Court won't review Obama's eligibility to serve!

Originally posted by Gregarious
Just reading your thoughtful and insightful responses to legitimate questions makes me value you as a fellow citizen even more than you deserve.

I must be careful to keep this civil.

You've already failed at that.

You attack the man because you think that enough evidence has been presented to convince you, a rabid supporter.

I don't "attack the man" based on the evidence I've seen. I attack based on the indisputable fact that not one single person asserting these allegations has yet provided even the tiniest piece of evidence to support them.

You wish to ignore the rules of law, and forego the highest and best evidence.

I'll state this again, and I'll bold it so you can read it without your glasses:

IF you can specifically lay out your entire case, including your hard and damning evidence that Obama is NOT a natural-born US Citizen, then I might at least be willing to consider it.

IF you can specifically state which "rules of law" I am, as you say, "ignoring", and provide for me the "highest and best evidence" I am "forgoing", then maybe--MAYBE--I might be convinced to give this subject a moment of careful consideration beyond the research I've already done.

IF the "questions" here are legitimate, then surely the anti-Obama posters can do this, yes?

Can any of you provide one scrap of direct, damning evidence?

Can you provide interviews where we know exactly who we're talking to, without things getting "lost" in translation between languages, or without deliberately misleading questions being asked of a helpless old woman who's proud of her grandson's accomplishments (assuming, as BH has noted, that the interview in question is even with whom we've been told)?

Can you provide a Kenyan birth certificate that directly disputes the Hawaii BC, certified as genuine by Kenyan officials and the US State Department?

Can you provide proof that Dr. Fukino, Hawaii State Director of Health, is lying?

Can you provide irrefutable evidence that the document provided by Obama in June is a forgery?

Can you provide proof that the DNC "propped up" a candidate who they knew was ineligible for office?

Can you provide direct evidence that John McCain, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, etc. also knew this, and because the outcome was "predetermined", as many posters say, they kept their mouths shut and continue to do so to this day?

Are you starting to see why my credulity in regards to this matter has been stretched to the breaking point?

Because you 'know' you are already correct, and anyone who does not agree with you is obviously wrong.

It has nothing to do with "knowing" I am "correct". It has to do with preponderance of evidence.

I have seen NOTHING CREDIBLE from ANY of the anti-Obama posters that leads me anywhere near the conclusion that Obama is a non-citizen and therefore ineligible for the office of the President of the United States of America.

All I have seen is links to Web sites and blogs run by right-wing fringe groups, funded alternately by agents of the GOP and/or White Supremacist groups, so-called "strict Constitutionalist" groups, etc.--ALL people who have a vested interest in seeing Obama fail.

Repeated requests for this evidence they supposedly hold (enough, in one person's case, to file challenges in court to any legislation Obama signs, or at least in that person's mind) have gone unanswered. The person who says they have enough to file charges refuses to pony up. Others simply ignore the (very reasonable) request and continue their attacks against Obama without one ounce of evidence to support their claims. And then, these same people attack me and others who refute them for being "Kool-Aid Drinkers".

IF you have evidence, you should provide it.

I said it before and I'll say it now:

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE EXTRAORDINARY PROOF.

And I don't want to hear any of this "I don't have to provide squat" crap either. If you can't back up your claims then the debate is effectively over. No, this is not a court of law. But, for anyone who uses even an ounce of their grey matter, the same standard applies to the court of Public Opinion, which is exactly what this is.

If you want me to take you and your claims seriously, provide your evidence.

Put up or SHUT UP.

Boy am I glad you are not in office.

Frankly, so am I. I have a feeling I'd be dodging bullets from people like you the rest of my life. I'd like to live long enough to retire, thank you very much.

Are you a cop?

Are you?

With your intense faculties of observation and analysis, you would make a great leader~in Lithuania.

Blah blah blah yackety shmackety. How original.

I have to tell you, you are trying to rip this guy, and in so doing you are making a laughing stock of yourself.

All I ask is that the people who make these accusations provide their evidence.

In ignoring this reasonable request, or in some cases outright refusing it in terms leaving no uncertainty in regards to their poor attitudes regarding the "truth" they revere so much, they effectively render themselves impotent with regards to the debate as a whole. They defeat themselves and their purpose with their incompetence and in my opinion, open themselves to ridicule.

I don't "play nice". The stakes are way too high for that.

Maybe you should think about your posts before you hit send. Please, please do. At least once.

Always have, always will. Can you say the same?

[edit on 12/9/2008 by The Nighthawk]

Originally posted by kozmo
WE, THE PEOPLE, are not going to take this *Snip* too much longer!!!

Who are you to think that you speak for the People?

If memory serves, the People have spoken, 69,394,675 of them, 52.9% of the voting public. And a majority of the People chose Obama to be the President.

You do not represent the People. You represent a minority who wants to overthrow the will of the People because you are not happy with the outcome of the election; you want a tyranny of the minority.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Well from the topic of this title the court will not review this... So in theory your wrong, because you already stated the court threw this out. So therefor there isn't a court that will review this, regardless of what your claiming the constitution says. The constitution also states that I have the right to bear arms; well after a year and a half waiting period when the original constitution stated if I wanted them I could just have them. So in short you cannot go by the constitution because lets be honest they contradict that thing every single day of the week. In conslusion until they actually review this, your about the 30th thread opened up on this same topic, which has become quite irritating since there still is nothing going on with this, and there won't be anything going on with this. So please when this actually gets into court then show me that the constitution is being followed because my constitutional rights get smaller every day.

[edit on 9-12-2008 by Lokey13]

reply to post by TrueAmerican


And also from your statement it clearly states you have to have probable cause to get a hold of this type of documentation. I will state right now that conspiracy of him being born out of the US will never bring this case into court without credible proof, that of which will never be found by the said people trying to mandate this court appearance. So unless these people you are stating have all of his families birth certs. including both mommy and daddy they will never be able to disprove that Obama's birth certificate reads BORN IN HAWAII.

Also it would have to be a Democrat looking for this type of information since the Republican's are looked at as trying to just smear Obama's flawless record.

[edit on 9-12-2008 by Lokey13]

If it was a conservative that was in question EVERYBODY would be up in arms, since it is a LIBRAL we don't even hear abou this much, ummmm I wonder why that is???? The bias media mabye......Yes, I think so!

Originally posted by Victoria 1
If it was a conservative that was in question EVERYBODY would be up in arms, since it is a LIBRAL we don't even hear abou this much, ummmm I wonder why that is???? The bias media mabye......Yes, I think so!

Actually if you PAID ATTENTION you would see that MCCAIN was also on the original paperwork to be questioned in this same thing.

The hate which you sense is not against conservatives or liberals, it is against America as a whole.

The more I read on this issue the more I come to the conclusion that reality clearly has a left wing liberal bias!

Not a one line post.

reply to post by Victoria 1


Um Obama isn't a liberal but is in fact a Democrat, don't really understand how liberals and democrats are being mixed up; were not talkin Ralph Nater here. The reason we don't see this in the news is that the Republican's that head major companies such as FoxNews see this as being a lost cause and something that will bring only hatred toward the bickering Republican Party. Nothing worse then seeming like a sore loser *cough* Sarah Palin.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


Love your point of view and have enjoyed quite a chuckle reading your posts, these topics are becoming far to easy to shoot down and the Republican's are becoming more and more transparent. Keep up the good work, I know I will.

reply to post by The Nighthawk


Great research, although I don't think you'll be seeing any new evidence anytime soon. As I stated in an earlier post this is about the 30th thread on this topic and I have yet to see anything credible, just a bunch of wind bags asserting an opinion as a fact when they have ABSOLUTELY no proof what so ever. So I'm intrigued and I hope someone trys to give you some answers, otherwise this is just another smear thread in need of being shut down.

[edit on 9-12-2008 by Lokey13]

SCOTUS, will not be the group that will put this matter to rest.

FACT: A Certificate of Live Birth IS NOT a Vault COPY of the Birth Certificate, so let's all get that straight first ok?

The COLB that is posted on Obama's website has been altered, at least 6 different ways. The certification number has been blacked out to avoid other ways of tracing it's authenticity.

Obama's College records, past employment records, US State Department records of travel, including ANY US Passport information are also sealed.

Because of Barack being adopted the Office of Vital Statistics in Hawaii would have sealed his original due to law. That is a very LARGE LEGAL problem for everyone taking up this case going forward; regardless of what you heard from their people out in Hawaii or in the MSM last month.

Constitution Law DOES NOT support Dual Citizens for the office of POTUS. Please go and check your sources if you want to still cling to that bogus fact.

School records that have been located out of Kenya, confirm Barack's adopted name, which puts into question him giving up US Citizenship by not retaking the Oath of Allegiance when returning to America. And mysteriously we can't find those records either; if they were ever even created.

His mother wasn't within the legal time frame of giving birth abroad because of her young age according to the law at the time, which also puts this into question.

NOTE: Those rehashing that Mccain was born on a Military base line, please go look at the law concerning US Military Personal stationed before replying to this.

NOTE: If Clinton, Mccain, and the Easter bunny knew Obama wasn't a US Citizen they'd have jumped all over it? Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't.

A few things clear all this up, releasing the Original Vault Copy of his Birth Certificate. And all additional records of employment as I'm sure at some point if he really was born in America and HELD a legitimate copy of a Hawaii Birth Cert, SOMEONE from his past employment has this in a filing cabinet right?

You don't spend a million dollars if you have nothing to hide. A copy of his Birth Cert (once he can get it unsealed) costs 12 DOLLARS.

In the meantime, the rest of America that still cares about the US Constitution will await his swearing in, and a signature on the first law he passes and TRY him as an usurper...

Originally posted by Victoria 1
If it was a conservative that was in question EVERYBODY would be up in arms, since it is a LIBRAL we don't even hear abou this much, ummmm I wonder why that is???? The bias media mabye......Yes, I think so!

Congratulations, you managed to get it completely backwards.

There were lawsuits contesting John McCain’s eligibility. Was “everybody up in arms”? In fact, if you search about this in all of ATS you will find 2 posts regarding these lawsuits.

Did you hear anything about it on the MSM? I doubt it.

Fred Hollander v. Senator John McCain and the Republican National Committee for example, contested that John McCain was born in Colón, Panama and provided a Certificate of Live Birth showing his birth place as Colón R. P. (Republic of Panama). [edit: here is the supposed birth certificate]

The birth certificate, according to Hollander, was found in the Panama Railroad Company’s records, who at the time was the owner of the land where The Colón Hospital was built.

Hollander also contested that McCain’s staff claimed McCain was born in Coco Solo Hospital, but the hospital was built in the summer of 1941, 5 years after McCain’s birth. On December 17, 1941 Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8981 which “transferred the area of the Coco Solo Hospital from the civil part of the Panama Canal Zone to the naval part” (source).

Hollander further contests that it is not clear this area was under American sovereignty, as alleged by some, who claim the Hay-Bunau-Varilla treaty granted sovereignty to the US.

However, looking at the Hay-Bunau-Varilla treaty, under Article II, the following is stated:

The Republic of Panama grants to the United States in perpetuity the use, occupation and control of a zone of land and land under water for the construction maintenance, operation, sanitation and protection of said Canal of the width of ten miles extending to the distance of five miles on each side of the center line of the route of the Canal to be constructed; the said zone beginning in the Caribbean Sea three marine miles from mean low water mark and extending to and across the Isthmus of Panama into the Pacific ocean to a distance of three marine miles from mean low water mark with the proviso that the cities of Panama and Colon and the harbors adjacent to said cities, which are included within the boundaries of the zone above described, shall not be included within this grant.

While I personally doubt Hollander is right about the question of the Coco Solo area sovereignty, he did made a somewhat compelling argument and asked the Court to request McCain’s birth certificate and related information.

The Court dismissed the lawsuit stating that,

Putting those considerations aside, however, the theory does not establish Hollander’s standing because it does not “allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendant’s allegedly unlawful conduct,”

The Court concluded the plaintiff didn’t have enough standing. Guess what? It’s exactly what other Courts have concluded in lawsuits regarding Barack Obama.

And I remember reading posts of people “up in arms” saying that if Berg/Donofrio/etc (voters and US citizens) didn’t have standing who did?


You can now resume screaming from the top of your lungs that the media and the Courts are biased because Obama is a ‘liberal’...


edit: added link


[edit on 9-12-2008 by danx]