WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to ...
Augusta Chronicle, GA -
US Rep Paul Broun, R-Ga., has won himself national attention for making the harshest criticism of Barack Obama since he became president-elect. ...
The looming Obamahitler dictatorship: Deja vu all over again
The "Obama is a Liberal Fascist Hitler" meme has been floating around since at least February, if not before. And now that the election's over and voters can't punish Republicans for spouting this kind of nonsense, it's getting a fresh life.
F'r instance, there's the Georgia Republican congressman who foresees young Brownshirts emerging from Obama's proposal for a national civilian-service corps:
A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.
"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."
Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.
"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."
Sounds like someone's been reading too much Jonah Goldberg. Of course, Jonah's adherents at sites like Red State and Gateway Pundit think Rep. Broun is on the right track.
Meanwhile, there's also the Texas state education-board member who fears that Obama is secretly plotting with Muslim terrorists to destroy America:
Daily Mail | Obama: The Next Great Dictator? AOL News Newsbloggers, VA - You see, though your party has just suffered an historic defeat to a very progressive Democrat, a new line of Barack-Obama-attack has suddenly emerged. ... Lawmaker sorry about Obama slam Speaking of ignorant Broun's back on Obama |
Obama will soon have to put his money where our hope is Daily Gleaner, Canada - Barack Obama's historic election victory last week has given many hope that sanity will return to a sometimes not-so-sane world. ... |
Examiner.com | Dictator-elect won't waste time signing executive orders Examiner.com - Shorty President Bush will bequeath the most powerful presidency in the nation's history to Obama, who will use his own presumed dictatorial authority to ... |
Subject: Re: Obama CONFIRMED born in Kenya by U.S. Ambassador to Kenya
Dear Ms. Bundy-
This is news to me, as I was in Honolulu at the time of Barack Obama's birth and friends of mine on the University of Hawaii campus were friends with his mother and went through the pregnancy with her.
Might a lawsuit be coming you way soon?
Howard Wiig
Institutional Energy Analyst
Dept. of Business, Economic Development and Tourism
State of Hawaii
P.O. Box 2359, Honolulu, HI 96804
Ph: 808-587-3811
Fax: 808-587-3820
email: hwiig@dbedt. hawaii.gov
"Ruth D. Bundy or Ralph C. Whitley, Sr." 11/11/2008 02:12 PM |
|
FYI. THIS IS NOT A DRILL ---- NOT SPAM ---- WILL ROCK THE PLANET SOON ENOUGH !
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ruth D. Bundy or Ralph Charles Whitley, Sr. <backflow.prevention@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Subject: TOP SECRET ------------ -- Obama CONFIRMED born in Kenya by U.S. Ambassador to Kenya
To: andymart20@aol.com, paulandrewmitchell2004@yahoo.com, comments@whitehouse.gov, President@whitehouse.gov, vice_president@whitehouse.gov, vice.president@whitehouse.gov, tampa.division@ic.fbi.gov, askdoj@usdoj.gov, HCSO <hcso@hcso.tampa.fl.us>, mark.alexander@usss.dhs.gov, Mel_Martinez@martinez.senate.gov
Cc: "Harry Lee Coe, IV" <hcivpa@verizon.net>, philjberg@obamacrimes.com, philjberg@gmail.com
TOP SECRET ------------ -- Obama CONFIRMED born in Kenya by U.S. Ambassador to Kenya
Mr. President and Others: FBI AND SECRET SERVICE RELAY TO THE PRESIDENT
As another Decorated Veteran this VETERAN'S DAY I plead with my President to take action to prevent what we both know will happen once the TRUTH is made known about Senator Obama NOT being qualified to take the office or OATH as President of the United States let alone Commander In Chief of the U.S. Military forces. All peoples in the Planet will learn the horrible TRUTH which should have been confirmed by LAWS making one show full BIRTH information when running for ANY OFFICE in any State, City, County or Federal Government in America. The problem NOW being disclosed could have Alien's or Illegal Alien's taking over this entire Nation one election at a time. More and more PROOF will be forthcoming shortly and MILLIONS, NO TENS OF MILLIONS, of people will be super upset, angry and seek arrests!
TENS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WORLDWIDE WILL HEAR THE NEWS AND BECOME VERY ANGRY THAT THIS FRAUD HAS TARNISHED AMERICA SOLELY BECAUSE NO BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS WERE DONE NOR PROOF SUPPLIED THE REPRESENTATIVES OF CONGRESS WERE REALLY QUALIFIED FOR OFFICES EVEN AS A LAWYER. I have such great respect for Attorney Phil Berg for bringing this matter UP and staying the course to see America WAKES UP to a problem easily solved by Law review of qualifications requiring ALL to provide PROOF OF BIRTH not COLB to run for key offices.
More and more cases are being filed to bring this monumental FRAUD up into the daylight.
When a citizen BORN IN KENYA is seeking Asylum in the United Kingdom with UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE supporting the BIRTH of Senator Obama it will be only a matter of time before the records are released WORLDWIDE then the potential for even Race Riots can be diminished by our President taking action FOR THE PEOPLE.
Phil Berg, attorney filing suits with others, listened along with a Radio Station who contacted the American Ambassador to Kenya confirming the birth VERIFIED clearly Senator Obama CANNOT BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Further, Senator Obama and his close family or friends, KNEW OF THE FRAUD AND PERJURY thus they must be arrested and protected during a full scale Criminal Investigation by the FBI, Secret Service and others appointed by the President before critical injury or death stops another investigation.
Accordingly, the FAX and E-MAILS sent to the President, take on more meaning in that the family of Senator Obama should be protected by removal to a safe location much like the U.S. Marshal Service has taken crucial witnesses in the past. Mr. President we asked for confirmation within 48 hours so you could PROTECT THE PRESIDENT ELECT AND THE FAMILY OF THE PRESIDENT ELECT from the backlash feared and dreamed.
TOP SECRET WARNING
ONCE THIS INFORMATION IS OUT IN THE SUNSHINE TO ALL AMERICANS AND FOREIGN NATIONALS YOU KNOW WHAT POSSIBLY WILL BE THE RESULT. USSS AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE FOR PROTECTION BUT THE OBAMA FAMILY MUST BE TAKEN INTO CUSTODY FOR THEIR OWN PROTECTION PLUS THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS STILL REMAINING CONFISCATED AND AUDITS DETERMINING HOW MUCH MONEY WAS SENT TO KENYA FROM THOSE PEOPLE DONATION FOR ELECTION ACCOUNTS TO CAUSE FUTURE PROBLEMS AND CHARGES PLUS FIND OUT HOW MANY FOREIGN DONATIONS WERE RECEIVED AS PART OF THE $650 MILLION DONATED AND MUCH USED ALREADY IN GIFTS TO ORGANIZATIONS OR PEOPLE WORLDWIDE !
PLEASE HAVE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS PROTECT THOSE CHILDREN IN THE OBAMA FAMILY PLUS THE PRESIDENT ELECT AND HIS SPOUSE OR OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS IN AMERICA LEGALLY OR ILLEGALLY.
Click below to listen
http://tinyurl.com/57afpl
MAY THE REST OF VETERAN'S DAY BE A CHANCE TO HONOR VETERAN'S WORLDWIDE !
NOTE: Not sent to the Press, Media, Radio Stations NOR others who might spread the word until the President, FBI, Secret Service and others such as my Senator Mel Martinez can take necessary actions. Message sent to Hillsborough County Sheriff David Gee to keep him in the loop as a former HCSO Deputy, Former TPD Officer and Former TIA Officer plus Senior Military Police Instructor.
Ralph Charles Whitley, Sr.
a Decorated American Veteran
4532 W. Kennedy Blvd. PMB-276
Tampa, FL 33609-2042 USA
111108 10:20 AM EASTERN
Phone: 813-286-2333
backflow.prevention@verizon.net
TOP SECRET ------------ -- Obama CONFIRMED born in Kenya by U.S. Ambassador to Kenya
Got this: THANKS!
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:39 PM, <JoanSharon@aol.com> wrote:
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell
Subject: Re: Internecine battle... just what this case needs (??)
Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 1:04 PM
Murphy v. Ramsey got garbled by a software error; repeating:
Federal citizenship is a political FRANCHISE domiciled in D.C.:
The people of the United States***, as sovereign owners of the national territories, have supreme power over them and their inhabitants. ... The personal and civil rights of the inhabitants of the territories are secured to them, as to other citizens, by the principles of constitutional liberty, which restrain all the agencies of government, state and national; their political rights are franchises which they hold as privileges in the legislative discretion of the congress of the United States**. This doctrine was fully and forcibly declared by the chief justice, delivering the opinion of the court in National Bank v. County of Yankton, 101 U.S. 129.
[Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15 (1885)]
[italics in original, emphasis added]
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: Internecine battle... just what this case needs (??)
To: JoanSharon@aol.com
Cc: SupremeLaw <supremelaw@googlegroups.com>
Ask Mr. Martin if he's ever read People v. De La Guerra, or Pannill v. Roanoke
or if he has ever bothered to visit a law library -- to construct the Qualifications
Clauses -- as we have done here. Before Internet ("BI"), this legal research took
several HUNDRED hours of hard work:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/swornaff.htm#delaguerra
As it was the adoption of the Constitution by the
Conventions of nine States that established and created the
United States***, it is obvious there could not then have
existed any person who had been seven years a citizen of the
United States***, or who possessed the Presidential
qualifications of being thirty-five years of age, a natural
born citizen, and fourteen years a resident of the United
States***. The United States*** in these provisions,
means the States united. To be twenty-five years of age, and for
seven years to have been a citizen of one of the States
which ratifies the Constitution, is the qualification of a
representative. To be a natural born citizen
of one of the
States which shall ratify the Constitution, or to be a
citizen of one of said States at the time of such
ratification, and to have attained the age of thirty-five
years, and to have been fourteen years a resident within one
of the said States, are the Presidential qualifications,
according to the true meaning of the Constitution.
[People v. De La Guerra, 40 Cal. 311, 337 (1870)]
[emphasis added]
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/twoclass.htm#pannill
... citizens of the District of Columbia were not granted the
privilege of litigating in the federal courts
From: Paul Andrew Mitchellgmail.com>
Subject: Berg v.Obama et al.: Got this from an e-mail friend....must read...S.Ct. case getting stranger
Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 1:35 PM
> Remind the Supreme Court of their sworn oath to defend
the United States Constitution!
Some of them DON'T HAVE CREDENTIALS! !
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
Now that Surrick's APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVIT has turned up
withOUT the required OMB control number (read "bootleg form"),
I predict the real action will soon occur at the Third Circuit:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/mandamus.htm (NOW PENDING)
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/intervention.prohibition.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/notice.of.intent.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/before.and.after.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/twoclass.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/votingaz.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/knudson/judnot09.htm
Clerks of Third Circuit have confirmed receipt of the filing fee
and docketed the above pleadings:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page01.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page02.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter 2008-11-06/page03.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page04.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page05.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page06.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page07.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page08.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page09.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page10.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/letter.2008-11-06/page11.gif
There is no legal quorum at the Supreme Court presently,
and they've been told:
Justices Stevens and Souter received all of the necessary evidence
via Certified U.S. Mail label serial number: 7008 1300 0002 3600 8875
Use "Track & Confirm" at the USPS website: http://www.usps.com
The Solicitor General received same via email c/o U.S. DOJ.
So, the Supreme Court is now looking at a "fork" in chess:
they will lose one or more pieces, one way or the other, this time.
The Third Circuit still has seventeen (17) Circuit Judges
all of whom have all 4 required credentials:
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#THIRD
The U.S. Courts of Appeal are Article III constitutional courts.
See Old Colony Trust v. C.I.R., 279 U.S. 716, 722 (1929):
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/279/716.html
[begin excerpt]
The Circuit Court of Appeals is a constitutional court
under the
definition of such courts as given in the Bakelite Case, supra, and
a
case or controversy may come before it,
provided it involves neither
advisory nor executive action by it.
[end excerpt]
The United States ex rel. now reserves its right to petition
the Third Circuit for a hearing or re-hearing en banc
-- as needed and at the proper time.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney. general.htm
Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 1:14 PM, <JoanSharon@aol.com> wrote:I spoke with the Clerks' Office of the United States
Supreme Court today (Nov 12, 2008) in Washington, and as I
suspected President-Elect Obama has not been
required by the United States Supreme Court to respond or even appear in court
in regards to theWrit of Certiorari submitted by
Attorney Philip Berg on December 1st, 2008. As of today they are
leaving up to Obama to respond or not respond.HOWEVER - The US Supreme COULD require and order Obama to
respond on December 1st, 2008. But as of today it is Obama's choice to
respond to the Supreme Court.THERE IS STILL TIME BEFORE THE DECEMBER 1ST, 2008 DEADLINE TO
ASK THE SUPREME COURT TO REQUIRE OBAMA TO APPEAR BEFORE THEIR COURT ANDPROVE IF HE WAS BORN IN THE UNITED STATES OR NOT AS REQUIRED
BY THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.PLEASE - DO NOT CALL THE COURT CLERKS OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES SUPREME COURT. THE CLERK WILL NOT CONVEY YOUR TELEPHONE
MESSAGES.YOU MUST WRITE THE SUPREME COURT OR BETTER YET WRITE THE
INDIVIDUAL JUSTICES LISTED BELOW.THE BEST WAY IS TO WRITE THEM LETTERS...BUT YOU MUST WRITE
THEM NOW!!!!The Clerk said the best way to contact United
States Supreme Court and demand that theyrequire Obama to respond to the allegations in Philip Berg's
Writ and have the Court require Obama to show documents to the Supreme
Court to verify his actual place of birth was to
write letters to the US Supreme Court to the following
address:United States Supreme Court1 First Street NEWashington DC 20543Or you can individually address letters asking individual
Court Justices to order President Elect Obama to appear before their Court
and verify his birth place to their satisfication and according
tothe requirements under the U.S. Constitution.The Supreme Court Justices are as
follows:Supreme Court Justice John StevensSupreme Court Justice Antonin ScaliaSupreme Court Justice Anthony KennedySupreme Court Justice David SouterSupreme Court Justice Thomas ClarenceSupreme Court Justice Ruth GinsburgSupreme Court Justice Stephen BreyerSupreme Court Justice Samual AlitoRemind the Supreme Court of their sworn oath to defend
the United States Constitution!
on the ground of
diversity of citizenship. Possibly no better reason for this
fact exists than such citizens were not thought of when the
judiciary article [III] of the federal Constitution was drafted.
... citizens of the United States** ... were also not thought of;
but in any event a citizen of the United States**, who is not a
citizen of any state, is not within the language of the [federal]
Constitution.
[Pannill v. Roanoke, 252 F. 910, 914]
[emphasis added]
http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chaptr11.htm
In the fundamental law, the notion of a "citizen of the United States" simply did not exist before the 14th Amendment; at best, this notion is a fiction within a fiction. In discussing the power of the States to naturalize, the California Supreme Court put it rather bluntly when it ruled that there was no such thing as a "citizen of the United States":
A citizen of any one of the States of the union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing. To conceive a citizen of the United States who is not a citizen of some one of the States, is totally foreign to the idea, and inconsistent with the proper construction and common understanding of the expression as used in the Constitution, which must be deduced from its various other provisions. The object then to be attained, by the exercise of the power of naturalization, was to make citizens of the respective States.
[Ex Parte Knowles, 5 Cal. 300 (1855)]
[emphasis added]
This decision has never been overturned!
What is the proper construction and common understanding of the term "Citizen of the United States" as used in the original U.S. Constitution, before the so-called 14th Amendment? This is an important question, because this status is still a qualification for the federal offices of Senator, Representative and President.
No Person can be a Representative unless he has been a Citizen of the United States for seven years (1:2:2); no Person can be a Senator unless he has been a Citizen of the United States for nine years (1:3:3); no Person can be President unless he is a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States (2:1:5).
If these requirements had been literally obeyed, there could have been no elections for Representatives to Congress for at least seven years after the adoption of the Constitution, and no one would have been eligible to be a Senator for nine years after its adoption.
Author John S. Wise, in a rare book now available on Richard McDonald's electronic bulletin board system ("BBS"), explains away the problem very simply as follows:
The language employed by the convention was less careful than that which had been used by Congress in July of the same year, in framing the ordinance for the government of the Northwest Territory. Congress had made the qualification rest upon citizenship of "one of the United States***," and this is doubtless the intent of the convention which framed the Constitution, for it cannot have meant anything else.
[Studies in Constitutional Law:]
[A Treatise on American Citizenship]
[by John S. Wise, Edward Thompson Co. (1906)]
[emphasis added]
Federal citizenship is a municipal FRANCHISE
domiciled in the District of Columbia:
http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chaptr11.htm
The people of the United States***, as sovereign owners of the national
territories, have supreme power over them and their inhabitants. ...
The personal and civil rights of the inhabitants of the territories are secured
to them, as to other citizens, by the principles of constitutional liberty,
which restrain all the agencies of government, state and national; their
political rights are franchises which they hold as privileges in the
legislative discretion of the congress of the United States**.
This doctrine was fully and forcibly declared by the chief justice,
delivering the opinion of the court in National Bank v. County of Yankton, 101
U.S. 129.
[Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15 (1885)]
[italics in original, emphasis added]
Sincerely yours,/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:42 PM, <JoanSharon@aol.com> wrote:
1 comment:
Remember, the burden of proof is on he who asserts, not he who denies; those disclaiming Obama's natural born citizenship must prove the contrary.
Given the facts, if the judges stopped dismissing cases on spurious claims of non-standing because the suitors weren't running for president, non-natural born would be easy to prove in the case of McCain.
All citizens have standing to ensure the Constitution for the United States is upheld; and they may freely use the Courts of the United States to enforce the law.
Post a Comment