“Mr. Obama: Don’t Miss Next Week’s Chicago Tribune – We The People’s Full-Page Citizenship Challenge To Run Twice, December 1st and 3rd”



Our full-page Open Letter to Mr. Obama will be published in the Chicago Tribune on both Monday, December 1, 2008 and Wednesday, December 3, 2008. It will appear in the main news section. Click here to view a copy of the final ad.


An Open Letter

to Barack Obama:

Are you a Natural Born

Citizen of the U.S.?

Are you legally eligible to

hold the Office of President?

We The People Foundation

For Constitutional Education, Inc.


2458 Ridge Road Queensbury, NY 12804


December 1, 2008

Mr. Barack Obama

Barack Obama Transition Office

Kluczynski Federal Building

230 So. Dearborn St.

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dear Mr. Obama:

Representing thousands of responsible American citizens who have also

taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America,

I am duty bound to call on you to remedy an apparent violation of the


Compelling evidence supports the claim that you are barred from holding

the Office of President by the natural born citizen clause of the U.S.

Constitution. For instance:

• You have posted on the Internet an unsigned, forged and thoroughly

discredited, computer-generated birth form created in 2007, a form

that lacks vital information found on any original, hand signed

Certificate of Live Birth, such as hospital address, signature of

attending physician and age of mother.

• Hawaii Dept of Health will not confirm your assertion that you were born

in Hawaii.

• Legal affidavits state you were born in Kenya.

• Your grandmother is recorded on tape saying she attended your birth

in Kenya.

• U.S. Law in effect in 1961 denied U.S. citizenship to any child born

in Kenya if the father was Kenyan and the mother was not yet 19

years of age.

• In 1965, your mother legally relinquished whatever Kenyan or U.S.

citizenship she and you had by marrying an Indonesian and becoming

a naturalized Indonesian citizen.

You have repeatedly refused to provide evidence of your eligibility when

challenged to do so in a number of recent lawsuits. Instead, you have

been successful in having judges declare that they are powerless to order

you to prove your eligibility to assume the Office of President.

Incredibly, the judge in Hawaii actually said it would be an invasion of

your privacy for him to order access to your original birth certificate in

order to prove your eligibility to hold the Office of President.

Before you can legitimately exercise any of the powers of the President

you must meet all the criteria for eligibility established by the Constitution.

You are under a moral, legal, and fiduciary duty to proffer such evidence.

Should you assume the office as anyone but a bona fide natural born

citizen of the United States who has not relinquished that citizenship, you

would be inviting a national crisis that would undermine the domestic

peace and stability of the Nation. For example:

• You would always be viewed by many Americans as a

poseur – a usurper.

• As a usurper, you would be unable to take the required Oath or

Affirmation on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or

false swearing, for being ineligible you cannot faithfully execute the

Office of the President of the United States.

• You would be entitled to no allegiance, obedience or support from

the People.

• The Armed Forces would be under no legal obligation to remain

obedient to you.

• No civilian in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any of

your proclamations, Executive Orders or directives, as such orders

would be legally void.

• Your appointments of Judges to the Supreme Court would be void.

• Congress would not be able to pass any needed legislation because

it would not be able to acquire the signature of a bona fide President.

• Congress would be unable to remove you, a usurper, from the Office

of the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos

including a potential for armed conflicts within the General

Government or among the States and the People to effect the

removal of such a usurper.

In consideration of the escalating constitutional crisis brought on by the

total lack of evidence needed to conclusively establish your eligibility,

I am compelled to serve you with this First Amendment Petition for a

Redress of this violation of the Constitution.

With all due respect, I ask that you immediately direct the appropriate

Hawaiian officials to allow access to the vault copy of your birth

certificate by our forensic scientists on Friday, Saturday and Sunday,

December 5, 6 and 7, 2008.

In addition, I ask that you deliver the following documentary evidence to

the National Press Club in Washington DC by 10 am on December 8, 2008,

marked for my attention:

• A certified copy of your original, signed vault birth certificate.

• Certified copies of your reissued and sealed birth certificates in the

names Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack

Dunham and Barry Dunham.

• A certified copy of your Certification of Citizenship.

• A certified copy of your Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity.

• Certified copies of your admission forms for Occidental College,

Columbia University and Harvard Law School.

• Certified copies of any legal documents changing your name.

Each member of the Electoral College, who is committed to casting a vote

on December 15, 2008, has a constitutional duty to make certain you are

a natural-born citizen. As of today, there is no evidence in the public

record (nor have you provided any) that defeats the claim that you are

barred by law from assuming the Office of President because you fail the

Constitutions eligibility requirements.

All state Electors are now on Notice that unless you provide documentary

evidence before December 15, that conclusively establishes your eligibility,

they cannot cast a vote for you without committing treason to the Constitution.

In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled

if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent,

the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people

by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a

lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become

a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this urgent matter.


Robert L. Schulz


Phil Berg Barack Obama Ron Polarik Jeff Schreiber

74 Responses to ““Mr. Obama: Don’t Miss Next Week’s Chicago Tribune – We The People’s Full-Page Citizenship Challenge To Run Twice, December 1st and 3rd””

  1. wndawmn666 Says:

    Love it! 🙂

  2. rosettasister Says:

    “In addition, I ask that you deliver the following documentary evidence to

    the National Press Club in Washington DC by 10 am on December 8, 2008,

    marked for my attention:”


    I heard MommaE say that she believes CSPAN will be recording the National Press Club event.

  3. wndawmn666 Says:

    I just hope that they really hammer home the fact that Barack Obama Jr., regardless of WHERE he was born, will NEVER be a natural born citizen of the United States.

    Even if he was born in Hawaii, he was born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and also to the United Kingdom (according to British Nationality Law 1948). This means divided loyalties.

    If a naturalized citizen (The Governator, for example) cannot serve as President because of past loyalty to a foreign nation, why on Earth would Obama be able to serve?

  4. rosettasister Says:

    Judah Benjamin has a lengthy article at TexasDarlin:

    “Natural Born Citizens: Or How to Beat a Subject to Death with a Stick.”


    Which concludes:

    Having said all of this, and granting that Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy are all either Federalists, or inclined towards the Federalist position, it is my belief that Donofrio’s case will probably not be heard because the whole issue is, as one of my legal friends in England called it “a poisoned chalice”. The Justices can follow the Law and risk calumny and civil disorder, or ignore the plain Common Law reading of the Constitution and risk usurpation and civil disorder.

    The comments at TD are always worth a look, too.

    Like this one:

    • on November 29, 2008 at 4:47 am

    Mitchell Langbert said:

    Ex Post Birth Certificates Available in Hawaii in 1961


    Who is Eligible to Apply for the Issuance of a Late Birth Certificate in Lieu of a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth?

    >The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, during the territorial era, to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had not been previously registered in Hawaii.

    The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program was terminated in 1972, during the statehood era.

  5. wndawmn666 Says:

    I will be beyond horrified if they decide not to hear the case.

    As of today, the Constitution doesn’t allow non natural born citizens to serve as President. This needs to be respected.

    I believe Obama’s dual citizenship at birth disqualifies him from serving as President because he cannot be ‘naturally born’ with allegiance to two nations.

    It is quite clear that his team is aware of this ‘technicality’.

    Just because someone doesn’t like the rules doesn’t mean they don’t have to follow them.

    I am also hoping that, if this case is heard, it is mentioned how Obama, in an interview, has stated that the Constitution is a ‘charter of negative liberties’.

    That ought to give the Justices some insight into what The One thinks about the foundation upon which this nation was built.

  6. Ted Says:

    On Dec 5 the Supreme Court will either allow or disallow the usurpation of both the Constitution and the Government of the United States — easily the most pivotal decision since our nation’s founding — and the silence of the news media is deafening (if not downright scary).

  7. Cyndi Says:

    Remarks of Senator Barack Obama on the Confirmation of Judge John Roberts
    Thursday, September 22, 2005

    Let me also say that I remain distressed that the White House during this confirmation process, which overall went smoothly, failed to provide critical documents as part of the record that could have provided us with a better basis to make our judgment with respect to the nomination. This White House continues to stymie efforts on the part of the Senate to do its job. I hope with the next nominee who comes up for the Supreme Court that the White House recognizes that in fact it is its duty not just to the Senate but to the American people to make sure we can thoroughly and adequately evaluate the record of every single nominee who comes before us.


    Obama has always believed it was the right of the people to know, until he started running for the presidency.

  8. wndawmn666 Says:

    Cyndi Says:
    November 29, 2008 at 5:44 pm

    Remarks of Senator Barack Obama on the Confirmation of Judge John Roberts
    Thursday, September 22, 2005


    Okay – I am posting that everywhere.

  9. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    I’m adding it to my blog….. good work Cyndi

  10. Cyndi Says:

    It was originally posted at Freerepublic.com. There was a link in the comment section clicked. So I am due no credit but thank you anyway. Just passing along info.

  11. Cyndi Says:

    Has anyone been able to find any information about a former INS agent who had seen Obama’s passport that said he was an Indonesia Student in 1981?

  12. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    It seems everything has disappeared about that,… I plan on looking it see if another blog copied the info.

  13. indy500 Says:

    With all this info. out there, why has Limbaugh, Hanity, Beck and others been silent? On Thanksgiving night, Hannity’s America did a story on UFO’s. Is’nt the Supreme Court cases on the 1st and 5th just a little more important that UFO’s?

    Maybe they don’t want to be responsible for unrest that will explode when this is finally decided. If that’s the case, it will be 10 times worse because a large segment of the population doesn’t have a clue to what is going on.

  14. Cyndi Says:

    Thank you Cindy.

  15. Cyndi Says:

    indy500 I think that is called a cover-up. They have the information, they just refuse to release it.

  16. rosettasister Says:

    Good morning/afternoon, all!

    Anyone heard from ThinkingMom?

    I have email into her.

    Maybe she’s “on the road”

  17. indy500 Says:

    I’ve never seen so many Cindy-i’s in my life.

  18. thinkingmom11 Says:

    Hi Rose – how sweet of you to ask about me 🙂 I was away most of the day yesterday and came home with a massive headache and went straight to bed. I am feeling much better now and have just been lurking today. I am just trying to catch up with all that has been going on…lots of good info posted here I want to check out – you all are AWESOME finding really great resources!

  19. rosettasister Says:

    thinkingmom11 Says:
    November 29, 2008 at 6:57 pm


    Hi, TM!

    Lurking?! I’ve been guilty of that too

    Please feel better.


  20. rosettasister Says:

    Polarik’s reply to Dr. Neal Krawetz:



    To: limeade

    Here are the comments I left on Neal Krawetz’s website:

    “Today, there is only one person who continues to propagate the “COLB is
    fake” conspiracy. He calls himself “Ron Polarik” (an anonymous pseudonym — not his real name), and he also uses bad science to support his claims.”


    Krawetz, you’re a hack who hasn’t got a clue what is real Science. You have not done a single scientific thing since your first post. You have provided no evidence to support your contention that the images posted online are genuine scan images of Obama real, paper COLB. In fact, you have not done anything related to the COLBs, except to toss out a few epithets, non sequiturs and anecdotes.

    REAL SCIENCE is not making denigrating and disparaging remarks about someone else’s research and him personally, which is what you did in the first part of your “Bad Science” diatribe. That’s slander.

    REAL SCIENCE involves trying to replicate what another researcher has done, and not pulling conjectures out of thin air, or something you sit on.

    I was the FIRST person to use REAL science in my analyses, beginning on June 13, the day after the DailyKos.com image and the My.BarackObama.com image, and continued to do so for four months, while all you did was flap your gums…twice.

    No one else has been able to do what I did – HONESTLY — because TechDude was a fraud and I was the person who outted him, not you.

    Ron is my real first name, and Polarik is what I got from my Father’s real last name.

    I don’t sign sworn and witnessed TWO Affidavits if I am a fraud or don’t exist.

    But, you ramble on anyway:

    “Polarik’s final report: Obama’s ‘Born’ Conspiracy is accompanied by a YouTube video. (Since he keeps restricting access to it and moving it around, I am making a copy available here.)”

    I have nothing to do with the access, and it’s never been moved around, because a copy of it has always been available on ObamaCrimes.com. The Youtube version was taken down ONE TIME for edits.

    Your opening statement shows the world just how clueless you really are:

    “Before I begin evaluating Polarik’s claims, I would like to point out that the entire claim — that Obama was not born in Hawaii — is false.”

    You, nor anyone else, has ever proven that Obama was born in Hawaii. Obama also has failed to prove that he was born in Hawaii. Obama has refused to show to anyone his real, “vault” original birth certificate. All that we’ve ever seen are forgeries, and you nor anyone else can refute that.

    Then, you continue:

    ” * 27-June-2008. Janice Okubo from the Hawaii Department of Health confirmed that the document was valid.”

    WRONG! She most certainly did nothing of the kind. What she said was that “it [the document image] looks exactly like my birth certificate,” meaning only that the form itself, and not what was used to make it, looked like her Certification of Live Birth with respect to the color and layout of her COLB that resembles the COLB form.

    BUT, what you and Politifact didn’t report (but I did) was that Okubo also said:

    “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”

    Let that quote sink in for awhile. Let it marinate in your brain, because the next Okubo quote slams the door on this image being anything “official”:

    “At this time there are no circumstances in which the State of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth certification or certification of live birth only electronically. In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the document.”

    Which begs the question, “Why, after four 1/2 months since the Daily Kos posted the first COLBimage, was no second scan image ever made, or better yet, why was no scan ever made of the reverse side of the COLB, the side that contains the embossed Seal and Registrar’s signature block?”

    Obama’s campaign only had $600 million, and they couldn’t make a second scan?

    By comparison, I have over 100 scan images,.of both the front and back, of two, real 2007 COLBs, and two real 2008 COLBs.

    Who else can make these claim? Not you, nor anyone else.

    Who else has scanned, photographed, and fully examined, under different lighting conditions and different magnifications,
    a real paper COLB?

    Not you, nor anyone else.

    Not only have you never done anything remotely close to what I’ve done, you can’t get your facts straight, and if you have no facts, then you create a few.

    For example, you said:

    ” * 15-Aug-2008. Politifact validated the information.”

    WRONG AGAIN. I referenced what Politifact did above, in relation to the COLB image, and what they did occurred on June 27, not August 16.

    How exactly does Politifact “validate” any birth record information when (1) no one outside of Obama’s immediate family, and directors Fukino and Onaka, knows anything about it, and (2) they send Okubo a very small and poor quality image of a nonexistent document, for which authenticity could never be determined.

    I did, however, prove that it was made from the same, forged source image.

    Politifact’s copy is almost, but not quite as bad, as the the intentionally miniscule Fight The Smears copy, weighing in at a collosal 585 x 575 pixels @ 100 DPI, to which you posted a link saying that, “In fact, the green thatched background is visible in every copy of the COLB.”

    THAT thumbnail of an image is not proportional to any other image posted, meaning they intentionally resized it without keeping the aspect ratio the same.

    So, since when is one image copy, FTS’s 585 x 575 pixel image, “every copy of the COLB?”

    1 = 3. Is that your idea of “new math?” Or just an “old oxymoron?”

    Well, you were technically correct by saying that “In fact, the green thatched background is visible in every copy of the COLB.”

    However, to say that I “tampered” with anything is a bald-faced lie, and one that I will demand you retract!

    You said the following:

    “First, the highest copy quality of the COLB contains no instances of the word “BIRTH” that looks like this.”

    Look like what? I’ve got dozens of similar comparisons taken directly from all four images, including the “higher” quality Fasctcheck image, that do show the gray and white pixel patterns when there should be green in between.

    I demonstrated that over and over again, taking genuine samples from real COLB
    images and the bogus Obama COLB image.

    But, all of my test samples have been enlarged to pixel size, and you will only see shades of green — you will not see any “green-thatched pattern” because that pattern becomes a series of green-sshaded pixels.

    “Every instance has that green thatched background around the letters. In fact, the green thatched background is visible in every copy of the COLB. Thus, Polarik has tampered with the data in order to remove the green thatched background.”

    As I said, that is a bald-faced lie that you will remove immediately.

    God, you are so out of your league here. I’m talking about pixels, while you’re talking about the entire image.

    You did not get what I said. What I’ve said, since Time immemorial, that the absence of green pixels in between the letters, that were replaced by gray and white pixels, is a sign that the original text on this image was graphically altered.

    And, I’m not the only person who knows this to be a fact, and not the only person who has actually seen this happen when overlaying portions of that green thatched background on top of existing text, and then creating a new text layer on top of that background layer, and then flattening the image.

    I never said that green pixels would be absent from the image when enlarged. On the contrary, I presented comparative samples taken from the scans of REAL 2007 COLBs and REAL 2008 COLBs.

    You chose to post a link to the FTS solely because it can only be viewed clearly at its original postage-stamp size, and if you tried to enlarge it t the size of the “BIRTH” comparisons that were made using full-sized scan images, you would really see “Smears” as in higly-smeared pixels. Basically, it would be the visual equivalent of what you’re saying about me.

    What I don’t understand is how you can get away with this nonsense. We’re we all expected to believe you because you have a flashy resume — so did TechDude, you fancy yourself as a forensic image analyst — so did TechDude. You have a PhD in computer science. Well, Techdude did not have that, but your specialty is NOT identifying forged document images, but in finding malicious code embedded in images — totally different thing.

    If you really were a hot-shot, forgery expert, then you would never be making these ridiculous claims. You also would show people something concrete evidence to support them.

    Well, you did post scans of black text printed on white paper from a Newsweek article.

    Then you stateed the following:

    “Looking at the paper version, it all looks uniform and black. However, the scanned image (full color, no enhancements, scanned on an HP Scanjet 3570c) shows that the black text contains a variety of colors.”

    Why would you make a color scan of a two-color original?

    Because, you don’t know any better. Everyone who is not you, would have made B&W bitmap image.

    The COLB is green, so how, exactly, is that the same thing as the COLB with its green “security pattern?”

    What it amply demonstrates is that:

    A. You don’t know the difference between color and black & white.

    B. You don’t know the difference between two-color bitmaps and 16.7 million color JPGs.

    C. You don’t take into account that the text in a magazine is screened.

    D. You don’t know the difference between VECTOR FONTS and RASTER FONTS, and

    E. You don’t know the difference between a completely, computer-generated graphic and typeset, printed pages in a magazine.

    I’m not sure which of these is the most egregious. didn’t you know that providing “irrelevant evidence” to support a “ridiculous claim” only make it seem more ridiculous?

    Even though Techdude provided fabricated, concrete evidence, at least it was the CORRECT TYPE AND FORMAT for making comparisons, and not the “Apples with Hand-Grenades” comparisos that you make.

    Sorry, but the public needs real and relevant research, and not the imitation kind of “Hey, I’m Dr. Neal Krawetz. I know everything!”

    ANYTHING would be a vast improvement, though, over what you actually say:

    “Regardless of whether the document on the web is real or tampered, the argument is moot; an authentic document exists. Thus, the conspiracy has no basis.”

    Now, that’s totally awesome Dr. K! An “authentic document exists.” What is this “authentic document” that does exist?

    1. Is it a standard birth certificate?

    2. Is it a Certificate of Birth?

    3. Is it a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth?

    4. Is it a Certification of Live Birth?

    5. Is it a Hawaiian document at all?

    Obviously you cannot answer that because neither Fukino nor Onaka has ever told anyone what information is on that “birth certificate,” let alone which of the five document types it might be.

    Moving right along…you said:

    “Now, given that Hawaii confirms it, why would they release a fake COLB when they could just as easily release a new one? (Occam’s Razor: it is easier to just release the real one.)”

    Hawaii did not confirm what was the document or what was contained on it. And, to prove how inept you are, I never said, nor has anyone else said, that Hawaii created a “fake” COLB!

    “”Regardless of whether the document on the web is real or tampered…”

    Since when is creating and proferring “a false identity document” irrelevant? Obviously, you’ve never heard anything about the penalties for doing so. They are a maximum of 15 years in jail and up to a $250,000 fine.

    I’m sure that Obama can handle the fine, but I’m not sure how he’ll run the country from behind bars.

    “Occam’s razor” doesn’t apply here. Shick’s Razor might apply if you use it right.

    You continue:

    ” * 31-Oct-2008 (alternate link). Quote: Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said today she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate.”

    Well, at least you got something right, but what they said reveals absolutely nothing about what kind of birth certificate they have on record, and nothing about what information it contains.

    Before 1972, parents could request a late birth registration for up to one year after their child was born, and it is highly likely that Stanley Dunham did just that.

    If that original birth record had matched the information on the forged Obama COLB, Fukino and Onaka would have shouted it from the top of the Health Dept. building. Heck, they would have thrown a giant luau.

    If that original birth record had matched the information on the forged Obama COLB, then we would have seen a second or third scan of a REAL COLB, full-size, and from both sides, and the quality of the scans would be infinitely better.

    Are there any second scans? Nope!

    Why is it that one, front side only, low-quality image of what is alleged to be a true copy of Obama’s “original birth certificate?”

    Uh…it’s not even a birth certificate or Certificate of Live Birth. A COLB is just a short transcript that CANNOT BE USED to obtain a passport, and CANNOT BE USED to prove that the holder is a natural-born, US citizen.

    So, even if it was real — which it is not even close to being real —

    Do you show ANY scans at all? Of course not because they would refute your empty conjectures.

    You have never even seen and touched a real paper COLB. I have.

    You have never even seen a real 2007 COLB and compared it to Obama’s bogus COLB image.

    I have.

    You have never even tried to reproduce any of the anomalous features I found on Obama’s bogus COLB image because it absolutely cannot be done naturally.

    In short, you have done Jack-squat to refute my evidence.

    You show my pixel analysis of the word, BIRTH, but instead of providing my comparison images, or even one of your own that was relevent (not those B&W magaine text), you simply leave a link to Factcheck’s image, which, with a compression ratio of 5.6%, and a JPG quality level of 46% is hardly “high quality” in anyone’s vocabulary.

    They could have cropped out the border, and bumped up the quality, while keeping the file size at or below the original 1.43 MB.

    You said that the second of my four claims was that “along with the missing green from outside the letters…”

    Hello??? Earth to Krawetz. I NEVER said that there was “missing green” from “outside the letters.” I said, and listen carefully this time:


    I can’t blame you entirely, because Factcheck also referred to them as”strange haloes,” something else I did not say.

    To continue your quote:

    “Polarik claims that there should be a green thatched pattern within the letters (“O”, “B”, etc. have internal areas that should contain green).”

    Darn. I have to repeat what I said again:


    Geez, if you cannot get the central concept right, then what hope does anyone have of finding even a kernal of truth in what you said?

    But, when you got to third base…er..I mean, the third claim which is actually your claim, not mine:

    “Third, the loss of the green background when scanned is intentional. Security paper, such as the green thatched background, is designed to distort when scanned.”

    Oh, really? Then why do all of my 100 scan images have the green background showing around, in, and between every letter???

    Yet, more iron-clad evidence that you don’t know Jack-squat, about scanning, about “artifacts,” and even about JPG images.

    “That’s a security measure. Thus, even if Polarik had not tampered with the image, removing the green from around the letters, the thatch background should not be crisp”

    You will NEVER be able to replicate either the Daily Kos image or the Factcheck image exactly by natural means.

    You will ONLY be able to replicate either the Daily Kos image or the Factcheck image exactly by human intervention, as in graphic alteration.

    In fact, I’ll bet you anything that you can name, that you cannot reproduce just the same border pattern as shown on the Kos and Factcheck images.

    Of course, you would lose, big-time, if I also bet you to try and natually recreate the same pixel patterns as shown in the Daily Kos image or the Factcheck image.

    I’m throwing down the same gauntlet to you as I have to everyone else, and the only person who was able to exactly reproduce the Daily Kos image was me, and the processes that I used were far from being natural, as in “natural-born.”

    I’m too tired to go on any further, but I’d say that I punk’d you good enough.

    64 posted on Saturday, November 29, 2008 11:59:08 AM by Polarik

  21. indy500 Says:

    If it is a cover up in the conservative media, are they providing cover for the Court to dismiss the lawsuits? The media will only mention it if it’s shot down.

    Why would conservative commentators hit so hard on Ayres, Dornan, Wright, Rezko and all the other stuff during the general election and now only react to Obama appointments and policy while the very basis for him being POTUS is questioned and they don’t even give it a passing mention?

  22. sba1872 Says:

    I’ve been reading everything on the net for the past two days and I am beyond bleary-eyed. My life is suffering so I must get to it. Before I do, I have to say this isn’t looking good. Judah Benjamin’s British friend’s “poisoned chalice” comment sums it up disappointingly well.

    So far, only Donofrio’s suit has survived dismissal. His was filed by way of application for stay (like Bush v. Gore). In reading the Reporters Guide at the supremecourtus.gov site (from which Leo was reciting on the last radio interview I heard), applications for stay, of course, usually involve a deadline. I’m not a lawyer, but I would expect that many applications for stay are in criminal matters where the applicant alleges he/she will suffer great harm if there is not an immediate stay of some judgment or ruling.

    Back to Leo’s stay application. In the area of the Reporters Guide relating to scenarios for the disposition of an application, it says:

    “- A Justice may simply deny without comment or explanation.

    – If a Justice acts alone to deny an application, a petitioner may reapply to any other Justice of his or her choice, and theoretically can continue until a majority of the Court has denied the application. In practice, applications usually are referred to the full Court by the second Justice to avoid such a prolonged procedure….”

    So does it mean anything that the second Justice, Justice Thomas, has referred to the full Court? Or has the matter just been kicked down the road to December 5? From the Conference List supplied at the site, it does seem that there is only one matter which was referred on November 19 and scheduled for conference December 5. But does that mean anything? Don’t know.

    As far as whether or not the decision is made public, I would imagine some stay applications require immediate attention and resolution, and are probably communicated by phone. The guide tells reporters that if you are following a specific matter to call and be put on a call-out list when anything happens in that matter.

    I don’t know anything anymore. I believe the tree has fallen in the forest and some people are deliberately denying that they heard it.

    This is why the API thing rang a bell with me. The one supposed quote that MO said. “My husband knows there is no law that can prevent him from becoming President.” Just a funny way to put it, as if he knew he was getting away with a technicality of some sort. For a supposed Constitutional scholar, he shows great disrespect for our founding document. If the Supremes did take up this question, as I believe they have a duty to do as no one else has the authority or responsibility, it will cause a great uproar. It’s just too late.

    So I suspect, “for the good of the country”, after BO takes office, there will, in fact, be an amendment to the Constitution undertaken by the Congress. I really would like to see the Bush v. Gore opinion again, though, to see what the Court’s reasoning was in deciding that it had the authority, responsibility and obligation to stop the count. Then I start thinking about the fact that McCain knew he himself to be ineligible as well. Blech. I’m done thinking. Too depressing. I’m going to be a Patriot and go out and shop at an American store (and probably end up buying something made in China). Double Blech. Rosetta, sorry for the long, rambling post. Thanks for providing the outlet.

  23. thinkingmom11 Says:

    Here is my take on the conservative media black out on this: Sean Hannity mentioned that he would be taking this up when he gets back on Mon. That is only 4 days before the Court takes a look. Remember the old lawyer rule: Never ask a question you don’t know the answer to. I don’t think these guys (nor too many others for that matter) know EXACTLY the truth behind where Obama was born so they are not wanting to go too far out on that limb. Sean, Rush, Beck etc. have their credibility to consider – and they don’t want to be caught with too much time or credibility invested in this if it turns out that there is no issue with O’s citizenship according to SCOTUS.

    I think what they should be willing to cover is the dual citizenship issue and the relationship to being Natural-born. I think that if they look at the NBC issue as it relates to Obama’s father, then they have something that seems a little less conspiracy-theory-ish. Obama’s fathers citizenship has NEVER been up for interpretation. If the natural born status is dependent on no other nation being able to claim jurisdiction over you, then O loses eligibility by his own admission as he was considered a British subject through his father’s allegiance. THAT is something that they can discuss without “asking a question they don’t know the answer to.”

  24. Cyndi Says:

    Obama wants more money from his believers

    “Will you support the Obama-Biden transition,” he wrote on Nov. 21, “with a donation of $250 or more?”


    My lord how much money does this man need? Soliciting money for the transition team.

    By the way where has ole’ Biden been Hiden’ haven’t seen him in so long almost forgot all about him.

  25. indy500 Says:

    Why can’t the whole thing just be put out there. It is a fact, the SCOTUS is considering a case on Obama’s eligibility. That’s not a conspiracy. There are legitimate questions of the posted birth certificate. There are legitimate questions about the Selective service form. Why not just put it out for consumption. Get this stuff in the media, even it’s just conservative commentators. Just put out what is know – don’t even comment on it if there is a question of credibility. Just get it out in case there is something to it. If it comes out as a complete surprise – we’re in for some rough times.

    If there is rough times, I’ll be right in the middle of it. I don’t relish the thought of civil unrest. The element of surprise will only make things worse. Why can’t the basic information be put out? That way if it comes to pass that Obama is ruled ineligible, at least the general public had an inkling. The shock of the whole thing will make it 10 times worse. I don’t look forward to what might happen.

  26. Cyndi Says:

    On the ATTORNEY’S REGISTRATION AND PUBLIC DISCIPLINARY RECORD for Barack Obama it has a space for full former names and it says none. I think this was talked about awhile ago but did they say whether or not he falsified the document? Because he has had other names.

  27. Cyndi Says:

    Sorry I forgot to post link-


  28. sdee Says:

    no tapes?

    new post on API site

  29. Cyndi Says:

    sdee I also noticed their other site is all messed up.


  30. Tenacity Says:

    Is there anything really worth seeing at API? I’d prefer not giving K the hit until he airs MO. If he fails to do as promised, whatever he gets he will deserve. If he airs MO soon, then I will be the first to forgive his past transgressions and give him kudos.

    I too have been lurking and reading and working and checking the flyer site to see if the DNS has propagated yet and then doing it all over again. Good posts and links today… very interesting. I feel like I’m watching the pot to see when it will boil. I am growing quite impatient.

  31. indy500 Says:

    After what happened to me yesterday on API, I won’t go back no matter what. I’m tired of the back and forth game. No reason whatsoever to play the game they’re playing.

  32. Tenacity Says:

    Are you bongo?

  33. rosettasister Says:

    As the API Chat Room Turns:

    API Say:

    API London_LegalDept:Several commenters on the API web site have warned us that there will be widespread civil disobedience and even possibly civil war if the dénouement of these events costs Obama the Presidency.

    API London_LegalDept:The same talk can be seen all over conservative weblogs and conservative media.

    HappyVermonter Say:

    HappyVermonter:API London… We’ll handle the fallout. You guys figure out how to handle your dental hygiene problem

    Bones Say:

    BonesBoy:Speculations about what might happen if the tape airs is just that, speculation. One could speculate that there will be riots, or that there won’t be riots.

    BonesBoy:What we know for sure is that everyone is entitled to the truth, and that each individual is responsible for his or her own actions as long as they are given the truth.

    BonesBoy:If the truth is withheld, then and only then could the person or persons withholding the truth be held accountable for any outcomes. Therefore, it is incumbent upon you to release the tape.

    RosettaSister Say:

    If audio exists and Korir chooses not to publish, then no one will believe that audio ever existed in first place.

    If audio does not exist and Korir claims he cannot in good conscience publish audio, then no one will believe that audio ever existed in first place.

    Either way, Korir loses all credibility.

  34. Tenacity Says:

    Korir has already lost all of his credibility. His only redemption is to air the tape and air it before December 5th. He will lose the chance to become famous and draw attention to his new site if the SCOTUS acts to vet BO on the 5th. If K airs the tapes before the 5th, then when the SCOTUS acts to vet BO, many will have lost their impetus to become unruly. The tape needs to be heard now so people will want BO vetted and disqualified.

  35. rosettasister Says:

    Tenacity Says:
    November 29, 2008 at 9:55 pm

    “His only redemption is to air the tape and air it before December 5th.”


    Agreed, Tenacity.

    But I fear Korir may be beyond redemption.

  36. rosettasister Says:

    Furthermore …

    This is how I see it:

    Korir has audio, and is toying with the American people.


    Korir has no audio, and is toying with the American people.

    Either way, I don’t like Korir toying with my people.

  37. the unveiler Says:

    To be aware – some folks say there will be race riots if Obama is not seated, but, they forget on the other hand there are many ‘Constitutionalists’, Skinheads, and other people who support our Constitution to the letter that are planning a pretty big riot if BO is installed into office – so either way – all hell is about to break out. What they are all waiting for now is the verdict from the Supreme Court. Korir’s little audio tape isn’t going to make one iota of an impact one way or the other – everything hinges on the birth certificate.
    I really do believe TPTB want BHO in office as he best fits the man they need to bring on the NWO. Whether BHO is a natural born citizen has nothing to do with their plans – he is a ‘man of the world’, and that is what they need and want. In other words, the AC will have taken his seat.
    The Unveiler

  38. Tenacity Says:

    Does anyone have any fair and reasonable ideas as to how to hold Korir accountable other than simply avoiding his site? MS’s techniques were not only apprehensible, but futile. With K being in Norway, it seems that we are prohibited from taking any criminal or civil action against him. Are his failures to report equal to misprision? Has K broken any laws that anyone knows of? No question, he has dissappointed a lot of people. He has lied on several occasions, but what recourse do we have without crawling into the same gutter with MS?

  39. rosettasister Says:

    the unveiler Says:
    November 29, 2008 at 10:08 pm

    “Korir’s little audio tape isn’t going to make one iota of an impact one way or the other – everything hinges on the birth certificate.”


    Agreed, unveiler.

    Korir had a chance to make a difference.

    Now, IF his “little audio tape” ever sees the light of day, I believe there will be a collective yawn.

  40. jjones35811 Says:

    I don’t think there is a whole lot that can be done other than boycotting him and any future avertisers.

  41. Tenacity Says:

    the unveiler Says:

    November 29, 2008 at 10:08 pm –
    everything hinges on the birth certificate.
    If you buy the federalist’s view, Donofrio’s position or Judah Benjamin’s statements, the BC is not critical. BHO is not a Natural Born Citizen even if he was born in HI and proves it. Everything hinges on whether the SCOTUS does it’s job and protects the Constitution.

  42. Stacy Says:

    What does everybody think of Korir’s latest post? Anyone holding out hope this will ever air?


  43. rosettasister Says:

    “what recourse do we have?”

    None, really, Tenacity.

    Except to ignore Korir and to turn away from him.

    Which I swore I would never do.

    But things have changed.

    He did not value my friendship.

    Now I am just so angry that he keeps dangling this damn thing above us like we’re circus animals.

    I don’t care if it exists or not.

    And I don’t care if it ever gets aired.

  44. sdee Says:

    The tape (if there is one) only serves to embarrass the MSM.

    Leo and the Supreme Court – we sit at a crossroads

  45. Goferit Says:

    Good afternoon,

    I’ve been around here, at API, the Blog etc.

    I’ve done my bit of hand to hand with the obots also. It is not a pleasant experience.

    I truly believe that API London legal dept is an OBOT.

    An instigator of the worst kind.Rosetta is correct, that the only way for Korir to save face is to release the tapes.

    I for one hopes he has them and they are released as expeditiously as possible.

    Thank you all who regularly post here. I have learned much from you and look forward to your continuing thoughts.

  46. rosettasister Says:

    Ted just left this on previous thread:

    Ted Says:
    November 29, 2008 at 10:18 pm

    On Dec 5 the Supreme Court will either allow or disallow the usurpation of both the Constitution and the Government of the United States — easily the most pivotal decision since our nation’s founding — and the silence of the news media is deafening (if not downright scary).

  47. Tenacity Says:

    I know you are right, but it is just so frustrating to let K get away with his tease. This is far too serious to allow a petty con to hold the American people and our Constitution hostage.

  48. jjones35811 Says:

    yes very frustrating and infuriating.

  49. Tenacity Says:

    Ted et al,
    Are you aware that the MSNBC article allowed comments, but blocked all comments that stood in opposition to MSNBC’s propaganda? Many commenters attempted to pose polite disagreement and all but those in agreement with MSNBC were moderated and never posted.

  50. sdee Says:

    the Editor added this – what a ride

    Appearing before a hearing in Congress.

    The reason we come to the readers for advice is because word has come that it may become necessary to be summoned to appear before a Congress hearing. Our fear is to accept such a hearing in Washington and then we put our lives in direct danger. API will insist to be heard in a secret location, but we may face a problem if it is not accepted. We may stand weak because we do not know how the American laws are practised as concerns hearings by Non-America citizens.

  51. jjones35811 Says:

    I tried to post there with no luck at all

  52. sdee Says:

    As long as Monica had the blue dress safe – she was safe.

  53. justanamericancindy4 Says:


    I posted to MSNBC and I also was blocked

  54. Tenacity Says:

    Hi Cindy,
    Do you know why you were blocked? Did you try to post a link or use any off-colored language?

  55. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    I seen an upside down flag avatar somehere else..wish I could remember where.. was that you?

  56. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    i was careful about being especially polite..but too the point… no link

  57. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    But I also have to say nothing new at all is being posted…. I believe that story appeared just before the torror attacks in India.. and that turned their focus….
    msnbc is the worst… it should be on the comedy channel

  58. Tenacity Says:

    Cindy & jj,
    Can you say “Censorship?” You both should have started your comments with a pro-gay marriage comment, then you might have been posted.

  59. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    lol… we should repeatedly email Sean Hannity…we threaten his gag on this issue…….his patriotism in doubt………… heck he might at least say something on his radio show..

  60. Lyn Says:

    MSNBC has been blocking most comments that were not positive about that One for MONTHS. (CNN does the same, especially on anderson blog) During the primaries it started, if you were correcting a lie about Hillary ect our comments would not post. (and these were comments with no bad words or links) I had quit even wasting my time, but tried to correct this latest first read article, and had 4 different posts blocked.

  61. Tenacity Says:

    Sounds like a great idea. He is planning on talking about the SCOTUS cases next week. This is the perfect time to email him. We should also call up and ask some questions during his radio show.

  62. indy500 Says:

    Tenacity Says:

    November 29, 2008 at 9:47 pm
    Are you bongo?

    bongo was the one that responded to me even though my post never made the light of day. bongo was also the one when the tape was to be published the last time made a big stink on API. It’s strange that both times I was trying to post to counter the BS. In fact one time bongo posted as africanpress – but had his usual avatar that no one seemed to notice. In fact – the john..esq that use to post opposing opinions on here phaked a friend in Phil Bergs office on API.

    I’m not the phony bongo or any of the other freakin phakes. I think I fell into disgrace when I had an opinion on the mole. To me it doesn’t matter any more. As far as riots in the streets, I deal with BS every day, been to the ER on the job and probably will go again. I can deal with whatever comes about. In fact, I get paid to deal with unpleasant BS that happens every day that never sees the light of day. This whole thing is a really good episode of the Twilight Zone. Only this time, when the plot unfolds it ain’t gonna be a TV show.

    I would rather deal with a constitutional issue grounded in fact that waters the tree of liberty than deal with a phake and phony arsehole that thinks he deserves a position of power because he bluffed the people into thinking he is something he ain’t. Either way I’m ready and the people who I deal with on a daily basis are ready. It would only make things a little more transparent if the public knew what was out there.

    Keep your powder dry because you never know when you may be standing alone. Been there and done that – Best advice is be ready no matter what!

  63. sdee Says:

    Does the Chief Editor not understand that any and every person to voice even an opinion in Kenyan politics has infinitely more courage the lot of spineless politicians we have filled Washington with?

  64. wndawmn666 Says:

    I posted a great, emotionless, fact-filled, reply on the MSNBC site and it never made it out of moderation.

  65. the unveiler Says:

    “What recourse do we have?” We have none – we were duped by the best of them. BUT, who does have grounds for a lawsuit is the woman attorney that works or represents Fox News. Chances are, she was never contacted, but someone should contact her to see if Korir ever informed her about an audio tape – probably another untruth. She would have a case, as would Fox for slander and falsely accusing the network of something they didn’t do. Probably no contact was ever made by Korir. One lie or untruth breeds more lies, the entire hoax was untrue. Those who were falsely represented have grounds for lawsuits. We don’t because he didn’t slander us, accuse us, or defame us. But he did give us much false hope – our fault for being so gullible I guess. If there was ever a tape it would have made the big time long before the election day came around.

  66. Cyndi Says:

    More Incriminating Evidence Gleaned From FOIA Requests to SoS’s in SC and CT: WHAT’S WORSE THAN NANCY PELOSI’S SIGNATURE ON NOMINATION DOCS?



    Don’t know if ya’ll have seen this yet.

  67. Cyndi Says:

    Now We Know The Who (kind of) /Further Indictment of Pelosi’s “Certification” of Barry Soetoro Barack Hussein Obama
    Here’s a good breakthrough. Tonight, based upon the recommendation of a comment left on another site, I went and found the Charter and Bylaws of the United States Democratic Party. After sifting through that, I was led to a document called “The Delegate Selection Rules For the 2008 Democratic National Convention”. It was issued by the Democratic Party of the United States, and seems to be approved by Governor Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.


  68. indy500 Says:

    the unveiler Says:
    November 29, 2008 at 11:54 pm:

    Dude – forget about the API stuff – let it go. I have, it’s a non-issue now. Concentrate on what is happening in the Supreme Court. If only the conservative media would have the nuts to mention it, maybe we would be spared the embarassment of having a foreigner as the next POTUS.

  69. justanamericancindy4 Says:

    I have a small blog in the “under construction phase” thanks to the holidays
    I’m an unknown with no traffic….. I am more than willing to set up a passworded comment section for those we want to stay in contact with each other in a safe enviroment…..I’m pretty sure I can make it private I will check and confirm in a few minutes if it is something you are interested in.

  70. rosettasister Says:

    Good Saturday Night!

    New Thread:


  71. justanamericancindy4 Says:


    sad but even if the tapes existed the power they might of had is now lost,… I still would like to hear them IF they exist and are ever played. The msm is almost a lost cause on playing anything….. the courts are the best bet.

  72. indy500 Says:

    Tenacity Says:

    November 30, 2008 at 12:07 am
    This is obviously not the place to discuss certain issues.

    Agreed. Part of keeping your powder dry.
    Tenacity Says:

    November 30, 2008 at 12:07 am
    I am making ready. I have also contacted some folks in uniform.

    Good idea, however law enforcement may have their hands full and may not be able to respond immediately or at all. First hand experience.
    Tenacity Says:

    November 30, 2008 at 12:07 am:
    When the time comes, I’d prefer having certain people beside me rather than facing me.

    I agree. I think you’re ex-military. Goes back to know your enemy.
    Tenacity Says:

    November 30, 2008 at 12:07 am

    It’s going to be difficult knowing who to trust and how to make contact.

    Once the poop hits the fan, you’re gonna basically be on your own if it’s bad enough where resources are maxed out. Just go back to where it started from and remember who you trusted and who stood tall in the face of adversity.

    Is it just me or does this whole thing seem like a bad dream?

  73. jjones35811 Says:

    Sorry, I’ve been away, yes I’ve posted other places
    Maybe you’ve seen my posts else where?

  74. goferit Says:

    justanamericancindy4 Says:
    November 30, 2008 at 12:20 am
    I have a small blog in the “under construction phase” thanks to the holidays
    I’m an unknown with no traffic…

    I’d like to be included…

    Not meaning to be forward!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: