Perhaps they are not new. Perhaps they are not collecting a database for the IRS to audit or other agencies and officers of the Government to pursue. I have heard of them before, and perhaps by my suspicion I wrong them.
As for the statement:
“The new ones who show up at the meeting screaming “Blow it up!” and “Burn it down!” are usually the government informants.”, this has been proven time and again to be the case, whether or not it applies in this case.
But what a wealth of data could be gathered if everyone were to
Simply complete this form...
Title:
First Name:
Last Name:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City:
State:
Zip:
Country:
Phone:
Email:
Confirm email:
Plenty of data there, but wait, there's more!
Add Family Members in your Household
(Note: one e-mail update per family will be sent to your e-mail address above.)
First Name: Last Name :
First Name: Last Name :
First Name: Last Name :
First Name: Last Name :
First Name: Last Name :
Please check all that apply (important):
>snip< [a list of issues of concern followed]
Now, I have heard, as I said, of Grassfire, and especially on the Border and illegal immigration.
Perhaps I am being unfair, but I would think twice before I listed family members by name anywhere on the web.
YMMV
“From what I have seen of the first part of the article, citing the arrival of a nation whose leader is as yet devoid of any lawful authority seems premature.”
With Reid and Pelosi already in office and in the highest Congressional positions, and already preparing the way for Obamanesque legislation, whi IS in charge. It appears Obama is conducting more press conferences than the sitting president.
We are in slightly more than a “transition.”
The nearly bullet proof legislation of the next Congress is already being prepared with great velocity.
Who IS in charge?
We seem to be willing to give the same ID information to any government agency that asks for the same.
I don’t believe we are too early for a concerted resistence. We should have been resisting already . . . more than 20 years ago . . . what we saw is coming down the pike.
According to my lights, the distilled question can be stated this way:
In 1961, would the United States government consider a child born in Hawaii of an American mother and a UK subject to have dual citizenship?
What might be helpful to the cause is if a lot of people were to pose this question to their local office of the State Department in their respective cities. I’m in Boston, so I can do it here.
What do you all think? Where are you located? Are you willing to pose this question - in writing or in person - in order to further the effort to arrive at an understanding of the true circumstances of Obama’s citizenship?
Let’s do it! Or do you see a flaw in my “magic question”?
[Background: I did read on a non-government site something about how the U.S. recognition of dual citizenship had changed in the last ten years, so perhaps in 1961, it wasn’t recognized. But it’s hard to believe that Obama Sr. would have been prevented from exercising his parental right to take the child to Kenya if he so chose. In that case, I cannot believe the U.S. would have prevented him and said it was because Obama Sr. did not give UK allegiance to his son at birth.
Here’s the site: http://www.uscitizenship.info/citizenship-library-dual.htm
And here’s the text:
4. I heard that the US and Canada don’t allow Dual Citizenship. Is this true?
This is incorrect. Both the US and Canada now allow their citizens to hold multiple citizenships. Most references to the contrary are out of date since this has been resolved for at least ten years in the case of the United States and over twenty in the case of Canada. Note that the respective governments often couch dual citizenship in negative terms as few governments like to lose control over their citizens.]
—–
Of course, we know that this is the text today:
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html
Dual Nationality
The concept of dual nationality means that a person is a citizen of two countries at the same time. Each country has its own citizenship laws based on its own policy.Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice. For example, a child born in a foreign country to U.S. citizen parents may be both a U.S. citizen and a citizen of the country of birth.
A U.S. citizen may acquire foreign citizenship by marriage, or a person naturalized as a U.S. citizen may not lose the citizenship of the country of birth.U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another. Also, a person who is automatically granted another citizenship does not risk losing U.S. citizenship. However, a person who acquires a foreign citizenship by applying for it may lose U.S.
citizenship. In order to lose U.S. citizenship, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign citizenship voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. citizenship.
Intent can be shown by the person’s statements or conduct.The U.S.
Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person’s allegiance.
However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries.
Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there.Most U.S. citizens, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States. Dual nationals may also be required by the foreign country to use its passport to enter and leave that country. Use of the foreign passport does not endanger U.S.
citizenship.Most countries permit a person to renounce or otherwise lose citizenship.
Information on losing foreign citizenship can be obtained from the foreign country’s embassy and consulates in the United States. Americans can renounce U.S. citizenship in the proper form at U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.
Steve Elliott
President, Grassfire.org
Steve Elliott is a nationally recognized Internet communications specialist and grassroots political leader. He is the President of Grassfire.org, one the nation’s largest online grassroots citizen action networks which has grown in just a few years to more than one million active participants.
Under Steve’s leadership, Grassfire.org has rallied citizens on a host of grassroots issues, including border security, tax reform, abortion, traditional marriage, supporting our troops, exposing media bias and defending the Pledge of Allegiance. Grassfire has been at the forefront of the effort to secure our borders and stop illegal immigration, rallying over 630,000 petition signers and hundreds of thousands of phone calls and faxes to Congress. Grassfire has also been leading the grassroots effort calling on the President to pardon imprisoned U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.
Steve has been a guest on dozens of radio and television shows including Fox News’ Neil Cavuto, CNN, CNBC, Alan Colmes, Mike Gallagher, Glenn Beck and Janet Parshall. He is the author of The Grassfire Effect: How One Small Spark Can Change Your World (2005: Broadman & Holman) which outlines a fundamental principle of individual and organizational growth. A graduate of Regent University (M.A. Public Policy), Steve is also the author of 21 Supreme Court Issues Facing America (2006) which applies a conservative model for the judiciary to today’s issues.
Steve resides in Virginia with his wife, Stacy and their five children