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

Full story: Chicago Tribune

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 ...
Comments
171,821 - 171,840 of 175,142 Comments Last updated 31 min ago
Learn to Read

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193734
Jun 17, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Show me where I have stated that I was an expert on Canadian Law! You can't
Now you can take your lying communist ass back to your bedroom and do whatever you like to do in there.
Show me where I said that you said you were an expert on anything.

You claimed that Canadian law had jurisdiction over aliens. You claim that US law does not. That kind of "expertise" is entertaining but as worthless as everything else in your fantasy

“ad maiora nati sumus ”

Since: Sep 09

Justice Scalia is an Oxymoron

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193735
Jun 17, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! All you have to do is read the preamble, it tells you who is subject to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution. Who are "We the People", it sure isn't the aliens, they are subjects of their country of origin. This is why we make treaties, one can't have jurisdiction over something that he doesn't own.
If the drafters of the Constitution only wanted citizens to be subject to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution they would have written WE THE CITIZENS instead of WE THE PEOPLE.

Please explain why the drafters of the civil right amendments to the constitution written the words "RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE" instead of RIGHT OF THE CITIZENS" in the First, Second,
Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Tenth?

Pleas explain why US Supreme Court has held that aliens are PERSONS and are entited to the protection of these amendments? Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 369 (1886); Wong Wing v. U.S. 163 U.S. 228,238 (1896) ; Shaughnessy v. Mezei, 345 U.S. 206, 212 (1953);
Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67, 77 (1976). Pyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211 (1982)

As for your legal analysis that jurisdiction only applies to something that is owned, then you assumed that people are owned by the government.
Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193736
Jun 17, 2014
 
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
You have enlighten us by stating the reason that an alien ISN'T SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION of the United States because an alien can't vote, be drafted or hold a federal job. I replied that by applying your legal analysis a minor ISN'T SUBJECT TO THE JURISDCTION of the United States because a minor can't vote, be drafted or hold a federal job.
No, the reason why an alien isn't subject to the jurisdiction, thereof (Constitution), is because he isn't a citizen. To say an alien is subject to the jurisdiction of the constitution would be giving him citizenship without the naturalization process.
Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193737
Jun 17, 2014
 
Learn to Read wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me where I said that you said you were an expert on anything.
You claimed that Canadian law had jurisdiction over aliens. You claim that US law does not. That kind of "expertise" is entertaining but as worthless as everything else in your fantasy
Learn to Read wrote:

<quoted text>
This from the expert on Canadian law ... Poor pathetic Dufus - whenever your fable falls apart all you can do is punt .

AND???
LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193738
Jun 17, 2014
 
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
A US citizen is only under US jurisdiction while here also. While in France, you are under French jurisdiction. However, the jurisdiction of the US over the US domain is not temporary.
Thus the term, "temporary jurisdiction" does not distinguish an alien from a citizen. LRS is going in circles.
<quoted text>
It doesn't in your small mind, that's for sure. Kiddie pool ------->

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193739
Jun 17, 2014
 
Jacques,
It is the second tallest structure in Chicago and should stand on its own merits.
You do not see John Hancock emblazoned across the side of the John Hancock. People the world over know the John Hancock without superfluous and trivial adornments.
Or The Louvre splashed atop The Louvre. Or Versailles festooned across the Palace of Versailles.
loose
Learn to Read

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193740
Jun 17, 2014
 
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>Learn to Read wrote:

<quoted text>
This from the expert on Canadian law ... Poor pathetic Dufus - whenever your fable falls apart all you can do is punt .

AND???
And I mocked you by calling you an "expert". Where does it say that you called yourself an expert? Poor illiterate moron.
Learn to Read

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193741
Jun 17, 2014
 
Hey Dufus. Where did I ever call myself a communist? List liar liar.
Dale

Wichita, KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193742
Jun 17, 2014
 
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
If the drafters of the Constitution only wanted citizens to be subject to the jurisdiction of the US Constitution they would have written WE THE CITIZENS instead of WE THE PEOPLE.
Please explain why the drafters of the civil right amendments to the constitution written the words "RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE" instead of RIGHT OF THE CITIZENS" in the First, Second,
Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Tenth?
Pleas explain why US Supreme Court has held that aliens are PERSONS and are entited to the protection of these amendments? Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 369 (1886); Wong Wing v. U.S. 163 U.S. 228,238 (1896) ; Shaughnessy v. Mezei, 345 U.S. 206, 212 (1953);
Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67, 77 (1976). Pyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211 (1982)
As for your legal analysis that jurisdiction only applies to something that is owned, then you assumed that people are owned by the government.
Aliens aren't "We the People", they happen to be subject to and subjects of their countries of origin.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193743
Jun 17, 2014
 
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
One year ago : Pro-Pravda=Putin communist traitor
Today : Pro-Pravda-Putin communist traitor
One year ago : Hater of that BLACK man in the WHITE HOUSE
Today : Hater of that BLACK man in the WHITE House
One year ago : Totally uninformed
Today : Totally uninformed
Plus ça change, plus c'est pareil.
That's it Jacqtari, throw that race card out there. It's all you've got.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193744
Jun 17, 2014
 
Herewith your reply to my post :
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>GFY!!! I ain't playing you game!
which asked :

Please tell me more about the Jay treaty of 1790 and how it affects aliens living in the U.S. and not subject to U.S. laws and being subjected to their countries' laws whilst living in the U.S. Should be interesting. Why do you never mention the various Vienna conventions?
I did not say anything about my knowledge of int'l law. I merely ask for yours as you write about it with such authority.

==========

Amazing. Out comes the standard "Justice" and birther non-reply. Is stuck, dumbfounded, has no riposte, comes out with profanity such as "GFY!!! I ain't playing you game!"

BREAKING FOXNEWS :

Scene : Birther land court of justice.
Presiding : Justice burfoon buffoon birther Dale

Lawyer : As you can plainly see, Justice Ha ha (sorry) Dale, your (snickers) Honour, my client is innocent of all charges against him.

"Justice" OMG Dale : GFY!!! I ain't playing you game

One last thing, Justice (guffaws), Dale, what does GFY. mean? I'm guessing it means "I don't know what to reply, I have nothing, never had."

And, being a "justice" (rolling in aisle), I'm sure GFY means "Go fudge yourself". Surely

Going to Chicago in the fall by car. If I get a speeding ticket, and not being an American "subject", and therefore not under U.S. jurisdiction, but "subjected" to Canadian jurisdiction by "treaty", I'll just tell the trooper to send the ticket to my government. And I'm sure he'll say "Yessir, will do that, and I apologize for stopping you even though you were doing more than 40 miles over the speed limit in a school zone. Do as you like, sir, and have a good stay".

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193745
Jun 17, 2014
 
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
Ohhhh Y~E~A~H ...!!!
A world-famous treatise on law by American Lady :

"Ohhhh Y~E~A~H "

Will surely go down in the annals of jurisprudence.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193746
Jun 17, 2014
 
Learn to Read wrote:
Hey Dufus. Where did I ever call myself a communist? List liar liar.
It's very obvious, twink. Bye Biff!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193747
Jun 17, 2014
 
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
A world-famous treatise on law by American Lady :
"Ohhhh Y~E~A~H "
Will surely go down in the annals of jurisprudence.
You've used the exact same phrase. There's that double-neck action, again!
Learn to Read

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193749
Jun 17, 2014
 
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>It's very obvious, twink. Bye Biff!
Poor little lost Romper. Something you've been denying is very obvious to the rest of us

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193750
Jun 17, 2014
 
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! wojar, aliens do not belong to the US, they happen to be subjects of other nations, this is why we have treaties, you can't have jurisdiction over something that isn't yours.
Aliens owe temporary allegiance while in the US and are under US jurisdiction, required to obey US laws. The US exercises its authority over persons and things within its dominions, not any foreign power, and power of the government of a sovereign nation to exercise authority over all persons and things within its territory is the very definition of jurisdiction. No treaties required. Furthermore, the government is empowered to enter treaties per the constitution, so it is a delusion to believe that provisions of treaties are not subject to the constitution. Treaty provisions that are not constitutional would be invalid.

Dale is pissing in the wind.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The US does not depend upon any treaty to enjoy the right of jurisdiction over everything within its domain.
The concept was explained quite nicely by E. de Vattel.
Ҥ 84. Jurisdiction.
The sovereignty united to the domain establishes the jurisdiction of the nation in her territories, or the country that belongs to her. It is her province, or that of her sovereign, to exercise justice in all the places under her jurisdiction, to take cognisance of the crimes committed, and the differences that arise in the country.”
Afro-Euro-Americ an Prez

Jacksonville, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193751
Jun 17, 2014
 
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
One year ago : Pro-Pravda=Putin communist traitor
Today : Pro-Pravda-Putin communist traitor
One year ago : Hater of that BLACK man in the WHITE HOUSE
Today : Hater of that BLACK man in the WHITE House
One year ago : Totally uninformed
Today : Totally uninformed
Plus ça change, plus c'est pareil.
La punaise de lit

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193752
Jun 17, 2014
 
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! I can see you haven't any knowledge of light, much less how it can manipulated.
Stupid!!! Keep up the great work, you amuse me.
I'm not an expert in Play Physics. That's Dale's bailiwick.

BTW, Dale, having studied college physics, and, as a scientist, having used all kinds of spectroscopic instruments, including circular dichroism, and UV-visible spectroscopy, and atomic absorption, I can say I have way more experience and knowledge of the physics of light than you ever will in your lifetime.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Dufus, do you know why solar panels are called "solar panels"? Solar energy is converted to electrical energy. The solar panel does not create energy. If your source of light is, for example, a light bulb, you will merely be taking electrical energy to light the bulb, transmit it to the panel, and reconvert it back to electrical energy, and the result will be a net loss as the efficiency is less than 100%. If you fantasize that the "solar panel" generates energy without a power source, you are mad, in violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics.
Dufus, your stupidity goes nowhere.
<quoted text>

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

RationalState

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193753
Jun 17, 2014
 
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! I can see you haven't any knowledge of light, much less how it can manipulated.
Stupid!!! Keep up the great work, you amuse me.
Dale, you cannot manipulate light to violate the Laws of Thermodynamics. Playing with solar panels and optics cannot create energy.

No amount of idiotic blithering, hand waving, and name calling can change that fact of the universe.

The only thing Dale is manipulating is the same organ he's been playing with since the age of two.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Dufus, do you know why solar panels are called "solar panels"? Solar energy is converted to electrical energy. The solar panel does not create energy. If your source of light is, for example, a light bulb, you will merely be taking electrical energy to light the bulb, transmit it to the panel, and reconvert it back to electrical energy, and the result will be a net loss as the efficiency is less than 100%. If you fantasize that the "solar panel" generates energy without a power source, you are mad, in violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics.
Dufus, your stupidity goes nowhere.

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#193754
Jun 17, 2014
 
garish
gay or colourful in a crude or vulgar manner; gaudy

Collins English Dictionary - Complete and Unabridged

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

78 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min PDUPONT 1,083,786
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 9 min ILfighter 68,060
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 14 min edogxxx 97,578
Abby 7-31 15 min edogxxx 1
Amy 7-31 18 min edogxxx 1
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 47 min JOEL COOL DUDE 68,440
Word (Dec '08) 3 hr andet1987 4,592
Amy 7-30 6 hr pde 21
•••
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••