From Douglas J. Hagmann, Director Northest Intelligence Network
Based on extensive research and review of nearly 1,100 pages of court documents filed within the last 60 days, the Northeast Intelligence Network has identified 19 lawsuits filed in various venues across the U.S. by a variety of Americans against Barack Hussein OBAMA, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Secretaries of State of several states, and other related parties.
The common issue of each lawsuit confronts the eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA to become America’s 44th President on January 20, 2009. Of the 19 lawsuits researched, thirteen-(13) remain active or somewhat active, meaning that the courts in the various venues in which they have been filed are considering the merits of the individual cases. At least six others have been dismissed or can otherwise be described as “dead-on-arrival” due to a number of different and wide ranging issues. Of the 13 remaining cases, however, three-(3) stand out from the rest based on the nature of their claims, each providing somewhat different perspectives relating to one core issue:
the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA to take office as President of the United States based on his citizenship status.
Perhaps it is no coincidence that this article is being published on December 7th, 2008, the 67th anniversary of the attack on America by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on this day in 1941. Barack Hussein OBAMA contends that he was born in Hawaii, a claim that despite countless erroneous media reports and reckless, poorly researched postings on numerous Internet Blogs to the contrary, has yet to be proven by Barack Hussein OBAMA or anyone else named as co-defendants.
Of the three aforementioned lawsuits, two raise questions about his actual location of birth (Berg, Keyes), while the third (Donofrio) focuses on his citizenship status. (While this might admittedly be an oversimplification, I believe it is a sufficient characterization for the purpose of this article).
Instead, Barack Hussein OBAMA, in conjunction with the co-defendants, has reportedly spent between $800,000 to close to $1,000,000 (one million dollars), using at least three different law firms to fight these civil actions. Now, consider that each and every one of the lawsuits filed against him could be immediately dismissed by the mere production of a single piece of paper that is available to him for the paltry sum of $12.50 at a recorder’s office in Hawaii. Keep in mind that at this point, OBAMA would likely not even have to make the document public, but provide it to the applicable judge or official for verification purposes to make this controversial maelstrom disappear.
As an investigator and a rational American citizen, I have to ask myself why Barack Hussein OBAMA has chosen not to dispose of this very simple matter in the most logical and expeditious manner possible. Not only would that satisfy these pesky plaintiffs who happen to respect the rule of law as laid out in the Constitution of the United States, but it would also go a long way to brand them and their supporters as deluded conspiracy theorists who have way too much time on their hands.
Following that same line of logic, I then have to ask myself why this matter of such constitutional importance has not received the coverage by the corporate media that it deserves. More ink has been used, and more airtime has been provided to the civil and criminal legal issues of the likes of O.J. Simpson than the possible constitutional ramifications of the eligibility questions of the new leader of the free world. I would argue that questions surrounding the eligibility of a professional football, basketball or baseball player, NASCAR race driver, or Olympic athlete would garner more media attention and outrage of otherwise rational Americans than this matter, which has far more important ramifications for this country as well as the entire planet.
Equally troubling is the failure of those who have been labeled or otherwise accepted as the public ambassadors of American conservatives holding much coveted and very valuable platforms, opportunities and audiences to address this issue with the intellectual honesty it deserves. In this instance, I am specifically referring to the vocal gatekeepers of American conservatism such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly whose combined audience and consequential influence is staggering to the imagination.
The same applies to conservative political pundits such as Michelle Malkin, Michael Medved and David Horowitz, the latter who, in an article published today, described Alan Keyes, one of the plaintiffs of the lawsuits, “an unhinged demagogue on the political fringe” for his role in wanting to insure that we are adhering to the rule of law outlined in the U.S. Constitution. This, by the way, is a key tactic employed by those who cannot fight the argument with facts; they attack the messenger.
By simply ignoring the legitimate questions raised by these lawsuits, however, it efficiently and effectively serves to brand anyone wanting answers as a card-carrying member of the lunatic, malcontented fringe of society.
Perhaps most disturbing of all is what I have found while researching this issue, something that requires much more time and space than can be allotted here. There appears to be an unprecedented level of collusion between numerous political power brokers on both sides of the political divide, elected and appointed officials on both the federal and state levels, as well as members of the corporate media. It is interesting if not alarming to take a few steps back in an effort to gain a wider perspective, and finding unusual alliances and political “bed partners” among various members this group.
To provide a bit of insight into what I am referencing, consider and conduct research yourself into some events that have taken place within the past several years – events that have effectively changed or otherwise had a direct impact on the social and geopolitical landscape of America and its power structure. A few examples include such things as NAFTA, the SPP treaty, border and immigration issues, the Patriot Act, the Global Poverty Act of 2007, the management of the oil “crisis,” the most recent economic crisis and the remedies enacted, and the recent G-20 economic summit, where President Bush essentially provided economic oversight of U.S. economic institutions to the European Union.
There is indeed something very wrong taking place, having sinister implications and global overtones. Sound too conspiratorial? Well, as long I will undoubtedly be branded a “conspiracy loon” for raising the issue of constitutional eligibility of the messianic Barack Hussein Obama, I might as well go all of the way.
Meanwhile, the constitutional “elephant in the room” is still there. And if I had to make a guess on how long the elephant would be staying, well, let’s just say this: I’d be planning on moving the furniture out and the food, water and the tons of newspapers that will be needed in.read more »
No comments:
Post a Comment