It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Obama thus far kept 105 of his promises, compromised on 35 promises and broke 16:
Originally posted by centurion1211
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Obama thus far kept 105 of his promises, compromised on 35 promises and broke 16:
Sorry, but 16 lies are still 16 lies.
[edit on 4/6/2010 by centurion1211]
The statement released by Hemenway noted Lakin is being supported by "hundreds" of people who have donated to his legal defense fund. He announced his refusal to obey orders after unsuccessfully following channels to get the same verification from the president that the officer has been required to provide throughout his 18-year military career.
The website also notes that the "counseling" document wasn't completely accurate. It's not "native-born" that is in question for Obama; it is the constitutionally mandated "natural born citizen."
Although the term is not defined in the Constitution, legal scholars believe it is best understood to mean a U.S. child of U.S. citizen parents.
WND has reported that the controversy raises the prospect that the government ultimately may not want to pursue a prosecution because a defense attorney could demand in court proof that the orders are issued by an eligible president.
Even participants in a forum on the left-leaning Huffington Post website seemed to agree in part.
"Freakin' Brilliant!" said one. "They can't court-martial him [without] the defense getting the judge to order the the (sic) birth-certificate be produced! Either Obama will have to produce or they can't prosecute. Genius."
During his presidential campaign, Hughes’s eligibility for the presidency was questioned because his father remained a British citizen. Breckenridge Long, an attorney and graduate of Washington University Law School who later served as Secretary of State as well as U.S. ambassador to Italy under FDR, examined the issue in an article entitled “Is Mr. Charles Evans Hughes a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ within the Meaning of the Constitution?” Published in the “Chicago Legal News,” Vol. 146, p. 220 in 1916, the article begins:
If Breckenridge Long was correct that the citizenship of a father determines that of the son, then Obama was never eligible to run, much less serve, as president. Long uncannily raised the three major factors which preclude Obama from being a “natural born Citizen”:
* his father was not a naturalized citizen of the United States before Obama’s birth;
* Obama had been taken to Indonesia and reportedly made a citizen of that country;
* on his campaign website, Obama admitted to having been born with dual citizenship.
Obama’s actual birthplace and original citizenship remain unknown.
Is Obama a “natural born Citizen”? If not, why was he allowed to seek the presidency? What were the influences at work in promoting a candidate with so many challenges to the “natural born Citizen” requirement? Have foreign powers seized control of our government, the possibility of which had been predicted by Alexander Hamilton?
If so, why has Congress allowed that to happen? Why will the courts not order discovery about Obama’s citizenship status?
If he never legally changed his name from his present one......
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Emilymary
Please show me proof that he ever officially changed his name to Barry Soetoro...if you can't...why should anyone have to show you proof that he ever changed his name back??? That is just backwards logic.
Originally posted by EndtheFed
Obama's first act as President was EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 banning release of any of his records. What does that tell you?
www.freerepublic.com...
In Obama's remarks on Wednesday morning, he said that, "Going forward, anytime the American people want to know something that I or a former President wants to withhold, we will have to consult with the Attorney General and the White House Counsel, whose business it is to ensure compliance with the rule of law.
One possibility is that he was out of the country in Pakistan--for what purpose nobody knows. The other is that Obama's time at Columbia was one of convenience, that is, to provide work of interest to the political science department in exchange for a degree:
So I am confident that Obama was working for something when he was in NY in 81-83. And whatever that something is, it (a) has some pull with the Columbia political science department, and (b) doesn't want this story to become news. And I am pretty confident that something relates, in some sense or part, to the New York radical community. Wouldn't you say this might be a bit larger, more stratified, complex and socially elite than, say, the local bowling club, Renne Faire, or what have you?
Because I am 100% sure that if Barack Obama was in a bunch of political-science classes at Columbia in 1981-83, he would have been widely noticed and remembered. If only because of his unusual name and unusual looks. A poli-sci program is not a civil-engineering department: it attracts people who are interested in people. And a Barack Obama who was not interested in school would not have gotten good grades - as I suspect he didn't at Occidental, either, where he is remembered as a party animal and soi-disant revolutionary. Not exactly the invisible man, in other words.
The 'New York radical community' indeed. Obama has admitted that during his college career he intentionally sought out and spent time with those who were considered Leftwing radicals. Bill Ayers is one who keeps popping up at every interval in Obama's history.
Thus, the question arises as to the purpose for which Columbia University allegedly granted a rather bogus degree to someone who did not attend class.
So I am confident that Obama was working for something when he was in NY in 81-83. And whatever that something is, it (a) has some pull with the Columbia political science department, and (b) doesn't want this story to become news
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming, that some group of individuals helped promote Obama into power.
Circumstantial evidence is best explained by saying what it is not - it is not direct evidence from a witness who saw or heard something.
Circumstantial evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact.
Because I am 100% sure that if Barack Obama was in a bunch of political-science classes at Columbia in 1981-83, he would have been widely noticed and remembered.