I have a hearing impairment and I do not listen to Internet rants - particularly Youtube. I've done a little searching and from what I can tell the RAP wants to revert back to the original constitution and laws of 1776 - 1860. With that in mind - here's just a few questions that come up for me:
1. The restoration of slavery and the abolishment the voting rights of black people is one thing that would get us back there. I'm sure that RAP favors that.
2. The Nineteenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution was not made until 1920. It was less than one hundred years ago that women were given the right to vote. I'm assuming RAP wishes to abolish a woman's right to vote as well.
3. Once slavery was abolished (after the bloodiest ware in U. S. history), blacks were segregated and still not given the freedom to vote and that wasn't changed until a little over forty years ago. Suspect that RAP wishes to reinstate some form of segregation and the denial of voting rights for blacks too.
4. In 1776 we had open borders with no restrictions on immigration. Does RAP want to restore that?
5. Until WWII the United States was not a major global power. We would save billions, perhaps trillions of dollars by trimming our defense budget thereby lowering taxes for everyone. Does RAP support that?
6. In 1776 citizens only owned muzzle loading, single shot rifles and pistols. I'd love to see us revert to that. Is RAP in agreement?
7. Of course the era they wish to return too didn't have computers, television, not even rail or automobiles. Does RAP desire to have us live like the hard working Mennonites do?
People who wish to return to some former time usually have no idea what they're talking about. I love the progress that we've made in the USA and I love watching those who don't agree with progress go absolutely nuts! There will be a lot more civil unrest, marches, riots, arson, murders, the whole works - all trying to stop progress, by people who don't believe in the ballot box. Good luck, it isn't going to happen.
It has more to do with reverting back to the dejure form of government that the original Constitution was based. Rather than moving back in time and running society like it was 200 years ago.
The financial terrorists, the banksters, corporate elites, power politicians - you can call them NWO elites, drunk with power, obsessed with greed - have blustered and bumbled their way and have brought the situation on themselves. Mired in frauding the American people, and like rats deserting a sinking ship, while running for the exits with their pockets stuffed with stolen loot, they seemingly had forgotten to close the gate behind themselves.
For it appears to me that those that are behind the Restore America plan have simply found themselves in a unique situation, having taken advantage, and acted swiftly, they have come to make the most of it. It has little to do with gaining a support of the majority of people, rather just a few good 'ol boys that have learned how to play the game of Commerce for themselves - the same game that the bankers, and the insurance corps have be playing for decades.
Perhaps you have read the recent January 6 article written by Christopher Story on the takedown of Operation Stillpoint. http://www.worldreports.org/news/257_operation_stillpoint_to_destroy_america_.... The recent Goldman Sachs/SEC debacle is a very very deep rabbit hole, it is only the tip of the iceberg, imo. The following article may explain how the 'guardians of the free republics' have been able to usurp the usurpers. Of course with the help of some other wealthy international heavyweights, i.e. in China.
Posted previously from: http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1437175
DUN & BRADSTREET: 'RATING SERVICE' FOR ALL CORPORATE ENTITIES'_VOID FOR LEGAL CAUSE_FRAUD_ "BRUTUM FULMEN"? by 'S'
There are a few more things worth noting regarding the DUN & BRADSTREET listing service:
D-B is a financial rating service for both ‘public’ and ‘private’ corporations. Utilities and municipal bond ratings would come under D-B perview for certain. It just really never occurred to me years ago when doing litigation discovery, research and analysis, and ‘structured settlements’ that there was seemingly anything incoherent with that fact that municipal and utility bonds are integral to D-B rating services. I never ever stopped to think about or scrutinize that fact, yet alone allow my deliberation and research skills to ‘wander’ or ‘wonder’ into research that would have disclosed what we recently found. Part of the ease of discovering the complex web of inter-related inter-locking CORPORATIONS had to do with ease of electronic research over the internet. Years ago, if one wanted to search anything within any of the rating services, including “Moody’s”, Standard & Poors, and Dun & Bradstreet, + others, one would have to either have to be a subscriber to the service in order to manually expedite their search-rating results, or, one would have to pay a fee and cause a search to arise.
D & B ‘ratings’ are effected everytime a ‘public hazard bond’, or ‘surety performance bond’, or ‘indemnity bond’ is complained against. An ‘administrative complaint’ is usually all that it takes to cause a ‘tag’ or book entry to be made on any particular bond. Any particular bond, once complained against three or more times, causes a change in underwriting bond ‘risk’.
For bonded Bar attorneys, who in many cases may also be appointed, commissioned, or elected to ‘public office’ as ‘Judge’, ‘Clerk of Court’, etc. when/if their bond is complained against for good and reasonable cause, their bond may be ‘pulled’, and due to loss of effective bond or ‘suretyship’, they cannot ‘practice’ or ‘discharge’ the duty of the office held, or occupied. In short, the bond maker-issuer is the bonding party for the benefit or on behalf of the ‘bondee’, ie. the purported ‘public officer’, ‘employee’, or ‘official’. This would extend as well to all other ‘public employees’ and ‘agents’-‘agencies’, etc.
Every ‘person’ being bonded has a Dun & Bradstreet ‘bond rating’. At least it is reasonable to assume such. Once three complaints are filed against any bond, assuming they are with merit and well supported by fact and ‘law’ of the ‘breach’ of fiduciary duty, the bond is most always pulled or revoked. The ‘servant’ at ‘risk’ by assuming the responsibilities of operating in any ‘official capacity’ or by ‘employment’, can no longer be underwritten as a ‘no risk’ or ‘low risk’ contract. One incident of ‘breach’ or operating ‘ultra vires’, or ‘without the law’, causes the ‘immunity’ provisions of the written ‘law’ to cease to be effective, because when one violates the law as a ‘public servant’, one’s immunity blanket ceases to apply, thereby leaving the insurer or bondsman or bond issuer exposed to the liability arising from the servant’s acts, which under any ‘breach of law authority’ causes or gives rise to an ‘injury’ which is a civil or criminal commercial liability.
Everything, whether civil or criminal or martial, is a matter of ‘commerce’, and admiralty law is the venue and jurisdiction by which disputes in/of commercial nature are resolved in truth and fact.
All writings of the United States of America and of the UNITED STATES, or any other ‘government unit’ are forms of making an ‘offer to contract’. There is no written matter of material fact or issue of fact that is ‘law’ which is not bonded. There is no ‘office’ or function of ‘civil service’ or ‘public’ function that is not bonded. If the bond is not in existence, the bondee is ‘exposed’ and without ‘coverage’ by any ‘surety’. Therefore, there is no ‘guarantor’ behind the agent, officer, official, or employee having ‘exposure’, by ‘assumption of risk’, of a material breach or injury in fact by the bondee [person being bonded or insured]. This leaves the person under taint or cloud of operating ‘in the public interest’ without the constitutionally and statutorily required bond, and therefore, in tacit violation of the constitutions and statutes under the scheme of ‘law’. “Law” applies first and foremost to government, its employees, officers, and agents.
In today’s rogue ‘doctrine of necessity’ ‘de facto’ environment, research has proven and documented that no person, performing as an ‘officer of the court’, being an alleged ‘judge’, being a ‘Bar attorney’ of the ABA or the Federal or State Bars, has a bona fide Constitutional Oath. The Bond that is supposed to be in existence sits atop the Oath. The Oath is not merely ‘incidental’ to the ‘office’ as has been ruled in some States by their corrupt court “officers”. The Oath is what imparts lawful and legal authority to the man/woman coming into ‘holding’ a ‘public office’ and becoming a ‘public official’.
A public servant having no proper Oath cannot have a proper Bond to encompass or include those risks associated with the ‘office’, ‘discharge of fiduciary duty’ of the office, and the various levels or elements of ‘law authority’ underlying the office. Hence, one may take an Oath to any office of the incorporated State, or the UNITED STATES, and not take a preceding Oath to the unincorporated de jure state or United States of America, and operate non/un constitutionally, which is all that has been going on for years, but which was not known or understood as being a material breach to the People of the State/state, causing or giving rise to material injuries in fact as a consequence of operating ‘ultra vires’, ie. outside the corporate charters and ‘trust indentures’ which create the office in the first place.
In the STATE OF NORTH CAOLINA, not one judge has taken the necessary Oaths of office, which include the organic ‘state’ de jure republic oath for “North Carolina”, and the subsequent and inferior or ‘lesser’ oath for the STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. The latter ‘public entity’ has federal character, a Federal Employer Identification Number, a Federal Tax Identification Number, and is a federal ‘instrumentality’ of the CORPORATE ‘UNITED STATES’, and the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, under definition of 28 U.S.C. §3002(15), AND 26 U.S.C. §§7701 (a)(9) and (10). This documented fact pertains to every judge in every State court, but also applies to most every other ‘public official’ or ‘law enforcement officer’.
I cannot address what other State public pretenders and ‘District Attorneys’ or “Prosecutors” do when bringing a criminal complaint against any “natural person”, which includes CORPORATIONS [YES, they are both the class of ‘person’ under statute ‘law’ definition], but in the STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, when it is the bringer of the action, the People of the State are never brought in as ‘party to the action’. Only the CORPORATION name is found on the Criminal Complaint or Information form. Only the corporate State is present in the courtroom, trying a case before a CORPORATE JUDGE. There exists a complete breach and break from the Constitution of North Carolina, because the People of the North Carolina republic, and their ‘law’, are not present in the action nor party to it. They are not in the courtroom, nor are they acting through any ‘officer’ of the People, as ‘District Attorney’, which Office alleges to be a ‘servant of the People’. It is NOT. Event the DA does not have the mandatory and proper Constitutional Oath as condition precedent under NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL STATUTES, which clearly state at Chapter 11, Section 11, there shall be two Constitutional Oaths taken.
Absent performance according to that bonded STATUTE regarding bonded Oaths, leaves a clear and certain risk-liability issue for the Bond maker-issuer. Some bonding agent has bonded the Statutes and other writings of the law of the State. Some bond issuer has bonded State ‘employees’, ‘officers’, and ‘public officials’. Some bond issuer has, therefore, “underwritten” risk on the basis of having full knowledge that there exist no Constitutional Oaths beneath the CORPORATE OATH. One cannot but presume that the bond issuer-maker has full disclosure; afterall, ‘they’ have been registered within each State Department of Corporations, do business in all ‘States’ and DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, and are presumed to know the “LAW”….including the “law of the land”, which under their “UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE” and all secondary ‘Civil’ or ‘Criminal’ Codes, would find itself to be in harmony with their legislative jurisdictional ‘statutes and implementing regulations’ at U.C.C. 1-308, 1-207, and 1-103, wherein All Rights are Reserved, and the U.C.C. states that it is harmonious with ‘all jurisdictions’, which would include the jurisdiction of the “law of the land”, ‘common law’, and the various common law Constitutions of the underlying several de jure republic ‘states’ of the American union, aka, United States of America.
Why would any bond underwriter knowingly underwrite these CORPORATE STATES, UNITED STATES, all of their ‘sub-corporations’, agents-agencies, instrumentalities, and their ‘law authority’ found in their various ‘writings’, private ‘laws’ etc., to operate a ‘public’ or ‘municipal’ construct as if it were ‘lawful government’, but knowing that it really is not? The underwriters of bonds, therefore, could not allege any defense against a massive intake of related claims by private inhabitants of any of the States or UNITED STATES who have been “compelled” under duress, extreme duress, or risk of extreme duress and prejudice of ‘seizure’, ‘confiscation’ ‘impound’, ‘occupation’, ‘detainment’, or injury or termination by any means of potentially lethal force?
Everyone who has ever been inside a State of North Carolina administrative or judicial ‘law’ proceeding, or been before any ‘clerk’ or ‘judge’ of same, or been prosecuted by any County District Attorney within said State/STATE, has been within a “brutum fulmen”:
Black’s Law Dictionary, 4t Edition: “brutum fulmen”: “An empty noise; an empty threat. A judgment void upon its face which is in legal effect no judgment at all, and bywhich no rights are divested, and from which none can be obtained; and neither binds nor bars anyone. Dollert v. Pratt-Hewitt Oil Corporation, Tex.Civ.Appl, 179 S.W.2d 346, 348. Also, see Corpus Juris Secundum, “Judgments” §§ 499, 512 546, 549.
The “Office of Sheriff” is a most important link between the People of any de jure republic ‘state’ and the Courts, and Offices of the State. However, it has been discovered that many Sheriffs do not, as Chief Law Enforcement Officer of any local ‘county’ or County, have a bona fide prior or ‘precedent’ Constitutional Oath to their respective republic state. Or, they may have taken a bona fide Constitutional Oath, and then disclaimed or disavowed it immediately henceforth by taking a CORPORATE Constitutional Oath. “A man cannot serve two masters”.
This same “axiomatic” principal applies to ‘officers’ of the United States as well. How can the newly ‘sworn’ Attorney General of the UNITED STATES, OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL [a federal corporation] take a Constitutional Oath to the United States, or UNITED STATES, and be held to such an Oath as ‘liable’ for his/her breach of fiduciary duty to the people of the United States of America, or to the franchise corporate trust estate ‘citizens of the UNITED STATES’, when the office ‘holder’ enjoins by contract to the ‘international purposes of INTERPOL’, under its Constitution [charter-contract] at Article 30 shortly after taking said Oath? Article 30 is quite explicit in meaning and intent. If one understands the “international purposes of INTERPOL” and all other ‘international agencies’ was and is to ‘establish a financial dictatorship within the United States/United States of America’ for the benefit of undisclosed third parties, under jurisdiction and authority of the IMF-U.N, then all of the lower level ‘breach of duty’ by lack of proper Bond and Oath issues would begin to make clear sense.
In short, all alleged ‘public servants’ are serving ‘public policy’ and ‘public administration’ of the ‘laws’ and enforcing those laws to protect the CORPORATION, to the disinterest and detriment of the People, whom have been ‘captured’, ‘searched’, ‘seized’, ‘boarded’ as with a ‘vessel’, and which People have been placed into ‘warehouse storeage’ as ‘human capital’ and ‘property’ of the de facto King or “Sovereign”, which/who has conquered and occupied the Office of the People, and subverted and subordinated it into an Office of Inquisition for YOU KNOW WHO!!
Lacking mandatory Oath, creates liability against the bond of the STATE, and every officer-agent-employee who has come to be ‘employed’ thereby. Breach of any underlying writing of the STATE, or State, or state, as an offer to contract in admiralty venue, is a certain “injury in fact” giving rise to a “material injustice” and resultant ‘liability’. There is no longer any question about ‘risk analysis’ or ‘damage assessment’. The only real issue is “HOW MUCH IS THE INJURY WORTH”? WHAT PENALTIES should be compelled above the mere “pecuniary” or monetary ‘relief’ to be sought? Treble damages? Punitive damages? Civil or Criminal or BOTH?
If Oaths and Bonds have not yet been ascertained for all relevant federal and State officers, agents, and employees, they should be compelled by FOIA request or subpoena duces tecum immediately so that the elements of contract and breach of duty by these ‘public servants’ under mandate of relevant Constitutions, statutes, regulations, etc., including the U.C.C. in Admiralty venue can be comprehensively determined; then, a resultant ‘cause of action’ constructed accordingly.
It is further axiomatic that: “Where a liability in equity arises due to injury by any party, and that party does not also provide a “remedy” for said liability, the injured party has the right and standing to create his own remedy”
Persons without proper Oaths do not and cannot have proper Bonds OR satisfy the necessary requirements to “hold” a bona fide “Office”, by ‘commission’, “election”, or “appointment”. In short, an ‘Officer’ or “Office Holder” cannot but ‘occupy’ the office under false and misleading pretense, misrepresentation, and FRAUD, which strips the ‘individual’ of ‘law authority’ and ‘immunity’ under well-seasoned law of the land and sea. Brutum fulmen!! Bonds that are attached to such juristic ‘persons’ are subject to claim and lien, after “adequate assurance of due performance” has been found lacking pursuant to U.C.C. 2-619. A proper Oath and Bond are but two of the three primary “poles” of “Office” [Oath, Bond, Commission]. One cannot act upon being ‘duly appointed’ or ‘duly elected’ or ‘duly commissioned’ simply by INCORPORATION and CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.
CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS lacking bona fide Constitutional nexus is without “law authority”, and therefore has no nexus to the Constitutionally protected ‘Right’ of “due process”. Hence, any act or action taken against any one by any alleged ‘official’, ‘officer’, agent’ or ‘employee’ lacking such nexus is subject to CLAIM and/or COUNTER-CLAIM in Admiralty venue and proceeding. The claim, once perfected after ‘exhausting administrative remedy’ is brought against the Bond and the DUN & BRADSTREET rating of that CORPORATE PERSON will be effected as a consequence. The idea is not to seek an illegitimate claim for merely punitive or monetary purposes, but to seek claim on the basis of protest, dispute, redress, relief, and ‘remedy’!!!
S
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/corporate_u_s/news.php?q=1...
"Perhaps you have read the recent January 6 article written by Christopher Story on the takedown of Operation Stillpoint."
Oh my yes, I've read it - or portions of it all over the Internet along the the Leo Wanta Hoax. Nothing but utter BS. Those that believe in any of it are totally brainwashed - hypnotized in fact.
All I see is white male old farts terrified of a woman speaker and a black president. (I'm a white male old fart myself, but I find what's happening in the world today is a blessing, not a curse.)
RAP IS about going back in time, moving backwards and I'll tell you for sure - it will never ever happen.
I find it interesting that you and Mr. Story are of the same opine when it comes to what you and him think of the RAP. Christopher Story himself has stated that the Restore America Plan is in his own words is "baloney".
You are attempting to create some spin yourself in what is being discussed here. 107689 says: "And you use them as an authority for you myth..."
I only posted this youtube video because it had contained much of the same information that I found when I began comparing what Tim Turner and Regan Reedy had said in radio interviews with what Christopher Story had reported back in January 6. It seems to me its more than coincidental fiction.
There are several points that seem to be cross referenced in what C. Story has reported and what a couple of the Elders have conveyed as to why they were able to arrest the bonds of vast numbers of public officials. Which are as follows:
1. the number of Congressmen that are under house arrest and/or have had their overseas bank accounts frozen. Mr. Turner has said there are 135 officials, whereas Mr Story reports there being 137 (close enough for horseshoes).
2. Turner: because of a court case in the Hague, it was the proof that allowed the bonds of those politicians to be arrested (put a lien against). C Story had also reported of a lawsuit filed in the World court in the Hague.
3. the amount of funds that were confiscated was reported to be the same... TURNER: $4.7 trillion. STORY: $4.5 TRILLION (again, close enough for horse shoes).
4. Regan Reedy (also one of the elders): INTERPOL is in the country to investigate the fraud that is going on with CAFR's across this nation, which involves foreign investors. Story also stated that INTERPOL is allowed DIPOLOMATIC IMMUNITY to investigate the U.S. government.
Both You and Christopher Story seem to be in the dark when it comes to understanding what these guys know of how the courtroom works, and how to go after prosecuting attorneys, judges and other public officials that are required to be bonded in order to work. They supposedly have public officials running out of the back door of courtrooms scared of losing their lives - of losing their livelihoods by putting them out of work. This what these guys have been teaching for more than +15 years... How to represent yourself pro se without an attorney.
cheers
"1. the number of Congressmen that are under house arrest and/or have had their overseas bank accounts frozen. Mr. Turner has said there are 135 officials, whereas Mr Story reports there being 137 (close enough for horseshoes)."
That is absolutely absurd and you know it.
"Both You and Christopher Story seem to be in the dark when it comes to understanding what these guys know of how the courtroom works, and how to go after prosecuting attorneys, judges and other public officials that are required to be bonded in order to work. They supposedly have public officials running out of the back door of courtrooms scared of losing their lives - of losing their livelihoods by putting them out of work. This what these guys have been teaching for more than +15 years."
More ludicrous, unsubstantiated paranoia.
Your posts would be absolutely hilarious if it wasn't for the fact that it is so sad that anyone believes them.
Again more spin.
I have never said I 'believe' it. I have said it appears to be more than coincidental fiction.
The difference is this... Unlike you, I am waiting to see how this unfolds... Without knowing the facts, I am remaining open to the very possiblity. Whereas you have already pre-judged, pre-concluded, without knowing the facts. As it is, you are "believing it" not to be true. Whereas I remain neither believing or disbelieving. I am simply stating the possibility that it may be true. A possibility that gets under your skin. Try asking yourself why does this possiblity bother you?
I suspect that it is because you are one of the Obama "believers". "Oh, Yes we can!!!" OOOOObaaaaaaammmmmaaaaaa.
Isn't that right?
"I suspect that it is because you are one of the Obama "believers". "Oh, Yes we can!!!" OOOOObaaaaaaammmmmaaaaaa.
Isn't that right?"
Spin? That link I provided isn't "spin" - it's an outright lie and by your continuous posting of all of it you've obviously bought into it.
I believe in our democratic republic and the power of the ballot box. I accepted the ascension of George W. Bush to power and lived with that for eight years. I can live with any elected official. Why can't you live with majority rule?
Oh, so you're a birther too. Did you question McCain's birth certificate when he ran for president? He was born in Panama. How about his collaboration with the enemy while he was a POW? Did you look into that. I doubt it. You were a "patriot" until a black man became president - by majority vote. Obama's birth certificate has been posted on the Internet and verified by the State of Hawaii and documented by a newspaper as well.
Tough little world you've built for yourself - I sure hope your enjoying it as much as I am.
A politician is a politician is a politician... it doesn't matter which one you are talking about. Be it McCain born in Panama... Obama born in Kenya... they are both working for the same people... bankers and corporate elites... they are all joined at the hip to this de facto corporate government. Like I said, a President of a corporation doesn't need to show proof of where he was born... doesn't need to follow Constitutional precepts... just impose more public policy on the little people.
I thought that the birth thing would puff up your sails. Now you got more to categorize and more labels to throw... yes I am enjoying watching you getting worked up into a tiz.
So you don't like politicians. What form of government do you wish to serve under?
You don't like the "birther" label? As long as you believe the lie that Obama was born in Kenya you will by choice carry that label.
Obama's birth certificate has never been shown on the internet or anywhere else. What was shown on the internet was a computer generated Certificate of Live Birth that took information from the original vault copy of hiw actual full birth certificate. Such certificates do not list the actual location of birth nor the hospital of birth as does the actual vault copy original. They prove nothing about the actual location where the birth occured since that exact same certificate is used for people born in Hawaii as well as people born outside Hawaii who have their birth certificates on file in Hawaii.
When it comes to lying about Obama's birth, how do you explain his grandmother's statement that he was born in Kenya? How do you explain Kenyan officials stating that he was born in Kenya. And how do you explain the millions that Obama has spent to make sure that his original birth certificate and numeous other records are not released to the public?
All the man has to do is simply release his original birth certificate. What possible legitimate reason could he have for not doing so? There simply is none!
BTW, this country does not and never has operated as a majority rule country. While we hear a lot of lip service about it being a "democracy', it is in fact a constitutionally secured Republic, where the rights of one and all are protected against oppression by minority rule. One of the things required by the Constitution is that a person must be a native born citizen in order to serve as President. Obama has failed to provide definitive proof that he is a native born citizen.
Oh Tony, your diatribe flows in many areas.
I cannot get my birth certificate and I live in the same city that I was born in. I can get a very similar to Hawaii computer generated certification of my birth, just like Obama has. They won't even let me see my birth certificate!!! I've tried. The copy that I got (before computers they did one by hand/typewriter - but not the original) got me into the military. It also got me a Top Secret security clearance (FBI granted) in the company that I worked for.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/04/anti-obama-birth...
Hawaii considers law on Obama's birth certificate
Apr 21, 2010
Some folks in Hawaii are tired of dealing with the controversy over President Obama's birth certificate.
The Hawaii Legislature is close to passing a law that would allow the state to ignore repeated requests for to produce the document. Lawsuits have been filed by people who don't believe Obama was born in Honolulu and is a U.S.-born citizen. The blogosphere and even some news stories have called these Obama critics "birthers."
This comes as Obama critics in Arizona try to get its Legislature to pass a law to require Obama -- and other presidential candidates -- to produce their birth certificates before they can get on a ballot.
Press secretary Robert Gibbs said there's little the White House can do about "crazy Internet rumors" that Obama was not born in the United States and is therefore ineligible for the presidency. He noted that the campaign posted copies of Obama's birth certificate, and that newspapers in Honolulu printed notices of his birth, which was on Aug. 4, 1961.
"I'm the guy who said 'put the birth certificate on the Internet,' '" Gibbs said. "It has apparently, among those people, dissuaded virtually none of them."
"BTW, this country does not and never has operated as a majority rule country. While we hear a lot of lip service about it being a "democracy', it is in fact a constitutionally secured Republic, where the rights of one and all are protected against oppression by minority rule.
I made the point earlier about the U. S. not being a democracy but a Republic, so why are you restating it?
One of the things required by the Constitution is that a person must be a native born citizen in order to serve as President. Obama has failed to provide definitive proof that he is a native born citizen."
By your convoluted definition - I cannot prove that I'm a native born citizen either and neither can any person born in Hawaii, or in my state of Washington. My German grandmother could easily say that I was born in Bonn, but it wouldn't mean anything - it's the birth certificate that counts.
How do you explain the newspaper announcement of birth? You have failed to produce any evidence or even any logic that Obama was not born in Hawaii.
Whatever the case may be in the city where you live, Obama and any other citizen of Hawaii CAN get a certified copy of their original vault certificate.
The computer generated COLB form that has been used as proof of Obama's citizenship does nothing to prove where he was actually born, as a genuine original long copy birth certificate would do.
So, once again, why has he simply not done so as opposed to go to extraordinary lengths and spend millions on attorney fees to make sure that his birth certificate, school and other records remain hidden from public view? Transparency my arse!
People can blather on about this or that and attack the messenger instead of the message all they want, but thus far I have not seen anyone provide a plausible and legitimate explanation for why Obama has not simply provided a certified copy of his original vault copy birth certificate.
Do you want to take a shot at it, or would you rather continue to attack the messenger(s), use your own birth certificate as a irrelevant smokescreen, play the race card and conveniently overlook such items as Obama's other hidden records, his own grandmother's statement and the statements of Kenyan officials?
"Whatever the case may be in the city where you live, Obama and any other citizen of Hawaii CAN get a certified copy of their original vault certificate."
Why even bother when the State of Hawaii has verified Obama's birth certificate to be genuine?
http://www.kxnet.com/custom404.asp?404;http://www.kxnet.com/News/Politics/291...
"The computer generated COLB form that has been used as proof of Obama's citizenship does nothing to prove where he was actually born, as a genuine original long copy birth certificate would do."
That's a lie. Here's Obama's birth certificate and it does show where
he was born:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2008...
My computer generated birth certificate doesn't say where I was born either - except for the city - just like Obama's.
"So, once again, why has he simply not done so as opposed to go to extraordinary lengths and spend millions on attorney fees to make sure that his birth certificate, school and other records remain hidden from public view? Transparency my arse!
People can blather on about this or that and attack the messenger instead of the message all they want, but thus far I have not seen anyone provide a plausible and legitimate explanation for why Obama has not simply provided a certified copy of his original vault copy birth certificate.
Do you want to take a shot at it, or would you rather continue to attack the messenger(s), use your own birth certificate as a irrelevant smokescreen, play the race card and conveniently overlook such items as Obama's other hidden records, his own grandmother's statement and the statements of Kenyan officials?"
I presented facts, none of which you can dispute.
My own birth certificate as an "irrelevant smoke screen?" It's identical in nature to Obama's. Where's the smoke screen? During my career I spent time doing some hiring of people and my government contract employer would not accept an original "long copy" of a birth certificate because the FBI wouldn't either. If we wanted to hire a person they had to go get the certified copy so that we could run an FBI (as in J. Edgar Hoover era) check on them.
I've been through the birth certificate process for security clearances and I've been on the hiring end. Obama's long-form wouldn't get him hired at my company, but his certificate of live-birth would - and it DOES show where he was born in spite of your false claim that it doesn't.
Obama's grandmother and Kenyan officials can say anything they want to - for reasons of national pride, but they can't produce a birth certificate to support their claims.
You still haven't addressed the newspaper announcements.
Your "birth certificate" would not be accepted by my employer - Boeing. I've seen many of them rejected. You have to get a "certified copy" of your birth certificate to satisfy my employer's/FBI requirements. The certified copy would have to have the seal and signature of your county clerk - as does Obama's "certificate of live birth." (States have different names for them. My state just calls them a certified copy.) Most birth certificates that I've seen - in fact all of them that I've seen, do not have that seal/signature. That's why they're great for framing and hanging on the wall but they don't mean anything otherwise.
Here is the State of Washington's requirement for an "enhanced" driver's license which is currently accepted at the Canadian border in lieu of a passport:
What you’ll need.......
No original birth certificate that I've ever meet the requirements. They have to go to the county auditor's office to be recorded by verifying the doctor's/midwife's identity and then the county can issue a different "certificate of birth" that does.