Lawsuit Against Obama Dismissed in Philadelphia Federal Court

If after I presented my argument, and people stop responding, does this mean i've won?

I've successfully squashed this thread... maybe i'll move on to all the other threads about obama's citizenship...

Originally posted by Memysabu
The guy needs to produce whatever to prove hes a natural born citizen period. If hes going to be the president it should be required.

And to the people saying this wouldnt be over even if he proved he was a citizen thats complete bull. If you show me a state certified birth certificate arguments (as I like to say) ova!

Just how many times does he have to do this before it is actually "ova"? And do you personally need to see it? And why do you not require the same from any other candidate?

FactCheck.org good enough?

We also note that so far none of those questioning the authenticity of the document have produced a shred of evidence that the information on it is incorrect.

Originally posted by nj2day

Originally posted by Memysabu

And to the people saying this wouldnt be over even if he proved he was a citizen thats complete bull. If you show me a state certified birth certificate arguments (as I like to say) ova!
[edit on 26-10-2008 by Memysabu]

This is the Birth Certificate supplied by the Obama Campaign:
latimesblogs.latimes.com.../photos/uncategorized/2008/06/13/bobirthcertificate.jpg

This is a random lady's hawaiian birth certificate (certified copy):

bp1.blogger.com...

Are we done with this discussion now? Does that satisfy everyone?

If you would like, here's a detailed analysis of the birth certificate:

directorblue.blogspot.com...

there ya have it...

Here's a better more detailed analysis of BHO's C.O.L.B., including detailed images of RGB value heat maps.

And if you look at your own link the one thing missing on O's cert (which is not missing on the random sample) is the stamp that questions the validity of the document in the first place, which I have been told is on the back. If it wasn't true it would be laughable.

reply to post by TheRooster


The raised seal is there, however the certificate is old, and it is only visible from the back...

its a raised seal, it will be on both sides.

his certificate has been made available, and all the Obama-haters say it is fake...

Can you prove your citizenship if your birth certificate is not accepted as evidence?

Originally posted by LogicalExplanation
The fact that his own grandmother said he was born in Kenya should be enough. Why would she say that, especially considering how much it could potentially hurt his chances at being prez, if it wasn't true?

Where did the quote come from? A blog on the Internet. That's where and Berg cannot verify it. Yet he used it in his lawsuit anyway.

Now Berg says he has a tape that verifies that she said the same thing. Only -- -- it hasn't been translated yet, and it is not under sworn affidavit. What a joke! For all Berg knows, the woman on the tape might be talking about the birth of the universe!

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by TheRooster

 

Who are you voting for then. If not McCain (correct spelling), then who? Nadar? Pfft. And if you aren't voting... you don't deserve to post on these topics.

So, it's either McCain or Nadar.

Either way, no one has really showed me anything to be concerned about with Obama. People are currently trying to get him kicked out on a technicality (that no one has yet proved to be a legit case). People have pulled out unsubstantiated claims and fake quotes of his family members.

This election has been dirty in the public's eyes. But, even worse, it has been far dirtier on this board. The ignorance that has breed on here is disgusting.

[edit on 26-10-2008 by Sublime620]

Yeah the ignorance is pretty bad on this thread, but all of it is coming from you. First of all, Rooster called him McSame for a reason. It wasn't a spelling error it is stating a fact that there are virtually no differences between the two pathetic mainstream candidates. Oh and how convenient that you call someone out on spelling yet you can't even spell Nader's name right.

And just because I want to keep the blood off my hands by not voting for any of the megalomaniacs running for president and don't want to take part in a political process that is purely symbolic and there to comfort the masses I don't deserve to have an opinion? For someone denouncing ignorance so boldly has to be aware of Stalin's quote, "It's not he who votes that counts, it he who counts the votes." An absentee ballot sent in by me with Ron Paul's name written on it would be one of the first ignored. This system has been broken for a long time and the powers that be have already decided that Obama the manchurian candidate will be the new figurehead for them.

Peace

reply to post by LibertyOrDeath008


You had me going for a second...

That is until you said something about a Manchurian candidate.

So the question of Obama's eligibility for POTUS doesn't end with Berg's conspiracy claims?

It goes much deeper, so deep in fact that you have have first hand knowledge or evidence that Obama's a Manchurian candidate?! Now Obama is a programmed assassin?!!!

Sublime620 said, "Who are you voting for then. If not McCain (correct spelling), then who? Nadar? Pfft. And if you aren't voting... you don't deserve to post on these topics."




Now, I'm getting REALLY REALLY sick of this viewpoint. What gives you the illusion that because you participate in a failure of a political system called "Democracy" (actually a Democratic REPUBLIC), that you have the right to discuss the relevant facts of a political situation, and someone else that does not participate in this farce does not have that right?




Democracy is just as big a failure and an oppressor as any other system created by man to govern his fellow men. What makes you think that because 15 percent of people in a nation want one man to exercise executive power over them, that that man has the right to exercise executive power over the other 85 percent of people that do NOT want him exercising such power over them. On the contrary to your comments, I say that people who vote (about 30 or 40 percent of people in a nation with a "GOOD" turn out) don't deserve to complain about whoever wins, because they agreed to that system. The people who do not want this farce of a democracy have every right to complain and criticize, because they never agreed to live under such a system as the tyranny of the majority minority. I hate that system, and do not wish to live under it....why should I have to give up the land I was born on or follow laws that are harmful to me and be persecuted for ancestral practices that have nothing to do with taking anyone else's rights just because 15 to 30 percent of people think I should? Aren't they the ones taking my rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which the founders of this country considered to be "self evident", and given by the Creator?


Well, my answer is that the main problem is that this country was FOUNDED UPON LIES AND WICKEDNESS AND HYPOCRISY...while these words of freedom, happiness, and justice echoed out of their mouths, they tolerated the subjugation and oppression of a kidnapped people, and even participated in it. And all this, against the dictates of what they considered to be their own religion. Indentured servitude is the only kind of "slavery" allowed for a Puritan's descendant who claims to believe in the scriptures. And they are required by the same, not only to release free their servant in the seventh year of their servitude, but also to furnish them liberally with everything they will need to start out/restart their independent life.


No, the people of this nation kidnapped, enslaved, subjugated, and oppressed others, and have remained unapologetic, and unmindful of their obligations to their ex-slaves. For this, they themselves are enslaved, and will find themselves in a quite negative situtation of their own making....indeed, they have been, and are already finding themselves in such a situation. They must cry out to the Creator in repentance, and begin to do right works. That includes reparations and repatriation for those who desire it. Those multiple trillions of dollars should not have been given to banks to bail them out....to the contrary, they will become stronger oppressors of you because of this. That money should have been used to right the ancient wrongs of this nation, and help those they have hurt, the Native Americans and the African Americans. Those they oppressed, murdered, and enslaved.


Instead, this nation will be deceived by its "democracy", and will continue to toot its own horn until it is completely destroyed.




-Elijah

[edit on 26-10-2008 by Elijah Mohammad]

reply to post by LibertyOrDeath008


I realize why he called him McSame. Much like saying, Barrack Hussein Mohammad Obama as mean of instigation, it's annoying and stupid. The little nicknames are as gay and bothersome as the Hollywood couple names. Are you a fan of Brangelina?

McSame is a stupid name. It doesn't sum anything up about him. In fact, it really misses a big point that he used to be completely different from Bush, but no one would vote for him. So he's changed his game plan to get elected. That doesn't necessarily mean he's changed his values (don't believe me, look at his recent middle-of-the-line voting record).

It's stupid. Just like the Obama Kool-Aid garbage. It's a buzzword. I don't say buzzwords because I don't want to be put down on that level of stupid. They are always meaningless, they are repeated to the point nausea, and are one of the main catalysts for uneducated discussion of politics today.

As for discussion if you aren't voting? There are people in foreign countries who would kill to vote in this election, yet people on this board claim they are not worthy of discussing our politics. Ignorance at best. The people who don't deserve to discuss politics are the people in this country who vote based off of ignorance, or don't vote at all.

If you don't think anyone is worth voting for, then why bother coming here to slander everyone's name with unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. You have no basis whatsoever to call Obama a Manchurian candidate.

But, realistically, what do you do to promote a cause? Are you out on the streets proactively protesting this election? Have you done anything at all to affect the process by which the election process is done?

What, besides coming on ATS and defacing the names of the candidates, have you done at all to deserve to discuss politics? Do you ever discuss policy?

Oh, and apologies for misspelling Nader's name. He's always failed so hard to being elected I've never really paid attention to him. At least, however, I know his name, for not long in history he will be forgotten.

[edit on 26-10-2008 by Sublime620]

The easiest thing to do would have been for Obama to submit his original copy of his birth certificate to the Judge, and the judge could have dismissed the case on the grounds that the claim was false, and end of story.

It makes no sense that Obama did not do this, or that his lawyers would advise him not to do this. That would have ended all questions. By not producing the document in question, it looks like Obama has something to hide.

Are we going to have another supreme court determined election?

Some things are understood by default:

Why place a law in the constitution with no way to enforce it, surely it's authors did not deem it necessary for the legislature to write one!
They could in no way have foreseen the citizens of this great nation standby in deafening silence of such an abomination.

Nor could they have ever imagined a man of God preaching- "God Dam America", yet gave men the right to do so!

We the people have the inherit right under the constitution to enforce all it's statutes, we are born in freedom with this burden.

The American Indians know the results of not protecting their borders!
May we never know the results of not protecting our "Constitution" and the resulting calamity!

May God help us to save ourselves and may God Bless America !

reply to post by poet1b


Same tired argument.

The case never proceeded to the point where Obama could have presented his documents to the judge. And even if he had, that wouldn't have been a guarantee of an open and shut case. If Obama's paperwork is in order, there's still the chance that it could have worked against him. Such is the nature of law and court proceedings.

The judge took over two months to dismiss the case. Which means that he persisted to rule in Berg's favor. However, within the context of the law, and with regard to the presentation of Berg's claims, the judge could not.

As others have pointed out, the Fifth Amendment is the right of every American. You cannot blame Obama for following the advice of his legal counsel.

reply to post by poet1b


Obama doesn't make decisions. His lawyers do. You listen to what your lawyers tell you to do. That's why we hire them.

His lawyers felt they could get the case dismissed, and obviously they were right.

Originally posted by nj2day
Can you prove your citizenship if your birth certificate is not accepted as evidence?

No! But if you'll pay for the move and can find a country willing to take me, I'll be ready on or about Jan 21st.

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by LibertyOrDeath008

 

I realize why he called him McSame. Much like saying, Barrack Hussein Mohammad Obama as mean of instigation, it's annoying and stupid. The little nicknames are as gay and bothersome as the Hollywood couple names. Are you a fan of Brangelina?

McSame is a stupid name. It doesn't sum anything up about him.

I'm sorry S.Lime but I don't think you actually know why I called him McSame. To me, it is the same McCrap, spewed by the McSame McPeople all the McFriggin McTime. It's kind of like calling those ridiculous huge homes in old neighborhoods McMansion's. It's McWrong, I'm McTired of it, and I wish this country had more McChoices than these two McSames.

No one who voted for the bail out bill should be left in office, not one of them! Is that clear? I appreciate the service John McCain gave to this counrty and will correct someone if it's ever questioned. But IMHO, he was wrong to vote in favor of the bail out. Parhaps if he had voted no, I would have felt more compelled to vote for him. Not Now. My sample ballot is already filled out and ready for election day. If I can't write in Ron Paul, I'm voting for Chuck Baldwin.

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by poet1b

 

Obama doesn't make decisions. His lawyers do. You listen to what your lawyers tell you to do.

I hope they're accessible at 3am when he gets the call Hillary was talking about, because if he can't figure out what to do to get into the Whitehouse, we're all doomed.

reply to post by TheRooster


That's a stupid cheap shot. Difference between law and politics. And even in that case, the president has advisers that he/she appoints for that exact reason. It's impossible for one person to be an expert in all areas.

Don't do cheap shots with me.

Enough!

Originally posted by TheRooster
I'm sorry S.Lime but I don't think you actually know why I called him McSame.

No more name-calling or other forms of trollery. It's disgusting and unworthy of our forums.

Warning issued.

A Call To Action: Ending The Political Game on ATS

Civility and Decorum are Required

Stay on topic or don't post.


[edit on 10/26/2008 by Majic]

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by TheRooster

 

That's a stupid cheap shot. Difference between law and politics. And even in that case, the president has advisers that he/she appoints for that exact reason. It's impossible for one person to be an expert in all areas.

Don't do cheap shots with me.

Sublime, He wants us to elect HIM POTUS, not his lawyers. Lawyers usually tell the guilty to keep their mouths shut knowing opening it may actually incriminate themselves. If indeed BHO has nothing to hide, wouldn't it be more of an inspiration to undecided voters if he blew off the attorneys and produced the vault C.O.L.B.?

His foreign counterparts already view him as weak, and at this point hiding behind his lawyers (when he has no reason to) would only serve to enforce that belief. No cheap shots here bro.

reply to post by TheRooster


Incorrect, right off the start. Lawyers tell some defendants to not be vocal. To assume guilt based off of silence is to throw the Bill of Rights out the window. Not all that are silent are guilty.

Also, there was no reason for Obama to do anything. The trial never reached the phase of discovery because it was thrown out before it got anywhere.

Obama has provided documentation to the state department (obviously enough to appease them). He has also provided the people with a Short-Form version of his Birth Certificate.

If this trial comes out again, and it makes it to discovery, then he'll need to answer.