Is the preceding statement on Obama's website true or false????
If the British Nationality Act of 1948 did not govern his status, then why did he say it did???
And why is the statement there at all if it didn't and he didn't agree with it???
You can't have it both ways, You can't say it and unsay it at the same time -- unless, of course, you're Obama or an Obamabot.
Again, is a US citizen subject to the laws of a foreign nation? Answer that question, please. It answers your own contentions, and shows them to be null and void.
It DOES NOT MATTER what another nation claims over you; what matters is what the US claims over you and which you accept for yourself.
DId you read that great comment by Seizethecarp the other day about the military likely recruiting active/former mil for psyops on the internet?
It was excellent. If you haven’t read it I’ll find it and post it.
(Courtesy ping to Seize.)
Here’s his comment and link to the thread it’s on.
Tuesday, May 04, 2010 12:06:21 PM · 420 of 451
Seizethecarp to Mr Rogers; Red Steel; little jeremiah; LucyT; BP2; rxsid; El Gato
“They claim Obama is ineligible for office because of his father - yet it was all known, and that argument rejected by the states, voters, McCain, the GOP, Sarah Palin, Coulter, Malkin, Rush, the Electoral College, Congress and ignored by the Supreme Court.”
I disagree. Failure to properly define and address an issue in a timely manner after full discovery of the facts (such as Obama’s intentionally withheld HI contemporaneous vital records and access to witnesses in Kenya and HI) does not equate to “that argument rejected by...”
Let me refer you to the following FR link:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2504335/posts?q=1&;page=1
At this link are links to four youtube videos by Dr. Ronald Polland in which he shows an extensive collection of webshots of news stories during the 2008 campaign.
The clear evidence from these webshots is that the Obama campaign and their MSM Factcheck and Politifact enablers successfully conducted a black propaganda psyops disinformation campaign against the US electorate which framed McCain’s NBC status as a BIG ISSUE and Obama’s NBC status as a NON-ISSUE (his precious “historic” candidacy was too good to check).
Obama may not have been a constitutional scholar but he and his campaign had years to get the jump on the media and opposition with claims that Wong Kim Ark was on-point with Obama’s public biography and was settled law.
The WKA ruling is not at all on point with Obama’s alleged bio and the ruling explicitly declines to define NBC, a statement likely inserted to refute the claim in the dissent that Wong was being made eligible to be president.
I am a little surprised that you have claimed to be amused by my suggestion that your posting pattern could raise suspicions. I am assuming that you are fully familiar with Army as well as CIA psyops.
“Psychological operations are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.[1]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States)
It has doubtless not escaped the attention of the Obama Admin. and DOD that troop morale is lower than desired and approval of Obama and confidence in his legitimacy is also slipping as the Afghanistan push approaches.
It is illegal for the Army and CIA to conduct psyops against US citizens except in cases of “emergency.” But the skill-set and experience in applying these political manipulation techniques is there in the Army and CIA personnel. At a minimum, when those personnel retire or are not actively deployed, their skills could be solicited and employed by non-government entities to manipulate target portions of the US public.
Entities who could be hiring retired or non-active psyops-trained Army/CIA personnel could be cut-outs with plausible deniablility to US govenment entities or funded by parties with specific agendas. These agendas could be political or economic.
Of concern to me are advisers close to Obama who have declared that “conspiracy theories” should be actively suppressed in the media and on the internet blogs using paid operatives to post comments refuting what the government determines to be conspiracy theories. There appears to be circumstantial evidence that bloggers and commenters who investigate theories and share them have even been targeted with trojan viruses to cripple their computers in a kind of internet sniper attack.
WKA has been the linchpin of what I consider to be the psyops campaign by Obama’s team and if the DOJ/DIA felt that protecting Obama’s legitimacy for the troops was an emergency, then protecting WKA becomes a fight to the death.
LTC Lankin’s act of conscience may have generated an underground wave of support in active duty troops both in internet buzz and financial contributions that the WH/DOJ/DOD may be monitoring.
It is not hard to anticipate that a psyops operation might have been launched to post comments on sites where Lakin has some support, such as FR. An operative with prior posting history would be perfect.
The psyops operatives would post comments that would attempt to mock Lakin by claiming that WKA is settled law and validates Obama’s legitimacy because SCOTUS and the political establishment could have contested Obama’s NBC status, but didn’t.
The psyops operative would attempt to delegitimize Lakin by accusing him of dishonorably attempting to avoid deployment.
Of course, this may have nothing to do with you.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2504697/posts?page=420#420
Another courtesy ping to Seize.