Axil, court battles have been inititated to force the revelation of Obama's
vault BC, but it has always been dismissed on technicality. Supposedly, no
American citizen can bring a charge against Obma because he has not been
"specifically aggrieved" or hurt by the elevation of an unqualified POTUS. In
other words, unless you can prove that you have been hurt more than the rest of
the people, you have no specific "standing" to bring a court case. This is how
Obama has been able to escape from justice. It does not hurt that the shadow
government demons are also threatening all those you would try.
It seems to me that if he is legit and has nothing to hide, he would simply
allow the openning of his vault BC and not spend over 4 million tax payer
dollars to defend it. What is the rational of defending a vault BC? Why spend
all the attorney's efforts and all the money that does not even belong to him?
Don't you find that unusual?
I have said before. The Birther movement will die a quick death and I will
apologize in shame and go away if Obama can do this.
Fact is, he won't because he can't. He either does not have a vault BC or his
vault BC must indicate he was not born in Hawaii. During that time, parents
and grandparents can register a birth by writing to the authorities. But the
BC thus created would not contain hospital or doctor's information, or midwife
information. That is likely what Obama's BC is missing. But we will never
find out because of the veil of corruption.
Axil, I don't care if Obama was releceted with 99% of the popular vote. The
Constitution ought be be stronger that mere popularity. We must be a nation of
laws if we are to survive as a nation. Bullying, ingnoring the law, and/or
"making up the rules as we go" will not cut it.
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
“But how about Obama? Do you think that his Birth Certificate have been
vetted properly and openly? Do you think Obama is a legitimately qualified
president? Can you conclude that he is a Natural-Born U.S. Citizen based on the
scanned BC he has put up of the Internet? Cause other than this scanned BC,
there is no other proof he was born in Hawaii.”
The supporters of G. W, Bush took their case to court and won. The same
should be done for the supporters of the Birther theory.
First find the convincing evidence, the smoking gun, that supports their
case, and then take it to the courts.
It is not productive to appeal to the court of public opinion to advance
their case.
I suspect an ulterior motive; that efforts in this regard are directed to
fill talk show air time and raise revenue from higher viewer ratings.
Obama was recently reelected with a majority of 53% of the vote, so it is an
uphill fight to change all those minds and if accomplished…so what.
Cheers: axil
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Yes, Axil, I am honest enough to acknowledge that I have been wrong about
GW Bush. I was a strong supporter of G.W. Bush at that time but have since
changed my view. His membership in the "Skull and Bones" secret society should
have tipped me off sooner, but I was preoccupied with partisanship at that
time. Though I still think that he won Florida.
But how about Obama? Do you think that his Birth Certificate have been
vetted properly and openly? Do you think Obama is a legitimately qualified
president? Can you conclude that he is a Natural-Born U.S. Citizen based on
the scanned BC he has put up of the Internet? Cause other than this scanned
BC, there is no other proof he was born in Hawaii.
I take that back, there could possibly be proof he was born in Hawaii that
is in his vault BC. But alas, for some unknown inexplicable reason, he has
blocked access to that.
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
“This is the pattern of a corrupt leader proped up by a corrupt shadow
government strengthened by corrupt demonic forces.”
This accusation is categorically true for G. W. Bush.
His election was notorious for a controversy over the awarding of
Florida's 25 electoral votes, and the subsequent recount process in that state,
fourth election in U.S. history in which the eventual winner failed to win a
plurality of the popular vote. Later studies have reached conflicting opinions
on who would have won the recount if it had been allowed to proceed.
On December 12, the partisan Supreme Court ruled in a 7–2 vote that the
Florida Supreme Court's ruling requiring a statewide recount of ballots was
unconstitutional, and in a 5–4 vote that the Florida recounts could not be
completed before a December 12 "safe harbor" deadline, and should therefore
cease and the previously certified total should hold.
It is my belief that G. W. Bush was not validly elected president of the
U.S. in contravention of the will of the majority.
Fortunately, all such injustices are remedied by the passage of time and
a beneficent providence.
Cheers: axil
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
No, I am not stating that the "President" is a muslim. I am stating
that the Usurper is a muslim. We currently don't have a legitimate president;
we have a usurper sitting on the throne.
Why doesn't he just come clean? He could do this with a single 2
minute phone call to the Hawaiian authorities to open access to his vault BC.
He can quickly end this controversy, establish his legitimacy, kill the
Birther movement and start the healing of the nation. He can do all that in 2
minutes, yet he spends over 4 million dollars of Tax payer's money to block
access to this vault BC. Why block access to such an innocuous document? WHY
indeed?
He won't because he can't. This is the pattern of a corrupt leader
proped up by a corrupt shadow government strengthened by corrupt demonic forces.
Jojo
----- Original Message ----- From: "de Bivort Lawrence"
<ldebiv...@gmail.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
Are you stating that the President is Muslim?
On Dec 27, 2012, at 9:27 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Lomax does not understand that this Executive Order covers anything
related to previous and current presidents. Anything about this current
president is covered by this order. IF anyone wants to release information
about Obama's BC, they have to go thru Eric Holder (the corrupt right henchman)
or thru the Presidential counsel; for approval. This is the veil of corruption
surrounding this usurper-in-thief and people like lomax are gving him a pass.
I'm not surprised as lies are OK for Lomax as long as it helps prop up his
illegitimate usurper muslim president.
Jojo
----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax"
<a...@lomaxdesign.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>; <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 6:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies
At 03:50 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Here is the actual Executive Order that Obama issued immediately
after he took power. The Media spins this as rescinding a Bush Executive Order
13233. But in fact, it is a new Executive Order to specifically require his
approval before release of any information, obstensively because of "Executive
Privelege".
Obstentively? Took me a moment. Ostensibly.
"Release of any information." Sure. "Any information" of what type,
where located, and by whom?
Now, Lomax, who is lying now. Do I get my apology now? What
exactly have you debunked? .... you blatant liar.
No, no apology, unless you show that the Executive Order does what
you claimed. I not only never claimed that this *particular* Exectuive Order
did not exist, I linked to it and discussed it specifically.
[...]
Go Ahead, take you best spin shoot. Let's see what spin and lies
you'll come up next.
You've acknowledged all along that what you are doing is spinning.
You have acknowledged that you say things that aren't true to create a dramatic
image. That's "spin." But I'll give you a fair chance here.
You claimed that this document is an Executive Order which blocks
access to Obama's vault BC. Below, I quote a bit of what I wrote, to which you
are responding. I wrote, in more than one way, "If he fails to apologize, or
point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar."
Okay, how does this Order do that? What would cause this document
to apply to birth records held by Hawaiian state officials? It's all here right
in front of us, no more research should be necessary.
But, also for the record, I'll say it again: There is no Executive
Order that blocks public access to the "vault" birth certificate. That access
is blocked by Hawaiian law on the privacy of records (as is true, I think, in
all states). Some access to records is blocked by HIPAA, a federal law relating
to the privacy of medical records, and there are other laws protecting the
privacy of certain records, but no relevant Executive Order that does what Jojo
claims.
He lied, and he is continuing to lie. But ... his turn.
THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release January 21, 2009
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 - - - - - - -
PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution
and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish
policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by
incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential
records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to
the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section
1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(a) "Archivist" refers to the Archivist of the United States or
his designee. (b) "NARA" refers to the National Archives and Records
Administration.
(c) "Presidential Records Act" refers to the Presidential Records
Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207.
(d) "NARA regulations" refers to the NARA regulations
implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270.
(e) "Presidential records" refers to those documentary materials
maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice
Presidential records.
(f) "Former President" refers to the former President during
whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created.
(g) A "substantial question of executive privilege" exists if
NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security
(including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the
deliberative processes of the executive branch.
(h) A "final court order" is a court order from which no appeal
may be taken.
Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a)
When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of
his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the
NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent
and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of
which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege.
However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent
or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials
not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent
President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the
President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for
the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President
shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.
(b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former
Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the
Archivist may disclose the records covered by the notice, unless during that
time period the Archivist has received a claim of executive privilege by the
incumbent or former President or the Archivist has been instructed by the
incumbent President or his designee to extend the time period for a time
certain and with reason for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a
shorter period of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section
1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the notice.
Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President. (a)
Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the
Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the
Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they
deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other,
the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate
concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified.
(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the
exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation
under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of
executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be notified promptly
of any such determination.
(c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the
President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive
privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the
President and the Attorney General.
(d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the
Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and
the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific
Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the
Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by
an incumbent President or by a final court order.
Sec. 4. Claim of Executive Privilege by Former President. (a)
Upon receipt of a claim of executive privilege by a living former President,
the Archivist shall consult with the Attorney General (through the Assistant
Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel), the Counsel to the
President, and such other executive agencies as the Archivist deems appropriate
concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the former
President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records
notwithstanding the claim of privilege. Any determination under section 3 of
this order that executive privilege shall not be invoked by the incumbent
President shall not prejudice the Archivist's determination with respect to the
former President's claim of privilege.
(b) In making the determination referred to in subsection (a) of
this section, the Archivist shall abide by any instructions given him by the
incumbent President or his designee unless otherwise directed by a final court
order. The Archivist shall notify the incumbent and former Presidents of his
determination at least 30 days prior to disclosure of the Presidential records,
unless a shorter time period is required in the circumstances set forth in
section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations. Copies of the notice for the incumbent
President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the
President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for
the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President
shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.
Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be
construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the
head thereof; or (ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable
law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (c) This order is not
intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or
procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United
States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or
agents, or any other person.
Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is
revoked.
BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE, January 21, 2009.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax"
<a...@lomaxdesign.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and
marriageable age
Conclusion, there is no such Executive Order. It appears that
Jojo Jaro believes birther myths, long after they have been conclusively and
with evidence debunked. If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order
doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar.
Notice, the above is in reference to what was said below. Jojo
doesn't actually read what he responds to. It was a reference to an "Executive
Order to block access" to "vault records," i.e., the Hawaiian vault copy of the
original long form certificate.
[...]
At 02:24 PM 12/26/2012, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 01:07 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie -
a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement
once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what?
Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access
to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to
Obama's vault BC.
Fascinating. Is there such an Executive Order? That would be
quite odd. Legally, the President has no authority over Hawaiian officials,
unless a federal issue could be shown. and this would not qualify.
Jojo went on to repeat the Executive Order claim that Obama is
preventing access to the vault certificate. Is that true? Is there an
"Executive Order to block access."
What can be found on this?
and then I went into detail, with links....
