It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does Obama The`King of the World’ Need A Birth Certificate?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 05:56 AM
link   
The Birth Certificate issue surrounding Barack H. Obama surfaced back during the 2008 election days...and has not left the radar since.

Some bigger thing is at work here, and I have suspected that from the start.

It apprears there is a much larger picture to hurridly contemplate...


Global citizens and Kings of the World find home at the United Nations, which operates as a law unto itself.


With that said...I am not one to want The United States of America to surrender sovereignty. But maybe it is already done?

Perhaps some of us can hear that sinister laugh coming from behind this whole Birth Certificate Issue?


There is no doubt that the sovereignty of the US, notwithstanding, the United Nations is a law unto itself.


Catch that? Notwithstanding the United Nations?
That bastion of filth, that gift from the Rockefellers?


A pig sty of corruption, and a body that blows its time on incessant talk while people die in genocides, the UN is also the main source of this summer’s “you’re all going to die” pandemic predictions that have yet to lead to the public panic needed to invoke martial law.


See...this whole fiasco is seen from around the world for what it really is.
Propaganda.

Barack H. Obama declared himself to be a global citizen long before he became President of The United States. We took him to be arrogant, but maybe he was just telling the truth?

So does it really come as a suprise to us that the UN granted Obama the unassailable right to be a law unto himself, with or without the personal documents proving who he really is?

No. We should have seen this coming.

Another hint...Czars. You have heard that word ever since he took office.


Barack Obama is a self-admitted global citizen who can do whatever he wants to America, and just like the organization which foments for One World Government that spawned him, is really a power until himself.



Since his arrival at the White House, Barack Obama has been touted as `King of the World’ rather than USA president.

As King of the World, does Obama really need born-in-USA status? On the occasion of their president’s 48th birthday yesterday, Americans still don’t know for certain from where he came, only where he is leading them.


canadafreepress.com...

Related ATS Thread

[edit on 6-8-2009 by burntheships]




posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   
No I don't think ( as a UK citizen ) BO needs a birth certificate, after all he had three or four different names didn't he? so why all the brooharhar over one BC. shouldn't he produce 3 or four?
I'm sure he can fake them for everyone, or fake them then hide them allowing for more conspiracy theorists to bemoan over and now he's a politician, so he can make the rules up as he goes ( or should that be and now those behind the scenes can make the rules up as they go?).

I'd bet my meagre wage that most politicians have had another name in the past and picked one that is suitable for that particular moment or picked one that is 'user friendly'.



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by DataWraith
 


Yes, I think you hit the nail on the head with "he can just make up the rules as he goes"

That, after all is what all the big boys at the Untied Nations do!
Volcker, Soros, Strong...Malloch-Brown.

Yes, we do not know where he came from, but we know where is leading us....someplace I do not want to go. That is for sure... just a matter of time as to whether it is too late.





[edit on 6-8-2009 by burntheships]



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 06:21 AM
link   
I often get the feeling that Obama truly believes that he is above all accountability and criticism. I have never seen an administration so loaded with czars and henchman foot soldiers in my life. All of these average citizens who are showing up at town hall meetings and rallies are now either crazy or corporate shills in the eyes of Obama and his minions.

I recall 8 strong years of raucous and very well publicized protests by the anti bush crowd during his tenure. From Hollywood to the news media they all had a very well known voice. Bush simply sucked it up as part of the job most of the time.

Obama's staff of former network news reporters went after Drudge with drooling mouths because Drudge exposed the truth about Obama's Health Care agenda. They are attacking concerned senior citiizens etc... It just never ends with this idiot.

Obama thinks he is the king of the world and that no one can beat him. Much like this little fella



[edit on 6-8-2009 by jibeho]



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


You point out what seems to be the most maddening part about it...Barack Obama does come off as seemingly unaccountable to anyone. Funny thing though, I remember that was a word he used in his campaigns.

Oh yeah...well it is all politics. Thing is...what has happened here is beyond the simplicity of it's appearance. I think the whole birth certificate issue is a false front to keep the masses fighting and distracted.

Here is what we should be looking at:

The long-awaited debut of Obama at the UN is happening right on schedule. Obama will chair “a special meeting of the U.N, Security Council on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament”. According to U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, that meeting will take place on Sept. 24 during the annual summit of the U.N. General Assembly.



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


I agree. Obama could end this whole debate by opening up his records. All of his records beyond just the BC. I want to read what he wrote during his college days. A time when he so proudly boasted of hanging out with Marxist Professors. I want to see his applications, his transcripts, his adoption records etc.

Above all, I would love to know what in the hell he was doing in Pakistan for 3 weeks in 1981. That was an odd year for an "American" to travel to such a political hot spot.

Keep in mind that two years earlier, the Soviet Union invaded neighboring Afghanistan; the Islamic revolution removed the Shah in Iran; a radical mob attacked the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, set it ablaze and killed a U.S. Marine along with two Pakistanis. Furthermore, military ruler Gen. Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq hanged former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Benazir Bhutto’s father, whose government he had toppled in the 1977 coup d' tat.

Muhammed Hasan Chandoo, Obama's roommate and travel buddy, has refused to make any comments regarding the trip to Pakistan. Obama had just transferred to Columbia at the time of the visit. Was he already that close to his new roommate to warrant a trip to such a dangerous land?

Pakistan was also under Martial Law in 1981 and had 2 million Afghan refugees by the end of the year.

Nice place to spend a holiday eh? One can only speculate why he would travel there.



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
I often get the feeling that Obama truly believes that he is above all accountability and criticism. I have never seen an administration so loaded with czars and henchman foot soldiers in my life.



Uhm.... Youre kidding right?


So you felt the Bush admin was all ready to take accountability for their actions the entire time?



I'm sorry but that's just plain silly. Bush extended the power of the executive further than it has ever been extended before under his banner of the Unitary Executive.

Instead of limiting gov like a good repub should, he expanded it. And when he did so he IN FACT made up the rules as he went along and tried to shirk all accountability for everything.

Foot soldiers? The Bush Admin was FULL OF THEM. Some of them even unwittingly, like Colin Powell and the lies he was persuaded to tell at the UN.

Let's not forget the Geneva Convention which was seen as "QUAINT" by the administration.

No... when it comes to "making up the rules as you go" and "Ducking accountability" The GWB Administration takes the grand prize.



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


32 czars that are accountable only to Obama. What does that tell you? They were all given jobs by circumventing the congressional vetting process. They do not answer to congress or the people of this country. Why?? They are protected under executive privilege.

Obama's armada swiftly attacks any and all critics on all levels. If you are not crazy you must be a racist if you don't agree with his policy or ideology. That is the message conveyed by this administration.

Obama has foot soldiers in Hollywood, TV media, newspapers, magazines, corrupt organizations like ACORN etc etc etc... And you of course!

[edit on 6-8-2009 by jibeho]



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Just a curious question. Why do you always SEEM to bring Bush into the picture when defending Obama?


Originally posted by jibeho
I often get the feeling that Obama truly believes that he is above all accountability and criticism. I have never seen an administration so loaded with czars and henchman foot soldiers in my life.


Do you feel the statement above is or isn't true?



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


What you are forgetting or purposefully overlooking is that politicans work together as a team to protect their meal tickets, pretending opposition that effectively keeps us/We The People divided, unable to come to unanimous conclusions about their deceitful machinations. One politican lays the groundwork for the next to implement. Have you not been paying attention?

If people would get off the political carousel and watch from an objective, impartial, unemotional distance, the picture that emerges is hard to miss.

I don't expect anyone to agree. Actually I would be pleasantly surprised to find out that anyone does agree. From my perspective it is obvious.



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Just a curious question. Why do you always SEEM to bring Bush into the picture when defending Obama?


Originally posted by jibeho
I often get the feeling that Obama truly believes that he is above all accountability and criticism. I have never seen an administration so loaded with czars and henchman foot soldiers in my life.


Do you feel the statement above is or isn't true?


I bring bush into this because I have yet to see any admin dodge accountability like the Bush Admin.

Until Cheney, Rove, and Rummy are tried for their crimes, the conservatives should count themselves as having "gotten away with murder".

My point is that I have seen nothing out of this Obama administration that even comes close to what Bush & Co perpetrated.



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 



My point is that I have seen nothing out of this Obama administration that even comes close to what Bush & Co perpetrated.


You got to admit that Obama and gang haven't served eight years like Bush did. IMO, it is too early to compare him to Bush record.

Furthermore, Obama hasn't had a 9/11. One has to wonder what Bush policies would have been like if there had been no 9/11.

Thanks for your response.

[edit on 6-8-2009 by jam321]



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


The door is wide open to a hoard of new crimes under Obama. Many under his employ have already committed crimes before they were hired. If he isn't crushing the constitution he will be sending more and more of our troops into a war that cannot be won with conventional means. Furthermore, Obama is carrying on with many of the same policies and tactics as Bush.

No Change for Obama. You should know that by now.


Obama Administration Maintains Bush Legal Argument for Terrorist Surveillance Secrecy


www.foxnews.com...


This one is new. Did I say henchmen? Obama and co. are soliciting for even more henchmen.


Cornyn accuses White House of compiling 'enemies list'



Cornyn was responding to a post on the White House's blog Wednesday in which users are asked to help stop the spread of disinformation about legislation to overhaul health insurance. The post offers an e-mail address, flag@whitehouse.gov, for users to forward anything "on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy."



In his letter, Cornyn asked that the effort cease immediately and that the administration inform Congress what it's doing to ensure that names and electronic information about citizens weighing in on health care are not collected.

Kevin McLaughlin, a spokesman for the senator, said that the office had received no response from the administration.


www.dallasnews.com...


[edit on 6-8-2009 by jibeho]

[edit on 6-8-2009 by jibeho]



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 



My point is that I have seen nothing out of this Obama administration that even comes close to what Bush & Co perpetrated.


You got to admit that Obama and gang haven't served eight years like Bush did. IMO, it is too early to compare him to Bush record.

Furthermore, Obama hasn't had a 9/11. One has to wonder what Bush policies would have been like if there had been no 9/11.

Thanks for your response.

[edit on 6-8-2009 by jam321]



Agreed on the time frame...

And let me say this for the record. For all those who think I'm anti-bush/pro-obama.

I didn't have anything negative to say about Bush until we went to Iraq. While many of my friends were touting that he was the devil, to me he was always just a silly man with no inclination toward book learning... and a hardon for Saddam.

When 9/11 happened, I thought his ability to project strength was great. I thought going into Afghanistan was exactly what needed to happen.

Keep in mind I lived in DC during 9/11 and having had been on an aircraft carrier before, it was quite odd to hear f-18s over my house. Even though I didn't side with Bushs (nor what would have been Gore's) policies I supported our president as I always do. (I'm not really that partisan... actually voted nader in the 2000 election).

But when we went to Iraq, and the lies that lead us there, Bush became less of a unexpected leader in a time of crisis and more of a criminal. Now I don't really know his intentions... so maybe his intentions weren't bad.. I dunno.

But I do know that Obama has not done anything like take the US to war under false pretenses. You might be able to compare Obama to Bush pre 9/11, but there is no way we can compare Obama of Aug 09 to Bush of 03+.

The other thing we have to consider, is what happens if we are hit again. I amongst many others who voted for someone else in 2000 rallied around our president in the days, weeks, and months after 9/11. I became the biggest fan of Ari Fliescher (sp?) in those days.

Would we be able to rally around Obama in his efforts to project strength? Or will people actually blame Obama for "letting it happen"?

I know I've discussed a lot of different things in this post... but I wanted to get that out there as many feel I'm an obamatron, which I am not.



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Your points are well taken. Likewise, I am not anti-Obama. I will praise him when he does well, but will continue to critique him on policies that I don't agree with.

The BC is not an issue for me. I don't believe he wants to be king of the world. But I do believe he has an arrogance about him that makes him think his way is the only way.

Instead of labeling people, he should get his staff to listen to those people. Many of their concerns are legit. If Congress isn't willing to read the bills they put forth, how can they expect people to believe that the bill is the best thing for America?



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


I agree that some of his records are so obviously missing.
Even Billary has opened up thier thesis papers...exposing links to the Black Panthers, and radicals!

It is way beyond suspicious that Obama has hidden most of this...excepting his books, which were carefully thought out before publishing.

I can give him the benefit of the doubt...but what he expects is a total pass!

reply to post by Hazelnut
 


Very well put...they do stick together when the heat is on.
They will languish about in the riches of the two party system as long as they can!

[edit on 7-8-2009 by burntheships]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Your points are well taken. Likewise, I am not anti-Obama. I will praise him when he does well, but will continue to critique him on policies that I don't agree with.

The BC is not an issue for me. I don't believe he wants to be king of the world. But I do believe he has an arrogance about him that makes him think his way is the only way.

Instead of labeling people, he should get his staff to listen to those people. Many of their concerns are legit. If Congress isn't willing to read the bills they put forth, how can they expect people to believe that the bill is the best thing for America?



Star for you Jam because I completely agree. While my views align more closely to Democrats than Republicans with most issues, I believe Obama, his rise to power, and his "historic" election have imbued him with a sense of power and arrogance that threatens to distort the meaningful changes in government he has promised to bring.

I do want healthcare reform, and I do want environmental reform. More protection for consumers and regulation for shady lending practices and ridiculously complicated stock and security trading.

Now that the Democrats pretty much have an iron grip on the hill, he has shown that his willingness to be bipartisan on issues only goes as far as rubber stamping bills the way he wants them. As we've seen with both healthcare and climate change, he and the Democratic party are willing to employ the exact same tactics as the Republicans who dominated Washington previously this past decade.

This past decade has shown me that the American electorate can swing wildly from right to left. Perhaps that shows an underlying need for a new party to satisfy the block of voters disenfranchised by both dominant parties in our government.

As to the OP...I don't believe Obama wants to be king of the world (he has a birth certificate, by the way, but let's not turn this thread into all the other typical certificate threads). I don't really think the Czars are evidence that he wants to be king of the world, he's just expanding control of the government to oversee or regulate certain aspects of the nation, which is typical expansionist policy for a liberal Democrat.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Avenginggecko
 


Yes...agreed.
I do not think Obama wants to be "king" either. The title fits though, as he has his sights far beyond this country.

He is planning U.S. integration with the E.U., is drafting Middle East Peace policys...has been to Germany to create a benchmark in his uprising...he is presenting himself to the United Nations...

You see, I also believe the likely scenario is he was born in Hawaii.
However, TPTB have found an extreme hot button as to the games involved with this BC and are using that as a means of great distraction.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join