2012 - o'mam: He who bows to the east. (video 9m57s) [redux]

Islam is at war with the United States ...contrary to o'mam's foolish Muslim mouthings! -- rfh

From: between  Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 Subject:  Video going to air before it gets cancelled

Have you seen this video?  If not, this certainly doesn't reflect his message last night. [2012 "State of the Union" address before Congress]

-- and people worry about Romney being a Mormon?????!!!!!!!  

video source: http://youtu.be/tCAffMSWSzY Uploaded to Youtube by FeelTheChangeMedia on Aug 7, 2009

Obama admits that he is a Muslim.  Obama bowing before a Muslim king.  Obama talking about his Muslim family.  Obama quoting from the Koran.  Obama defending Islam.  Obama visiting a Mosque.  And many more clips of Obama and his Muslim connections.  Legal Disclaimer: The writers, producers, and editors of this video are not claiming or implying that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim, or that Obama said he was a Muslim, rather they are only examining the evidence surrounding the rumor that Barack Hussein Obama might be a secret Muslim.

---

They have killed many many Americans!!! - rfh

related: http://harrold.org/rfhextra/religion.html

related: http://harrold.org/rfhextra/menu.htm

---

2012 - Rejecting the Keystone pipeline is an act of insanity (By Robert J. Samuelson. Amb. Brenda Johnson)

Why are we blindly accepting "the annointed one's" authority to block this anyway?  What is his authority?  Do we accept his "enabling acts" without question?  What's Congresss for? -- rfh

related: Lord Monckton on Global Warming

related: http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/10/climate-chains-and-lord-christopher.html

related: http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/12/oclimatologist-lord-christopher.html

related: http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-poised-to-cede-us-sovereignty.html

related: http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2011/07/be-watchful-s3081-unintended.html

---

From: baja Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 Subject: Rejecting the Keystone pipeline is an act of insanity (By Robert J. Samuelson. Amb. Brenda Johnson)

I agree - this was a really bad decision (in terms of the short and long-term interests of the U.S.) about an important issue, made by the president purely to try and improve his chances for re-election.

---

Rejecting the Keystone pipeline is an act of insanity
By Robert J. Samuelson, Washington Post, January 19, 2012
     President Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is an act of national insanity.  It isn't often that a president makes a decision that has no redeeming virtues and - beyond the symbolism - won't even advance the goals of the groups that demanded it.  All it tells us is that Obama is so obsessed with his reelection that, through some sort of political calculus, he believes that placating his environmental supporters will improve his chances.
     Aside from the political and public relations victory, environmentalists won't get much.  Stopping the pipeline won't halt the development of tar sands, to which the Canadian government is committed; therefore, there will be little effect on global-warming emissions.  Indeed, Obama's decision might add to them.  If Canada builds a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific for export to Asia, moving all that oil across the ocean by tanker will create extra emissions.  There will also be the risk of added spills.
     Now consider how Obama's decision hurts the United States.  For starters, it insults and antagonizes a strong ally; getting future Canadian cooperation on other issues will be harder.  Next, it threatens a large source of relatively secure oil that, combined with new discoveries in the United States, could reduce (though not eliminate) our dependence on insecure foreign oil.
     Finally, Obama's decision forgoes all the project's jobs.  There's some dispute over the magnitude.  Project sponsor TransCanada claims 20,000, split between construction (13,000) and manufacturing (7,000) of everything from pumps to control equipment.  Apparently, this refers to "job years," meaning one job for one year.  If so, the actual number of jobs would be about half that spread over two years.   Whatever the figure, it's in the thousands and thus important in a country hungering for work.  And Keystone XL is precisely the sort of infrastructure project that Obama claims to favor.
     The big winners are the Chinese.  They must be celebrating their good fortune and wondering how the crazy Americans could repudiate such a huge supply of nearby energy.  There's no guarantee that tar-sands oil will go to China; pipelines to the Pacific would have to be built.  But it creates the possibility when the oil's natural market is the United States.
     There are three things to remember about Keystone and U.S. energy policy.
     First, we're going to use lots of oil for a long time.  The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that U.S. oil consumption will increase 4 percent between 2009 and 2035.  The increase occurs despite highly optimistic assumptions about vehicle fuel efficiency and bio-fuels.  But a larger population (390 million in 2035 versus 308 million in 2009) and more driving per vehicle offset savings.
     The more oil we produce domestically and import from neighbors, the more we're insulated from dramatic interruptions of global supplies.  After the United States, Canada is the most dependable source of oil - or was, until Obama's decision.
     Second, barring major technological breakthroughs, emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, will rise for similar reasons.  The EIA projects that America's CO2 emissions will increase by 16 percent from 2009 to 2035.  (The EIA is updating its projections, but the main trends aren't likely to change dramatically.)  Stopping Canadian tar-sands development, were that possible, wouldn't affect these emissions.
     Finally, even if - as Keystone critics argue - some Canadian oil were refined in the United States and then exported, this would be a good thing.  The exports would probably go mostly to Latin America.  They would keep well-paid industrial jobs (yes, refining) in the United States and reduce our trade deficit in oil, which exceeded $300 billion in 2011.
     By law, Obama's decision was supposed to reflect "the national interest."  His standard was his political interest.  The State Department had spent three years evaluating Keystone and appeared ready to approve the project by year-end 2011.  Then the administration, citing opposition to the pipeline's route in Nebraska, reversed course and postponed a decision to 2013 - after the election.
     Now, reacting to a congressional deadline to decide, Obama rejected the proposal.  But he also suggested that a new application with a modified Nebraska route - already being negotiated - might be approved, after the election.  So the sop tossed to the environmentalists could be temporary.  The cynicism is breathtaking.

---

High Fashion in the Mosque...Check out his shirt

From: baja Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 Subject: High Fashion in the Mosque...Check out his shirt

I don't apologize for not being ' sensitive ' and offending anyone...

     


     We're constantly clubbed on the head with the claim that the Muslim world condemns 9/11, abhors 9/11, etc.

     Yet every day Shirts like this a mass produced, marketed, and sold by street venders thru out the middle east and it's simply OK. 

     Now a few of our guys, after months of sleeping on the cold ground, eating MREs, not having a good hot shower, and away from their love ones, get caught piss'n on a couple of dead rag head Al Qada types and they are condemned by the world.

related: http://harrold.org/rfhextra/religion.html
related: http://harrold.org/rfhextra/menu.html

---

10 healthy reasons to have a beer!

article source: http://brookstonbeerbulletin.com/10-healthy-reasons-to-drink-beer/

10 Healthy Reasons To Drink Beer

by Jay Brooks on January 16, 2012 in Beers,Just For Fun,News,Top 10

     I may not always see eye-to-eye with the Roman Catholic Church, but I'm with them all the way on this one.  While many religious denominations forbid their followers from drinking alcohol and others preach against it, it's nice to see at least one take a more rational approach.  Not only does Catholic Online tell everyone: "Have a beer. Really, go ahead and have one."  They even go so far as to encourage you to spread the word to your fellow man (and woman): "Tell everyone we said it's okay to pop a cold one."  Talk about a great beginning.

     The article published today on the catholic website is entitled 10 healthy reasons to have a beer! and also carries this subtitle: "Beer outperforms wine as a healthy beverage in several categories."  [original article below -- rfh]  After detailing beer's long history and its changing perception today, they get to the meat of their thinking:

     Several years ago, it became understood that wine had a surprising number of health benefits.  Since then, beer drinkers have had to endure a litany of praises about how great wine was for health as opposed to beer.  But now, it turns out that the wine drinkers needn't be so smug when comparing their beverage to beer.

     Researchers from around the world have spent years studying one of our favorite beverages in detail, and there's some good news.  The latest collection of studies from around the world reveals that if the beer is enjoyed in moderation, meaning one for women, and no more than two for men, per day, then it can yield a surprising number of health benefits.

Below is the list of their ten reasons to drink a beer, but check out the original story to read the background for each of these ten.

1.      Strong Bones
2.      Strong Heart
3.      Kidney Stone Prevention
4.      Dementia Prevention
5.      Reduced Cancer Risk
6.      Taking Your Vitamins
7.      Stroke Prevention
8.      Diabetes Prevention
9.      Blood Pressure
10.      Long Life

     I've seen, read and even written about most, if not all, of these health benefits from drinking beer in moderation, but it's nice to see them all in one place.  The article ends with this appropriate suggestion.  "So the next time you decide to have a beer, you can enjoy it without the guilt."  Amen to that.

---

10 healthy reasons to have a beer!

article source: http://www.catholic.org/health/story.php?id=44416

By Catholic Online (NEWS CONSORTIUM)

1/17/2012, Catholic Online ( www.catholic.org )

Beer outperforms wine as a healthy beverage in several categories.

Have a beer.  Really, go ahead and have one.  Tell everyone we said it's okay to pop a cold one while you read the next 10 surprisingly beneficial facts about beer. -- All settled?  Got your pint?  Then let's begin!

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - Beer is an ancient beverage, in fact it has been around since prehistoric times -- prior to the invention of writing and the foundation of the earliest civilizations.  Beer is also the third most widely consumed beverage on the planet just behind water and tea.
     In more recent times, beer has enjoyed a mixed reputation.  Thanks to modern advertising campaigns, beer is often associated with family, friends, sporting events, and good times in general.  However, beer is also associated with intoxication, alcoholism, weight gain, and overindulgence.
     Several years ago, it became understood that wine had a surprising number of health benefits.  Since then, beer drinkers have had to endure a litany of praises about how great wine was for health as opposed to beer.  But now, it turns out that the wine drinkers needn't be so smug when comparing their beverage to beer.
     Researchers from around the world have spent years studying one of our favorite beverages in detail, and there's some good news.  The latest collection of studies from around the world reveals that if the beer is enjoyed in moderation, meaning one for women, and no more than two for men, per day, then it can yield a surprising number of health benefits.
     Here's a list of 10 while you enjoy your pint.
1. Strong bones
     Apparently, beer contains relatively high levels of silicon.  A 2009 study performed at Tufts University revealed that older men and women who consumed one to two drinks daily had greater bone density with the greatest found in those people who preferred beer or wine.  But there was one caveat, people who had more than two drinks per day were at a greater risk of fractures.
2. A strong heart
     You have to have a strong heart to drink certain kinds of beer but the 2011 analysis of 16 previous studies including more than 200,000 people, found that 31 percent reduction in the risk of heart disease in people who drank a pint of beer daily.  But those who drank more than a pint saw their risk increase.
3. Kidney stone prevention
     Kidney stones are one of the more painful afflictions that a man can suffer but the good news is each daily bottle of beer that men drank lowered their risk of developing kidney stones by 40 percent.  Exactly how this works is still unknown, but researchers suspect that beer's high water content keeps the kidneys flushed and prevents calcium from building up and forming stones.
4. Dementia prevention
     A 2005 study which tracked 11,000 older women showed that moderate drinking reduced their risk of mental decline by as much as 20 percent.  Additionally, women who drank a beer a day were about 18 months younger, according to tests which rated their mental ability.
5. Reduced cancer risk
     A study done in Portugal showed that steak marinated in beer eliminated 70 percent of the carcinogens that are produced when the meat is fried in a pan.  It's believed that the sugars and beer prevent the carcinogens from forming.
     Both beer and wine are also known to contain high levels of antioxidants.
6. Taking your vitamins
     A nutritional study performed in the Netherlands showed that beer drinkers had 30 percent higher levels of vitamin B6 in their blood than nondrinkers.  As a bonus, the beer drinkers had twice as much vitamin B6 as wine drinkers.  Take that, vino!
     Beer is also known to contain vitamin B12 and folic acid.
7. Stroke prevention
     The Harvard school of public health found that moderate amounts of alcohol consumption, which includes beer, helps to prevent blood clots.  Blood clots cause strokes which can be debilitating and even fatal.
8. Diabetes prevention
     Another Harvard study concluded in 2011 showed that 38,000 middle-aged men who raised their alcohol intake to two beers per day reduced their risk of developing type II diabetes by 25 percent.  Alas, the benefits drop off if a third beer is consumed.
9. Blood pressure
     One final Harvard study of 70,000 women ages 25 to 40 revealed that moderate beer drinkers are less likely to have high blood pressure.  When those women were compared to women who drink wine or other alcoholic beverages, beer still did a better job of reducing the risk than the other beverages.  Beer wins again!
10. Long life
     A comprehensive 2005 review done by the USDA which examined the results of 50 different studies revealed that moderate drinkers live longer than heavy drinkers and nondrinkers.  The USDA estimates that moderate drinking prevents 26,000 deaths a year due to lower rates of illness, particularly heart disease, stroke, and diabetes.
     Ultimately, there is a wealth of evidence that suggests why consumption of alcohol, and in this case beer, has a number of beneficial health effects.  So the next time you decide to have a beer, you can enjoy it without the guilt.  But remember, all things in moderation.  The benefits listed above are only good for the first two.
 © 2012, Catholic Online.  Distributed by NEWS CONSORTIUM.

---

personal security - Who're your neighbors? [kinda scary?]

From: rapa  Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012  Subject:  neighbors

I tried this out, it's kind of scary, the pictures are at least 2-3 years old for my place but the phone numbers are right for the people I know. - DBH

Want to know who your neighbors are?  Go to this site & put in your address & it comes up with a satellite photo and the names and phone # of your neighbors.  Neat, but kinda creepy how much info is out there.  T. 
http://neighbors.whitepages.com

 DBH, Senior Special Agent - USCS/ICE - Retired

---

2012 - How does he do it? Simply Amazing! [redux]

At least I have a birth certificate. -- rfh

Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for election to the office of President or Vice President.

Part of the constitutional provision as it appeared in 1787

Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as president of the United States:

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.

The Twelfth Amendment states that, "No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." The Fourteenth Amendment does not use the phrase natural-born citizen. It does provide that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

The first several presidents prior to Martin van Buren, as well as potential presidential candidates, were born as British subjects in British America before theAmerican Revolution.^[4] 

^(Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause_of_the_U.S._Constitution)

From: thy Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 Subject:  Simply Amazing!!!!

SIMPLY AMAZING WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT

     Isn't it amazing that, within only one week of Tiger Woods crashing his Escalade, the press found every woman with whom Tiger has had an affair during the last few years?

     And, they even uncovered photos, text messages, recorded phone calls, etc.!

     Furthermore, they not only know the cause of the family fight, but they even know it was a wedge from his golf bag that his wife used to break out the windows in the Escalade.

     Not only that, they know which wedge!

     And, each & every day, they were able to continue to provide America with updates on Tiger's sex rehab stay, his wife's plans for divorce, as well as the

dates & tournaments in which he will play.

     Now, Barack Hussein Obama has been in office for three plus years, yet this very same press:

•  Cannot find any of his childhood friends or neighbors;
•  Or find any of Obama's high school or college classmates;
•  Or locate any of his college papers or grades;
•  Or determine how he paid for both a Columbia & a Harvard education;
•  Or discover which country issued his visa to travel to Pakistan in the 1980's;
• Don't know when or where he was born;
•  Or even find Michelle Obama's Princeton thesis on racism.

     They just can't seem to uncover any of this.  Yet, the public still trusts that same press to give them the whole truth!

     I find that totally amazing, don't you?

---

Jan. 22 - Norma McCorvey: "I think abortion's wrong..."

From: American Minute  Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 Subject: Jan. 22 - Norma McCorvey: "I think abortion's wrong..."

American Minute with Bill Federer Jan. 22 - Norma McCorvey: "I think abortion's wrong..."   JANUARY 22, 1973, the Supreme Court decisions of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton allowed abortion in all nine months of pregnancy.      23 years later, Norma McCorvey, who was the "Jane Roe" in the Roe v. Wade suit, was interviewed by USA Today. She stated that once, while employed at a clinic when no one was in:      "I went into the procedure room and laid down on the table...trying to imagine what it would be like having an abortion...I broke down and cried."      On ABC's World News Tonight, Norma McCorvey said: "I think abortion's wrong. I think what I did with Roe v. Wade was wrong."      On November 3, 2005, former Democrat President Jimmy Carter stated to reporters at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, DC, regarding his book, Our Enduring Values -America's Moral Crisis:      "I never have felt that any abortion should be committed-I think each abortion is the result of a series of errors...I've never been convinced, if you let me inject my Christianity into it, that Jesus Christ would approve abortion."      Jimmy Carter concluded:      "I have always thought it was not in the mainstream of the American public to be extremely liberal on many issues. I think our party's leaders -some of them- are overemphasizing the abortion issue." News from AmeriSearch Get the classic book The Ten Commandments & their Influence on American Law To invite Bill Federer to speak, contact AmericanPriorities@gmail.com or call 1-888-USA-WORD. Watch Federer's "Faith in History" program.   Receive the daily minute on your Facebook wall, Twitter feed, or RSS reader. Visit our website to download an MP3 version of the American Minute suitable as a radio PSA. Please visit the store today to help us keep the American Minute going during this critical time.  Order William J. Federer's books and audio for yourself or for a friend.   Know someone who would be interested in receiving the American Minute?   Use the Send to a Colleague link below to tell others about the American Minute.  If someone forwarded you this email, click Join Our Mailing List to receive the American Minute. American Minute is a registered trademark.

2012 - "Elephant in the Room" Gov. can't find birth certificate.

Stating the obvious

     "Elephant in the room" is an English metaphorical idiom for an obvious truth that is being ignored or goes unaddressed.  The idiomatic expression also applies to an obvious problem or risk no one wants to discuss.  It is based on the idea that an elephant in a room would be impossible to overlook; thus, people in the room who pretend the elephant is not there have chosen to avoid dealing with the looming big issue. (definition: Wikipedia)

     All candidates for the presidency should be required to prove their birth ...before being accepted on any ballot.  If they don't, as in the case of o'who?'s efforts to conceal his true identity vis-à-vis birth records, then why should a 'birther' be denigrated?  The constitutional responsibility rests upon the 'wanna be' candidate.

     All states should have a law in place, and enforced, mandating unequivocal proof of eligibility before allowing any candidate on a presidential ballot.

     Of course, as is the case now, we can simply ignore the Constitution.  Hundreds of thousands fought and died to defend our Constitution,  therein lies a tragic truth.  -- rfh

From: kd Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 Subject: Birth Certificate Update

If you can't trust your Progressive/Socialist/Marxist/Communist president or your Progressive/Socialist/Marxist/Communist governor of Hawaii, who can you trust ...KD

Part of the constitutional provision as it appeared in 1787 
(Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause_of_the_U.S._Constitution)

UPDATE: Governor Neil Abercrombie is facing renewed pressure over Obama's Hawaiin? origins
Hawaii governor claims record of Obama's birth 'exists in archives' ...but can't produce the vital document.

By Daily Mail Reporter, Last updated at 3:32 PM on 20th January 2011
article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1348916/Hawaii-governor-says-Obamas-birth-record-exists-produce-it.html 

     Pressure was mounting on Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie today amid increasing confusion over whether President Obama was born there.
     Abercrombie said on Tuesday that an investigation had unearthed papers proving Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.
     He told Honolulu's Star-Advertiser: 'It actually exists in the archives, written down,' he said.
     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.
     He said efforts were still being made to track down definitive vital records that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii.
     Abercrombie was asked: 'You stirred up quite a controversy with your comments regarding birthers and your plan to release more information regarding President Barack Obama's birth certificate.  How is that coming?'
     He acknowledged the birth certificate issue would have 'political implications' for the next presidential election 'that we simply can not have'.
     'It's a matter of principle with me,' the 72-year-old said.  'I knew his mum and dad.  I was here when he was born.  Anybody who wants to ask a question honestly could have had their answer already.'
     Birthers insist Obama, born in 1961, is not eligible to be commander in chief.  The reasons often vary, and have changed and expanded in the two years since the Internet rumour began.
     The beauty of Hawaii .., but there is still a cloud hanging over Obama's birthright.
     Some believe his Certification of Live Birth is fake and he was really born in Kenya.  Others argue that Obama is a citizen of the United Kingdom or Indonesia.  Most theories have been dismissed by many in public office and the media, and have been found to be misleading or generally untrue.
     However, the conspiracy theories still thrive, and according to Abercrombie, are likely to continue despite whatever evidence that shows him to be a proper U.S. citizen.
     'You're not going to convince those people because they have a political agenda, or they have minds that go in that kind of direction,' he told CNN.  'Conspiratorial theorists are never going to be satisfied.  This has gone into another area of political attack.'
     And he again promised he would do 'what I can do' to publicly verify that records show Obama was born in Hawaii and is a citizen of the United States, making him eligible to be President.
     The Governor vowed when he took office in December that he would do his best to end the debate over Obama's birth, which began in 2008 during the presidential campaign.
     'We'll do what we can as quickly as we can to make it inevitable that only those who wish the President ill, only the ones with a political agenda, will be the ones doing this kind of thing,' he said at the time.  'The President is entitled to the respect of his office and he's entitled to have his mother and father respected.'
     During that interview, Abercrombie said his goal to combat birthers was a personal one.

Constitution Society: Founding Documents	Online Books + Federalist Papers	History+Documents	Quotations+American Values
TimeLine of: the Magna Carta	Arbroath Declaration"Scots Wha Hae"	History of:  The US Bill of Rights	Constitution + more Amendments

email Congress & W.H.: http://capwiz.com/congressorgfb/issues/alert/?alertid=41045506

2012 - U.K. o'comic strips

From: thy Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 Subject: Comic strips from the U.K.

From the UK - splendid, just splendid!  The Brits, as usual, are a bit more subtle than we are -- nice use of irony?

---

2012 - Archie Bunker Calls It: Archie v o'fool (video 3m10s)

From: bbSent: Monday, January 16, 2012 Subject: Archie Bunker: The Prophet

video source: http://youtu.be/YX8YC_B7wtQ

Uploaded to Youtube by frigifide on Sep 20, 2011

---

o'bamanation - Generations

From: bb Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 Subject: Generations

People born before 1946 were called The Silent & Powerful Generation.
People born between 1946 and 1964 are called The Baby Boomers.
People born between 1965 and 1979 are called Generation X.
And people born between 1980 and 2010 are called Generation Y.

Why do we call the last group Generation Y?

Y should I get a job?
Y should I leave home and find my own place?
Y should I get a car when I can borrow yours?
Y should I clean my room?
Y should I wash and iron my own clothes?
Y should I buy any food?

But a cartoonist explained it very eloquently:

---

WARNING - S.B.1698: Authorizes Feds To Revoke Citizenship Of Americans

From: Western Journalism  Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012  Subject: Senate Bill Authorizes Feds To Revoke Citizenship Of Americans

Senate Bill Authorizes Feds To Revoke Citizenship Of Americans

by Doug Book, Jan 16, 2012

     A bill has been introduced in the United States Senate which will authorize the federal government to revoke the citizenship, creating practical expatriates, of American citizens.

     Introduced by Connecticut Independent Joe Lieberman and Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown, S 1698, the "Enemy Expatriation Act," is a simple, 2 page document which offers apparently innocent amendments and additions to existing federal legislation. (1)

     That legislation, known as Title 8, outlines the role of aliens and nationality in the U.S. Code.  And it is just one small piece of this massive and complex law which the Enemy Expatriation Act seeks to modify, that being Section 349, the means by which "a person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality", - that is, his citizenship. (2)

     Though there is currently little contained in Section 349 which would alarm any American citizen, one phrase added to the legislation by the "Enemy Expatriation Act" would change everything.  For it states that anyone voluntarily "engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States" will lose his nationality."  And nationality means citizenship! (1)

     To be sure, most of us would be in favor of revoking American citizenship if it has been improperly, perhaps surreptitiously attained by Muslim terrorists who have entered the United States only to commit acts of violence and murder.

     But it's necessary to remember who we are dealing with in Washington, DC. To Janet Napolitano and her Department of Homeland Security, it is Libertarians, soldiers returning from combat, gun owners, militia members, devout believers in the Constitution and those who loudly mistrust and criticize the federal government who are the true threats of "engaging in hostilities against the United States."  Perhaps not coincidentally it is also members of these groups who are the most vocal critics of the Obama Administration!

     And as the Obama Regime considers each of these individuals a potential domestic terrorist, how long will it be until a member of one of these "highly suspect" groups is conveniently accused of "materially supporting hostilities against the United States?"

     Much of this language should sound quite familiar, for it is taken directly from the recently enacted National Defense Authorization Act of 2012.  There was great concern surrounding the authority given the President by this law to imprison American citizens without trial or charge if he should consider them enemies who present a danger to the United States and its people.  And, just as the President is granted that authority by the NDAA, should the Enemy Expatriation Act pass both the House and Senate, he will ALSO have the authority to revoke their citizenship.  (3)

     Isn't it odd that, no so long ago, the left was adamant about GRANTING to Muslim terrorists in Guantanamo the rights of American citizens - rights to a lawyer, Miranda rights of silence, and the right to a speedy trial before a jury!  Yet with the signing into law of senate bill 1698, those same rights, indeed American citizenship itself, could be revoked from any one of "We the people!"

     The election is only months away.  Regardless who wins it, the "legal" destruction of our natural rights as citizens of the United States by Barack Hussein Obama or any other president must NOT be permitted.

Further reading: 

http://www.asil.org/insights091020.cfm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_8_of_the_United_States_Code

http://news.findlaw.com/wp/docs/terrorism/sjres23.es.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002385----000-.html

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_781.html
article source:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/senate-bill-authorizes-federal-government-to-revoke-citizenship-of-the-american-people/

Constitution Society: Founding Documents	Online Books + Federalist Papers	History+Documents	Quotations+American Values
TimeLine of: the Magna Carta	Arbroath Declaration"Scots Wha Hae"	History of:  The US Bill of Rights	Constitution + more Amendments