BIG NEWS- Arpaio: Obama birth record 'definitely fraudulent'

reply to post by spoor


Apparently you passed up the very convenient supreme court case where they stated just that. There are citizens of the State and Federal Citizens. Birth Certificate = Federal Citizen, while State Citizens were freemen..

None of you can seem to remember or know that our Government at one time did not run the people; the people ran the Government. Nor can you remember that the Constitution founded a Republic, and not a Democracy as many people like to claim.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas



Just in case you did; Here it is for the inconvenience of your eyes again.

After the 14th amendment [sic] in 1868: It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States** and a citizenship of a State, which are distinct from each other and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual. [Slaughter House Cases, 83 U.S. 36] [(1873) emphasis added] The first clause of the fourteenth amendment made negroes citizens of the United States**, and citizens of the State in which they reside, and thereby created two classes of citizens, one of the United States** and the other of the state. [Cory et al. v. Carter, 48 Ind. 327] [(1874) headnote 8, emphasis added]

Wake up call - Obama is not going to be put out of office because of his birth certificate. If you think that, maybe you should think about putting your energies some where else. Just a thought. And more important, what exactly is the point? Can someone born at age 1 in another country run our government?

Originally posted by Beers
Wake up call - Obama is not going to be put out of office because of his birth certificate. If you think that, maybe you should think about putting your energies some where else. Just a thought. And more important, what exactly is the point? Can someone born at age 1 in another country run our government?

What exactly is the point to this comment?

If Obama is not shown to be a natural born citizen then everything that has happened under his watch is invalid.

Think about how many people died fighting a corporate war for oil and rare earth minerals.

The point is that it is treason.

And the age 1 comment is pertinent how?

reply to post by Beers


Our founding fathers would be ashamed if they could see what we have reduced our country to. Nothing but debt, and more debt.

Originally posted by kyviecaldges

Originally posted by Beers
Wake up call - Obama is not going to be put out of office because of his birth certificate. If you think that, maybe you should think about putting your energies some where else. Just a thought. And more important, what exactly is the point? Can someone born at age 1 in another country run our government?

What exactly is the point to this comment?

If Obama is not shown to be a natural born citizen then everything that has happened under his watch is invalid.

Perhaps - but since he is a NBC that's a hypothetical question.

The point is that it is treason.

Perhaps it would be - if he wasn't a NBC. But since he is, it ain't.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by Beers

 

Our founding fathers would be ashamed if they could see what we have reduced our country to. Nothing but debt, and more debt.

And a completely ignorant populace who willingly oblige their captors.

It's Stockholm syndrome.

In psychology, Stockholm syndrome is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them.

link to source

Guessing your not Obama fans. Any chance of bias?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Perhaps - but since he is a NBC that's a hypothetical question.

Are you really gonna start this nonsense again.

You have been proven wrong 16 million different ways.

NO ONE KNOWS IF HE IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Perhaps it would be - if he wasn't a NBC. But since he is, it ain't.

Nothing that he has ever shown has proven this.

You deathers have now been proven wrong by BOTH me and Veritas on your endless argument that ALL CAPS does not qualify someone a 2nd class 14th Amendment citizen.
And you can't prove that he is a natural born citizen.

This has turned into an academic bloodbath.

reply to post by flyswatter

Now lets lets rewind to the England, 1066. The people of England held Allodial title to their land which meant nobody, not even the King could take their land for not paying a tithe/tax. Now in 1199, enter King John Lackland Plantagene. He invoked the Law of Mortmain, which was that nobody may pass their land onto the Church or anyone else without the King's approval. The Vatican was not happy about this because King John and England owed a lot of money to them. King John refused the Vatican's representative Stephen Langton, who was chosen by Pope Innocent III to rule England. In 1208, England was placed on Papal interdict meaning probation. King John was excommunicated and in trying to regain his stature he groveled before the Pope. He returned the title to his kingdoms of England and Ireland to the Pope as vassals, and swore submission and loyalty to him. King John accepted Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, and offered the Pope a vassal's bond of fealty and homage. Two months later, in July of 1213, King John was absolved of excommunication, at Winchester, by the returned Archbishop of Canterbury, Langton. On October 3, 1213, by treaty, King John ratified his surrender of his kingdoms to the Pope, as Vicar of Christ who claimed ownership of everything and everyone on earth as tradition. Where in the Bible did Jesus give any man this kind of power over all men and land? He didn't. Nor did he create a religion or the office of Pope. Can you have a third party break a contract between you and another person under duress..? Don't those of you who are forced into a contract reserve all your rights under modern UCC 1-207 and claim UCC 1-103? The contract (treaty of 1213) was between two parties. Now the Barons of England would not put up with being slaves anymore so they took to the sword and made King John sign the Magna Carta. So doesn't this act of the Barons violate the principle of natural law, when they created the Magna Charta, as having no force and effect upon a contract between two parties? Well Pope Innocent III, the other contracting party thought so, for he declared the Magna Carta to be: ". . .unlawful and unjust as it is base and shameful. . . whereby the Apostolic See is brought into contempt, the Royal Prerogative diminished, the English outraged, and the whole enterprise of the Crusade greatly imperiled." Quoted from G.R.C. Davis: Magna Charta. Trustee of the British Museum. London. 1965. What this means is, despite what most think the Treaty of 1213 is still valid. The Treaty of 1213 created a contract, not a trust. A contract may not be broken by a 3rd party, such as the Barons in this case. Now this means because the Magna Carta did not fly, when British immigrants colonized America, America is considered the Pope's land. How? Via the Treaty of 1213, all of the King's lands are the Pope's, and he and his subjects are vassals of the Pope. Now here is where it gets interesting. www.youtube.com... It has been proven that All U.S. Presidents are direct descendants of this very same King John Plantagene. What are the odds?

All presidents must be related to this King because the Treaty of 1213 could never be broken under duress by a 3rd party. Because the King made the Treaty with the Pope, and their descendants, they must hold these lands for the Pope as their contract.

Originally posted by Beers
Guessing your not Obama fans. Any chance of bias?

I am staring at the monitor in shock at the moment.
Mouth agape shock.

This has nothing to do with liking or disliking Obama.

This has everything to do with me loving my country.

reply to post by Beers


I'm not a fan of Government officials, they lie. Period.

Take this for example. If you've ever seen Cops or had one pull you over and ask to search your car; Did they ever once tell you what they are looking for and where specifically it is to be at? No? By law of the Constitution; they are required to. However, if you don't know the law; they can screw you on it all they want if never called on it.

Originally posted by kyviecaldges
If Obama is not shown to be a natural born citizen then everything that has happened under his watch is invalid.

Except for the fact that Obama HAS shown that he is a NBC, so your silly birther conspiracy theories fail.

He is the legal POTUS, and although those with Obama Derangement Syndrome hate that fact, that is reality.

All your silly trying to claim all capitals in a name mean anything fail miserably as it is just not true. The same reason all the freemen claims fail in court, as they are not based on anything but silly stories.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

All presidents must be related to this King because the Treaty of 1213 could never be broken under duress by a 3rd party. Because the King made the Treaty with the Pope, and their descendants, they must hold these lands for the Pope as their contract.

TOTALLY AGREED!!!

The Roman Empire never died.
It just mutated gained power in the shadows.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
By law of the Constitution; they are required to.

Again a lie from you, as where is that claim stated in the Constitution? The Constitution does not even mention cars...

Originally posted by kyviecaldges
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Perhaps - but since he is a NBC that's a hypothetical question.

Are you really gonna start this nonsense again.

You have been proven wrong 16 million different ways.

NO ONE KNOWS IF HE IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Perhaps it would be - if he wasn't a NBC. But since he is, it ain't.

Nothing that he has ever shown has proven this.

You deathers have now been proven wrong by BOTH me and Veritas on your endless argument that ALL CAPS does not qualify someone a 2nd class 14th Amendment citizen.
And you can't prove that he is a natural born citizen.

This has turned into an academic bloodbath.

Of course we cant prove it. But then again, we dont have to, as those in Hawaii have already confirmed he was born there.

Now, if you wish to debate that, go right ahead. You can say you dont trust them, or that you think they are all in on this grand conspiracy - thats fine.

Or, if you still want to run with the whole 14th amendment and all caps argument, thats also fine. As I said, lets take this to a practicing attorney and see what he thinks he (or another lawyer) could do with it in court.

reply to post by spoor

Except for the fact that Obama HAS shown that he is a NBC, so your silly birther conspiracy theories fail.

He is the legal POTUS, and although those with Obama Derangement Syndrome hate that fact, that is reality.

All your silly trying to claim all capitals in a name mean anything fail miserably as it is just not true. The same reason all the freemen claims fail in court, as they are not based on anything but silly stories.

No he has not.

What exactly is this Obama Derangement Syndrome you speak of?

All your silly trying to claim all capitals in a name mean anything fail miserably as it is just not true.

And yet you still refuse to address the argument with anything but generic ridicule.

EPIC FAIL.

reply to post by spoor


Then tell me why there is clearly a difference in mail? Why would they send all bills, corporate, and commercial mail, to an all caps name; while letters from elsewhere aren't? You can scream till your blue in the face that all caps means nothing; it doesn't change the fact they still use them, and the circumstances they use them under.

reply to post by flyswatter


Actually I have spoken to a lawyer; and a very good one I might add.

Wow, you guys really think that his birth certificate means something...why? Check with America, it doesn't. Wait, let me tune in any mainstream media....nothing. What does your birth certificate mean? What should it limit you to? And more importantly, why should it limit you at all.