Posted on 01/11/2010 12:47:03 PM PST by Red Steel
It is my best guess that Obama’s attorneys figured that once Judge Carter dismissed it was over… far from it! Orly has come back with a strong offense. For sure the Justice Department (Obama, et al) is doing its best to stop Judge Carter from approving the transfer to Judge Lamberth in Washington DC. Orly filed a nice response to their opposition.
Below are some highlighted excerpts from the filing:
Orly has pointed out that Judge Carter promised to hear the case on its merits. The Justice Department defending Obama conned the Judge into dismissing and used the excuse of “jurisdiction” claiming only Quo Warranto can be brought in Washington DC.
Orly said, “fine, let’s move the case.” She is asking Judge Carter to move the case to Judge Lamberth’s court in DC. This would serve to best expedite the case, including discovery.
Orly is making sure that Judge Carter is aware of the fact that the Justice Department and Eric Holder have been stalling for many months now. An original Quo Warranto was filed in Judge Taylor’s Washington DC court (he has since retired.. couldn’t stand the heat in my opinion).. that was back in March, 2009. The Justice Department has done everyting in its power to stall, hide, ignore the case..
Orly is telling the Judge that the longer he waits to allow “we the people” to seek justice in court the more damage that Obama does to our Country. The Justice Department is basically defending a Usuper in office.. the entire system appears to be corrupt.. of course, Eric Holder is simply a puppet for Obama.
We hope and pray that Judge Carter allows this case to be transferred.. Obama will have a much tougher time getting the case dismissed in Washington DC if Carter allows the transfer.. Any kind of ruling against Obama will set a precedent that could literally force the Court into action.
**(_!_)**
I’ve heard about the games that groupies play... so don’t be coy now... :-)
No, it's "The Games People Play" by the Spinners, 1975 (which you are a master).
To be clear, I do not like you, I despise your posts, contribution's to this site and do not ever want to communicate with you again.
Do you get it? Is that "coy" enough for you?
Anyone who wishes nuclear disaster on this country to satisfy your political views is not a welcome debater to me, buzz off!
Anyone who wishes nuclear disaster on this country to satisfy your political views is not a welcome debater to me, buzz off!
Well, when you totally fabricate something, like that assertion, you gotta expect a response to that...
You just didn't read my post up above, to another poster, apparently.
The following from Post #300
and the post where she wished there would be a horrible terrorist attack and Americans killed just to make the Dems look bad. Clearly ST is demented.
Well, I don't know for sure if you're demented or not -- but -- I can tell you lack some good reading skills and you also lack some knowledge of what the Bush Administration said, too... :-)
Let me help you out here... so we can get you "up to speed" in a hurry...
As we all know (who have been keeping up on these Islamic terrorists and what our government has been saying and doing about it) -- we've heard multiple times from various Bush Administration officials in the past that it was a certainty that Islamic terrorists would succeed in a massive attack on the United States, at one time or another (but we didn't know when...), something on the scale of 9/11 or greater.
They've let us know repeatedly that this is the case. They've said it's "not a matter of if" but only "a matter of when"... and that they will certainly succeed.
The reasoning that they gave for that is that they've said that in order for us to succeed in preventing such an attack, we have to be perfect in preventing 100% of these kinds of attacks, while all the other side has to do is succeed at "only one such attack"....
The Islamic terrorists can fail 99 times and onlyl succeed one time in this kind of attack, and that's the big one that the government is talking about.
Now, I hope I've gotten you "up to speed now" -- since you've missed that part in the past.
AND..., another thing you may have missed in the past, apparently so, are several threads here on Free Republic, where our government (in the Bush Administration) has been making plans to set up large camps and facilities for handling larger populations that will be displaced from these kinds of terrorist attacks (that they've said they are guaranteed to happen and succeed). These large camps are meant for various kinds of disasters, and not only for Islamic terrorists, but there are being planned right now (and were during the Bush Administration and they were behind schedule in getting those camps completed for rescuing large populations that would be dislocated during any such major attack like they say is coming).
And so, again, another item to "get you up to speed"... :-)
NOW..., since you're up to speed on a few details that you were missing before, let's propose a scenario for you in the attack that is coming and will succeed, as the Bush Administration has been telling us, in the past, when they were in office. I don't think Obama is saying very much about it now, though (as a side-note here).
Two scenarios here... one is that such an attack happens during a Democrat Administration, you know... the one who continually denies the dangers of such an Islamic terrorist attacks and say that the conservatives and Republicans are to blame for these things in the first place.
The other scenario is that such an attack happens during a Republican Administration...
Between the two scenarios of what is going to be happening in the future, I would prefer that such an attack happen during a Democrat Administration and not during a Republican Administration.
Can you imagine what kind of havoc that the Democrats would try to place on a Republican Administration for them not keeping us safe, when such a things happens? I can imagine it... they're pretty good at doing that.
On the other hand, if this coming attack happens during a Democrat Administration, it will force them to deal with the realities of the Islamic terrorists -- something that we need to do anyway, and in any case. The only problem is that the Democrats always block any effective action on this. With this attack that is coming, they Democrats could not block the kind of effective action we need when such a thing happens, with it being on their watch...
That scenario is the preferable one of the two...
I hope you've gotten fully up to speed now... :-)
To be clear, I do not like you, I despise your posts, contribution's to this site and do not ever want to communicate with you again.
There's a real easy way to accomplish that...
You see..., I don't usually keep up a dialogue with anyone if they "don't dialogue" with me -- doncha know... :-)
What I find, many times, from some in the Obama Derangement Syndrome group -- is that they'll say, "I don't want to talk to you..." and then they'll keep right on talking themselves, back to me (or "about" me...) ... LOL...
I have never figured that one out yet.
So, if you don't talk to me, then I won't be talking to you. But, if you post a thread somewhere, I may post to that thread, just like all the other FReepers will post to that thread. Or if I see something that I might comment on, then I may post a single comment to it, if it happens to be you.
But, overall, I won't dialogue with you if you don't dialogue with me... that's generally the way it works for me.
Oh..., one more thing... I will "dialogue" if I find someone talking "about" me... :-)
Re: Spy chiefs turn on President Obama after seven CIA agents are slaughtered in Afghanistan
To Star Traveler | 01/03/2010 8:28:54 PM PST sent
Hey S.t.
Wow, that was an explosive post, and you know what, I think I agree with what your are trying to say though I think you could have done a better job articulating your point. You gave the impression that you were wishing it to happen rather than saying if it’s going to happen, it’s better on his watch. (Yes, I read your follow ups)
This Country needs a severe wake up call and with your post you pointed out some harsh realities, very difficult for some to face. The strange thing is, the very people who need to be woken up are the people most here, including me, would rather do without anyway.
Go figure
Your reply:
Re: Re: Spy chiefs turn on President Obama after seven CIA agents are slaughtered in Afghanistan
From Star Traveler | 01/04/2010 5:25:09 AM PST read
Yeah, you read it right. I really don’t know how many people really realize that our government is really preparing for a massive attack. Some that see this object to the preparations from fear that it’s meant for imprisoning our own citizens. I see it as the necessary preparations for when the massive attack eventually happens. And, of course as I’ve said already in the posts, I think if it happens during a Republican in office the liberals will ignore the real enemy of Islam and deflect blame on the Republicans. If it happens with a Democrat Administration, they will be forced to face up to the real enemy of Islam. Anyway... that’s my thinking on it... Thanks
I'll let fellow Freepers decide
Great idea!!! I will do that in the future. :)
I think this is the thread you were looking for...post #11.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2420170/posts
Wow, going through your posting history is a journey of sick, troll drowning in scum territory. Looking for the specific post which has apparently been deleted by the mods, the one where you called for a nuclear attack on out cities,
Sorry, never did call for that. But, I have repeated several times (many times, in fact) that the Bush Administration has made it clear to us that we're in for a major attack -- a certainty, they said.
It was told to us that it's not a matter of "if" but simply a matter of "when". And the reasoning was given to us this way. In order to prevent such an attack we have to be perfect, 100% of the time and stop all such attacks. But, for the Islamic terrorists to be successful in their endeavor to attack us -- all they have to be is successful once. They can fail 99 times and only succeed once -- and "that's it"... And they made it clear that the U.S. cannot succeed 100% of the time and that they were warning us that a major attack woudl get through.
Now, if anything, for people to ignore this certainty is sticking their heads in the sand and trying to pretend it's not true. It was amazing that the Bush Administration actually said that repeadedly to us, to wake us up to the facts.
And in case you didn't get it before, here's the post I did to another poster... about the same thing...
We'll try it once again for you... :-)
The following from Post #300
and the post where she wished there would be a horrible terrorist attack and Americans killed just to make the Dems look bad. Clearly ST is demented.
Well, I don't know for sure if you're demented or not -- but -- I can tell you lack some good reading skills and you also lack some knowledge of what the Bush Administration said, too... :-)
Let me help you out here... so we can get you "up to speed" in a hurry...
As we all know (who have been keeping up on these Islamic terrorists and what our government has been saying and doing about it) -- we've heard multiple times from various Bush Administration officials in the past that it was a certainty that Islamic terrorists would succeed in a massive attack on the United States, at one time or another (but we didn't know when...), something on the scale of 9/11 or greater.
They've let us know repeatedly that this is the case. They've said it's "not a matter of if" but only "a matter of when"... and that they will certainly succeed.
The reasoning that they gave for that is that they've said that in order for us to succeed in preventing such an attack, we have to be perfect in preventing 100% of these kinds of attacks, while all the other side has to do is succeed at "only one such attack"....
The Islamic terrorists can fail 99 times and onlyl succeed one time in this kind of attack, and that's the big one that the government is talking about.
Now, I hope I've gotten you "up to speed now" -- since you've missed that part in the past.
AND..., another thing you may have missed in the past, apparently so, are several threads here on Free Republic, where our government (in the Bush Administration) has been making plans to set up large camps and facilities for handling larger populations that will be displaced from these kinds of terrorist attacks (that they've said they are guaranteed to happen and succeed). These large camps are meant for various kinds of disasters, and not only for Islamic terrorists, but there are being planned right now (and were during the Bush Administration and they were behind schedule in getting those camps completed for rescuing large populations that would be dislocated during any such major attack like they say is coming).
And so, again, another item to "get you up to speed"... :-)
NOW..., since you're up to speed on a few details that you were missing before, let's propose a scenario for you in the attack that is coming and will succeed, as the Bush Administration has been telling us, in the past, when they were in office. I don't think Obama is saying very much about it now, though (as a side-note here).
Two scenarios here... one is that such an attack happens during a Democrat Administration, you know... the one who continually denies the dangers of such an Islamic terrorist attacks and say that the conservatives and Republicans are to blame for these things in the first place.
The other scenario is that such an attack happens during a Republican Administration...
Between the two scenarios of what is going to be happening in the future, I would prefer that such an attack happen during a Democrat Administration and not during a Republican Administration.
Can you imagine what kind of havoc that the Democrats would try to place on a Republican Administration for them not keeping us safe, when such a things happens? I can imagine it... they're pretty good at doing that.
On the other hand, if this coming attack happens during a Democrat Administration, it will force them to deal with the realities of the Islamic terrorists -- something that we need to do anyway, and in any case. The only problem is that the Democrats always block any effective action on this. With this attack that is coming, they Democrats could not block the kind of effective action we need when such a thing happens, with it being on their watch...
That scenario is the preferable one of the two...
I hope you've gotten fully up to speed now... :-)
We've already been told by our own people that this is going to happen. And I also agree with their assessment (with the Bush Administration and his officials) who have said that it's not a matter of "if" -- but only a matter of "when".
And as I've already said, that since we're talking about Islam being guaranteed to attack us again with a major attack and succeed (as our own officials have told us, repeatedly) -- it's better that this kind of thing happen sooner than later. It's all the quicker that we get to the business of attacking Islam and putting them back where they were before, instead of their third major push on Western civilization since they began.
I would even recommend a pre-emptive attack on Islam, if the U.S. and the Western Powers would do it, just like Israel has had to do in the past, too, in order to save itself from devastating losses.
We should do a pre-emptive attack on Islam and gut its ability to attack the West like it's been doing and is going to continue to do until it gets that devastating attack that our own officials tell us is going to happen.
However, I don't think we will launch any such pre-emptive attack on Islam, so I al left with the only other alternative, which is to wait for them to succeed in their own devastating attack, since this country does not really want to go to war with Islam and eliminate its threat on Western society.
from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2420170/posts?page=66#66
You were saying ...
Nuclear terror is inevitable? And the Bush Administration as a matter of official statements said so? Another act of terror most certainly was predicted and the Administration said it would occur and it has, as Ft. Hood illustrates this as does the underpants bomber attempt. But nuclear?
They didn't get real specific except for the fact that another major attack was inevitable, because we cannot prevent 100% of the attacks all the time. It's going to come, sooner or later. But, it was mentioned that it could be nuclear and/or biological, plus a few other kinds, too. There are government documents out there, for action, on how to prepare for this thing that is coming up and our government (at least during the Bush Administration) was making preparations for it. It's in the works. I don't know if the Obama Administration is still making those same kinds of plans or not, right now.
You write like you think you'd be avoiding the catastrophe you'd be content to visit upon others in order to make some sort of mass political epiphany come to pass.
No..., I figure that I've got just as good a chance as anyone else in getting caught in that kind of thing. I've flown on planes and I figure that I've got as good a chance as anyone else to get bombed out of the sky as you or the next person does. I've ridden on trains and there was one time that there was a guy taken off the train (on a long-distance ride on the Southwest Chief) because he said that there was a bomb on board and he pulled the emergency stop and everyone was diving out of the train when it stopped... [that was a sight to behold, too...]
And I can be shopping in the shopping center and it can be bombed by a guy walking around with a terrorist bomb-belt on him and I can get nailed just as quick as the next guy.
All that can happen and it makes no difference at all to reocgnizing the fact that we're going to have another major terrorist attack succeed, just like our own conservatives in government were telling us during this last administration. Considering how this present administration is handling things, I would say it's a lot more likely now...
You see..., it's not been me who has been the "authority" behind the statement that's it is going to happen. It's been our own people telling us this, and many seem to want to ignore it.
Now, if it's going to happen, then it's much better for it to happen sooner than later, for one thing. And for another thing, it's much better for it to happen during a Democrat Administration rather than a Republican.
Tell you what. You can terrorize Obama all by yourself. Just draw some nuclear attention to yourself by blowing yourself up with your own home-made, garage-forged nuke. Kind of like: You "glow" first. How 'bout it?
I'm not the one who is at war with the West. It's Islam that is at war with the West, so sorry..., you've got the "wrong idealogy" for engaging in terrorist attacks if you think I'm inclined to do so... LOL...
from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2420170/posts?page=76#76
ST's standard excuse to avoid the issue because her views are totally flawed.
You are a filthy LIAR
To: Skepolitic It couldn’t happen to a better President, than to happen on Obama’s watch that the Muslims attack the U.S. relentlessly. And I hope the Islamic terrorists make Obama’s watch one of the bloodiest and worst presidencies in the history of U.S. Presidents — from Muslims... Nothing better could happen on Obama’s watch — in order to shake people’s thinking up, in regards to “Obama-think” — than to have a massive Islamic terrorist attack on the U.S., and bomb several U.S. cities with nukes...
Thank you azishot :)
I'll try to get you up to speed here and sort it out for you, from another post on that thread... :-)
You were saying ...
Star Traveler has wished for this, not prophesied it. There is a hell of a difference. NO ONE on this board is as antagonistic to this administration and islam as I am, but I would never, never, never post something that actually wishes it on any American for any reason, let alone party politics. That post was pure evil.I don't think you've got the critical reading facilities -- which are needed to read some of these posts that I make... LOL... you need to brush up a bit on that.
First of all, you'll note that we've already been told, repeatedly by our own conservatives, in the former Bush Administration that we are in for a major terrorist attack that will succeed. Not only that, the Bush Administration was making solid and concrete preparations for that, and setting the government in motion for what to do with large displaced populations around the U.S. that would be affected by this sort of major terrorist attack.
They have also told us that this is a certainty that this will happen. It's not a matter of "if" it will happen, but it's a matter of "when" it will happen. They've said it in just those words. They've also told us repeatedly that we can't stop all the attacks, because for us to succeed in this endeavor (of stopping all the attacks) we have to be successful 100% of the time -- but on the other hand -- the terrorists only have to be successful (exactly) one time and one time only. Islam can fail 500 times in a row and succeed only once out of that 500 times and they've done it.
But, we can succeed 499 times in a row and fail just one out of 500 and we get it "big time" in a real and major way. Thus, the government has been making preparations for our population for evacuating major poplulation areas, setting up the people elsewhere and taking care of people when such a major attack happens. That's what has been going on with our government in the past -- at least with the Bush Administration.
I have no idea if the Obama Administration is continuing that kind of "thinking ahead" for such an event or not. Probably not.
So, if one were to ask if it's more likely or less likely during the Obama Administration, I would say "more likely" and it couldn't happen to a better President than Obama ...
From http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2420170/posts?page=109#109
ST's standard excuse to avoid the issue because her views are totally flawed.
I've been answering the issue pretty plainly and directly... it's just that some of the Obama Derangement Syndrome don't like the answers... that's all...
It pretty much goes like this, as I said in another post...
With this issue (as framed by many here...) it just comes down to these two things...
With "Birthplace" you get that from the State of Hawaii, according to their statement. Or if you don't like that, then you get a state law requiring it for candidates. That's all there is to it.
With "Citizenship of Parents" you have to get a Supreme Court decision for the relevance on "natural born" -- if you want to settle it.
And with those two things -- that's all she wrote... end of story...
And then also, I explained in another post the following to help someone else out... :-)
If you want to know if Obama was born in Hawaii, go to #1
If you want to see the birth certificate and see some other details and information, go to #2
If you want to get it sorted out and decided -- as to whether the parents' citizenship affects the status of a candidate as "natural born" -- then go to the Supreme Court, which is the #3
292 is “me” = the obsession!!!
POOOOH,I feel it’s time to take a real good shower, how about you, especially after readings and seeing the ST @ 292???
You did.
"You bring your pack of After-Birther's to shut down and inhibit discussion genius."
I’ll rephrase for clarity.
It’s self evident that you don’t have the power to zot the thread. And it’s obvious that you want to bring these threads to a halt if you could, or at the very least deflect discussion away from the subject.
Well, I would say that posting to me and about me — is the obsession that y’all have... LOL...
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.