The Constitution: English Common Law or the Law of Nations?

©2011  The Birthers

(cross-posted with permission…)

The Constitution of the United States was based on English Common Law or the Law of Nations?

Very soon a new debate will arise in America as the 2012 Presidential elections take place. This debate will not be about where of Obama was born, but rather which definition of a natural born citizen did the founding fathers use. Many pundits will say that a natural born citizen is nothing more than a English natural-born subject, because it is the definition they want to have applied to Obama. Others will say it is a definition taken from Emmer Vattel’s work called the Law of Nations.

Will you believe that the Constitution of the United States was influenced by this man and his writings?

 

Sir William Blackstone (10 July 1723 – 14 February 1780) Commentaries on the Laws of England February 1766

There is a school of thought that uses the ruling of Justice Thomas Stanley Matthews, as the definitive mandate that we use English Common Law as the source for interpreting the terminology used in the Constitution.

Thomas Stanley Matthews (July 21, 1824 – March 22, 1889)

There is no common law of the United States in the sense of a national customary law, distinct from the common law of England as adopted by the several states each for itself, applied as its local law and subject to such alteration as may be provided by its own statutes.” Justice Matthews, SMITH V. ALABAMA, 124 U. S. 465 (1888)

They will even state that this ruling was only the codification of the precedent to interpret the terminology of the Constitution that was implied by one of America’s most respected chief Justices John Marshall in the UNITED STATES V. WILSON, 32 U. S. 150 (1833)

John Marshall (September 24, 1755 – July 6, 1835) Chief Justice of the United States (1801-1835)

But would they be mistaken? The events and correspondence surrounding the framing of the Constitution would differ from later revisionists concepts of the importance of English Common law. There is no doubt that English common law was adopted by the several states, but not in its entirety or in the purity of Blackstone’s Commentaries. Each state not only adopted portions of English common law that were in effect at the time, they also transformed English common law to suit their local customs. Nothing can be clearer on the subject of the abrogation of the tradition of English common law in the drafting of the Constitution then the words of the man called the Father of our Constitution. James Madison.

James Madison, Jr. (March 16, 1751– June 28, 1836) our fourth President and the man called the Father of our Constitution wrote to George Washington concerning the progress of the convention.

What can he mean by saying that the Common law is not secured by the new Constitution, though it has been adopted by the State Constitutions. The common law is nothing more than the unwritten law, and is left by all the constitutions equally liable to legislative alterations. I am not sure that any notice is particularly taken of it in the Constitutions of the States. If there is, nothing more is provided than a general declaration that it shall continue along with other branches of law to be in force till legally changed.

What could the Convention have done? If they had in general terms declared the Common law to be in force, they would have broken in upon the legal Code of every State in the most material points: they wd. have done more, they would have brought over from G.B. a thousand heterogeneous & antirepublican doctrines, and even the ecclesiastical Hierarchy itself, for that is a part of the Common law. If they had undertaken a discrimination, they must have formed a digest of laws, instead of a Constitution.” Letter to Geo Washington October 18, 1787

Madison’s letter to George Wasgington was echoed not 47 years later in the case of Wheaton V. Peters, by Justice John McLean.

John McLean (March 11, 1785 – April 4, 1861) American jurist

It is clear there can be no common law of the United States. The federal government is composed of twenty-four sovereign and independent states, each of which may have its local usages, customs, and common law. There is no principle which pervades the union and has the authority of law that is not embodied in the Constitution or laws of the union. The common law could be made a part of our system by legislative adoption. WHEATON V. PETERS, 33 U. S. 591 (1834)

Another founding father, George Mason IV (December 11, 1725 – October 7, 1792) a delegate from Virginia to the U.S. Constitutional Convention, who is called the “Father of the Bill of Right,” had said during the debate on ratification in Virginia that Constitution was not founded on English common law through a single example on treaties, bluntly stated that English common law was not the common law of the United States.

Though the king can make treaties, yet he cannot make a treaty contrary to the constitution of his country. Where did their constitution originate? It is founded on a number of maxims, which, by long time, are rendered sacred and inviolable. Where are there such maxims in the American Constitution? In that country, which we formerly called our mother country, they have had, for many centuries, certain fundamental maxims, which have secured their persons and properties, and prevented a dismemberment of their country. The common law, sir, has prevented the power of the crown from destroying the immunities of the people. We are placed in a still better condition — in a more favorable situation than perhaps any people ever were before. We have it in our power to secure our liberties and happiness on the most unshaken, firm, and permanent basis. We can establish what government we please. But by that paper we are consolidating the United States into one great government, and trusting to constructive security. You will find no such thing in the English government. The common law of England is not the common law of these states. I conceive, therefore, that there is nothing in that Constitution to hinder a dismemberment of the empire. George Mason, June 19, 1788

Thomas Jefferson (April 13, 1743 – July 4, 1826,) a Founding Father and author of the Declaration of Independence who found the term subject so distasteful he did not cross it out from a draft of the Declaration of Independence, he obliterated it.

If not English common law then which political philosophy could have influenced our Founding Fathers. Overlooked is the importance of the Law of Nations written 8 years before Blackstone’s Commentaries, and of which Blackstone refers to on several occasions.

Emer (Emerich or Emmerich) de Vattel (April 25, 1714 – December 28, 1767) codified The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law in 1758.

The Law of Nations has been referred to by a host of our Founding fathers.

Benjamin Franklin (January 17, 1706  – April 17, 1790)

Benjamin Franklin’s (a signer of our Constitution) letter to Charles W.F. Dumas, December 1775

I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the Law of Nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept (after depositing one in our own public library here, and send the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you directed) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for their author”?

James Wilson (1742 – 1798) was one of the Founding Fathers of the United States and a signer of the United States Declaration of Independence. Wilson was a major force in drafting the United States Constitution. He was one of the six original justices appointed by George Washington to the Supreme Court of the United States.

When the United States declared their independence, they were bound to receive the law of nations, in its modern state of purity and refinement.Justice James Wilson Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199, 281 (1796)

James Otis Jr. American Statesman and cconsidered father of the American Revolution. The phrase “”taxation without representation is tyranny,” is often associated with him.

In his pamphlet “The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved,” he argues that the colonial charters were constitutional arrangements. He then goes on to quote Vattel, that the right to establish a constitution lies with the nation as a whole, and the Parliament lacked the right to change the fundamental principles of the British Constitution.

Samuel Adams (1722 – 1803) was an American statesman, political philosopher, and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. Member of the First and Second Continental Congress.

“Vattel tells us plainly and without hesitation, that ‘the supreme legislative cannot change the constitution,’ ‘that their authority does not extend so far,’ and ‘that they ought to consider the fundamental laws as sacred, if the nation has not, in very express terms, given them power to change them.'” Samuel Adams, 1772

John Adams(1735 – 1826) was member of the First and Second Continental Congress, appointed to the committee to draft the Declaration of Independence, and second President of the United States.

The Idea of M. de Vattel indeed, scowling and frowning, haunted me.John Adams

Alexander Hamilton (1757 – 1804 ) American revolutionary war hero, lawyer and founding father.

Multiple citations of Vattel and the Law of Nations are attributed to him.

Lawyers for the plaintiff argued that the legislature was the supreme law-giving authority of the state, and was subject to no control except that of the people. However, the New York State Constitution had adopted the common law of England, as part of the Constitution of New York. This British feature, of making past precedents part of the Constitution, Hamilton turned on its head, by arguing that, since the law of nations was part of the common law, the decisions of the New York Legislature must be consistent with the law of nations, in order to have validity. And Hamilton used Vattel as the standard for defining the law of nations.

James Duane (1733 – 1797) American jurist, member of the committee of Sixty which started the revolutionary war in New York, member of the Continental Congress, signer of the Articles of Confederation, member of the New York Convention to ratify the US Constitution.

Duane placed his praise for Vattel into the court record in the Rutgers v. Waddington case, over which he presided as judge, while Hamilton appeared for the defense. Comparing Vattel to a previous author on the law of nations, Duane stated, “This last work, says a writer, is evidently rather an introduction than a system; and it served only to excite a desire to see it continued with equal perspicuity and elegance. The honor of this task was reserved for the great Vattel, whose work is entitled to the highest admiration!”

Chief Judge JAMES DUANE, for the court, declared that the state constitution embodied the COMMON LAW and that the common law recognized the law of nations. Duane also declared that the union of the states under the ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION constituted “a FUNDAMENTAL LAW, ” according to which Congress had exclusive powers of making war and peace: “no state in this union can alter or abridge, in a single point, the federal articles or the treaty.” His logic having led him to the brink of holding the Trespass Act void, Duane abruptly endorsed the prevailing Blackstonian theory of legislative supremacy. When the legislature enacted a law, “there is no power which can controul them … the Judges are not at liberty, altho’ it appear to them to be unreasonable, to reject it: for this were to set the judicial above the legislative, which would be subversive of all government.” Duane then declared that the legislature had not intended to revoke the law of nations and that the court had to expound the statute to give the legislature’s intention its effect, whereupon the court emasculated the statute. The judgment was that for the time the property was held under military order, acts done according to the law of nations and “buried in oblivion” by the treaty could not be redressed by the statute; Rutgers could not recover for trespass. Synopsis of Duane’s ruling, 1784

George Washington (1732 – 1799) American revolutionary leader and hero, Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, first President of the United States.

Besides borrowing Vattel’s Law of Nations from the New York City library for over two hundred years, Washington relied heavily on Vattel’s work to the point that he was accused by Citizen Genet, the Ambassador from the French Republic of supporting Vattel’s Law of Nations over France’s quarrel with England, by writing, “you bring forward aphorisms of Vattel, to justify or excuse infractions committed on positive treaties.”

In closing this essay there are so many more references to the importance Vattel and the Law of Nations played in both our Declaration and Independence it is very difficult to reference them all here. I would strongly suggest you check out the excellent research by rxsid over at the freerepublic which can be seen here.

But you need to make a choice, will you allow your heritage to be stolen from you as you sleep and awake to lick the boots of your masters have placed on your neck as you become nothing more than a subject of the government?

Or, are you willing to bend your knee to the Divine Providence that our founding fathers had no shame to kneel before and ask for the strength to regain the heritage of a citizen of free and independent nation?

If you wonder what the difference is between a citizen and a subject, a subject has mailable privileges granted to him by the government, while a citizen has inalienable rights guaranteed by nature’s God. The choice between the two has always been yours to make.

111 Responses to “The Constitution: English Common Law or the Law of Nations?”


  1. 1 drkate May 26, 2011 at 10:22 am

    This is a well reasoned article by Teo…and this is what we must all be prepared to talk about as we enter the 2012 election cycle.

    What kind of handouts will be useful? Remember there is that great set of pictures available at Jefferson’s Rebels and at Mario Apuzzo’s blog…

    • 2 jtx May 26, 2011 at 10:45 am

      Much of the “defense” the Barky-lovers use can be traced to their justapositioning the argument of his “eligibility” onto ECL so that being only a “citizen” (of any sort) is sufficient.

      Just more of the effort to destroy the US Constitution by these treasonous bastards (including of course the MSM in addition to Congress and the Courts).

      We’ll soon have an anchor baby as President … hell, we probably already do!!

      • 3 drkate May 26, 2011 at 10:47 am

        And a ECL ‘natural born subject’ still owes his allegiance to the King/Queen, a single person, not the soil, the people, or its constitution.

  2. 4 Alex May 26, 2011 at 10:39 am

    I’m studying up on this, so I will provide, hopefully, an intelligent post. In the meantime, this looks like it might be helpful and apropos:

    “I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education” (Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:278).

    http://www.ohiolawnotes.netne.net/foundation/commonlawvsstatutorylaw.html

    • 5 drkate May 26, 2011 at 10:43 am

      Excellent…and thank you for that quote. This is really the crux..we the people have the right, the government is not trying to educate, they are trying to take it away.

      • 6 Starla May 26, 2011 at 1:08 pm

        “THE PATRIOT ACT: WHEN TRUTH BECOMES TREASON”

        The Intel Hub
        By Susan Lindauer, former CIA Asset covering Iraq & Libya
        May 23rd, 2011

        From: http://theintelhub.com/2011/05/23/the-patriot-act-when-truth-becomes-treason/

        * * * * * * * * * * * * *

        “OREGON SENATOR REVEALS SECRET GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE GRID”

        Kurt Nimmo
        Infowars.com
        May 26, 2011

        Excerpt:

        “In an interview with Wired, Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, adds yet more confirmation to what many of us have known for years – the government has built a secret surveillance structure far more portentous and dangerous than anything devised by the PATRIOT Act now up for renewal.”

        Read More Here: http://www.infowars.com/oregon-senator-reveals-secret-government-surveillance-grid/

        * * * * * * * * * * * * *

      • 7 Paula May 26, 2011 at 6:36 pm

        Exactly. Love that quote, too. I love reading quotes from the founders…such wisdom and foresight.

        We must begin to truly educate Americans, and to do that, we need to do away with Dept. of Ed. and get the Feds out of state’s business!

    • 8 Alex May 26, 2011 at 10:47 am

      That link, BTW, goes to a whole page of definitions of common law. My fear is that, since The Powers That Be have been working for many, many years to illegally insert Obama into the office of president, that even some of these source materials are tainted with skewed definitions.

      Legal “experts” have been trying to change or influence the understanding of natural born citizen, with no thought given to what is true or right, but only to what will keep their man in office, at least since 2006, if not before.

      http://www.ohiolawnotes.netne.net/foundation/commonlawvsstatutorylaw.html

  3. 9 AttilasDaughter May 26, 2011 at 10:53 am

    OT

    Maybe something for You photo collection, Dr.K?

    I don’t know what to say, something between Laurel&Hardy and Ghetto lottery winners.

    Caption contest?

    • 10 drkate May 26, 2011 at 10:56 am

      :shock: weekend caption contest for sure…

    • 11 anonymouse May 26, 2011 at 11:03 am

      Someone just said to Obama that the world knows he’s a fraud, Michelle is like, “does that include me too?”

      When the face is pulled down like that caricature upside down smile, that is true sadness/negativity. Something ruptured Ofraud’s entitlement world, momentarily anyway. He can’t handle that.

    • 12 Troy May 26, 2011 at 12:29 pm

      GOOD GRIEF!!!

      PLEASE give a *WARNING* when posting a link like that….I think I fried my corneas and damaged my retinas….BLIND!…I’m blind!!

    • 13 Papoose May 26, 2011 at 8:57 pm

      uhhhh, ummm, ahhhhummmm, what isssss ummmmm,uh, i know thissss, i know thissss….ummm ahhhh what isssss

      DING!

      Sorry, barky and malarcky, time’s up.

      ~~ and the correct answer is!

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bastardization

  4. 14 anonymouse May 26, 2011 at 11:00 am

    http://www.usnaturalborncitizen.us

    Americans Rejected English Common Law For Citizenship: Thomas Jefferson Removed “Subjects” From Declaration of Independence to Stress This The United States Rejects English Common Law For Citizenship Because We Are Not Subjects to a King, We Are Citizens Of A Nation.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/02/AR2010070205525.html

  5. 18 Philo-Publius May 26, 2011 at 11:09 am

    Why The Judicial Fraud In The Chrysler Dealers’ Case Is More Dangerous To The USA Than Obama’s Ineligibility.

    “If the courts are willing to openly lie to your faces, to change the testimony of witnesses, to make facts up out of thin air and to put words into the mouths of a witness which the witness did not say… than this country is in immediate danger of complete and utter destruction. This threat is so much greater than any one man in the White House.”

    http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/05/26/why-the-judicial-fraud-in-the-chrysler-dealers-case-is-more-dangerous-to-the-usa-than-obamas-ineligibility/

  6. 19 itooktheredpill May 26, 2011 at 11:16 am

    Our Founders founded this country on:

    “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”

    The “Laws of Nature” is Natural Law.

    The “Laws of … Nature’s God” is Biblical Law.

    When the Founders considered how to apply the Laws of Nature to the conduct and affairs of nations, they looked to the work of Emmerich de Vattel:

    “THE LAW OF NATIONS OR PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF NATURE APPLIED TO THE CONDUCT AND AFFAIRS OF NATIONS AND SOVEREIGNS”

    George Washington, John Jay, and the Natural Law Definition of “Natural Born Citizen”

    • 20 itooktheredpill May 26, 2011 at 11:17 am

      And to the second “bedrock foundation”, Bibilical Law, (the “Laws of … Nature’s God”), this Democratic President had it right:

      The fundamental basis of this Nation’s law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings which we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don’t think we emphasize that enough these days.

      If we don’t have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.

      President Harry S. Truman

      • 21 Starla May 26, 2011 at 1:33 pm

        “REPUBLICAN LT. GOVERNOR KILLED TSA BILL FOR OBAMA”

        Paul Joseph Watson
        Infowars.com
        May 26, 2011

        Excerpt:

        “The man who was instrumental in working with the federal government to sabotage a bill that would have made TSA grope downs a felony in the state of Texas was Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, a former CIA agent and establishment insider considered to be the wealthiest man in Texas politics.

        As we have documented, the anti-pat down bill was derailed in the Texas Senate having unanimously passed the House by 138-0 votes after the Department of Justice sent a letter threatening to impose a no fly zone over Texas and shut down Texas airports. The warning was nothing short of a federal blockade and an act of financial terrorism.

        But the federal assault was aided by a traitor from within the state, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who only served to amplify the threats made by the DOJ in communicating them to members of the Senate, convincing them them to cave in and forcing the hand of Senator Dan Patrick to withdraw the bill before it could be shot down permanently.

        “He came up with this elaborate political play to kill the bill without his fingerprints,” Sen. Patrick, R-Houston stated, adding, “His fingerprints are all over this.”

        Read More Here: http://www.infowars.com/ex-cia-spook-dewhurst-sabotaged-anti-tsa-bill-for-obama-administration/

        * * * * * * * *

      • 22 Starla May 26, 2011 at 2:07 pm

        MUST READ EXCELLENT ARTICLES!

        “WAITING FOR THE MIRACLE TO COME”

        By Pamela Geller
        May 26, 2011

        http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/waiting_for_the_miracle_to_com.html

        * * * * * * * *

        “THE DEAD-END STREEET OF IDENTITY POLITICS”

        By Dean Malik
        American Thinker
        May 23, 2011

        Excerpt:

        “History will judge Obama harshly . . . he will leave behind the bitter fruits of class warfare, racial identity politics, and a redistributive economic policy that will fundamentally alter the American social compact” (snip)

        Read More Here:

        http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/the_deadend_street_of_identity.html

        * * * * * * *

    • 24 AttilasDaughter May 26, 2011 at 11:27 am

      from the article:

      Obama on the economy

      And the other point I think David and I would agree on is that this is going to be a constant process of trying some things, making adjustments. There are going to be opportunities for us to make investments. There are going to be other areas where we think those were good ideas at the time, programs that were started with the best of intentions and it turns out they’re not working as well as they should. If a program is not working well, we should get rid of it and put that money into programs that are working well. It means that we’ve got to make sure that we take a balanced approach and that there’s a mix of cuts, but also thinking about how do we generate revenue so that there’s a match between money going out and money coming in.

      (really obvious he has no idea what he is talking about)

  7. 25 borderraven May 26, 2011 at 11:27 am

    Brilliant!

    I have been seeking this quote:

    “The common law of England is not the common law of these states. I conceive, therefore, that there is nothing in that Constitution to hinder a dismemberment of the empire. George Mason, June 19, 1788″

  8. 26 jane May 26, 2011 at 11:46 am

    Constituionally speaking….if we have the right to bear arms WHY do we have to register to get a gun in most states?

    Seems we can just get one w/out governmemt imposing themselves.

  9. 27 jane May 26, 2011 at 11:47 am

    Oops, that should be Constitutionally……darnit.

  10. 28 anonymouse May 26, 2011 at 11:54 am

    If jus soli only was NBC, then what would be the f*cking need for the 14th?

    All former slaves were born jus soli, yet a big freaking-deal constitutional amendment was required to make them citizens…

    they were born subject to the jurisdiction of the USA since they were born countryless

    then the 14th goes on to define the need for at least one US citizen parent to be a statutory citizen, and if you were born even in the USA you still need at least one US citizen parent to be a citizen

    not a natural born citizen however…

    so really, how dumb, if just being born in the USA was a NBC, then there’d be no CAUSE to add the 14th

    • 29 thinkwell May 27, 2011 at 1:01 am

      Really good point. The 14th Amendment did not address natural born Citizenship at all. It only defined as U.S. citizens those born to non citizen parents (i.e., former slaves), but born within sole jurisdiction and boundaries of the USA.

      If prior to the 14th jus soli was not by and of itself sufficient to make one even a U.S. citizen, how then could anyone claim that jus soli could be what the Founders considered was by and of itself sufficient to make one a U.S. natural born Citizen? It simply does not compute.

  11. 30 Mick May 26, 2011 at 11:57 am

    Didn’t Scalia say that the Common Law is dead?

    The Constitution says that Congress SHALL define and punish offenses against the Law of Nations, not against British Common Law.

  12. 31 Mick May 26, 2011 at 12:00 pm

    Marbury v. Madisaon established that no legisltive Act can serve to make the operation of any clause of the Constitution Moot, or inoperable. If BCL was the law of the land, then the Legislature could simply pass laws to change the body of the Constitution, rather than calling a Constitutional Convention.

  13. 32 Mick May 26, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    James Wilson, original Supreme Court Justice on the importance of Law of Nations, and Article 1 Section 8, Clause 10

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_10s5.html

  14. 33 Stock May 26, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    OT- But what Im going to say may seem weird but think about it-On Oct 23, 2008 (the day before I found SR511) I was asleep-completely oblivious to what has been going on in this Country since the early 1900’s-oblivious to the Government taking away our God given rights-usurping the Constitution-simply by our being uninvolved and trusting citizens in the belief that our representatives in Government were actually doing the job as we would do it-(honoring our Oath to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution). Well, along comes this “situation” and lo and behold-it just unravels a whole can of worms (mostly all in DC) So, while these past few years have been really crap- and have effected all of our lives-negatively-and we find ourselves in a major battle that is far from over-Im starting to appreciate that it just may be so much better to know that maybe enough of us have been alerted as a result of imposter and his actions just in enough time to be able to turn the Nation from the path to complete destruction which we were on. At least with our eyes open we have a shot.

    • 34 Troy May 26, 2011 at 1:33 pm

      Short of an all out revolution, the train is a runaway and headed off the tracks….The DC stranglehold is so tight that it will never be loosened by conventional means….It’s all too far gone and can never be reversed without a total and complete “opt-out” from the global finance scam on which our very economical existence is based….It’s going to get MUCH worse before the people will finally take up arms and cast off the evil beast, known as Fedzilla….That’s a fact!

    • 36 Alex May 26, 2011 at 6:04 pm

      Good point.

  15. 37 drkate May 26, 2011 at 2:05 pm

    OT warning for north and south carolina

  16. 38 madeleine7 May 26, 2011 at 2:19 pm

    Dr. Kate , Thanks for all the hard work. Stay safe!! ( I was horrified at what Miss Tickly reported!!) and keep telling it like it is. Am really glad you are linking to “dutchinse´s site.” May God always protect and bless you both. We live in dangerous times , staring down unscrupulous and homocidal, power-hungry maniacs

  17. 39 Starla May 26, 2011 at 2:27 pm

    Here is an article re: Sarah Palin. What do you think about Palin’s political views & her possible run for the WH?

    “CASTING NOTICE: SARAH PALIN: WONDER WOMAN”

    Posted by Thomas S Schmitz

    Excerpt:

    “As the golden age of Hope & Change struggles with soaring deficits, misguided thinking, out of control spending, shocking joblessness, three wars, & a President hell bent on gifting Hamas with Christian and Jewish Holy Sites; a nation in need is looking for a hero….A heroine.

    America is looking for a leader who see’s this nation as we do. A leader who has as much faith in the American people as our framers had.

    There is a rebellion growing against a devilish man who works to subvert America and her allies. The electorate is waking up, and America realizes that our biggest mistake would be to give Barack Hussein Obama the benefit of the doubt.

    Mr President, GAME ON!

    The LSM hostile smear campaign against Sarah Palin has back fired. She is more powerful than ever. Supporters across the nation have been quietly meeting, strategizing, and preparing for the restoration of our Republic. (snip)

    Hey, America…Guess what? WE DON’T NEED THE LSM ANYMORE!

    With our help, Sarah Palin is poised to be the leader who finally casts Barack Hussein Obama back into the beastly Chicago lakeside of fire from whence he came.

    Begining in 2013 Michelle Obama will once again not be proud of her country.

    There is light in this moment of darkness in America.”

    Read More: http://www.jeffersonsrebels.blogspot.com/

    * * * * * * * * * * * *

  18. 40 Starla May 26, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    O/T

    “BRAIN DEAD DEM DOESN’T REMEMBER SENATOR OBAMA INVESTIGATED
    & CHALLENGED JOHN MCCLAIN’S NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP IN APRIL 2008 AND MAKING JOHN MCCAIN SHOW HIS BIRTH CETITICATE TO THE
    U.S. SENATE – DEM LEADER BLAMES RACISM FOR ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONS!!!”

    CDR Kerchner
    May 26, 2011

    http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2011/05/26/brain-dead-dem-doesnt-remember-senator-obama-investigated-challenged-john-mccains-natural-born-citizenship-in-april-2008-and-making-john-mccain-show-his-birth-certificate-to-the-u-s-senate/

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=303617

    * * * * * * * * *

    “SHARIA LAW ATTEMPTED IN FLORIDA COURTS SINCE 1978″

    Posted on May 26, 2011

    Excerpt:

    “Since 1978? Sharia was creeping 20 years before this blog started. Proponents of sharia law claim legislation is a “solution in search of a problem.” Obviously not. Any presence of sharia law is a problem. via Watchdog: Islamic Sharia law 0-4 in Fla. courts since 1978. floridatoday.com.”

    Read More:

    http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/05/26/sharia-law-attempted-in-florida-courts-since-1978/

    * * * * * * * *

  19. 41 Starla May 26, 2011 at 2:42 pm

    “ALEX JONES SHOW: JEROME CORSI (CENSORSHIP WAR ON JESSE VENTURA AND AMERICA)”

  20. 43 jane May 26, 2011 at 3:01 pm

    If you can, click to C-SPAN and watch Inhofe……he is telling the Senate why we should defend Israel…he is telling how Israel is protected by GOD and we are suffering because our country/prez has turned its back on the JEWS.

    POWERFUL SPEECH!

  21. 44 Jan May 26, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    To think that in high school I hated history classes. Managed to get through them with “B”s and “C”s.

    I have learned more about history in the last three years. True history, and the truth about today in our world.

    Dr. K, thank you so much for hanging in there and allowing us to post on your blog.

  22. 46 Alex May 26, 2011 at 3:16 pm

    I’m still working on this – it’s not an easy subject, though muy interesante. About a million things had to be done between my last post and now, including trying to figure out how to reinstall Vista on my daughter’s laptop.

    Such a fascinating thread, Kate – thank you for all the new neurons! ;-) Here’s something that may be applicable:

    [snip]

    “In any case, it all boils down to this chain of logic. What is a court? A court is the person and suit of the sovereign. Yes, indeed, the judge is the highest officer of the court; however, the judge is not the sovereign. No officers of the court, highest to lowest, are the sovereign. For a second time, a court is the person and suit of the sovereign. Who is the sovereign in these United States? The people are sovereign. What is a sovereign? A sovereign is one possessing sovereignty. What is sovereignty? There are two fundamental elements of sovereignty: 1) The power to do everything in a State without accountability to higher authority and 2) the decree of the sovereign makes law. The people themselves possess sovereignty.

    [snip]

    http://www.ohiolawnotes.netne.net/foundation/commonlawvsstatutorylaw.html

    I personally think that this brings home the fact that *we* should be able to kick Harrison to the curb, and the only way the Big Money Backers are preventing that is through subterfuge. They do not have a legal leg to stand on, period.

  23. 47 jane May 26, 2011 at 3:25 pm

    Just watched Dr Kate’s video regarding NC/SC…ugh!

    I live in NC……….any others?

    • 48 drkate May 26, 2011 at 3:30 pm

      I’ve signed up with that dutchsinse site to keep apprised. also look a the weather patterns on your computer…

      • 49 drkate May 26, 2011 at 3:38 pm

        OT–Corsi debates liberal jackass and whoops him. LOL they refuse to let it die and keep showing themselves as completely uninformed and pretend stupid:

      • 50 Rene May 26, 2011 at 4:09 pm

        We just got an email from a friend in New Jersey who says a tornado is heading their way. She is alone at homw with hubby at work and quite concerned.

        Have a duughter in NC but have not heard anything from her regarding bad weather.

      • 52 heather May 26, 2011 at 8:33 pm

        Dr Kate–thanks for posting this daily. This is extremely important info for all of us. Since I just experienced the OK tornados, I am so on top of his site. Also I posted to Jin last night on the previous thread how to prepare.

        Better to be prepared in advance than at the last minute when you are out of time.

        I hope Jin is ok, as they were getting something last night/today. This NC-SC storm coming through will most likey go north from there into NJ since thats the pattern of southern storms into the northeast. Everyone needs to be alert to weather. Bad enough we have barry and co destroying everything about our country, now we have this.

        Have you heard from Jin, perhaps by email?

        • 53 drkate May 26, 2011 at 9:01 pm

          no word yet. Prayers abound.

          • 54 heather May 26, 2011 at 9:22 pm

            Thanks–I’m worried–these storms Dr Kate are abnormal and tremendously huge and destructive. I saw where the baby in joplin was found today–she was ripped from her moms arms–she was found dead and the baby in central ok found dead in the lake where she landed. How horrible to lose anyone to weather conditions.

            I know we are getting something tomorrow night (these things always come at night)–right now no tornados but tomorrow could be different. Not looking forward to anymore. It was 5-19-10 that my house got struck by lightning and that was enough for me. Of course I was standing 6 ft from the impact! I have had more bad things happen to me in the past 5 yrs since I moved here then ever in my life. Just bad luck I suppose, now I need that changed!

            • 55 Jan May 26, 2011 at 10:06 pm

              Heather, when the weather calms down, if it ever does, G. Edward Griffin has started a new program and is looking for volunteer investigators. He has a couple of neat programs where you can identify the planes you see spraying, take pictures, record the time and location.

              I can’t do anything yet as we’ve had solid cloud cover for days.

              http://www.realityzone.com/currentperiod.html

              • 56 heather May 27, 2011 at 5:27 am

                Jan, thanks–I will check that out. Yesterday was the first day with crystal blue skies–no clouds until 6pm then the spraying started again. It’s very ironic that everytime they spray we have massive storms. The entire sky late yesterday was solid white again–and that is unheard of here. This state is known for their beautiful blue skies.

                I even have my sister in law looking up as she and my brother have lived here 30 yrs and never have seen white skies. So its not my imagination.

                At this moment (7:30am)the skies are clear blue and no clouds and we are due for bad storms late today into tonight-therefore I will watch again for new clouds. Heck we all know what these so called clouds look like–they are so easy to spot.

                Maybe that letter to that congressman from one of DutchSinse website viewers will investigate and finally put an end to this poison raining down on us.

  24. 58 jane May 26, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    I’ll be out of state this weekend, but I do read the site.
    Please keep those of us in the dangerous areas posted.

    THANKS DR Kate!

  25. 59 Alex May 26, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    I wondered who Madison was talking about when he said “What can he mean by saying that the Common law is not secured by the new Constitution…?”

    It was the guy you mentioned later on. If anyone is interested, this is why Mason – who refused to sign the Constitution, at least at one point – thought that the common law was not secured by the new Constitution, at least according to this website:

    “Consider now what Madison wrote in The Federalist No. 43. The copyright of authors has been solemnly adjudged, in Great Britain, to be a right at common law. This was correct, insofar as it went, because copyright in Great Britain had indeed been adjudged a common law right in the celebrated case of Millar v. Taylor. If this statement is to be taken as an affirmation that Madison interpreted “securing” as meaning “to insure or affirm,” however, then also implicit in it is a presumption that rights under the common law carried over and were operative under the new Constitution. Yet the Constitution says not a word about the common law. Indeed, this was one of the reasons given by Virginia delegate George Mason for refusing to sign the Constitution. As he put it, “[n]or are the people secure even in the enjoyment of the benefit of the common law [which stands here upon no other foundation than its having been adopted by the respective acts forming the constitutions of the several States].” [FN80] Mason had a point, because the applicability of the common law to the American colonies had been a matter of great contention between the crown and the colonies. [FN81] Not all of the states had adopted the common law, [FN82] however, and in those states which had adopted it, there was great confusion as to exactly what had been adopted.

    http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/eldredvashcroft/cyber/walters.html

  26. 60 Rene May 26, 2011 at 4:26 pm

    DR. Kate
    Why don’t they go after Nancy Pelosi , she is the one who submitted the forms stating that Obama was eligible to be president , and a different form was used in Hawaii from the DNC. That’s blatant fraud right there, put enough pressure on her and she would most likely rat the rest of them out to save her skin.

  27. 61 Starla May 26, 2011 at 4:49 pm

    “OBAMA’S INELIGIBILITY: THE U.S. GOVERNMENT MUST BE PURGED”

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36801

    * * * * * * * * * *

    “OBAMA’S INELIGIBILITY: HAS THE TIME COME FOR REBELLION?”

    Excerpt:

    “We are experiencing, in real-time, the destruction of the Constitution and a flagrant disregard for the rule of law by elected officials and government bureaucrats.” (snip).

    “There is also evidence that he may have committed fraud regarding his birth documents, Social Security number, his Selective Service registration and his real estate transactions in Chicago.

    I am a scientist by training and temperament. I do not adhere to conspiracy theories. In my opinion, it is no longer just a theory. There is sufficient evidence to warrant an official investigation.

    The continuous stonewalling by both parties’ elite is clearly directed toward preventing such an investigation because it would divulge that our government is riddled with corruption and operates solely to benefit the political royalty.”

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36706

    * * * * * * * * * *

    “AUDIO: JEROME CORSI GIVES AN UPDATE ON THE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT BEING FILED WITH FBI ABOUT OBAMA’S NEWLY FORGED BIRTH CERTIFICATE”

    Audio: The Dr. Jerome Corsi interview begins about 27 minutes in.

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36706

    * * * * * * * * * *

    • 62 Alex May 26, 2011 at 6:18 pm

      Good CFP quote. I would add that all this is also being done to benefit the “corporate royalty.” The mega-rich think they can make the rules.

      • 63 heather May 26, 2011 at 9:27 pm

        Well, I’ll have them know that I make my rules, and I am boss of myself–no one else so screw these elitists — and they only got to where they are because they stole from us.

        Plain and simple.

  28. 64 Starla May 26, 2011 at 4:51 pm

    “OBAMA’S INELIGIBILITY: WE KNOW”

    Excerpt:

    “Republicans, Democrats and members of the MSM have been involved in a cover-up for reasons of complicity, negligence, avarice or cowardice.”

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36911

    * * * * * * * * * *

    “OBAMA’S PLAN FOR AMERICA IS PRESIDENT-ASSISTED SUICIDE”

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36515

    * * * * * * * * * *

    “OBAMA’S ELIGIBILITY: THE BIG CON”

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/35358

    * * * * * * * * * *

    • 65 heather May 26, 2011 at 9:48 pm

      And barry plans on campaigning on the KILL of bin laden. That’s another headliner today. He plans on traveling the country and taking a bow for his murder of someone they have dubbed as usama bin laden!

  29. 66 Alex May 26, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    It seems like a no-brainer that the Founding Fathers and Mothers would agree that this country was FOUNDED to get away from English law. So why in Heaven’s name would we use it to interpret the very document designed to make the separation formal??

  30. 69 Papoose May 26, 2011 at 6:41 pm

    If the Founders didn’t intend to distinguish a difference between a natural born citizen and citizen, the clause would read:

    No Person except a Citizen shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

    The intent is that one must be “natural born” – full blooded at the time of one’s birth.

    Natural born citizenship is inherited through one’s American parents.

    Its so simple. born = at the time of birth.

    Not half Kenyan and half ex patriot American. No way.

    • 70 heather May 26, 2011 at 9:25 pm

      Papoose–hey-how has your weather been in Pa? I heard Philly had a tornado and it took out 3 buildings.

  31. 71 Paula May 26, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    I enjoyed reading through this. Thanks for posting this Dr. Kate. It has always been clear to me that Vattel’s Law of Nations was used to form our Constitution.

    Let it be clearly understood that We the People are not subjects of the Feds or States, nor shall we ever be!

  32. 72 Troy May 26, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    Trump is a hypocrite, a liar, and a traitor!
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    You’re forged! Trump declares Obama’s birth certificate fake
    ‘I always said I wanted to know if it was real’
    Read more: You’re forged! Trump declares Obama’s birth certificate fake http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=303181#ixzz1NWGR1dsg

    Trump denies reading book he signed agreement to get
    Issues statement distancing himself from suspicion about Obama birth certificate fraud
    Read more: Trump denies reading book he signed agreement to get http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=303721#ixzz1NWGuWGfw

    • 73 Alex May 27, 2011 at 4:29 am

      You know, watching Trump’s show and hearing about his other behavior, I know what kind of a person he is. But what I don’t get is: If The Donald was working with Soetoro, why was he “allowed” to say things like, in essence, “I don’t think he was smart enough to get into Harvard”?

      Don’t get me wrong – Barry is NOT, in any way shape or form, smart enough to get into Harvard. He did the unheard of and didn’t even write an article as “editor” of the Harvard Law Review. There are so many other examples of his stupidity that I don’t need to recount them here – it’s obvious.

      But if Trump was in cahoots the way everyone has been saying, to set up Obama to whip out the “real” bc and put the whole matter to rest, then why did he talk about fraud to the nth degree, question Harrison’s intelligence over and over, imply the Obama/Dunham family was a bunch of criminals (which they are)? That doesn’t make any sense to me. Then again, none of this disaster makes any sense whatsoever.

      • 74 Alex May 27, 2011 at 4:43 am

        But you know what? We don’t have to depend on Donald Trump to save this country. We depend on God and on each others’ goodness and courage. One way or another, we’ve got this! All things work together for those who love God :-).

    • 77 Paula May 27, 2011 at 4:34 am

      Agree with that! Trump, unfortunately, has shown himself a player in all of this and not for the good of the country, but looks to be like for the good of Trump and Obama.

      I believe Mr. Corsi over Mr. Trump any day!

      • 78 heather May 27, 2011 at 4:57 am

        And I as well. Can’t put my finger on why barry would turn this over to Trump like this. Somethings not right with this whole little picture.

  33. 79 no-nonsense-nancy May 27, 2011 at 4:45 am

    Heather, thankfully no tornatoes have hit Philly and no lost buildings.

    • 80 heather May 27, 2011 at 4:55 am

      I read on fox that 3 buildings in the city had tornado damage last week–hmmm–well thats good to hear anyway.

  34. 81 speedy May 27, 2011 at 5:02 am

    I used to think that Trump would be good until he backtracked and denied saying that he believed bo’s bc was fraudulent. That shows that he is not on our side. He wants to run for third party so that he can be a spoiler and split the vote and take away votes from the republicans so that we get stuck with the usurper again. If Donald was genuine, then he would not go back on his words and lie to cover up. He has disappointed me.

  35. 82 OLN May 27, 2011 at 5:10 am

    Hello everyone,

    I would like to add my thoughts on this matter. First, the people of the United States adopted the system of common law jurisprudence from their former sovereign. The common law is enforced here in these United States since day one of our republic. The government, whether it be federal, state, or local, cannot use the common law since it must show the authority strictly given (statute law or written law). Amendment X to the Constitution clearly states that powers not delegated to the General Government, nor forbidden to the States by the Constitution, are exercised by the State governments or the people themselves. To show authority, the General Government must show the written law, that is, statute law (written law). Common law is generally based on customs and usages; common law is unwritten law. There is no delegated authority in the Constitution for the General Government to use the common law. On the other hand, if one’s court uses the common law regarding, federal issue, then the Constitution authorizes the General Government to lend the court its judicial power. That is clearly stated in Art. III, sec. 2, cl. 1.

    Second. The people are the sovereigns. This fact is well established in the American courts. For instance, “[A]t the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are Sovereigns without subjects . . . and have none to govern but themselves” Chisholm v. State of Georgia, 2 U.S. 419, 1 L. Ed. 440 (1793). Dr. Franklin stated, “In free governments, the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns.” Our courts recognize this fact again and again. Now, one could argue our servants do not act that way, true, thus we the people must educate ourselves and let our servants know their place in our republic again.

    Third. Amendment XIV to the Constitution DID NOT create a new class of person. Amendment XIV defined citizenship in these United States. A citizen is a person that is born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. If one meets both requirements of Amendment XIV, then he is a citizen. Otherwise he is a people. Keep in mind, a person may be a citizen for some purposes and not a citizen for other purposes. Let us examine the first section of Amendment XIV.

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

    If a person satisfies both A and B, then he satisfies C (A + B = C). If a person satisfies A but does not satisfy B, then he does not satisfy C (A – B ≠ C). In the former, the person is a citizen. In the latter, the person is a people. Remember, a person may be a citizen for some purposes and not a citizen for other purposes (see 14 Corpus Juris Secundum §1128 for more details).

    Fourth. The word “people” may be either singular or plural:

    PEOPLE, n. [L. populus.] 1. The body of persons who compose a community, town, city or nation. We say, the people of a town; the people of London or Paris; the English people. In this sense, the word is not used in the plural, but it comprehends all classes of inhabitants, considered as a collective body, OR any portion of the inhabitants of a city or country. (Webster, 1828)

    Therefore, it is proper, and grammatically correct, to say, “I am a people of the State of X.” Or, “I am a people of the United States.” You are a people. You people. I am a people. This people. That people. We are not accustomed to saying it because it sounds odd to our ears, but it is proper and grammatically correct.

    Finally. In re the “natural born citizen” clause. I recommend reading the following source:

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_5.html

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_5s1.html

    http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_5s2.html

    • 83 anonymouse May 27, 2011 at 10:35 am

      BE AWARE THAT A2S1C5 SAYS 14 YEARS A RESIDENT

      NOT 14 YEARS A CITIZEN

      even then they differentiated between a citizen and a natural born citizen…

      if you ever start out as a statutory citizen, you are not a natural born citizen, since all natural born citizens are thus so AT BIRTH and cannot be made so at any time thereafter

  36. 84 Troy May 27, 2011 at 6:23 am

    So where’s the real birth certificate?
    A new national eligibility billboard campaign is born
    ——————————————————————————–
    Posted: May 26, 2011
    8:45 pm Eastern

    © 2011 WND

    WASHINGTON – It was a billboard campaign that put the eligibility question on the front burner of American politics, says Joseph Farah.

    And it’s a revised version of that campaign that will bring it back before the 2012 election, he says.

    Two years ago, Farah launched the original outdoor advertising program that simply asked, “Where’s the birth certificate?”

    It was more controversial than Farah ever imagined. Five major outdoor advertising companies banned it. The outdoor advertising trade association denounced it. Farah’s regular news media appearances evaporated.

    Yet it captured the imagination of a nation skeptical about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility for the presidency.

    When the White House attempted to answer the question with the release of what it touted as Obama’s original long-form birth certificate, the campaign was suspended. But when that document posed more questions than it answered, in Farah’s words, he decided to revise and extend the campaign.

    (Story continues below)
    Read more: So where’s the real birth certificate? http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=303777#ixzz1NYi9aX8E

    • 85 Alex May 27, 2011 at 8:19 am

      Good idea! And I think one thing that would help our side tremendously would be a catchy phrase concerning this whole ineligibility mess. I mean, if OJ can get away with murder because of “If the glove does not fit, then you must acquit,” surely we can come up with something that will stick in people’s minds and bug them until justice is served.

      So far, I got nothin’ ;-).

      • 86 Troy May 27, 2011 at 8:51 am

        “If the glove does not fit, then you must acquit,” surely we can come up with something that will stick in people’s minds and bug them until justice is served.
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        Dr. Kate has had it on her blog many times.

        “Born a Brit – Not Legit”

    • 89 drkate May 27, 2011 at 9:15 am

      NO NO NO!!! Stop with the BC, farah! Pick up on the dual citizen theme please! Then you’ll get the real forgery which will be undetectable!!!

      • 90 Troy May 27, 2011 at 9:21 am

        They are not going to get off of the BC because Corsi is CONVINCED that Barry was born in Kenya.
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        Ineligible
        “Born a Brit – Not Legit”

        • 91 drkate May 27, 2011 at 9:26 am

          And this is the problem in my view. This is exactly what happened to the Chester Arthur investigation…instead of looking at his citizenship they went after his birth place. History is repeating itself. The BC focus undermines everything about NBC!

          • 92 Durus May 27, 2011 at 9:41 am

            So who is Obama’s father? Do we really know?

            • 93 drkate May 27, 2011 at 10:26 am

              We don’t and we don’t care. Obama staked his entire career on BHO sr. So he has to live with it.

              • 94 heather May 27, 2011 at 11:03 am

                I agree-forget the BC–everyone in the world knows its a fake (its posted internationally)and this means he was not born in HI. If the certificate is a fake and forged it doesn’t matter, it means the entire birth in Hi is a lie. His father was a british subject and later he was adopted as an indonesian by Lolo Soetoro–this means he is not a NBC—nor is he even a naturalized citizen of the USA! Cannot be–where are the documents showing he naturalized when he came back from Indonesian to live with grammy and pop?

          • 95 anonymouse May 27, 2011 at 10:29 am

            Right On Dr. Kate!
            I question these people, when the obvious stares us all straight in the face.

            Palin’s parents were both US Citizens, but watch they will misdirect on to where she was born only (Sand Point Idaho).

      • 96 Alex May 28, 2011 at 4:32 am

        Totally disagree. It is apparent at this juncture that no one cares – except us! – that Barry’s father was British, and that he is either a British citizen alone, or a dual citizen. I think that Obama would *love* us to focus on the natural born citizen issue alone, because it will go nowhere.

        The fact that he *was* born in Kenya, on the other hand, if proven, will get his @zz out in a hurry! So I think Corsi and WND are doing the right thing.

    • 98 sky May 27, 2011 at 10:11 am

      We The People Excellent Information site patriotactionnetwork right side column to view all.

  37. 99 Troy May 27, 2011 at 6:26 am

    WND warned Obama would release forged birth doc
    Reliable source in Hawaii was in contact with state officials
    ——————————————————————————–
    Posted: May 26, 2011
    11:35 pm Eastern

    © 2011 WND

    Nearly two months before Barack Obama released what he claims is his valid Hawaii long-form birth certificate, a document met with accusations of fraud by experts, WND was warned by an intelligence source in contact with Hawaii officials that a forged version would be released.

    No story was published in WND, because the unnamed confidential source’s story could not be corroborated.

    “I think it’s important for the public to know that we were warned by a source who had provided reliable information in the past about the controversy over Obama’s eligibility that something was about to be released,” said Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND. “It was my decision not to go with the story then. And it’s my decision to make this warning public now in light of the unanswered questions about the document released by the White House.”

    The source warned in February that the long-form birth certificates issued to the Nordyke twins one day after Obama was born create a barrier for anyone attempting to create a fraudulent long-form, Kapi’olani-generated birth certificate for Obama.

    Get the inside details on what could be the most serious constitutional crisis in modern history, in “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President.”

    The Hawaiian source pointed out to WND the key to understanding why forging a Kapi’olani birth certificate posed problems for Obama lies in an analysis of the certificate numbers the Hawaii Department of Health issued to twin daughters born to Eleanor Nordyke at the Kapi’olani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital on Aug. 5, 1961, one day after Obama was supposedly born at the facility.

    (Story continues below)
    Read more: WND warned Obama would release forged birth doc http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=303749#ixzz1NYijvo3B

  38. 100 Bones May 27, 2011 at 11:11 am

    While the judicial system seems to be totally corrupt, all that is needed is one courageous judge. Just one, and the tables could turn. Are you out there? We will stand by you… and we’ll all get through the ensuing mess, and be stronger than before.

    • 101 JanH May 27, 2011 at 5:24 pm

      all that is needed is one courageous judge. Just one, and the tables could turn.

      That would seem to be the one missing piece.

  39. 102 Jan May 27, 2011 at 1:14 pm

    Great video on YouTube

  40. 103 Drew May 27, 2011 at 6:45 pm

    IMPORTANT — News Release of May 22, 2011

    Expanded Analysis of President Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth

    by Douglas Vogt

    Re: Legal proof that President Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery.

    http://www.vectorpub.com/Obamas_certificate_of_birth_May-22-2011_Expanded_News%20Realease.pdf

    …… more:

    http://www.vectorpub.com/Obamas_Certificate_Forgery.html

  41. 106 Jan May 28, 2011 at 11:09 am

    FOOD FOR THOUGHT
    Executive Order 10995: Seizure of all communications media – radio, television, newspapers, CB and Ham radio, telephones and the internet (in effect, suspension of the first amendment)
    Executive Order 10997: Seizure of all electrical power and fossil fuels
    Executive Order 10998: Seizure of all food sources, farms and farm equipment. Food will be rationed. Today some states have anti-hoarding laws on the books, stating that anything over a one week’s supply of food is considered hoarding and against the law.
    Executive Order 10999: Seizure of all transportation and control of all highways, interstates and seaports. Any vehicle, public or private, can be taken.
    Executive Order 11000: Seizure of all civilians for work under Federal supervision.
    Executive Order 11003: Seizure of all airports and aircraft, public or private.
    Executive Order 11004: Housing and Finance given authority for population relocation.
    Executive Order 12919: Directs various Cabinet officials to be ready to take over virtually all aspects of the United States economy during a “state of national emergency” at the direction of the president.
    Executive Order 13010: Directs FEMA to take control over all government agencies in times of emergency. FEMA is under the direct control of the executive (presidential) branch of government.
    Executive Order 11490: Establishes presidential control over all United States citizens, businesses, and churches in times of “emergency”
    These are executive orders passed by presidents–Republican and Democrat alike–elected to preserve our freedoms and the Constitution. Their very duplicities show that they have no intention of honoring the ideals of the constitutional republic handed down to us, that they are the very men that the Founders warned us about.

    • 107 drkate May 28, 2011 at 11:12 am

      That’s right. And this is the 20 year fight we have on our hands. Get the usurper out, clip the wings of the next NWO guy, get the commies completely out of government by 2018.

      • 108 Paula May 29, 2011 at 5:20 am

        I hope and pray we can do it, Dr. Kate. We must get the word out to the general public that we have elected communists to our government. The general public must understand what is going on.


  1. 1 An Open Letter to the "Senior Staff" at Breitbart.com Trackback on May 23, 2012 at 10:50 am
  2. 2 An Open Letter To The “Senior Staff” At Breitbart.com | Expose Obama Trackback on May 23, 2012 at 12:12 pm
  3. 3 An Open Letter To The “Senior Staff” At Breitbart.com Trackback on May 23, 2012 at 12:14 pm
Comments are currently closed.



May 2011
M T W T F S S
« Apr   Jun »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

PROTECT OUR LIBERTY HERE!

Get Your Copy at drkatesview@gmail.com

Blog Archive

Just follow copyright law and nobody gets hurt!

The contents of this blog are protected under U.S. Copyright Law, United States Code, Title 17. Requests for use of active and archived articles in this blog must be presented in writing in the comment section, and proper attribution is expected. Thank you in advance.

drkatesview thanks you!

Donate to DrKatesView!

Donate Now!

Since 8/15/09

  • 1,685,297 views

Listen to drkate’s Revolution Radio

RSS Atlas Shrugs

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Spectator

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Button 1 120 by 90
Site Build It!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 604 other followers

%d bloggers like this: