Berg's Simple Question

Below is a sample of a not untypical response which those of us who have been writing about this case have been receiving. Note particularly the smug condescending tone of the opening insult. The commenter has reluctantly agreed to descend from the rarefied atmosphere of his purported legal expertise to clarify these obtuse issues for us woefully uninformed laymen.

I think it might be helpful here to remind commenters such as the above mentioned that we are all of us laymen. For all of us there are innumerable subjects about which we may know little or nothing. To allow oneself to get puffed up over one's accumulation of knowledge in one particular field of expertise lays one open to questions about one's ignorance in all of those other areas. For most of the genuine experts I have had the pleasure of meeting or corresponding with, they have all seemed to share an easy familiarity with this concept of comparative ignorance. It is simply called humility. But for some, unfortunately, this character trait is noticeably absent. And for those of us who by force of circumstance must deal with these arrogant pomposities we must choose to either try to deflate them or if possible to just ignore them. Read the small sample below and you'll quickly see what I mean.

"Ok, I will try to explain this as simply as I can because it’s obvious that none of you know a thing about how this works:
1) The order filed by Berg requesting certain items regarding Obama’s citizenship is a BLANK ORDER. It’s not signed by the court’s judge (Surrick). It’s common practice for attorneys to draft up orders in their favor so all the judge has to do is sign it if he/she grants the attorney’s wishes. However, the court already DENIED Berg’s first motion back in August [1], and Berg submitted another motion asking Obama and the DNC to submit documents by October 15th. This motion is moot because the judge has NOT signed it and will most likely dismiss it (again) for reasons I explained earlier (Berg lacks legal standing to sue ..."

The now famous Berg v. Obama case to which this commenter refers is a perfect example of this problem. It is by definition a legal issue which calls for a certain degree of legal competence to comprehend the complexities involved. Yet we need not have a law degree to recognize these attacks for what they most certainly are. They are simply rebuttals. Not just professional dissenting opinions, but hot angry and impassioned denials. These respondents are not just interested in refuting the facts of this case; they are seeking to totally discredit and destroy the opposing advocate, whom they repeatedly characterize as an incompetent -- or worse.

However, to this particular layman it seems -- despite the labyrinth of legalise with which the liberal opposition has attempted to obscure the real issue involved here -- that if the Obama supporters are resting their case on their desperate attempts to define Atty. Berg as a 'nutcase' they have little ground to stand on. His resume alone would preclude this assumption. Yet how often have we read this same line of defense -- that Berg and his whole absurd case are inconsequential because he's a nutcase?

Well, to me, this nutcase's simple question -- "If you are a natural born citizen, Mr. Obama, what are you hiding?" is simply overwhelming. And the silence is simply deafening.

Well, Mr. Obama -- What are you hiding?

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday Hero

Sgt. Anton J. Hiett
25 years old from Mount Airy, North Carolina
391st Engineer Battalion, Army Reserve
March 12, 2006


Misty Hiett, the widow of Sgt. Anton Hiett, said in an interview that he, Sgt. Hiett, asked to transfer to the 391st Engineering Battalion when it looked like his reserve unit would not be deployed.

Sgt. Hiett was a truck driver who joined the military right out of high school because he "wanted to go help out" during the current conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. After his transfer to the 391st, he was deployed to Afghanistan on April 22, 2005.

On March 12, 2006, Sgt. Hiett, and three fellow soldiers from the 391st, Staff Sgt. Joe Ray; Spc. Joshua Hill and Sgt. Kevin Akins, were killed when an IED detonated near their Humvee during combat operations west of Asadabad, Afghanistan. He left behind his wife and their then 2(now 4)-year-old daughter Kyra.

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero.
We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.
<

Sphere: Related Content

Myth vs Fact

Myth	Fact
Islam: Religion of peace.	Malik's Muwatta Book 21, Number 21.15.35: Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "The nobility of the mumin is his taqwa. His deen is his noble descent. His manliness is his good character. Boldness and cowardice are but instincts which Allah places wherever He wills. The coward shrinks from defending even his father and mother, and the bold one fights for the sake of the combat not for the spoils. Being slain is but one way of meeting death, and the martyr is the one who gives himself, expectant of reward from Allah."
Tafsir

Sphere: Related Content

Obama: Muslim or Christian; What's the Difference?

Is he or ain't he? Only Barack Hussein Obama knows for sure. Whats the difference?

If he is a genuine convert to Christianity, the threats he poses are limited to the consequences of his:

• Communist ideology
• alliances:
• terrorists
• Ayers
• Khalidi
• racists
• Wright
• racketeers
• vote fraud practitioners
• Acorn
• inexperience
• incompetence.

If his conversion from Islam to Christianity was a scam perpetrated for political expediency, then electing him is, in effect installing an enemy agent as Commander in Chief. Abysmal ignorance of the doctrines of Islam recorded in the Qur'an & Hadith prevents many members of the American Electorate from comprehending the adverse consequences of electing a Muslim to high office.

22:41. Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamat-as-Salât. [i.e. to perform the five compulsory congregational Salât (prayers) (the males in mosques)], to pay the Zakât and they enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islâm has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur'ân as the law of their country in all the spheres of life]. And with Allâh rests the end of (all) matters (of creatures).

The phrases highlighted in red above basically mean that a Muslim who obtains power will impose Sharia. The translator's comment, highlighted in purple, confirms that fact. Do you really want to give that power to the enemy? A Muslim President would pack the court system with Muslims & Dhimmis, life time appointments that can not be rescinded.

24:55. Allâh has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practise their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Islâm). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the Fâsiqûn (rebellious, disobedient to Allâh).

(And those who believe and do righteous good deeds,) meaning, their hearts were truthful and their limbs obedient with the righteous acts they were commanded, [The Reward of Righteous Believers]

Righteous good deeds: code words for Jihad. What righteous acts were they commanded to perform? 8:39, 9:29. They intend to take power, by force or by stealth; why should we give it to them? Why should we yield our hard won liberties? How will we ever recover our hard won liberties when the enemy has taken control of our armed forces?

12:40. "You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged), you and your fathers, for which Allâh has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allâh. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism), that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not.

Only Islam's demon has the right to rule. Legislation contrary to his Qur'an or Moe's sunnah is not allowed.

33:36 It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.

Allah rules. His Messenger and his Caliphs decide and that is the end of the matter. That is not how our Constitution works. Why do you want to risk losing our Constitution? Why are you willing to risk imposition of Islamic theocratic tyranny?

Under Islamic law, any child born to a Muslim father is Muslim. Renouncing Islam and converting to a real religion is a capital offense. Apostates must be killed if they do not recant & revert. Why then do Muslims; even Islamic terrorists, want Barack Hussein Obama to be elected? Why aren't they issuing and attempting to carry out fatwas against him? Obviously, they believe that his conversion was a sham. Obviously, they believe that his policies will be favorable to them.

They may be right. We can't take that chance. If Barack Hussein Obama truly abandoned Islam and converted to Christianity, let him curse and condemn the damnable doctrines of Islam which sanctify & mandate aggressive conquest against Pagans & 'people of the book', genocide & terrorism.

If he is a closet Muslim, he won't abjure those doctrines because he believes them. In that case, we don't want him. If he is a Christian, but unwilling to offend Muslims by telling the truth about their curse worthy doctrines & practices, then he has no salt or savor, and is unworthy of high office.

In either case, Barack Hussein Obama must be rejected because he can not be trusted with the high office he seeks.

Sphere: Related Content

Election Day in Canada: Easy as ABC

Who wins, who loses.....

By the time you read this, voting in the Canadian federal election will already be over in some parts of the country. Even though all polling stations across the country close at 7pm, which is local time. This means that - usually - by the time the last voter in the west has voted, the government of Canada has already been decided by the most populous provinces in the east.

Those provinces: Ontario and Quebec. The irony of those two provinces deciding the fate of the nations is not lost on me. Quebec's most vocal party federally (or so it seems via the airwaves) is Bloc Quebecois whose sole mandate, as far back as I can remember, is to have Quebec separate from Canada and be declared a separate nation....

Go read the significance of "ABC" and the rest of MY take on Canada's 3rd election in 4 years at NewsBlaze here.

Sphere: Related Content