Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,605 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,143,360
Pageviews Today: 1,563,721Threads Today: 384Posts Today: 7,003
12:31 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I

 
Eight Squared
User ID: 948451
United States
04/26/2010 05:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
ochange



On November 23, 1993, President Clinton signed United States Public Law 103-150, which not only acknowledged the illegal actions committed by the United States in the overthrow of the legitimate government of Hawaii, but also that the Hawaiian people never surrendered their sovereignty.

The latter is the most important part of United States Public Law 103-150 for it makes it quite clear that the Hawaiian people never legally ceased to be a sovereign separate independent nation. There is no argument that can change that fact.

United States Public Law 103-150, despite its polite language, is an official admission that the government of the United States illegally occupies the territory of the Hawaiian people.

In 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii's statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations' charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding. (The same is true of the Alaska plebiscite).

In a world where nations are as governed by laws as are men, Hawaii is not and has never legally been a part of the United States. Hawaii was stolen from the Hawaiian people, and they want it back.

So what does this mean, even if Barry Soetoro (Obama) was born in Hawaii 1961, Hawaii wasn't legally a State of the United States but a sovereign independent nation. Barry Soetoro (Obama)is not a natural born citizen. Thank you Bill Clinton.


See Elk v. Wilkins, 83 U.S. 36 (1872)

The Court denied Elk, a Native American, the right to vote as a US citizen even though he was born on US soil, because he was born on an Indian Reservation. Elk was not born subject to the jurisdiction of the US, because he “owed immediate allegiance to” his tribe, a vassal or quasi-nation, and not to the United States. The Court held Elk was not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States at birth.
Rev. Moon Jew

User ID: 798834
United States
04/26/2010 05:51 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
While all that is very true - the turds in power would rather keep Obummer than give up their ill gotten gains in Hawaii.

But personally, I don't believe he was born here anyway.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Albert Einstein

revstargazer (at) hotmail.com
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 953403
United States
04/26/2010 05:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
Dunno.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 919411
United States
04/26/2010 06:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
Obama's father was a citizen of the British Crown when Obama was born.

Obama is not a "natural born" citizen of the United States of America.

End of story.

Obama is not President. His run and election were unconstitutional.

The military industrial complex is running the U.S. through Biden's office.

Obama is the President of the North American sector for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) which owns the District of Columbia. The IMF and Obama's jurisdiction only extends through D.C.

Oklahoma is about to print their own money and they are discussing forming their own standing army (militia) as the free Republic of Oklahoma has a right to do.

Wake up people.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 903601
United States
04/26/2010 06:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
ochange



On November 23, 1993, President Clinton signed United States Public Law 103-150, which not only acknowledged the illegal actions committed by the United States in the overthrow of the legitimate government of Hawaii, but also that the Hawaiian people never surrendered their sovereignty.

The latter is the most important part of United States Public Law 103-150 for it makes it quite clear that the Hawaiian people never legally ceased to be a sovereign separate independent nation. There is no argument that can change that fact.

United States Public Law 103-150, despite its polite language, is an official admission that the government of the United States illegally occupies the territory of the Hawaiian people.

In 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii's statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations' charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding. (The same is true of the Alaska plebiscite).

In a world where nations are as governed by laws as are men, Hawaii is not and has never legally been a part of the United States. Hawaii was stolen from the Hawaiian people, and they want it back.

So what does this mean, even if Barry Soetoro (Obama) was born in Hawaii 1961, Hawaii wasn't legally a State of the United States but a sovereign independent nation. Barry Soetoro (Obama)is not a natural born citizen. Thank you Bill Clinton.


See Elk v. Wilkins, 83 U.S. 36 (1872)

The Court denied Elk, a Native American, the right to vote as a US citizen even though he was born on US soil, because he was born on an Indian Reservation. Elk was not born subject to the jurisdiction of the US, because he “owed immediate allegiance to” his tribe, a vassal or quasi-nation, and not to the United States. The Court held Elk was not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States at birth.
 Quoting: Eight Squared 948451


Oooooo.....GOOD question....But....Sorry to burst your bubble....Hawaii became a state on August 21, 1959.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 948451
United States
04/26/2010 06:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
Oooooo.....GOOD question....But....Sorry to burst your bubble....Hawaii became a state on August 21, 1959.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 903601


No, you didn't burst my bubble, the perspective by the native people of Hawaii, the people never ceded their sovereignty, hence, the so called statehood in 1959 is illegal and swindle by the occupying government of the time.

norespect
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 945461
United States
04/26/2010 07:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
This is not the first time this sort of thing has happened. For example, Ohio was to be admitted to the union as of Mar 1, 1803 but the vote never came to Congress. It was formally admitted to the union on Aug 7, 1953. Congress passed an expo-facto resolution (illegal according to the Constitution) which formally recognized Ohio a state as of 1803.

[link to www.enquirer.com]

The following Presidents were born in Ohio:
Ulysses S. Grant (18th)
Rutherford B. Hayes (19th)
James A. Garfield (20th)
Benjamin Harrison (23rd)
William McKinley (25th)
William H. Taft (27th)
Warren G. Harding (29th)

This would mean that since Congress committed an illegal act, that anything signed into law by these Presidents is null and void. Likewise, anything based on those laws or derived from them.

So, similarly, is the issue with Hawaii. It is even clearer in the case of Hawaii. It is a separate sovereign nation.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 945461
United States
04/26/2010 07:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
The resolution to make Ohio a state as of 1803 was illegal because of Article 1 Section 9, in the US Constitution clearly states:

"No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
Eight Squared (OP)
User ID: 948451
United States
04/26/2010 07:27 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
This is not the first time this sort of thing has happened. For example, Ohio was to be admitted to the union as of Mar 1, 1803 but the vote never came to Congress. It was formally admitted to the union on Aug 7, 1953. Congress passed an expo-facto resolution (illegal according to the Constitution) which formally recognized Ohio a state as of 1803.

[link to www.enquirer.com]

The following Presidents were born in Ohio:
Ulysses S. Grant (18th)
Rutherford B. Hayes (19th)
James A. Garfield (20th)
Benjamin Harrison (23rd)
William McKinley (25th)
William H. Taft (27th)
Warren G. Harding (29th)

This would mean that since Congress committed an illegal act, that anything signed into law by these Presidents is null and void. Likewise, anything based on those laws or derived from them.

So, similarly, is the issue with Hawaii. It is even clearer in the case of Hawaii. It is a separate sovereign nation.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 945461


Holy crap! Thank you for that. I am truly surprised the people at the time didn't complain about this procedural error. Somethings never change. Now I'm interested in what is null and void with the permutations thereof.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 313077
United Kingdom
04/26/2010 07:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I
Holy crap! Thank you for that. I am truly surprised the people at the time didn't complain...
 Quoting: Eight Squared 948451


I'm guessing they did, but were seen in the same way the "birthers" are now.

News