorist a ‘fat lip’ during capture, covering up the Ft Hood Terrorist attack, Obama’s staggering dragging his feet on supporting our troops and commander in Afghanistan, his total lack of experience in governance, reckless disregard for the United States Constitution, bowing to foreign leaders, among other items too long to mention here.

 I wonder what will happen after too many layers are revealed, or what will be the publics reaction upon seeing the real Barack Obama unmasked. Or when Barack Obama followers wake up and discover they have been assimilated into the collective, but not for their own good.

Obot’s deserve thanks and recognition

There are a few times when Obot bloggers deserve thanks and recognition.

For the past few days, I have been posting to the Right Side of Life, currently there are two Obot bloggers that have provided some inlightening insight to the Obama world.

First off the is Sue, posting the following regarding McCain vs Obama and their medical records;

Sue posted  ”Three weeks ago, John McCain, who would be the oldest president in history if elected, released 1,173 pages of his medical records to the press. He did so only after a series of delays, however, and then granted a pool of about a dozen news outlets access to them for three hours, with no photocopying allowed. One reporter whose employer was not invited to view the documents was The New York Times’s Lawrence K. Altman. His exclusion was a bit ironic, given that he is an M.D. and was part of the group that viewed the last batch of McCain’s medical records, which the senator released in 1999 during his first bid for the Oval Office.”

Obama releases medical information: “excellent health.” By Lynn Sweeton May 29, 2008 10:54 AM “WASHINGTON–Likely Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is in “excellent health,” according to a summary of Obama medical records released on Thursday. The 276-word summary was written by Dr. David L. Scheiner, the Chicago doctor who has been Obama’s personal physician since March, 1987. Obama has not had a check-up in more than a year. Scheiner described Obama as “lean and muscular with no excess body fat.” Obama is still using Nicorette gum to stay off cigarettes–he has quit smoking several times, his doctor notes.

Of which I replied the following;

Sue; WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO YOURSELF. ARE YOU THAT SELF-ABUSIVE? DO YOU REALLY ENJOY PROSTITUTING YOURSELF OVER LIES AND DECIET?

Sue oposted – Three weeks ago, John McCain, who would be the oldest president in history if elected, released 1,173 pages of his medical records to the press. and the about Brack Obama;

“WASHINGTON–Likely Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is in “excellent health,” according to a summary of Obama medical records released on Thursday. The 276-word summary was written by Dr. David L. Scheiner, the Chicago doctor who has been Obama’s personal physician since March, 1987.

So what you are saying is John Mccain allowed 1,173 pages to be looked at, while Barack Obama brought a note from his doctor. WOW – such clarity and transparency!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sue ‘the hell-bent on self destruction Obama prostitute’

Totally amazing how they can equate a doctor’s note to close to 1,200 pages of documentation. I am begining to see how they can trust an forged image on the internet and 2 physical ones off FactCheck the same as a verified and confirmed one for McCain.

Now for my biggest thanks and Hat tip goes off to Black Lion.

So talking about what passport Barack Obama traveled to Pakistan under in 1981, we don’t have two possibilies, not three, but FOUR!

This blogger after refering to Obama’s Dual Citizenship actually corrected me and alluded to the fact that there are not two, not three, but atleast four citizenships.

 As explained by Black Lion, Obama claims to have US Citizenship [proof never submitted] the same time he has British citizenship from his father, being governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948, now Kenya was a British colony till 1963, when it gained independence and became it own country.

Now, Obama states the following off his web-site so this NOT heresay evidence but from Obama himself.

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. 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.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

So we are up to three different citizenship for Obama.

But just like the TV commercials – We’re not done yet!

There is still Indonesia, and that makes a running count of FOUR possible passports he could have had.

WOW – even farther from the free of foreign influence in the Presidency that the Founding Fathers fought for.

Hat tip to Black Lion and lets see if you can’t move the bar even farther.

Now, a third Obot has joined the ranks;
 
brygenon is now claiming that John McCain’s Birth certificate is forged. Talk about calling the kettle black, Obama’s is forged and people who question anything about Obama are called racist.

New Obama Movie

In honor of the racist bigots posting on several blogs, such as Sue, Black Lion, brygenon over on the Right Side of Life, who call anyone that has anything to say against “their” Obama a racist. I have decided to have a little fun and make the following illustration poking fun at their inabilty to see facts. Mind you that unlike them, I do not revert and call people racists. I for one, standby Alan Keyes and Pastor Mannin, who also question the illegal undocumented alien, Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility as POTUS.

So here’s to you Sue, Black Lion, and brygenon