Why Obama is ineligible – regardless of his birthplace

Why Obama is ineligible – regardless of his birthplace

Reposted from World Net Daily

By Leo C. Donofrio, Esq.
April 1st, 2010

The following discussion assumes President Obama was born in Hawaii and is a United States citizen.


The purpose of this article is to highlight judicial and historical evidence suggesting that a “natural born citizen” must be born in the United States to parents who are citizens.  By that definition, Obama is not eligible to be president.  Therefore, his presidency and official administrative acts remain subject to being rendered void by the Supreme Court.


The relevant Obama admission

At the official Obama campaign website – Fightthesmears.com – just below the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) – the following admission was also published:

When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children.

This was republished from a Factcheck.org, article which further stated:

In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.

The constitutional question presented is whether a person born with citizenship in and allegiance to a foreign nation can be considered a “natural born citizen” of the United States as required by Article II, Section 1.

The U.S. State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual discusses problems associated with dual citizenship:

7 FAM 081: U.S. Policy on Dual Nationality:(e)While recognizing the existence of dual nationality, the U.S. Government does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Dual nationality may hamper efforts by the U.S. Government to provide diplomatic and consular protection to individuals overseas. When a U.S. citizen is in the other country of their dual nationality, that country has a predominant claim on the person.

This helps explain why the definition of “natural born citizen” as one born in the nation to parents who are citizens makes perfect sense in that such a person will not be infected by dual-allegiance problems.  If the parents are citizens, neither will confer allegiance to a foreign nation.  Additionally, if one is born on soil foreign to the parents, that nation is likely to recognize the person as a citizen.  Owing allegiance to more than one nation is an unnatural circumstance of citizenship.

While the Constitution requires representatives, senators and presidents to be citizens, Article II, Section 1, additionally requires that the president’s citizenship be “natural born.” A natural born citizen is not a higher level of citizen.  “Natural born” simply describes a circumstance of citizenship.

Now watch the red-hot eligibility story on DVD: “The Question of Eligibility: Is Barack Obama’s presidency constitutionally legitimate?”

There are multiple circumstances that create “citizens at birth.” Some require a federal statute for citizenship while others rely on the 14th Amendment.  Had the framers of the 14th Amendment sought to deem every person born in the United States a natural born citizen, they certainly could have included such plain, unequivocal language.  But they didn’t.

In 1790, the first Congress deemed all persons born of two United States citizen parents abroad to be “natural born citizens,” but the words “natural born” were repealed in 1795.  Congress never again legislated the definition of “natural born citizen,” and no United States statute currently defines the term or even mentions it.

The citizenship of a person born in the United States to parents who are citizens is self-evident and has never required naturalization, a federal statute or an amendment, and the Supreme Court has indicated that such persons are the only citizens who satisfy the natural born citizen requirement of Article II, Section 1.

Origin of the natural born citizen clause

The strict constitutional requirements were enacted to exclude citizens for the sake of national security in safeguarding the office from inexperience and from persons who may not have sole allegiance.  It appears the clause was first introduced for constitutional consideration in a letter from John Jay to George Washington dated July 25, 1787:

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

Jay underlined “born” which signifies the importance of allegiance from birth.  The “natural born” requirement renders irrelevant that a person – born to foreign or dual allegiance – may not have renewed his foreign citizenship upon reaching maturity.  One is either eligible to be president at birth, or one will never be eligible.

An important historical definition of “natural born citizen” comes from a 1797 translation of the “Law of Nations,” a 1758 text by Emerich de Vattel, which summarized that body of international law known also as the “Law of Nations”:

The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

Note that a child of former aliens can be a natural born citizen under this standard if born in the United States to parents who were naturalized prior to the child’s birth.  That was made clear by the Supreme Court’s opinion in Perkins v. Elg.

It appears from James Madison’s notes of August 1787 that the delegates used the terms “native” and “natural born citizen” synonymously.  Additionally, Ben Franklin stated that the framers frequently consulted Vattel’s text.  Also consider that Article I, Section 8, grants Congress the authority to “punish … offenses against the Law of Nations.”

In the case of The Venus 12 U.S. 253, 289 (1814), Chief Justice John Marshall stated:

Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. …”

Chief Justice Marshall relied upon a pre-1797 edition of Vattel’s text.  The 1797 translation was adopted by the Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), where Chief Justice Waite stated:

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

It’s significant that this decision was issued six years after the 14th Amendment was enacted.  As such, Minor illustrates that the 14th Amendment simply defines who is a citizen, not which citizens are natural born.

If Obama had run for president in 1874 – six years after the 14th Amendment went into effect – he wouldn’t have been eligible since he doesn’t fit the Minor Court’s standard for a natural born citizen.

The strange case of Chester Arthur

The holding in Minor v. Happersett must have given Chester Arthur nightmares when he ran for vice president in 1880, six years after Minor.  Arthur, a prominent New York lawyer, managed to conceal from public view that his father didn’t become a naturalized citizen until 14 years after he was born.  Therefore Chester Arthur was a British subject at birth.

Arthur’s deception in concealing this fact involved numerous lies to the Brooklyn Eagle newspaper concerning his father’s heritage, immigration and age.  He also quite famously burned most of his papers and lied about his own age.

Historical records bear witness that this issue was never discussed in relation to Chester Arthur’s eligibility until recently.  Helping to cloud the issue all these years was a famous conspiracy theory expounded by a New York lawyer named Arthur Hinman who alleged  Chester Arthur was born in Canada and was therefore not eligible.  This sensational and unfounded conspiracy theory took the spotlight and unfortunately provided a smokescreen to conceal the true eligibility defect.

Chester Arthur is the only president prior to Obama who – after the grandfather clause of Article II, Section 1, expired – was not born in the United States of two citizen parents.  As such, Obama supporters have sought to use Chester Arthur as precedent for justifying Obama’s eligibility.  Such reliance is unfounded because it wasn’t known at the time Chester Arthur held office that he was born with dual nationality.  That this was concealed from the general public is confirmed by two important law review articles.

In the September/October 1884 issue of The American Law Review, George C. Collins discussed the citizenship status of persons born on U.S. soil to foreign parents.  In the concluding paragraph, Collins stated:

Birth, therefore, does not ipso facto confer citizenship, and it is essential in order that a person be a native or natural born citizen of the United States, that his father be at the time of the birth of such person a citizen thereof, or in case he be illegitimate, that his mother be a citizen thereof at the time of such birth.

It’s ridiculous to imagine the sitting president wouldn’t be mentioned when the article concerns the issue of whether a person born of an alien father is even a United States citizen.

Chester Arthur’s true eligibility defect doesn’t appear to have been mentioned in any historical record until December 2008 when it was exposed at my blog.  Clearly, Chester Arthur’s deception cannot serve to validate anyone’s presidential eligibility.  He got away with it, but that doesn’t make it right.

U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

In 1898, Justice Horace Gray wrote one of the most controversial opinions in Supreme Court history wherein a man born in the United States of Chinese alien parents was held to be a citizen.  Wong Kim Ark is the precedent relied upon for the assertion that any person born on United States soil, regardless of parentage, is a citizen.  But that’s not accurate.  The holding in Wong Kim Ark appears to require for citizenship that a person be born on United States soil to parents who are permanently domiciled here.  If the domicile requirement is upheld in future cases, anchor babies will no longer be assumed to be United States citizens.

Regardless, the holding in Wong Kim Ark did not state that such a citizen was “natural born.” In fact, Justice Gray reiterated the definition of natural born citizen as one born on United States soil to parents who are citizens when he favorably discussed Minor v. Happersett:

That neither Mr. Justice Miller nor any of the justices who took part in the decision of The Slaughterhouse Cases understood the court to be committed to the view that all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment is manifest from a unanimous judgment of the Court, delivered but two years later, while all those judges but Chief Justice Chase were still on the bench, in which Chief Justice Waite said: “Allegiance and protection are, in this connection (that is, in relation to citizenship), reciprocal obligations. The one is a compensation for the other: allegiance for protection, and protection for allegiance. … At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens. …”

While the dissent feared the majority holding would make Wong Kim Ark eligible to be president, Justice Gray’s restatement of the Minor Court’s definition of a natural born citizen as one born in the United States to parents who are citizens stands in direct contrast to the dissent’s fear.

A few years after Wong Kim Ark was decided, the Albany Law Journal published an article by Alexander Porter Morse entitled, “NATURAL-BORN CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES: ELIGIBILITY FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT” (Albany Law Journal Vol. 66 (1904-1905)):

If it was intended that anybody who was a citizen by birth should be eligible, it would only have been necessary to say, “no person, except a native-born citizen”; but the framers thought it wise, in view of the probable influx of European immigration, to provide that the president should at least be the child of citizens owing allegiance to the United States at the time of his birth. It may be observed in passing that the current phrase “native-born citizen” is well understood; but it is pleonasm and should be discarded; and the correct designation, “native citizen” should be substituted in all constitutional and statutory enactments, in judicial decisions and in legal discussions where accuracy and precise language are  essential  to intelligent discussion.

The term “native born citizen” has been erroneously substituted for “natural born citizen” by numerous commentators.  Mr. Morse correctly points out that the two are not synonymous.  His article also proves once again that Chester Arthur’s dual nationality was hidden from the public.  There would have been no point in writing the article – which doesn’t mention Chester Arthur – had the nation previously condoned a president born with dual allegiance.

The argument against Obama being eligible rests on multiple Supreme Court cases that define a “natural born citizen” as one born in the United States to parents who are citizens.  This is not a political issue.  It’s a legal issue faced by a nation where nobody is supposed to be above the law.  As such, it deserves judicial review.

[For the most comprehensive etymological deconstruction of the term “natural born Citizen,” I strongly recommend, “What Is A Natural Born Citizen Of The United States?” by John Greschak.

Leo Donofrio is an attorney with 20 years’ experience.  He is a partner in the law firm of Pidgeon & Donofrio and he authors the Natural Born Citizen blog.

Posted in All Things Obama/Soetoro, Constitutional Violations, Controlled Mainstream Media, Economy Hijacked, Illegitimate War, new world order, police state, Presidential eligibility | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Come all ye disgruntled voters to the Libertarian Party to restore the Republic!

It has become apparent that, in the clamor for expediency to increase the chances that the MA Senate seat go to a non-Democratic candidate who therefore would favor dumping Big Gov tax and spend policies, Republican Scott Brown’s glistening personal appeal is being exploited to eclipse his own 11-year legislative record of favoring Big Gov tax and spend policies. He even promoted RomneyCare, which would require everyone to either buy medical insurance or pay a mandatory penalty tax, which is a key part of the Nancy Pelosi-Harry Reid-Barack Obama Health Care Reform Bill.

The MA election has turned out to be the perfect lab case scenario. The political scientist observes indisputable evidence of the “false left-right paradigm.” He/She notes the knee-jerk response of the well-trained but uninformed voters to bank on the particular candidate of whichever of the two parties that they are made to believe will now subvert the overwhelmingly unpopular policy/bill du jour, only to end up asking, after a campaign platform is ignominiously dishonored, “Why doesn’t anything ever change in Washington?”

Now that same political scientist is observing a critical convergence of circumstances. The MA seat has turned out to be pivotal in determining whether Washington lobbyists will get their way with socialist Healthcare “Reform,” even in the face of tanked public support. Now, voters in large numbers have awakened to the cruel truth that Republicans and Democrats have, by design, always been two sides of the same corporate lock-step coin. Voters of all partisan stripes are grieving the outrageous insult of having been sold a load of crap by candidate Obama. Voters are hugely indignant to learn that the Income Tax revenue goes entirely to pay the Federal Reserve in the futile effort to cover the interest (national debt) owed to it for its loans of fiat money to the United States Treasury. Voters are in the throes of personally experiencing the egregious repurcussions of Washington’s and Wall Street’s criminal shenanigans. Voters are aghast at the audacity, complexity, and 20-year history of the Global Warming hoax. Voters are outraged with a Federal Government that is hell-bent on perpetuating military incursions, on literally making war, rather than turning its attention full-throttle to solving the criminal murder of our nation’s economy. Voters in increasing numbers are convinced that the Federal Government overall is actually not on their side. Voters are fed up with the fact that there is a fundamental, gaping and systemic disconnect between the people and the people’s government.

And now, the voters in increasing numbers are learning why all that is so. At every turn, they are discovering that Reality is not what the Federal Government has told them it is. The Federal Government is losing its cult-members.

Through the Federal Reserve, international bankers have incrementally pillaged our country, as the Federal Reserve Central Bank is not federal at all but rather the privately-owned, illegitimate instrument of international bankers that was brought into being by the globalist conspiracy to take down America.

Through Trojan-Horse foundations, Marxist/Socialist subversives have co-opted the pitch of the schoolhouse rallying knell away from Sovereign individuality as propounded by the meaning of the words of the U.S. Constitution, to sound instead the Collectivist paradigm with the intent to ‘dis-inform’ the young. Phase two has been to the more easily incrementally commandeer the well-intentioned through contrived environmental initiatives. Phase three has been to clandestinely manipulate the progressively dumbed-down generations into regarding the U.S. Constitution as an outworn, inapplicable instrument of retardation, and to insidiously advance Socialist dynamics under the guise of Democracy as the no-brainer solution to all our ills.

Through complicit government officials, policies have been engaged that are designed to accomplish the opposite of their touted purpose. Among many, one humungous example is the Patriot Act, and a close second, NAFTA.

The political scientist is witnessing an unprecedented development. The people of the entire political spectrum are awakening from the long-nurtured, deviously-calculated matrix that had been intended to cloud clear, independent thinking long enough for the Pied Piper, the closer of Marxist globalists, to take down America, to subvert the Natural Liberties of Sovereign Citizens as enumerated within the U.S. Constitution, and render this nation an available, a perhaps de-facto, participant in a socialist, even totalitarian World Government.

The political scientist is observing the congealing of a growing swathe of voters who are conscientious objectors; who are, in increasing numbers and by the Grace of God, defiantly refusing to be led as lambs to the slaughter. Voters have become disaffected from partisan loyalty. The ranks of voters considering themselves “Independent” have surged, many actually defecting completely from both parties. At the same time, many voters even in all their outrage are sinking into a state of discouragement, believing that their vote cannot or will not really make a difference. Voters crave a genuine, liberty-loving leader, not a fabrication of the globalist puppeteers.

The Massachusetts senatorial race represents a microcosm of the phenomenon that is developing nationwide. It is also the first full-on example of the convergence of these unprecedented circumstances in our time.

The political scientist reasons that, absent such a leader, the disgruntled voter will stay away from the polls at election time. And with regard to a certain portion of uninformed voters, he/she be correct.

However, the political scientist would need to update his/her criteria to include a factor not traditionally taken into account: The Internet.

With the MA election now only a few days away, it may be nevertheless too late for the disgruntled voter to so quickly become informed of the real choices, and of what makes those choices real. But that’s okay. The informing of the disgruntled voters has begun, and it will only accelerate exponentially.

Here’s what the disgruntled, uninformed voter is aching to hear:

The U.S. Constitution stands, and does so on its own merit. Nevertheless, it is the People upon whom the U.S. Constitution relies to survive all assaults.

Every U.S. Citizen is a Sovereign Citizen. Your very life constitutes your right of existence conferred upon you by your Creator, while your body is your primal property. Your rights to free speech; free expression; free press; freedom of association and assembly; freedom of religion; freedom of movement and travel; privacy; the petitioning of the government for redress of grievances, to include the receiving of such redress; habeas corpus; freedom from illegal search and seizure; freedom to own and bear arms; freedom to own property; freedom from military policing (posse comitatus); representative taxation of Capital Gains apportioned to the several states; and many more, are not granted to you by the U.S. Constitution. These basic rights are your LIBERTIES conferred upon you by your Creator because you are ALIVE. The U.S. Constitution is the ‘nation-founding’ document that lists (enumerates) them.

Does the U.S. Constitution list ALL of them? Most likely not; it’s not perfect, but it’s a helluva start.

The U.S. Constitution is the people’s Constitution, created by the People as the blueprint FOR the united STATES of the People, not OF the United States as a corporate entity. As such, the U.S. Constitution places limits on the Federal Government, rendering the Federal Government the servant of the Sovereign Citizens while reserving to the People or to the several states all “powers” not specifically delegated to the servant Federal Government.

After President Andrew Jackson’s successful rescue of the United States from the clutches of the international bankers by his prohibiting the creation of a Central Bank in 1832, the Federal Government nevertheless was subsequently shanghaied by international bankers in 1913 when they commandeered the Congressional process to get the “Federal Reserve” Central Bank brought into being. They then proceeded by regulation, not through the Congressional process, to impose a “voluntary” tax on wages and earnings. The history of political evolution since then has predominantly been of the Federal Government’s mounting usurpations of “powers” from the people that are not specifically delegated to it by the people’s Constitution. Political parties are IRRELEVANT with respect to this truth.

The U.S. Constitution safeguards INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, not tyranny. Its entire premise is the warding off of all forms of tyranny. The U.S. Constitution, therefore, is the arch-enemy of Collectivism, otherwise known as Socialism, Communism, and Marxism. The U.S. Constitution is no match for these, however, without the People’s constant and direct VIGILANCE.

The U.S. Constitution articulates the basic right of the People to peacefully ensure that a wayward and unresponsive Federal Government correct its usurpations: the withholding from the Federal Government of all financing coming directly from the People. The U.S. Constitution further guarantees the right of the People to discard, to “throw off,” a Federal Government that is not responsive and answerable to, and serving the People, and to re-establish the originally-intended REPUBLIC, the People’s Representive government.

Whether or not it’s too late for this truth to inform the Massachusetts contingent of disgruntled voters in time for next Tuesday’s election, let the truth nevertheless be declared far and wide:

Committed LIBERTARIANS are sounding the Socialist New World Order death knell, and are being joined increasingly by Democrats and Republicans alike who have sincerely (not merely in Libertarian clothing) emerged from the matrix to see the false left-right paradigm.

These Democrats and Republicans have honestly moved to an ‘independent’ stance, and have come to appreciate the freedom-loving platform of the Libertarian Party. Many if not most of these newborn might even switch to the Libertarian Party as a result of their emergence.

However, it is imperative that all concerned understand fully a particular danger. It’s high time that it be broadcast in no uncertain terms:

The Constitution Party consists of THEOCRATS in Independent Party (or “American Independent Party”) clothing, who, while touting adherence to the U.S. Constitution through one corner of the mouth, are dishonoring it through the other by promoting the same mindset of government-regulated morality as that promoted by most Republicans. This is but another form of Socialist engineering, with the potential to evolve into TYRANNY.

LIBERTARIANS founded the “Tea Party” Movement! Apart from those that are sincerely independent-minded, the unscrupulous of Republicans are attempting to ride its coat-tails merely to resuscitate the Republican Party, while FAKE Republicans are those whose covert agenda is to perpetuate the status quo in Washington D.C. and who will stoop to pretense to appeal to ‘independent’ voters.

Let the next nine months in advance of the midterm elections resound with the rallying cry: Come all ye disgruntled voters to the LIBERTARIAN Party to restore our Republic to Constitutional LIBERTY! Let us identify the Libertarian Party candidates in our respective localities and inform our neighbors, friends and families of that genuine call to Liberty for which our Founding Fathers so valiantly fought.

— Opey606Read the "Articles of Freedom" by the Continental Congress 2009


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

— Left vs. Right vs. You

From the brochure produced by TheLibertySource.com

Politicians on the left and the right believe government should control large parts of your life. Those on the left seek to control your economic life, while those on the right seek to control your personal life — all in the name of the “Greater Good.”

But in a free society, government’s proper role is to keep us secure from the threat of assault, theft, civil injustice, and foreign attack. So, as long as your actions are peaceful, you should have the freedom — the right — to live your life without government interference.

Like most Americans, the Libertarian Party is not bound by the labels of “left” or “right” — “liberal” or “conservative.” We respect you as a unique individual and we’re building a party in the sensible center to put more freedom of choice and responsibility into your hands.

— In a Free Country, Who Decides?

Should you be free to make important decisions about your life, your family, your money, and your business — or should politicians decide for you? On every issue we ask: In a free country, who decides?

If you believe, as we do, that you should be free to make the choices that impact your life, please support our efforts to move public policy in the direction of liberty.

To learn more about the Libertarian Party, visit us onilne at www.LP.org

Where Do Libertarians Fit in Left vs. Right Politics?

(If the chart embedded in the Scribd window below is not visible, hover your mouse-pointer over the right side of the Scribd window and click on the generated hand finger pointing to the right — no pun intended.)

Posted in Civil Liberties and Rights, Constitutional Violations, Economy Hijacked, Illegal Federal Tax, Illegitimate War, new world order, police state | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Richard Gage’s 9/11 Presentation in Auckland, New Zealand, Silences The Debunkers with PROOF that WTC Twin Towers were pulverized by High Tech EXPLOSIVES


Richard Gage’s Auckland, NZ Presentation Silences The Debunkers

(Reposted from: http://www.911blogger.com/node/22011

On Monday the 30th of November, Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, gave his third and final presentation in New Zealand on the Hard Evidence Down Under Tour, to an audience of 143 in Auckland, at the Trades Hall in Grey Lynn.

Says Martin Hanson who had also attended Gage’s Wellington presentation of the 21st of November, which had had over 630 attendees, “The Trades Hall was full except for two or three empty seats.”

The event began shortly after 6pm and lasted for 3 hours. A show of hands at the beginning indicated that the audience was comprised largely of people who already knew the official story of 9/11 was a hoax. Only 11 indicated that they believed the WTC buildings were brought down by jet fuel and fires, while 18 indicated they were unsure.

Evan Ward, who was recording the event said: “Richard Gage was very professional. The presentation was down-to-earth and in layman’s language, so the information was accessible to most anybody.” Ward, who has been investigating the evidence of 9/11 for approximately 3 years, said he also had learnt something new.

Brian Reiersen, who was in the audience offers: “The information Gage presented was very hard to argue with. It was very, very good. I couldn’t fault what he had to say and any reasonable person shown this on TV would realise, given the free-fall nature of the collapses, that the Twin Towers and Building 7 of the World Trade Centre, were brought down with explosives. Richard Gage proved it.”

What Reiersen found most convincing he said were the telling photos of all the cars in the vicinity of the WTC buildings that were covered in dust after the building collapses, that remnants of WTC 1, 2 and 7 were found outside the buildings’ footprints, including that huge girders were thrown 600 feet horizontally and were embedded in adjacent buildings, and that dust samples contained nanothermite.

As Gage points out, nanothermite is a highly advanced, highly energetic material that does not come from a cave in Afghanistan. Rather, evidence indicates that the explosive material, which is known as the “loaded gun” of 9/11, as it goes off when it’s ignited, was developed by US government scientists, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories.

There were five or six in the audience who were obviously 9/11 truth debunkers initially says Reiersen. “I was sitting behind them. They were lawyers and intelligent, yet paradoxically they believed the official story. Gage easily handled their questions and then they became silent. He’s a very, very professional person and exposed that there was a monster cover up.”

Near the conclusion of the presentation, Gage asked for a show of hands of those who still believed the official story and only one raised a hand, while five indicated they were still unsure.

Reiersen, who walked behind the deflated debunkers following the event, heard one of them say that they had a lot to think about now.

The 1st of December is Gage’s last night in New Zealand on this tour. He is flying out tomorrow morning to Japan for the start of the 7-city Japan Truth tour, which kicks off on the 4th of December and said he’s particularly looking forward to meeting Yukihisa Fujita, the Japanese politician who has been challenging the official account of 9/11 in the political arena.

He said he regards the New Zealand tour as a huge success, largely owing to the mainstream media coverage it got. Gage was on Close Up, the country’s most popular current affairs program, and on Radio NZ’s popular Saturday morning show with Kim Hill. While he said the latter interview was not very good, he believes it helped to attract a lot of attention to the tour.

It also appears to have attracted a lot of attention to Radio NZ. Mark Cubey, the producer of the Kim Hill show advised via e-mail on the 2nd of November, that Hill has received over 350 e-mails from listeners regarding the interview, a representative sample of which she read out on air on the 28th of November. If the comments she read out are anything to go by, as they included: “Poorest interview I have ever heard…corporate whore..”, “Disgusting piece of trash..she should be fired,” “What a horrible stupid vile woman,” “Most dreadful interview…,” the Gage-Hill interview will likely go down in Radio NZ history, as one of their worst ever.

The night before he left New Zealand, I asked Richard Gage if he had anything he wanted to convey to the people of New Zealand. He replied that everyone must make every effort to spread the truth. Inform your family, friends and colleagues, even though it might not be easy to do so. He says you must go out of your way to wake everyone you know up to what really happened on 9/11.

The Hard Evidence Down Under Tour 2009 – An Amazing Success!!


Richard Gage’s New Zealand Tour Getting Good Media Coverage

Richard Gage Goes Mainstream In New Zealand On The Kim Hill Show

Richard Gage’s Wellington Presentation Gets Biggest Blueprint For Truth Audience Ever


Posted June 4, 2009:

For some time now I’ve been deliberating on how and when I would treat this subject. It’s fully apparent to me now that there really is little commentary needed, no persuasive arguments to be advanced beyond what has already been both written by scientists and videoed. The scientific revelations have been circulating via Internet video, “alternative media” and the blogosphere for three years now. Of course the U.S. “mainstream” media will not touch it, even though since April 2009 a major joint international scientific report, led by Danish scientist Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen, that thoroughly analyzes the particles in the dust of the WTC rubble, was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal (OCPJ, 2009, 2, 7-31) and widely circulated and openly discussed all over Europe His paper in PDF may be downloaded from the Bentham OCPJ site (it’s a large document, 9.88Mb, so please allow a few seconds to download). Since its publication, Niels Harrit was interviewed by a major Danish TV news station, and in the U.S. by Alex Jones, of PrisonPlanet.com.

Then, finally in May 2009, a ‘mainstream’ U.S. television station, Fox, in Colorado, interviewed Richard Gage, of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth.

Progress is being made to expose the EVIL to the *American* public!

The conclusive forensic science-based evidence now proves that the twin towers were brought down by thermite reaction.  Thermite is a mixture of powdered aluminum and iron-oxide, or “rust.”  When thermite is mixed with sulfur as an accelerant, it is called, “thermate.”   With nano-technology, thermite particles can be created in a laboratory in microscopic size, rendering the resulting “nano-thermite” extremely explosive.  The “loaded gun” is the presence of tons of this unexploded nano-thermite within the dust of 9/11, while the “smoking gun” consists in the presence of two main by-products of thermite reaction: 1) molten iron, both pouring down the sides of the towers before pulverization, accumulating into underground lakes, and shot out as tiny spheroids that solidified in flight through the air; and 2) the white smoke of aluminum-oxide billowing from the base and other exploding areas of the towers, at one point even before a plane hit.  These facts are further explained in the videos below. Several weeks before 9/11, there were workmen working for some time on an elevator renovation project within the twin towers during business hours, and the towers had even been closed to everyone but a working crew on at least one entire weekend, with the electrical power completely shut down. There were reports of sightings of workmen hauling a large number of reels of some sort of cable, among other equipment, into the buildings.

The molten steel (chemically transformed to molten iron, aluminum, sulfur, manganese, oxygen, potassium and flourine) dripping from the towers after the airplanes hit is indicative of this nano-thermite reaction which had nothing whatever to do with the planes. No fire can burn hot enough from such an event to melt steel like butter from ‘top-to-bottom.’  Yet molten iron remained burning for six or more weeks under what rubble was left. Moreover, the 9/11 Commission report completely overlooked the “collapse” (controlled demolition) of Building #7, the third building destroyed.

Events are overtaking us at breakneck speed now that Obama has assumed the Presidency, events that are being accelerated purposely, precisely because the American people are discovering the truth and those pulling the strings behind Obama want to keep us distracted from bringing THEM into full view.

It’s time that all the public at large HEAR the truth. We The People OWE IT TO OUR FELLOW CITIZENS whose lives were snuffed out by this treachery to see to it that the truth come out, and that those responsible within the United States government, past and present, are hauled out to justice, while the larger picture, the full account of the real motive, is finally delivered to the world. The very existence, the very survival, of our Constitutional Republic truly … TRULY … hangs in the balance.

The Time Has Arrived.

Robert Gage on FOX, May 28th, 2009:

Another with Richard Gage, in three parts:

Pt. 1

Pt. 2

Pt. 3

Danish Scientist Niels Harrit

(From kaspertheories.com):


The BENTHAM Open Chemical Physics Journal (Volume 2, ISSN: 1874-4125) has published an excellent research paper authored by:

  • Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA
  • S&J Scientific Co., Provo, UT, 84606, USA
  • 9/11 Working Group of Bloomington, Bloomington, IN 47401, USA
  • Logical Systems Consulting, Perth, Western Australia
  • Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA
  • International Center for 9/11 Studies, Dallas, TX 75231, USA

The lead author is Niels H. Harrit of the Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen.

The paper ends with the statement, “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”

Download this excellent paper in PDF from the Bentham OCPJ website (Large document 9.88Mgb, please allow a few seconds to download).

Resource link: http://www.ae911truth.org/info/51

Here is that paper embedded here:

Chemical reaction further explained:

Building #7 – Third tower to “collapse.”  Was there a motive?

Scott Forbes and powerdown. Further damning evidence:

Stephen Jones, formerly of Brigham Young University

Steven Jones Discussing 9/11


View “9/11 – Blueprint for Truth”, full screen at Google Video:


Worldwide petition for a new investigation!! Please sign.


Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth/

9/11 Truth

9/11 Blueprint for Truth (2008 Edition) – Full Documentary (2 hrs.)

David Ray Griffin – 9/11; Should the truth be revealed or concealed?

David Ray Griffin – Official Website

David Ray Griffin – Search results


9/11 Ripple Effect website

9/11 Ripple Effect – Full Documentary (1.5 hrs)

Loose Change – Final Cut – Full Documentary (2 hrs.)

9/11 Revisited – Video Documentary (1.5 hrs)

9/11 Truth Move

What hit the Pentagon on 9/11?

Credible Critics of the official account of 9/11

“Conspiracy Theories”

MIT Engineer Jeff King about WTC Collapse

Firefighters for 911 Truth

Physics 911 – Scientific Panel Investigating 9/11

Lawyers for 9/11 Truth

Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth

Veterans for 9/11 Truth

Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth

9/11 The Israeli Connection — News Video Expose (20 min)

Pilots for 9/11 Truth

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Patriots Question 9/11

San Diegans for 9/11 Truth




More links and info to come.

Posted in 911 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

State-Controlled United States Media Still In Lockdown Over $3.87 Trillion Lawsuit AGAINST the Securities and Exchange Commission

The American Republic has been under siege since the illegal inception of the private Federal Reserve Central Bank, and its political integrity under assault since the assimilating of thousands of Nazis by way of Operation Paperclip, bursting into fruition with the CIA-instituted coup through JFK’s assassination. Many of the individuals behind this putrid history are alive today, and learning who they are and how this all came to be is the inevitable result of probing just what is behind the largest criminal racketeering lawsuit ever to be filed, one whose defendants are individuals at the helm of the SEC and, as the lawsuit indicates, by association individuals within, and by implication behind, the United States Government. Now, it’s become nakedly evident that we can no longer afford to entrust the preservation of our American Republic into the hands of the CIA-controlled mainstream media.


Since this mega-lawsuit was filed in early January, 2010, not one news agency other than WorldReports.org has covered it. The explanation? Major criminal racketeering on the part of the Securities and Exchange Commission on behalf of the U.S. Communist-infiltrated Shadow Government’s “Operation Stillpoint.” … What? no? … heh.

FINALLY !! . . . . . the Examiner takes a, albeit cursory, stab at ’em. Inform yourself of the details surrounding the decades-old international plot to take down the American Republic partaken of by Nazi infiltrator, George H. W. Bush, alias for German-born George H. Scherf, Jr., G.W. Bush, Kissinger, Gorbachev, Obama, Kohl, Merkel, Ackerman, and the Clintons, just to name a few, at http://worldreports.org/news

This video was posted on YouTube on April 5th, 2010:

CMKM Diamonds and the $3.87 trillion lawsuit you didn’t hear about

March 30th, 2010
By Tim Barello





“Conscience and law” [Photo Credit: Marcel Douwe Dekker]

As the United States continues to fracture in every way imaginable, most citizens are unable to keep up with the never-ending hodgepodge of government corruption.  Each day, a new larger-than-life scandal emerges, and in the short mind span of news media, there is always a bigger and better story to chase. Right now, the hot button issue for mainstream news outlets is healthcare reform, and its myriad implications for our society; this doubtlessly ensures the aforementioned media will continue to overlook unprecedented accusations brought forth in a recent $3.87 trillion lawsuit (embedded below) against U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary L. Shapiro, as well as several other current and former SEC commissioners, among others.

This Bivens action suit represents the largest fraud case in world history, and was filed in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, on January 8th by Pasadena attorney Al Hodges; in his complaint, made on behalf of CMKM Diamonds shareholders, Hodges alleges that:
[Complaint paragraph 31] During the period of June 1, 2004 through October 28, 2005 a total of 2.25 Trillion “phantom” shares of CMKM Diamonds Inc, was sold into the public market through legitimate brokers, illegitimate brokers and dealers, market makers, hedge funds, ex-clearing transactions and private transactions. The sales of the majority of such shares were at all times known to the Securities and Exchange Commission, including Defendants herein.
[Complaint paragraph 32] At some date prior to June 1, 2004 the Securities and Exchange Commission in concert with the Department of Justice of the United States, together combined with Robert A. Maheu and others to utilize CMKM Diamonds, Inc. for the purpose of trapping a number of widely disbursed entities and persons who were believed to be engaged in naked short selling of CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock and cellar boxing the company.
The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice, with assistance from the Department of Homeland Security, believed and developed evidence that said short sellers were utilizing their activities to illegally launder moneys, wrongfully export moneys, avoid payment of taxes, and to support foreign terrorist operations.
To fulfill the plan to criminally trap such wrongdoers, the Securities and Exchange Commission, with assistance from the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security:
(a) Assisted in and approved the retention of Roger Glenn, an ex-SEC trial attorney and drafter of Sarbanes-Oxley, to join CMKM Diamonds Inc. for the purpose of verifying claims value, increasing authorized shares of stock to 800,000,000,000, and supervising from the inside of the company;
(b) Encouraged the company to expand its promotional activities, assisted in the set up of the “racing activities” of the company, and underwrote a substantial portion of the cost of such activities;
(c) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the sale of certain company claims to several foreign corporations;
(d) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the conferences between Robert A. Maheu and his associates on the one hand, and the wrongdoing short sellers on the other, all for the purpose of settling the potential liability of said wrongdoers with consent of the U. S. Government and a representation of no criminal prosecution for such illegal sales;
(e) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the declaration of dividends payable by the company to each common shareholder of CMKM Diamonds, Inc.
(f) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the distribution of shares of CIM, a private company owned by Urban Casavant, as a stock dividend, including consent and approval of distribution of said shares to holders of more than 1.4 Trillion shares of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. common stock.
Based on these assertions, CMKM was used by the U.S. government as part of a covert sting operation – unbeknownst to shareholders – to apprehend criminals for their offenses. However, instead of prosecuting most of them, restitution deals were apparently cut:

[Complaint paragraph 34] During the period from March, 2004 through August, 2006, on behalf of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. Robert A. Maheu, with assistance from others, negotiated a settlement with the illegitimate brokers, dealers, market makers, hedge funds, and other persons and entities that had engaged in naked short selling of CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock and cellar boxing the company. In exchange for a U. S. Government promise of no prosecution for such sales, the wrongdoers each promised to pay negotiated amounts to a frozen trust for disbursal at a later time.

[Complaint paragraph 35] Plaintiffs herein are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that other moneys have been collected for the benefit of the shareholders of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. from the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation, from the United States Government, and from the sale of additional assets including consent to enter into joint venture agreements with other companies holding mineral claims in Saskatchewan, Canada. Plaintiffs herein are further informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that said moneys, collected for the benefit of shareholders have also been placed in a trust or are otherwise now held in trust by the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation and the United States Treasury.

Therefore, the crux of this complaint – and the massive fraud allegedly committed by the SEC (and Department of Justice) – is as follows:

[Complaint paragraph 36] Plaintiffs herein are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that at all times mentioned, the Securities and Exchange Commission reserved unto itself the sole and absolute discretion to determine when moneys collected pursuant to the scheme set forth above would and could be released for distribution.

[Complaint paragraph 37] Demand for release of said moneys has been repeatedly presented to the Securities and Exchange Commission without result. Agents and employees of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice have represented repeatedly that the release of moneys for distribution was imminent, and/or would occur within several weeks, and/or would occur within less than a month. Each of said representations have been made knowing them to be false, and at the specific direction of the named Defendants. These actions of withholding distribution of said moneys, without compensation and without due process of law, amount to a taking of the property of the individual Plaintiffs and of all similarly situated.

During the timeframe referenced above, CMKM was registered as a publicly traded diamond and gold mining company. By 2005, concrete evidence detailing fraud within the company emerged; in addition, it became publicly apparent that CMKM also sold, at the very least, hundreds of billions of unregistered shares – a practice often referred to as naked short selling – to third parties. Eventually, the SEC moved to delist CMKM stock, whose value never exceeded one penny per share, in accordance with Section 12(j) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. After several administrative proceedings, CMKM stock was ultimately deregistered in October 2005.
In September 2006, Floyd Norris, chief financial correspondent of The New York Times and The International Herald Tribune, caught wind of the CMKM scandals, and began to report on some elements of the criminal fraud that ravaged CMKM’s estimated 40,000 shareholders. Norris has reported on more than one occasion that at least 259 billion shares of unregistered CMKM stock was sold; however, per the SEC’s 2008 action against CMKM, the agency itself acknowledges that as many as 622 billion shares of “purportedly unregistered stock” was sold by the company over a 20 month period.
So, how did Hodges initially determine that at least 2 trillion unregistered shares were sold?
[Complaint paragraph 25] A frequently asked question (FAQ) page was added to the web site [CMKMTaskForce.com] on the evening of November 4, 2005 and in response to a question about the degree of naked shorting of CMKM stock, the Task Force [consisting of Robert A. Maheu, Donald J. Stoecklein and Bill Frizzell] indicated that “Credible information indicates the number of naked short shares is potentially as high as 2 Trillion shares.”

Several weeks ago, I spoke with Al Hodges, a practicing attorney with four decades of experience, to find out more about this extraordinary case, and moreover, to determine exactly how he calculated his clients’ potential damages to be nearly $4 trillion – a figure many observers have openly scoffed at.
Almost immediately, I could not help but ask why the mainstream media has not fairly reported on this case; frankly, given the scope of accusations, one would assume that, at the very least, Floyd Norris and The New York Times would have some interest in thoroughly examining the merits of this action; instead, Norris has essentially brushed off Hodges’ allegations as being baseless.
It’s not that Hodges and his associates haven’t tried to attract the media’s interest; in fact, on this side of the Atlantic, all the major dailies, including The Los Angeles TimesThe New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post have all been informed of the suit. Their respective editorial staffs – with the exception of Floyd Norris – have utterly decided to ignore it.
In the United Kingdom, efforts have also been made to attract mainstream media interest. Veteran financial intelligence Editor and Publisher Christopher Story FRSA – an investigative specialist that focuses on covert government operations and scandals – has personally reached out to The Daily Telegraph’s International Business Editor Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, with whom he is acquainted, to notify him about Hodges’ case. To date, Pritchard has failed to respond to Mr. Story, who has authored a number of articles (1) – and other published commentary – in The Daily Telegraph over the course of his near 50-year-career.
Hodges noted that Story, publisher of International Currency Review, and several other serials, is “subscribed to by every intelligence operation in the world.”
If intelligence agencies are reading about CMKM, then why isn’t the mainstream press covering this case? Hodges prudently observed that “they’re not going to touch it.”
“They [the government] used the shareholders without their consent to perform this ‘sting operation’ for National Security interests, and it wouldn’t have worked the way it worked if they had disclosed it,” he continued.
“On the other hand, it isn’t right to bury a company and put them out of business for the purpose of trapping people who are using the company to cheat the government, to line their own pockets, and to fund their operations against the United States.”
As noted above in complaint paragraph 34, and per Hodges, a deal was eventually reached with the aforementioned criminals; they paid the government restitution for documented illegal actions, and in turn, were offered immunity from prosecution.
“Rob Maheu had all these people in a big room in Las Vegas, and made [an] offer to them,” he said.
“Every person, organization and representative in that room stepped up, and either transferred money while they were there, or agreed to transfer money upon some further schedule” to avoid indictment.
Hodges also said, “I have a witness who was there, who saw it, and part of the 2.25 trillion phantom shares is documented by that person’s observations of how many shares were represented in that room.”
“People are going to laugh and titter about the amount of money that is being claimed, but understand the context of the lawsuit,” he said, before concluding, “we are not asking the government to pay us $3.87 trillion, what we’re asking is for them to release the funds that have been collected for us.” Thus, the implication is that this sum also incorporates substantial punitive damages.
In the end, Hodges believes the U.S. government is going to settle the case before it actually moves to trial. On this possibility, he said, “I think its in the process of happening as we speak.”
Based on these explanations – and the recent scandals and assertions that have surfaced about the SEC – I believe the mainstream media is doing the public a great disservice by not properly examining Hodges’ CMKM case.
The same conclusion must also be drawn about Christopher Story’s reports on the criminality that is undermining international efforts to refund the U.S. dollar, which is dangerously close to losing its status as the world’s global reserve currency… but that’s touching on a whole other can of worms … or is it?
(1)  In Paul Johnson’s article “Unions, Pensions, and Financial Responsibility: The British Experience” published in the Journal of Labor Research, Volume 2, Issue 2 (1981) pp. 292, 294, 295, 296, he highlights Christopher Story’s authoritative research, as published in The Daily Telegraph on 30 April, 31 August and 1 September 1976, as well as on 4 September 1978.


Posted in Constitutional Violations, Controlled Mainstream Media, Economy Hijacked, Illegitimate War, new world order, police state, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Health Care Reform: We’re Being Fooled Again

Health Care Reform: We’re Being Fooled Again

By Sheldon Richman
Published 03/24/10
Reposted from: Campaign For Liberty

The medical system does need reforming — radical reforming. It’s more expensive than it ought to be, and powerful interests prosper at the expense of the rest of us. The status quo has little about it to be admired, and we shouldn’t tolerate it.

Thus, the American people should be fed up with Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid for insulting our intelligence with their so-called heath-care reform. It is nothing of the sort. What they call progressive reform is little more than reinforcement of the exploitative system we suffer today.

Whether intentionally or not, Obama & Co. have misdiagnosed the problem with the current system and therefore have issued a toxic prescription as an alleged cure. They essentially say that the problem is too free a market in medical care and insurance; thus for them the solution is a less-free market, that is, more government direction of our health-care-related activities.

Yet if the diagnosis is wrong — which it is — the prescription will also be wrong.

Note that the attention of nearly all the “reformers” is on the insurance industry. What ostensibly started out as “health-care reform” quickly became health-insurance regulation. A common theme of all of the leading proposals is that insurance companies have too few restrictions on them. So under Obamacare, government will issue more commands: preexisting conditions must be covered; policy renewal must be guaranteed; premiums may not reflect the health status or sex of policyholders; the difference between premiums charged young and old must be within government specs; lifetime caps on benefits are prohibited, et cetera.

In return for these new federal rules, insurance companies are to have a guaranteed market through a mandate that will require every person to have insurance. So what looks like onerous new regulations on the insurance companies turns out to be a bargain they are happy to accept. Instead of having to innovatively and competitively attract young healthy people to buy their products, the companies will count on the government to compel them to do so. Playing the populist role, Obama & Co. bash the insurance companies, but in fact the “reform” compels everyone to do business with them.

What about this would the insurance companies dislike? Health insurance is not the most profitable business you can be in; the profit margin is 3-4 cents on the dollar. So a guaranteed clientele is an attractive prospect. The people who will be forced to buy policies are the healthy, who will pay premiums and make few claims. The only thing the companies don’t like is that that penalty for not complying with the mandate is too small. Many young people may choose to pay the penalty rather than buy the insurance because it will be cheaper. But that presents a problem: when the uninsured get sick and apply for coverage, they won’t be turned down because that would be against the law. So look for harsher penalties in the future to prevent this gaming of the system. The insurance companies win again.

What’s missed is that the “reformers” leave untouched every aspect of the uncompetitive medical and insurance cartels that exists entirely by virtue of government privilege. Most of this privilege is extended by state governments through monopolistic licensing, but Congress could repeal the prohibition on interstate insurance sales and the tax favoritism for employer-provided medical coverage. The ruling party has refused to consider those sensible moves.

The upshot is that this reform is a fraud. It leaves in place the government-created cartels and throws a few crumbs to people who are struggling — but mostly by bolstering the insurance monopoly.

Two myths must be shattered. First, the choice is not between this phony reform and the status quo. The “reform” merely puts makeup on the status quo. The free market is the real alternative.

Second, the free market couldn’t have created the medical mess because there has been no free market in medicine. For generations government has colluded with the medical profession and the insurance industry to force-feed us the system we have today.

The Who’s prayers weren’t answered: We are being fooled again.

Posted in All Things Obama/Soetoro, Civil Liberties and Rights, Constitutional Violations, Controlled Mainstream Media, Economy Hijacked, Illegal Federal Tax, new world order, police state, States' Sovereignty | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Slaughter Solution Could Spell the Demise of the Democratic Party and the Impeachment of Obama

Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, New York Democrat, defends tying the health care bills together. “There’s no way in the world we’d do anything unconstitutional,” she said

What Slaughter, Obama, and Pelosi are resolute in failing to recognize is that the “Slaughter Solution” proposal for circumventing the constitutional process, in order to “deem” the Health Care Reform bill, regardless of any prior procedural precedent that may or may not have been set, represents a wanton indulgence in the appearance of impropriety. That very willingness to engage in even the appearance of impropriety is the earmark of the arrogance which is so characteristic of encroaching Tyranny.

Slaughter is wrong. Nothing could be more unconstitutional than for the American Congress to MIS-represent the American People.

Please click here to see how this action could spell not just the demise of the Democratic Party, but the bringing up of Pelosi, Slaughter, Reid and company on Treason charges and the start of a call for the impeachment of Obama:

From: Impeach the president? — WashingtonTimes.com

Posted in All Things Obama/Soetoro, Civil Liberties and Rights, Constitutional Violations, Economy Hijacked, new world order, States' Sovereignty | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Resuming, with Caution, My Support For Debra Medina For Texas Governor

To be clear, it’s the question of consistency that turned out to be the biting issue with the Medina-9/11 hoopla. The common man who knows the value of consistency and strives to live by that value has grown truly FED UP with the inconsistencies of his elected purported representatives, right to the top!

When Mark Davis spewed his stuff into the fan and Debra sopped up the splattering, many honest people took several steps away from Debra because they, and I, truly had, up to that point, come to believe that we had finally encountered the genuine straight-talker, straight-shooter, and everyday-neighbor personality whom everyone craves, one who could not be snookered or compromised while measuring all things against the U.S. Constitution. However, I found her responses to Davis to be somewhat rambling and convoluted, indicating a possible sense of desperation to strike a measured yet credible chord regarding the 9/11 Commission report.

With her assent to such a vicious characterization of 9/11 Truthers after having previously sympathized with our right to harbor conscientious and valid questions about such an incredibly painful issue, she exhibited the same unsavory propensity toward calculated inconsistency for the sake of political expediency that we’ve seen in candidates from both major parties. Such was the shock wave that profoundly resonated throughout the Liberty Movement, resounding still more because of the plethora of damning false flag evidence. From the get-go, however, I sensed that Mark Davis was staging a pre-arranged platform, lending an air of utter dishonesty to the entire act.

I listened to Jack Blood tonight. (MP3) I was reminded of George Orwell’s utterance, “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” Jack Blood was all about doing the revolutionary thing with this airing … out. He helped me to put aside (but not fore-go!) the confusion and disappointment over the Davis interview. I want to make clear that I would have come to the same decision to withdraw support, based not on whether Debra believes 9/11 was an inside job but on the points of her inconsistency and assent to the demonizing of 9/11 Truthers, even had I not first heard about it all from Alex Jones. Nevertheless, it is true that AJ’s long rant served to hammer home these valid points, while his effusive invective over the compromising of principles did have a convicting influence. Engaging in calculated inconsistency, and the maligning of sincere truth-seekers, in one fell swoop, by someone who had garnered our confidence, was, and is, enormously hurtful, especially for those 9/11 Truthers who have been personally impacted by this dastardly, evil, false flag atrocity. God will see to it, I truly believe, that justice will be done, BUT! only *through our participation* in the march of Truth.

With all that said, I acknowledge that no one of us can alter or control what others think of us. In the end, all we truly have is the inner spirit-leading toward all truth, should we choose to follow it, however imperfectly, and regardless of what anyone thinks of what that should look like. I want to resume believing that Debra Medina *would* step forward to explain herself conscientiously were she not needing to walk a fine line to vie for an elected office.

I believe Texas MUST be salvaged from the neo-con, NWO wrecking-yard plans. I think Debra would be the first to agree that, should she succeed to the Governor’s chair, she should be watched like a hawk by the people, many of whom would be engaging in such a level of political involvement for the first time. Regardless of her genuine stand on the 9/11 question, she is, and always has been, all about salvaging Texas for Texans. Basing my feeling on the overall platform of her candidacy, I would be proud to become a Texas resident someday were she to become Governor.

Posted in 911, Civil Liberties and Rights, Constitutional Violations, False Flag, new world order, States' Sovereignty | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Pentagon Seeks “De-Citizenship” Work-Around To Create Precedent for a Police State

I would expect that a judiciary body would find that there exists within the U.S. Constitution safeguards of the natural rights and protections of those American citizens who are Native-born, together with those of its specialized category of ‘Natural-born,’ as being innately Sovereign over the Federal Government, losing a critical measure of their liberties only upon conviction by jury trial of Treason and precipitating severe punishment.

The only citizenship-stripping which already finds precedent appears to be in the case of Naturalized immigrants who, having been found guilty in a jury trial of treasonous criminal activity, can not only be subject to severe punishment but also stand to forfeit their citizenship status that had been previously granted through the process of Naturalization (14th Amendment). But one’s Native-born and its specialized category of ‘Natural-born’ citizenship status are not dependent upon the 14th Amendment.

It seems to me that this “exploration” by the tyrannous neo-cons amounts to yet another attempt to usher in a Police State, to subvert the Republic.   Apparently the Pentagon wants to usher in a Police State, as in TOTALITARIANISM.

It’s high time our elected representatives REPRESENT their constituent CITIZENS and set the Pentagon straight.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Pentagon Quietly Explores De-Citizenship of US Citizen Terrorists

By Steve Clemons – February 10, 2010, 12:07PM
Reposted from

At the highest levels of the US military, a quiet discussion is going on about putting in place a legal framework that would permit the US government to strip American citizenship from terrorists.

The case of Las Cruces, New Mexico born al Qaeda commander Anwar al-Aulaqi, who has been a key organizer and recruiter for the terrorist organization in Yemen is the primary driver of this exploration of possibly modifying US law to allow “de-citizening.”

As the Washington Post‘s Dana Priest recently revealed, al-Aulaqi was added recently to a short list of other Americans for whom there are kill orders in place.

A senior Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has told me that to his knowledge, there has been no serious discussion in the Committee of stripping US citizenship from terrorists, but a senior Pentagon official has confirmed that some in the military are exploring the upsides and downsides of such a more routenized mechanism for stripping citizenship.

A national security attorney who serves in an advisory capacity to President Obama has reported to me that there is no legal way for the US military or the government to strip citizenship from Americans.

But Eugene Volokh, exploring in a Salon article the case of American gone al Qaeda adventurer John Walker, writes in 2001 that “8 U.S.C. § 1481 : US Code – Section 1481” may provide such a mechanism.

As Volokh then wrote pondering whether a terrorist could be stripped of his US citizenship:

Maybe. A federal statute says that a citizen loses his citizenship by “serving in the armed forces of a foreign state if such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States” but only if he does so “with the intention of relinquishing United States [citizenship].”

This topic can be more ably discussed by sharp legal minds like Jeffrey Toobin, Jeffrey Rosen and Glenn Greenwald — but it seems to me that establishing a regularized legal framework specifying that alleged terrorists be stripped of US citizenship so that the military can deal with those de-nationed individuals differently reminds me of the kind of legal gray area that Cheney national security adviser David Addington loved to create.

By posting this question, I trust that others will review other cases and the legal background of this question of stripping citizenship in times of war — and weigh in.

The Pentagon’s top stars are mulling over this issue now and just beginning to probe receptevity in the administration and among some in Congress.

Posted in Civil Liberties and Rights, Constitutional Violations, Illegitimate War, new world order, police state | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Another Police-State, Totalitarian “Notch” for the Shadow Government – The Power to Assassinate American Citizens Abroad is Seized In Plain View

The individual’s right to freely question and to freely choose dissent is already becoming endangered as it is. 9/11 “Truthers” and “Birthers” are increasingly vilified and painted as “dangerous” by mainstream media and the talking-head puppets of the CIA and Pentagon. Now, with the CIA incrementally showing its hand, the “Shadow Government” has fundamentally asserted a constitutionally-prohibited power, and has done so “in-your-face” to our congressional representatives. This has opened the door for further deconstruction of our Republic by encouraging the construction of a pretext of conscientious, questioning, peace-loving American citizens potentially being regarded as dangerous extremists. Acceleration of the ushering of the Republic of the United States into an eventual Totalitarian Police State proceeds apace. It’s all by design.

It seems to me that the individual States should lever some genuine 10th Amendment constitutional power over this egregious violation by the rogue Shadow Government of the civil rights of Sovereign Citizens!


Posted in All Things Obama/Soetoro, Civil Liberties and Rights, Constitutional Violations, new world order, police state | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment