Canadian TV Goes Birther: 62% Say Obama is Not an American Citizen

 Freedom Outpost

There are two definitive schools of thought within the “birther” movement. However, more often than not, you are exposed to only one. Not all “birthers” believe that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. In fact, many believe that this is somewhat irrelevant. Many, like myself, believe that since Barack Obama, Sr. was not a citizen of the United States when Barack Obama, Jr. was born that our President may be a “citizen” but that he is a not a “natural born citizen” and thus ineligible to hold the office of President.

Though it is doubtful that you will see any American owned media outlets devoting programs to this debate (seems highly unlikely six years later), Richard Syrett of The Conspiracy Show decided to go where American media refuses to. He devoted an entire episode of his program to this debate and it aired Monday on Canadian television.

Our friends at Birther Report summarize the broadcast:

As reported here Canadian broadcaster Richard Syrett interviewed Attorney Mario Apuzzo, Attorney Phil Berg, computer expert Karl Denninger and Allenna Leonard of Democrats Abroad. The show focused on Obama’s forged birth certificate and the Article II natural born Citizen clause in the U.S. Constitution. Full show below…

The host says Birthers that conclude a natural born Citizen is one born on U.S. soil to two U.S. citizen parents (Vattel) stand on pretty solid ground but notes the other side could provide a compelling counter-argument (Blackstone). Syrett said to dismiss Birthers as racist is extremely unfair. He also believes evidence suggesting Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery is not conclusive but says it deserves further investigation and serious media scrutiny. Syrett warned viewers that if Obama is not eligible and he forged his birth certificate the United States would be plunged into a constitutional crisis unparalleled in its history. His full conclusion excerpted here


You can watch the entire episode here. .

The debate over the definition of “natural born citizen” has largely been in trying to determine the intentions of our founders. Both sides can roll out historical court decisions to seemingly support their case, but I prefer to start at the beginning. What is perceived as true in 2014 was not necessarily true in 1790. I always encourage people to do their own research. However, in the course of that research I would suggest that you start with our first congress. My interpretation is that BOTH parents must be citizens to create a “natural born citizen.” If not, then why the distinction between a simple “citizen” and a “natural born citizen?”
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/09/canadian-tv-goes-birther-62-say-obama-american-citizen/#3aWFlEQUDz8vwExK.99

The establishment’s fear of the truth empowers Obama

Family Security Matters

by LAWRENCE SELLIN, PHD

 

What would happen if Americans learned that Barack Obama is not just an individual with a history of radical, anti-American associations, but an illegal President and an unindicted felon?

What would happen if Americans learned that the US government, including all members of Congress, and leading figures in American media knew it and deliberately hid the truth from us?

If such a scenario were true, the political system and the media, as we now know it, would collapse, most politicians and journalists would lose their jobs and many would go to jail.

Who in government and the media have the greatest incentive to remain silent and run out the clock on Barack Obama?

Continue reading

Reasoning ‘Kenyan Born’

PJ Media

Janine Turner

Reason is the fundamental element to keeping a republic viable. If the people lose their ability to reason, or their desire to reason, republicanism becomes obsolete. History has proven this over and over again.

Hence the reason John Adams said, “Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people.” Hence the challenge Benjamin Franklin gave Americans by stating they had given us a republic — if we could keep it.

The question today is if Americans really want to keep republicanism. Republicanism requires vigilance and passion, civic responsibility and reason.

Republicanism cannot be maintained by “letting other people do it.”

A good example is the story of the quarreling brothers. As the story goes, two young brothers were fighting over a peanut butter sandwich. Their mother stepped in and said, “Now boys, think about what Jesus would do. He would give his sandwich to the other.” The boys thought about this for a moment and then the older brother said to his sibling, “Ok, you be Jesus!”

Letting other people do all the work while enjoying the fruits of the labor is represented in many ways other than “spreading the wealth around.” Often in our republic people want to “spread the civic work away” – from them. Many people do not want to “get involved” in the responsibility of maintaining our republic.

This may manifest in an avid passion to destroy republicanism because they believe that flatlining life and lives is the answer, or it may manifest in the opposite way, which is seemingly innocent but just as destructive — by being politically correct.

The ideology of flatlining and the submission to political correctness both defy reason and reason is fundamental. The irony is that the left, with its desire to flatline life, and the right, with its desire to be quietly conservative and politically correct, are colliding in a ruin of republicanism.

Case in point — the question of where President Obama was born. This question is permeating the web in a radical way with the emergence of Obama’s former author bio, which states he was “born in Kenya.” This bio was a part of Obama’s persona until he began to run for president in 2007.

 

Continue reading

Obama’s Eligibility: The Final Word

T-Room

by Paul R. Hollrah

In recent days I have been drawn into yet another debate over presidential eligibility, as specified in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.  Given that Barack Obama has occupied the Oval Office illegally for more than five years, without so much as a whimper of protest from most American voters or the mainstream media, some may feel that any further discussion of this matter may be akin to “beating a dead horse.” Nevertheless, if we insist on referring to ourselves as a constitutional republic, and if we continue to insist that we honor constitutional principles and the rule of law, then we have no choice but to understand precisely what the Founders intended when they drafted our governing document in 1787.

What generated my recent exchange on the subject of presidential eligibility was an article in the January 31, 2014 edition of pegAlert, the newsletter of the Pennsylvania Business Council.  The article in question was titled, “SANTORUM PREPPING FOR ANOTHER RUN IN 2016.”

Continue reading

Obama Eligibility Challenge Reaches United States Supreme Court

By Sharon Rondeau | The Post & Email (Jan. 28, 2014) —

 

REPEATING A LIE “DOESN’T MAKE IT TRUTHFUL”

A petition for certiorari regarding Barack Hussein Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president and commander-in-chief arrived at the U.S. Supreme Court and was docketed as of January 23, 2014 after a long and circuitous routing through the New York State courts.

Obama’s eligibility has been questioned since late 2007, when commentator Chris Matthews stated on air that Obama was “born in Indonesia,” followed by a similar report in a Hawaii newspaper.  Various reports in African newspapers dating back to before Obama’s first presidential election in 2008 stated that Obama was born in Kenya.  His own biographer concurred until April 2007, when the official narrative changed to say that Obama was born in Hawaii.
Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president and commander-in-chief to be a “natural born Citizen.”
Compounding doubt as to whether or not Obama meets the constitutional criteria, he claims that his father was a citizen of Kenya and later, Great Britain, following Kenyan independence in 1963.  Research into the intent of the “natural born Citizen” clause has shown that the citizenship of the parents, and not the birthplace, was actually paramount in determining a child’s citizenship and allegiance.  In the modern era, however, the term has been eviscerated such that most Americans interpret it to mean a simple birth on U.S. soil without regard to the parents’ citizenship.

Continue reading

Is Obama Planning a Third Term as President & Is Congress Able to Stop Him?

Freedom Outpost

A third term for President Obama?  Impossible you say.  Unconstitutional you  say.  True.  The 22nd Amendment says, “No person shall be elected to the office  of President more than twice.”  In 1947 FDR had just been elected to an  unprecedented fourth term.  After twelve years in office, political cronyism was  so deeply ingrained in public law and philosophy that Congress called a  Constitutional Convention for the purpose of proposing the 22nd Amendment;  subsequently ratified by three-fourths of the states and enacted into law.

So how can President Obama seek a third term?  Well, the Constitution also  says in Article  II, Section 1 that, “No person except a natural born Citizen. . . shall be  eligible to the Office of President.”  How’s that one been working out for ya?   We will no doubt be hearing much more about that should Senator  Ted Cruz (R-TX) seek the presidential  nomination, but that’s  another story for another day.

Continue reading

An Open Letter, To Those Masquerading as the Media

Sharon Rondeau 

 The Post & Email

To the 39 “media” outlets protesting lack of access to the Obama White House in a hand-delivered letter on November 21, 2013:

Putative White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was given a letter signed by 39 members of the media protesting lack of access and ability to photograph Obama in his official capacity.

Your missive to putative White House spokesman Jay Carney will fall on deaf ears.
You wonder why Obama’s handlers will not allow you access to “the President while he is performing his official duties.”  You question why only sanitized, poised photos released by the White House are allowed to circulate in the public arena.  In order to obtain answers, however, you need to look at yourselves and admit what you, not Obama, did to your profession.
Had you researched Obama’s background in 2007 and 2008, you would have found out that he is a communist.  “Communist,” you say?  Oh, you believed that communists were a thing of the past, something railed about by that crazy Sen. Joseph McCarthy back in the 1950s while more sophisticated members of the Congress and the “media” laughed behind his back or ridiculed him openly.  Yes, ridicule is a thing you “journalists” do quite well when you see something that is simply below your elevated stature to investigate.

An example is the questions about Obama’s constitutional eligibility which arose in 2008.
In late 2007, progressive talking head Chris Matthews said on MSNBC that “Obama was born in Indonesia.”  While Matthews failed to cite a source for his statement, a second similar report went to print in a Hawaii publication shortly thereafter.  None of you was even the slightest bit curious about Obama’s background and whether or not he was constitutionally eligible to occupy the highest office in the land.  You gave no thought to Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution which mandates that only a “natural born Citizen” be elected to the presidency.

Continue reading