D.C. court case demands Obama explain eligibility

Not out of the woods yet Barry!

Quo Warranto is being filed today in DC

Taitz doesn't give up easily.Why?

Background of the case Here comes the plaintiff Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ and alleges, that District of Columbia jurisdiction allows Quo Warranto ex relator status in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States, civil and military”. D.C. Code §§16-35-1-3503. Taitz has filed both with the Attorney General Eric Holder and the US Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor and his successor Channing Phillips a request for Quo Warranto in March and April of 2009 respectively. Exhibits 5,6, copies of the Certified Mail receipts, showing that those were received. Taitz has a web site, where she popularized this issue. The web site gets between 2-8 million hits depending on the month. Hundreds of concerned citizens have called the Department of Justice demanding a response to Quo Warranto submission. No response was received for ten months. Letters, e-mails, faxes went unanswered. Employees of the justice department were slamming phones in the face of the citizens, who were calling and urging a response, even when those calls came from high ranking officers of US military. This game of hide and seek by the Attorney General Holder and US attorneys was infantile at best and treasonous at worst, as National Security is on the line. Recent near tragedy of NorthWest 253, slaughter of CIA agents and tragedy at Fort Hood are only a few reminders of the danger.

link

Petition for a Writ of Mandamus 1. Title 28 Part 4 Chapter 85§ 1361 provides for an action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. 2. Petitioner is providing this court Exhibit 1, Affidavit from a renown licensed document expert Sandra Ramsey Lines, in her declaration under penalty of perjury, , that states “ …COLB presented on the Internet by various groups, which includes “daily Kos”, the Obama campaign, “Factcheck” and others cannot be relied upon is genuine. 3. State of Hi statute 338-5 allows one to obtain a Birth Certificate based on a statement of one relative only, without any corroborating evidence from any hospital. 4. Obama refused to unseal his original birth certificate from Hi which would provide the name of the doctor, the name of the hospital and signatures of ones in attendance 5. Taitz brought legal actions on behalf of her clients, members of US military, candidates on the ballot, state representatives and others seeking verification of Obama’s eligibility. 6. Taitz suffered damages of $20,000 sanctions, when US Judge Clay D. Land deemed her actions frivolous. 7. Taitz has suffered severe emotional distress, her law licensed was endangered and her standing in the community was affected in the aftermath of this decision. 8. Taitz is seeking a Writ of mandamus, directing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to provide a copy of the original birth certificate used by Barack Hussein Obama in application for his US passports, to verify Obama’s eligibility.

Writ of Mandamus 1. Title 28 Part 4 Chapter 85§ 1361 provides for an action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. 2. Exhibit 2 herein is an affidavit from a licensed investigator Susan Daniels. It shows that most of his life Obama has used a social security number 042-68-4425, which was assigned to an individual born in 1890 and was issued in the state of CT. Since Obama is not 120 years old and was never a resident of CT, it is a sign of him using a social security number of the deceased, which is usually an indication of foreign birth. 3. Exhibit 3 shows a copy of the on line verification. This is an official record, that shows that indeed Obama used this social security number from the state he never lived in. this is yet another evidence of fraud, coming from an official governmental record. 4. Exhibit 4 Affidavit and Attachment from licensed investigator Neil Sankey. Sankey is a former member of an elite unit of Scotland Yard responsible for combating organized crime. Sankey has done compilation from several national databases, which shows that Obama has used as many as 39 different social security numbers, none of which were issued in the state of Hi, which is a sign of fraud, social security fraud, identity theft, possible IRS fraud, possible elections fraud, possible nonprofit organizations fraud. 5. Taitz was injured when she was subjected to retaliation and $20,000 sanctions upon bringing the above information to court in the Middle district of GA, Judge D. Land, Rhodes v MacDonald 6. Plaintiff is seeking a Writ of Mandamus from this Honorable court to direct Michael Astrue, commissioner of Social Security Administration to release an original application for this social security number, as was submitted in the state of CT and issued to an individual born in 1890, as well as order an investigation, how Obama was able to obtain a social security belonging to an individual born in 1890 and issued in CT, as well as an investigation, as to how Obama was able to use 39 diferent social security numbers according to National Databases Lexis Nexis and Choice Point.

[edit on 1-2-2010 by genius/idoit]

[edit on 1-2-2010 by genius/idoit]

reply to post by genius/idoit


Doesn't give up because there are some people who want to see Obama

fail so bad, they don't care if the country goes down the toilet.

Silly Huh

The Mystery of Barack Obama Continues

link

Most Americans don’t realize we have elected a president whom we know very little about. Pictured: Barack Obama’s Autobiography, Dreams from My Father. Pictured: Barack Obama’s Autobiography, Dreams from My Father. Researchers have discovered that Obama’s autobiographical books are little more than PR stunts, as they have little to do with the actual events of his life. The fact is we know less about President Obama than perhaps any other president in American history and much of this is due to actual efforts to hide his record. This should concern all Americans.

What is he hiding? Well, for starters, some of these records will shed light on his citizenship and birth. Pictured: “Scott & Barry, 3rd grade 1969” Punahou School in Hawaii. Pictured: “Scott & Barry, 3rd grade 1969” Punahou School in Hawaii. For example, Obama’s application to Punahou School – now mysteriously missing – would likely contain a birth certificate. And, according to attorney Gary Kreep, “his Occidental College records are important as they may show he attended there as a foreign exchange student.” Indeed, Obama used his Indonesian name “Barry Soetoro” while attending Occidental. Kreep has filed lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president and as part of his lawsuit he requested Obama’s records from Occidental. However, Obama’s lawyers quickly moved to stop Occidental from honoring this request. Furthermore, now that at least three document authentication experts have declared the scanned “Certificate of Live Birth” Obama’s campaign team gave to a pro-Obama website to be an obvious phony; we know that he is hiding something here as well.

What’s more, there are questions about how he paid for his Harvard Law School education since, despite a claim by Michele Obama, no one has produced any evidence that he received student loans. The Obamas will not release any student loan details despite repeated requests from the Chicago Tribune. However, it appears that his Harvard education may have been paid for by a foreign source. Khalid Al-Mansour, an advisor to Saudi prince Al-Walid bin Talah, told Manhattan Borough president, Percy Sutton, that he was raising money for Obama’s Harvard tuition.

More recently, it was discovered that Obama’s Selective Service card may have been doctored. Federal law requires all American males to register for the Selective Service (the draft) in case a major war broke out. Blogger Debbie Schlussel has discovered solid evidence that Obama’s Selective Service registration form was submitted not when he was younger as required, but rather in 2008 and then altered to look older.

The real reason why Obama probably did not submit this form as a teenager is that he assumed his Kenyan or Indonesian citizenship exempted him from this requirement. But clearly, as he grew older and entered politics, he saw that any documents revealing a foreign birth – Selective Service registration, birth certificate, school applications, etc – would be problematic if he ran for the presidency. Thus, it is not a coincidence that every document which contains information about his birth or citizenship is either missing, sealed, or has been altered.

Of all these marvels, the latest mystery and probably most perplexing is that of Obama’s social security number. It appears that Obama has multiple identities in term of possessing numerous social security numbers. Orly Taitz, an attorney who has filed numerous suits against Obama regarding his eligibility to serve as president, appears to be the first to discover this. In her suit, representing a number of military officers who are refusing to serve under an ineligible commander in chief, she hired private investigator Neil Sankey to conduct research on Obama’s prior addresses and Social Society numbers. Using Intelius, Lexis Nexis, Choice Point and other public records, Sankey found around 25 Social Security numbers connected with Obama’s name.

In Obama’s home state, Illinois, Sankey tracked down 16 different addresses for a Barack Obama or a Barack H. Obama, of which all are addresses he was known to have lived at. Two Social Security numbers appear for these addresses, one beginning with 042 and one starting 364. In California, where Obama attended Occidental College, there are six addresses listed for him, all within easy driving distance of the college. However, there are three Social Security numbers connected to these addresses, 537 and two others, each beginning with 999.

Nevertheless, all this mystery surrounding Obama appears to be a generational thing. Researchers have discovered nearly a dozen aliases, at least two different Social Security numbers, and upwards of over 99 separate addresses for Ann Dunham, his mother. We do know she worked for the ultra liberal Ford Foundation but we also know she may have earned some income from pornographic poses, as evidenced by photos recently discovered by some researchers—how embarrassing. The only thing researchers are able to find out about Obama’s mother is the fact she made porn. I’m sure that’s a first for presidential mothers.

photos of obama's mother
If you look you can find the full photos
[edit on 1-2-2010 by genius/idoit]

[edit on 1-2-2010 by genius/idoit]

reply to post by Sean48

Doesn't give up because there are some people who want to see Obama fail so bad, they don't care if the country goes down the toilet.

Maybe we think the country stands a better chance of not going down the toilet if we don't have a criminal(fraud) at the helm.

reply to post by Sean48


Or maybe.....

Just maybe....

We would like a proper answer to the question....

Is this a legal president or not????

I would not have voted for the other side in case you are wondering, however, our boys overseas should be taking lawful orders from a lawful president.

IMHO that is. At least that is what I was taught in school....

When did they change the rules?????????????????

Genius..brilliant, just brilliant.

There were some things I didnt know about until you posted some of the personal things about Obama. Such as, his mom being in porn(will holdback) the fact that he has had NUMEROUS SSN's..The fact that he didnt do his selective service at 189required) but didnt have it done till 2008 and they made it "look aged". The fact that his mother had 99 different addresses(wtf?),a dozen aliases..this does NOT look good for Obama.

Side Note-I applaud Orly Taitz for staying stong on this. No matter what the haters say, she is doing a great service to this country. If this is blown wide open, she will be remembered forever(and in a good way).

Edit- What you say Obama?

[edit on 1-2-2010 by Common Good]

reply to post by Sean48


It seems to me that it would be much, much more harmful to the country to allow a man who is ineligible to hold the presidency.

On the other hand, I think that his opponents are setting themselves up for a humiliating defeat on this issue. I suspect that he can produce proof of his eligibility if he absolutely has to, but he has realized that he can use the issue to marginalize a certain segment of his opposition.

reply to post by Common Good


Her's a little more from the link

www.westernjournalism.com...
The lack of documents regarding Obama also extends to his mother and to his grandparents. Indeed, researchers have been unable to find marriage licenses for his mother’s two marriages, assuming she was ever legally married. Ditto goes for the marriage license for Ann’s parents. They cannot find birth certificates for her, her parents, or for even for her grandparents. Even more so, despite Obama’s boast of his grandfather’s military service, there’s no record of that either. For reasons no one knows, much of Obama’s life, his mother’s life and his grandparent’s life has been erased from the records as if they never existed.

And I did not uncover this it came from another member.I don't know if they want credit or not so I'll keep it to my self until they say otherwise.

[edit on 1-2-2010 by genius/idoit]


[mod edit: added required source link]

[edit on 2-2-2010 by 12m8keall2c]

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by genius/idoit

 

Doesn't give up because there are some people who want to see Obama

fail so bad, they don't care if the country goes down the toilet.

Silly Huh

all you have to do is literally just open your eyes, or even one of them if you want to see obama fail, so it's definitely not about that. you obviously keep yours closed. silly huh?

to me, it isn't a direct personal attack on obama (we can wait until after the evidence is presented for that), it's about.. #, what's it called... laws or constitution or something and someone being a lawyer and noticing problems or something. if you follow it instead of just talk # on it you might not think it's so silly.

and there is another element people leave out. that it was all intentional. i mean look even before he was elected, we had the total fraud and sickeningly confused and reptile with an identity-crisis hillary, pure war/homeland security puppet mccain and ultra psyhopath and inept vice palin, or the guy that isn't even a US citizen and his vice who will do all the work for him and wrote proto-patriot act laws and has been in the game forever. in any case, it's a huge F-U to the american citizen, the deep government at any angle saying, this is no longer a country of the american constitution and we will run it accordingly and in the same breath mockingly defend its corpse and call you a terrorist or a teabagger for challenging them. i garuntee i'm way younger than 90% of the members on this website and i see instantly through this charade. transparencey indeed.

reply to post by genius/idoit


Right on, thanks for the info.
This is all TOO coincidental for my taste. Something big is being covered up here be it his birth place, or something else, time will only tell.
There is no reason to hide all of that information other than the fact that you are covering your own ass from a screwed up past or a made up one.

Well whoever your source is, they got my respect. And yes, you might wanna wait for their approval first.
This will be interesting to watch unfold, even if they dont find any wrong doing on his part. Holding vital information from the public is treasonous, and should be dealt with accordingly(if proven).
For some strange reason though, I have a feeling too many people have been paid off for this to go anywhere, but Im no lawyer. So I hope I am wrong.

good find man hes in for treason one way or the other now it looks like

Originally posted by genius/idoit
Not out of the woods yet Barry

yes he is, actually

Taitz doesn't give up easily.Why?

because she is a raving nutcase

3. State of Hi statute 338-5 allows one to obtain a Birth Certificate based on a statement of one relative only, without any corroborating evidence from any hospital.

wrong actually, "Within the time prescribed by the department of health, a certificate of every birth shall be substantially completed and filed with the local agent of the department in the district in which the birth occurred, by the administrator or designated representative of the birthing facility, or physician, or midwife, or other legally authorized person in attendance at the birth; or if not so attended, by one of the parents.

The birth facility shall make available to the department appropriate medical records for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this chapter.

so the birth facility must have a record of the birth.... so Taitz lies again!

expect this to be thrown out very shortly

www.factcheck.org...

No Trial for Obama

January 25, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Q: Is federal judge David O. Carter starting a trial on Jan. 26 to determine whether Obama is qualified to be president?

A: No. This is yet another bogus claim circulated by persons who cling to a belief that Obama was not born in the U.S.A. The judge threw the case out of court back in October.

FULL QUESTION

Is this true?

Court date Jan 26, 2010—-Obama

I ask that you pray for this Judge. I also ask that you storm Heaven, and ask God to allow the truth to come into the light. Get as many people as you can to pray for this to be resolved….HONESTLY….without bribes.
Please Pray For Him

Federal Judge Carter sets Trial Date for Obama’s Eligibility!

The expedited trial has been set for Jan. 26, 2010

⬐ Click to expand/collapse the full text ⬏
Many concerned veterans and citizens attended the hearing in Federal Court in Santa Ana in the lawsuit against Barack Obama to determine his eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief. About 150 people showed up, almost all in support of the lawsuit to demand that Obama release his birth certificate and other records that he has hidden from the American people..

Judge David Carter refused to hear Obama’s request for dismissal. He indicated there was almost no chance that this case would be dismissed. Obama is arguing this lawsuit was filed in the wrong court if you can believe that. Obama would prefer a "kangaroo court" instead of a Federal court! Assuming Judge Carter denies Obama’s motion for dismissal, he will likely then order expedited discovery which will force Obama to release his birth certificate in a timely manner.

The judge, WHO IS A FORMER U.S. MARINE, repeated several times that this is A VERY SERIOUS CASE which must be resolved quickly so that the troops know that their Commander in Chief is eligible to hold that position and issue lawful orders to our military in this time of war. He basically said OBAMA MUST PROVE HIS ELIGIBILITY to the court! He said Americans deserve to know the truth about their President!

The two U.S. Attorneys representing Barack Obama tried everything they could to sway the judge that this case was frivolous, but Carter would have none of it and cut them off several times. Obama’s attorneys left the courtroom after about the 90 minut e hearing looking defeated and nervous.

Great day in America for the U.S. Constitution! The truth about Barack Obama’s eligibility will be known fairly soon - Judge Carter practically guaranteed it!

Video from the press conference after the hearing coming soon. Congratulations to plaintiffs attorney Dr. Orly Taitz! She did a great job and won some huge victories. She was fearless!

This needs to be forwarded to everyone you know….

FULL ANSWER

The lawsuit in question here was filed hours after Barack Obama took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, and it raises groundless claims made in dozens of similar lawsuits, all but a few of which have been dismissed. It claimed that evidence exists to show Obama was born in Kenya, among other things. In fact, Obama long ago produced a valid birth certificate issued by the state of Hawaii, and state officials have said the state’s "original vital records" show Obama was born in Hawaii and is "a natural-born American citizen."

This particular e-mail once had a tiny shred of truth to it. At one point Judge David O. Carter had indeed blocked out a tentative trial date for this case, briefly encouraging the Obama birth deniers. But that was as a procedural matter only, and it was never likely that any trial would be held. To reach a trial the case had to survive a motion to dismiss it, which no previous lawsuit by Obama birth deniers had done.

This one didn’t either. Judge Carter not only dismissed the case, but he ended his Oct. 29 opinion with a denunciation of the arguments and claims made by the anti-Obama attorneys:

Judge David O. Carter, Oct. 29, 2009: Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore … mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by “We the People”–over sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.

Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.

Up until that time, Obama deniers took hope from the fact that Judge Carter had listened patiently and had even blocked out time for a trial should the case ever get that far. But the judge also made clear in his remarks from the bench that he was skeptical that any court had the authority to remove a sitting president from office as the plaintiffs sought, since the Constitution gives the Senate the "sole power to try impeachements." And eventually, that’s the reason he gave for tossing out the case:

Judge David O. Carter, Oct. 29, 2009: There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpret whether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office. However, on the day that President Obama took the presidential oath and was sworn in, he became President of the United States. Any removal of him from the presidency must be accomplished through the Constitution’s mechanisms for the removal of a President, either through impeachment or the succession process set forth in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.

The Obama deniers aren’t giving up, of course. They continue to seek an appeal of Judge Carter’s dismissal. But unless they succeed in that there will be no trial.

Footnote: Judge Carter was less harsh in his opinion than another federal judge who threw out a similar lawsuit brought by the same attorney, Orly Taitz, in Georgia. Judge Clay D. Land issued a ruling declaring the suit before him to be "frivolous." He also said it "has no merit." And he later fined Taitz

(cont.)

He also said it "has no merit." And he later fined Taitz $20,000 for wasting the court’s time. He said:

Judge Clay D. Land, Oct. 13, 2009: When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for a political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law.

Taitz is appealing the fine.

For the record, Judge Land was nominated by President George W. Bush, while Judge Carter was nominated by President Bill Clinton.

–Brooks Jackson
Sources

Barnett v. Obama. CASE NO. SACV 09-0082 DOC (ANx). United States District Court for the Central District of California. 29 Oct 2009.

Rhodes v. MacDonald. CASE NO. 4:09-CV-106 (CDL). United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. 16 Sep 2009.

Rhodes v. MacDonald. CASE NO. 4:09-CV-106 (CDL). United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. 13 Oct 2009.


So, more BS from a chain email, no doubt.....

Those who were eligible (who held the office) did they do such a grand job?

reply to post by genius/idoit


I am so glad to hear that efforts are still moving forward to confront Obama’s refusal to show all of the records necessary to confirm or deny his eligibility to be the POTUS.

I wanted to briefly state that my interest in Obama is complicated but I must share some additional information with you that I feel will compliment your own data.

In order to continue putting some dots together I am going to offer you some conjecture that you will want to follow-up on if indeed you seek to gain a better understanding of what Obama’s records refusal could imply if actually released, scrutinized and investigated.

The first part of this puzzle is your own posting. It provides a good deal of information and it is key to the puzzle because it also addresses in a legalistic manner Obama’s refusal to release those records and shows how long and when such actions were initiated. With your posting we are up to date with Obama’s legal issues.

The second part of this puzzle that I suggest you view is a posting from ATS that I viewed back on January 8, 2010. I am providing a link so you can view a video by Honorable James David Manning, PHD, Columbia University. If you have not yet viewed this video, I recommend that you watch it because it relates to his issues with records at Columbia Univ.

atlah.org...

The third and last part of this puzzle is my part. While my portion can only be construed as conjecture, I am willing to live with whatever adjective you wish to place on me because although I cannot prove what I say, I can provide enough credible evidence to begin to infer that there exists some truth to the third part. I just ask that you consider my third part because I believe it will help you in your understanding of why Obama is refusing to release records to the public.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

To better understand my third part you will have to become familiar with two witness interviews by Dr. Dan Burisch and Andrew D. Basiago. These two federal witnesses have stated that Obama was tutored by the CIA for his role as president because the two witnesses listed above have indicated that secret technology has been abused to look into the future to see who the presidents are so that major changes can be made to alter the future time line into a future that those controlling the secret technology can control and use to place their own chosen puppets into the office of the presidency.

These witnesses claim that presidents George H Bush Sr., Clinton, George W. Bush Jr., and Obama were all selected to be president and that secret technology is being abused to view the future and then alter the present to affect changes to the future time line. These witnesses claim that Obama is an agent of the CIA and as such his records would confirm a lengthy CIA relationship.

You can Google Dr. Dan Burisch and Andrew D. Basiago, Atty. At Law. While it may take a while to listen to their interviews and videos, I contend that it will help you to better understand your first part which when combined with part two of James David Manning, PHD and then finally with part three, the two federal witnesses. I have no doubt that you will better understand why Obama has to keep his records secret once you consider parts two and three.

Thanks for your posting. It really was good to read. Let's hope things go well in the courts and that some Judge doesn't defeat everyone's efforts to know the truth about Obama's records.

reply to post by genius/idoit


And then you don't even say what the source you are linking to the alleged pictures has to say about their authenticity. God, pathetic.

edit: It is, however, a fact that Scott Brown, himself, posed nude, if that does so offend your senses....


snopes.com

Claim: Photographs show Ann Dunham (Barack Obama's mother) posing in the nude.

Origins: The above-displayed photographs of a young woman posing au naturel in what looks to be a 1950s-era residential living room began circulating on the Internet in March 2009 with text identifying the subject as Ann Dunham (later Ann Dunham Soetoro), the mother of President Barack Obama.

The appearance of these pictures touched off the usual debate about whether they were genuine photos or digitally manipulated fabrications. We don't yet know the true origins of these pictures, but many have speculated that the real answer lies somewhere in between: perhaps they're real photographs of a (so far unidentified) woman who just happened to bear a coincidental facial resemblance to a young Ann Dunham:



Last updated: 15 March 2009

The URL for this page is www.snopes.com...

Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2010 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson.
This material may not be reproduced without permission.
snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.








[edit on 2/1/2010 by skunknuts]

Originally posted by MaxBlack
I am so glad to hear that efforts are still moving forward to confront Obama’s refusal to show all of the records necessary to confirm or deny his eligibility to be the POTUS.

Wrong, that record has been shown and is available on the web....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

that was a lie, that court case was thrown out last year...

with two witness interviews by Dr. Dan Burisch

oh dear, here we really have a kook
www.lasvegasnow.com...
Burisch says he worked in an underground lab at S-4 near Area 51, the same place first made public by Bob Lazar. Inside he met an extraterrestrial named Jrod and they became pals. He also met angels in the lab and they spoke in Hebrew.

On Frenchman's Mountain, Burisch discovered the first seeds of life on earth.....There are photos of Burisch and his wife in military garb saluting each other. Neither ever served in the military...What about his PHD? Burisch says he earned his doctorate in 1990 at Stony Brook University in New York. The school says he was never a student there. Burisch says his records were erased. But at the time he supposedly earned his degree in New York, records show, he had a full time job in Las Vegas as a parole officer.
www.lasvegasnow.com...

as to Andrew Basiago....

"Andrew D. Basiago is an American attorney and amateur scientist.

Emphasis on the "amateur."
Poor Mr. Basiago is currently being dissed by the National Geographic Society because they narrow-mindedly refuse to publish his claims that the Mars Rover Spirit captured photographic evidence of life on the Red Planet. He wrote a letter to the Society in an effort to get them to publish his "findings."

From the press release:

"I was astonished by what I found," he said. "There, on the Red Planet, were beings in blue bodysuits and the abstract artwork of a Martian civilization. I was looking at the first evidence of life beyond Earth!"

In his letter to the National Geographic Society, the lawyer writes that careful evaluation of PIA10214 reveals "a cosmic treasure trove of pictographic evidence of life on Mars, including humanoid beings, animal species, carved statues, and built structures."

According to Basiago, the humanoid beings photographed in PIA10214 have bulbous heads and elongated bodies, like the extraterrestrials described in alien contact accounts. Some have two arms and legs like human beings, while others have multiple appendages and segmented or larval bodies, as if they are human-insect hybrids.

You want to know what's really sad about this? Aside from the craziness of thinking Martians in Little Blue Bodysuits have been captured on film and you're the only one on the planet to recognize it, I mean.

The part where Mr. Basiago has "five academic degrees, including a BA in History from UCLA and a Master of Philosophy from the University of Cambridge."
Just goes to show that advanced education does not exempt you from acting like a complete and utter 'tard."
www.hotchicksdigsmartmen.com...

some Judge doesn't defeat everyone's efforts to know the truth about Obama's records.

we already know the truth, except some birthers refuse to accept it!

[edit on 1/2/10 by dereks]

Originally posted by IceHappy

Or maybe.....

Just maybe....

We would like a proper answer to the question....

Is this a legal president or not????

Exactly.
Is there something wrong with wanting to know the truth?
Why has looking for the truth become the "wrong" thing to do?
Because we have been sleeping so long that it is making some people very nervous - I suspect.
This isn't about Obama -
this is about tranparency in all things that affect us on this planet.

reply to post by skunknuts


First of all I didn't list the original source because it violates the T&C on nudity and I provided a link to snopes which if anything is pro obama.

Second you are referencing a different case and if you would have read the info provided in the post you would have known that.Your blind allegiance to obama is both and disturbing and disheartening.