Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

You Have the Right to Remain Silent (LT Colonel Lakin Read His Rights)
Safe Guard Our Constitution ^

Posted on 04/13/2010 8:19:14 AM PDT by Man50D

Washington, D.C., April 13, 2010. Army doctor Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin yesterday met with his brigade commander, Col. Gordon R. Roberts, who proceeded to read LTC Lakin his Miranda rights, and who informed LTC Lakin he had the “right to remain silent” because LTC Lakin is about to be charged with serious crimes. Col. Roberts was at age 19 awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, the only recipient of the nation’s highest honor currently on active duty in the Army.

LTC Lakin had previously been ordered in writing to report yesterday to Ft. Campbell, KY and then on to deploy for his second tour of duty in Afghanistan. Lakin refused to obey these orders and instead came to work yesterday morning at the Pentagon. Late yesterday afternoon he was confronted by his brigade commander.

Before the meeting was over, LTC Lakin’s Pentagon Access Pass had been revoked, and his laptop computer was set to be confiscated.

The message to LTC Lakin is clear; through official channels, he was informed yesterday that he will shortly be court-martialled for crimes (specifically, missing movement and conduct unbecoming an officer) that for others has led to lengthy imprisonment at hard labor.

Lakin has announced in a YouTube video that has now been viewed more than 110,000 times that he considers it his duty to refuse to obey orders that would be illegal if President Obama is ineligible to hold office.

Meanwhile, cries mount for proof of that eligibility, but nothing has been forthcoming. The Obama campaign at one point released a copy of computer-generated abstract of information purportedly in Hawaii's records system, but the source of this information is unclear and need not have been a birth certificate issued contemporaneously and signed by the doctor who attended the birth. Even the document released was only a copy, and the version printed in the Los Angeles Times on June 16, 2008 is on a form only in use since late 2001. Even as it is, the document contains a warning that it is merely “prima facie”--threshold, rebuttable and thus inconclusive --evidence of birth, and the copy the Times printed mysteriously has the certificate number blacked out, thereby rendering the document unusable according to language on the bottom.

Given the seriousness of the offenses with which LTC Lakin is about to be charged, the American Patriot Foundation today renewed its plea for donations to its legal defense fund for LTC Lakin. Details are available at APF's website, www.safeguardourconstitution.com


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: army; birthcertificate; birthers; certifigate; lakin; military; naturalborncitizen; obama; terrencelakin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 1,051-1,1001,101-1,1501,151-1,2001,201-1,248 last
To: etraveler13
There are claims that a parent cannot expatriate a child’s U.S. citizenship, however, this is not correct.

Perhaps. Unfortuantely for you, there is no provision of the 1952 act under which Obama would have been expatriated.

Renewing an Indonesian Passport after the age of 18 is an affirmative act,

Yes, but unfortunately for you, there's no evidence he ever had an Indonesian Passport, let alone renewed one.

as you are swearing allegiance to another Country.

Which he never did.

Soetoro/Obama renewed his Indonesian Passport when he traveled to Pakistan, that is why he had to stop in Indonesia first.

Prove it.

Remember, in 1981, Dunham was divorcing Soetoro in Hawaii and was not in Indonesia. Obama/Soetoro admits to traveling to Indonesia first and then onto Pakistan.

So?

Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams from my father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother. But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro.

Divorces don't need to be filed in person, especially if they are uncontested. She most likely mailed in the papers from Indonesia.

In addition, the State Department has stated in response to a FOIA request that they do not have a U.S. Passport application on file for Barack H. Obama.

I very much doubt it. Source please.

1,201 posted on 04/19/2010 1:11:05 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1193 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
I don’t believe he is a naturalized citizen. Personally I belive he is an illegal alien.

Yes, I understand that birtherism is a religion, and that is part of your creed. Unfortunately, you have no evidence to back up this belief of yours.

I do not believe that there is a document to be found. That is why he is sealing everything.

Obama didn't seel anything. All the records birthers complain they can't see are protected by privacy laws that apply to everyone.

I stated that AT THE VERY BEST... which presumes that he came back to the US and reapplied for citizenship denounced his Indonesian citizenship

Why would he denounce a citizenship he never had to begin with?

denounced his British citizenship

Why would he have to denounce something he lost automatically when he was in his early 20's?

I think he got his education with student visas from Indonesia and travelled under an Indonesian passport

Allegations for which you have no evidence.

Illegally changed his name from Barry Soetoro to Barak Obama

You have no evidence he ever legally changed his name to Soetoro, let alone he "illegally" changed it back.

I don’t care if you believe me, it is my own investigation and satisfies only me. Don’t like it? Tough.

I know. You will believe what you believe, evidence be damned. As I said, birtherism is a religion.

1,202 posted on 04/19/2010 1:18:38 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1195 | View Replies]

To: curiosity
Uhh..yes it can. Scanners can be set to add a white border. On some scanners that is the default setting.

Feel free to document this with a link. The border around the alleged COLB is not the same width all the way around and not the same color. A digitally added border would be. Sorry, but this claim fails. Plus, you can see the shadow of the edge of the document in the scan. The document in the factlack photos doesn't match.

1,203 posted on 04/19/2010 1:18:48 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1199 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
It is in the court system now. Berg is pursueing it at his speed not yours, and I pretty much guarantee that he does not give a cr!p about what you might or might not think.

I'm sure he doesn't, since it's the judges' opinions, not mine, that matter. Unfortunately, no judge seems to have thought his cases had any merit, and I suspect he will continue to find them to be of this opinion as he continues filing his frivolous suits.

Circumstantially, it makes sense to believe that Berg has heard the recording, and as such has proceeded with it.

IMHO, it doesn't make much sense to believe anything coming out of the mouth of a guy who thinks 9-11 was an inside job.

The fact that you have not heard it, means nothing.

Apparently, no one has heard it except Berg and his client, which doesn't inspire much confidence. Good luck convincing anyone with that kind of evidence.

Feel free to find definitive proof that this was never said, like a statement by Michelle Obama, reported by API.

LOL. You're asking me to prove a negative. Let me give you a little lesson in logic. The burden of proof is on the one who makes a positive assertion that something happened, not on the person who would deny it.

1,204 posted on 04/19/2010 1:34:45 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1197 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
For your first statement, it is obvious to anyone that reads the judges dismissal statements that the cases are not being dismissed because of the merits, but technicalities.

Failure to prefect service is a technicality, standing is merit.

His father is not a US citizen, therefore Obama is not a Natural born citizen, therefore he does not meet the qualifications for the office. Period.

That is an opinion, not a fact.The majority of voters knowing that his father was not a US citizen voted for him believing him to be a NBC. Congress certified the vote without objection.

Just because a car thief steals a car, Possession does not equal Ownership. The fact that the thief has eluded the police, or they do not pursue him, does not make him less guilty, or NOT a thief....you ken?

In this case, to continue your analogy, Obama not only has the car, but also the bill of sale, and the pink slip issued to him from the DMV.

1,205 posted on 04/19/2010 6:57:00 PM PDT by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1187 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
African Press International (API) claims to have audio recordings of Michelle Obama in a bigoted rant against “American bloggers” and anti-Obama media outlets (Fox?).

That story was so thoroughly discredited, dead and buried, I'm truly surprised to see it resurface.

Last I heard, Sammy claimed George W had the tapes.

1,206 posted on 04/19/2010 7:05:38 PM PDT by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1192 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom

Really? I have done quite a bit of searching.
Since you seem to have a definitive answer on the subject, would you be so kind as to post a link from API, Obama, a credible news source that says so?
I appreciate it.
E...


1,207 posted on 04/20/2010 9:56:14 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1206 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom

Lady, in the age of photoshop fake bill of sales are common. I have a nephew conned by one. If the car was stolen, that stolen status is not remedied by tricking the DMV into issuing a ‘legit’ title.


1,208 posted on 04/20/2010 10:00:10 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1205 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom

Failure to prefect service is a technicality, standing is merit.


Evidently, you did not read the link I posted. Indeed Standing is a tool used to NOT hear a case, it is a technicality used successfully to stop a case from proceeding.
Merit, on the other hand, or Merits of a case, are facts or circumstantial evidence that warrant exploration to get to the truth of a matter. It follows that if a case is not heard BECAUSE of a technicality (Like Standing), the Merits of the cas cannot be explored.

The FACT that Barak Obama Sr is Barak Obama II/Barry Soetoro’s father is admitted in the two books by BHO/BS, the divorce decree from Obama and his wife. This is his father.
Based on the outcome, it is apparent that the Majority of the people who voted for Obama were duped. They believed that Nancy Pelosi, and the DNC, and Howard Dean, head of the DNC, as well as every Secretary Of State of each of States also vetted the President elect, it was also assumed that our representative in Washington, and the VP did their jobs. It was not an issue that the public is responsible to resolve. That will never happen again, I bet.
It is ignorant to make the statement that those who voted for Obama knew he was constitutionally ineligable. If those who were responsible to properly Vett his had done their job, he would not have been on the Democratic Ballot, and you know it.

In my analogy, he stole the car, is a thief, and has not been arrested yet, but will be, its a matter of time.


1,209 posted on 04/20/2010 10:07:24 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1205 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

It is in the court system now. Berg is pursueing it at his speed not yours, and I pretty much guarantee that he does not give a cr!p about what you might or might not think.
****
I’m sure he doesn’t, since it’s the judges’ opinions, not mine, that matter. Unfortunately, no judge seems to have thought his cases had any merit, and I suspect he will continue to find them to be of this opinion as he continues filing his frivolous suits.


No case has been heard on its merits thus far. So your opinion is speculation at best.

Circumstantially, it makes sense to believe that Berg has heard the recording, and as such has proceeded with it.
****
IMHO, it doesn’t make much sense to believe anything coming out of the mouth of a guy who thinks 9-11 was an inside job.

It appears that you also seem to believe that you shoot the messenger, and ignore the message.

Feel free to find definitive proof that this was never said, like a statement by Michelle Obama, reported by API.
***
LOL. You’re asking me to prove a negative. Let me give you a little lesson in logic. The burden of proof is on the one who makes a positive assertion that something happened, not on the person who would deny it.

I showed you where it was stated, provided a link, and even the Attorney pursuing it. You stated that it was not true. You have answered my informtion with an opinion. I asked you to substantiate that opinon with more credible evidence. That sir, is debate. You are correct that the burden of proof is on the person making the assertion, which is you, that it is not true. Its your turn to state that it was JUST an opinion, or back up your words with credible evidence. Either one is fine with me.


1,210 posted on 04/20/2010 10:15:10 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1204 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

I don’t believe he is a naturalized citizen. Personally I belive he is an illegal alien.
***
Yes, I understand that birtherism is a religion, and that is part of your creed. Unfortunately, you have no evidence to back up this belief of yours.


So your saying I am a birther? Your wrong. I am a constitutionalist. And you have no evidence that he is a Natural Born Citizen, as there is not Birth Certificate provided by Obama, and he has sealed all of the Evidence from the American People. Yet, you seem fine with that??

I do not believe that there is a document to be found. That is why he is sealing everything.
***
Obama didn’t seel anything. All the records birthers complain they can’t see are protected by privacy laws that apply to everyone.

Incorrect. Proof of citizenship for the purpose of Vetting a President of the United States is Required per the constitution. The head of the Democratic National Convention and its Secretary must confirm this and write a statement to that effect to the Secretaries of State of each of the states. The Secretaries of States for each of the States are required to investigate each candidate they place on the ballot, and the BC is required for Presidential candidates to confirm NBC status. Finally the Vice-President who presides over the congress for the purpose of counting electoral votes take a final call for objections prior to counting electoral college votes.
So your wrong.

I stated that AT THE VERY BEST... which presumes that he came back to the US and reapplied for citizenship denounced his Indonesian citizenship
***
Why would he denounce a citizenship he never had to begin with?

It is my OPINION, that he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, it is circumstantial at this point. What is not at issue, is that he is the Son of Barak Hussien Obama Sr. Which makes him a dual citizen, which is not permitted for the office of President of the United States.

denounced his British citizenship
***
Why would he have to denounce something he lost automatically when he was in his early 20’s?

Since you seem to admit this. You have also just admitted that he is a dual Citizen. Which cannot become President Of the United States...case closed.

I think he got his education with student visas from Indonesia and travelled under an Indonesian passport
****
Allegations for which you have no evidence.

What part of “I think” don’t you understand?

Illegally changed his name from Barry Soetoro to Barak Obama
***
You have no evidence he ever legally changed his name to Soetoro, let alone he “illegally” changed it back.

Actually, ancillary evidence has been posted from his elementary school in Indonesia listing him as Barry Soetoro, and the rules that govern Indonesia at the time did not allow dual citizenship, he had to be adopted. Also the divorce decree from Soetoro, listed an adult child needing Educational Assistance. Which was Barry Soetoro.

I don’t care if you believe me, it is my own investigation and satisfies only me. Don’t like it? Tough.
***
I know. You will believe what you believe, evidence be damned. As I said, birtherism is a religion.

Again, I have more evidence, evidently that you, circumstantial and fact based that leads me to my conclusions. You seem to be all over the place.
As I said previously, I am a constitutionalist, but wonder if you know the difference between the two. If not, you need to educate yourself.


1,211 posted on 04/20/2010 10:29:50 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1202 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

There are claims that a parent cannot expatriate a child’s U.S. citizenship, however, this is not correct.
***
Perhaps. Unfortuantely for you, there is no provision of the 1952 act under which Obama would have been expatriated.


If you read enough to ask the question, you read the legal brief, that explained it. I reread the post and the answer it there for anyone to read.

Renewing an Indonesian Passport after the age of 18 is an affirmative act,
***
Yes, but unfortunately for you, there’s no evidence he ever had an Indonesian Passport, let alone renewed one.

Obama travelled in to Pakistan and Indonesia at 19 years old, which required a passport(Visa), it is known that he did not have a US passport until he became a Senator for Illinois. So he either has a Kenyan (british) passport, or he has an indonesian passport. Which lends one to believe that he is not a US citizen, or he would have travelled with a US Passport. That is called deductive reasoning.

as you are swearing allegiance to another Country.
***
Which he never did.

Under the law, if he renewed or applied/recieved a passport from another country, you reaffirm your citizenship.

Soetoro/Obama renewed his Indonesian Passport when he traveled to Pakistan, that is why he had to stop in Indonesia first.
***
Prove it.

The use of the passport proves it, I don’t have to.

Remember, in 1981, Dunham was divorcing Soetoro in Hawaii and was not in Indonesia. Obama/Soetoro admits to traveling to Indonesia first and then onto Pakistan.

So?

Since he went there first, then to pakistan, one would use deductive reasoning to conclude that he was updating his passport after his 18th birthday, prior to travelling, which is required in Indonesia.

Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams from my father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother. But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro.
***
Divorces don’t need to be filed in person, especially if they are uncontested. She most likely mailed in the papers from Indonesia.

Actually, her signature is on the divorce decree and it is notarize (witnessing the signature) from a notary in Hawaii, so she was there for the divorce proceeding. The pettitioner has to be in court, but the respondent (Soetoro) does not. Been there, done that.

In addition, the State Department has stated in response to a FOIA request that they do not have a U.S. Passport application on file for Barack H. Obama.
***
I very much doubt it. Source please.

The posting was from Attorney Berg. However the fact that Obama never got a US Passport before becomeing a US State Senator is a matter of Public Record.
Then there is Michelle Obama’s statement the Kenya is her husbands HOME Country.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLDHDfPNBME


1,212 posted on 04/20/2010 10:53:24 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1201 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

Did you even read the link?
It is a tactic used often to Not hear cases.
Proof in point Obama vs. Keyes. As a result of Obama being in the election Alan Keyes lost the election. That is direct harm, tangible harm, arising from the actions of Obama running for Illinois State Senate. That is STANDING per your definition. Yet the judge chose not to hear it.
Arbitrary use of judical power for its own means.


1,213 posted on 04/20/2010 10:56:27 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1200 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13

You have uncurious dissected, vivisected, filleted and dismembered.

Of course, he’ll be back saying the same crap, that’s what 0bummer toady suckups do.

You should save your replies and post ‘em next time he regurgitates the same idiocies.


1,214 posted on 04/20/2010 11:31:14 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1213 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
As a result of Obama being in the election Alan Keyes lost the election.

ROFLOL. Can you actually say that with a straight face?

If you actually believe that Keyes would have won, or even snowball's chance in hell of winning the election, Obama or no Obama, then I've got a bridge to sell you.

1,215 posted on 04/20/2010 11:47:08 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1213 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

You are entitled to your opinon on how the Senatorial Race would have concluded if Obama had not run, but it would have been JUST an opinion.
The question was establishing STANDIND, which by definition Alan Keyes did establish.


1,216 posted on 04/20/2010 11:49:06 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1215 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13

Pardon me...STANDING...


1,217 posted on 04/20/2010 11:49:49 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1216 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
You are entitled to your opinon on how the Senatorial Race

Keyes was trying to establish sanding based on his losing his 3rd party bid for the the 2008 presidential race, not the 2004 Senate race. Not even Keyes questions Obama being eligible for the Senate.

The question was establishing STANDIND, which by definition Alan Keyes did establish.

So you say. Unfortunately, every single judge who has ruled on the matter disagrees with you, and it is their opinion, no yours, that matters.

1,218 posted on 04/20/2010 11:56:42 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1216 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
If you read enough to ask the question, you read the legal brief, that explained it. I reread the post and the answer it there for anyone to read.

I have. Unfortunately for you, there is simply no basis under the law at that time for Obama to have been expatriated.

Obama travelled in to Pakistan and Indonesia at 19 years old, which required a passport(Visa),

Right. And a US passport would have been just fine.

it is known that he did not have a US passport until he became a Senator for Illinois.

I don't believe you. Prove it.

So he either has a Kenyan (british) passport, or he has an indonesian passport. Which lends one to believe that he is not a US citizen, or he would have travelled with a US Passport. That is called deductive reasoning.

True. Unfortunately, deductive reasoning can lead you to a false conclusion if your premise is wrong. In this case, it is the premise that he travelled on some passport other than a US passport. You have exactly zero evidence to back that up.

The use of the passport proves it, I don’t have to. Since he went there first, then to pakistan, one would use deductive reasoning to conclude that he was updating his passport after his 18th birthday, prior to travelling, which is required in Indonesia.

Logic does not support that conclusion. You have absolutely no basis to believe he ever had an Indonesian passport, much less renewed one in that year.

Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams from my father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother. But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro.

Actually, you've got your dates wrong. She divorced Lolo in 1980 and filed the divorce papers in the summer of that year. Obama traveled to Indonesia and Pakistan in 1981, so the story that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mom fits, even if she filed her papers in Hawaii in person.

The posting was from Attorney Berg.

In orther words, you have no evidence other than the word of a known liar and conspiracy theorist.

However the fact that Obama never got a US Passport before becomeing a US State Senator is a matter of Public Record.

Please direct me to this public record. I have yet to see it.

Then there is Michelle Obama’s statement the Kenya is her husbands HOME Country. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLDHDfPNBME

And what, exactly, is that supposed to prove?

1,219 posted on 04/20/2010 12:05:12 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1212 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

Which reaffirms my point that STANDING is arbitrary. No one disputes he was harmed. Keyes vs. Obama, and Lightfoot vs. Bowen clearly show to me the refusal to hear the merits of the case when standing was established. The court decided that standing can be reinterpreted by the judge as they see fit.


1,220 posted on 04/20/2010 12:13:59 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1218 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

If you read enough to ask the question, you read the legal brief, that explained it. I reread the post and the answer it there for anyone to read.
***
I have. Unfortunately for you, there is simply no basis under the law at that time for Obama to have been expatriated.


Then eveidently you have a problem with comprehension

Obama travelled in to Pakistan and Indonesia at 19 years old, which required a passport(Visa),
***
Right. And a US passport would have been just fine.

Obama traveled to Indonesia, Pakistan, Southern India and Kenya in 1981. He said he went to Indonesia to see his mother. This seemed plausible, except for the fact that his mother returned to Hawaii in August of 1980 to file for a divorce from her second husband, Lolo Soetoro. Unless she went back to pal around with the man she divorced, she wasn’t there at the time of Obama’s visit.

There’s another problem. No record of Obama holding an American passport prior to the one he received once becoming a U.S. senator has been found.


it is known that he did not have a US passport until he became a Senator for Illinois.
***
I don’t believe you. Prove it.

Since Obama had to apply for a US Passport to travel for the state, it implies that he never held a previous US Passport, or he would simply be updating and existing one. Passports have to be updated in the US every 5 years, same thing in Indonesia. Which is why he went to indonesia when his mother was in Hawaii.

So he either has a Kenyan (british) passport, or he has an indonesian passport. Which lends one to believe that he is not a US citizen, or he would have travelled with a US Passport. That is called deductive reasoning.
***
True. Unfortunately, deductive reasoning can lead you to a false conclusion if your premise is wrong. In this case, it is the premise that he travelled on some passport other than a US passport. You have exactly zero evidence to back that up.

You have produced no evidence that his had a US passport at the time either, have you. Yet, he had to apply, rather than re-apply for his Senate passport, according to court records filed by 3 attorneys. But you can wipe all their statements out, by simply proving your side of the argument that he had a US Passport.
Show us all how brilliant your are, and produce evidence.
Admittedly, mine is based on conjecture, but alot of circumstantial evidence that would be cleared up quickly with discovery granted on any case currently filed against Obama.

The use of the passport proves it, I don’t have to. Since he went there first, then to pakistan, one would use deductive reasoning to conclude that he was updating his passport after his 18th birthday, prior to travelling, which is required in Indonesia.
***
Logic does not support that conclusion. You have absolutely no basis to believe he ever had an Indonesian passport, much less renewed one in that year.

I disagree. I believe that there is ample circumstantial evidence that is on my side of the argument, What evidence, circumstantial or otherwise do you supply that says he had a US Passport. Obama has never stated, that I have read, that he travelled with a US Passport. Show me anything that states otherwise.

Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams from my father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother. But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro.
***
Actually, you’ve got your dates wrong. She divorced Lolo in 1980 and filed the divorce papers in the summer of that year. Obama traveled to Indonesia and Pakistan in 1981, so the story that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mom fits, even if she filed her papers in Hawaii in person.

No, your wrong, the divorce was filed in August 1980, the tail end of the Semester at Occidental, and 4 weeks before the fall semester at Columbia.
http://decalogosintl.org/documents/Soetoro_Divorce.pdf

The posting was from Attorney Berg.

In orther words, you have no evidence other than the word of a known liar and conspiracy theorist.


Your as bad as Curiosity, you shoot the messenger and ignore the message. Facts are facts, unless you can disprove them, its just your opinion. Since Berg put them into a lawsuit, that was not heard on its merits, his evidence was not put into the record. So, your calling him a liar without hearing the evidence. You call him a liar and conspiracy theorist, which you cannot prove, because his statements have not been heard or debated in open court, there has been no discovery granted which may or may not corroborate his statements, yet, you pass judgement on him based on ..... What?

However the fact that Obama never got a US Passport before becomeing a US State Senator is a matter of Public Record.
***
Please direct me to this public record. I have yet to see it.


Your correct, those records are part of lawsuits, yet to be heard, but not debated by Obama himself. He sealed his passport records as well. Why would he do that? I distinctly remember him saying he would have the most transparent administration in history...I have yet to see it.

Then there is Michelle Obama’s statement the Kenya is her husbands HOME Country. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLDHDfPNBME
***
And what, exactly, is that supposed to prove?

That SHE stated that Kenya was her husbands HOME country, not America. Just one more nail in the coffin.


1,221 posted on 04/20/2010 1:00:15 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1219 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13

Cool — a classic “baffle ‘em with BS post” - 18 graphs by my counting, which no human will probably ever read, care about, or understand.

Keep birther-n, etraveler13! Keep going back and drinking from the fountain of conspiracy — there’s no plot too complex, no act too vile, no directions too complicated, for the true birther believer!


1,222 posted on 04/20/2010 1:55:27 PM PDT by browardchad ("Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own fact." - Daniel P Moynihan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1176 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
Obama traveled to Indonesia, Pakistan, Southern India and Kenya in 1981. He said he went to Indonesia to see his mother. This seemed plausible, except for the fact that his mother returned to Hawaii in August of 1980 to file for a divorce from her second husband, Lolo Soetoro.

Yes, but she went back to Indonesia to continue her career as an anthropologist, and she lived there until she found out she had ovarian cancer, which I believe was late 1994.

Unless she went back to pal around with the man she divorced, she wasn’t there at the time of Obama’s visit.

No, she went back to continue her career as an anthropologist.

There’s another problem. No record of Obama holding an American passport prior

How do you know that?

Since Obama had to apply for a US Passport to travel for the state,

How do you know he had to apply for a passport to travel for the state? What is your evidence?

it implies that he never held a previous US Passport, or he would simply be updating and existing one. Passports have to be updated in the US every 5 years, same thing in Indonesia. Which is why he went to indonesia when his mother was in Hawaii.

You have no evidence of either a) that he applied for an Indonesian passport or b) that his mother was in Hawaii when he was in Indonesia. In point of fact, given that she had been living in Indonesia since 1977 (with, perhaps, a brief stay in Hawaii in 1980 to file for divorce), it is more that likely that she was in Indonesia when he was there in 1981.

You have produced no evidence that his had a US passport at the time either, have you.

Passport application records are protected by privacy laws.

Yet, he had to apply, rather than re-apply for his Senate passport, according to court records filed by 3 attorneys.

Unfortuantely, unsubstantiated assertions by attorneys don't count as evidenece of anything.

To date, no attorney has produced any evidence that Obama made a first-time application for a US passport when he was a Senator. If you know of such evidence, please direct me to it.

But you can wipe all their statements out, by simply proving your side of the argument that he had a US Passport. Show us all how brilliant your are, and produce evidence.

I'm not the one making the allegation that he had a foriegn passport. That puts the burden of proof on you, not me.

Given that he was a US citizen at one point, and that there are no provisions in the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act under which he would have lost his citizenship, then the presumption must he traveled on a US passport, until it is proven otherwise.

No, your wrong, the divorce was filed in August 1980,

I said it was filed in the summer of 1980. Are you now denying that August is in the summer?

the tail end of the Semester at Occidental, and 4 weeks before the fall semester at Columbia.

So?

Your as bad as Curiosity, you shoot the messenger and ignore the message.

Berg is acting like whitness, not a messenger. You are asking me to take his word for something. Unfortunately, given his history as a 9-11 truther, his word is worthless.

Facts are facts, unless you can disprove them,

You got it backwards. Something isn't a fact until it is proven. Until then, it is mere speculation, and when coming from someone like Berg, with a history of lying, it can be presumed false until prove true.

So, your calling him a liar without hearing the evidence.

I'm calling him a liar because he has a history of lying. As to hearing his evidence, I'd be happy to do it. Unfortunately, he hasn't produced any.

You call him a liar and conspiracy theorist,

So you think his theory that Bush was behind 9-11 is plausible?

Your correct, those records are part of lawsuits, yet to be heard, but not debated by Obama himself.

There doesn't need to be a lawsuit heard in order for there to be public record. Either that public record exists, or it does not. Where is it?

He sealed his passport records as well.

He did nothing of the sort. His passport records are protected by privacy laws, just like yours and mine.

That SHE stated that Kenya was her husbands HOME country, not America.

It prove nothing. Unfortunately, lots of first-generation US-born children of immigrants refer to their parents' country of origin as their home country.

1,223 posted on 04/20/2010 2:05:21 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1221 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
Which reaffirms my point that STANDING is arbitrary.

How so?

No one disputes he was harmed.

That's precisely what they dispute. The court's argument is that Keyes had not even the remotest chance of winning the 2008 election, so he couldn't possibly have been harmed by having Obama in the election. Seems like airtight reasoning to me.

Where do you find fault with it?

1,224 posted on 04/20/2010 2:20:08 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1220 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
Then eveidently you have a problem with comprehension

Okay. Then show me precisely under which provision of the immigration and nationality act of 1952 Obama was expatriated when he was living in Indonesia.

1,225 posted on 04/20/2010 2:21:33 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1221 | View Replies]

To: browardchad

Its all about the constitution man, just the constitution. He is not a natural born citizen. His father is a British Subject. He at best is a dual citizen, at worst not a citizen at all.

Keep drinking the after-birther kool-aide man.


1,226 posted on 04/20/2010 4:33:49 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1222 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

Scribd has all the lawsuits Berg filed, I will not dig them up for you.
Since you are not open to what these lawyers are filing, or even the possibility that they may be correct, it is now evident to me that nothing much will be accepted by you.


You cannot prove that he has a US Passport, or ever had a US passport, but two people were fired and one was shot execution style for, it appears, trying to find out.

Passport information is available thru FOIA by attorneys, law enforcement, and the secret service all the time.

I hold you to the same standard you hold me to. Prove it, or say its your opinion, or its outstanding litigation. But then, litigation means nothing unless its heard by the courts and decided on.


1,227 posted on 04/20/2010 4:52:52 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1223 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

Had Obama not been in the election, many things could have happened that never had the chance to happen. You can speculate, but you do not know with certainty, no one can, that the outcome would not have been a positive one for Keyes.


1,228 posted on 04/20/2010 4:54:34 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1224 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

I went back and read it again. If you disagree with what the statutes say, It will do me no good to debate you on those issues.
It comes down to premise, Berg steps you thru it, if you don’t see it, you either don’t agree, or can’t follow it.


1,229 posted on 04/20/2010 4:59:45 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1225 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
...would you be so kind as to post a link from API, Obama, a credible news source that says so?

I don't think there is a credible news source that would have anything to do with API or Chief Editor Korir.

1,230 posted on 04/20/2010 7:15:58 PM PDT by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1207 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
It is ignorant to make the statement that those who voted for Obama knew he was constitutionally ineligable.

It was no secret that his father was not a US citizen and still they believed that Obama was a NBC.

1,231 posted on 04/20/2010 7:32:40 PM PDT by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1209 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom

Being ignorant does not make them correct.


1,232 posted on 04/20/2010 9:28:16 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1231 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom

If there were, I think you would immediately impugn them.


1,233 posted on 04/20/2010 9:29:04 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1230 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
If there were, I think you would immediately impugn them.

But there aren't so your point is moot.

1,234 posted on 04/20/2010 10:25:41 PM PDT by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1233 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
I went back and read it again.

Good. Then you should have no trouble pointing out the section of the statute under which he was expatriated.

If you disagree with what the statutes say, It will do me no good to debate you on those issues.

I don't disagree with the statutes. I just want to be told under which provision he was expatriated.

1,235 posted on 04/20/2010 10:33:20 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1229 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
you do not know with certainty, no one can, that the outcome would not have been a positive one for Keyes.

Well, the judge disagrees with you.

1,236 posted on 04/20/2010 10:33:59 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1228 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
Since you are not open to what these lawyers are filing, or even the possibility that they may be correct, it is now evident to me that nothing much will be accepted by you.

I am open to anything for which they have evidence. Unfortuantely, as far as I can tell, they have none. But if you can point to some real evidence, then I'll take a look at it.

You cannot prove that he has a US Passport, or ever had a US passport,

Of course I can't. I can't prove anyone, except members of my immediate family, has a passport because passport application files are protected by privacy laws.

but two people were fired and one was shot execution style for, it appears, trying to find out. Passport information is available thru FOIA by attorneys,

No it is not. An attorney could ask a judge to subpoena it, but such a motion would only be granted if the said attorney had some evidence that said information is relevant to a legitimate case. Unfortunately birthers, their attorneys have failed to do this.

law enforcement, and the secret service all the time.

Only if they can show probable cause.

I hold you to the same standard you hold me to. Prove it,

The burden of proof is on you, not me, since it is you who are accusing Obama of an expatriating act.

or say its your opinion, or its outstanding litigation. But then, litigation means nothing unless its heard by the courts and decided on.

The courts have already decided on 40+ of these cases, and in ever instance, it was dismissed. What makes you think that any of the cases are going to have better luck in the future.

1,237 posted on 04/20/2010 10:41:08 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1227 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom

But my point is not.


1,238 posted on 04/21/2010 11:50:39 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1234 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

And I refuse to hold your hand thru something I clearly read. Your looking for an argument, and your not going to get one.


1,239 posted on 04/21/2010 11:51:40 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1235 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

So your statement implies that Judges ALWAYS make the right decision?


1,240 posted on 04/21/2010 11:52:24 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1236 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

Since you are not open to what these lawyers are filing, or even the possibility that they may be correct, it is now evident to me that nothing much will be accepted by you.
***
I am open to anything for which they have evidence. Unfortuantely, as far as I can tell, they have none. But if you can point to some real evidence, then I’ll take a look at it.


Hence the rub. Nothing has been heard on its merits yet in open court. I emphasize, the merits of each case, has NOT been heard in open court. Hence the evidence you require has been hidden because of Obama’s Legal tactics. Which begs the question “ Why won’t he simply release the information required to end this, once and for all?”

You cannot prove that he has a US Passport, or ever had a US passport,
***
Of course I can’t. I can’t prove anyone, except members of my immediate family, has a passport because passport application files are protected by privacy laws.

Thank you.

but two people were fired and one was shot execution style for, it appears, trying to find out.
***
???

No comment on the people arrested and one shot Execution style?

Passport information is available thru FOIA by attorneys,
***
No it is not. An attorney could ask a judge to subpoena it, but such a motion would only be granted if the said attorney had some evidence that said information is relevant to a legitimate case. Unfortunately birthers, their attorneys have failed to do this.
***
E: law enforcement, and the secret service all the time.
***
Only if they can show probable cause.

I let you go on a bit, because you said it was not true, then provided the means that they get access.
Probable Cause is a method to get this information when presented to a judge, that is called “Discovery”
In Obama’s case, Discovery has not been given by a judge at this point.

I hold you to the same standard you hold me to. Prove it,
***
The burden of proof is on you, not me, since it is you who are accusing Obama of an expatriating act.

My point, is that we are all going on what information we can formulate. You spend all your time, literally, dissing anyone trying to find out, discuss, disseminate, et al. Learn about what people know, what people are doing, what litigation is in progress, and how it is handled, and outcomes. You are...a character assassin...in my book. One is left to see what your motive is, and the only one I can come up with, is that you pound on people until they stop, or go away, which I think is your whole point.
Well, it won’t work with me. Your an insignifican flea, I learn more from you than you ever can quash from me. I never believed that people are paid to do what you do, but really, I see no curiousity in what you do. Its quite psychological, quite predictable, and eventually, people go away (which I think is your intent), or they ignore you. Your validity is at question, you remind me of a nagging broodhen who is not interested in the safety of her chicks, rather their dominance. Your boring and tiring, and lacking is anything positive IMO.

or say its your opinion, or its outstanding litigation. But then, litigation means nothing unless its heard by the courts and decided on.
***
The courts have already decided on 40+ of these cases, and in ever instance, it was dismissed. What makes you think that any of the cases are going to have better luck in the future.

All that they have decided to do, is NOT hear the merits of the cases. The substance of these cases, has not been heard of judged. The merits have not been explored or discovery granted.
Each of the lawyers are working within the system to find the right way to present the cases, which will meet the requirements of the courts. This is unexplored territory, and slowly these legal minds are exploring different avenues. I feel that they will one day succeed, and when they do, it will be a waterfall effect of evidence, and discovery, which will, for the American People, and the American way of life, create precident, and remove a person not qualified under the constitution.
It will have many benefits. We will demand vetting for all canditates. We will now know that same-o same-o cannot be allowed in Congress, and possible senators and congressmen will be asked hard questions and be held accountable at the ballot box. We will have a more informed citizenry that will not depend that things are done correctly. IMO this will be a major paradigm shift on US government and accountability. The unintended consequences of what Obama is doing, is that it is waking a slumbering constituency, lolled into slumber thinking they could do nothing. People are rediscovering that they can make a difference. They are holding MSM and Newspapers accountable, and many are failing as a result. Once powerful pundits who banked on that slumber, are now seeing that they are ineffectual in the land of public opinion. Those who held power in high offices across the land are finding that they are being scrutinize like never in their careers, and many have decided not to run for re-election, or are running scared, and for good reason. In my town, those running for local elections are being asked where they stand, hard questions. Many of the incumbents are not even trying to continue after a few town hall meetings. The good ole boy network, is being torn apart from the grassroots. Little by little American is distroying the underpinnings that support the bloated heiarchy that has existed and fed off the populace. Litigation is being presented at the grass roots level to remove people who do not do their jobs. All of the sudden mid term re-elections are a real possibilities, and appointments are being given a jaundiced eye. America is waking up. Those in my area that proudly supported Obama, are realizing that they were lied to, cheated on, and are being treated like dirt, ignored, and taken advantage of. When we start paying for Health Care we don’t agree with, with money we don’t have, for coverage that is worse that what most have, and won’t be able to keep, for 4 years ahead of the time they can not even use it. Then be hounded by the IRS if they don’t pay it. They will rebel. I hope it does not get to that point, but it well may. Lets not forget that the Bush Tax Cuts, are set to expire. As I live with a Tax Accountant, I hear what is coming, and how the public does not have a clue. The Bush tax cuts were supposed to become permanent. They are due to expire, and when they do, you are penalized for being married. Its a long list, and its real. Here is a link:
http://www.thecomingdepression.net/main-street/forgotten-bush-tax-cuts-expire-in-2010-economy-to-sink-further-into-depression/
Obama stated that the lower and middle income tax brackets will not see NEW taxes,but, he never said that old ones would not come back. The tax returns of 2010 will be a wake up call for those who voted for Obama, and a devastating burden to all. But hey, the Author of the Most TRANSPARENT administration in history, never said that you did not have to be aware, you have to listen, and learn, because you can count on the fact, that he and the MSM will print, in small letters on page 22 of the newspaper, that they are doing it. They will tout it on the political channels at 2am in your time zone. You will be suckered. He will do it with conviction that the information is there if you look for it.
Those who can use the internet effectively, will be informed, and will pass it along. They will battle people like you who dilute the message by demanding our time to produce links, justify websites, and defend authors, not for the content of their work, or the facts that surround it, but because of the website, or an article they wrote in the past that branded them in your eyes and someone of disrepute. You will attack the author, and attempt to distroy the message. Sadly, it will work for all but the most determined. Eventually, you, and those like you, will fail. You will fail because what we have to lose, is more important than what you seek to gain. I would ask you to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem. We are on a path of discovery of our own, that is being hindered by our protagonist. We are seeking ways around a head on assault of our Constitution. Never in our history, have we had access, worldwide, to the information available on the Internet, and we are using it. Many are making attacks to stop this flow of information, they are the ones who want to stifle knowledge, hide information, and keep the populace blind to all but what they choose for us to hear. It won’t work, if this goes, something else will take its place. You will lose. America will win. We will learn from and improve our methods for the betterment of all. Sadley you, and those like you will probably never be held accountable for your damage IMO, becuse the very constitution that protects us, protects you too. But, Karma is a B!tch, and nobody escapes the consequences of their behaviour. Not a threat, just a known fact.


1,241 posted on 04/21/2010 12:36:54 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1237 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13

Here is what you will lose (from the Cato Institute):


2001
•A reduction of individual income tax rates from 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent to 10, 15, 25, 28, 33, and 35 percent;
•An increase in the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000;
•A phased-in reduction in estate taxes, and a one-year repeal in 2010;
•A big expansion of tax-favored retirement savings plans.

2002
Congress enacted a “stimulus” tax cut bill in 2002. The main provision allowed businesses to “expense,” or immediately write-off, 30 percent of the cost of equipment purchases (later increased to 50 percent). Expensing is an important step toward converting the income tax to a consumption-based tax. It simplifies the tax code and spurs growth by removing taxes on the normal return to investment. Unfortunately, the partial expensing was only implemented temporarily and it has now expired.

2003
Under President Bush’s leadership, Congress passed a further package of pro-growth tax cuts in 2003. The centerpiece of the law was a cut in the top capital gains rate from 20 to 15 percent and a cut in the top individual rate on dividends from 35 to 15 percent. Tax experts had long discussed the distortionary effects of the excessive taxation of corporate equity in the U.S. tax code. Under the 2003 law, the capital gains and dividend cuts were set to expire after 2008.

2004
There have been increasing concerns about the uncompetitiveness of the complex and high-rate U.S. corporate income tax. The U.S. corporate tax rate is one of the highest in the world, and it has remained unchanged while other nations have made dramatic cuts. The chairman of the House tax committee, Bill Thomas, was determined to deal with the problem and he pushed for major corporate tax reforms. However, what ended up being signed into law in 2004 was a mixed bag. Some important simplifications in the treatment of foreign income by multinationals were included, but the federal corporate rate was not cut except for certain favored industries.

2005
The main tax event of 2005 was the appointment by President Bush of a commission to look into major tax reforms. The commission produced a very good report that described two detailed and workable reform plans for the income tax (see www.taxreformpanel.gov). Unfortunately, the plans were not as far-reaching as a flat tax, but they did include rate cuts, simplifications, and pro-savings provisions. Sadly, the White House has dropped plans for major tax reform for now, but reform may come back on the agenda in 2007.

2006
This year, Republicans have tried to tie up loose ends from prior tax legislation. They voted to extend the capital gains and dividend tax cuts for two further years (until 2010). But they were less successful in their effort to make estate tax repeal permanent, as repeal narrowly failed in a June Senate vote. A compromise bill with a cut to the estate tax rate might be passed later in the year.

The Years Ahead
While President Bush has been a supporter of pro-growth tax reforms, there are shortcomings in recent tax policies. For one thing, the tax code continues to get more complicated by leaps and bounds. Also, policymakers have not repealed the alternative minimum tax, a parallel income tax system that threatens to hit 30 million households by the end of the decade.

Another shortcoming has been the failure to make tax cuts permanent.
Nearly all of the Bush cuts—
individual rates
capital gains
dividends
estate tax
are set to expire after 2010.


Sixty votes are needed in the 100-member Senate to pass permanent tax cuts. There are just 55 GOP senators, and they have faced a politically far-left Democratic opposition.

There are only about 50 serious budget reformers in the 435-member House. For the rest, it’s been a pork-barrel pigout in recent years.

The future of the Bush tax cuts depends to a large extent on the next president, who will enter office in 2009. Whether the United States moves toward major tax reform, such as a low-rate flat tax, will also substantially depend on the next resident of the White House.

And now, we see what is happening. No new taxes on lower income people IMO was a deception on Obamas Part, he did not lie, but he did not explain the the American people in his Transparent Role in Office the consequences of his inaction and that of his Administration.


1,242 posted on 04/21/2010 1:03:14 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1241 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
And I refuse to hold your hand thru something I clearly read.

So you can't cite the specific provision under the 1952 act under which he would have been expatriated. Thought so.

1,243 posted on 04/21/2010 1:11:28 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1239 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
I realize that Obama is a sleezy politician who is doing great harm to the country. No one would love to see him driven from office more than me.

Unfortunately, I'm also a realist and realize that there's no merit to any of the birther claims. It's all massive waste of time and effort that would be better spent by trying to beat him at the ballot box in 2012.

That is why I spend time trying to debunk birther myths. I see birtherism as a massive distraction to conservatives, and therefore something that hurts our movement.

1,244 posted on 04/21/2010 1:14:37 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1241 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

No, I simply won’t.


1,245 posted on 04/21/2010 1:36:57 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1243 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

I hear an respect your opinion, but I don’t agree with it.
If you find it a great distraction, why not walk away?
Your efforts for the most part, are not appreciated evidently. What you post, is venom, and not appreciated by most of what I read. You inhibit the free flow of ideas, and prevent people from joining in and maybe, just maybe learning something.
Is that your intent? Or has all of this gotten away from you.
I see you as part of the problem, not part of the solution.


1,246 posted on 04/21/2010 1:40:02 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1244 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
No, I simply won’t.

Sure thing, Sparky.

1,247 posted on 04/21/2010 1:57:57 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1245 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

see, we can agree on some things...


1,248 posted on 04/21/2010 7:51:52 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1247 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 1,051-1,1001,101-1,1501,151-1,2001,201-1,248 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson