BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

There are 243213 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jan 8, 2009, titled BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen.... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

Learn to Read

United States

#186876 Mar 21, 2014
Breaking news. AL Supreme's create GIANT LOOPHOLE for Birfoons to pursue their fable.

Dissenting CJ Moore creates new law, declaring "Should he who was elected to the presidency be determined to be ineligible, the remedy of impeachment is available through the United States Congress, and the plaintiffs in this case, McInnish and Goode, can pursue this remedy through their representatives in Congress"

Obama may as well start packing his bags!

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186877 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
And in the Afghan War we had the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, France, Australia, Georgia, Poland, Romania, Turkey and CANADA!!!
Now stick that in you cocaine pipe and smoke it!!!
We are not talking Afghan war here, Rogue. Quit changing the subject. The Afghan intervention WAS okayed by the UN. It should not have been, but it nevertheless was. We Canadians went in, big mistake and with a Liberal gov't. They can be dumb as well.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186878 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Doo Doo, you just did respond to a foul mouth !!!
Yes, Congress approved as did the U.N. and besides the U.S.we had the United Kingdom, Australia, Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Bulgaria, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands and Spain in the coalition.
Can you tell us who was in the coalition when Bil Clinton invaded Yugoslavia?
And if you can not prove you points, shut the f-up!!!
Thank you for acknowledging that you are indeed a boorish foul mouthed individual.

The UN not only did not approve the invasion of Iraq, it condemned it, in Kofi Annan's own words.

And because the UK, Australia, Poland,Ukraine, Georgia, Bulgaria,Denmark, Italy, Holland and Spain contributed troops , that does not make it UN-approved. Are you daft?

Analyse the countries that went in with the U.S. The former eastern bloc countries went in for the money and the modern armaments that the U.S. bequeathed them. Italy, Holland, Australia, pulled out faster than lightning when they saw what a mistake they had made. As to the UK, the biggest partner, Toni Blair, its otherwise competent Prime Minister, had to resign mostly on account of his mistake in going to Iraq.

Bill Clinton invaded Yugoslavia? Why don't you stick to driving helicopters and little airplanes? It's what you do best, and not get involved in politics, internal or external and int'l affairs.

The U.S., along with NATO nations and with the authorization of the United Nations, did indeed intervene in the former Yugoslavia. As did France, the UK, Canada, Italy etc. Clinton invaded Yugoslavia? Again, you've lost it. Read this, from your bible, Wikipedia :

==========

From Wikipedia :

Early involvement and monitoring

NATO's first involvement in both the Bosnian War and the Yugoslav wars in general came in February 1992, when the alliance issued a statement urging all the belligerents in the conflict to allow the deployment of United Nations peacekeepers. While primarily symbolic, this statement paved the way for later NATO actions.[1]

On July 10, 1992, NATO foreign ministers agreed, at a meeting in Helsinki, to assist the United Nations in monitoring compliance with sanctions established under United Nations Security Council resolutions 713 (1991) and 757 (1992). This led to the commencement of Operation Maritime Monitor off the coast of Montenegro, which was coordinated with the Western European Union Operation Sharp Vigilance in the Strait of Otranto on July 16.[2] On October 9, 1992, the Security Council passed Resolution 781, establishing a no-fly zone over Bosnia-Herzegovina. In response, on October 16, NATO expanded its mission in the area to include Operation Sky Monitor, which monitored Bosnian airspace for unauthorized flig

==========

The NATO intervention, though not perfect, did stop the Nazi-like killings, concentration camps and brought an end to hostilities. Unlike GWB's Afghanistan and Iraq. Look at those two today.

Now that you've been proven wrong for the 4th or 5th time today, by me and others, will your no-response be "Shut the f**k up?"

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186879 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue, read this, specially what Kofi Annan said about the illegality of the war : The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal".

For the pro-war hawks to refer to the 1991 U.N. ceasefire resolution as justification makes the Tonkin Gulf resolution look like the Gospel Truth., Ridiculous.

Legality of the Iraq War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An UN weapons inspector in Iraq.
The legality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq has been widely debated since the United States, United Kingdom, and a coalition of other countries launched the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal."[1][2] The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court reported in February 2006 that he had received 240 communications in connection with the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 which alleged that various war crimes had been committed. The political leaders of the US and UK have argued the war was legal, while many legal experts and other international leaders have argued that it was illegal. US and UK officials have argued that existing UN Security Council resolutions related to the 1991 Gulf War and the subsequent ceasefire (660, 678), and to later inspections of Iraqi weapons programs (1441), had already authorized the invasion.[3] Critics of the invasion have challenged both of these assertions, arguing that an additional Security Council resolution, which the US and UK failed to obtain, would have been necessary to specifically authorize the invasion.[1][4][5]

The UN Security Council, as outlined in Article 39 of the UN Charter, has the ability to rule on the legality of the war, but has yet not been asked by any UN member nation to do so. The United States and the United Kingdom have veto power in the Security Council, so action by the Security Council is highly improbable even if the issue were to be raised. Despite this, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) may ask that the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—"the principal judicial organ of the United Nations" (Article 92)—give either an 'advisory opinion' or 'judgement' on the legality of the war. Indeed, the UNGA asked the ICJ to give an 'advisory opinion' on "the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel", by its resolution A/RES/ES-10/14,[6] as recently as 12 December 2003; despite opposition from permanent members of the Security Council. It achieved this by sitting in tenth 'emergency special session', under the framework of the 'Uniting for Peace' resolution. The ICJ had previously found against the US for its actions in Nicaragua, a finding the US refused to comply with...

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#186880 Mar 21, 2014
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
the original charter for that war was to get Osama bin Laden. Mission has been accomplished, time to leave.
Mission NOT accomplished by GWB and concluded by president Obama.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186881 Mar 21, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
XXXXXX
The NATO intervention, though not perfect, did stop the Nazi-like killings, concentration camps and brought an end to hostilities. Unlike GWB's Afghanistan and Iraq. Look at those two today.
Now that you've been proven wrong for the 4th or 5th time today, by me and others, will your no-response be "Shut the f**k up?"
Well dah, most of those involved where ....Christians. Bosnia Herzegovina have the highest percentage of MUSLIM (40%) which are the major source of violence in the former Yugoslavia. What percentage of the people in Afghanistan and Iraq are NOT Muslims?
In the U.S. crime rates are mostly racial as blacks are eight times more likely to commit violent crimes than non-blacks. And Liberals are ten times more likely to commit violent crimes than Conservatives too!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186882 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>I wonder if you read any of it as it seems to be many loopholes to reopen the case.
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Denied by the Alabama Supremes. Oh yeah. Tons of loopholes - why don't you start working on your appeal brief?
Did you read it? All of it? Yes or no?!? Probably not as you seem unable to write more than two lines.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186883 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
And in the Afghan War we had the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, France, Australia, Georgia, Poland, Romania, Turkey and CANADA!!!
Now stick that in you cocaine pipe and smoke it!!!
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
the original charter for that war was to get Osama bin Laden. Mission has been accomplished, time to leave.
Sooo, why are we still there? Who is the current president? You can't blame Bush for a promise Obama has not kept!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186884 Mar 21, 2014
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you are one of the historically challenged group. Actually the UN not only didn't approve of our invasion of Iraq, Kofi Annan condemned the invasion as an illegal act.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/16/...
The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.
Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish."
He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from
Second, the original resolution passed by Congress was passed after assurances from Bush that he would go back to the UN for approval to invade Iraq one more time before actually invading. When it became apparent that Russia, Germany and France would not approve of the invasion, bush reneged on his promise
third, Congress passed that resolution passed on the phony, doctored up intel supplied by the bush administration. I guess congress was naive to think that no american president would put our troops in harm's way for no reason, except to make a profti, i.e. Cheney had a vest interest in the profits of Haliburton. Guess they didn't learn their lesson from LBJ and the false flag operation known as the Gulf of Tonkin
Yes they did, in 1992. It was a two part war because Saddamn continued to ignore U.N. mandates!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186885 Mar 21, 2014
Iraq Resolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
.
President George Bush, surrounded by leaders of the House and Senate, announces the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, October 2, 2002.

The Iraq Resolution or the Iraq War Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,[1] Pub.L. 107–243, 116 Stat. 1498, enacted October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing military action against Iraq.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186886 Mar 21, 2014
Yep, the vote in the House was 197 for, 133 against, 3 no votes and in the Senate the vote was 77 for and 23 against. Now you Libtards need to shut up!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186887 Mar 21, 2014
And put this in your cocaine pipes and smoke it too.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ243/...

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#186888 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>I wonder if you read any of it as it seems to be many loopholes to reopen the case.
<quoted text>
Did you read it? All of it? Yes or no?!? Probably not as you seem unable to write more than two lines.
Hilarious, Rouge's ignorant one-liner rebutted perfectly by LTR's knowledgeable one-liner, and Rougetard's criticism is "you seem unable to write more than two lines". Priceless!

Plenty of "loopholes" for McInnish to take his case to the US Supreme Court? Again, Priceless!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Denied by the Alabama Supremes. Oh yeah. Tons of loopholes - why don't you start working on your appeal brief?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186889 Mar 21, 2014
Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#186890 Mar 21, 2014
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#186892 Mar 21, 2014
Learn to Read wrote:
Bad news Birfoons - another day, another defeat for Birfistan
https://acis.alabama.gov/displaydocs.cfm...
Those losses just keep piling up
OMG, and not one justice's opinion even mentioned any points from Zollo the Clown's brief. According to Rougetard logic that is a loophole major!
Learn to Read

Scottsburg, IN

#186893 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>I wonder if you read any of it as it seems to be many loopholes to reopen the case.

Did you read it? All of it? Yes or no?!? Probably not as you seem unable to write more than two lines.
Every word. Not a loophole to be found Just Birfoon fail and Birfoon tears

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#186894 Mar 21, 2014
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
They (Congress) relied on misleading reports from the CIA which Dumbya had insisted upon. Pathetic. Dumbya subverted the CIA to provide false analyses in the same way Stalin forced the NKGB to produce intelligence reports to conform to his paranoid delusions.

Telling is a memorandum from Gorbachev on "the impermissibility of distortions of the factual state of affairs in messages and informational reports sent to the Central Committee of the CPSU and other ruling bodies."

Amazing, Gorby was trying to get reliable information, trying to get away from sycophantic reporting, and Bush, later was moving toward sycophantic reporting where intelligence reports should be tailored to the predisposition of the head of state.
Learn to Read

Scottsburg, IN

#186895 Mar 21, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>OMG, and not one justice's opinion even mentioned any points from Zollo the Clown's brief. According to Rougetard logic that is a loophole major!
Even the "Decending" opinion (got to love Orly) admits that the case is moot If that isn't a giant loophole then there isn't one to be found

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#186897 Mar 21, 2014
Grand Birther wrote:
My goodness, Rogue really ought to be embarrassed, but I doubt he is capable of the introspection and lacks the self-awareness to actually be able to feel shame.
That reminds me of a study published over 10 years ago wherein it was found that a very large proportion (perhaps a majority, I don't recall) of the most confident people lacked the self awareness to realize they are incompetent. I first learned of the study in the Tuesday Science Section of the New York Times , so it must be false ("Loony-Lefty"), according to Rougetards.

Rouge Moron, Dufus Dale, and the Bayou Birfoon come to mind as exemplars.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min Reality Check 1,681,143
UN Troops? 44 min UN Troops R Here 6
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 4 hr Alain Vain 11,727
White house press core 5 hr ACE MAN 1 2
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 5 hr honeymylove 3,750
booker 6 hr AMERICAN PATRIOT 2
Time to send in the Feds 7 hr Edmond Ruffin 3

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages