Free Republic

During the first year of OVOMITS USURPATION of the Office of the President, there was a group that organized a GRAND JURY and went about inditing OVOMIT. OK ---so what happened? Why weren't any charges pressed?

The answer to the question is simple — He can’t show what he does not have.

We can only hope. How’s that for change?

There’s no such thing as a birthers.

We’re CONSTITUTIONALISTS

Home page where this info came from:

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=26474

Posted by fadestyle on 10/15/09 10:47 AM

Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty, Claims British Lord

Fightin’ Words
October 15, 2009

The Minnesota Free Market Institute hosted an event at Bethel University in St. Paul on Wednesday evening. Keynote speaker Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, gave a scathing and lengthy presentation, complete with detailed charts, graphs, facts, and figures which culminated in the utter decimation of both the pop culture concept of global warming and the credible threat of any

significant anthropomorphic climate change.

A detailed summary of Monckton’s presentation will be available here once compiled. However, a segment of his remarks justify immediate publication. If credible, the concern Monckton speaks to may well prove the single most important issue facing the American nation, bigger than health care, bigger than cap and trade, and worth every citizen’s focused attention.

Here were Monckton’s closing remarks, as dictated from my audio recording:

At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen, this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed. Your president will sign it. Most of the third world countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regime from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it.

I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” - because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.

How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once. So, at last, the communists who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental movement, who took over Greenpeace so that my friends who funded it left within a year, because [the communists] captured it - Now the apotheosis as at hand. They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.

[laughter]

And the trouble is this; if that treaty is signed, if your Constitution says that it takes precedence over your Constitution (sic), and you can’t resign from that treaty unless you get agreement from all the other state parties - And because you’ll be the biggest paying country, they’re not going to let you out of it.

So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege merely to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free. But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever. And neither you nor any subsequent government you may elect will have any power whatsoever to take it back. That is how serious it is. I’ve read the treaty. I’ve seen this stuff about [world] government and climate debt and enforcement. They are going to do this to you whether you like it or not.

But I think it is here, here in your great nation, which I so love and I so admire - it is here that perhaps, at this eleventh hour, at the fifty-ninth minute and fifty-ninth second, you will rise up and you will stop your president from signing that dreadful treaty, that purposeless treaty. For there is no problem with climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to [help] it.

So I end by saying to you the words that Winston Churchill addressed to your president in the darkest hour before the dawn of freedom in the Second World War. He quoted from your great poet Longfellow:

Sail on, O Ship of State!

Sail on, O Union, strong and great!

Humanity with all its fears,

With all the hopes of future years,

Is hanging breathless on thy fate!

Lord Monckton received a standing ovation and took a series of questions from members of the audience. Among those questions were these relevent to the forthcoming Copenhagen treaty:

Question: The current administration and the Democratic majority in Congress has shown little regard for the will of the people. They’re trying to pass a serious government agenda, and serious taxation and burdens on future generations. And there seems to be little to stop them. How do you propose we stop Obama from doing this, because I see no way to stop him from signing anything in Copenhagen. I believe that’s his agenda and he’ll do it.

I don’t minimize the difficulty. But on this subject - I don’t really do politics, because it’s not right. In the end, your politics is for you. The correct procedure is for you to get onto your representatives, both in the US Senate where the bill has yet to go through (you can try and stop that) and in [the House], and get them to demand their right of audience (which they all have) with the president and tell him about this treaty. There are many very powerful people in this room, wealthy people, influential people. Get onto the media, tell them about this treaty. If they go to www.wattsupwiththat.com, they will find (if they look carefully enough) a copy of that treaty, because I arranged for it to be posted there not so long ago. Let them read it, and let the press tell the people that their democracy is about to be taken away for no good purpose, at least [with] no scientific basis [in reference to climate change]. Tell the press to say this. Tell the press to say that, even if there is a problem [with climate change], you don’t want your democracy taken away. It really is as simple as that.

Question: Is it really irrevocable if that treaty is signed? Suppose it’s signed by someone who does not have the authority, as I - I have some, a high degree of skepticism that we do have a valid president there because I -

I know at least one judge who shares your opinion, sir, yes.

I don’t believe it until I see it. ... Would [Obama’s potential illegitimacy as president] give us a reasonable cause to nullify whatever treaty that he does sign as president?

I would be very careful not to rely on things like that. Although there is a certain amount of doubt whether or not he was born in Hawaii, my fear is it would be very difficult to prove he wasn’t born in Hawaii and therefore we might not be able to get anywhere with that. Besides, once he’s signed that treaty, whether or not he signed it validly, once he’s signed it and ratified it - your Senate ratifies it - you’re bound by it. But I will say one thing; they know, in the White House, that they won’t be able to get the 67 votes in the Senate, the two-thirds majority that your Constitution has stipulated must be achieved in order to ratify a treaty of this kind. However, what they’ve worked out is this - and they actually let it slip during the election campaign, which is how I know about it. They plan to enact that Copenhagen treaty into legislation by a simple majority of both houses. That they can do. But the virtue of that - and here you have a point - is that is, thank God, reversible. So I want you to pray tonight, and pray hard for your Senate that they utterly refuse to ratify the [new] Treaty of Copenhagen, because if they refuse to ratify it and [Obama] has to push it through as domestic legislation, you can repeal it.

Regardless of whether global warming is taking place or caused to any degree by human activity, we do not want a global government empowered to tax Americans without elected representation or anything analogous to constitutional protections. The Founding Fathers would roll over in their graves if they knew their progeny allowed a foreign power such authority, effectively undoing their every effort in an act of Anti-American Revolution. If that is our imminent course, we need to put all else on hold and focus on stopping it. If American sovereignty is ceded, all other debate is irrelevant.

Edited to add @ 8:31 am:

Skimming through the treaty, I came across verification of Monckton’s assessment of the new entity’s purpose:

38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

World Government (heading added)

(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

To Redistribute Wealth (heading added)

b) The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to address loss and damage from climate change impacts [read: the “climate debt” Monckton refers to], including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, © a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest incentives relating to REDD actions.

With Enforcement Authority (heading added)

© The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; © a short-term technology action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange [read; enforcement].

Please watch this video!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5dOgbu40

No not a newbe and not an OBOT.

I hope they hang OVOMIT by his balls.

Like Judge CArter I too was a Marine that swore to uphold the Constitution.

CARTER DISMISSED ORLY TAITZ’S AND GARY KREEP’S ENTIRE LAWSUIT

IN A STUNNING REVERSAL, JUDGE CARTER DISMISSED ORLY TAITZ’S AND GARY KREEP’S ENTIRE LAWSUIT IN SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA, TODAY, OCTOBER 5, 2009!

MEANWHILE, IN GEORGIA, JUDGE LAND ISSUED $10,000 IN SANCTIONS AGAINST ORLY TAITZ. SINCE SHE HAS NEVER HAD A PAYING CLIENT (ALL HER WORK ON “THE UNHOLY CRUSADE” TO REMOVE OBAMA HAS BEEN DONE PRO BONO), THIS MEANS HER NET INCOME FROM PRACTICING LAW IS MINUS TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. PERHAPS SHE SHOULD RETURN TO THE PRACTICE OF DENTISTRY, WHERE SHE WAS ONLY SUED SIX TIMES FOR DENTAL MAL PRACTICE.

IN SANTA ANA, JUDGE CARTER NOTED THAT:

• IN HIS COURT, ORLY CLAIMED JUDGE LAND IN GEORGIA HAD RULED THAT MEMBERS OF THE MILITARY, SUCH AS CAPTAIN CONNIE RHODES, HAD “STANDING,” AND THAT JUDGE CARTER WAS BOUND BY “PRECEDENT” TO FIND THAT HER PLAINTIFFS ALSO HAD “STANDING”.

• BUT IN JUDGE LAND’S COURT, ORLY’S MOTION TO RECUSE COMPLAINED VEHEMENTLY THAT JUDGE LAND HAD NOT, REPEAT NOT GIVEN CAPTAIN RHODES “STANDING”.

JUDGE CARTER ASKED ORLY, “WHICH JUDGE ARE YOU LYING TO, ME OR JUDGE LAND?”

HE ALSO EXPLAINED THAT ONLY THE CONGRESS, NOT THE COURTS, HAVE THE POWER TO DECIDE ON THE ELIGIBILITY OF THE UNITED STATES PRESIDENT. HE SAID THAT ALL ORLY’S EVIDENCE WAS SO MUCH BULLSHIT, ESPECIALLY THE TWO FORGED KENYAN BIRTH CERTIFICATES.

HE SAID THAT ALL ORLY’S EXHIBITS WERE THE EXACT SAME EXHIBITS AS SHE GAVE TO CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS IN MOSCOW, IDAHO IN APRIL. “IF CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS DIDN’T ACT ON THESE PAPERS, WHY SHOULD I?”

AND HE NOTED THAT THERE ARE FEWER THAN SIX LAWYERS, OUT OF 1.2 MILLION LAWYERS IN AMERICA, WHO THINK OBAMA’S DUAL CITIZENSHIP WOULD DISQUALIFY HIM FROM THE PRESIDENCY. “EVERYBODY KNOWS OBAMA’S FATHER WAS KENYAN — HE WROTE A WHOLE BOOK ABOUT IT,” SAID JUDGE CARTER. “IF THAT DISQUALIFIES HIM, WHY HASN’T THE SUPREME COURT PAID ANY ATTENTION TO THAT ARGUMENT?”

Orly’s case dismissed by Judge Carter.

Sur_Reply -— An additional reply to a motion filed after the motion has already been fully briefed.

In stating Canal Zone I was speaking in general of Panama. I agree with your statement and the location on the hospital, but the facts remains there was a contract(?) with the NAVY to provide health care for the troops and the civilian dependents. It’s because of this contract(?) that they are considering the hospital in the same manner embassies are treated.

HTTP://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/Keny ... bpoena.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... ucasSmith/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith01.png
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith02.png
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith03.jpg

This is all of the links that I can find.

I see that the HTML code didn’t print as it should.

The code is <> with a P in between the <>. This will force a new line.

Try putting

at the end of the sentence. Thats the HTML code to start a new paragraph. Make sure you use the <> symbols.

The Act of 1790 was superseded by the Naturalization Act of 1795 Naturalization Act of 1795 The United States Naturalization Act of January 29, 1795 repealed and replaced the Naturalization Act of 1790. The 1795 Act differed from the 1790 Act by increasing the period of required residence increased from two to five years in the United States, and introducing the Declaration of Intention requirement, or "first papers", which create...

. There is no mention of NOT granting "NATURAL BORN STATUS" in the 1795 Naturalization Act to a child born outside the U.S.. Checked several references ( Wikipedia, National Archives, ect.) and they all said basically the same thing.

From ObamaCrimes.com Kenyan Consul General Served With Subpoena

I think this could be the beginning of the downfall. Of course serving the Consul General doesn't mean someone in Kenya can't purge the records but at least something is happening. Email message follows here:

THIS WILL HOPEFULLY BE THE END OF OBAMA "ISSUE"...Dan Smith,NY

PAUL ANDREW MITCHELL HAS BEEN WITH THIS FROM THE START. Please read AFFADAVIT & DECLARATION by Lucas Daniel Smith Hat Tip to Paul Mitchell .......

Please Forward this out... In a message dated 9/5/2009 8:23:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, supremelawfirm@gmail.com writes:

Is it now time formally to serve a SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE?

, http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/Keny ... bpoena.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... ucasSmith/ http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith01.png http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith02.png http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith03.jpg

-- Sincerely yours, /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/p ... eneral.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice Declaration under Penalty of Perjury: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1746.html

From ObamaCrimes.com Kenyan Consul General Served With Subpoena I think this could be the beginning of the downfall. Of course serving the Consul General doesn't mean someone in Kenya can't purge the records but at least something is happening. Email message follows here: THIS WILL HOPEFULLY BE THE END OF OBAMA "ISSUE"...Dan Smith,NY PAUL ANDREW MITCHELL HAS BEEN WITH THIS FROM THE START. Please read AFFADAVIT & DECLARATION by Lucas Daniel Smith Hat Tip to Paul Mitchell ....... Please Forward this out... In a message dated 9/5/2009 8:23:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, supremelawfirm@gmail.com writes: Is it now time formally to serve a SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE? http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/Keny ... bpoena.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... ucasSmith/ http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith01.png http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith02.png http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith03.jpg -- Sincerely yours, /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a) http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/p ... eneral.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm All Rights Reserved without Prejudice Declaration under Penalty of Perjury: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1746.html

There’s still a lot of fuzziness around McCain’s NOT being qualified.

True he was born of two parents that were U. S. citizens and it’s true that he was born in a hospital in the Canal Zone, not on U. S. soil. However, the hospital may have been under contract to the U. S. at the time, which seems to be the case and it could be considered in the same manner as with U. S.Embassies being U. S. property (?). This is an issue that the Supreme Court will have to decide.

Another thing to think about is when was the hospital aboard the Naval Base built. It’s my understanding that it wasn’t built till after Johnny boy was hatched, by a couple of years. So anyone spouting off that he was born in the base needs to research their facts a lot more.

No, No, No....you got that wrong. The correct spelling is YOU’RE F’n FIRED!!!

And your proof is?