This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Stunning Hypocrisy of the U.S. Government
Congress has exempted itself from the prohibition against trading on inside information … the law that got Martha Stewart and many other people thrown in jail.
There are many other ways in which the hypocrisy of the politicians in D.C. are hurting our country.
Washington politicians say we have to slash basic services, and yet waste hundreds of billions of dollars on counter-productive boondoggles. If the politicos just stopped throwing money at corporate welfare queens, military and security boondoggles and pork, harmful quantitative easing, unnecessary nuclear subsidies, the failed war on drugs, and other wasted and counter-productive expenses, we wouldn’t need to impose austerity on the people.
The D.C. politicians said that the giant failed banks couldn’t be nationalized, because that would be socialism. Instead of temporarily nationalizing them and then spinning them off to the private sector – or breaking them up – the politicians have bailed them out to the tune of many tens of billions of dollars each year, and created a system where all of the profits are privatized, and all of the losses socialized.
Obama and Congress promised help for struggling homeowners, and passed numerous bills that they claimed would rescue the little guy. But every single one of these bills actually bails out the banks … and doesn’t really help the homeowner.
The Federal Reserve promises to do everything possible to reduce unemployment. But its policies are actually destroying jobs.
Many D.C. politicians pay lip service to helping the little guy … while pushing policies which have driven inequality to levels surpassing slave-owning societies.
The D.C. regulators pretend that they are being tough on the big banks, but are actually doing everything they can to help cover up their sins.
Many have pointed out Obama’s hypocrisy in slamming Bush’s spying programs … and then expanding them (millions more).
And in slamming China’s cyber-warfare … while doing the same thing.
And – while the Obama administration is spying on everyone in the country – it is at the same time the most secretive administration ever (background). That’s despite Obama saying he’s running the most transparent administration ever.
Glenn Greenwald – the Guardian reporter who broke the NSA spying revelations – has documented for many years the hypocritical use of leaks by the government to make itself look good … while throwing the book at anyone who leaks information embarrassing to the government.
Greenwald notes today:
Prior to Barack Obama’s inauguration, there were a grand total of three prosecutions of leakers under the Espionage Act (including the prosecution of Dan Ellsberg by the Nixon DOJ). That’s because the statute is so broad that even the US government has largely refrained from using it. But during the Obama presidency, there are now seven such prosecutions: more than double the number under all prior US presidents combined.
***
Please read this rather good summary in this morning’s New York Times of the worldwide debate Snowden has enabled – how these disclosures have “set off a national debate over the proper limits of government surveillance” and “opened an unprecedented window on the details of surveillance by the NSA, including its compilation of logs of virtually all telephone calls in the United States and its collection of e-mails of foreigners from the major American Internet companies, including Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Apple and Skype” – and ask yourself: has Snowden actually does anything to bring “injury to the United States”, or has he performed an immense public service?
The irony is obvious: the same people who are building a ubiquitous surveillance system to spy on everyone in the world, including their own citizens, are now accusing the person who exposed it of “espionage”. It seems clear that the people who are actually bringing “injury to the United States” are those who are waging war on basic tenets of transparency and secretly constructing a mass and often illegal and unconstitutional surveillance apparatus aimed at American citizens – and those who are lying to the American people and its Congress about what they’re doing – rather than those who are devoted to informing the American people that this is being done.
The Obama administration leaks classified information continuously. They do it to glorify the President, or manipulate public opinion, or even to help produce a pre-election propaganda film about the Osama bin Laden raid. The Obama administration does not hate unauthorized leaks of classified information. They are more responsible for such leaks than anyone.
What they hate are leaks that embarrass them or expose their wrongdoing. Those are the only kinds of leaks that are prosecuted. It’s a completely one-sided and manipulative abuse of secrecy laws. It’s all designed to ensure that the only information we as citizens can learn is what they want us to learn because it makes them look good. The only leaks they’re interested in severely punishing are those that undermine them politically. The “enemy” they’re seeking to keep ignorant with selective and excessive leak prosecutions are not The Terrorists or The Chinese Communists. It’s the American people.
The Terrorists already knew, and have long known, that the US government is doing everything possible to surveil their telephonic and internet communications. The Chinese have long known, and have repeatedly said, that the US is hacking into both their governmental and civilian systems (just as the Chinese are doing to the US). The Russians have long known that the US and UK try to intercept the conversations of their leaders just as the Russians do to the US and the UK.
They haven’t learned anything from these disclosures that they didn’t already well know. [He's right.] The people who have learned things they didn’t already know are American citizens who have no connection to terrorism or foreign intelligence, as well as hundreds of millions of citizens around the world about whom the same is true. What they have learned is that the vast bulk of this surveillance apparatus is directed not at the Chinese or Russian governments or the Terrorists, but at them.
And that is precisely why the US government is so furious and will bring its full weight to bear against these disclosures. What has been “harmed” is not the national security of the US but the ability of its political leaders to work against their own citizens and citizens around the world in the dark, with zero transparency or real accountability. If anything is a crime, it’s that secret, unaccountable and deceitful behavior: not the shining of light on it.
It has gotten so blatant that even New Yorker comic Andy Borowitz is lampooning the hypocrisy coming out of Washington:
At a press conference to discuss the accusations, an N.S.A. spokesman surprised observers by announcing the spying charges against Mr. Snowden with a totally straight face.
“These charges send a clear message,” the spokesman said. “In the United States, you can’t spy on people.”
***
“The American people have the right to assume that their private documents will remain private and won’t be collected by someone in the government for his own purposes.”
“Only by bringing Mr. Snowden to justice can we safeguard the most precious of American rights: privacy,” added the spokesman, apparently serious.
Similarly, journalists who act as mere stenographers for the government who never criticize in more than a superficial fashion are protected and rewarded … but reporters who actually report on government misdeeds are prosecuted and harassed.
Further, the biggest terrorism fearmongers themselves actually support terrorism. And see this.
In the name of fighting terrorism, the U.S. has been directly supporting Al Qaeda and other terrorists and providing them arms, money and logistical support in Syria, Libya, Mali, Bosnia, Chechnya, Iran, and many other countries … both before and after 9/11. And see this.
The American government has long labeled foreigners as terrorists for doing what America does.
Moreover, government officials may brand Americans as potential terrorists if they peacefully protest, complain about the taste of their water, or do any number of other normal, all-American things.
This is especially hypocritical given that liberals like Noam Chomsky and conservatives like the director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan (Lt. General William Odom) all say that the American government is the world’s largest purveyor of terrorism.
As General Odom noted:
Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.
These are just a couple of ways in which the D.C. politicians are hypocrites.
»
- advertisements -
More on hyprocrisy. Remember the who is facing 105 years for publishing the leaked emails concerning a certain British contractor and then Turkish officials catching, militants with sarin gas (later rebuked) then the US claiming Syria used sarin gas well now it ties all together.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/06/23/310505/qatar-behind-syria-chemic...
A new report has revealed that chemical arms used by Takfiri militants in an attack near Syria’s northwestern province of Aleppo in March had been provided by two Qatari officers through Turkey.
According to a Saturday report by the Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar, Qatari officers Fahd Saeed al-Hajiri and Faleh Bin Khalid al-Tamimi were behind the transfer of chemical substances to anti-Syria militants through Ankara.
The Qatari officers were later killed in a suspicious explosion in Somalia in May, the report said.
On March 19, over two dozen people were killed and many others injured when foreign-backed militants fired missiles containing a chemical substance into the Khan al-Assal region in the northwestern city of Aleppo, Syria’s official news agency SANA reported.
The new report by the Lebanese daily was based on information received from the security service of an unnamed country in the region. The details of the case had been handed over to the Russian intelligence agency (FSB), the report said.
In an attempt to cover up the issue as Moscow demanded Ankara for explanation, Turkey announced that it had confiscated two kilograms of the nerve agent sarin following the arrest of 12 members of the terrorist al-Nusra Front, the report added.
On May 30, Turkish media reported that two kilograms of sarin gas as well as heavy weapons had been discovered during raids on the homes of 12 members of the al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra Front in Turkey’s southern city of Adana, located some 150 kilometers (93 miles) from the border with Syria.
The United States has claimed that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons against the militants and thus crossed Washington’s “red line,” while Damascus dismisses the allegations as mere “lies” and “fabrications.”
On May 5, the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on Syria said it found testimony from victims and medical staff that shows militants had used the nerve agent sarin in Syria.
Expect some major disturbances in the farce this week. There always seems to be ones when Benghazi gets hot. Ham knows exactly what happened, who issued the stand down orders and was sacked afterwards to cover it up.
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/06/17/General-Carter-Ham-to-Fina...
General Carter Ham is scheduled to testify to the House Armed Services Committee on June 26 at a classified briefing about his knowledge of events that took place when the attack on the U.S. Consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya happened last September, reports Fox News' Greta Van Susteren:The briefing is organized by the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee of the HASC. Ham, who was the head of AFRICOM during Benghazi attack, will brief members behind closed doors about why military assets that were available were not sent to Benghazi to help the Americans who were under attack.
State Department whistleblower Greg Hicks appeared before Congress and told members on the House Oversight Committee that LTC Gibson is the Army Lieutenant Colonel who was told to stand down along with other special forces who were ready to deploy to Benghazi to aid those who were under fire by the attackers.
Although the briefing is behind closed doors, the Committee's request for information from DoD gives clues as to what they are likely to be talking to the briefers about next week. On April 17 HASC Chairman Buck McKeon (R - CA) sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel requesting the Department of Defense's classified version of the Benghazi attack timeline after being notified by the Joint Staff there would be delay in delivery, "due to a requirement to coordinate it within the interagency."
....
And it is on like Donkey Kong.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06/it-begins-gang-of-8-members-jeff...
http://senatorflake.com/recall-senator-mccain/
http://senatorflake.com/
A new website is asking Arizona residents for their signatures to recall Senators Jeff Flake and John McCain for supporting the immigration-amnesty bill.
The website even has an easy name to remember – SenatorJeffFlake.com
And this is from shameless Senator John McCain’s recall page:
Do you remember this? McCain’s “Complete the Danged Fence”? In June 2013, McCain showed us his true colors and voted against building the 700 mile-long fence (that was required by previous law in 2006).
Said ad with McCain in it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0lwusMxiHc&feature=player_embedded
McFly meets with rebel Alciada in Syria and then returns on message with "terrorist attacks on US soil," threats, takes this months boogie man award. I don't even think hypocrisy is a big enough word for this kind behaviour. I think the lies have become so big there is no more room for hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy is my middle name.
Hypocrisy and arrogance, two things my subjects must master if they follow me...
This terrorism thing is just getting ridiculous now. This story went from tinfoil hat low brow fringe paranoia alt sites to MSM tells you all you need to know more so than the actual story.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/21/official-says-water...
Residents who say children have become ill from drinking water says state is attempting to silence its critics.NASHVILLE -- A Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation deputy director warned a group of Maury County residents that unfounded complaints about water quality could be considered an "act of terrorism."
"We take water quality very seriously. Very, very seriously," said Sherwin Smith, deputy director of TDEC's Division of Water Resources, according to audio recorded by attendees. "But you need to make sure that when you make water quality complaints you have a basis, because federally, if there's no water quality issues, that can be considered under Homeland Security an act of terrorism."
"Can you say that again, please?" an audience member can be heard asking on the audio.
Smith went on in the recording to repeat the claim almost verbatim.
The audio was recorded May 29 by Statewide Organizing for Community eMpowerment, a Smyrna-based civic action group that had been working with Maury County residents to tackle water quality complaints in Mount Pleasant. Residents there have complained to the state for months, saying some children had become ill drinking the water. The meeting was organized by State Rep. Sheila Butt, R-Columbia, and attended by residents, TDEC and local officials.
TDEC said it was looking into what had been said at the meeting and that Smith would not be available for comment.
"In terms of the comments made by a member of the Water Resources Division at the meeting, we are just receiving the information and looking into this on our end," spokeswoman Meg Lockhart said. "The department would like to fully assess what was said in the meeting. I am told that the meeting was far longer than the audio clip provided by SOCM and that Mr. Smith actually clarified his remarks. But again, we are looking into it."
.....
yup, when it goes local is when it really starts getting dangerous.
http://www.maxkeiser.com/2013/06/kr461-keiser-report-global-financial-ho...
[KR461] Keiser Report: Global Financial Holocaust
Posted on June 22, 2013 by Stacy Herbert
Read more at http://www.maxkeiser.com/2013/06/kr461-keiser-report-global-financial-ho... SY7azJk.99
It's 1984. Just re-write it and re-write it and before long it becomes the truth.
In a few weeks most of the people in America if not the world will believe that Snowden was the one that spied on everyone and not the USSA.
It's an amazing thing to watch, it's all a show, the comatosed of the world will for an instance look up from the reality T.V nonense teat they are sucking from, see that this evil traitor snowden was spying on them and public opinion will turn againest him. Just watch
DO AS WE SAY !! NOT DO SAY WE DO.
Come on America we are waiting for you to rise up againest these animal until you do no one will follow
It should come as no surprise that a country chock full of hypocrites is governed by same...
A2S1C4, which mandates that the POTUS be a natural born Citizen, is a self executing constitutional provision. No statute or law is necessary to enforce it. Obama, a British subject, born of a British subject father, cannot be a natural born Citizen. He is the frontman of the Criminal banking elite, put in place to run interference for their criminal enterprise.
Amendment 25:
Section 1: "In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President".The POTUS can be removed, and it does not have to be by impeachment.
US Code 3 S. 19:
(a)
(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President. (2) The same rule shall apply in the case of the death, resignation, removal from office, or inability of an individual acting as President under this subsection"."Inability" can be defined as "lack of legal competence", and the 25th Amendment superceded a part of the 12th Amendment which states:
"And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President". The criminals in government will not remove him, they are doubling down by promoting other ineligibel candidates---- Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are also not eligible, and were born of NON CITIZEN Parents. Eligibility for the Presidency requires birth to US Citizen parents (2, or to a single US Citizen mother) in the US. The purpose of the Usurpation is to void US Citizen sovereignty, and to void the Constitution. It is up to We the people to rise up and DEMAND the removal of the Domestic Enemy Usurper from office. That is the game changer and the first step in restoring the Republic. But GW has totally ignored this Constitutioonal disaster and has basically protected the Usurper. Are you afraid of becoming a real enemy of the state GW--- afraid of being a real patriot? When will you reach the heart of the matter--- that the President himself is a domestic enemy Usurper, and that We the people have every right to yank that smug puppet of the 1% from our house-- the people's house.
"Another and no less important desideratum was, that the Executive should be independent for his continuance in office on all but the people themselves".------- Federalist 68
"Thou shalt ot put a king over thee who is not thy brother"---- Deuteronomy 17:15
"No person, but a natural born Citizen, shall be eligible"---- A2S1C4
"The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners." Minor v. Happersett 88 US 162, 167
Just in case anybody GAFs…
There is not much more to say about that which is licit or illicit.. Q. E. D.
http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/us_constitution/news.php?q=1308252582
IRREFUTABLE AUTHORITY HAS SPOKEN
(Oct. 18, 2009) — The Post & Email has in several articles mentioned that the Supreme Court of the United States has given the definition of what a “natural born citizen” is. Since being a natural born citizen is an objective qualification and requirement of office for the U.S. President, it is important for all U.S. Citizens to undertsand what this term means.
Let’s cut through all the opinion and speculation, all the “he says”, “she says”, fluff, and go right to the irrefutable, constitutional authority on all terms and phrases mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: the Supreme Court of the United States.
First, let me note that there are 4 such cases which speak of the notion of “natural born citizenship”.
Each of these cases will cite or apply the definition of this term, as given in a book entitled, The Law of Nations, written by Emmerich de Vattel, a Swiss-German philosopher of law. In that book, the following definition of a “natural born citizen” appears, in Book I, Chapter 19, § 212, of the English translation of 1797 (p. 110):
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . .
The French original of 1757, on that same passage read thus:
Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pays de parents citoyens, . . .
The terms “natives” and “natural born citizens” are obviously English terms; used to render the idea convyed by the French phrase “les naturels, ou indigenes”: but both refered to the same category of citizen: one born in the country, of parents who were citizens of that country.
In the political philosophy of Vattel, the term “naturels” refers to citizens who are such by the Law of Nature, that is by the natural cirumstances of their birth — which they did not choose; the term “indigenes” is from the Latin, indigenes, which like the English, “indigenous”, means “begotten from within” (inde-genes), as in the phrase “the indigenous natives are the peoples who have been born and lived there for generations.” Hence the meaning the the term, “natural born citizen”, or “naturels ou indigenes” is the same: born in the country of two parents who are citizens of that country.
Vattel did not invent the notion “natural born citizen”; he was merely applying the Law of Nature to questions of citizenship. In fact the term first appears in a letter of the future Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, to George Washington during the Constitutional Convention, where the Framers were consulting 3 copies Vattel’s book to complete their work (according to the testimony of Benjamin Franklin).
Let take a brief look, now, at each case. For each case I include the link to the full text of the ruling.
The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)The first was decided in A.D. 1814, at the beginning of the republic, by men who were intimately associated with the American Revolution. In that year the following men sat on the Supreme Court:
Bushrod Washington, (b. June 5, 1762 — d. Nov. 26, 1829), served Feb. 4, 1799 til Nov. 26, 1829.
John Marshall (b. Sept. 24, 1755 — d. July 6, 1835), served Feb. 4, 1891 til July 6, 1835.
William Johnson (b. Dec. 27, 1771 — d. Aug. 4, 1834), served May 7, 1804, til Aug. 4, 1834.
Henry Brockholst Livingston (b. Nov. 25, 1757 — d. Mar. 18, 1823), served Jan. 20, 1807 til March 18, 1823
Thomas Todd (b. Jan. 23, 1765 — d. Feb. 7, 1826), served May 4, 1807 til Feb. 7, 1826.
Gabriel Duvall (b. Dec. 6, 1752 — d. Mar. 6, 1844), served Nov. 23, 1811 til Jany 14, 1835.
Joseph Story (b. Sept. 18, 1779 — d. Sept. 10, 1845), served Feb. 3, 1812 til Sept. 10, 1845
Nearly all these men either participated in the American Revolution, or their fathers did. Joseph Story’s father took part in the original Boston Tea Party. Thomas Todd served 6 months in the army against the British; and participated in 5 Constitutional Conventions from 1784-1792. During the Revolutionary War, Henry Brockholst Livingston was a Lieutenant Colonel in the New York Line and an aide-de-camp to General Benedict Arnold, before the latter’s defection to the British. William Johnson’s father, mother, and elder brother were revolutionaries, who served as statesman, rebel, or nurse/assistant to the line troops, respectively. John Marshall was First Lieutenant of the Culpeper Minutement of Virginia, and then Lieutenant in the Eleventh Virginian Continental Regiment, and a personal friend of General George Washington; and debated for ratification of the U.S. Constitution by the Virginian General Assembly. Bushrod Washington was George Washington’s nephew and heir.
Being witnesses and heirs of the Revolution, they understood what the Framers of the Constitution had intended.
The Venus case regarded the question whether the cargo of a merchantman, named the Venus, belonging to an American citizen, and being shipped from British territory to America during the War of 1812, could be seized and taken as a prize by an American privateer. But what the case said about citizenship, is what matters here.
WHAT THE VENUS CASE SAYS ON CITIZENSHIP
In the Venus Case, Justice Livingston, who wrote the unanimous decision, quoted the entire §212nd paragraph from the French edition, using his own English, on p. 12 of the ruling:
Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says:
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…
Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)In 16 years later the Supreme Court heard the case regarding the dispute over the inheritance received by two daughters of an American colonist, from South Carolina; one of whom went to England and remained a British subject, the other of whom remained in South Carolina and became an American citizen. At the beginning of the case, Justice Story, who gave the ruling, does not cite Vattel per se, but cites the principle of citizenship enshrined in his definition of a “natural born citizen”:
Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.
Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)This case concerned Mrs. Happersett, an original suffragette, who in virtue of the 14th Amendment attempted to register to vote in the State of Missouri, and was refused because she was not a man. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in that year, wrote the majority opinion, in which he stated:
The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.
UPDATE: May 25, 2012
In your above article, which is very good, there is one error that you may wish to correct. In the Minor v. Happersett case, you refer to Mrs.Happersett as though she was the plaintiff. This is incorrect. The plaintiff was Virginia Minor. Happersett was the Registrar of Voters. I would appreciate your acknowledgment of my email. Thank you. Bruce O. Mann Attorney at Law 26875 Calle Hermosa, Ste. 1Capistrano Beach, CA 92624
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)In this case, Wong Kim Ark, the son of 2 resident Chinese aliens, claimed U.S. Citizenship and was vindicated by the court on the basis of the 14th Amendment. In this case the Justice Gray gave the opinion of the court. On p. 168-9 of the record, He cites approvingly the decision in Minor vs. Happersett:
At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
On the basis of the 14th Amendment, however, the majority opinion coined a new definition for “native citizen”, as anyone who was born in the U.S.A., under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Court gave a novel interpretation to jurisdiction, and thus extended citizenship to all born in the country (excepting those born of ambassadors and foreign armies etc.); but it did not extend the meaning of the term “natural born citizen.”
CONCLUSIONFinally it should be noted, that to define a term is to indicate the category or class of things which it signifies. In this sense, the Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.
Hence every U.S. Citizen must accept this definition or categorical designation, and fulfil his constitutional duties accordingly. No member of Congress, no judge of the Federal Judiciary, no elected or appointed official in Federal or State government has the right to use any other definition; and if he does, he is acting unlawfully, because unconstitutionally.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/10/18/4-supreme-court-cases-define-natural-born-citizen/
http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/us_constitution/news.php?q=1308252582
I remember back in the day, Russian disidents who spoke their mind used to defect to the West. If I try telling that to my kids today they would never believe me. Oh how the wheel has turned. Two thumbs down Obama. Change you can believe in!
Marta Stewart was not convicted of insider trading, that was what they went after her for, but she was convicted of making a false statement to a federal agent. Scooter Libbey was imprisoned for the same thing, not for outing Valery Plame as a covert CIA agent. The guy who outed her as a CIA employee was a state department fat head who was never charged because the law only prohibits revealing covert agents and she was just another desk jockey in DC. Think for just a minute, how many people have lied to congress in the last year from this administration or took the fifth amendment to conceal crimes such as Fast and furious or the EPA, IRS, and DOJ criminal activity. Are we really equal under the law??
All of those people who lied and obfuscated before congress should have been investigated and prosecuted by a special prosecutor/grand jury, but the evil John Boehner won't move to set up the proper prosecution, instead he has convened at least four different political committees and created an ineffective political circus wherein nobody will be held accountable. Boehner should be hanged from the nearest lampost.
Hypocrisy is a problem, but the greatest problem is immoral liars who will stop at nothing to stay in power.....that is the greatest problem
The government doesn't care if they look hypocritical to foreign leaders, they have recordings of all those leaders' phone calls and Emails.
You'll find that many of those "Foreign Governments" might also have quite extensive files on YoBama et al. Governments of Countries such as China and Russia for example . . . .
I agree. Most of the world leaders have to know Ovomit is a usurper. I have been wondering just when at least one of them will speak up and challenge his authority, especially Netanyahu.
Of course, I also wonder why someone in the congress hasn't had the guts to file a quo warranto in the D.C. District Court challenging his eligibility. ALL of the corrupt, self-serving cowards in the congress have been bombarded by MILLIONS of constituants demanding the removal of Ovomit and The Mooch.
It makes me sad to say it, but I believe the republic has been corrupted beyond repair.....FUBAR.
STARVE THE BEAST!!!
The revolution is brewing.
Sigh. This is me, back from a conference in a certain town in a certain state that was never more than a make-believe town with buildings that were corporate hq for large oil co among other things. Oddly almost every building was empty, for sale, corpnames stripped off. So, Government hypocrisy. GW, you're so analytical. <sound of someone taking a toke>Sometimes, you just gotta let irony FLOW over you. You know. Like art.
the problem with politicans is not that they are hypocritical - as true as that statement is....the real problem is that they are nazis - everyone of them....a vote for republican or democrat is a vote for naziism.....most americans are nazis who now believe that adolf hitler was a reasonable leader who was ruling germany "for your protection."
On his previous visit to Germany Obama filled out a stadium; now he couldn' fill out the urinals in said stadium.
You know we know he knows he's a Loser.
Those of government do not commit hypocrisy, they lie.
They lie to provide cover for their thefts and murders.
Lying is an intensional act but being a hypocrit is a mental disorder.
First of all, there is no such thing as 'government'. That is nothing but a word concept that some people use to hide behind. There are individuals who carry out certain roles that we call 'government'.
That said, the hyprocrisy of some people in positions of 'authority' in'government' shouldn't be a surprise. Its been going on for thousands of years. The real problem is that people have remained ignorant and gullible when it comes to those in 'government'. They seem to often look upon them as their parents; as people who really have their interests in mind like Mommy and Daddy would.
It's a corporation, with a corporate charter and a board of directors.
Hypocrisy gets most of us through the day. We need to clear it up in ourselves to see it clearly in others. And also so that we don't go over the top on vengeance.
over the top... ???
At this point I doubt any level of savage reprisal and vengeance would/could be over the top for these fuckers.
And some leakage out into the wider community may, on balance, not be a bad thing either.
STUNNING HYPOCRISY about says it all.
I wish the full weight of the US Justice System had come down on that peter puffer Jon Corzine as hard as it's coming down on Mr. Snowden....
Corzine will not escape the full weight of the American people or his at the end of a looped rope.
Side note: "US justice system" is an oxymoronic phrase.
"Criminal Justice System" is more accurate.
"It's not justice, it's just us."
"When in the course of human events ..."
"When in the course of human events ..."
If you did man-on-the-street interviews, how many Americans know those words ? One in a hundred ? Far less ?
That's the problem.
The last President who understood the CORE problem and corrected that problem ( for a time ) was Andrew Jackson. I doubt David Rockefeller would have liked Andrew one bit . Rockefeller is a living library of what the the REAL owners of our country want for its future. What he knows about the people behind our elected puppets would start a revolution yesterday. Resentment by the common man will pack a wallop when it is unleashed this time around.
greatest thing about being a hypocrite is youre never wrong
I am not a crook, everyone else is.
Signed, .Gov
Mr. President, our country needs you to stand up or go. You don't need a better speech writer, you need courage.
He is a globalist, redistributing the wealth from US to developing nations. He is doing what he came to do.
baloney. he's redistributing to his international predator bankster benefactors, overlords, and related scum.
nations, as such, are irrelevant to the discussion.
Bullshit.
Chris Matthews said it was all because of the sun making the TelePrompter screens illegible.
And Chris knows.
Well Mr. Washington, we exist only to please our masters. As slaves, ours is not to question, but to accept and obey. Anyone spending time figuring out how this government works is likely to end up on disability by claiming insanity. Notice how the disability rolls have escalated more than new jobs have been created. Politicians are living in another world and could care less about the public, except when they need our votes.
I believe the US "jumped the shark" a long time ago but I suppose when the like of George Washington gets "rendered" or "disappeared" then we won't need to debate the point.
Or as I ready to leave for Europe on vacation this week if my inconsequential and insignificant criticisms here on ZH causes me or my family any unecessary cavity searches as I am as big of a nobody as there is on the planet.
Where is the tipping point me wonders.....
Its already a fascist business model built on crime and fraud. The psycho-paths/socio-paths run the system and their lust for power has run wild. The real wonder is how ignorant and asleep are the general public. A century of public 'education' and propaganda mass media has taken its toll.
http://beforeitsnews.com/economy/2013/05/our-system-is-so-flawed-that-fr...
Leap forward 5 more years and you will see it was about 1999 we just never realized. One day we may find out all of the Y2K hysteria was nothing more than disinformation that the government used to hijack the entire technological infrastructure.
"The Stunning Hypocrisy of the U.S. Government"
My days of being stunned by the hypocrisy of the US Government are long gone.
The very latest at which anyone should be stunned by the US goverment would be NDAA detention forever without trial. To say nothing of a kill list that could contain American citizens. To say they are now stunned is proving they have been asleep sheep.