blind_html Fwd: The Battle for the U.S. Constitution

  • From: Nimer Jaber <nimerjaber1@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: blind_html <blind_html@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 15:28:15 -0600

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Travis <baconlard@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:14:26 -0500
Subject: The Battle for the U.S. Constitution
To: baconlard@xxxxxxxxx

 Thursday, July 30, 2009 The Battle for the U.S.

*30 July 2009:* I'm just a tad surprised it has taken this long. What has
"taken this long," you may ask? In just four days time 10 full months will
have elapsed since 3 October 2008, a month prior to the presidential
election, when Northeast Intelligence Network Director Doug Hagmann
wrote *these
words* <> regarding the first of dozens
of high-profile law suits challenging Barack Hussein Obama's Constitutional
eligibility to be President of these United States:

*Based on information I obtained confidentially from sources close to this
case **(Berg v. Obama a/k/a Soetoro)** within the last 48 hours, it appears
that the court will, in fact, dismiss this complaint*. Unfortunately, the
dismissal will be based on a series of obscure technicalities and citations,
thus setting the stage for a larger constitutional crisis in the months
ahead. *Count on it.*

 And then, one month after the election and about a month prior to the
Inauguration, Director Hagmann wrote *these

 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*.

 So, here we are, 10 months later and the issue of Obama's (a/k/a Soetoro's)
Constitutional eligibility appears to be approaching critical mass at about
the same time as the Iranian nuclear weapons production issue and other
"global overtones" have also attained the same status. Crisis management,

About a week ago Patrick Wood, the eidtor of The August Forecast, wrote an
article entitled "*Constitutional Crisis
The first few sentences penned by Mr. Wood provide a good overview regarding
the disposition of opposing forces along the front lines of the coming

 The inflam­ma­tory issue of Bar­rack Obama’s birth cer­tifi­cate is
gath­ering steam across America: Was he or was he not born in the United
States? If he was born any­where other than on Amer­ican soil, then his
pres­i­dency is inval­i­dated. Why? The Con­sti­tu­tion of the United States
point­edly requires that the Pres­i­dent be a nat­ural born citizen.

Defusing the issue would be easy: Obama could simply pro­vide a legit­i­mate
and com­plete birth cer­tifi­cate proving his birth loca­tion. Not only has
he stub­bornly refused to do so, but he has spent sev­eral mil­lion dol­lars
in legal fees to thwart var­ious cit­izen law­suits that demand proper

Obama has also legally cloaked records that could poten­tially sup­port or
dis­credit his cit­i­zen­ship claims, like school records and tran­scripts
from Har­vard and Occi­dental Col­lege. Some inves­ti­ga­tors sus­pect that
he may have applied for admis­sion as a for­eign student.

The pack of critics (called “birthers” by Obama defenders) is get­ting
larger by the day. Lou Dobbs and Rush Lim­baugh are both talking about it.
WorldNet Daily devoted an entire issue of Whistle­Blower Mag­a­zine to it.
Lawyers have filed dozens of
law­suits. Mil­i­tary offi­cers are chal­lenging poten­tially illegal orders
to be deployed to combat zones over­seas. Left-wing orga­ni­za­tions are
being drawn into vocal oppo­si­tion, thus stir­ring the pot even more.

As the battle heats up, the attacks on the “birthers” by their detrac­tors
(mostly left-wing) is taking on a familiar pat­tern. The former are being
being ruth­lessly ridiculed, scorned and mar­gin­al­ized as the “lunatic

So far, nei­ther side has blinked. Nei­ther is willing to give an inch. The
battle lines have been drawn.

 On one side are arrayed the Constitutionalists. Constitutionalists are
American citizens like myself who hold the rule of Constitutional law as
sacrosanct, inviolable, worth defending, worth sacrificing our lives for if
need be but not for our martyrdom sake, but for our children and our
children's children and their Constitutional rights, so help us God.

On the other are the Obamites led by the usurper-in-chief himself. Leftist,
socialist, marxist and their strange, ever-insurgent Islamic bedfellows who
are the antithesis of everything the Constitutionalists stand for. The

Skirmishing has been occuring all along the battlefront for some time now.
Court battles have been rising and falling like the tide at the Normandy
beachhead. Then came one very significant skirmish involving a reserve U.S.
Army major who refused to accept a deployment order to Afghanistan on the
basis of Obama's eligibility to issue lawful orders as the U.S. Armded
Forces Command-In-Chief. The major won his case, his deployment was
cancelled. The enemy had blinked rather than fight head-on.

The enemy then used a secret apparatus known as the Defense Security
Service, not entirely legal or within the scope of that agency's mission
statement in my humble opinion, to get the Army major fired from his
civilian job. This was a stealthy flanking maneuver which may or may not yet
generate its own legal battles.

Nevertheless, and as I predicted at least 10 months ago, the U.S. Armed
Forces would provide the ultimate test in forcing the issue of Barack
Hussein Obama's Constitutional eligibility. I said this test would occur
within the framework of his being able ot issue lawful orders, pursuant to
the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). This test was in fact manifest
in the court skirmish won by the reserve Army major. This was the skirmish
which I believe has fully illuminated the Obama Administration's "Achilles
Heel" and the Obamites know it. This critical issue has nearly scared the
enemy senseless and it urgently needs to be exploited to the fullest extent
possible as it is a bridge from which a spear can literally be thrust into
the enemy's rear. This issue is, in tactical miltary terms, the bridge over
the Rhine River at Remagen. As 1st Army Commander Omar Bradley exclaimed
when his troops had crossed the bridge after a day long assault, *"Hot dog .
. . this will bust 'em wide open. Shove everything you can across!"*

The Obamites desperation became palpable due to this military victory and it
manifested itself in the media this past week with *CNN's Lou
Dobbs*<>and PMSNBC's
resident leftist "tea-bagging queen" Rachel Maddow" trading
fire on-the-air.

The only question now is when will the exploitation of the breach, the
illuminated "Achilles Heel" take place? I suspect that assault will occur
when a commander for the Constitutionalist side stands up and leads the
charge across the bridge despite withering enemy fire.

The NEIN Blog <>


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Politics & Current Events" group.
To post to this group, send email to politics-current-events@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
To unsubscribe, please send a blank email to
with unsubscribe in the subject line.
To access the archives, please visit:


Other related posts:

  • » blind_html Fwd: The Battle for the U.S. Constitution - Nimer Jaber