Tag Archives: September 2

Obama seeks support for Syrian strike, September 2, 2013, Congressional approval, Lobbying blitz, Classified intelligence presented to congressmen, John McCain and Lyndsay Graham favor broader measures

Obama seeks support for Syrian strike, September 2, 2013, Congressional approval, Lobbying blitz, Classified intelligence presented to congressmen, John McCain and Lyndsay Graham favor broader measures

“we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to Al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.”…CIA Benghazi talking points memo

“400 US surface-to-air missiles were ‘STOLEN’ from Libya during the Benghazi attack and are ‘now in the hands of Al Qaeda’, claims whistleblower”…The Mail Online August 13, 2013

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”…Barack Obama

From the NY Times September 2, 2013.

“The Obama administration began a full-press campaign on Sunday for Congressional approval of its plan to carry out a punitive strike against the Syrian government.

The lobbying blitz stretched from Capitol Hill, where the administration held its first classified briefing on Syria open to all lawmakers, to Cairo, where Secretary of State John Kerry reached Arab diplomats by phone in an attempt to rally international support for a firm response to the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus.

Mr. Kerry appeared on five morning talk shows, announcing new evidence — that the neurotoxin sarin had been used in the attack that killed more than 1,400 people — and expressing confidence that Congress would ultimately back the president’s plan for military action.

Behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, the administration presented classified intelligence to any senator or House member who wished to attend. About 80 did, but some from both parties emerged from the briefing convinced that the draft language authorizing military action would need to be tightened.

The rush of activity came a day after Mr. Obama’s surprise decision to seek the authorization of Congress for a strike on the Syrian government.”

“Syria’s deputy foreign minister, Faisal Mekdad, told reporters in Damascus, “It is clear there was a sense of hesitation and disappointment in what was said by President Barack Obama yesterday. And it is also clear there was a sense of confusion, as well.”

In some measure, part of the challenge that the Obama administration faces in trying to rally support at home for a punitive strike in Syria is the result of the deep ambivalence it has expressed about becoming involved in the conflict.

Part of the White House strategy for securing Congressional support now is to emphasize not only what Syria did, but also how a failure to act against Syria might embolden enemies of Israel like Iran and Hezbollah.

Mr. Kerry, in his television appearances, said that if Congress passed a measure authorizing the use of force, it would send a firm message to Iran that the United States would not tolerate the fielding of a nuclear device, and thus safeguard Israel’s security.”

“Senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, both Republicans, have warned that they would not support “isolated military strikes in Syria” that were not part of a broader strategy to shift the momentum on the battlefield. Mr. Obama is scheduled to meet with Mr. McCain on Monday at the White House.”

Read more:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/world/middleeast/syria.html?_r=0

Citizen Wells opinion.

I oppose a strike against Syria at this juncture primarily for the following reasons.

No clear evidence has been presented of those responsible for alleged chemical attacks.

It is unclear what a strike against Syria would accomplish.

The devil I don’t know, which could replace the Assad regime, is of concern.

The track record of the Obama Administration is horrid. I do not trust them.

Obama has stated he will stand with Muslims.

John McCain and Lindsey Graham have no credibility. They both favor a strike.

Lt Col Lakin Hearing, September 2, 2010, Judge Lind ruling, Judge Lind incompetent treasonous and/or complicit in conspiracy

 Lt Col Lakin Hearing, September 2, 2010, Judge Lind ruling, Judge Lind incompetent treasonous and/or complicit in conspiracy

From World Net Daily September 2, 2010.

“A career officer in the U.S. Army acting as a judge in the court-martial process for Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin today ruled that the military is no place for Barak Obama’s eligibility to be president to be evaluated.

Army Col. Denise R. Lind today ruled in a hearing regarding the evidence that will be allowed in the scheduled October court-martial for Lakin that he will be denied access to any of Obama’s records as well as any testimony from those who may have access to those records.

With her decision, Lind plunged into lockstep with a number of federal judges who have ruled on civil lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility. They have without exception denied the plaintiffs’ any access to any requested documentation regarding the president’s eligibility.

Lind ruled that it was “not relevant” for the military to be considering such claims, that the laws allegedly violated by Lakin were legitimate on their face and that the chain of command led up to the Pentagon and that should have been sufficient for Lakin.

Paul Rolf Jensen, Lakin’s civilian attorney, said the case would continue. But he said the courts now have denied his client the opportunity to present his defense.

Jensen had argued that under U.S.C. Rule 46, a defendant being put on court martial has the right to call any and all witnesses and obtain any evidence in his or her defense.

Lind, who took 40 minutes to read her decision to the courtroom, disagreed.

She said opening up such evidence could be an “embarrassment” to the president and anyway, it should be Congress that would call for impeachment of a sitting president.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=198465

It is apparent that Judge Lind does not know her ass from a hole in the ground. First of all, impeachment is not necessary or appropriate for removing a usurper, an illegal occupant of the White House.

Judge Lind’s first duty is to uphold and defend the US Constitution. Secondary to that is her duty as a judge to the defendant, the court and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

In regard to her statement about embarassment of Obama. First of all, Obama is not POTUS. Secondly, this situation of a usurper occupying the White House is already an embarassment to the nation.

I will comment further on this decision soon.

Terry Lakin court martial hearing, September 2, 2010, Judge denies request for Obama records

Terry Lakin court martial hearing, September 2, 2010, Judge denies request for Obama records

From ABC News 25

“A military judge in Maryland has refused to order the release of school records that could include a copy of President Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

The documents were sought by an Army doctor, Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who is being court-martialed for disobeying a deployment order because he doubts Obama’s qualifications to serve as commander in chief.

The judge ruled Thursday that those records and any other evidence or witnesses pertaining to Obama’s birth are not relevant to the case and will not be admitted. Prosecutors have argued that Obama’s birth certificate shouldn’t be part of the case, especially since the order for Lakin to deploy to Afghanistan didn’t come directly from the president.”

Read more:

http://www.news25.us/Global/story.asp?S=13091049

Obama not natural born citizen, The Blaze, Glenn Beck, Call me, Citizen Wells open thread, September 2, 2010

Obama not natural born citizen, The Blaze, Glenn Beck, Call me, Citizen Wells

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

Glenn Beck stated that he started The Blaze, TheBlaze.com, to counteract misinformation from websites like the Huffington Post. I will not let Beck get away with insulting concerned Americans who question Obama’s eligibility. Especially three star generals.

http://citizenwells.com/2010/09/01/the-blaze-theblaze-com-lakin-court-martial-glenn-beck-v-arianna-huffington/

From the Citizen Wells archives December 28, 2008.

“Why I ask, should not the ‘injunctions and prohibitions’ addressed by
the people in the Constitution to the States and the Legislatures of
States, be enforced by the people through the proposed amendment?” 
“The oath, the most solemn compact which man can make with his Maker,
was to bind the State Legislatures, executive officers, and judges to
sacredly respect the Constitution and all the rights secured by it.”
Rep. Bingham (See Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1090 (1866))

“To understand the intent of the founding fathers in using the words
“natural born citizen”, to define presidential eligibility, one must
first examine any influential documents and opinions from those
involved in crafting the US Constitution. What is clear and indisputable
is the following:

  • A naturalized citizen is a citizen by no act of law such as naturalization.
  • A child born to US citizens on US soil is a natural born citizen.
  • The Naturalization Act of 1790 provided the following:

“the children of citizens of the United States that may
be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United
States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens””

“Vattel’s “The Law of Nations”, written in 1758, was a
valuable reference guide for the founding fathers.

Ҥ 212. Citizens and natives.
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.”

“Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice John Jay, on
July 25, 1787, wrote the following to George Washington:

“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide
a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration
of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the commander
in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any
but a natural born citizen.””

“The Lightfoot lawsuit in CA states the obvious:

“This letter shows that the meaning of natural born citizen, is one
without allegiance to any foreign powers, not subject to any foreign
jurisdiction at birth.””

“After the US Constitution was written, further
clarifications can be found

“All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign
power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the
United States.”

1866, Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised

“every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of
parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the
language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.””

“Rep. Bingham on Section 1992 (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

“Bingham subscribed to the same view as most everyone in Congress at the
time that in order to be born a citizen of the United States one must be
born within the allegiance of the Nation. Bingham had explained that to
be born within the allegiance of the United States the parents, or more
precisely, the father, must not owe allegiance to some other foreign
sovereignty (remember the U.S. abandoned England’s “natural allegiance”
doctrine). This of course, explains why emphasis of not owing allegiance
to anyone else was the affect of being subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States.””

“United States v. Wong Kim Ark, March 28, 1898 Reveals the following:

“Nevertheless, Congress has persisted from 1795 in rejecting the English
rule and in requiring the alien who would become a citizen of the United
States, in taking on himself the ties binding him to our Government, to
affirmatively sever the ties that bound him to any other.”

“It is beyond dispute that the most vital constituent of the English
common law rule has always been rejected in respect of citizenship of
the United States.”

“Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution,
I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that “natural-born citizen”
applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United
States, irrespective of circumstances, and that the children of foreigners,
happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of
royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race,
were eligible to the Presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad,
were not.”

“Greisser was born in the State of Ohio in 1867, his father being a German
subject and domiciled in Germany, to which country the child returned.
After quoting the act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment, Mr. Secretary
Bayard said:

Richard Greisser was no doubt born in the United States, but he was on his
birth “subject to a foreign power,” and “not subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States.” He was not, therefore, under the statute and the
Constitution a citizen of the United States by birth, and it is not
pretended that he has any other title to citizenship.”

“And it was to prevent the acquisition of citizenship by the children of
such aliens merely by birth within the geographical limits of the United
States that the words were inserted.

Two months after the statute was enacted, on June 16, 1866, the Fourteenth
Amendment was proposed, and declared ratified July 28, 1868. The first
clause of the first section reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
wherein they reside.

The act was passed and the amendment proposed by the same Congress, and it
is not open to reasonable doubt that the words “subject to the jurisdiction
thereof” in the amendment were used as synonymous with the words “and not
subject to any foreign power” of the act.””

“Perkins v Elg, 307 U.S. 325,328 (1939) differentiates between a US citizen
and a natural born citizen.  Ms. Elg, was born in Brooklyn, NY to an
American mother and a Swedish father was a US citizen, but not a natural
born citizen.”

The entire article can be and should be read here:

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/28/natural-born-citizen-obama-is-not-eligible-obama-birth-certificate-us-constitution-founding-fathers-intent-lawsuits-obama-kenyan-vattel%e2%80%99s-the-law-of-nations-john-jay-berg-donofrio-k/