SLAVE to the HIVE.. the collective..
Posted on 09/22/2013 9:00:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
When a person thinks about something unceasingly to the point it dominates their every thought they are obsessed and maybe even haunted. For the past 5 years a surprisingly large segment of the population are obsessed with finding a reason to correct what they consider an affront to their existence, and have sought any reason to remove the twice elected African American man living in the White House. This week an obsessed Islamophobe and birther came up with what he thinks is master plan to subvert the will of the people in the last two Presidential elections, and is asking Christians, Jews, people of faith and all true patriots to join him in staging a coup to remove the legally elected President of the United States.
The anomaly of nature summoning millions of like-minded Islamophobes ironically is taking a cue from Muslims in Egypt who demanded the ouster of President Morsi. He believes that if millions of Christians and Jews occupy Washington, they will be able “to cleanse the nation of the half-Muslim, anti-white, socialist fraud in the White House.” The man, Larry Klayman, penned an inflammatory article titled “Obama, Come Out With Your Hands Up,” and cited a laundry list of imagined offenses that in his mind warrant the people’s support to overthrow the government because according to him, Republicans, the judicial system, and government officials lack “the will or courage to remove the mullah-in-chief from office.” Klayman is not new to obsessing over removing Democratic Presidents from office. He filed no less than 18 lawsuits to remove former President Bill Clinton from office, but his preoccupation with President Obama is freakishly dangerous with an angry religious and racially-motivated citizens’ army determined to take down this President.
Klayman’s screed decried a “neutered, impotent elephant (GOP), and federal and state judges who have had the chance to effectively remove Obama over his lack of eligibility to be president, as he is not a natural born citizen.” His assertion is that besides the President’s so-called “phony” birth certificate, there is a bizarre issue that Obama “lacks having two American-born citizen parents as required by our Constitution.” Since Republicans and courts are not indicting, prosecuting, and convicting the President, Klayman hailed “Freedom Watch’s citizens’ grand juries, which are indicting and trying political felons like Obama as we speak. In this regard, a conviction is near in the case of the Obama for eligibility fraud.” They also claim President Obama stole the presidency and has done so much harm that he finally has to “know that his time has come to leave his perverted, Islamic concept of Mecca, and our nation’s hallowed capital.”
According to Klayman and Freedom Watch, “Once convicted, We the People have the right to enforce this conviction and demand that Obama surrender himself to the people’s system of justice for incarceration.” Klayman is certain the President will not capitulate to the Christian and patriot demands because of “his arrogance and disrespect for American law and his allegiance to Sharia law.” So he is calling “upon all American patriots, once we obtain this conviction to converge on Washington stand in front of the White House and demand that Barack Hussein Obama leave.” Apparently Klayman and Freedom Watch are aiming for a date during the week before Thanksgiving to converge on and occupy Washington in the millions and chant, “Mr. President, put the Quran down, get up off your knees, and come out with your hands up!” Klayman ends his screed with a warning that although “I do not advocate violence, it is time we show Obama that we mean business and he would be well advised to ride off into his Islamic sunset, link up with 72 virgins and party on at his expense – not ours!”
For a so-called patriot, Klayman is about as ignorant of the Constitution as he is obsessed with President Obama. First, there is no requirement in the 14th Amendment that two American-born citizen parents are required to be a natural born citizen, and Freedom Watch’s “citizen’s grand juries” have no standing in the judicial or criminal justice system to enforce their cartoonish idea of removing a sitting President by coup d’état.
Regardless the bizarre notion that citizens can convene a bogus grand jury and remove an entire Administration, there is an inherent danger in whipping up outrage among so-called patriots that have threatened armed revolution to overthrow the government because an African American is President. Last year in Georgia, four U.S. soldiers were arrested for conspiring to overthrow the government, stockpiling assault weapons and bomb components, and plotting to assassinate President Obama. The prosecutor in the case said the soldiers’ ultimate goal was to assassinate the President and overthrow the government, and had purchased $87,000 worth of guns and bomb-making materials for the plot. However, the idea of armed revolution or coup is not consigned to fringe right-wing militant groups and was endorsed by Virginia Republicans last year.
The Virginia Republican Committee called for “armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November” because they claimed President Obama “shuns biblical praise, handicaps economic ability, disrespects the honor of earned military might” and that if they missed an electoral opportunity to defeat President Obama, “we shall not have any coarse (sic) but armed revolution.” What the Republican threats of armed revolution really expose is that anything outside the conservative agenda is a valid reason for “armed revolution” against the government, especially with an African American in the White House. An army of racist Islamophobes armed with “pretend” indictments, substantial arsenals, and religious fervor portend a dangerous time for America that is getting more precarious by the minute with valuable assistance from fringe conspiracy theorists whipping their sycophants into frenzy.
Larry Klayman is an unpatriotic Islamophobe and a freak of nature, but he is dangerous and he knows what he is inciting is a revolution to overthrow the legally elected President and his entire Administration. Klayman gave away his violent intent when he said, “it is time we show Obama that we mean business and he would be well advised to ride off into his Islamic sunset, link up with 72 virgins” that Christian patriots understand is code for death according to Islamic beliefs. With an ever-increasing proliferation of assault weapons and ammunition caches worthy of an infantry field squad, and non-stop calls for revolution dysfunctional racists and religious extremists believe is the only hope for a white Christian America, it is just a matter of time before there is bloodshed on a massive scale.
Obviously Republicans, conservative Christian extremists, and so-called patriots are never going to support anything this President supports regardless it is good for the nation or the people. However, the calls for revolution, and now a coup mirroring events in Egypt founded on Islamophobia and debunked conspiracy theories is unprecedented. Americans should fear that there are more guns, more racially motivated hate, and more religious zeal than Egyptians could have ever hoped for, and with establishment Republicans giving tacit approval with their silence informs that given time, men like Klayman could incite revolution that gun-crazed racially-motivated militant groups covet whether they are libertarians, Republicans, or teabaggers.
Obviously this President is never going to support anything that is good for the nation or the people.
What in the world does a chicken coop have to do with any of this? Do you mean coup, as in a sudden appropriation of leadership or power, like an armed revolt?
My prediction? President Obama will terminate office peacefully at the end of his term. We have a chance in every election to “overthrow” the government by the power of our votes. I suggest we continue to use them.
You’re only giving left-wing authors like Rmuse ammunition to use against law-abiding, peace loving, constitutional conservatives.
That would be “coup d’état,” unless you had some chickens in mind to do the dirty work. It was a mistake, I know, but just having fun.
White Christian Americans have, and will, fight and die for the right of homosexuals to live as free human beings, even though they mostly disapprove of, and even loathe, their lifestyles.
Muslims have, do, and will gut homosexuals and stick their decapitated heads on pikes the very moment they have the political power to do so, and have consistantly proved this in their teachings and actions around the world right up to the present day.
Guess which group homosexuals support?
Liberals: It's the stupidity, stupid.
Cincinnatus?
I hope that Obama just hands over power on January 20, 2017, in a legal way but my gut tells me he will not. The only way he will do that is to a hand picked stooge who will pardon him and keep coveredd up his misdoings and scandals. His progessives and goons will tamper with the election to make sure his crony gets in—with the help of the MSM. It could be Hillary but she may not keep her promissed to Obama and unmask him. One thing is clear—we on the right MUST work together to keep the house and gain the Senate. We must keep pushing to keep Obama’s Transformations from killing what is left of American Liberty. Only in this way can we learn all of the scandals (and my bet there are a great many more we know nothing about). Only if things become truly oppressive should anyone thing of armed revolt—before that—CW II.
The chump that wrote this , not only has one, but IS one.
That’s ‘’coup’’.
Way I see it, our side would meet a challenge to freedom from ‘’the State’’ with our weapons. Their side would crap on a police car.
Liberals are too stupid to be idiots.
I already have a coop. 9 hens, 1 pullet, and a rooster live in it.
Coups are a little harder to come by, and much harder to build.
Anyone know Klayman’s freeper handle?
The chickens have come home to roost.
Klayman sued Bush too. It’s just that Democrat Presidents are criminals, because they want to turn our country into a socialist society. That can only be accomplished through illegal means.
Whew! That title had me real worried for a minute.
Supreme Court cases that cite “natural born Citizen” as one born on U.S. soil to citizen parents:
The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says: “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As society cannot perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their parents, and succeed to all their rights.' Again: 'I say, to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen; for if he be born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. . . .
Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939),
Was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen and that the child's natural born citizenship is not lost if the child is taken to and raised in the country of the parents' origin, provided that upon attaining the age of majority, the child elects to retain U.S. citizenship "and to return to the United States to assume its duties." Not only did the court rule that she did not lose her native born Citizenship but it upheld the lower courts decision that she is a "natural born Citizen of the United States" because she was born in the USA to two naturalized U.S. Citizens.
But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg 'solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship.' The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants [307 U.S. 325, 350] (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227 , 57 S.Ct. 461, 108 A.L.R. 1000), declared Miss Elg 'to be a natural born citizen of the United States' (99 F.2d 414) and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary's discretion with respect to the issue of a passport but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship."
The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.
"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.
A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789
Where has that been decided???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.