Obama's Motion to Dismiss Berg's lawsuit denied!?

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   
"He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda," wrote Dewar.
www.taxtyranny.ca...
The architect of the Kyoto Protocol.

Speach given by Mo Strong

rigorousintuition.blogspot.com...


What if a small group of these word leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries?
And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an
agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? Will
the rich countries agree to reduce their impact on the environment? Will
they agree to save the earth?
The group's conclusion is 'no.' The rich countries won't do it. They won't
change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: isn't the only
hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it
our responsibility to bring that about?
This group of world leaders form a secret society to bring about a world
collapse. It's February. They're all at Davos. These aren't terrorists -
they're world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world's
commodity and stock markets. They've engineered, using their access to stock
exchanges, and computers, and gold supplies, a panic. Then they prevent the
markets from closing. They jam the gears. They have mercenaries who hold the
rest of the world leaders at Davros as hostage. The markets can't close. The
rich countries...?" and Strong makes a slight motion with his fingers as if
he were flicking a cigarette butt out of the _
I sat there spellbound. This is not any story-teller talking. This is
Maurice Strong. He knows these world leaders. He is, in fact, co-chairman of
the Council of the World Economic Forum. He sits at the fulcrum of power. He
is in a position to do it




posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by daeoeste
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 

Ha Ha Ha.you are not a toll as far as I can tell,friend.Do you see my point though?The reason why we do not elect foreigners to the office of president is to prevent a conflict of interest.There is a MAJOR conflict of interest when these candidates work for multi-national entities which get no public scrutiny.


Yes I understand and yes they should be scrutinized, especially one who comes onto the scene as an unknown.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Obama on the Issues

A look at Barack Obama's environmental platform and record

www.grist.org...




We already know from the Internet that Soros has gone a long way to bankroll Obama’s campaign, but not so well known is that Soros worked in conjunction with Strong to saturate the American automobile market with the China-produced Chery.

Like the bad guys in a spy movie, Soros and Strong teamed up on the Chery, a sort of poor man’s made-in-China vehicle, with which they hope to flood the U.S. market next year.” (Canada Free Press, June, 2006).

Is it mere coincidence that during the $700 billion bank bailout debate, the House of Representatives this week approved a $25-billion package of low-cost loans to help hard-pressed carmakers and their suppliers finance plant modernization at a time of restricted access to public capital markets?

Isn’t what’s happening in the U.S. right now what this deadly duo always advocated? Strong has been saying all along that China would someday soon replace the U.S. as world economic leader.


www.canadafreepress.com...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.inplainsite.org...

The Lucis (Lucifer) Trust

United Nations

Greenpeace International

Greenpeace USA

Amnesty International

Remember Strong is angry with GW over his failure to join in on Strong's pet project the Kyoto protocol

Now his greatest opponent is George W. Bush.
www.alternet.org...



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Maurice strong ( U.N. environmental leader ).
"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized nations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring this about?"

libertyforlife.com...

www.canadafreepress.com...

I am just trying to connect the dots here

it begins in the 1800s occult circles,

more later,

but some of the topics on this forum are addressing this in relation to the financial crisis, well they are touching on it anyway

[edit on 113131p://bSunday2008 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Skull and Bones members




Maurice bought the Colorado Land & Cattle Company and its accompanying 200,000 acres of San Luis Valley in Colorado in 1978 (now owned by the Conservation Fund). This land sits on multiple huge underground water streams. Strong & Co. created American Water Development Inc. in 1986 to pump up this water. After the locals started protesting, saying the valley would be turned into a desert, Strong decided to save his reputation as environmentalist and bailed out.

The ranch belonged to Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi, a man who's career was started by the Bin Ladens and who strong connections to British intelligence.

Supposedly, in 1978, a mystic informed Hanne and Maurice Strong that "the Baca would become the center for a new planetary order which would evolve from the economic collapse and environmental catastrophes that would sweep the globe in the years to come."

Hanne and Maurice Strong created the Manitou Foundation in 1988, a New Age institute on or near the Baca Ranch. On the website it reads: "In the mid 1990’s, Manitou and specialists of The Conservation Fund, with generous support of Laurance Rockefeller [the late UFO/Crop Circle investigations funder] and the Jackson Hole Preserve, devoted several years to extensive studies of Manitou’s mountain properties, culminating in the creation of the Manitou Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP)." At the ranch there are representatives of many of the world's religions, spiritual movements, and New Age sects, including the Catholic and Protestant churches, Buddhist monks, and representatives of different variations on Hinduism. A circular temple has been built on the ranch where the missionaries of different religions can contemplate with each other. you look at the floor plan you'll see the building is a complex flower (the representatives sit in circles within this flower) within a Celtic Cross/Hindu Kiakra. The latter two represent a divine sexual union. The building seems to be a Rosy Cross, which can be interpreted as having the same meaning. In that last case, the color of the rose would correspond with the nearby mountain range: Sangre de Cristo, meaning 'Blood of Christ', the sacred name the Spanish settlers decided to reserve for it.


isgp.eu...



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   
His citizenship should not be in question. His mother was a US citizen, so no matter where he was born, so is he. As his father was a Kenyan citizen, he would have been born with dual citizenship. Constitutionally, due to his mother, whether or not he was born in the US, he is a 'natural born citizen'.


No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.


Source.

Title 8 Section 1401 of the US Code specifies this further:


* Anyone born inside the United States

* Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe

* Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.

* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national

* Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year

* Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21

* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)

* A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.


Source.

His mother clearly lived more than 5 years in the US:


Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro (November 29, 1942 – November 7, 1995), known as Ann Dunham, and later as Ann Sutoro[1] was an anthropologist who specialized in rural development. Born in Kansas, Dunham attended high school near Seattle, Washington, and spent most of her adult life in Hawaii.


Source.

Another case of 'smoke and mirrors' from the right. This case will be thrown out in the end.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


To elaborate more, I included a source to your source


(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person

(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or

(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and


www4.law.cornell.edu... 01401----000-.html

Emphasis on the bold part.

Was Obama's mother employed with the U.S. government when and if she was overseas or was she a part of the U.S. military?

It might not be that easy to throw this case out, unless the judge is in the tank for Obama.



[edit on 13-10-2008 by wutone]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by wutone
 


Since his mother was born and raised in the states, and was here through high school, then she has the five year minimum requirement necessary. But since he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii in 1961, and Hawaii was admitted to the Union on August 21, 1959, this is a no brainer! Of course he is a natural citizen.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Yea but if Barack Obama was born out of country, he would only be a natural citizen only if his mother was on military duty or was employed for the services of the U.S. government during the time of Obama's birth.

I think the lawyer who is suing JUST TO SEE Obama's long and official birth certificate wouldn't overlook that fact.

The real no brainer is just for Barack Obama and the DNC to stop beating around the bush and show the real certificate already, not the 2 different versions that Daily Kos and the Fight the Smear websites displayed.

The case should have been thrown out of court already, there is no reason for this waste of time, and there is no why Obama shouldn't just shut everyone up on this issue. Obama is just acting like there is something to hide.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by wutone
Yea but if Barack Obama was born out of country, he would only be a natural citizen only if his mother was on military duty or was employed for the services of the U.S. government during the time of Obama's birth.


No, only if his mother had lived in the US for less than 5 years, 2 of which were after the age of 14. She was born and raised in Kansas, and attended High School in Seatle.


* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)


And a lawyer will sue a ham sandwich if you pay him. This is clearly a case of trying to instill voter doubt. I do agree that he should just release the damn document and get it over with, but I think he just doesn't want to give them the satifaction.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 02:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
No, only if his mother had lived in the US for less than 5 years, 2 of which were after the age of 14. She was born and raised in Kansas, and attended High School in Seatle.


* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)




with military and diplomatic service included in this time

This is the provision that allows a citizen to give birth outside the country and still consider his or her child to be considered as a natural citizen. It isn't about where Obama's mother was when she lived in the U.S., I have no question about that, it is whether or not she was employed with the military or the government at the time of Barack's birth if indeed he was born out of the country.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by wutone
 


As long as she lived in the US for a total of 5 years with 2 years being after age 14, it wouldn't matter whether she was working for the Government at the time, and it is clear that she did. If a woman has lived her whole life up to 22 years of age and travels to lets say France on vacation and gave birth, that child is still a US citizen.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
I think you guys are arguing over apples and oranges here. There's no doubt that Obama is a citizen based on his mother's citizenship. The doubt here is the place of birth. One of two things is true here. Either Obama was born in Hawaii...which would make him a natural born citizen. OR he was born an American citizen in Kenya...but not a natural born citizen.

The entire meat of this case is the birth location...not the citizenship. Apparantly several members of Obama's family have stated that he was born in Kenya, not Hawaii. An original birth certificate issued by the hospital would settle this issue...but Obama is refusing to turn it over. It looks like, from this thread, that the judge has ordered he do so within 3 days so this should be resolved either way shortly.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueTriangle
 


He would be a natural born citizen no matter where he was born. Check my first post for source material on the Constitution and US code that covers this. They are quite clear on this.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
OH wow the web page just went down but I managed to get this.

as fast as it came up it disapeared

PHILIP J. BERG, ESQUIRE, : Plaintiff : vs. :CIVIL ACTION NO: 08-cv- 04083 : BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, ET AL, : Defendants :

ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO RULE 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)

THIS CAUSE came before the United States District Court Judge, Honorable R. Barclay Surrick on Defendant’s Barack Hussein Obama and the Democratic National Committee’s Motion to Dismiss. Having reviewed the Motion and Plaintiff’s Opposition to said Motion and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) is DENIED.

It is further ORDER of this Court that the following discovery is to be turned over to Plaintiff within three (3) days:

1. Obama’s “vault” version (certified copy of his “original” long version) Birth Certificate; and 2. A certified copy of Obama’s Certification of Citizenship; 3. A Certified copy of Obama’s Oath of Allegiance.

IT IS SO ORDERED


Obama is toast. He cannot produce a certified Oath of Allegiance, which nullifies the birth certificate. and cert of citizenship.

He would in fact be an Illegal Alien inside the US under a technicality.


I think Hillary may be the next Democratric candidate for President.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Mods, please delete this post. Replying to later post.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by BlueTriangle]

[edit on 13-10-2008 by BlueTriangle]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueTriangle
 


No, the US Code source deals with natural born citizenship, which clearly he has no matter if he was born in the states or on the moon. Natural born means that he was born a citizen, not where he was born. The only way he could not be a natural born citizen is if his mother was proven to not be his biological mother, and I have seen no indication of that.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Code source deals with natural born citizenship, which clearly he has no matter if he was born in the states or on the moon. Natural born means that he was born a citizen, not where he was born. The only way he could not be a natural born citizen is if his mother was proven to not be his biological mother, and I have seen no indication of that.


OK. It's been awhile since I researched this, now I remember what the issue was. The argument for his not being a natural born citizen if born in Kenya is based on the version of this law that was in place when Obama was actually born. You are quoting the current version which was enacted in 1986 and is much more lenient. The pre-1986 version apparantly required 5 years after 16, not 2 as the current one does. I've seen excerpts (I'm looking at one now), but I'll go out and try to find the full context and post it here when I do.

Edit: Having trouble finding the full context since it's an old law. I've seen this excerpt all over the place.

"If only one person is a US citizen at time of one's birth that parent must have resided in the UNITED STATES for a minimum ten years, five of which must be after the age of 16. "

I've seen references on a few official sites that this law read identical to this except the five years had to be after the age of 14, not 16. Either way, if Obama was born in Kenya it won't work.

I've also seen links to a court case in which it was decided that the post-1986 rules were not retroactive to births before that time. Obama was definitely born under the more stringent requirements.

It comes down to one thing...where was he really born. If it's Hawaii, he's good to go. If it's Kenya, he cannot be President and he's technically not even a citizen right now. I gotta say...I'm more than a little suspicious on his reasons for not just producting the documents without having to be forced by a court.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by BlueTriangle]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueTriangle
 


Then the question would be whether or not it was 'Grandfathered' in. It would seem to me that it would replace the old law from that point forward. We'll just have to wait and see what the Judge says. When is this supposed to hit the Court?

[edit on 13-10-2008 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Then the question would be whether or not it was 'Grandfathered' in. It would seem to me that it would replace the old law from that point forward. We'll just have to wait and see what the Judge says. When is this supposed to hit the Court?


I referenced this in my edit above...but I'll put it here too. It's not grandfathered in, the courts decided. Here's the quote with the statute # if you want to research it.


Source
Prior to 14 November 1986, the physical presence requirement in this case was ten years (instead of five) -- including five years (instead of two) spent after the parent's 14th birthday. The requirement was reduced in 1986, but the change did not retroactively make US citizenship available to people born previously who did not meet the old requirement. (Congress's intent not to make this change retroactive was affirmed in 1988 with the passage of Public Law 100-525, § 8(d), 102 Stat. 2619).


Edit: typo fix.

[edit on 13-10-2008 by BlueTriangle]





new topics
 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join