This website is dedicated as a place where fellow Americans may convene to share in the celebration of the magnificent heritage of our great nation. We recognize the need for eternal vigilance to defend against the constant threat from those who seek to undermine our God given rights as so eloquently inscribed by our Founders into the nation’s founding charter, the United States Constitution.

Monday, April 18, 2011

New Pixel Patriot Analysis: Constitutional Crisis Update; Freedom of Information & The People’s Right To Know

Freedom of Information
The People’s Right To Know

Pixel Patriot
February 10th, 2011

Fact: The United States is in the midst of a Constitutional crisis.

Barack Hussein Obama (AKA Barry Soetoro) has risen to power illegally usurping the office of the President of the United States, by hiding any and all documents that would verify his eligibility. In doing so it has required a great many people in positions of power and societal influence who are either complicit in this treasonous coup or they have abrogated their responsibility to the nation including those in direct violation of their sworn oath by remaining silent as the foundations of our Republic are dismantled right before our eyes. From every branch of government: executive, legislative, judicial, military and law enforcement to the news organizations and the media who are ignoring the moral and ethical demands of their profession. What our country is waking up to is the stark reality that we have a criminal government that is out of control. Naturally, some documents could and should be withheld from public purview due to national security implications, however; some documents cannot. When evidence of fraud and corruption are obtainable, it is the duty and responsibility of government oversight organizations, journalists and the American public through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process to expose such criminality in order to bring it to justice.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is a federal law that allows for the full or partial disclosure of previously unreleased information and documents controlled by the United States Government. (In theory.)

In practice…not so much.

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

Leading the charge on Capitol Hill is the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Rep. Darrell Issa who issued demands for the Obama administration to surrender documents, but the deadline for the request was summarily ignored.

The Holder Memo sets the policy on how federal agencies should apply FOIA exemptions.

The Holder Memo:
When information not previously disclosed is requested, agencies should make it a priority to respond in a timely manner. Timely disclosure of information is an essential component of transparency.

Rep. Issa who holds Congressional subpoena power said that not only is his demands for compliance being ignored, but that the administration is actively obstructing his investigations whereby top Department of Homeland Security Officials are instructing career employees NOT to search for the documents he is requesting.

I was disappointed to learn that on or about Jan. 20, 2011, DHS’s Office of General Counsel instructed career staff in the Privacy Office not to search for documents responsive to my request

Some of the documents being demanded from the DHS include emails between key DHS officials and the Obama administration. The Associated Press previously reported top DHS officials told career employees to steer sensitive FOIA requests to Obama’s political advisers for unusual scrutiny.

Rep. Issa goes on to say…

during the week of Jan. 10, 2011, my staff obtained material that called into question the statements supplied by the Department during a September briefing

…indicating obstruction of justice from career employees within the DHS.

Ironically however, the oversight committee is neglecting to investigate the treasonous usurpation of the Presidency of the United States after mountains of letters, faxes, emails and phone calls by millions of Americans. They were even served notice by certified mail and hand delivered so that they can’t say they didn’t know. Unfortunately with no accountability the committee can say it was just a simple…err “oversight”.

“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” is a Latin phrase meaning…

"Who will guard the guards themselves?"

The question put before Socrates in Plato’s “The Republic” proffers the notion that a “noble lie” can deceive the guarding class into believing they will do what is right solely because it is right. However, history is replete with examples of societies concentrating power into the hands of a few and invariably human nature yields to personal ambition, special interests and corruption. Not having enough laws is not our problem. We have plenty of them and are creating more everyday. The enforcement of our laws, or lack thereof; is our Achilles heel.

Therefore let us be about the business of guarding ourselves…


A FOIA request automatically grants plaintiff “standing” in a court of law

Jurisdiction, Venue, and Other Preliminary Matters
The United States district courts are vested with exclusive jurisdiction over FOIA cases by section (a)(4)(B) of the Act, which provides in pertinent part:

On complaint, the district court of the United States in the district in which the complainant resides, or has his principal place of business, or in which the agency records are situated, or in the District of Columbia, has jurisdiction to enjoin the agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant.

Its statutory language, as the Supreme Court ruled in Kissinger v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, makes federal jurisdiction dependent upon a showing that an agency has "improperly"; (2) "withheld"; (3) "agency records." Judicial authority to devise remedies and enjoin agencies can only be invoked, under the jurisdictional grant conferred by § 552, if the agency has contravened all three components of this obligation.


New York State Supreme Court of Kings County

The historic significance of Mr. Strunk’s hearing January 11th in the New York State Supreme Court of Kings County whereby the Honorable Supreme Court Justice David I. Schmidt acknowledged Barry Soetoro is NOT a natural born Citizen can’t be ignored.

The Justice wanted to know Plaintiff's understanding of the difference between "Native" and "Natural" born citizen on the argument of blood and soil under the Law of Nations as well as Vienna Convention matters as to citizenship status of the children of diplomats and tourists who were not certified admitted by the Customs Service; and that Plaintiff filed a copy of the SCOTUS decision in McCreery's Lessee v Somerville 22 US 354 (1824); the Justice responded favorably with his familiarity with the difference between the Natural and Native born as there is within Jewish law similar precedent and agreed that Barack Hussein Obama as a prima facie matter is not natural-born because his father was a student from Kenya and as a British subject and a 18 year old U.S. Citizen mother Barack Hussein Obama based upon his own admission is only Native Born.

Justice Schmidt has said Obama is not a natural born Citizen (NBC) based on:
1. COLB at Factcheck.org
2. Obama website said he is native born
3. The COLB has a legal British subject father and a U.S. Citizen mother…NO MATTER WHERE HE WAS BORN!

What I liked about the response by Justice Schmidt was that he understands the import of this whole action as to the official record of the marriage and divorce when as a result Stanley Ann Dunham got full custody of Barack Hussein Obama. The Justice is smart and understands this logic very well because as you know Justices do divorce actions all the time.”

For any journalist or news organization to try to label Honorable Justice Schmidt as a “birther” will inevitably turn the tables upon themselves and hasten the destruction of their credibility.

Take judicial notice of the following Affidavit here.

I have an entered order from the NYS AG and with it I will file for reconsideration by Wednesday, February 16th for Justice Schmidt to review cure to the procedural matters accordingly. My motion for reconsideration will include a reworked Amended Complaint as well as the Amended Summons.”

“The Amended Complaint will have three cause of action:
(1) Breach of Fiduciary duty in which I will seek a partial summary declaratory judgment related to the NYS BOE mal-administration of Presidential candidates ballot access to the New York 2008 Election cycle;
(2) Scheme to defraud the voters in which I will seek a jury trial and
(3) Scheme for unjust enrichment involving fraudulent campaign financing fund raising part of which involves foreign monies entering through JP Morgan here in New York and the involvement of the NYS BOE in such fund raising oversight for various New York parties and national campaign committees for which I will seek damages inter alia for the cost of the election.”

Procedural matters:
In regards to particularity, CPLR 3016 (b) and the vagueness referenced by the court as to the cause of action for "sedition, treason and conspiracy" as not being a civil action, I regard each as part of the proximate cause of injury as part of a scheme to defraud that has a 6 year statutory limit with CPLR 213(8) "an action based upon fraud; the time within which the action must be commenced shall be the greater of six years from the date the cause of action accrued (from collusion in re: NBC on or about December 2005) or two years from the time the plaintiff or the person under who plaintiff claims discovered the fraud (DOS FOIA release July 29, 2010), or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it."

Fraud outlined in Amended Complaint:
“The actual scheme to defraud the voters in 2008 began in earnest on February 22, 2006 the Editor of the Chicago-Kent Law School Law Review, Sarah P. Herlihy (Kirkland & Ellis LLP), published a memorandum with approved edits of 11-23-05 entitled AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE at Vol. 81: 275 and with a special footnote designating the author has a J.D. from Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2005 and that the author would like to thank Professor Graeme Dinwoodie, and the 2004–2005 Globalization and Its Effect on Domestic Law Seminar Class for their valuable comments and insights on this Note.”

The key to understanding the scheme to defraud the voters in 2008 is the circumvention of USC Art 2 Section 1 Clause 5:

1. That in the memorandum Part one of the paper provides a brief history and overview of the natural born citizen requirement. Part two discusses the rational reasons for abolishing this requirement and describes why the increase in globalization makes abolishing the natural born citizen requirement more necessary than ever. Part three presents the arguments against allowing naturalized citizens to be eligible for the presidency and identifies common beliefs about globalization that will cause Americans to rely on emotion and oppose a Constitutional amendment.

2. That in the Conclusion shown on page 26, Ms. Herlihy as a proponent for the elimination of the Natural Born Citizen clause requirement argues in support of globalization writes quote:
“Ultimately, the emotional reasons to oppose a constitutional amendment abolishing the natural born citizen requirement for presidential eligibility will prevail over the rational reasons because the rational reasons derive, in large part, from the increase in globalization. The current American perceptions about the effects of globalization and the misunderstandings about what globalization actually is will result in Americans deciding that naturalized citizens should not be president because this would, in effect, be promoting globalization. Although this argument is admittedly circular, because globalization is the thing that makes the need to abolish the requirement more and more persuasive, Americans’ subsequent perceptions about globalization are the very things that will prevent Americans from embracing the idea of eliminating the natural born requirement. Logical Americans are looking for a reason to ignore the rational reasons promoted by globalization so that they may vote based on their own emotions and instincts. Whether it is because of fear, racism, religious intolerance, or blind faith in the decisions of the Founding Fathers, Americans want to find a way to avoid changing the natural born citizen provision to allow naturalized citizens to be eligible for the presidency. Ultimately, Americans will rely on the perceived negative effects of globalization, or rather their perceptions of globalization’s negative effects, to justify their decision to allow emotion to prevail over reason.“
3. That according to Sarah P. Herlihy’s resume on line with the International Law firm of Kirkland & Ellis LLP in Chicago after Ms. Herlihy was the Law Clerk to the Honorable Michael M. Mihm, United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, 2005 – 2006 she has been employed by the firm and in the resume she is listed with receiving the award of the Order of the Coif whose various members of the Society are traced throughout the Obama support network working in the conspiracy with the Defendants.

4. That a Principal of Kirtland & Ellis LLP, Bruce I. Ettelson, P.C., is Member of finance committees of U.S. Senators Barack Obama and Richard Durbin. http://www.kirkland.com (towards bottom of the page)

5. In addition to members of the firm making donations to the Obama campaign , Jack S. Levin, P.C., another partner who, in December 2002 was presented the ” Illinois Venture Capital Association’s lifetime achievement award for service to the private equity/venture capital community” presented by Sen. Barack Obama.

6. That Kirtland & Ellis LLP is a global firm with powerful international clients listed on the website that span the business affairs of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM).

Peter G. Peterson and Zbigniew Brzezinski in coordination with Standard Oil of California (SOCAL) dating back to 1972 that after 2001 and the failure of the George W. Bush Administration to prosecute the Afghan War after 2003 and lead to the creation of the Barack Hussein Obama presidency by a scheme to circumvent USC Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5.

According to Article V of the U.S. Constitution, 3/4 of the states are needed to ratify a Constitutional Amendment. As there are currently 50 states (not 57), 38 states would be needed to do this.

Mr. Strunks First Amended Complaint (FAC) documented here and based on the underlying Verified Complaint previously reported here In Mr. Strunks FOIA Case DCD 08-cv-2234, in the District of Columbia, further evidence of obstruction of justice in this long train of abuses and usurpations by the Obama administration has been uncovered with documented proof that the same misdirection tactics used against the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are also being carried out by career employees in the Department of State as well.

The DOS entered an unsworn, uncorroborated “communication” into federal court in response to the lawsuit Strunk v. State Department of which is highly questionable due to numerous contravening DOS documents. The conflicting document alleged that the General Services Administration (GSA) gave direction to the DOS to destroy passport records. However, a subsequent investigation revealed that the DOS and agents thereof in an official capacity perpetrated fraud upon the court.

That Plaintiff based upon information by certain proof has shown there is a matter of spoliation of evidence, public records and misstatement in an egregious fraud upon this Court supported by Mr. Jacobsen’s and other parties request for records that should be the interest of this Court that they be released because there currently exists an overwhelming public interest in obtaining the information requested above and a desire by me and the general public to know who the President is. Plaintiff believes it is unprecedented in the history of the United States that the life, history and background of a sitting president has been so well hidden, sealed and obfuscated as it has with this President; and further, as Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military in the world today, and as a President who openly declares that he wants to "fundamentally change the United States," the public interest far outweighs his personal privacy interest. There is no verifiable evidence in the public record that President Obama was ever vetted to hold the office of President; and that the information requested herein may shed light on the extent and scope of the fraud upon this Court as to the spoliation and cover-up that has occurred during this FOIA action herein as to the eligibility, or ineligibility of Mr. Obarna to be President of the United States; and Plaintiff/ Declarant believes the balancing process weighs heavily for release of his records, and that the information requested could prove that this President is ineligible to hold the office of President and prove that the public trust has been violated, and continues to be violated, now rests with this Court alone herein.

Justice Leon tried to recuse himself from this case but Justice Lamberth as Chief Justice refused to accept the recusal.

The New York State Supreme Court of Kings County where Mr. Strunk is seeking justice was founded upon a Statute in 1691 wherein:

Provided alwayes, and be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid that no Persons Right or property shall be by any of the aforesaid Courts Determined, except where matters of Fact, are Either acknowledged or passeth by the Defendants faults for want of Plea or Answer, unless the fact be found by the verdict of Twelve Men of the Neighbourhood, as itt ought of Right to be Done by the Law.”

Freedom can be maintained only where courts and judges are strong enough to curb the will of the most powerful—even of the sovereign who appointed them—so that the rights of the individual shall always be measured by established principles and rules of law. The struggle to maintain the supremacy of the law and the rights of the weakest individual against the encroachment of the power never ends. That struggle went on in Colonial days; it goes on today; it will continue so long as men love freedom enough to fight for it.”

The judiciary of America save few honorable justices has lost its soul along the way. 


Mr. Allen has filed over 50 FOIA requests. These actions include (FOIA) requests seeking the immediate processing and release of agency records with regard to Barry Soetoro, Stanley Ann Soetoro, and Lolo Soetoro and all known and unknown aliases.

Allen on standing:
The order to proceed to the briefing schedule and not dismissing the complaint is proof that there was standing. There is always standing in a FOIA case if in fact they withheld documents or tried to, or if they didn’t answer in time, all those things create standing in a FOIA case.”

Allen asserts Barry Soetoro is neither a citizen of the United States nor an alien with permanent residence and said:
"… we know Barry Soetoro was an Indonesian citizen at the age of 7 and that he had ties in Hawaii, Soetoro would have had to have gone through immigration and customs at some point between 1961 and 2009."

The Privacy Act only protects U.S. citizens and permanent resident aliens and does not apply to foreigners, unions, collective associations or corporations -
§ 552a. Records maintained on individuals (a)(2) the term "individual" means a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence
In an effort to obtain these records he has also filed complaints in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona against Barry Soetoro, aka Barrack H. Obama, aka Barry Obama; Attorney General Eric Holder; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano; and Does 1-49.
On his Illinois State Bar application where it asked for other names used by the applicant, Obama stated, "none." Because … Barack Obama denies he was ever called Barry Soetoro it shouldn't be a problem with transparency when it comes to producing the requested records … And because Barry Soetoro is not a citizen, as defined by the law, he isn't protected by the FOIA."

Allen says that one of the key findings in the 113 pages of documents released as a result of the statutory compliance of his FOIA request is the determination that Barry Soetoro (ALA Barrack Hussein Obama) was only 4 years old when Stanley Ann Dunham married Lolo Soetoro. The marriage license as evidenced on pages 68, 71 and 85 are irrefutable proof that Barry Soetoro would have been subject to the Indonesian law by which he was automatically adopted by Lolo Soetoro and therefore would have required repatriation or naturalization as an American citizen.

PAGE 68 - Stanley Ann Dunham signed her last name as Soetoro with a date of 12/2/65 signifying Barry was automatically Indonesian at age of 4.”

PAGE 71 - Evidence that they had given proof of their marriage to INS by 7/21/65

PAGE 85 - Certificate of Marriage, State of Hawaii, License #80296
“I hereby certify that LOLO SOETORO and STANLEY ANN DUNHAM”

Allen says he reached an agreement in November with the DOJ and DHS that if he removed Stanley Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro from the filing; but not Barry Soetoro the case would move forward. This was resolved last Friday when they gave back his original filing fees and agreed to close the original filing clearing the way for a new filing to occur. Allen has now re-filed with the 9th Circuit before Honorable Justice Frank Zapata with proof of service and expects the brief to be ready by April 22nd. He was served with a form letter for the first time by Helen L. Gilbert who will be the opposing attorney for the Department of Justice.


Kenneth Allen v. Barry Soetoro, et al #11-15094
Plaintiff - Appellant: KENNETH LEE ALLEN

Nature of Suit: Other Statutes - Freedom of Information Act
In conclusion the requestor named here as Kenneth Allen, hereby requests that the information requested under 5 USC §§ 552 and 552(a) with respect to Barry Soetoro, Lolo Soetoro and Stanley Ann Soetoro be released in the interests of the public good. The public interest in the release of any information requested on Barry Soetoro that may exist is not the type of interest protected by the FOIA. But that interest falls outside the ambit of the public interest that the FOIA was enacted to serve. And as a member of Judicial Watch, I also feel it is in the interest of National Security that these documents be released. It would also be fair to ask for documents pertaining to Barack Obama should he in fact be Barry Soetoro. I think Barry Soetoro’s aka, Barack Obama, aka Barry Obama’s British birth should be proof that he in fact was never qualified to run for president or even Senator of these United States of America. Also for the record I have filed this civil action on my own behalf.”
Previous Case: Allen v. Soetoro et al (4:2009cv00373)

CPT Barnett (Ret.) for over two years now has been seeking through a FOIA request with the DOS passport records from United States Passport and all consular records for Stanley Ann Dunham aka Stanley Ann Obama aka Ann Dunham aka Ann Obama for the years of 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962.

The obfuscation CPT Barnett (Ret.) has experienced include extensive delays in responding to her requests, not receiving what she requested and receiving documents she did not request.

Due to the “communication” by the DOS in the Strunk v. State Department case, CPT Barnett (Ret.) has just re-filed her FOIA request before the Appeals Review Panel for the U.S. Department of State:
RE: Case No.: 200900535 - Consular and Passport Records for Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama) for the years 1959-1962
This is an urgent appeal of national importance in response to the Department of State’s correspondence to me dated Dec. 10, 2010, from Alex Galovich.”

“I urge you to order U.S. Marshals to immediately secure all of the remaining paper passport and consular documents, microfilms, and indexes regarding records for Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama, further on to be referenced as SAD) before they disappear as well. The processing of my original FOIA request is not complete as my request for SAD’s consular and passport records was not addressed at all by the DOS.”

CPT Barnett (Ret.) also has a new FOIA request with the Social Security Administration (SSA) on the SS# number that Obama is using. Licensed private investigators have verified that this number was issued in the State of CT and there are no records verifying he ever lived there. She says that the time has lapsed for which the SSA were required to respond and they have not.

CPT Barnett (Ret.) has recommended that a whistleblower go to the Inspector General (IG) for the DOS and/or the Republican controlled Congress.

CPT Barnett (Ret.) was a plaintiff on several of the eligibility lawsuits including Lightfoot v. Bowen and Barnett et. al. v. Obama et al. and is currently a plaintiff on a lawsuit brought by Orly Taitz before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Dr. Taitz filed a FOIA complaint on February 6th:
Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq, Pro Se v. Michael Astrue, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

U.S. District Court, The District Of Columbia

Dr. Taitz upon evidence and sworn affidavits from multiple licensed investigators has shown that Barack Hussein Obama is linked in the National databases to some 39 Social Security numbers and multiple addresses.

Excerpt here:
Plaintiff received a report and an affidavit from a licensed investigator and former Elite Anti Communist proliferation and Anti Organized Crime unit Scotland Yard officer Neil Sankey. (Exhibit 2 A and B) Mr. Sankey’s report and an affidavit, showed that Barack Hussein Obama, the President of the United States (hereinafter “Obama”) is linked in the National databases to some 39 Social Security numbers and multiple addresses. The number he used most often since around 1980 is 042-68-4425. According to Lexis Nexis and Choice Point this number originally was assigned to an elderly individual born in 1890, who resided in CT, but was assumed by Obama from around 1980-1981. Obama was never a resident of Connecticut.”

“Taitz provided a sworn affidavit of a licensed investigator Susan Daniels, showing that in national databases the name of Barack Obama is linked to SSN 485-40-5154, which is traced to Lucille T Ballantyne born 12.22.1912, deceased 09.13.1998, the mother of the Chief Actuary of the Social Security administration Harry C Ballantyne.”

Taitz numerous FOIA requests have been met with obfuscation and repeated denials by the Social Security Administration whereby the are in violation of the 5 U.S. §552 and Pursuant to the Freedom and Information Act, 5 U.S.C.§552(a)(3):
Plaintiff has exhausted its administrative remedies as provided in the Freedom of Information Act and Agency regulations.”

As such:
Plaintiff has a right of access to the documents requested, and Defendant has no legal basis for their actions in withholding the right of access to such documents.”


No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
It’s the law. As “We the People” have come to find out, Barack Obama is not eligible for the office that he holds for numerous reasons. It is unfathomable how selfless patriots have stepped up to fight against this tyranny and have had to endure ridicule for merely seeking the TRUTH and are being labeled as “birthers” in an attempt to silence them and just make the situation go away. Make no mistake. This crime is still unfolding. Everyone will be accountable for their actions. In the long lens of history when the TRUTH is told, the timeline will forever show those that fought for Truth, Righteousness and Justice; and those who did not.

The U.S. Constitution comes before Statutes, Edicts, Ordinances, Rules or Regulations.
It was so important for our leaders to uphold and comply with the laws of the land that our Founders wrote into the law that they shall be bound by an oath:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

One of the “Forgotten” Founding Fathers
Fisher Ames (April 19, 1758 – July 4, 1808)

Representative in the United States Congress from Massachusetts’s 1st District.

Fisher Ames, a distinguished statesman; had a deep abiding conviction for the virtues of a constitutional republic. Ames said:
"A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way. The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty."

The State of Hawaii is currently in the center of a firestorm due to the obfuscation of its government officials and the agencies tasked with maintaining and managing its vital records. They have UIPA laws with provisions and exemptions for privacy, however the publics right to know with certainty who their President and Commander-in-Chief is, is not bound by those exemptions.

On Dec. 6th, 2010 Neil Abercrombie was sworn in as Hawaii’s 7th Governor whereby he took the following oath:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Hawaii, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as Governor to best of my ability."

Then prophetically Abercrombie said:
"The campaign is ended, the transition is concluded, the challenge awaits.

He was not kidding.

Literally hundreds of lawsuits have been levied against Barrack Hussein Obama including his many aliases (i.e. Barry Soetoro, Soebarkah) for over 2 years with more currently docketed.

Ms. Sarah Obama, Obama’s maternal grandmother

October 16, 2008
“Were you present when your grandson Barack Obama was born in Kenya?” Yes

Hawaii Gov. Says Proof of Obama's Birth Certificate Exists but Hasn't Produced the Document
'Birther' Says, 'If You Have It, Show It to Us'
Jan. 20, 2011
Officials in Hawaii say they have located President Obama's birth certificate indicating that he was born in the state, but have yet to produce the document at the heart of a long-simmering conspiracy theory.

And here is what Gov. Abercrombie is quoted as saying by ABC:
"Our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives written down," Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie told Honolulu's Star-Advertiser.

Across the pond over in England, The Daily Mail reported:
But it became apparent that what had been discovered was an unspecified listing or notation of Obama's birth that someone had made in the state archives and not a birth certificate. And in the same interview Abercrombie suggested that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.

And also on that same day, former Hawaii elections clerk Tim Adams signed an affidavit swearing he was told by his supervisors in Hawaii that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama Jr. in Hawaii and that neither Queens Medical Center nor Kapi'olani Medical Center in Honolulu had any record of Obama having been born in their medical facilities.

Then the Associated Press reported on the bill introduced by the Hawaii Legislature that would allow anyone to get a copy of Obama’s birth records for a $100 fee.

SECTION 1. The state department of health has continued to be inundated with requests from various individuals and parties for information regarding President Barack Obama's birth. The continually increasing number of requests have caused the department of health distress as state resources, including employee time and energy, have to be diverted from other department responsibilities. It may be the case that if requesters were to have access to the actual birth records of officials who require United States citizenship to hold public office, any ambiguity surrounding the issue may be dispelled.

The purpose of this Act, therefore, is to allow the department of health to disclose the birth records of officials who require United States citizenship to hold public office.

SECTION 2. Section 338-1, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new definition to be appropriately inserted and to read as follows:

""Person of civic prominence" means a person who is a candidate for, or elected to, a public office that requires the person to be a United States citizen, either natural born or naturalized, to hold the public office for which they are a candidate or to which they have been elected."

Its interesting how suddenly the media has an interest in Obama’s lack of verifiable proof to his birth story after two years of ridiculing anyone who simply asked for evidence of that same proof; but when an 18 year Army officer who is sitting in Fort Leavenworth because he was court martialed for asking, they had no interest in his interest. What kind of leader would send a war hero to prison rather than showing his birth certificate and spending over 2 million dollars to hide it?

Let’s once again have a look at the Holder Memo:
"The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears."

Yet that is precisely the reason Army Col. Denise R. Lind acting as judge in the LTC Terrance Lakin court martial hearing ruled that evidence would not be allowed. She said opening up such evidence could be an “embarrassment” to the president, and it’s up to Congress to call for impeachment of a sitting president.

You can help LTC Terry Lakin's family by making a monetary donation to a Trust set up for his family here; http://www.TerryLakinActionFund.com

[yoo-surp, -zurp]
–verb (used with object)
1. to seize and hold (a position, office, power, etc.) by force or without legal right.

The prophetic pen of Fisher Ames

Fisher Ames had a fundamental role in the wording of the First Amendment, which was adopted by the House:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

The historic significance of the Honorable Mr. Ames therefore takes on even greater meaning as he imparts his wisdom as mightily and eloquently as the more prominent Founding Fathers by foretelling for a future age what lies ahead:
"We are, heart and soul, friends to the freedom of the press. It is however, the prostituted companion of liberty, and somehow or other, we know not how, its efficient auxiliary. It follows the substance like its shade; but while a man walks erect, he may observe that his shadow is almost always in the dirt. It corrupts, it deceives, it inflames. It strips virtue of her honors, and lends to faction its wildfire and its poisoned arms, and in the end is its own enemy and the usurper's ally, It would be easy to enlarge on its evils. They are in England, they are here, they are everywhere. It is a precious pest, and a necessary mischief, and there would be no liberty without it."

The winds of change have borne within our shores a society whereby the “mob rule” of Democracy is preferable to that of a Republic in the absence of a free press. All of the pleadings by the millions for our representatives to stand up and stop this usurpation have been, and continue to be ignored. And it is not because the National Press Corps and main stream media are unaware of the illegality of Obama to putatively hold office and execute unlawful orders, they most certainly are aware. Therefore after three years they can not now or ever say they failed to report this criminal ascension because they just didn’t know. All of the news organizations and corporate media except for a very few, have proactively and recklessly, as a policy; instituted a moratorium or “cone of silence” on this issue and just because they have refused to report on the hundreds of court cases challenging Obama’s eligibility due to the fact that he is not a natural born Citizen does not mean they never existed. Subsequently the general public to a large degree are unaware of the grave national security issues arising from Obama’s dual allegiances based on his father’s Kenyan birth and British nationality. For a complete understanding of the constitutional hurdles to Obama’s ineligibility for the presidency, read attorney Mario Apuzzo’s exhaustive research, court pleadings and historical judicial precedence here including the epic case Kerchner v. Obama & Congress that was denied for lack of “standing”.

Because Obama not only putatively holds the position of President of the United States but also that of Commander-in-Chief of its armed forces, it is imperative to point out how much deliberative foresight and great debate convinced the Founders of the critical importance for a strong check against foreign influence. Our country had just endured a bloody revolution against tyranny; so the thought of a President with dual allegiances would have been intolerable and therefore a specific clause was written into the Constitution to prevent just that.

An Illustrated History Of Washington And His Times

Entered, according to act of Congress, in the year 1868.

We must take heed of the wisdom of our Founders. In the authoritative work “An Illustrated History of Washington and His Times” George Washington’s words come alive to remind us and warn us lest we as a nation come to the same demise as previous democratic governments:

If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake) since history and experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

And we find yet again that the concept of a natural born citizen was ubiquitous to the lexicon of the times:

which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations.

FACT: Not a single institution in America will lay claim to having birthed Obama. 


The following statement was published by Obama’s official web site, Fight The Smears:

When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children. 

US State Department Services Dual Nationality

The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance. However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country.”

Therefore, according to Obama’s own State Department, he owed allegiance to the Queen of England and United Kingdom at the time of his birth and can never be a natural born Citizen of the United States according to Article II, Section I, Clause V of the US Constitution.

Sextus Empiricus

(c.160-210 AD), was a physician and philosopher
 "Those who claim for themselves to judge the truth are bound to possess a criterion of truth. This criterion, then, either is without a judge's approval or has been approved. But if it is without approval, whence comes it that it is trustworthy? For no matter of dispute is to be trusted without judging. And, if it has been approved, that which approves it, in turn, either has been approved or has not been approved, and so on ad infinitum."

Obama became a U.S. Senator in 2004 by having the records of 2 different opponents unsealed while running for office in Illinois claiming the public’s right to know outweighed privacy. Blair Hull was the Democrat opponent in the Illinois Senate race primaries and Jack Ryan was the opponent in the General election.

Yet in the U.S. Supreme Court case:
It is uncontested, however, that the right to inspect and copy judicial records is not absolute. Every court has supervisory power over its own records and files, and access has been denied where court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes. For example, the common-law right of inspection has bowed before the power of a court to insure that its records are not "used to gratify private spite or promote public scandal" through the publication of "the painful and sometimes disgusting details of a divorce case." In re Caswell, 18 R. I. 835, 836, 29 A. 259 (1893). Accord, e. g., C. v. C., 320 A. 2d 717, 723, 727 (Del. 1974)."

Obama is the exception. Why?

Right now we can get any birth certificate for any president or presidential candidate with a Freedom of Information Act request EXCEPT for Obama’s.

Case in point:
(Associated Press) On Saturday October 23rd, 2010 in Fairbanks, Alaska, a judge ruled that an Alaska borough must release personnel records from Senate Republican candidate Joe Miller's time as a government attorney. Several news organizations had sued for the information. Miller argued that any release of personnel records violated his privacy rights.

Retired Superior Court Judge Winston Burbank said the public's right to know outweighs Miller's right to privacy, however some of the documents would be redacted.

The ever audacious Obama, speaking at the National Archives (no less) on May 21, 2009, demanded 4 times that the Congress, the Courts, and "We the People" watch over him and hold him and his administration accountable:

C-Span quotes found at:

37:10 - 37:23
"I ran for President promising transparency, and I meant what I said. That is why, whenever possible, we will make information available to the American people so that they can make informed judgments and hold us accountable.

37:54 - 38:07
“…whenever we cannot release certain information to the public for valid national security reasons, I will insist that there is oversight of my actions - by Congress or by the courts.

38:28 - 38:39
“…in our system of checks and balances, someone must always watch over the watchers - especially when it comes to sensitive information.

40:44 - 41:01
I will never hide the truth because it is uncomfortable. I will deal with Congress and the courts as co-equal branches of government. I will tell the American people what I know and don't know, and when I release something publicly or keep something secret, I will tell you why."


Maybe you like this one better…



On January 22nd, the 38th anniversary of the Supreme Court's pro-choice decision in Roe v. Wade, Obama said:

Today marks the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that protects women's health and reproductive freedom, and affirms a fundamental principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters.

Yet he forgot to mention this Supreme Court decision:
United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974)

That ruling still stands in executive privilege cases for the proposition that no person, even the president, is above the law and must turn over evidence when a judge orders him to do so.

Chief Justice Warren Burger, a Nixon appointee, wrote for the court:

"[N]either the doctrine of separation of powers nor the need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances. The President's need for complete candor and objectivity from advisers calls for great deference from the courts. However, when the privilege depends solely on the broad, undifferentiated claim of public interest in the confidentiality of such conversations, a confrontation with other values arises. Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, we find it difficult to accept the argument that even the very important interest in confidentiality of Presidential communications is significantly diminished by production of such material for in camera inspection with all the protection that a district court will be obliged to provide."

The court also asserted its own relevance and the vital power of federal trial judges to control cases in their courtrooms.
Justice Burger wrote:

"In light of the uniqueness of the setting in which the conflict arises, the fact that both parties are officer (sic) of the Executive Branch cannot be viewed as a barrier to justiciability. It would be inconsistent with the applicable law and regulation, and the unique facts of this case, to conclude other than that the Special Prosecutor has standing to bring this action, and that a justiciable controversy is presented for decision."

Barrack Hussein Obama is undoubtedly the most deceitful and corrupt man to ever betray the “Public Trust.” We have become a nation of lawlessness and corruption that most people find unimaginable.

To know that there is a wrong and not try to right it is a sin, and in some cases it is also a crime, which is also a sin.

18 U.S.C. § 4 - Misprision of felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

There is a faction of our society who call themselves “progressives”. This is a code word for Communism. They would prefer a liberal socialistic society such as China, Russia, Cuba and Venezuela because of the ideals espoused by dictators such as Mao, Stalin, Castro and Chavez.

Once again let’s reflect on the words of Founder Fisher Ames:
Our sages in the great constitutional convention... intended our government should be a republic which differs more widely from a democracy than a democracy from a despotism. The rigours of a despotism often... oppress only a few, but it is the very essence and nature of a democracy, for a faction claiming to oppress a minority, and that minority the chief owners of the property and truest lovers of their country.

America has flourished since it’s founding as a Republic but now finds itself at a crossroads and must have leaders willing to stand up against this tyranny.


Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC) was a Greek philosopher, a student of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great.

“Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.”

Yet again we are reminded of the peril that befalls a nation and its society at large when a debased public morality allows its political leaders to run roughshod over the Constitution seeking special interests that they could never get in a fair election at the ballot box. Obama and his fellow “Progressives” are proceeding with their plan to erase the rule of law in lieu of a kinder, gentler Constitution; one that can be nuanced and interpreted relative to the cultural ideals of the times. How convenient for him that the times can now be defined by a Supreme Court with justices he appointed so that amendment numero uno trumps treason.

Subpart F. Labor-Management and Employee Relations
Section 7301. Presidential regulations
CODE OF ETHICS FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICE (signed into law on July 3, 1980)

I. Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department.
II. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.
III. Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving earnest effort and best thought to the performance of duties.
IV. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished.
V. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors.
VI. Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.
VII. Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly, which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of governmental duties.
VIII. Never use any information gained confidentially in the performance of government duties as a means for making private profit.
IX. Expose corruption wherever discovered.
X. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust.

A provocateur and community organizer he may be, but a leader Barack Obama is not. For this once proud nation will never knowingly and collectively follow a known criminal who not only refuses to defend his country, but court martials the heroes that do; all the while being forced to endure his unabated globetrotting apology tour on the people’s dime criticizing America for things she never did in an attempt to bring America down and eliminate her superpower status in the eyes of the world.

He has mastered the art of surrendering for others what he can take from them without their consent.

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (Feb. 27, 1807-Mar. 24, 1882)

Though the mills of God grind slowly,
Yet they grind exceeding small;
Though with patience he stands waiting,
With exactness grinds he all.”

Freedom isn’t free and America better wake up fast and fervently defend it, lest it be a memory in the vestiges of history.

© 2011 Pixel Patriot
 (All rights reserved.)


constitutional walking tours philadelphia said...

Thanx for an information...

Post a Comment

Design by Free WordPress Themes | Bloggerized by Lasantha - Premium Blogger Themes