____________________________________

ParrotNewsReport.com/cj (Citizen Journalist Blog)

ParrotNewsReport.com (All the news at at glance)


Saturday, June 5, 2010

Barack Obama carries a series of good luck charms that are idols



Photo of his Chicago home with Hanuman on the walls

Monkey hindu idol in obama's pockets

Ahmadi Nezhad says Obama is the mehdi or their twelfth imam. The mehdi or 12 imam is the ANTI CHRIST OF THE BIBLE. Is Iran telling us Obama is the anti christ? Nezhad called obama the "Imam of the Rightfulness"
.........................................................................................
Jesus called Judas Iscariot a "son of perdition," meaning that Judas was like the Antichrist in that he did not believe that Jesus was the Son of God; Judas denied Jesus as God. Judas didn't claim himself to be Christ -- that would have made him a pseudo-Christ, a false Messiah. Instead, Judas denied who Jesus was, and I think that is a strong clue for understanding and identifying THE Antichrist of end-times events.

Judas appeared to be a Christian, or at least a follower of Christ since the term "Christian" had not been coined yet. In fact, he was considered a disciple.

That may be true of the Antichrist -- he may appear to be Christian, and in fact, try to appear to be a devout Christian.

But Judas didn't really believe that Jesus was the Son of God; there was no evidence of the fear of God in Judas' life. It is believed from Scripture that Judas held the money purse for Jesus and the disciples and took money from it.

That may also be true of the Antichrist -- he most likely won't really believe that Jesus is the Son of God; therefore, there will be no real evidence of the fear of God in his life. And like Judas, the Antichrist may be in a position to be in charge of sums of money that he has no qualms about using for his own ideological purposes.

(Does this sound like an entity that is in the news almost everyday? It does to me.)

Jesus, Himself, called Judas the son of perdition. And since the Antichrist is also called the son of perdition, it appears to me that Jesus was giving us clues to understanding the Antichrist by deliberately using the same name for Judas. Therefore, understanding Judas is probably a key to understanding something of the Antichrist.
.........................................................................................

Thoth is the Egyptian form of the monkey god Hanuman that Obama carries with him.

Idols are not without attachment, and it appears that Obama has chosen Hanuman. It is in his pocket, he has a 2-foot idol (inscribed with his name: SHRI BARACK OBAMA, which means LORD or MASTER BARACK OBAMA)

August 20, 2008 – The Chicago Tribune reported in late June, 2008 that Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) carries a series of good luck charms with him. One of those charms is a Hindu brass monkey king. The charm is an image of Hanuman, Hinduism’s monkey god.Brij Mohan Bhama, a politician associated with the ruling party in India, is a follower of Hanuman and presented the Senator with a 2-foot-high gold-plated Hanuman idol, which had been blessed by a dozen Hindu priests in a special prayer service.According to Bhama, “Obama has deep faith in Lord Hanuman and that is why we are presenting an idol of Hanuman to him.” Bhama also told The Hindu news: “We will ensure that Mr. Obama receives the idol by August 24, a day before the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado.” In addition to the idol, Obama will also receive a Hindu hymn book called the Hanuman Chalisa.

Hanuman is a Hindu god worshipped as a symbol of physical strength, perseverance and devotion. Hanuman’s exploits are recounted in a Hindu epic called Ramayana.

Sen. Obama also carries an American Eagle pin given to him by a Native American woman and a poker chip given to him by one of his supporters, a Madonna and child, and a bracelet belonging to a soldier deployed to Iraq.

“This seems to be an odd assortment of trinkets to carry around,” said TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. “Perhaps this collection of lucky charms is symbolic of Obama’s buffet-style religious belief system, nurtured as a child in an Islamic school in Indonesia and for 20 years under the teachings of Black Liberation Theology racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright.”

Obama was depicted by Egyptians this past June as the New King Tutankhamon of the World.

The Antichrist is called the SON OF PERDITION. That must mean his father is the one who went into perdition.

Perdition is "utter damnation," something terrible chilling considering that at the White House Correspondents' Dinner in May 2009, Obama stated that Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican Party, had just found himself "in the heezy," which is slang for "utter damnation," or perdition.

Jesus called Judas Iscariot a "son of perdition," meaning that Judas was like the Antichrist in that he did not believe that Jesus was the Son of God; Judas denied Jesus as God. Judas didn't claim himself to be Christ -- that would have made him a pseudo-Christ, a false Messiah. Instead, Judas denied who Jesus was, and I think that is a strong clue for understanding and identifying THE Antichrist of end-times events.

Obama's idols

(All this could explain why obama can't cough up his real identity.)

DNC Failed to Certify Obama as Eligible in MOST States!

(This is old news but it is proof positive obama is a FRAUD. The dnc committed FRAUD to get the FRAUD obama on the ballot in all 50 states. A dnc certificate of nomination in 49 states did not include the certification language that the state of Hawaii dnc certificate of nomination included. When the electorial votes were counted congress allowed FRAUD to be committed when the electorial votes were certified.) Story Reports

DNC Failed to Certify Obama as eligible in 49 States and committed FRAUD when obama was certified as eligible in Hawaii.

The stench and filth that is permeating the gulf of mexico is similar to the stench and filth of BO that permeates the white house and America. Both will take years to clean up.
...........................................................................................

DNC Failed to Certify Obama as Eligible in MOST States!

Canada Free Press

By JB Williams Friday, September 25, 2009

When I first became aware that the Democratic National Committee prepared, signed and notarized two slightly different Certification of Nomination documents for the Obama-Biden ticket in the 2008 election, I was shocked and after verifying both documents as real, I wrote about it in The Theory is Now a Conspiracy and Facts Don’t Lie released on September 10, 2009.

The Theory is Now a Conspiracy and Facts Don’t Lie

The question was obvious – Why TWO different DNC Obama certification documents, and why did one have proper certification of constitutional eligibility in it, while the other had that certification deleted?

The Obama camp had been using the defense that the DNC had properly vetted and certified Obama’s eligibility for months. Judge after judge had used that claim and the fact that Obama’s COLB (Certification of Live Birth) had been “Snoped – FactChecked – blogged and twittered” as “legal proof” that Obama was eligible for office, despite the very real fact that Obama has never released any authenticated proof on the subject.

Then we find out that the DNC did NOT certify Obama as eligible under Article II – Section I of the Constitution, in 49 of 50 states. The DNC had only filed such certification in the state of Hawaii, Obama’s alleged birth place. The other 49 states received a Certification of Nomination which did NOT certify Obama as constitutionally eligible for office.

This story caused a firestorm of interest, comment and speculation across the web, leading Bob Unruh at World Net Daily to ask, What does Pelosi know about Obama’s eligibility?

What does Pelosi know about Obama’s eligibility?

On September 15, I released a follow up report, The Theory is Now a Conspiracy—II in which I was able to provide answers to many of the questions swirling around the two DNC docs.

The Theory is Now a Conspiracy—II

* Both docs were real and both docs had been filed with Election Commission offices
* Only the doc filed in Hawaii certified Obama as constitutionally eligible
* Nancy Pelosi did in fact sign both documents, indicating awareness
* Both documents had been used before by the DNC, in 2000 and 2004
* Different states have different state statutes on the matter
* But the Constitution is clear, and the DNC ignored it

n short, the answer to Bob Unruh’s question at WND seems to be yes, Nancy Pelosi knew that she was signing a false statement on behalf of Obama. But she also knew that this false statement of eligibility would only be filed in Hawaii, which has a very specific state statute that requires that each party certify the constitutional eligibility of their candidates, using specific text.

It further appears that this Certification of Nomination which includes text concerning constitutional requirements is the basis for statements made by Hawaii officials, who have proclaimed that Obama is a “natural born citizen” on the basis that Nancy Pelosi said so in her false Certification of Nomination.

After all, NO actual birth certificate has ever been released by Obama. A COLB, which anyone born anywhere in the world could purchase from Hawaii in 1961, in fact at least two different COLB’s from Hawaii, are all that has been offered by Obama.

The Story Continues

After releasing Parts I and II of this ongoing investigative report, literally hundreds of American citizens have taken it upon themselves to call their state Election Commission office and request copies of what the DNC filed in their state. Many of those documents have since been faxed or emailed to me.

In all cases except Hawaii, the DNC form without certification of constitutional eligibility was filed by the DNC. Meanwhile, everywhere we look, the RNC used one universal certification document which included full certification of constitutional eligibility in every state, in 2000, 2004 and 2008.

The following explanations have been offered on the subject.

* Only Hawaii has a state statute requiring such language
* Other states don’t require certification of constitutional standing for office
* The DNC certified Obama during the primary process
* Certification is “implied”

Obviously, while Hawaii’s statute requires that such language be there in the certification of nomination, no state statue requires that such language not appear in the document. So, why didn’t the DNC use one universal doc like the RNC?

Upon further investigation, we did indeed learn that some state primary filings do include language of constitutional eligibility by each candidate. However, that is a statement made by each candidate, not a certification of compliance made by the Party which had vetted the candidate and certified.

And, I can’t believe that anyone needs me to explain the significant difference between “implied” and “certified?” A personal check “implies” that you have money in your account, which may or may not be true. But a “certified” check guarantees that you have that money in your account.

We are talking about the highest office in this land and the most powerful office in the world. “Implied” won’t cut it when the US Constitution itself has very specific requirements for this office, even if Snopes, FactCheck and Obama bloggers don’t care, the rest of America should.

NO DNC Certification in many States

Not only did the DNC NOT certify eligibility in their Certification of Nomination for 49 states, they didn’t certify during the primary process in many states either. In fact, in most states, it appears that the DNC never certified constitutional eligibility for Barack Hussein Obama, despite their many claims of proper vetting and certification, all of which we now know to be false.

While the RNC filed the same proper certifications in all states with 100% consistency, the DNC filed a variety of improper documents which essentially certified nothing. They certainly failed to certify that Barack Hussein Obama met all legal requirements for the office.

Barack Hussein Obama fails to meet Article II – Section I requirements for the office of President because he is NOT a “natural born citizen” according to the foundation for that clause, the Law of Nations based upon Natural Law, which requires that one be the natural born child of TWO US citizens, born on US soil.

Whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, he is NOT the natural born citizen of TWO US citizens. He is the natural born son of a father who was at all times, a citizen of Kenya. Just as he adopted by natural law, his fathers name, he also adopted by natural law, his fathers citizenship. The efforts by Obama fans to use “anchor baby” arguments, claiming Hawaii as his birth place, fall short of the actual qualification.

But even more important, we now know that the DNC never certified to the contrary, except in Hawaii. The DNC never “certified” that Obama met all legal requirements for the office of president, like the RNC did for McCain.

At no point in the string of documents filed by the DNC or Obama, did anyone certify to the state of Arkansas that Obama was eligible for the office he sought. This is true in many states.

The US Senate never passed a resolution affirming that Barack Hussein Obama is a “natural born citizen” in accordance with the same definition the Senate used to make just such an affirmation on behalf of John McCain during the 2008 election.

( Attention all "naturals" as I call them, the supporters of the FRAD obama. Answer this question. Why didn't the US senate pass a resolution affirming that Barack Hussein Obama is a “natural born citizen” in accordance with the same definition the Senate used to make just such an affirmation on behalf of John McCain during the 2008 election?

I'll answer that. The US senate didn't because obama was not and is not a natural born citizen.

The really funny fact is obama defined what a natural born citizen is in Mccain's senate resolution. This resolution informs Americans that a natural born citizen is born to TWO American citizens at birth not just one. Obama agreed and signed the resolution. Obama also sponsored the resolution. The resolution was for Mccain but in doing so obama not only defined what a natural born citizen is for Mccain but anyone else claiming to be a natural born citizen. Obama admitted he is NOT a natural born citizen . Obama was born to parents who did not qualify him to be a natural born citizen. Obama is qualified to be only a natural born liar and FRAUD.) Story Reports

Everyone in America knows who John McCain is, who his parents are, where he was born and that he is a true American war hero. Still, the Senate felt it necessary to pass a resolution affirming McCain’s “natural born citizen” status on the basis that he was the son of TWO US citizens, born on American soil at a US Navy base in Panama where his father was deployed at the time of John’s birth.

But nobody knows who Obama is or where he came from, as even his family in Kenya claim to have been present at his birth in Kenya, and no authenticated proof to the contrary has ever been presented.

Many Americans, at home, in congress and in the media, have assumed that Obama meets all qualifications because the DNC said he did. But in 49 states, they never said it, at least officially!

If you ask Nancy Pelosi, on what basis did she “certify” Obama as eligible under Article II, she would simply state that she never made any such certification, except in Hawaii… and she would be telling the truth!

The language necessary to certify Obama as eligible was omitted from the documents filed at 49 Election Commission offices, and in most of those cases, such certification was also missing in the primary filings.

The DNC had been omitting that language from their official filings for years. Refusing to certify their candidates as “constitutionally eligible” has been a practice of the DNC for at least a few election cycles now. Why?

The Final Questions

1. Why did the DNC certify Obama’s eligibility only in Hawaii?
2. Why did no state DNC office, DNC elector, or Election Commission office catch it?
3. Since the DNC made no such certification, on what basis do we assume Obama to be eligible?
4. Without any such certification, isn’t it more important than ever to see the actual birth certificate and ask the courts to make an official ruling on the definition of “natural born citizen?”
5. Why did the DNC use TWO different docs, one incomplete, when the RNC used the same complete doc nationwide?
6. On what basis will the media continue to claim that Obama is eligible?
7. Why did Nancy Pelosi show signs of stress in her Hawaii certification of Obama?
8. When will every American demand answers to these and many more questions?

At the end of the day, we clearly have a political Party currently in power which gained that power by ignoring or intentionally subverting the US Constitution. At a minimum, they were very sloppy and derelict in their duty. At worst, they are complicit in a crime of monumental proportions.

Article II requirements exist, they are quite clear, the parties are obligated to vet and certify their candidates, and yet the DNC failed miserably in all categories. Still, the nation assumes that all was above board. On what basis do we now make that assumption?

Armed with this information, it is now up to the American people to decide what to do with this information. But one thing is vividly clear, nobody in the DNC wants to address any of these questions and Obama’s Department of Justice is too busy running interference for their Messiah to be bothered with such minor details as the rule of constitutional law.

Friday, June 4, 2010

An objection to Hawaiian electorial votes should have taken place in Jan 6, 2009


The second form appears identical, although the signatures are different, including the same strategic typographical error. But in this one, the verification of eligibility under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution is included.

Hawaiian DNC document.


3 USC 15 - Sec. 15. Counting electoral votes in Congress

Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors.

The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o'clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer.

Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses.

Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received.

.........................................................................................
Why didn't at least one US Senator and one US Congressman call for an objection to the electorial votes? What states would they have objected to? Could the objection have been to question the natural born citizenship of obama?

The state that should have had its electorial votes objected to was Hawaii.

Hawaii was the only state in the United States that was certified by the DNC, to comply with Hawaiian law, that obama was a natural born citizen. No other state was certified by the dnc that obama was a natural born citizen except Hawaii.

An objection to require the dnc to explain how obama was certified a natural born citizen for Hawaii only.

Only the dnc knows how they certified obama a natural born citizen for the State of Hawaii only.

When officals in Hawaii state obama is a natural born citizen, they could be referring to the dnc certificate of nomination.

The dnc certificate of nomination for Hawaii was different for Hawaii only.

This should have been objected to by every other state in the union.

Every other state in the union was given a certificate of nomination that did not state obama was a natural born citizen. Certification was “implied” only. Other states don’t require certification of constitutional standing for office. Only Hawaii has a state statute requiring such language.

Hawaii was an exception. The dnc had to comply with hawaiian law in 2008 to get obama on the ballot.

The dnc certified obama as a natural born citizen. Obama was certified as a natural born citizen in one state only, Hawaii.

I find this extremely strange.

The only proof Hawaii has that obama was a natural born citizen is the fact the dnc provided that state with a unique certificate of nomination in 2008.

This is what obama and the dnc don't want you to know.

1. Why did the DNC certify Obama’s eligibility only in Hawaii?
2. Why did no state DNC office, DNC elector, or Election Commission office catch it?
3. Since the DNC made no such certification, on what basis do we assume Obama to be eligible?
4. Without any such certification, isn’t it more important than ever to see the actual birth certificate and ask the courts to make an official ruling on the definition of “natural born citizen?”
5. Why did the DNC use TWO different docs, one incomplete, when the RNC used the same complete doc nationwide?
6. On what basis will the media continue to claim that Obama is eligible?
7. Why did Nancy Pelosi show signs of stress in her Hawaii certification of Obama?
8. When will every American demand answers to these and many more questions?

The DNC drafted, signed and notarized TWO slightly different versions of their Official Certification of Nomination documents, not just one. One of those documents had complete legal language, for Hawaii, and one of them was missing the text concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama, for the other 49 states.

The version which is absent any certification of constitutional standing for the office of president is the version that was filed with every state in the country, except Hawaii.

The fact that TWO DNC Certifications exist, both signed, dated and notarized by the same individuals on the same day, means that a very real conspiracy to commit election fraud was under way, and since it took until six months after the election to uncover it, the conspiracy was indeed successful.

The documents show the "Official Certification of Nomination" of Obama, of "5046 South Greenwood Avenue" in Chicago and Joe Biden, of "1209 Barley Mill Road" in Wilmington, Del., as the party's candidates.

They were signed by Pelosi as chair of the Democratic National Convention as well as Alice Travis Germond, the secretary of the Democratic National Convention at its nominating meetings in Denver a year ago.

They were notarized by Shalifa A. Williamson of Denver.

I would like all the "naturals" as I call them to tell a "birther" why this is not election fraud.

........................................................................................

When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified.

If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State.

But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted.

When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted.

No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.

Read more: http://vlex.com/vid/sec-counting-electoral-votes-congress-19216383#ixzz0pvohkEHE

Thursday, June 3, 2010

5 ways to get a "birth certificate" from Hawaii


Rod Blagojevich, Barrack Obama and Richard Daley during a rally in Chicago, April 16, 2007. Photo Reuters
Barrack Obama, quote "I only saw Rod Blagojevich one time ... and that was in the stands and from a distance at a Chicago Bears Football Game" unquote.

(A bold face lie. Documented. I believe obama is telling another bold face lie about where he was born in the form of a "certificate of live birth" generated out of thin air.) The elements of fraud on the nation have been met.

So many questions but no solid validated answers. "Offical" statements from Hawaii cannot be validated by anyone seeking to verify obama is a US citizen. Therefore "offical" statements from Hawaii mean nothing.

There are 5 ways to get a birth certificate from Hawaii.

5 ways to get a "birth certificate" from Hawaii

There is not way on earth to verify what if anything is on file or was on file in Hawaii if obama applied for a "birth certificate" that was never issued in the first place.

BC4 could have been conjured up by obama. If so there is no birth certificate on file in Hawaii and never was.

BC4. If a child is born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year.

(See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961.) In 1955 the "secretary of the Territory" was in charge of this procedure. In 1960 it was transferred to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor ("the lieutenant governor, or his secretary, or such other person as he may designate or appoint from his office" §338-41
[in 1961]).

5 ways to get a birth certificate from Hawaii


"a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii" Obama could have given, "testimony" to the Hawaiian Lt Governor that he was born in 1961. If the Lt Governor believed obama, he was then issued a "certificate of live birth". So it is also possible obama himself had a "certificate of live birth" issued.

I would call this a super delayed "birth certificate". This "certificate of live birth" cannot be the same as the "certificate of live birth" issued by a hospital because it would not include any signatures or the doctor, parents or registrar. So what is issued? A "certification of live birth". Keep in mind this flavor of "birth certificate" is generated out of thin air with NO original "certificate of live birth" to get the information from. The testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]), OBAMA, is all that is needed. Statements from obama to a Lt governor. It doesn't indicate any documents need to be presented as valid proof only "testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]), OBAMA. This is a "birth certificate" created out of thin air!

What I would like to know is what would satisfy the Lt governor of Hawaii to issue a "certificate of live birth" years later? It doesn't say. It just says if the Lt governor is satisfied. This sounds like anything could satisfy the Lt governor, especially if a US senator requested a copy of his "birth certificate".)

Oh ya I forgot about this one a sure fire way for obama to have obtained a birth certificate from Hawaii if he was born in Kenya. This was made for a thug from chicago.

In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fourth kind of birth certificate for children born outside of the Territory or State of Hawaii. HRS Chapter 338 was amended to add a new section authorizing the Director of the Department of Health to issue a birth certificate for a person NOT born in Hawaii either as a Territory or State, upon sufficient proof that the legal parents of such individual had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth of such child.

So heck, you didn't need to be born in Hawaii to get a Hawaiian birth certificate if your parents lived in Hawaii for at least 1 year prior to the birth.

THIS IS ALSO A BIG POSSIBILITY. How can anyone prove Hawaii did not create a "birth certificate" for little bo just because his parents lived in Hawaii 1 year prior to his birth outside the state of Hawaii?

Okubo, who said that she gets weekly questions from Obama ‘Birthers’ that are “more like threats,” explained that the certificate of live birth reproduced by Obama’s campaign should have debunked the conspiracy theories. “If you were born in Bali, for example,” Okubo explained, “you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate. But it’s become very clear that it doesn’t matter what I say. The people who are questioning this bring up all these implausible scenarios. What if the physician lied? What if the state lied? It’s just become an urban legend at this point.”

“If you were born in Bali, for example,” Okubo explained, “you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali.

HRS Chapter 338 amended indicates Hawaii in 1982 would issue a birth certificate for a person NOT born in Hawaii either as a Territory or State, upon sufficient proof that the legal parents of such individual had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth of such child.

So ya you could get an Hawaiian "birth certificate" if you were born in Bali but the "birth certificate" would not indicate you were born in bali it would indicate your were born in Hawaii as the law says. Okubo knows Hawaii is not going to issue an Hawaiian "birth certificate" saying you were born in Bali. It would indicate the subject person was born in Hawaii because the parents had lived in Hawaii 1 year prior to the birth of the child.

A "birth certificate", or "certificate of live birth" created out of thin air just because the birthers lived in Hawaii 1 year prior to the birth of BO.

AMAZING!

Obama Cloward Piven Government

(Obama and his regime are the "enemy" sabotaging our society and ripping the guts out of our private economy. Government control of the private economy is the ultimate goal. Every obama initiative is destructive. This EVIL must be rooted out in Nov 2010. Otherwise the regime will be too entrenched. The enemy are traitors to America. The enemy must be defeated.) Story Reports
..........................................................................................
James Simpson Article On cloward-piven-government

Obama Cloward-Piven Government

James Simpson

"It is high time we overcome the denial...."

Excerpt 1

In September of last year, American Thinker published Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis. Part of a series, it connected then presidential candidate Barack Obama to individuals and organizations practicing a malevolent strategy for sabotaging our society. Since then the story of that strategy has found its way across the blogosphere, onto the airwaves of radio stations across the country, the Glenn Beck television show, Bill O’Reilly and now Mark Levin.

Excerpt 2:

The real goal of “healthcare” legislation, the real goal of “cap and trade,” the real goal of “stimulus” is to rip the guts out of our private economy and transfer wide swaths of it over to government control. Do not be deluded by the propaganda. These initiatives are vehicles for change. They are not goals in and of themselves, except in their ability to deliver power, and will make matters much worse, for that is their design.

Excerpt 3:

It is time to acknowledge that these people are our enemies. They don’t use guns, yet, but they are just as dangerous, determined and duplicitous as the communists we faced in the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam and bush wars across the globe, and the Nazis we faced in World War II. It is high time we overcome the denial, and fully digest and internalize this fact, with all its ugly ramifications.

Excerpt 4:

Every single citizen who cares about this country should be spending every minute of his/her spare time lobbying, organizing, writing and planning. Fight every initiative they launch. It is all destructive. If we are to root out this evil, it is critical that in 2010 we win competent, principled leaders willing to defend our constitution and our country. Otherwise the malevolent cabal that occupies the seat of government today will become too entrenched.

James Simpson Article On Cloward-Piven Government

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were four different ways to get an "original birth certificate" on record

In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were four different ways to get an "original birth certificate" on record.

They varied greatly in their reliability as evidence. They will be referred to as BC1, BC2, BC3, and BC4. There is also a BC5.

BC1. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the facts of the birth date, location, parents’ identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).

BC2. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed. The birth certificate could be filed by mail. There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before "the local registrar of the district." It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parent’s signature to a form and mail it in. In addition, if a claim was made that "neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate." (Section 57-8&9) the Dept of Health was contacted and asked what they currently require (in 2008) to back up a parent’s claim that a child was born in Hawaii. The answer was all they required was a proof of residence in Hawaii (e.g. a driver’s license [We know from interviews with her friends on Mercer Island in Washington State that Ann Dunham had acquired a driver’s license by the summer of 1961 at the age of 17] or telephone bill) and pre-natal (statement or report that a woman was pregnant) and post-natal (statement or report that a new-born baby has been examined) certification by a physician. On further enquiry, an employee explained that the pre-natal and post-natal certifications had probably not been in force in the ‘60s. Even if they had been, there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii.

BC3. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, a "Delayed Certificate" could be filed, which required that "a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing or the alteration [of a file] shall be endorsed on the certificates", which "evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file." The statute provided that "the probative value of a ‘delayed’ or ‘altered’ certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence." (See Section 57- 9, 18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961)."

[In other words, this form of vault birth certificate, the Delayed Certificate, required no more than a statement before a government bureaucrat by one of the parents or (the law does not seem to me clear on this) one of Barack Obama’s grandparents. If the latter is true, Ann Dunham did not have to be present for this statement or even in the country.]

BC4. If a child is born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year. (See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961.) In 1955 the "secretary of the Territory" was in charge of this procedure. In 1960 it was transferred to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor ("the lieutenant governor, or his secretary, or such other person as he may designate or appoint from his office" §338-41
[in 1961]).

("a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii" Obama could have given, "testimony" to the Hawaiian Lt Governor that he was born in 1961. If the Lt Governor believed obama he was then issued a "certificate of live birth". So it is also possible obama himself had a "certificate of live birth" issued. I would call this a super delayed
"birth certificate". This "certificate of live birth" cannot be the same as the "certificate of live birth" issued by a hospital because it would not include any signatures or the doctor, parents or registrar. So what is issued? A "certification of live birth". I believe this is also a real possiblility.

What I would like to know is what would satisfy the Lt governor of Hawaii to issue a "certificate of live birth" years later? It doesn't say. It just says if the Lt governor is satisfied. This sounds like anything could satisfy the Lt governor, especially if a US senator requested a copy of his "birth certificate".) Story Reports

BC5 In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fifth kind of "original birth certificate". Under Act 182 H.B. NO. 3016-82, "Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that the proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child." In this way "state policies and procedures" accommodate even "children born out of State" (this is the actual language of Act 182) with an "original birth certificate on record." So it is even possible that the birth certificate referred to by Dr Fukino is of the kind specified in Act 182.

This possibility cannot be dismissed because such a certificate certainly satisfies Dr Fukino’s statement that "I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures." If this is the case, Dr Fukino would have perpetrated so unusually disgusting a deception that I find it practically incredible (and I greatly doubt that anyone could be that shameless). On the other hand, if the original birth certificate is of types 2, 3, or 4, Dr Fukino’s statement would be only somewhat less deceptive and verbally tricky. I only bring up this possibility to show how cleverly hedged and "lawyered" and basically worthless Dr Fukino’s statement is.

Sections 57-8, 9, 18, 19, 20 & 40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act explain why Barack Obama has refused to release the original vault birth certificate. If the original certificate were the standard BC1 type of birth certificate, he would have allowed its release and brought the controversy to a quick end. But if the original certificate is of the other kinds, then Obama would have a very good reason not to release the vault birth certificate. For if he did, then the tape recording of Obama’s Kenyan grandmother asserting that she was present at his birth in Kenya becomes far more important.

As does the Kenyan ambassador’s assertion that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, as well as the sealing of all government and hospital records relevant to Obama by the Kenyan government. And the fact that though there are many witnesses to Ann Dunham’s presence on Oahu from Sept 1960 to Feb 1961, there are no witnesses to her being on Oahu from March 1961 to August 1962 when she returned from Seattle and the University of Washington. No Hawaiian physicians, nurses, or midwives have come forward with any recollection of Barack Obama’s birth.

The fact that Obama refuses to release the vault birth certificate that would instantly clear up this matter almost certainly indicates that the vault birth certificate is probably a BC2 or possibly a BC3.

It is almost certainly a BC 3 or even a BC 4 if the "Certification of Live Birth" posted on the Daily Kos blog and the fightthesmears.com website by the Obama campaign is a forgery.

(The bottom line is if obama was born outside of the US his mother did not quality him to be a US citizen in 1961. He was an illegal alien for 33 years until 1994 when the law changed. Hawaiian officals could have issued several kinds of "birth certificates, or certifications to him or his "parents" depending on what kind was applied for. The document obama has presented cannot be verified by Americans who want to know if obama is a US citizen. They want to see real proof. They don't want to see a document that can't be verified. They don't rely on any statements from Hawaiian officals. Only the real deal counts. Obama is not the real deal. Obama is a FRAUD!) Story Reports

Tipper saw herself walking into the "global warming" sunset. She decided to pull the plug and cut al loose


Al gore is stunned after he is told his wife tipper is a closet denier of "climate change" or "global warming". She also said their bed was so cold even global warming could not have warmed it up. Al gore offered to deny global warming to reconcile with his wife. She told him the sun would freeze over before they would reconcile.

Then al gore offered to return his academy award, nobel peace prize, berkeley medal, roger revelle prize, NAACP image award, grammy award, national civil rights museum freedom award, honorary doctorate in humane letters, primetime emmy award, prince of asturias award, quill award and webby award. Gore said, "Our love story marriage has broken up because george bush stole the 2000 election."

Tipper told him his awards didn't mean anything to her. She said, quote: "I lived with an IDIOT for 40 years, acting as if he deserved his awards. I would like to give my husband an award, its the frankenstein award because he has been a frankenstein of a husband and a cold fish of a lover."
.........................................................................................

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, are separating after 40 years of marriage.

According to an e-mail circulated among the couple's friends and obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday, the Gores said it was "a mutual and mutually supportive decision that we have made together following a process of long and careful consideration."
Friends of the couple said that they had grown apart.

Al Gore is 62 and Tipper Gore is 61. No specifics were given in the Gores' statement about their separation. Friends of the couple said that they had grown apart.

Coontz quoted an AARP study of divorces after long marriages that found men often initiate divorce proceedings because they have found someone else, while women pull the plug because they are tired of "putting up with stuff."

The Lilac Tree in Evanston hosts a program called Divorce University, which brings women going through divorce together with lawyers, mediators and other experts. Carol Patinkin, executive director of The Lilac Tree, said half of the 101 participants who answered a survey at the program in April were leaving relationships of 20 or more years. Of those, 14 percent had been together more than 30 years.

Ila Chaiken, a social worker at The Lilac Tree, saw her marriage to her high school sweetheart unravel after 25 years. She knows all too well the terrain that Tipper Gore is traversing.

"Most women think it's going to be forever," Chaiken said.

Chaiken has had numerous clients in the same age range as Tipper Gore, many of whom "see themselves walking into the sunset … and then they are cut loose."

.......................................................................................
Tipper saw herself walking into the "global warming" sunset. She decided to pull the plug and cut al loose.

"Love means never having to say you're sorry" is a line from the novel and 1970 film Love Story starring Ali MacGraw and Ryan O'Neal.

Tommy Lee Jones moved to New York to become an actor, making his Broadway debut in 1969's A Patriot for Me in a number of supporting roles. In 1970, he landed his first film role, appropriately playing a Harvard student in Love Story (Erich Segal, the author of "Love Story," said that he based the lead character of Oliver on the two undergrad roommates he knew while teaching at Harvard, Tommy Lee Jones and AL Gore).

(Eric segal the author of love story based his lead character on tommy lee jones and al gore. Did tipper marry a closet light in the loafers, light on his toes frankenstein?)

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Obama is the only president who has suppressed vital personal information; every other has made full disclosure.

(The article below points out every other president has made full disclosue of vital personal records. Obama has been given a pass because he is the first "black" president. I'm not giving obama a "pass" on his full disclosure of his vital records. I said FULL disclosure. Obama hides his "vitial records" using the race card. Obama is a FRAUD. He has not made a full disclosue of his birth record that can be verified.) Story Reports

By David Solway

Obama is the only president who has suppressed vital personal information; every other has made full disclosure.

The document released online is not an authentic birth certificate. It is the "short form" affidavit, a Certification of Live Birth (COLB) with standard information left out, such as the actual name of the birth hospital and the name of the attending physician. In "Dreams from My Father," Obama mentions having found his birth certificate, which, as it turns out, was then conveniently lost in a small house fire. Nor would the two announcements in Honolulu newspapers confirming his birth constitute proof of American citizenship or be accepted as such in a court of law, for obvious reasons.

Even if we refrain from coming to unequivocal conclusions on this file, it seems almost certain that his records must contain damaging information that could bring his presidency into serious, if not terminal disrepute.

How else would one explain the fact that his university transcripts and his records as an Illinois state legislator, like his "long-form" birth certificate, are inaccessible and that Obama has hired a team of lawyers to make sure they remain that way? This behavior is completely unprecedented in POTUS annals, and he should be duly challenged on it.

Requiring Obama to open his dossier is not a sign of conspiratorial suspicions; it is quite simply a civil responsibility and the most reasonable of demands since this is precisely what all U.S. presidents should do and have done. Shirking this responsibility, however, is largely a symptom of either moral cowardice or false propriety, irrespective of how it may be embroidered for public consumption or self-protection. Of course, there are some who demur out of a sense of fundamental decency which, we might note, goes unreciprocated by the president and his team.

So the obvious questions are: Why has Obama not consented to this request? Why does he not dispel suspicion by making his papers available to the public if he has nothing to fear? What makes him noli me tangere? What is he reluctant to shed light upon? Why is the debate about his origins not stopped dead in its tracks by the publication of valid, irrefutable documentation? And why are those who ask these logical and totally justifiable questions dismissed as madmen and conspiracy theorists? The conspiracy, it would seem, travels the other way.

And the farce goes on.

Why has the state of Hawaii passed a law allowing it to block requests for the release of Obama's birth certificate? Health Director Chiyome Fukino claims to have seen the authentic document – a valid copy not lost in a fire? – and obviously expects us to take her word for it without a single shred of evidence. Further – and this is crucial – why should Ms. Chiyome feel obliged to attest to having vetted the famous certificate if, as many of the president's supporters have claimed, including White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and MSNBC's Chris Matthews, the question has long been settled and the certificate is already in the public domain?

There would be absolutely no need for such an affirmation if the matter were indeed settled. The lady doth protest too much, methinks. But since we are dealing with a COLB, what would prevent Hawaii from modifying or passing a law permitting it to issue a facsimile of the original birth certificate online or to the newspapers, thus putting the matter to rest once and for all? And why does Obama not file a petition and avail himself of this option? If everything is halal, it would surely be to his advantage to do so. His legitimacy would then be corroborated beyond the slightest ambiguity and fade from public consciousness, for as things stand the controversy is detrimental to the confidence a people must repose in its leader.

It is as if all the interested parties have taken a vow of omerta. In addition, one gets the distinct impression that the president's supporters wouldn't care if he were a holographic emanation, so long as he remains in power. (Obama has been described as the "teflon president," since no criticism or accusation sticks to him; but the "holographic president" might be just as accurate a designation, as he is a kind of ectoplasmic projection constructed by his own figments and velleities in tandem with a media machine working overtime.) Others are perfectly content to declare allegiance to a closed book, just as Obama is perfectly happy to keep the book closed. None of this makes any sense unless there is some form of deception at work. What else are we to reasonably assume? Can there be some other interpretation? If there is, let's hear it. Otherwise it is difficult to avoid the conjecture that we have been royally conned and are now confronted with a tainted presidency.

("we have been royally conned and are now confronted with a tainted presidency." I agree. A total FRAUD has been "elected president.) Story Reports

The evidence seems to point increasingly in this direction. Moreover, an integral part of the evidence calling the president's legitimacy into question is precisely the lack of available evidence, that is, what appears to be the willful and deliberate suppression of veridical data that would immediately put the issue to bed. It is very much like pleading the Fifth Amendment. One is exempt from incriminating oneself, which inevitably suggests that unpleasant facts lurk beneath the surface. The evasion is further accentuated when obstacles are purposely put in the path of revelation. This is so obvious as to provoke wonderment that such strategies of resistance and obscurantism are rarely queried by journalists, editors and public intellectuals. For where there's smoke, there's a gun, so to speak.

Master of mendacity: Obama and the birthers

Monday, May 31, 2010

S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US.


Obama and his wife want to control what you eat

There are 2 versions of Bill Number S.510 for the 111th Congress.

1 . FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (Introduced in Senate)[S.510.IS]
2 . FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (Reported in Senate)[S.510.RS]

The Snake Has Two Heads Or Two Versions This is weird don't you think?


By Steve Green

S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US.

It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money.

“If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes.

(Obama not only wants to control health care through government panels that determine if you are worthy of life, he also wants to control your right to grow food in your own garden. The FRAUD obama is not just a fraud but is evil!) Story Reports

It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God.” ~Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower

It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food.

Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto’s Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create — without judicial review — if it passes. S 510 would give Monsanto unlimited power over all US seed, food supplements, food and farming.

History

In the 1990s, Bill Clinton introduced HACCP (Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points) purportedly to deal with contamination in the meat industry. Clinton’s HACCP delighted the offending corporate (World Trade Organization “WTO”) meat packers since it allowed them to inspect themselves, eliminated thousands of local food processors (with no history of contamination), and centralized meat into their control. Monsanto promoted HACCP.

In 2008, Hillary Clinton, urged a powerful centralized food safety agency as part of her campaign for president. Her advisor was Mark Penn, CEO of Burson Marsteller*, a giant PR firm representing Monsanto. Clinton lost, but Clinton friends such as Rosa DeLauro, whose husband’s firm lists Monsanto as a progressive client and globalization as an area of expertise, introduced early versions of S 510.

S 510 fails on moral, social, economic, political, constitutional, and human survival grounds.

1. It puts all US food and all US farms under Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, in the event of contamination or an ill-defined emergency. It resembles the Kissinger Plan.

2. It would end US sovereignty over its own food supply by insisting on compliance with the WTO, thus threatening national security. It would end the Uruguay Round Agreement Act of 1994, which put US sovereignty and US law under perfect protection. Instead, S 510 says:

COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.

Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.

3. It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into “the United States.” Since under that law, the US is a corporate entity and not a location, “entry of food into the US” covers food produced anywhere within the land mass of this country and “entering into” it by virtue of being produced.

SEC. 310. SMUGGLED FOOD. (d) Definition- In this subsection, the term `smuggled food' means any food that a person introduces into the United States through fraudulent means or with the intent to defraud or mislead.

(Its says ANY FOOD a person introduces into the US with the intent to defraud or mislead. Do you see the words ANY FOOD? This bill would make ANY FOOD the government, obama and his thugs, want to declare 'smuggled food'. This is made to order for the 666 symbol that everyone must display to buy or sell. Its just like the bible says. In the last days people will have iching ears to listen to false teachers. Obama is not only a FRAUD his is as this bill shows setting up food rationing by the government as it sees fit. 666=obama) Story Reports

4. It imposes Codex Alimentarius on the US, a global system of control over food. It allows the United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the WTO to take control of every food on earth and remove access to natural food supplements. Its bizarre history and its expected impact in limiting access to adequate nutrition (while mandating GM food, GM animals, pesticides, hormones, irradiation of food, etc.) threatens all safe and organic food and health itself, since the world knows now it needs vitamins to survive, not just to treat illnesses.

5. It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening US security.

6. It includes NAIS, an animal traceability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals. The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease. Biodiversity in farm animals is being wiped out to substitute genetically engineered animals on which corporations hold patents. Animal diseases can be falsely declared. S 510 includes the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite its corrupt involvement in the H1N1 scandal, which is now said to have been concocted by the corporations.

7. It extends a failed and destructive HACCP to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production – put it in corporate hands and worsen food safety.

8. It deconstructs what is left of the American economy. It takes agriculture and food, which are the cornerstone of all economies, out of the hands of the citizenry, and puts them under the total control of multinational corporations influencing the UN, WHO, FAO and WTO, with HHS, and CDC, acting as agents, with Homeland Security as the enforcer. The chance to rebuild the economy based on farming, ranching, gardens, food production, natural health, and all the jobs, tools and connected occupations would be eliminated.

9. It would allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and GMOs. This would industrialize every farm in the US, eliminate local organic farming, greatly increase "global warming" a farce, from increased use of oil-based products and long-distance delivery of foods, and make food even more unsafe. The five items listed — the Five Pillars of Food Safety — are precisely the items in the food supply which are the primary source of its danger.

10. It uses food crimes as the entry into police state power and control. The bill postpones defining all the regulations to be imposed; postpones defining crimes to be punished, postpones defining penalties to be applied. It removes fundamental constitutional protections from all citizens in the country, making them subject to a corporate tribunal with unlimited power and penalties, and without judicial review. It is (similar to C-6 in Canada) the end of Rule of Law in the US.

(The bill talks about penalties but just like the stimulus bill does not define what is included in the bill. Imagine a bill passed by congress then modified later to include anything. Its the obama way. Its the chicago thug criminal way. Like I said obama is evil.) Story Reports

For further information, watch these videos:

Food Laws – Forcing people to globalize

State Imposed Violence … to snatch resources of ordinary people

Corporate Rule and the corporation exists in the district of columbia

Reclaiming Economies

Oak snake image at Alfred B. Maclay Gardens State Park, Florida

Food Safety: The Worst of Both Bills (HR 2749 and S 510)

The snake is hissing in the grass and its obama's mentor (Article source)

Oregon's small-scale farms worry about sweeping food safety bill

Sunday, May 30, 2010

Obama’s Dreams From My Father, Are Composites Of People Made Up


Obama could not have filed a selective service registration form from Hawaii on September 4, 1980 as he was attending Occidental College in California, the classes of which commenced August 24, 1980.
........................................................................................

England’s the New Statements, also reviewed Obama’s biographical record and concluded that

"background is strikingly dysfunctional but by no means economically underprivileged."

The article also noted that Obama’s Dreams From My Father were a:

…a personal and political résumé that, in places, seemed almost unbelievable - so I [Andrew Stephen of New Statesmen] was not surprised to read in his [Obama’s] introduction to the reissued edition of “selective lapses of memory” and “the temptation to colour events in ways favourable to the writer”.

Having Dreams on hand, I double-checked Andrew Stephen’s passage, and lo-and behold, after having his book remaindered in 1995, Obama’s new 2004 edition boasted the following paragraph:

…there are the dangers inherent in any autobiographical work: the temptation to color events in ways favorable to the writer…. selective lapses of memory. … Although much of this book is based on contemporaneous journals or the oral histories of my family, the dialogue is necessarily an approximation of what was actually said or relayed to me. For the sake of compression, some of the characters that appear are composites of people I’ve known, and some events appear out of precise chronology. With the exception of my family and a handful of public figures, the names of most characters have been changed for the sake of their privacy. [7]

That’s called insurance. As with everything Obama does, it comes after the fact, after the lies are told, and sold. His 2004 caveats are telling:

1) Obama admits that his dialogs are contrived in places.
2) Some of his characters are composites
3) Their names are fake
4) The chronology is invented or wrong

Basically, Obama is telling us that in Dreams From My Father some events are colored by selective lapses of memory.

A great deal of Obama’s supposed cases of racism are fabricated for his political purposes.

On Page 26 of “Dreams of My Father”, first published in 1995 , Obama writes:

“I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school,”

(What is the birth certificate obama is talking about? If it was a long form birth certificate with hospital name and doctor name, signatures etc, why did obama present a short form birth certificate missing an important embossed seal and signature on his web site? What happened to this "birth certificate" obama found? It must be fabricated as a "composite" "birth certificate" for his book. The certificate he was talking about was fabricated as is his unverified "certification of live birth" with no hospital name, no doctor name, no signatures, no embossed seal and signature.) Story Reports

While this brief quote does not state WHAT article it is that Obama found, it does mention that he found it WITH his BIRTH CERTIFICATE. This would have been in the mid 70′s, so this birth certificate would not have been a computer generated document.

This statement shows that Obama has seen the original, and that it was in the apartment where he lived, and where his grandmother lived.

(This is what obama wants you to believe. If he had an original hospital generated "certificate of live birth" he fabricated it for his book. There would have been no need to apply for a "certification of live birth" short form. Obama has only applied for a short form. The form he has posted on the web has not been accepted by registrar only filed with registrar. This indicates Hawwian officals wanted more evidence of obama's birth in Hawaii before accepting it. If it was accepted by the registrar it would have an offical seal and signature and would state, "accepted by registrar". It does not indicate this. Obama's evidence is totally FAKE!) Story Reports

(Bottom line, obama's book is a faked. Obama admits this in the revised 2004 edition. This is the same year he actually became a US citizen. Prior to this time obama was an illegal alien because his mother gave birth to him outside of the US. She did not convey US citizenship.

Obama is a composite of fake "dreams". The one Social Security number Obama most frequently used, the one beginning with 042, is a number issued in Connecticut sometime during 1976-1977, yet there is no record of Obama ever living or working in Connecticut. Indeed, during this time period Obama would have been 15-16 years old and living in Hawaii at the time.) Story Reports

Did President-elect Barack Hussein Obama commit a federal crime in September of 2008? Or did he never actually register and, instead, did friends of his in the Chicago federal records center, which maintains the official copy of his alleged Selective Service registration commit the crime for him? It’s either one or the other, as indicated by the release of Barack Obama’s official Selective Service registration for the draft.

* The Selective Service Data Mgt. Center Stonewalled for Almost a Year on Obama Registration, Until Right Before the Election. Then, they suddenly found the record on September 9, 2008. They stated that his record was filed on September 4, 1980. Obama could not have filed it in Hawaii on September 4, 1980 as he was attending Occidental College in California, the classes of which commenced August 24, 1980.

Obama has also faked his selective service registration

Obama is a retroactive citizen and not a natural born citizen

Obama revised his own history of himself to hide the fact he was an illegal alien at birth.

I don't believe obama has a hospital certificate of live birth. I don't believe obama is a US citizen as he says he was in 1961. Obama only became a citizen in 1994 because of a 1952 law was changed to make him a citizen retroactively. Obama is a retroactive citizen. He was an illegal alien from birth until 1994.


U.S. CITIZENSHIP LAW AND OVERSEAS AMERICANS

Obama’s "American citizen parent", Ann Dunham, had to have been a resident of the United States for 10 years, at least five of which were over the age of 14. Dunham did not meet that requirement (of the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June, 1952) until her 19th birthday in late November of 1961, almost four months after Obama was born.

Obama was an ILLEGAL ALIEN for 33 years until The Immigration and Nationality Corrections Act (Public Law 103-416) on October 25, 1994 was revised. On this date obama became a US citizen but not a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

This makes obama a RETROACTIVE US citizen. This also makes obama a FRAUD because he said he was born in Hawaii at birth. The "certification of live birth" obama has presented to the world is issued to persons who are not born in hospitals and most likely were born outside of the US. This is why his "birth certification" does not list a hospital, doctor or registrar name.