Archive for the ‘Judicial’ category

Barack Hussein Obama; Is He Eligible or Not-What is He Hiding? Follow up

October 21, 2008

Barack Hussein Obama; Is He Eligible or Not-What is He Hiding? Follow up

Is it legal or “A Birth Certificate Change You Can Believe In?” Change you can believe in by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive. (Ephesians 4:14) https://worldviewpoints.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/

“Pennsylvania Democrat Philip J. Berg, who filed a lawsuit demanding Sen. Barack Obama present proof of his American citizenship, now says that by failing to respond Obama has legally “admitted” to the lawsuit’s accusations, including the charge that the Democratic candidate was born in Mombosa, Kenya.” According to Berg, “…Obama has legally admitted he is not a natural-born citizen.” http://www.worldnetdaily.com/

“Hawai’i Supreme Court asked to issue emergency writ opening secret Obama birth files.
Andy Martin expands efforts to pry loose Barack Obama’s birth secrets.” http://contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/

http://contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/2008/10/hawaii-supreme-court-petition

Advertisements

Barack Obama— A Victory for All Americans? What?

July 29, 2007

Barack Obama— A Victory for All Americans? What?
Maybe the Senator meant to say, it was a victory for all illegal aliens. Unfortunately, those are the words of just another “Washington wanna-be”, a “WWB”, who is a hypocrite.

(Hypocrisy is the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion, being hypocritical is with a false appearance of what is good; a hypocrite is an actor or pretender of virtue and fairness.)

The WorldNetDaily.com reports that, “[T]he presidential hopeful praised the recent court decision overturning one city’s attempt to protect itself from hostile foreigners filling their streets with drugs, crime and gangs as “a victory for all Americans.”” www.worldnetdaily.com/news/

In his own divisive comment, Senator Obama suggests that this is a victory for all Americans! He wants to be the President of the United States, but does not allow local communities to act in their best interest and thus the best “interests of our national and economic security”.

Now, in his own divisive, exploitive and hypocritical quote from barackobama.com: “Barack Obama believes the immigration issue has been exploited by politicians to divide the nation rather than find real solutions. This divisiveness has allowed the illegal immigration problem to worsen, with borders that are less secure than ever and an economy that depends on millions of workers living in the shadows. Obama believes we must rise above divisive politics and act in the interests of our national and economic security. Obama has played a leading role in crafting comprehensive immigration reform and believes that our broken immigration system can only be fixed by putting politics aside and offering a solution that strengthens our security while reaffirming our heritage as a nation of immigrants.” www.barackobama.com/issues/

“Some of the most violent criminals at large today are illegal aliens. Yet in cities where the crime these aliens commit is highest, the police cannot use the most obvious tool to apprehend them: their immigration status.” “Sanctuary laws are a testament to the political power of immigrant lobbies.” www.cis.org/articles/

That report was as of 2004, how much worst are things now? How many more lives have been lost because of politically correct self-serving politicians like Senator Obama (a so called Christian)?

What about this Senator Obama? “MS-13 is attempting to become a unified criminal enterprise operating under one leadership.” “The Washington Times has obtained a copy of the letter and an Army intelligence presentation on the growth of MS-13, or Mara Salvatrucha.” http://washingtontimes.com/

Or, Senator Obama, what about this then? “Using the GAO report, Representative Steve King of Iowa points out that 25 Americans, on average, are killed by illegal aliens every day (about evenly split between motor vehicle accidents and outright murder).”
“Do the math: That works out to more than 9,000 deaths per year, or more than 36,000 deaths over the past four years. That’s more than ten times the number of Americans killed in Iraq over the past four years!” “Oddly, I’ve seen people in my hometown protesting against the war in Iraq, but I’ve never seen anyone protesting against the illegal alien invasion that is killing tens of thousands of Americans right here on our own soil.” www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/

Or, Senator Obama, you may need an education, so try this. “The Statue of Liberty is a monument dedicated to freedom and liberty. She never meant that foreigners have the right to violate America’s immigration laws.” “Calling an illegal alien an undocumented immigrant is like calling a burglar an uninvited house guest.” www.illegalaliens.us/

And Senator Obama wants to be the Chief Law enforcement executive for the United States of America? Sorry Senator Obama, other socialists Democrats, and weak compromising Republicans we already have a “chief non law enforcement executive” occupying the White House—we do not need another.

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.” (Matthew 23:27)

The 16th Amendment and Income Taxes?

July 26, 2007

The 16th Amendment and Income Taxes?
Amendment XVI (1913)-The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration.
“…Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21)

According to Attorney Thomas Cryer, “[Working] is a God-given fundamental right that is protected under the Constitution and can’t be taxed any more than exercising freedom of speech.”www.worldnetdaily.com

WorldNetDaily.com reports that, “The Internal Revenue Service has lost a lawyer’s challenge in front of a jury to prove a constitutional foundation for the nation’s income tax, and the victorious attorney now is setting his sights higher.”

Attorney, Thomas Cryer [LSU Law School, Baton Rouge, LA, J.D. 1973, Honor Graduate] has taken on the IRS and has won a precedent setting case. http://www.youtube.com/

WND said that Cryer “argued that income is not necessarily any money that comes to a person, but rather categories such as profit and interest.” The article goes on to state that Cryer asserts that, “There’s no law making the average working man liable [for income taxes], there’s no law or regulation that allows the IRS to contend that earnings are 100 percent profit received in exchange for nothing, and the right to earn a living through any lawful occupation is a constitutionally protected fundamental right, and it is exempt from taxation.”

Attorney Cryer had asked the IRS to show him the legal authority that made him liable for the income tax but the IRS did not respond.

Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.
Mark Chapter 12 of the Bible says;
14: And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?
15: Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it.
16: And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar’s.
17: And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him. (Mark 12:14-17)

Have we as citizens of the U.S. rendered more to “Caesar” than his due?

In this writers opinion there is a major legal threshold issue also, and that is, is there truly a legally ratified Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?

“Bill Benson’s findings, published in “The Law That Never Was,” make a convincing case that the 16th amendment was not legally ratified and that Secretary of State Philander Knox was not merely in error, but committed fraud when he declared it ratified in February 1913. What follows is a summary of some of the major findings for many of the states, showing that their ratifications were not legal and should not have been counted.”
www.givemeliberty.org/taxes/notratified

According to his Motion to Dismiss (United States v. Tommy K. Cryer No. 06-50164-01 Western District of Louisiana Shreveport Division) Cryer argues that, “It is, therefore, respectfully submitted that insofar as the government purports to apply the income tax law as imposing a tax on wages, salaries and fees personally earned, it is in conflict with Article I, § 9, cl. 4, of the Constitution, and is, as so applied, unconstitutional and not entitled to enforcement.”

In his Motion, Attorney Cryer goes on to state that, “Based upon recent cases involving claims that wages are not income there is an apparently common misconception, an erroneous understanding or belief, that the issue of whether wages, salaries and fees personally earned are “income” within the meaning of the income tax law and, particularly, “within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment”, has been settled. It has not. One government official contends that wages are constitutionally taxable income because the Supreme Court has not found them to be otherwise.”

The LieFreeZone Website says “THE TRUTH: The income tax law, although it is carefully written to APPEAR otherwise, does not actually tax your wages, salaries and fees that you earn yourself because the Constitution does not allow the federal government to tax those earnings.”

The Site further states that “The Sixteenth Amendment DID NOT authorize the federal government to tax your PERSONALLY earned wages, but only that part of your wages that is PROFIT, or GAIN above and beyond what you gave up in order to receive them. Can you say what part of your wages are above and beyond your personal investment in earning them?” www.gcstation.net/liefreezone/

Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. The question is, have we as citizens of the U.S. rendered more to “Caesar” than his due?

They Will Not Let It Die—So, Consider This.

June 15, 2007

They Will Not Let It Die—So, Consider This.

“To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.” (Ecclesiastes 3:1). And there is a time to kill the “Immigration Bill”; a time to let it die.

They will not let the “Alien Immigration-Amnesty/Backdoor Plea Bargain Bill” die. https://worldviewpoints.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/

So, consider this:

“People who are pushing for a “guest worker” program show not the slightest interest in what has been happening under guest worker programs in Europe. Facts are apparently irrelevant.”

So is logic. “Guests are people you invite to your home.” …“Home invaders are people who break in, despite doors that have been shut to keep them out.”

“As for facts, guest workers from Third World countries have created centers of crime and violence in Europe, and some guest worker communities have become breeding grounds for terrorists.”

“Today’s illegal immigrants are too often analogized to early 20th century immigrants from Europe. But their situation is far more similar to that of contemporary “guest workers” in Europe.” —A Home Invader Program?, By Thomas Sowell
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2007/06/14

So, if our “leaders” are serious about a real “Alien Home Invasion Plan” then a start might be “The O’Reilly Plan”. The No Spin Immigration Solution—by Bill O’Reilly

Outline:
1) Secure the Southern Border
a. 700 miles of barrier
b. double the border patrol and back them up with 10,000 National Guards people.

2) Require All Illegal Aliens to Register
a. at the post office with Homeland Security.
b. given a tamper proof ID card, designating their temporary status and their right to work.
c. if the illegal aliens do not register, it’s a criminal felony.
d. subjecting the person to immediate deportation or jail time.

3) Business Executive Fines and Possible Prison Time
a. for hiring an illegal worker who doesn’t have a tamper proof ID card.

4) Illegal Alien Z-visa Case Review
a. by federal authorities decide who would stay. (No blanket amnesty, allowing rational decisions about who’s helping America and who isn’t).
b. No illegal alien who commits a crime while here would be allowed to stay.
c. No welfare of any kind would be paid to folks here illegally. They’d have to work for their living. http://www.billoreilly.com/currentarticle

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.” (Ecclesiastes 3:1)

Hillary Clinton: Statement of Pure Evil—“A Woman’s Right to Choose…”

April 18, 2007

Hillary Clinton: Statement of Pure Evil—“A Woman’s Right to Choose…”

4/18/2007-Hillary Clinton: From the Senate: Statement on Supreme Court’s Gonzales v. Carhart Decision; Washington, DC — “This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman’s right to choose and recognized the importance of women’s health. Today’s decision blatantly defies the Court’s recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.” http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=1451

A Statement of Pure Evil—A Woman’s Right to Choose (to Kill their Baby)—addition added by this writer.

This is pure evil; how can a mother say that the rights and lives of women must be taken into account over the partial-birth abortion of a baby? What about the rights of fathers? Partial-birth abortion is one of the most evil and barbaric voluntary acts committed by humans.

[See excerpts quoted below from the Supreme Court Decision-and you be the judge]

Erosion of what constitutional rights?—you do not have a constitutional right to kill your baby? Maybe Hillary Clinton can show us where in the U.S Constitution it gives women the right to kill their baby.

Just because, in the past, there was an evil decision made by fallible Supreme Court Judges (mere men and women) does not mean that the U.S Constitution gives women the right to kill their baby.

Hillary Clinton, and any other human being, must have a “conscience seared with a hot iron” to really believe that killing a baby by choice is a constitutional right. This is merely “lies in hypocrisy” by a liberal politician seeking power.

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;” “Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;” (1Timothy 4:1-2)

Now, you be the judge!

The following statements are quotes from the Supreme Court Decision: Gonzales v. Carhart; No. 05-380 April 18, 2007

Decision Excerpts: Abortion Methods

“Abortion methods vary depending to some extent on the preferences of the physician and, of course, on the term of the pregnancy and the resulting stage of the unborn child’s development. Between 85 and 90 percent of the approximately 1.3 million abortions performed each year in the United States take place in the first three months of pregnancy, which is to say in the first trimester.”

“The most common first-trimester abortion method is vacuum aspiration (otherwise known as suction curettage) in which the physician vacuums out the embryonic tissue. Early in this trimester an alternative is to use medication, such as mifepristone (commonly known as RU-486), to terminate the pregnancy.”

“Of the remaining abortions that take place each year, most occur in the second trimester. The surgical procedure referred to as “dilation and evacuation” or “D&E” is the usual abortion method in this trimester.”

“A doctor must first dilate the cervix at least to the extent needed to insert surgical instruments into the uterus and to maneuver them to evacuate the fetus.”

“The resulting amount of dilation is not uniform, and a doctor does not know in advance how an individual patient will respond. In general the longer dilators remain in the cervix, the more it will dilate. Yet the length of time doctors employ osmotic dilators varies. Some may keep dilators in the cervix for two days, while others use dilators for a day or less.”

“After sufficient dilation the surgical operation can commence. The woman is placed under general anesthesia or conscious sedation. The doctor, often guided by ultrasound, inserts grasping forceps through the woman’s cervix and into the uterus to grab the fetus. The doctor grips a fetal part with the forceps and pulls it back through the cervix and vagina, continuing to pull even after meeting resistance from the cervix. The friction causes the fetus to tear apart. For example, a leg might be ripped off the fetus as it is pulled through the cervix and out of the woman. The process of evacuating the fetus piece by piece continues until it has been completely removed. A doctor may make 10 to 15 passes with the forceps to evacuate the fetus in its entirety, though sometimes removal is completed with fewer passes. Once the fetus has been evacuated, the placenta and any remaining fetal material are suctioned or scraped out of the uterus. The doctor examines the different parts to ensure the entire fetal body has been removed.”

“Some doctors, especially later in the second trimester, may kill the fetus a day or two before performing the surgical evacuation. They inject digoxin or potassium chloride into the fetus, the umbilical cord, or the amniotic fluid. Fetal demise may cause contractions and make greater dilation possible. Once dead, moreover, the fetus’ body will soften, and its removal will be easier. Other doctors refrain from injecting chemical agents, believing it adds risk with little or no medical benefit.” http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/

You be the judge!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hypocrite Feinstein, Too?

March 28, 2007

Hypocrite Feinstein, Too?

Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California, even questioned Carol Lam’s immigration prosecution rates!

[Hypocrisy/Hypocrite; the false assumption of an appearance of virtue…, an actor or pretender of virtue and fairness.]

“Even Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., now one of Lam’s strongest supporters, questioned Lam’s immigration prosecution rates, although Feinstein said she was satisfied with the answer that Lam was focusing on big cases.

Issa and 18 other lawmakers angrily wrote Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Oct. 20, 2005, about immigration prosecutions, particularly in Southern California.

“It is the responsibility of the Department of Justice to punish dangerous criminals who violate federal laws, and this includes criminal aliens,” the letter reads.”
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/

“In short, not only were Feinstein and Issa bombarding DoJ with complaints about Lam’s lax immigration enforcement for weeks before and after Sampson wrote the “real problem” memo, but the delegation actually was scheduled to meet with DoJ officials on the very day, May 11, that the memo was sent. In short, there is a ton of evidence that DoJ’s explanation (re immigration) was accurate, and not a single shred of evidence to indicate that Sampson had any concerns whatsoever, not even a smidgen, with the Cunningham/Lewis investigations.”

“How, then, could Feinstein, with a straight face, refuse to accept the DoJ explanation that Lam’s problem was with immigration enforcement, when she, Feinstein, knew that the explanation was accurate — and when, of course, as we have seen, Lam was not investigating Lewis?” http://www.spectator.org/blogger

“On May 11, then-Justice Department chief of staff Kyle Sampson wrote an e-mail to an official in the White House counsel’s office asking to discuss “the real problem that we have right now with Carol Lam” that led him to believe she should be replaced. That e-mail was included in documents released by the Justice Department last week.

Justice Department officials have said that Lam was let go because of insufficient prosecution of gun crimes and immigration violations. Gonzales has denied that any of the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys were connected with investigations they were pursuing.

But Feinstein has said that despite those denials she believes Lam’s dismissal had something to do with her prosecution of the Cunningham case. Lam’s office indicted Foggo and Wilkes last month, just two days before she left her post.

Speaking on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday Feinstein stopped short of claiming that Sampson’s May 11 e-mail was directly related to Lam’s disclosure the day before of pending warrants.” http://www.nctimes.com/articles

“Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” Matthew 7:5

Hypocrite Hillary?

March 28, 2007

Hypocrite Hillary?

Sen. Hillary Clinton said that Attorney General Gonzales should resign?
“Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” Matthew 7:5

[Hypocrisy/Hypocrite; the false assumption of an appearance of virtue…, an actor or pretender of virtue and fairness.]

“A spokeswoman for the president has affirmed that it’s perfectly reasonable for U.S. attorneys to be hired and fired at will – because of the president’s authority to set the agenda the U.S. attorneys are to fulfill.”

“Dana Perino was responding to a question from Les Kinsolving, WND’s correspondent at the White house, who asked, “Sen. Hillary Clinton said that Attorney General [Alberto]Gonzales should resign ‘because he is at the center of a widening scandal over the firing of several U.S. attorneys, a grand total of eight.’ But in March of 1993, when Janet Reno fired all 93 U.S. attorneys at once, President Clinton said – a quote – “All of those people are routinely replaced,’ noted The Wall Street Journal.”

“And my question: What is the president’s reaction to the Clinton appointment of Paula Casey as U.S. attorney in Little Rock who never brought any major Whitewater indictments?” http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article

I repeat, however, my previous comments on this matter: “Democrats and Republicans, it is time to stop playing politics and put the Liberal World View Points to rest on this matter!”