BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

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

There are 242994 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.

Democracynow org

Oakdale, NY

#168805 Aug 24, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hummmm, but what about Bill "I did not have sex .." Clinton? You seem to bash Bush but ignore Clinton and Obama!!!
Why did Clinton let Obama Bin Laden slip away?
By MANSOOR IJAZ
President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.
I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.
From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.
Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center.
The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index...
Slick Willie wanted to wiretap and the Republicans stopped him, thus September 11, 2001 was the fault of Republicans.

----------

TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT--CONFERENCE REPORT
http://tinyurl.com/2lj3t8 / April 17, 1996
Congressional Record: April 17, 1996 (Senate)- Pages S3454-S3478 DOCID:cr17ap96-153
Terrorism prevention Act--Conference Report
Orrin Hatch: Mr. President, again, in the real world, in the case of the Unabomber or a terrorist where there is a real threat or an immediate concern, you do not need this provision to get an emergency wiretap. All the Senator's motion does is expand the number of crimes that would trigger the wiretap statute. This amendment was offered during the Senate debate. It was defeated. It was not a part of the Senate bill. It was not a part of the House bill. It is not a part of our conference report, and rightly so. I oppose this provision that could expand emergency wiretap authority to permit the Government to begin a wiretap prior to obtaining court approval in a greater range of cases than the law presently allows. I personally find this proposal troubling. I am concerned that this provision, if enacted, would unnecessarily broaden emergency wiretap authority. Under current law, such authority exists when life is in danger, when the national security is threatened, or when an organized crime conspiracy is involved. In the real world, we do not need this amendment to get emergency wiretap authority, and that is a fact.
Let me also say that this authority is constrained by a requirement that surveillance be approved by the Court within 48 hours, but that authority already exists in those areas I have addressed.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdo...

Clinton PDD 63
http://tinyurl.com/cvuom

For Immediate Release May 22, 1998 FACT SHEET PROTECTING AMERICA'S
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURES: PDD 63
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd-63.htm

Clinton PDD 62
http://tinyurl.com/bze57

COMBATING TERRORISM: PRESIDENTIAL DECISION DIRECTIVE 62
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ciao/62fa...

“Arm the homeless!”

Since: Jul 12

The internet

#168806 Aug 24, 2013
loose cannon wrote:
Scrutiny,
How much hashish must a physicist smoke before he casts his fairy dust aside and puts all his stock and faith in a disbelievable Big Bang Theory?
It's not a trick question. I am asking you.
loose
And I am asking you what you find about it to be unbelievable?

It works... and works spectacularly. No faith required. We can see it. It is still happening.

What I don't know is what you don't know about BBT.

If you can tell me what doesn't make sense to you maybe I can help. A lot of people hit snags because of incorrect assumptions. And this in no way means they aren't intelligent.

But I promise you, there isn't a scientific issue you can bring up about it that I can't explain or at least attempt to communicate in a different fashion. If it involved enough I may have to look it up, but most questions won't require it.

UNLESS "why" it happened comes into the arena. That simply is not a scientific issue. How.. we are all over, why doesn't matter to us at all.
Democracynow org

Oakdale, NY

#168807 Aug 24, 2013
COMPREHENSIVE ANTITERRORISM ACT OF 1995
http://tinyurl.com/ys56o4 / April 18, 1996

Congressional Record: April 18, 1996 (House)- Pages H3605-H3618 Government Printing Office's Online Records: DOCID:cr18ap96-43
Conference Report on s. 735, Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
Dan Burton (R-Ind): If the Government of the United States can through, quote-unquote, good faith tap our phones and intrude into our lives, they violate our constitutional liberties, and that is something that we should not tolerate, and that is in section 305 and section 307. The FBI can gain access to individual phone billing records without a subpoena or a court order. Once again I believe that infringes upon our constitutional rights and liberties, and while we are trying to deal with terrorism, and we should, we should not violate our constitutional rights and liberties, and I believe this bill in its present form does. And that is why I think the Barr amendment is absolutely essential if we are going to pass something that will really deal with terrorism crime, but protect the liberties that we fought so hard for in the Revolutionary War.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdo...

----------

U.S. warned in 1995 of plot to hijack planes, attack buildings
September 18, 2001 http://tinyurl.com/l2kuo7w
MANILA, Philippines (CNN)-- The FBI was warned six years ago of a terrorist plot to hijack commercial planes and slam them into the Pentagon, the CIA headquarters and other buildings, Philippine investigators told CNN.
Philippine authorities learned of the plot after a small fire in a Manila apartment, which turned out to be the hideout of Ramzi Yousef, who was later convicted for his role in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Yousef escaped at the time, but agents caught his right-hand man, Abdul Hakim Murad, who told them a chilling tale.
"Murad narrated to us about a plan by the Ramzi cell in the continental U.S. to hijack a commercial plane and ram it into the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and also the Pentagon," said Rodolfo Mendoza, a Philippine intelligence investigator.
Philippine investigators also found evidence targeting commercial towers in San Francisco, Chicago and New York City.
They said they passed that information on to the FBI in 1995, but it's not clear what was done with it./ http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/18/inv.hij...

----------

CIA Warned Of U.S. Attack In '95
Said Islamic Extremists Could Strike Targets In NYC, Washington
April 16, 2004 / http://tinyurl.com/2huu2
Six years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the CIA warned in a classified report that Islamic extremists likely would strike on U.S. soil at landmarks in Washington or New York, or through the airline industry, according to intelligence officials.

Though hauntingly prescient, the CIA's 1995 National Intelligence Estimate did not yet name Osama bin Laden as a terrorist threat.

But within months the intelligence agency developed enough concern about the wealthy, Saudi-born militant to create a specific unit to track him and his followers, the officials told The Associated Press.

And in 1997, the CIA updated its intelligence estimate to ensure bin Laden appeared on its very first page as an emerging threat, cautioning that his growing movement might translate into attacks on U.S. soil, the officials said, divulging new details about the CIA's 1990s response to the terrorist threat.

The officials took the rare step Thursday of disclosing information in the closely held National Intelligence Estimates and other secret briefings to counter criticisms in a staff report released this week by the independent commission examining pre-Sept. 11 intelligence failures.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/21/ter...
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#168808 Aug 24, 2013

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#168809 Aug 24, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry if you can not get the analogy. You need a CQ (Commonsense Quotient) of at least 90 to "get it"!
By the way, how many at-fault car crashes have you been involved in? People with low CQs have high accident rates too!
The age of a planet is determined when the solar system formed.
If you brought up God Years in a Astronomy class. The teacher would say there is no such thing as God years in Astronmy then the teacher would give you an F



Grand Birther

Fairfax, VA

#168810 Aug 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Garfer Birks, do you think we care what you're convinced of? FATAZZ Chance!
Oh look, the birfoon is capable of parroting what s/he read.

Good job, birfoon.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#168812 Aug 24, 2013
Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh look, the birfoon is capable of parroting what s/he read.
Good job, birfoon.
Incapable of answering a simple question, Garfer? Why am I not surprised? Your posts are neither informative or funny, so why waste your time?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#168813 Aug 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
Fool. Do you by any chance work for WND.com ? If not, you should as you seem as dense and deceitful (transl : liar) as them.

Clinton did not declare war on Iraq. If so, please name the combat unit that invaded and the general in command. He did practice air interdiction, yes. He did have suspicious sites bombed, yes. At little cost to Iraqi citizens and no cost to US servicemen except when those F-16 or F-15 whatever stupid cowboys killed that helicopter. His bombing must have had results as there were no WMDs when GWB conducted his, ha ha, LMAO (LRs tm reg'd) "Mission Accomplished" invasion.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#168814 Aug 24, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Fool. Do you by any chance work for WND.com ? If not, you should as you seem as dense and deceitful (transl : liar) as them.
Clinton did not declare war on Iraq. If so, please name the combat unit that invaded and the general in command. He did practice air interdiction, yes. He did have suspicious sites bombed, yes. At little cost to Iraqi citizens and no cost to US servicemen except when those F-16 or F-15 whatever stupid cowboys killed that helicopter. His bombing must have had results as there were no WMDs when GWB conducted his, ha ha, LMAO (LRs tm reg'd) "Mission Accomplished" invasion.
Just a snipet!
I take it your English has failed you. Seems the foreign boy is wrong again!
That's 0 - 301! LMAO!

But Bill Clinton, four years ago, took to the airwaves and explained his authorization of non-U.N.-approved missile strikes against Iraq, using the very same arguments now advanced by President Bush. Yet the silence was deafening.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2003/02/17376/#Y7HDeI8eipO...

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#168815 Aug 24, 2013
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ever hear of the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas which was cancelled by the Democrat controlled Congress and Bill Clinton in 1993?!?
It would have been far bigger and powerful than the Swiss one and would have probably solved that question.
From Wiki:
Comparison to the Large Hadron Collider[edit source | editbeta]
The SSC's planned collision energy of 40 TeV is almost three times the current 14 TeV of its European counterpart, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN in Geneva.[20]
The SSC cost was due largely to the massive civil engineering project of digging a huge tunnel underground. The LHC, in contrast, took over the pre-existing engineering infrastructure and 27 km long underground cavern of the Large Electron-Positron Collider, and used innovative magnet designs to bend the higher energy particles into the available tunnel.[21] The LHC eventually cost the equivalent of about 5 billion US dollars to build.
You wrote : "Ever hear of the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas which was cancelled by the Democrat controlled Congress and Bill Clinton in 1993?!?
It would have been far bigger and powerful than the Swiss one and would have probably solved that question."

Funny you. "would have been far bigger". It was not, is not, was never built as it was not cost-effective, was too expensive.

This is like saying "IF the Boeing SST had been built, it would have been much faster and much bigger than the Concorde. "IF" is the key conjunction here. As is said in French : "Si (if) ma tante avait des couilles, elle serait mon oncle".(IF my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle").
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#168816 Aug 24, 2013
And foreign boy, just so you know, Clinton is a liar. Has been for decades! Yet to you he's some sort of idol. LMAO! I wouldn't leave the man alone with my dog! Just like his wife, he's political scum.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#168817 Aug 24, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, then, start obeying those laws and the Constitution, not just the laws and part of the Constitution that suit you.
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You trying to tell me what to do, boy?
I don't have to. You're the one constantly boasting about the best Constitution on earth and how important it is to you and how President Obama's "natural-born status" does not reflect the letter of the Constitution. To quote your bosom buddy Rogue, "You're a flaming hypocrite". Not to mention non-Constitution respecting traitor.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#168818 Aug 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Just a snipet!
I take it your English has failed you. Seems the foreign boy is wrong again!
That's 0 - 301! LMAO!
But Bill Clinton, four years ago, took to the airwaves and explained his authorization of non-U.N.-approved missile strikes against Iraq, using the very same arguments now advanced by President Bush. Yet the silence was deafening.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2003/02/17376/#Y7HDeI8eipO...
Strange, when I stump you, which is every time, you criticize my English. Any other scheme to mask your ineptitude and ignorance? Any explanation why my second language is superior to your first and only one? At least, having only one, you'd think you'd do a better job of it. Sigh.

Clinton never claimed he had UN approval. Your bosom buddy and close confidant Rogue is the one who claims GWB had Russian-German-UN approval. Asked to prove it, he replied like you many other times when pressed : YOU prove they didn't (what?) approve it. LMAO (LRSW tm reg'd). What a clump of ooze you are. Ughhhh

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#168819 Aug 24, 2013
P.S.:

You wrote : "Strange, when I stump you, which is every time, you criticize my English. "

I should've also said what an improvement your reply is compared to the usual death threats.

LRS : The symbol of crass/vulgar/gross mediocrity sinking farther and farther out of sight.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#168820 Aug 24, 2013
LMAO (LRS tm reg'd) I quoted myself instead of you, not that the message is not the same. Here, crud and mollusc :

"I take it your English has failed you"
Grand Birther

United States

#168821 Aug 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Incapable of answering a simple question, Garfer? Why am I not surprised? Your posts are neither informative or funny, so why waste your time?
Maybe you'll find this grammar lesson informative, birfoon.

If you use "neither" in a negative pairing, you should use "nor" to indicate a continuation of the negative state.

I realize the common birfoon such as yourself has trouble grasping simple conceits such as this, but I'm confident you'll master it with a little practice.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#168822 Aug 24, 2013
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, then, start obeying those laws and the Constitution, not just the laws and part of the Constitution that suit you.
<quoted text>
I don't have to. You're the one constantly boasting about the best Constitution on earth and how important it is to you and how President Obama's "natural-born status" does not reflect the letter of the Constitution. To quote your bosom buddy Rogue, "You're a flaming hypocrite". Not to mention non-Constitution respecting traitor.
Foreign boy, what are you bytchin' about now? Why don't you tell me what part I'm not abiding by? Then, you can show me my numerous posts where I boast about the Constitution. You're a flake. You don't know doodly squat about me, do you? Nope. Why don't you go home foreign boy? For the record, I do not believe Obobblehead was born in Hawaii. And he is by far the worst leader (ha!) this country has ever seen. Now, if that upsets you, then here's a quarter. Call someone who gives a damn. You're as hypocritical as the next person, probably more so. Now roll your tongue up off the floor and stick it in your ear. Bonehead.
Justice LRS

Shreveport, LA

#168823 Aug 24, 2013
Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe you'll find this grammar lesson informative, birfoon.
If you use "neither" in a negative pairing, you should use "nor" to indicate a continuation of the negative state.
I realize the common birfoon such as yourself has trouble grasping simple conceits such as this, but I'm confident you'll master it with a little practice.
Thank you for proving my post.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#168824 Aug 24, 2013
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
You trying to tell me what to do, boy?
Isn't it funny that Obama has no right to amend the Affordable Care Act, but he has. And the Libtards don't give a scheißen because Obama did it and that makes it all right with them.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#168825 Aug 24, 2013
Grand Birther wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe you'll find this grammar lesson informative, birfoon.
If you use "neither" in a negative pairing, you should use "nor" to indicate a continuation of the negative state.
I realize the common birfoon such as yourself has trouble grasping simple conceits such as this, but I'm confident you'll master it with a little practice.
Justice LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for proving my post.
I guess Terri Tunna finally got a job in DC with the Obama administration.

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Al Franken's record, sized up (Oct '14) 47 min pakalolo 81
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr Ms Sassy 1,641,489
News Sen. Al Franken Accused Of Sexual Assault By LA... 1 hr Divine Messenger 50
News Gillibrand: Bill Clinton should've resigned ove... 2 hr Rick Perry s Closet 72
News Oil business seen in strong position as Trump t... (Jan '17) 2 hr C Kersey 21
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 2 hr positronium 14,076
News White nationalists: Charlottesville just a begi... 2 hr Randy Bush 331
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 2 hr Chilli J 41,866
News Donald Trump pauses for a water break 6 hr Ronald 102
More from around the web