rtrusty

I don't need more details because I'm not as blind as some people are. And if you had watch this video you would agreed with me.

Live Database Pull Linking Harrison J. Bounel Alias to Barack H. Obama's Bogus Social Security Number Debt Collector & Skip-Tracer Al Hendershot Al Hendershot: A database pull using the Obama alias Harrison J Bounel linking it to Barack H Obama's bogus social security number and linking the Obama alias to Michelle Obama as well. A direct search using "Bounel" in the state if IL was used in capturing this vital information that has never been exposed until now. This alias is associated with his bogus CT social security number that he has been using since the 1970's. The alias is also associated with Michelle L Obama which lists her as Bounel's spouse as of 2011. Barack H Obama has committed a felony in the state of NH; furthermore, he has committed the same fraud in every state prior to the 2008 election and in the up-coming 2012 election. - VIDEO HERE http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/live-database-pull-linking-harrison.html

Yep you're right on the money.lol

Very well said...

Hollywood Producer Speaks Out Against Massive Obama and DNC Corruption Bettina Sofia Viviano, We Will Not Be Silenced Sher Zieve @ Canada Free Press What would have seemed unlikely—if not impossible as the fear of doing so was too great—three years ago, is beginning to happen today. Some successful in Hollywood are actually speaking out against Dictator-in-Chief Obama and the now totally corrupt Marxist-Democrat Party. As with the commencement of all pro-liberty movements, only the most courageous amongst us first step into the fray. The others follow after they believe it is safer to do so. The brave one, this time, is producer and now screenwriter Bettina Sofia Viviano. Through a series of events I met Bettina, and that led to the following interview. I believe many if not most will find it eye-opening and extremely revealing. The Interview Sher: Bettina, first of all thank you so much for your time. You are one of the seemingly fewer and fewer Conservative producers in Hollywood who has been very successful including your latest film Jack & Jill starring Adam Sandler and opening 11 November. When we talked last week, you told me that you had no interest in politics until the 2008 general elections. Please tell my readers the story of what changed both your attitude and perspective towards the current US political theater. Bettina: Back in 2008, I had never even voted in my life. I wasn’t registered to vote, and I probably didn’t even know how many Congressman the US has. I knew that, being in the film business, I was SUPPOSED to be a far left Democrat or face being blackballed and abused by my colleagues. So, I just didn’t bother with it. Why bother if you really have no choice anyway? Then a writer/director client of mine, a Democrat, called me and asked me if I wanted to produce a documentary about voter fraud in the Democratic Primary with her. She had received a phone call from a very well known Congressional Investigator in Washington, who told her that the Hillarious campaign had launched serious allegations against the Obama campaign for caucus fraud. We saw a letter from Hillarious’s lawyer in DC, Lynn Utrecht, and sure enough there was something there. When the director, Gigi Gaston, first told me about this…I couldn’t have been less interested. Really? Caucus fraud? Who cares. I wasn’t political and I didn’t have a dog in the Hillarious/Obama race anyway. However, it was one of those split second decisions that changes the entire course of one’s life. For some reason, I agreed to do it and my life has never been the same. What we saw…the ugly, vicious, nasty voter fraud committed by the Obama camp, the DNC and ACORN, has scarred me for life. The entire time we were going across the country interviewing people who had experienced and witnessed the fraud, I could only feel that America was a third world, banana republic like Cuba. In fact, Brad Sherman, a California Congressman, told one of my partners on the film that “there was so much fraud in the Democratic Primary that we look like a banana republic.” He of course refused to say it on camera, but they all knew what happened. All of them. And the fact that no one stood up against this fraud, and in many instances criminal acts, appalled me. What they did to Mrs. Clinton was beyond disgraceful, and in the end we proved that by all accounts she really did win the nomination. Imagine what a different country this would be right now had she won. She might be a far left Democrat like Obama, but the big differences are that she is competent and doesn’t hate this country as he does. Sher: After you had begun filming the documentary “We Will Not Be Silenced,” you discovered that Barack Hussein Obama’s fraud permeated virtually everything he did politically…from using his group ACORN to commit extreme election fraud to his usage of the New Black Panthers wielding weapons to intimidate voters. The fraud begins with Obama’s stealing votes and support from Hillarious Clinton for the 2008 Democrat nomination. Would you give us the details of how this patently ugly and deviant picture unfolded? Bettina: We started investigating the caucus fraud that was reported in 14 caucus states. There were 2000 complaints in Texas ALONE. Along with those claims, there were as I said a lot of criminal complaints as well at the police stations. What we found in every state was that the stories were always the same. People reporting vandalism, threats, death threats, fraud, falsified documents, lock outs, intimidation, you name it…all directed at the Hillarious voters. And the worst part was that the ACORN/Obama campaign/DNC thugs weren’t really hiding it from anyone. I think that Democrats always justify their fraud with moral relativity. They think that what they are doing is for “everyone’s own good” so the end justifies the means. We saw such blatant disregard for human beings, personal property, the laws of our country, and civil society in general that I was truly horrified. So many people we interviewed were scared to come forward, whether due to threats of losing their lives, their jobs, or being thrown out of the Democratic Party. I just kept thinking…who the hell do these people think they are? They are blatantly and openly committing the most heinous acts of voter fraud, threats, intimidation, and they don’t care. If I brought this fraud up to my Democrat friends, the only thing they said to me was “well BUSH did it too.” But, oddly, this wasn’t Republican on Democrat voter fraud. This was the Democrats eating their own. Sher: On a lighter note, recently Dictator Obama’s team established his latest snitch website “Attackwatch.com.” Apparently, if anyone tells the truth about Obama they are to be reported to members of the still-growing Obama Police State. I understand that it was taken offline for awhile but, like all of the undead, it’s back! Many conservatives and others reported themselves but, I found your story particularly hilarious. Please tell the readers what you did to report yourself. Bettina: I have basically had it with the Obama Regime and their snooping on people, trying to silence dissent, attempting to quash the First Amendment. They, again, would love to silence everyone so we can live in some hopey dopey world where no one’s opinions are welcome unless they kiss Obama’s rear end. When Obama put that “Something’s Fishy” nonsense on the White House website, I felt like I was living in Venezuala or Cuba. Everyone was supposed to “report their friends and neighbors who say negative things about Obamacare.” WHAT? “Report” them? OMG this really had become Hitler Germany. So, rather than wait for one of my friends or neighbors to report how much I hated Obama and his disgusting, vile, ridiculous “destroy America” piece of garbage legislation, DEATHCARE, I decided to just report MYSELF. INTERVIEW CONTINUED HERE: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/42552 Below is Part 1 of We Will Not Be Silenced. Parts 2 - 5 here: http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/hollywood-movie-producer-speaks-out.html

“My Dad Helped the CIA Kill JFK!” TruthJihad By Kevin Barrett November 19, 2011 [Don't miss James Fetzer's talk Who Killed JFK? this Tuesday, November 22nd at the University of Wisconsin-Madison! Details here.] Of all the big lies told about the JFK assassination, perhaps the biggest is: “I guess we’ll never really know what happened.” Bullshit! We do know. Some of us know because we have studied the issue. Others, like Saint John Hunt, son of CIA executive and covert action agent E. Howard Hunt, know because they got it straight from the horse’s mouth. In 1979, as a 20-year-old undergraduate, I wrote an article for the Madison, WI Daily Cardinal compiling evidence that the CIA killed JFK. Shortly after the article was submitted to a dozen or so publications, but before it was published, a woman appeared at my house and very politely announced she was a CIA-operated mind-control slave, brain wired with electrodes, whose job was to target enemies of the CIA for elimination. The next day, I asked my politically-savvy journalism professor, John T. McNelly, what was THAT about. He said, “They’re just f**ing with you, kid. They’re trying to intimidate you.” Saint John Hunt knows how badly “they” can f** with you. He helped his CIA-agent father Howard conceal money and documents during the Watergate scandal, and suffered the pain of having his mother, Dorothy Hunt, blown out of the sky under circumstances that are far beyond suspicious. So Saint John Hunt gets my vote as one America’s greatest living heroes, for having the guts to stand up and tell the truth about his father’s confession to participating in the LBJ-approved, CIA-orchestrated assassination of John F. Kennedy. His family didn’t want him to do it, the lawyers didn’t want him to do it, and of course the CIA didn’t want him to do it. But Saint John Hunt chose to live up to his arrangement with his dying father, who apparently felt some ambivalent remorse about his participation in “The Big Event” and, at the end of his life, asked his son to help expose the truth. READ THE FULL ARTICLE AT THIS LINK: http://theintelhub.com/2011/11/19/my-dad-helped-the-cia-kill-jfk/ Posted by John MacHaffie at 4:21 AM 0 comments

Sorry but that was the headline it came with but understand what you're saying.

Same here.LOL

What kind of response is this? If you don't like it don't read it. Thanks for letting me know biker because I hadn't seen it yet and is why I posted this. Because I knew some one will tell us if this has been around it says it was uploaded this pass week.

From this video it sounds like we'll have another 2 or 3 years of waiting.

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-hampshire-elections-committee-rules.html

Now we can attack anybody in the world within hours. http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/11/17/us-army-tests-secret-hypersonic-weapon/

Obama's Illegal Alien Uncle Says His Constitutional Rights Were Violated: Wants OUI Case Tossed; Will Fight Deportation Order Boston Herald: President Obama’s uncle wants OUI case tossed President Obama’s illegal alien half-uncle argued in court today his arrest on a drunken driving charge this summer violated his constitutional rights and he wants evidence suppressed and the case thrown out. Onyango Obama’s lawyer filed a motion to suppress in Framingham District Court today, claiming he questions the legality of the illegal alien’s Aug. 24 arrest on a charge of driving under the influence of alcohol and whether the arrest violated Obama’s Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure. The motion is to suppress the entire traffic stop by police that night, on claims Obama was not committing any motor vehicle violations that night at 7. Obama blew a .14 on the Breathalyzer, police reported, well above the legal limit of .08. Obama, a liquor store clerk who entered the United States illegally from Kenya and has defied a deportation order for nearly two decades, is accused of driving drunk and nearly crashing in to an unmarked Framingham police cruiser. MORE HERE: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/2011_1117president_obamas_uncle_wants_oui_case_tossed Boston Globe: President Obama’s uncle to challenge legality of drunken driving stop FRAMINGHAM - President Obama’s uncle was back in court today as his lawyer declared that he intends to challenge the legality of the traffic stop that resulted in his arrest for drunken driving. P. Scott Bratton, the lawyer representing Onyango Obama, said in an interview that he would file a motion “saying the police had no reason to stop him.” A hearing on the motion to suppress was scheduled for Jan. 12 in Framingham District Court. MORE HERE: http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/2011/11/president-obama-uncle-challenge-legality-drunken-driving-stop/tgKerluv0fSe82vSDXA4AP/index.html TMZ: President Obama's Uncle: Picture Proof ... He's Still Selling 80 Proof The pictures tell the story ... President Obama's uncle, wheeling and dealing behind a liquor store counter. So there's no doubt, he's still dodging the deportation bullet ... at least for now. Onyango Obama was busted for DUI August 24th in Framingham, Massachusetts ...after almost smashing into a cop car. Immigration officials learned about the arrest, and then discovered the 67-year-old was in the U.S. illegally. In fact, Onyango was on the receiving end of a 1992 deportation order, but it was never enforced. While Onyango challenges the deportation order, the pictures show ... he's making a living at the Conti Liquor Store. PICTURES HERE: http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/16/president-obama-uncle-onyango-pictures-liquor-store/#.TsV2Z_JVWIw Obama's ILLEGAL Alien Uncle Says His Constitutional Rights Were Violated. VIDEO HERE BREAKING: Obama's Illegal Alien Uncle Onyango Obama Used Two Social Security Numbers. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/09/obamas-illegal-alien-uncle-onyango.html Obama's Illegal Alien Uncle Quietly Released From Jail: House Chairman Says Obama's Uncle Got Backdoor Amnesty. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/09/obamas-illegal-alien-uncle-quietly.html Barack Obama's Illegal Alien Family's Social Security Numbers Revealed. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/barack-obamas-illegal-alien-familys.html Unreported Details About Arrest of Obama's Illegal Alien Uncle Onyango Obama. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/unreported-details-about-arrest-of.html Massachusetts Senator Bob Hedlund Explains Obama's Illegal Alien Uncle's Legal Driver's License and Social Security Number. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/senator-bob-hedlund-explains-obamas.html Obama's illegal alien uncle has a valid social security number and driver's license. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/obamas-illegal-alien-uncle-has-valid.html Attorney That Defended Obama's Illegal Alien Aunt Also Will Defend Obama's Illegal Alien Uncle. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/attorney-that-defended-obamas-illegal.html Uncle Obama has a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement warrant for his arrest. MORE HERE: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/obama-has-federal-immigration-and.html

If you can't handle the truth maybe you shouldn't be here.lol

When I watch this it made me say I don't have any problems what so ever.

A hearing, with the apparent support of two state lawmakers, is scheduled before the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission to hear a complaint filed by Orly Taitz that alleges Barack Obama has used fraudulent documents and a fraudulent Social Security number. The hearing is scheduled Friday at 2 p.m. in Room 307 of the New Hampshire Legislative Office Building, and Taitz is encouraging the public to be present. The state holds the first presidential primary Jan. 10, 2012. On her website, Taitz said state Rep. Harry Accornero had said he was joining in her complaint, and she expects Rep. Larry Rappoport also to be in attendance. The lawmakers could not be reached immediately for comment. "Let's hope the elections board of New Hampshire will have the decency to refuse [to allow] Obama to appear on the ballot due to undeniable evidence of him using a stolen [Connecticut Social Security Number] … and due to the fact that he is using a computer generated forgery instead of a valid birth certificate," Taitz wrote. Jerome Corsi's New York Times best-seller, "Where's the Birth Certificate?", which addresses Obama's Social Security Number, is now available for immediate shipping, autographed by the author, only from the WND Superstore She noted that the election code in the state contains a statement that requires a candidate to swear to his qualification to be president pursuant to Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the United States Constitution, which states, "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president." Taitz has been involved in a long list of high-profile cases over the past few years that have challenged Obama's eligibility under the Constitution's requirement that the president be a natural-born citizen. Some believe that means a birth in the United States, and they doubt the validity of the image of a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth that Obama released in April. Others say natural-born means both parents must be citizens at the time of the birth. Under that standard, Obama could not qualify, because his father was a student in the U.S. but not a citizen. The complaint alleges that Obama is ineligible because "he never provided any documentary evidence of his natural born status." Further, "The most staggering evidence is Mr. Obama's lack of a valid Social Security number and his use of a fraudulently obtained Social Security number from the state of Connecticut, a state where he never resided, which was never assigned to Obama, according to E-Verify," the complaint states. It alleges not only is the Obama birth documentation a modern printout, there are numerous experts who attest it is fraudulent. "Taitz received an affidavit from scanning machines expert Douglas Vogt. … It shows further evidence of forgery, such as different types of ink used. Some of the document shows as gray scale scanning, some as black and white scanning, some color. It shows different types of letters and kerning … numerous other parameters lead to the same conclusion, that the document in question is not a copy of a 1961 type written document, but a computer generated forgery, created by cutting and pasting bits and pieces from different documents and filling in the blanks with computer graphics," the document explains. "Obama does not have an valid identification papers, which are necessary to be a candidate on the ballot, running for the U.S. presidency, based upon New Hampshire elections law 655-17 and on Article 1, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution," Taitz wrote. "This case shows an unprecedented level of corruption and lawlessness in the federal government and in the government of Hawaii, which allowed Obama to get on the ballot in 2008. … Petitioner demands removal of Obama from the ballot in the state of New Hampshire in the Democrat party primary and demands immediate criminal prosecution of Obama and his accomplices for elections fraud, common law fraud and uttering of forged documents." Meanwhile, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County in Arizona has assigned a special cold case team to investigate the possibility that Obama could use fraudulent documents to apply for the Arizona ballot next year. He's said the investigators have accumulated thousands of pages of evidence and his report likely will come early in 2012. Read more: New Hampshire wakes up to Obama's alleged Social Security fraud http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=368645#ixzz1dvpNDVmQ

Secrets of Soros, Obama, Occupy and MSM, Part 1 Posted: November 13, 2011 5:30 pm Eastern © 2011 While Occupy protesters continue to rant in select cities around the country, I'm wondering who is shadier: corporate Wall Street or corporate media? Of course, there's no surprise or secret in saying that the mainstream media, or MSM, is biased. But have you noticed the particularly intense acceleration and force of progressive MSM news reports in the last decade? How fair is that accelerated bias for most trusting and unsuspecting Americans, young or old? Subscribe Here To Receive Chuck Norris' Weekly Column In Your Email BONUS: Please also keep me informed about news and special offers from WND. Privacy Policy Gone are the days when broadcasters like Walter Cronkite attempted to convey objective and unbiased news. Propaganda seems to be at the heart of most national news. Passions, preferences and political persuasions permeate nearly all the news. Opine is ubiquitous and obvious by reporters' facial expressions alone. Like many of you, my wife, Gena, and I are avid watchers of the local, national and global news. Though we have our own preferences, we try to acquire a comprehensive understanding of the big issues. But we feel for other hard-working people (including homemakers) who don't have the time to read and research like we do. For quite some time, if I have wanted to obtain the "complete news," I often have to go to multiple sources. As reported by NewsBusters, consider in a single day last week how the MSM angled their reporting in ways to manipulate public opinion and align it with their corporate media (supporters) bias, which ironically (or maybe not so) parallels White House prejudice. "Networks hit Cain with 117 stories; ABC: Accusers seek 'safety in numbers' from Cain" "NBC uses Penn State scandal to slam Catholic Church" "NPR asks Bill Clinton: Obama's seen as liberal, 'How'd that happen'?" "NY Times spikes Fast & Furious hearing in print, omits Eric Holder's admission completely" "CNN to Perry: Convince us your campaign isn't finished" "NY Times twice omits Obama from headline to embarrassing insults of Netanyahu" "Newt mocks [CNBC journalist's] 'funny' defense of the liberal media" "CNN spins elections as Republican setback" "ABC and CBS spike Ohioans' rejection of Obamacare mandate, NBC sees voter call for 'restraint'" (Column continues below) The Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs even confessed that big-business money funneled via the MSM molds and directs the public's social and political viewpoints: "[T]he summits of American business now control or powerfully influence the major media that create American public opinion." The fact is, the primary networks, ABC, CBS and NBC, and their smaller cable channels, are owned and financed by an interlocking network of corporate conglomerates and controlled by progressive and politically biased proprietors. Billionaire moguls like George Soros are using millions and millions of dollars not only ensuring the second coming or election of President Obama but also with the greater goal of chipping away the very foundations of our republic. Just a few months ago, Media Research Center's Dan Gainor exposed globalist George Soros' financial connections to MSM and his funding of $52 million to influence and direct journalism in the national networks. Or do you think it's merely a coincidence that he has ties to more than 30 major news organizations, including the New York Times, the Associated Press, Washington Post, NBC and ABC, and yet no one hears anything from those networks about Soros' behind the scenes finagling and financing? It fascinates me that Occupiers hate the rich cats, unless they help finance their cause or rally at their sides, like George Soros and Michael Moore. Even with its liberal bent, Snopes.com just verified Thursday that Vice President Joe Biden's attorney son, Robert Hunter Biden, was retained for years to "undertake some lobbying efforts on behalf of Brookfield Office Properties," which just happens to own Zuccotti Park in New York, where the Occupiers rally their national movement. Snopes.com also verified that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's live-in girlfriend, Diana L. Taylor, is on the board of directors of Brookfield Office Properties. And just two months ago in September, the federal government's Department of Energy guaranteed a stimulus "loan" of $168.9 million to Brookfield Asset Management, which is a parent company of Brookfield Office Properties. But I'm sure those local and Washington governmental associations with Occupy Wall Street are all just coincidental and inconsequential, right? (In Part 2 next week, I'll detail George Soros' latest 2012 presidential campaign secret and his collective goal and master plan with the MSM and the White House itself.) http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=367589

Very well said.

Yes I guess some people do have pride and will not sell out their country for their careers. And I've learned in the last couple of years no matter what kind of evidence you show people those that want Obama to succeed at all cost do not and will not believe what is shown them.

The Obama Eligibility Question Is he eligible to serve as President of the United States, or is he a usurper? Let’s analyze what we know to be true. By Paul R. Hollrah @ Canada Free Press Never in American history has a national leader served under a darker cloud of suspicion than Barack Hussein Obama. Was he born in Hawaii or in Kenya? Did he become an Indonesian citizen in 1967? Where did he spend the summer of 1981? Did he actually attend classes at Columbia? Did he write Dreams from My Father? These are all interesting questions, but not the most critical ones. The most critical question relates to his eligibility. Is he eligible to serve as President of the United States, or is he a usurper? Let’s analyze what we know to be true. First, we have the absolute and unequivocal requirements of Article II. Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which states that, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” We know that Obama was not a citizen of the United States at the time the Constitution was adopted, we know that he was at least thirty-five years of age when he took office in January 2009, and we know that he has been a U.S. resident for at least fourteen years. But is he a “natural born” citizen? What is a “natural born” citizen, and how do we prevent an individual who is not a natural born citizen from ever becoming president or vice president? To answer these questions we must examine how our political leaders, from the Founding Fathers through the present day, have defined the term “natural born;” we must understand U.S. government policy on dual citizenship; we must examine the circumstances of Obama’s birth and citizenship; and finally, we must examine the vetting process that was designed to prevent an ineligible person from ascending to the presidency or the vice presidency. What is a “Natural Born” Citizen? In drafting the U.S. Constitution, the Founders relied on the work of Swiss philosopher Emerich de Vattel. In his 1758 legal treatise, The Law of Nations, Book One, Chapter 19, in a section titled “Of the citizens and natives,” Vattel defines the term “natural born Citizen” as follows: “… The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens… The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. 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 [emphasis added].” When the Founding Fathers met in Philadelphia in September 1787 to approve the final draft of the U.S. Constitution, the physical scars of the War of Independence from Great Britain were still visible all around them and a deep-seated animosity toward all things British colored every aspect of their daily lives. So is it conceivable that, just five years and eleven months after the British surrendered at Yorktown, the Founders would have presented to the states for ratification a Constitution that would allow an individual with divided loyalties – e.g. an individual with dual US-British citizenship – to serve as president or vice president of the United States? Not likely. Expressing the prevailing concerns of the time, and as an expression of the fear of foreign influence that gripped the hearts of the Founders, Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers, “These most deadly adversaries of republican government (cabal, intrigue, etc.) might actually have expected to make their approach from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own (a “Manchurian candidate?”) to the chief magistracy of the Union?” What is likely, even probable, is that the Founders drafted Article II, Section 1 so as to reflect Vattel’s definition of a “natural born” citizen. That is precisely why the Framers found it necessary to include in Article II, Section 1 the often overlooked and little understood words, “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution…” At the time the Constitution was adopted there were three types of citizens: 1) The former British subjects who, having renounced all foreign allegiances and having pledged to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, became citizens of a sovereign American nation when the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776; 2) The post-Declaration children of those who became U.S. citizens on July 4, 1776, the first “natural born” citizens of the United States, and all less than twelve years old at the time the Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788; and 3) A class of citizens comprised of those who were naturalized citizens by act of law, requiring a loyalty oath and renunciation of all foreign allegiances, and those who were dual citizens by automatic operation of foreign laws. To fully understand the importance of the words, “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution…,” it is necessary to recognize three significant dates. Those dates are: 1) July 4, 1776, the date on which the Declaration was signed, making all citizens of the thirteen colonies citizens of the United States; 2) June 21, 1788, the date on which ratification by the State of New Hampshire made the Constitution the official law of the land; and 3) July 4, 1811, the date on which the first “natural born” citizens… those born to U.S. citizens after the signing of the Declaration on July 4, 1776… became thirty-five years of age. (It was not until the thirty-fifth anniversary of the signing of the Declaration that the first natural born citizens became eligible to serve as president or vice president of the United States.) Since the Founders intended that only “natural born” citizens should ever serve as president or vice president… excluding naturalized citizens and those with a history of dual nationality… it became necessary to provide an exemption of limited duration covering those who were born prior to July 4, 1776. For example, presidents Washington, J. Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams, and Jackson were all “citizens,” but not “natural born” citizens because they were born prior to July 4, 1776. All were “grandfathered” and made eligible under the phrase, “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution…” Martin Van Buren, born to U.S. citizens on December 5, 1782, became the first “natural born” U.S. president. It was the simplest and easiest way of creating a body of candidates during the earliest years of the republic, unconstrained by the requirement that they be “natural born” citizens, at least 35 year of age. Every U.S. president since Van Buren… with the exception of Chester A. Arthur, whose father was a British subject at the time of his birth, and Barack Obama, whose father was also a British subject at the time of his birth… has been a “natural born” U.S. citizen. The Constitution limits candidates for president and vice president to “natural born” citizens and to those who were citizens of the United States at the time the Constitution was adopted. There can be no exceptions… not even for Barack Obama. In 1866, John A. Bingham, chief framer of the 14th Amendment, which granted citizenship to the freed slaves, wrote as follows: “Every human being born within the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty [emphasis added] is, in the language of the Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” In subsequent years, as modern transportation systems were developed and international travel became commonplace, the term “natural born Citizen” evolved to include those who were born to American parents outside the continental limits of the United States… as was the case with former Michigan Governor George W. Romney (born in Mexico to American parents) and Senator John McCain (born in Panama to American parents.) Clearly, those who drafted the U.S. Constitution and subsequent amendments knew what it meant to be a “natural born” citizen, but what of our political leaders of today? In the early months of 2008, at a time when Hillarious Rodham Clinton was the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination and only those in the “tin foil hat” brigade of the party were taking Barack Obama seriously, a number of lawsuits were filed questioning whether Senator John McCain, having been born in the Panama Canal Zone, was a natural born U.S. citizen. Former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, a conservative Republican, and Harvard Law professor Laurence H. Tribe, a liberal Democrat, were assigned the task of researching the issue. In a March 19, 2008 memorandum, Olson and Tribe concluded that, “based on original meaning of the Constitution, the Framers’ intentions, and subsequent legal and historical precedent, Sen. McCain’s birth, to parents who were U.S. citizens serving on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, makes him a ‘natural born Citizen’ within the meaning of the Constitution.” Weeks later, in an April 10, 2008 statement, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said, “Based on the understanding of the pertinent sources of constitutional meaning, it is widely believed that if someone is born to American citizens anywhere in the world they are natural born citizens. Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen [emphasis added].” This was followed by an April 30, 2008 Senate resolution, approved by a vote of 99-0 (Senator John McCain abstaining). The resolution declared: “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 Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘natural born citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.” It is important to note that all four references… the 1866 Bingham statement, the Olson-Tribe Memorandum, the Leahy statement, and the U.S. Senate Resolution… all utilize the plural terms “parents” or “American citizens,” strongly suggesting that the “natural born” question rests, in large part, on the necessity of both parents being U.S. citizens. While the Constitution itself does not define the term “natural born Citizen,” the legal precedent referred to in the Olson-Tribe memorandum cited above is taken from Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162(1875), the only defining precedent established by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court concluded in Minor 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.” It is also important to note that, during the past decade, a number of resolutions have been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives aimed at amending Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, completely altering the traditional interpretation of the term “natural born Citizen.” For example, in support of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s stated presidential ambitions, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), introduced House Joint Resolution 104 on September 15, 2004. The resolution proposed to amend Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution by adding the following language: “A person who is a citizen of the United States, who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years, and who is otherwise eligible to hold the Office of the President, is not ineligible to hold that Office by reason of not being a native born citizen of the United States.” H.J.R. 104 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution, where it remained through the end of the 108th Congress. Then, early in the 109th Congress, on February 1, 2005, Rohrabacher made a second attempt with the introduction of H.J.R. 15, which contained essentially the same language as the failed H.J.R. 104 of the previous Congress. And while it is understandable that Rohrabacher would attempt to amend the Constitution to make it possible for his own governor, a naturalized citizen, to seek the presidency, similar attempts by Democrats during the same decade are not so easily understood or explained. For example, on June 11, 2003, during the 108th Congress, Rep. Vic Snyder (D-AR) introduced H.J.R. 59 which would have totally eliminated the “natural born Citizen” requirement in Article II, Section 1 by substituting the following language: “A person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years shall be eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” The Snyder proposal was followed by H.J.R. 67, introduced on September 3, 2003 by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI). The Conyers proposal would have added the following substitute language to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution: “A person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years shall be eligible to hold the Office of President.” On January 4, 2005, early in the 109th Congress, Conyers made a second attempt with the introduction of H.J.R. 2, proposing the same language as contained in H.J.R. 67 of the 108th Congress. And on April 14, 2005, Rep. Vic Snyder made yet another attempt, introducing H.J.R. 42, containing amendatory language identical to his H.J.R. 59 of the 108th Congress. All of the above resolutions, proposing to send constitutional amendments to the states for ratification, suffered the same fate. All died in committee without being acted upon. Any member of Congress is free to introduce a resolution proposing an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, what distinguishes Rep. Rohrabacher’s resolutions from those of his Democratic colleagues is that his motive was clear… he was interested in making it possible for his governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to seek the presidency. The motivations of his Democrat colleagues, on the other hand, are a mystery; they only serve to raise important questions. In other words, if the “natural born Citizen” requirement had not represented a major problem at any time in U.S. history, why were Democrats suddenly concerned about it in 2003, 2004, and 2005 when a young black man, the son of an American mother and an African father, was emerging as a rising star in the Democratic Party? So the question arises, what did Congressmen Snyder and Conyers know that caused them to offer proposed constitutional amendments in the House of Representatives? More specifically, what did they know about Obama’s presidential ambitions and his inability to meet the “natural born Citizen” standard, and when did they know it? U.S. Government Policy on Dual Citizenship The official U.S. government policy regarding dual citizenship is found in publications of the Consular Affairs Division of the U.S. Department of State, as follows: CONTINUED HERE: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/42350

I agreed but will we get one?

New Hampshire Election Ballot Access Challenge Complaint Filed Against Obama Excerpt from Attorney Taitz: This is extremely important. New Hampshire is an early primary state and it allows anyone to challenge a candidate on the ballot. You do not have to be a resident of NH. We have to capitalize on this opportunity. I put a lot of work and a lot of sleepless nights in gathering all the information and exhibits. In the post below you will find a total of 87 pages in PDF files and a docx version of the complaint. You will find a complaint, challenging Obama’s legitimacy on the ballot, 66 pages of exhibits, containing sworn affidavits and documents, showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a fraudulently obtained CT Social Security number 042-68-4425, which was not assigned to him according to E-Verify and SSNVS. You will find a certified mail tracing number and a blank form for you to fill out. On the form you can state, that you want to join the challenge filed by Attorney Dr. Orly Taitz. SOURCE HERE AND HERE. ELECTION LAW COMPLAINT FILED BY ATTORNEY TAITZ ADDENDUM TO ELECTION LAW COMPLAINT FORM, SEEKING TO REMOVE FROM THE BALLOT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE FROM DEMOCRAT PARTY BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, II DUE TO LACK OF ELIGIBILITY, LACK OF PROOF OF NATURAL BORN US CITIZEN STATUS DUE TO LACK OF ANY LEGAL AND VERIFIABLE IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS AND DUE TO FRAUDULENT USE OF A CONNECTICUT SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER 042 -68-4425, WHICH WAS NEVER ASSIGNED TO HIM ACCORDING TO E-VERIFY AND SSNVS, AND DUE TO USE OF A COMPUTER GENERATED FORGERY INSTEAD OF A VALID LONG FORM U.S. BIRTH CERTIFICATE. ----- 1. Barack Hussein Obama, II is not a natural born citizen and is not qualified to be on the ballot as a Presidential candidate. In 2008, when Mr. Obama ran for the U.S. presidency, he was never vetted and he never provided any documentary evidence of his natural born status. Any challenger to his eligibility, including complainant herein was mobbed with allegations of racism coming from largely left leaning pro-Obama media. We have seen an unprecedented level of corruption in all 3 branches of the U.S. government and the government of HI, which allowed Mr. Obama to get into the White House without any valid identification papers. 2. The most staggering evidence, is Mr. Obama’s lack of a valid Social Security number and his use of a fraudulently obtained Social Security number from the state of Connecticut, a state, where he never resided, which was never assigned to Obama, according to E-Verify and SSNVS 3. Complainant herein, is Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ, attorney and doctor licensed in the state of California, who is an attorney admitted to the Supreme Court of the United States, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Dr. Taitz is a civil rights leader, who is fighting an unprecedented level of corruption in the government and courts in order to preserve an unalienable right of U.S. citizens to elect eligible candidates and vote in fraud free elections. Dr. Taitz is also a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate 2012 in the state of California. 4. In 2009 Dr. Taitz received reports from licensed investigators Neil Sankey and Susan Daniels, which show, that according to most reputable national databases for most of his life Barack Obama used a Connecticut Social Security number 042-68-4425, issued in 1977, even though he was never a resident of the state of Connecticut. In 1977, Social Security numbers were assigned according to the state where application were submitted. In 1977 Obama was nowhere near Connecticut, he was a student at the Punahoa school in Hawaii, where he resided. Additionally, national databases showed another birth date, associated with this number, a birth date of 1890. In around of 1976-1977, due to changes in Social Security administration, many elderly individuals, who never had Social Security numbers before, had to apply for their Social Security number for the first time in order to obtain Social Security benefits. It appears, that the number in question was assigned to an elderly individual in CT around March of 1977, the death of this elderly individual was never reported, and from around 1980-1981 this number was fraudulently assumed by Barack Obama. Exhibit 1, Affidavit of Susan Daniels 5. Taitz was a delegate at the Continental Congress Convention in 2009, where she had a discussion on the matter of Barack Obama’s fraudulent use of the aforementioned Connecticut Social Security number with a recently retired senior deportation officer from the department of Homeland Security, John Sampson. Mr. Sampson provided her with an affidavit, attesting to the fact, that indeed according to national databases Obama is using a Connecticut Social Security number, even though there is no reasonable justification or explanation for such use by one, who resided in Hawaii in and around the time the Social Security number in question was issued. Exhibit 2 Affidavit of John Sampson. 3. In 2010, Barack Obama posted on line on WhiteHouse.gov his 2009 tax returns. As he posted those returns, he forgot to flatten the PDF file, so all of the layers of modification of the file became visible to the public. One of the pages contained Obama’s full Social Security number 042-68-4425. Taitz received an affidavit from Adobe Illustrator program expert Chito Papa, attesting to the fact, that initially posted tax returns of Barack Obama contained Connecticut Social security number 042-68-4425. While the file was later flattened and the Social security number can no longer be seen, thousands of US citizens and individuals around the world were able to obtain the original file with the full Social Security number. 4. Taitz checked an official site for Selective Service SSS.gov. She entered name Barack Obama, date of birth 08.04.1961 (Obama’s alleged birth date) and Connecticut Social Security number 042-68-4425, which Obama is using in his tax returns. She got a verification, showing, that Barack Obama registered for Selective Service, using this CT SSN. At this point she had three investigator reports and two US government documents, showing Obama using CT SSN 042-68-4425. 5. Taitz received an affidavit from a witness Linda Jordan, who ran a E-Verify check for the above Social Security number 042-68-4425. According to E-Verify, there is no match between Obama’s name and the Social security he used in his tax returns and his Selective service application. 6. Taitz received an e-mail from a US Army officer, Colonel Gregory Hollister, whereby he did an independent check and found, that indeed Obama is using this Connecticut number 042-68-4425. He also, contacted SSNVS (Social Security Number Verification Systems) and found that the number Obama is using was never assigned to him. Exhibit 6. Additionally, there is a clear pattern of Social Security fraud by Obama’s family members and close associates. Recently Obama’s uncle Onyango Obama was arrested for drunk driving and found to be using for employment a Social Security number, even though he is an illegal alien and not allowed to work. Obama’s aunt Zeutuni Obama was stealing tax payer dollars by living in subsidized housing and using a state of Indiana-issued Social Security number, even though she is an illegal alien and was never a resident of the state of Indiana. Obama’s close associate, mentor and co-board member from Annenberg Challenge, William Ayers, in his book “Fugitive Days” admitted to creating over a hundred fraudulent Social Security numbers using names of deceased infants, who did not get their Social Security numbers before their deaths. “After the Baltimore fiasco, stealing ID was forbidden. Instead we began to build ID sets around documents as flimsy as a fishing license or a laminated card available in a Times Square novelty shop called “Official ID.” We soon figured out that the deepest and most foolproof ID had a government-issued Social Security card at its heart, and the best source of those were dead-baby birth certificates. I spent impious days over the next several months tramping through rural cemeteries in Iowa and Wisconsin, Illinois and North Dakota, searching for those sad little markers of people born between 1940 and 1950 who had died between 1945 and 1955. The numbers were surprising: two in one graveyard, a cluster of fourteen in another. Those poor souls had typically been issued birth certificates—available to us at any county courthouse for a couple of bucks and a simple form with information I could copy from the death announcement at the archive of the local paper—but they had never applied for a Social Security card. Collecting those birth certificates became a small industry, and within a year we had over a hundred. For years I was a paper-made Joseph Brown, and then an Anthony Lee, remarkably durable identities. My on-paper official residences: a transient hotel in San Francisco and a warehouse in New York.” Bill Ayers, Fugitive Days. Ayers had a whole business of forged social security card making. It is unfortunate, that the person, occupying the position of the U.S. president, was using and is using a bogus social security number. To see legal documents go here. http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-hampshire-election-ballot-access.html

That is not the same case.

Some people may not like the truth but most of us do.