Sunday, April 14, 2013

Conn. Senator Is Actually Urging Fox Not to Air Saturday’s NASCAR Race…Because the NRA Is Sponsoring It

Chris Murphy Tells Fox, Murdoch Not to Air NRA NASCAR Race
U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., speaks at a gun violence conference as U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., left, listens in Danbury, Conn., Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013. The conference, organized by members of the state’s congressional delegation is to push President Barack Obama’s gun control proposals. Credit: AP
Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy does not like the NRA, and he’s making that quite clear. In a letter to News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch, he’s asking that Fox cancel plans to air Saturday’s NASCAR Sprint Cup race — because the NRA is sponsoring it.
Murphy wrote that the race is taking place during Senate consideration of legislation to reduce gun violence in the wake of the elementary school shootings last December in Newtown, Conn., and feared the race will give national attention “to an organization that has been the face of one side of this heated debate.”
Fox officials declined comment Thursday. The NRA 500 from Texas Motor Speedway will be broadcast as scheduled.
Murphy also questioned the Victory Lane tradition at Texas, where the winner gets a cowboy hat and can fire six-shooters loaded with blanks into the air.
“This celebration of guns is inappropriate in the immediate wake of the Newtown massacre,” Murphy added. “But most importantly, broadcasting this race, which will highlight the NRA and its radical agenda during this time, sends a harmful signal to the families affected by gun violence, as well as the millions of Americans who support sensible gun control measures and enjoy your sports programming.”
“I think the fact that they’re not loaded is a fairly safe thing,” said Eddie Gossage, the president of Texas Motor Speedway, in response to the victory celebration.
Gossage has repeatedly said that the NRA’s sponsorship is “not about politics. It’s about sports marketing.” He said he has received fewer than a dozen cards, letters or emails about the deal since it was announced last month.
Chris Murphy Tells Fox, Murdoch Not to Air NRA NASCAR Race
FILE – In this Nov. 4, 2012, file photo, Jimmie Johnson fires blanks out of a pair of revolvers as he celebrates his win in Victory Lane following the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series auto race at Texas Motor Speedway, in Fort Worth, Texas. Credit: AP
But that’s not good enough for Murphy. He told Murdoch “your company would now essentially endorse the NRA’s extreme position against such laws by broadcasting this event.”
This is not the NRA’s first title sponsorship in NASCAR. The group sponsored a second-tier Nationwide race last September at Atlanta, which like Texas is owned by Speedway Motorsports Inc.
Asked about ticket sales for Saturday night’s race, Gossage said he expects a similar crowd to last spring when the crowd of 159,200 was the largest for a NASCAR race last season.
“I can’t speak for everybody but I can speak for myself in saying that I would really rather stay out of politics and just race,” said NASCAR driver Brad Keselowski, the defending Sprint Cup champion, who owns rifles. “That is certainly not the situation though. Sometimes we get thrown into it whether we want to or not. I think the best thing is just to acknowledge it and try to move on with it.”
You can read the full letter from Murphy to Murdoch below:
Dear Mr. Murdoch:
I write today to urge you to not broadcast NASCAR’s NRA 500 at Texas Motor Speedway on April 13th.  This race, which is being sponsored by the National Rifle Association (NRA), is going to take place during the Senate’s consideration of legislation to reduce gun violence. The race not only brings national attention to an organization that has been the face of one side of this heated debate, it also features the live shooting of guns at the end of the race. This celebration of guns is inappropriate in the immediate wake of the Newtown massacre. But most importantly, broadcasting this race, which will highlight the NRA and its radical agenda during this time, sends a harmful signal to the families affected by gun violence, as well as the millions of Americans who support sensible gun control measures and enjoy your sports programming.
The horror that unfolded on December 14th at Sandy Hook Elementary School has sparked a national conversation about the adequacy of our gun laws.  You, News Corporation and its subsidiaries, including Fox News, should contribute and continue to cover this discussion. Given that you have been outspoken in your support of gun reform, it is the height of irony that some would perceive that your company would now essentially endorse the NRA’s extreme position against such laws by broadcasting this event.
Shortly after the tragedy in Newtown, you called on policymakers and the President to strengthen our gun laws, asking, “when will politicians find courage to ban automatic weapons?” This valid question will be answered when the Senate considers major reforms to our gun laws in early to mid-April.  As a senator, I can tell you that many of us possess the courage, and will strongly advocate for sensible gun reforms to take assault weapons and high-capacity magazines off our streets and require all gun purchasers to submit for a background check.
You also challenged President Obama to show bold leadership on this issue after he addressed the nation.  I believe that the President has shown incredible leadership since the tragedy by trying to help our country, my state, and the community of Newtown heal in the wake of this terrible event.  I would like to make a similar challenge to you.  You should play a constructive role in our national dialogue by refraining from broadcasting the NRA 500.  By airing this race you will be strengthening the brand of a radical organization that is currently standing in the way of meaningful progress on this issue. Today’s NRA bears little resemblance to the one of its founding.  It stokes fear and perpetuates a perverse interpretation of the Second Amendment in order to sell more guns and fuel larger donations from gun manufacturers.  After the events of Newtown, Aurora, Oak Creek, and so many other senseless tragedies, the NRA continues to say that the only solution to gun violence is more guns.  It even disavows common sense measures, like universal background checks for gun purchases – a policy that enjoys the support of 74 percent of its members and that it advocated for in 1999.
Considering your support of sane gun control measures and the extreme nature of the NRA, I urge you to not broadcast this race on April 13th.  Inserting Fox Sports in this debate at this critical time will give credence to an extreme organization that is opposed to reasonable policies to stem gun violence. Thank you in advance for your consideration.
​The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Editor’s note: ​TheBlaze will be sending two reporters to the NRA 500 on Saturday. Be sure to check back this weekend for full coverage.

Obama's missing 'thesis'

NBC Senior Investigative Producer Jim Popkin looks at "Obama and the case of the missing 'thesis'" in an item on NBC blog Deep Background.  
Conservative provocateurs have been hunting for it. Investigative journalists have been on the prowl, too. Even a former professor has been searching through old boxes for his copy of it. But today Barack Obama made it official: He doesn't have and can't release any copies of the thesis-length paper he wrote 25 years ago while a senior at Columbia University.
"We do not have a copy of the course paper you requested and neither does Columbia University," Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt told NBC News.
The hunt for Obama's senior "thesis" began with a throwaway line in a newspaper article last October. The New York Times story, on Obama's early New York years, mentioned in passing that the presidential contender had majored in political science at Columbia and had spent his time "writing his thesis on Soviet nuclear disarmament."
Journalists began hounding Columbia University for copies of the musty document. Conservative bloggers began wondering if the young Obama had written a no-nukes screed that he might come to regret. And David Bossie, the former congressional investigator and "right-wing hit man," as one newspaper described him, took out classified newspaper ads in Columbia University's newspaper and the Chicago Tribune in March searching for the term paper.
So what does the missing paper say, and could it be politically damaging to Obama? The Obama campaign won't offer any guidance since it says it doesn't have a copy. Spokesman Ben LaBolt wouldn't even say whether Sen. Obama threw out his copy or lost it.
So we turned for answers to the former professor who graded the now-elusive paper. His former professor, Michael Baron, recalled in an interview with NBC News that Obama easily aced the year-long class. Baron described the paper as a "thesis" or "senior thesis" in several interviews, and said that Obama spent a year working on it. Baron recalls that the topic was nuclear negotiations with the Soviet Union.
"My recollection is that the paper was an analysis of the evolution of the arms reduction negotiations between the Soviet Union and the United States," Baron said in an e-mail. "At that time, a hot topic in foreign policy circles was finding a way in which each country could safely reduce the large arsenal of nuclear weapons pointed at the other … For U.S. policy makers in both political parties, the aim was not disarmament, but achieving deep reductions in the Soviet nuclear arsenal and keeping a substantial and permanent American advantage. As I remember it, the paper was about those negotiations, their tactics and chances for success. Barack got an A."
Baron said that, even if he could find a copy of the paper, it would likely disappoint Obama's critics. "The course was not a polemical course, it was a course in decision making and how decisions got made," he said. "None of the papers in the class were controversial."

Obama's Missing Thesis

9:51 AM, Jul 25, 2008 • By JAIME SNEIDER
The latest report on Obama's missing thesis comes from MSNBC. Written his senior year at Columbia University, Obama's thesis was about Soviet nuclear disarmament. It's only natural to wonder what the budding socialist turned presidential candidate thought of nuclear proliferation in the early 1980s.
The Obama campaign, proving every bit as secretive as the Office of the Vice President, has been less than forthcoming with details. "Spokesman Ben LaBolt wouldn't even say whether Sen. Obama threw out his copy or lost it." At an earlier date, an aide actually told the New Republic the junior senator couldn't recall what he had written about, but as that editor notes, "who doesn't remember their senior thesis?" To get the inside scoop, MSNBC contacted the former professor who taught Obama's senior seminar and who recalls the content of the paper better than Obama himself.

His former professor, Michael Baron, recalled in an interview with NBC News that Obama easily aced the year-long class. Baron described the paper as a "thesis" or "senior thesis" in several interviews, and said that Obama spent a year working on it. Baron recalls that the topic was nuclear negotiations with the Soviet Union.
"My recollection is that the paper was an analysis of the evolution of the arms reduction negotiations between the Soviet Union and the United States," Baron said in an e-mail. "At that time, a hot topic in foreign policy circles was finding a way in which each country could safely reduce the large arsenal of nuclear weapons pointed at the other รข€¦ For U.S. policy makers in both political parties, the aim was not disarmament, but achieving deep reductions in the Soviet nuclear arsenal and keeping a substantial and permanent American advantage. As I remember it, the paper was about those negotiations, their tactics and chances for success. Barack got an A."
What MSNBC doesn't report is that Baron, or at least a Michael Baron who also happens to run an electronics company in Florida, has given $1,250 to Obama. Maybe if the Obama campaign would release the thesis and Obama's college transcript like a normal presidential campaign, we could all decide for ourselves whether Obama deserves an A.

Barack Hussein Obama (Sr.) – British Passport – April 29, 1959.

o senior british pass 3Its fascinating and incredible just to look at Barack Obama Sr.’s old British (Colony and Protectorate of Kenya) Passport.
I have a bunch to say but, for the time being, wont bore you with an exhaustive report.  I will, however, offer the following brief introduction for your review:
- DOB:  18.06.1934  or June 18, 1934.  5 years later he says June 18, 1936.   So much for the critics (mainly Obotopians) who indicated that Obama would certainly know his own date of birth.  I will elaborate more in my forthcoming report.
- Eyes:  Brown Black.   5 years later he says black brown eyes.
- Height:  5′ 10″.  5 years later he says 5′ 11”.
- Occupation: Clerk.  Did you know that he was a clerk for the Kenya Railways?  I did not know until recently.
- Issued in Nairobi on April 29, 1959.   Note: Nairobi was located in the Kenya Colony, not to be confused with the Kenya Protectorate.
- Names of wife and children (and their bio data) are requested but are not provided.
I will issue a more detailed and comprehensive report later.   Have fun:
o senior british pass 1o senior british pass 2o senior british pass 4Please exercise your free speech in the comments section below. There are no stipulations of political correctness on this blog. Speak your mind, give us your thoughts, both objective and subjective. Share your ideas, hunches, inklings or your expertise. Please provide recommendation and corrections if you spot errors in fact within the blog report. Lastly, remember that posting a comment is much like casting a vote, so please do so.

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Family Lies: Barack Hussein Obama British Passport Adds More Lies To Obama's Life Story?

Barack Hussein Obama (Sr.) 
– British Passport – 
April 29, 1959
By Lucas Smith

Its fascinating and incredible just to look at Barack Obama Sr.’s old British (Colony and Protectorate of Kenya) Passport.

I have a bunch to say but, for the time being, wont bore you with an exhaustive report. I will, however, offer the following brief introduction for your review:

- DOB: 18.06.1934 or June 18, 1934. 5 years later he says June 18, 1936. So much for the critics (mainly Obotopians) who indicated that Obama would certainly know his own date of birth. I will elaborate more in my forthcoming report.

- Eyes: Brown Black. 5 years later he says black brown eyes.

- Height: 5′ 10″. 5 years later he says 5′ 11”.

- Occupation: Clerk. Did you know that he was a clerk for the Kenya Railways? I did not know until recently.

- Issued in Nairobi on April 29, 1959. Note: Nairobi was located in the Kenya Colony, not to be confused with the Kenya Protectorate.

- Names of wife and children (and their bio data) are requested but are not provided.

I will issue a more detailed and comprehensive report later. Have fun: [...] - Pics via Lucas Smith @ Was Obama Born In Kenya.


FLASHBACK: Freedom Of Information Act Release Reveals Obama's Father Was An Illegal Immigrant - DETAILS HERE.


((( This High Definition video was produced in 720P HD – Select the HD quality setting for optimal viewing experience )))

2006: Obama In Kenya: I Am So Proud To Come Back Home - VIDEO HERE. 

2007: Michelle Obama Declares Obama Is Kenyan And America Is Mean - VIDEO HERE. 

2008: Michelle Obama Declares Barack Obama's Home Country Is Kenya - VIDEO HERE. 

FLASHBACK: Obama Is The Original Birther! Obama In 1991 Stated In His Own Bio He Was Born In Kenya. DETAILS HERE. 



  • College grants for students
  • Federal Tax
  • Personal Loan
  • Free conference call
  • Conference Calls
  • Conference Calling
  • Schools
  • Cooked
  • The Originals
  • Records

Who is Barack Obama?

By Mondo Frazier
There are so many things the public does not know about the man who sits in the White House.  Who is Barack Obama?  In my search to find out the answers I embarked on a journey that has lasted three years and counting -- and nearly made my head explode.
As usual, when Obama is the subject, Americans can't count on the progressives in the Corporate Mainstream Media (CMM) for much help.  So, what's one to do?  The foreign press proved helpful.  Therefore, gleaned from the foreign press: a few stories which didn't rate any coverage from the U.S. CMM.
In 2005, then-Senator Barack Obama went on a mission to Russia with Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN).  The  newly-minted U.S. senator was invited to be part of a Russian fact-finding tour that inspected a nuclear weapons site in Perm, Siberia.  The base Lugar and Obama visited was where mobile launch missiles were being destroyed under the Cooperative Threat Reduction program (CTR), which also went by the name of the Nunn-Lugar program.
What happened next -- after the inspections were over -- was at the time reported by several foreign news sources but was never reported in the USA by the CMM.  The Russians detained Obama and Lugar for three hours at the airport, demanding to examine both Obama's and Lugar's passports and search their plane.  Some sources reported that the Russians accused Barack Obama of being a spy.
But wait -- there's more!
According to an Italian source, the Russians did not accuse Obama of being an American spy; they accused him of being a spy for the British!  The report went on to say that the incident ended up involving the White House, the U.S. State Department, and military officials, along with their counterparts in Moscow.
Strangely enough, an official report from Lugar's office about the trip never mentioned the incident.  Neither did Barack Obama in 2008 when he was desperate to exhibit some foreign policy chops.
One other oddity: in the fall of 2008, Obama admitted on his site that he had held dual citizenship with both the United States and Great Britain (the site explained that this was due to Barack Obama, Sr. being a foreign national) until 1982.  Did the Russians know something about Obama's citizenship in 2005 that ordinary Americans don't know in 2011?
Another story no one has seen fit to ask about: Obama's Most Excellent Pakistani Adventure.
In the summer of 1981, 20-year-old Barack Obama embarked on a two-week trip to Pakistan.  At least what little reporting that has been done claimed the length of the trip was two weeks.  The only proof that the trip didn't turn into a longer stay is that we (supposedly) have records which show that Barack Obama enrolled at Columbia University later that same summer.  Of course, the public hasn't seen those records, but that's what we've been told.  Anyone in doubt will be directed to Obama's autobiography, Dreams from My Father.
Obama clearly gave the impression in DFMF that he was this penniless, somewhat confused young man, in search of an identity.  Obama makes sure readers don't miss the point by writing that he was forced to wear "thrift store clothing" during this time.  Yet he somehow managed to find the cash to finance a two-week trip to Pakistan.
Which he never wrote about.  Which in itself is odd: here's a guy who wrote two autobiographies that explored events real, imagined, and totally fictional that supposedly forged the modern-day Barack Obama from humble beginnings.  That's according to the Obama NarrativeTM -- which gets most of its facts from Dreams from My Father.
Not only did a poor, nearly destitute Obama manage to afford the trip to Pakistan, but once there he somehow financed two weeks in the Lahore Hilton International.  In addition, Obama was introduced to the future prime minister and president of Pakistan -- and went bird-hunting with him.  Which the prime minister mentioned in the Pakistani press in 2008.  There's so much more, including one question the CMM never asked Obama: who arranged all of this?  For a 20-year-old nobody.
Another curious piece to the queer Obama puzzle is the connection -- which hasn't been made in the CMM (attention, Fox News!) -- between illegal foreign contributions to the Obama campaign and subsequent billions in Stimulus money to foreign companies and banks.  During and after the 2008 election, accusations of illegal foreign contributions -- which flowed into the Obama campaign when credit card safeguards were disabled on the campaign's website -- were documented in the conservative press and elsewhere.
Who were these mysterious donors, and in what countries did they live?  Unfortunately, due to the chicanery of Team Obama, we may never know.  Fast-forward to 2009.  Obama's multi-billion-dollar Stimulus is rushed through Congress, and billions of dollars in Stimulus money are doled out to foreign companies and banks.  Finland, China, Brazil, and India are just a few of the beneficiaries of Americans' hard-earned tax dollars. Might these have been payoffs for those shady, unknown donations?
Bill Clinton was the first president to benefit from a foreign spoils system, but Barack Obama has made Clinton look like an amateur. 
One more coincidence in shady fundraising.  The lady involved with Obama's fundraising in the Caribbean?  None other than Vera Baker, who packed up and hurried left the country after the National Enquirer started exploring a possible tryst between her and Obama in a Washington hotel.
Barack Obama can only hope that ObamaCare covers "extreme stress" -- because whoever on his staff is responsible for keeping track of all of the weird stuff in the president's life is definitely a candidate for burnout. 
One final item involves that most elusive of documents: Obama's long-lost long-form birth certificate.
A Chicago-area activist, Sherman Skolnick, writing for a radio show/website (now defunct) by the name of Cloak and Dagger uncorked this headline on his readers.  It referred to another story he'd written in 2005 -- three years before anyone in the media coined the term "birther" to tamp down curiosity about our 44th president's past.  (All-caps headline in the original story.)
Just another day in the life of anyone attempting to pierce the shroud of mystery that surrounds our 44th president.  The final result is the publication of The Secret Life of Barack Hussein Obama.
Mondo Frazier is the editor/founder of the website DBKP - Death By 1000 Papercuts and the author of The Secret Life of Barack Hussein Obama, published by Threshold Editions/Simon & Schuster.

Article II has now been erased

by Jon Christian Ryter on January 30, 2013     Print This Post Print This Post
Barack Hussein Obama, the community organizer who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, got there by violating Article II of the Constitution of the United States not once but four times in four years. Add his four violations of Article II with two violations of Article I since becoming the “Occupier,” and we have six impeachable offenses that could, and should, land Mr. Obama in a federal penitentiary.
While any American with an IQ larger than their hat size who has read Lord Christopher Monckton’s Peer Review on Obama’s birth, or has studied Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s forensic report on the evidence which conclusively proves that the long form birth certificate that Obama claims as his long form birth certificate is a very amateurish forgery of the long form Hawaiian birth certificate of Virginia Sunahara, who was born at Wahiawa Hospital in Hawaii on August 4, 1961 and died of postnatal complications the following day at Kapi’olani Hospital. Her birth and death certificate number was 151-61 10641. That, of course as all of us now know, is the number that Obama’s political advocates in Gov. Neil Abercrombie’s [D-HI] liberal bureaucracy claims belongs to Obama.
But before dealing with the impeachable crimes that should remove Obama from the White House and transfer him to the Big House, let’s settle the birth certificate issue once and for all, since it’s this distraction that has kept the American people from coming to grips with the fact that Obama is not, and never was, a citizen of the United States. The birthers created an unnecessary distraction—the question whether Obama met the constitutional letter of the law needed to be deemed an Article II natural born citizen. Their argument muddied the water so much that most Americans through the birthers were splitting hairs because Obama’s father was a Kenyan citizen although his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham was born in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas on Nov. 29, 1942 and was an American citizen. In their mind, that settled the birth issue. The only problem is, according to US Citizenship law at the time of Obama’s birth, an American mother—unmarried, or at least not married to an American husband (and living outside of the United States at the time of the live birth of her baby)—had to be at least 19 years of age to transfer citizenship rights to her offspring. On Aug. 4, 1961 Stanley Ann Dunham was three months and 25 days shy of being able to legally transmit citizenship to her son, who was born in Kenya, not Hawaii—the claims and fabrications of the Obama people notwithstanding.
The fact that Obama does not possess a genuine United States birth certificate is the crux of the battle going on in the court in Honolulu at this time. Virginia Sunahara’s brother, Duncan Sunahara, has been trying to get a copy of his long dead sister’s birth certificate since the short copy version of Obama’s birth certificate popped up on the White House website in 2009. Oddly, the head of the Hawaii Dept. of Health, Loretta Fuddy, told Duncan Sunahara in 2010 that no birth or death record for Virginia Sunahara existed in the HDOH. As far as Fuddy was concerned, no such person had ever been born in Hawaii between 1960 and 1964—nor was there a record of anyone with that name having died, either.
Duncan knew from his elderly mother, who now suffers from dementia, that his sister was born in the same hospital where he was born a few years earlier—Wahiawa General Hospital. She had serious postnatal problems and was transferred to another hospital where she died. Duncan’s mother no longer remembered the name of the hospital. Duncan Sunahara checked both of them—Queen’s Hospital and the Kapi’olani Medical Center, but neither hospital would provide him with any information since he was not the parent of the deceased child and, therefore, was not legally entitled to the information..
It was not until Dean Haskins of the Birther Summit went to Hawaii and, with Sunahara, visited the HDOH. Figuring they would run into the Fuddy Stone Wall that blocked Duncan Sunahara a year earlier, Haskins was shocked that Duncan’s application, this time around, produced Virginia Sunahara’s short form (which the HDOH called her long form) birth certificate. But, a closer look at the document the HDOH gave Sunahara provided the answer. The number assigned by the HDOH to the newly “discovered” Sunahara birth/death certificate on Aug. 4/5, 1961 was 151-61 011080. The problem is, when you look at the birth progression you run into the Nordyke twins, Susan and Gretchen, the 10,637th and 10,638th babies born in Hawaii in 1961. They were born on August 5 (the day Virginia Sunahara’s birth/death certificate would have been certified). Virginia Sunahara’s birth death certificate should have been 61 10641. Instead it was 61 11080, or 339 births past the Nordyke twins. The problem with Obama having that number, 61 10641 is that he was theoretically also born on Aug. 4, 1961—after the Nordyke twins who were actually born after him. One of the 7 sextillion impossibilities that convinced forensic scientists in both Europe and Maricopa County, Arizona that the Obama birth certificate was a fraud, stolen from a dead baby found in the Hawaiian birth records on a date convenient enough to work for Kenyan born Barack Hussein Obama to make the British born citizen, Indonesian-adopted Negro baby appear—49 years after his birth—to be an African-American natural born United States citizen who was eligible to seek the office of President of the United States when he does not even have a Certificate of Citizenship (an immigration document for foreign born persons applying for citizenship) and, of course, a certified copy of Obama’s Oath of Allegiance to the United States—possessed by naturalized citizens, and even natural born citizen whose stepfathers renounced their natural citizenship rights in order to gain Indonesian citizenship privileges (the only way Obama would be allowed to attend any school in Indonesia). That, by the way, should be enough to convince any Congressman whose IQ is less than the number of his or her congressional district that Obama is not, nor ever was, a citizen of the United States
In a Honolulu, Hawaii court hearing in Sept., 2012—initiated by Duncan Sunahara to get his sister’s actual long form birth certificate—his lawyer argued to the court that his client was entitled to the long form, hospital version of his sister’s birth certificate. The State argued it had the right to provide whatever version it wished, and since taking photographs of 50 year old documents put them at risk of damage, the HDOH could issue whichever version they wanted. Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine testified under oath in court that “…to get the long form you actually have to go to the vault. And the records that are in the vault have been stored in volumes—not just the one, not just the plaintiff’s sister’s records, but other records from around that time of birth…In this case, [Mr. Obama's] birth certificate—which we know is all about that!”
Here’s the serious problem with Ms. Nagamine’s brief argument that no one caught or everyone simply chose to ignore. Nagamine argued that the birth record of 61 10641 was Obama’s, and that Sunahara’s birth record was 61 011080. There were 17,616 births in Hawaii in 1961, with a statistical average of 48 births per day, which would have placed that birth 9 to 10 days after the Nordyke twins who were actually born a day after Virginia Sunahara was born, and on the day she died.) Nagamine knew if she was forced to produce the hospital record of 10 10641, the jury would not be looking at Barack Obama’s Hawaiian hospital long form birth certificate, they would be looking at Virginia Sunahara’s birth/death certificate—the document Gov. Neil Abercrombie and Obama’s cronies in the Hawaiian state government figured no one would ever come looking for. After all, who looks for the birth records of a baby no one ever heard of who died 52 years ago?
Since nothing in the Sunahara case mentioned the name of Barack Obama, what would make Nagamine blurt out, when Sunahara’s lawyer demanded they be allowed to look at the page where his sister’s long form hospital birth certificate was stored, only to receive the objection that Obama’s birth certificate was there, with the defiant comment that, “…we know this is all about that!”
In the book, “Fugitive Days” by former domestic terrorist and Obama-buddy Bill Ayers writing about changing one’s identity to avoid capture by law enforcement, wrote: “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…available to us at any county courthouse for a couple of bucks.” Over the years Barack Hussein Obama has used at least 27 different social security numbers. The most recent one—and the one he is using to draw his paycheck at the White House is still officially listed as the Social Security card of Jean Paul Ludwig. Ludwig was born in Connecticut in 1890. He’s been dead for 32 years..
Snopes and Fact or Fiction both argue that Obama could not have been using Ludwig’s social security card because Ludwig was still alive when Obama registered for the draft. Jean Paul Ludwig died in June, 1981 in Hawaii. The part about Ludwig still be alive when Obama turned 18, is true. But, there’s still a problems with their argument.
Sheriff Joe Arpaio has forensically proved that Obama’s Selective Service Card was also a forgery. What does that mean? It means Obama never registered for the draft on Sept. 4, 1980. Since Obama did not possess a US birth certificate on Sept. 4, 1980, there were no documents advising the Selective Service System that there was a guy running around the country by the name of Barack Obama who had not registered for the draft. Since Obama did not have a birth record trail to worry about, and since foreign students with Indonesian passports studying in the United States are not obligated to register for induction into the US Army—nor were they required to produce evidence that they had applied for a Selective Service Card, Obama would have had no need to use Ludwig’s, or for that matter, anyone else’s Social Security card to register for the draft—at that moment. He would, however, in 1983. Ludwig died in 1982, so there was no one using his SSN in 1983 when Barack Obama appears to have replaced Barry Soetoro at Columbia University.
For all practical purposes, except in Kenya’s birth records at the Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombassa, and in Grandma Dunham’s heart, Barack Obama didn’t exist. Barry Soetoro was the Indonesia student who enrolled in Occidental College in 1978, not Barack Obama. It was not until Obama enrolled in Columbia that he would need a Selective Service Card. While Obama’s records, dates and names are deliberately skewed out of focus so the lens of history under the Barry Soetoro chapters of Obama’s life—the Indonesian chapters, could be erased and quietly replaced with the edited Barack Obama—the mulatto American—chapters that suggest that Obama was not born in Kenya but Hawaii. He was suddenly no longer the Wahabbi-trained Islamist raised in Indonesia where his step father traded his British citizenship for an Indonesian education since, in Indonesia, only citizens are awarded with an education. Now, through the opaque shroud of history the Wahabbi-trained Muslim from Kenya and Indonesia became the make-believe Christian from Hawaii.
Except to his closest friends who still called him Barry, Soetoro was being methodically erased because those who were retooling him for an American political career knew that a Shariah-indoctrinated radical Muslim didn’t fit in the pro-Israeli political landscape of the United States. Obama’s transitional year became 1982 when Barry Soetoro officially became Barack Obama when he entered Columbia University. Soetoro,who came to Occidental College in Los Angeles, California as an Indonesian Muslim, transferred in Sept. 1982 to Columbia University as a Hawaiian-born Christian American. It was at that time that Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah began Obama’s Manchurian Candidate makeover.
Barry Soetoro didn’t need a Selective Service Card since he was still a foreign student with an Indonesian passport. Barack Obama, on the other hand, could not legally enroll as an American student at Columbia University in 1982 without a Selective Service card because the law required it. When Barry Soetoro morphed into Barack Obama in what appears to be late 1982 or early 1983, Obama had a Selective Service Card which apparently contained Jean Paul Ludwig’s (now deceased) Social Security number. So, having Ludwig die during Obama’s “black hole” period was a stroke of luck for Obama. Between 1981 and 1983 Obama pretty much erased Barry Soetoro. The final vestiges of Soetoro were left behind when Obama went to Harvard Law School. He only had one bitter pill left to swallow when he graduated from Harvard and took his bar exam. He lied on his bar membership application. His supporters claim he lost his law license for inadvertently claiming he held he title of “Professor of Law” at Harvard when he fact he was a temporary part-time instructor. The real lie? He responded “no” to a question on the application which said: “Have you ever used an assumed name?” Michelle Obama surrendered her law license to avoid behind charged with insurance fraud. They’re a pair that belongs together. They just don’t belong together at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC. The White House is the home of America’s patriots. The Obamas fit the crooked political lifestyle of Cook County, Illinois. I guess that’s why they call Chicago “home.” Both Snopes and Fact or Fiction goofed on the Ludwig social security card issue because they pinned their opinion on a date that proved not to have been important.
Add the Sunahara case to other cases filed by other plaintiffs, and a statement made by Alabama Supreme Court Judge Tom Parker concerning the criminal forensic investigation performed by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on the short and long form birth certificates that Barack Obama claimed were his becomes paramount. Parker, in writing the court’s ruling, said that if “…the evidence Hugh McInnish presented had been presented in a proper evidentiary form, it would have raised serious questions about the authenticity of both Obama’s short and long form birth certificates.”
What does all of that mean? Put in simple terms that even a politician with a law degree from Harvard or a social progressive journalist with a liberal arts degree from Vanderbilt should be able to understand without a constitutional interpreter, Barack Hussein Obama does not possess a shred of unfabricated evidence that could withstand forensic scrutiny sufficiently enough for any honest law enforcement forensic scientist to claim, with integrity, that Obama qualifies as an Article II citizen of the United States. Shockingly, every honest law enforcement crime lab scientists who has forensically examined the photoshopped Virginia Sunahara birth certificate, 61 10641, called it a sloppy fake.
In a ruling given on March 27, 2012 the Alabama Supreme Court struck down a petition for a Writ of Mandamus against Barack Obama filed by an Alabama resident, Hugh McInnish against Alabama Secretary of State Beth Chapman. McInnish demanding that Barack Obama be required to prove he was eligible to serve in the office of President of the United States by producing a long form birth certificate for the court’s scrutiny before being placed on the ballot. In his petition, McInnish argued the State Supreme Court of Alabama had original jurisdiction in the case he presented pursuant to § 12-2-7(2), Ala.Code 1970 on all Writs of Mandamus and Writs of Quo Warranto. The all-Republican nine member court denied McInnish’s petition for a Writ of Mandamus not based on the lack of evidence of forgery presented to the court, but because a majority of the judges said they did not believe the State Supreme Court had legal jurisdiction to determine who is eligible to seek office in Alabama—even if fraud appears obvious..
Apparently none of the justices of Alabama’s Supreme Court have ever read Article I, Sec. 6 of the Constitution which reserves absolute jurisdiction to pick “The times, places and manner of holding elections” to the State election officials. Specifically, with regard to the office of President, the 10th Amendment makes it clear that any “…powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.” Absolutely nowhere—not one sentence, word, dot or tittle spells out who has the ultimate authority to vet candidates for President when they refuse to verify they are constitutionally eligible to serve. Based on the 10th Amendment, that power rests solely with the people who have a constitutional responsibility to make certain their national leaders are natural born Americans according to Article II, Section 1 § 6. Imagine what could happen if a illegal alien who was born in Kenya and was raised in a Muslim nation like, say Indonesia, and attended a Wahabbi school where he was taught Shariah Law, pretending to be a US citizen, came to the United States, became a State Congressman (even though he was not a US citizen), then became a US Senator (again, even though he was not a US citizen), and then stole two national elections with the unimaginable happening—he was able to steal 35 million votes in 2008 and 36 million votes in 2012 because no one took the time to properly vet him to make sure he was eligible to seek office in the United States (since, after all, that would be racist thing to do—actually making sure the guy was an actual citizen before allowing his name to be placed on the ballot…just because he was black. Shame on us. And, not just us, the common folk. Shame on the judges and lawyers and Congressmen and Senators who are sworn to protect the Constitution of the United States. Shame on them for exchanging career quid pro quos to protect an illegal alien posing as a US Senator or as the President of the United States..
Or like the judges on the Alabama high court deciding they didn’t want to lock horns with the more powerful politicians in the federal courts, believing from their liberal law school days that federal courts have the right to overrule State courts anytime they want, even on matters where the States are constitutionally supreme—in the way and manner that State elections are conducted.
That’s why when the Appellate Court to the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that the justices had no authority to examine and reject unqualified candidates in what each of them saw as the fraudulent Obama birth data presented by Hugh McInnish to support his argument, they did not deny him—or his assertions—standing. The court ruled that McInnish could refile his lawsuit in the Alabama District Court.
Lord Christopher Monckton noted in his Hereditary Peers Briefing Paper (which was sent, certified mail, to every member of Congress and scores of important people in the United States and in England (since Obama is still, primarily, a citizen of the British government). Lord Monckton pointed out that in light of Judge Tom Parker’s obiter dictum combined with the forensic evidence detailed in McInnish’s allegations, Hawaii cannot rely on the “full faith and credit” clause (Art. IV Sec. 1) to require other States to accept the birth certificate they produced for Obama as genuine. “If it is the forgery it appears to be,” Monckton said, “at least one person at the Hawaii Health Department knows it is a forgery.” Monckton also noted that “The attorneys for any person charged with a federal offense created as such under the Obama Administration have the right, under Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, to request access, by their own forensic investigators, to the Hawaiian Health Department’s original birth record of Barack Obama to satisfy themselves that the man who claims to be the President of the United States is, in reality, the President of the United States”. But since Obama has already spent millions of dollars to prevent anyone access to the 151 61 10641 birth records will fight to make sure the lawyers for those charged with crimes will never see that document, either. It would be sheer insanity on his part to allow that to happen.
Why? Because it doesn’t exist. File 151 61-10641 is the long form birth and death certificate for Virginia Sunahara who was born on Aug. 4, 1961 and died on Aug. 5, 1961. This is what the evidence accumulated by McInnish and compiled by Paul Irey and Doug Vogt, retired US Navy Commander Charles Kerchner (who was a charter member of the birther movement with a series of ads in the Washington Times National Weekly Edition and a self-financed lawsuit that reached the Supreme Court), Helen Tanner and the Article II Political Action Committee, the Birther Summit, British Lord Christopher Monckton and Sheriff Joe Arpaio, his lead investigator Mike Zullo, and finally Dean Haskins and businessman Gary Laconis who followed the trail all the way to the courtroom in Honolulu where the battle to expose that the birth/death certificate of an infant named Virginia Sunahara ultimately became the photoshopped birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama.
Alabama Supreme Court Justice Tom Parker wrote the opinion on the McInnish finding. In the official court ruling he said: “The language of the foregoing provision of the Alabama Constitution implies that this Court is without jurisdiction over McInnish’s original petition for a Writ of Mandamus. It is not our appellate jurisdiction that is being invoked, and this matter is not within original jurisdiction of the Court ‘to issue such remedial writs or orders as may be necessary to give it general supervision and control of courts of inferior jurisdiction.’ (Ala. Const. 1901, Art. VI, § 140.) The Office of Secretary of State of Alabama is not a court of inferior jurisdiction; that this court may control through the issuance of a writ in response to a petition first filed in this Court…” Parker stated that the evidence McInnish provided, along with findings of the Cold Case Posse makes Obama’s birth certificate highly suspect, and he questioned whether it would be able to stand up in a court of law. He also noted that he was experienced in computer science and indicated that he concurred with the conclusion of forgery made by Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse. “McInnish,” he said, “seeks from this Court a Writ of Mandamus directly ordering Beth Chapman, as Secretary of State for the State of Alabama, ‘to demand that Obama cause a certified copy of his bonifide birth certificate to be delivered to her direct from the government official who is in charge of the record in which it is stored, and to make the receipt of such a prerequisite to his name being placed on the Alabama ballot for the November 6, 2012 general election..’
“McInnish,”he continued, ” has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition which, if presented in the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of the both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of [Obama] that have been made public.”
If Judge Parker and Lord Monckton are correct in their interpretation of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse information, and the materials collected by Irey, Doug Vogt and others, then the Alabama Supreme Court was the first United States court to actually see, examine and affirm that Barack Hussein Obama has violated Article II, Section 1§ 5. Not only is he not an Article II natural born citizen of the United States, the evidence appears to be saying he is not a citizen of the United States of any stripe.
Lord Monckton’s Peer Review points out that when the odds of each serious question against Obama are multiplied together, the proof emerges. Just as the Alabama State Supreme Court argued against their own jurisdiction to make a ruling on evidence which (they said) “…if presented in the appropriate forum…would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the short for and the long-form birth certificates of…Obama…” the odds that all of these serious questions occurring as an accident in one document have an individual probability of one in 75 sextillion, or 0.000001.
If the whole body of evidence of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s criminal forensic investigation of Obama’s birth certificate, his social security card and his Selective Service Card did not scientifically prove that all three were layered in fraud, we could call those labeled as “birthers” by the liberal media as conspiracy nuts and hoaxers. However, when the entire body of evidence shows not only that the Obama White House has engaged in a fraud to make Barack Hussein Obama appear to be something he is not—a constitutional citizen of the United States of America, then the whole body of evidence screams for an immediate Congressional investigation not only of Barack Obama, but the leaders of the Democratic Party and the head of the Democratic National Committee who had a constitutional duty and responsibility to properly and thoroughly vet the candidate who was to head their Party, to make certain that his candidacy complied with Article II, Section 1 § 6 which requires every candidate for President to be a natural born citizen of the United States.
Furthermore—and equally as important as § 6—since this is how the Democratic Party has managed to steal control of the White House in both 2008 and 2012—and control of the House and Senate from 2006 to 2010,. is Article II, Section 1 § 5 which requires that all voting in our national election completely take place on one day, Article II, Section 1 § 5 gives the sole authority to Congress to determine the one day in which all of the voters shall cast their ballot for the office of President—noting that day shall be the same throughout the United States. Congress has the authority to change Election day from, say, the second Tuesday after the first Monday of November to third Tuesday after the second Monday of October, of the first Tuesday, or Wednesday, or the first Monday after Independence Day, or whatever. But, what the Constitution designates as Election Day is one day. Not three weeks or three months of “early voting,” since early voting is specifically designed for one thing—vote fraud. And, constitutionally, neither the States nor the federal legislature, nor the idiot in the White House who has convinced the idiots on main street America that Executive Orders grant presidents with legislative authority they are specifically denied in Article I, Section 1.
My God, I know schools in America no longer teach American history nor American government, nor anything about the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights, but you people have eyes even if you lack brains. Most Americans are Christian, and they are proud of the fact (and enjoy the bragging rights) that they’ve read the Holy Bible from cover-to-cover at least once—and some four or five times. Some of them even understand what they read. But how many times have you read the Constitution? The nice thing about the Founding Fathers is that they wrote a document that an uneducated farmer could understand. It does not require a lawyer to interpret it. The lawyers who have, and who created about 1.5 million pages of law from this simple document that easily fits on one side of an 24″ X 34″ sheet of paper, did so to make our rights so complicated that you would need a bevy of lawyers to understand them—although none of the lawyers would agree what they wrote actually meant.
When the Constitution says “The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States,” the Constitution is not referring to the members of the Electoral College casting their votes for the President. Article II, Section 1 § 4 and 5 are a joint phrase. Whether you realize it or not, when you cast your vote for “President,” you are not actually casting your vote for, say, someone on the Democratic ticket named Barack Obama and someone on the Republican ticket named Mitt Romney.” (I ignored naming any third party candidates since the way our electoral system has evolved, only Candidate “D” and Candidate “R” can get elected. All third party candidates have been reduced to the role of “spoiler” to be used by the princes of industry and the barons of banking and business to guarantee that the candidate they invested hundreds of million of dollars in wins—and they get to control the agenda his Administration puts forth. Who you are actually electing on Election Day (Article II, Section 1 § 5) are the State “electors” (members of the Electoral College) who will meet in the United States Senate on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December to cast their votes for the candidate selected, by majority vote, by the voters in their States. (Title 3 § 6 of the US Code). So, regardless what your teachers at school tell you, or the politicians you email say, they are lying to you if they tell you anything different than you just read here.
The Social Progressives controlled the Congress of the United States during the Administrations of Teddy Roosevelt [R] (a Marxist socialist);. Thomas Woodrow Wilson [D] (a socialist); Franklin D. Roosevelt [D] (a Marxist socialist); Harry Truman [D] (a socialist); Jimmy Carter [D] (a Marxist socialist); and Barack Obama [D] (an Islamofacist Marxist). Beginning with FDR, the socialist Congresses each of those presidents controlled used the Executive Magic Eraser—unconstitutional Executive Orders—to erase those parts of Article I, Article II and Article III that interfered with the expansion of power of the three branches of the federal government. Not one American (except those branded as conspiracy nuts) complained. No newspaper, radio station or TV network—which the Founding Father protected with the 1st Amendment to prevent the federal government from ever stifling exposes of free speech. But, Franklin D. Roosevelt, who tried to enact laws to control the free press that would have allowed him to become the same type of dictator as Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Josef Stalin, was stopped by one man—legally blind US Senator Thomas D. Schall [R-MN] who aligned the media behind his effort to protect the 1st Amendment. Schall completely blocked Roosevelt’s attempt to regulate newspaper. But because “the press” didn’t not mention radio, television and the Internet which were over a century away when the Constitution was written, only newspapers and magazines—now the dying media—were protected by the 1st Amendment.
No Congressman or Senator except Schall tried to include radio under the umbrella of the 1st Amendment. And, although the United States Supreme Court has ruled three times that independent journalists writing in the blogsphere on the Internet are protected by the 1st Amendment Obama has already tried to regulate the Internet. After failing to regulate the Internet in 2007, 2009 and 2010 with absolute control over both Houses of Congress, and in 2011 with control of the Senate, Obama issued an unconstitutional Executive Order giving the FCC the authority to regulate the Internet and crack down on birther websites.
And Senator Schall? He successfully blocked Roosevelt from regulating the free press. When the New Deal Congress enacted the Federal Communications Commission Act if 1934 the newspaper industry was specifically excluded. All FDR got to regulate was radio because it was not specifically mentioned as “press” in a 1787 document. Schall, who lived in northeast DC off the Baltimore-DC Parkway, was struck down by a hit-and-run driver while crossing the street near his home on Dec. 19, 1935. He died in a DC hospital three days later. Schall’s opponent in 1936 was Floyd Olson, a Roosevelt flunkie from Minnesota. As the campaign heated up in 1935, Schall convinced Democrat Huey Long of Louisiana to come to Minnesota and campaign against both Olson and FDR, but Long was assassinated in September, 1935. About the same time, Olson was diagnosed with a fast-growing stomach cancer. Six months after Schall was runover by a speeding motorist, Olson died of cancer.. Schall began his House career as a noninterventionist Republican. In the Senate he saw government becoming too powerful, and too concentrated in the hands the of princes of industries, the barons of banking and statist politicians like FDR.
Every Congressman and Senator since the Roosevelt years who fought the princes of industry and the barons of banking and business have died—many of suspicious causes—pr they suddenly lost all donor support or, beginning in 1995, failed to get reelected as unions and leftwing special interest groups took control of the electronic voting systems in almost every voting precinct in the country. The money barons now control every facet of the media except the alternative news media in the blogsphere on the Internet. If the courts prevent them from censoring the blogsphere, Congress will likely assess an email postal charge per email sent (to protect the USPS) , killing the small, not-for-profit electronic news sites overnight, and crippling the largest blogs.
If the Democrats get one more seat on the US Supreme Court, crooked politicians and even more crooked judges will completely erase the Bill of Rights beginning with the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and then the balance of Articles I, II and III. The Constitution will exist in name only. The princes of industry and barons of banking were complicit in erasing Article II, Section 1 § 6 in 2008 and again in 2012 when they knowing backed a illegal alien for the White House. That task was simplified with the passage of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 which erased Article II, Section 1 § 5, creating early voting and an automated voter registration system that allowed those not eligible to vote to register—and vote…early—and often. When the fraudulent registrations were confirmed, the registrations were discarded but the fraudulent votes had already been blue-bagged and were counted as legitimate votes. In 2008, 96,992,000 registered voters (who actually voted) somehow cast 132,618,580 votes. In 2012, 90,682,968 registered voters (who actually voted) cast 136,985,809 votes. In 2008, Obama won 35 million nonexistent votes, defeating Sen. John McCain by 10 million votes that didn’t really exist. In 2012, Obama won 36 million nonexistent votes, and defeated Mitt Romney by less than 5 million votes—once again, with 36 million votes that didn’t exist. In addition, the Obama Campaign, convinced they would lose all of the battleground States to Romney, early voted Republicans in those States who historically voted on election day. When they went to their voting precincts to vote, they discovered someone had already voted their names. They were not allowed to vote..
The Founding Fathers created the only honest, failsafe method of voting ever devised by man. The names of the candidates appear on a paper ballot. With a black lead pencil, the voter indicates his choice by marking the candidate he was casting his vote for. There was never any guesswork who the voter was voting for. Which means the election were honest. If America does not return to its roots and restore the paper ballot and the #2 pencil, the princes of industry will always win the White House. And, with each new victory, just a little more liberty will vanish under the magic eraser of government.