Berg is “Outraged” that Obama & DNC Hide Again Behind Legal Issues as their attorney files a Motion for Protective Order to “not” Answer Admissions & Production of Documents while Betraying Public in not Producing Documents proving Obama is “qualified” to be a candidate for President.
It is believed Obama is an “illegal alien”
For Immediate Release: - 10/06/08
(Contact info and pdf of press release below)
Country is Headed to a Constitutional Crisis
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/06/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that Obama and Democratic National Committee [DNC] filed a Joint Motion for Protective Order to Stay Discovery Pending a Decision on the Motion to Dismiss (which was) filed on 09/24/08.
While legal, Berg stated he is “outraged as this is another attempt to hide the truth from the public; it is obvious that documents do not exist to prove that Obama is qualified to be President.” The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.
Their joint motion indicates a concerted effort to avoid the truth by attempting to delay the judicial process, although legal, by not resolving the issue presented: that is, whether Barack Obama meets the qualifications to be President.
It is obvious that Obama was born in Kenya and does not meet the “qualifications” to be President of the United States pursuant to our United States Constitution. Obama cannot produce a certified copy of his “Vault” [original long version] Birth Certificate from Hawaii because it does not exist.
Furthermore, and actually more important is Obama’s Certificate of Citizenship that he received when he returned from Indonesia, as if it exists it would indicate that Obama was “naturalized” and also not able to be President.
The DNC has promised “we the people” an Open and Honest Government and has promised to uphold our United States Constitution. The DNC has failed their promise. DNC Chairperson Howard Dean should resign as he has not and is not fulfilling his responsibility of seeing that a “qualified” candidate is on the ballot as the Democratic candidate for President of the United States.
Berg stated that a response in opposition will be filed in the next day or so to the Defendants Motion for a Protective Order.
Our website obamacrimes.com now has 21.7 + million hits. We are urging all to spread the word of our website – and forward to your local newspapers and radio and TV stations. Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith.
Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
Joined: Jul 2008
Current Posts: 775
"What you won't hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon -- that sees our opponents not as competitors to challenge, but enemies to demonize." – Barack Obama, June 3, 2008
http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate
Barack Obama’s Official Birth Certificate can be seen at the above url. Clayton has once again proven that he/she is not really interested in the truth, all he/she is interested in is getting people to pay attention to his/her agendas of hatred and various propaganda items. He/she does not want you to focus on really important items like how the Republicans have ruined our economy during the past thirty eight years by deregulating the banks and other financial institutions that were their biggest supporters in every election I can trace. I'll bet that most people don't know that even the infamous Swift Boat propagandists (who are back with us again with their lies and innuendo just like Clayton) were financed by a Texas banker buddy of George Bush. This same insidious individual is now attacking Obama using the same dirty politics as Sarah Palin and Karl Rove use all of the time.
DON'T FORGET TO CONFIRM THAT YOU ARE REGISTERED TO VOTE AND PLEASE VOTE IN THIS IMPORTANT ELECTION.
Joined: Oct 2007
Current Posts: 1069
When you learn to get your facts right try again, Until then you will remain the Dishonest poster on this Board.
Joined: Jul 2008
Current Posts: 775
Look at the bottom of the certificate Clayton it says
"This document serves as prima fascia evidence in any court proceeding."
Get it? Do I have to spell out what that means?
No I'll tell you what it means. It means that you don't want anyone to focus on the disasterous economy that McCain and Bush caused. You don't want to focus on
the war that Bush lied to start and then McCain wants to continue in order to pay off his
supporters.
Joined: Oct 2007
Current Posts: 1069
and that Hussein is a fraud.
No real Birth certificate holds that phrase within it's contents. Documents must be witnessed, that means confirmed by a notary public to contain those words; and this document carries no such seal. Nor does it carry an offical seal of an issuing office, or the signiture of an officiating administrator.
FACE IT YOUR DOCUMENT IS A FAKE
YOUR CANDIDATE IS A FAKE
Impeachment begins day one, and BO the stinking one, will be the first illegitimate president .
Barack the Bastard Boy President
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
Again, a court has thrown out the suit against Obama's citizenship. You'll probably say it was the result of an activist judge - What part of the American system do you trust? Are you sure you're in the right country? Also, since Obama's parents were still together at the time of his birth, he is not a bastard in that sense. As for the "boy" part - man, grow up and join the modern world. I feel sorry for you.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
brennymac wrote - '... Again, a court has thrown out the suit against Obama's citizenship. ...'
You will find more recent and accurate status of the ongoing legal proceedings in the Americans being scammed by Obama... the alien??? forum.
http://forums.contracostatimes.com/node/20999/177200#comment-177200
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
Okay, I saw the Dec. 1 appeal that has been given to the plantiff (far less likely than when given to a defendant). However, the chance that this will end up being some major event that destoys Obama presupposes that:
1) The background check that goes into becoming a state Senator, let alone a United States senator, let alone a presidential candidate for a major political party, completely ignores investigation into the legitimacy of one's citizenship, making the security around those positions more lax than the FBI, CIA, etc. - wholly and truly an idea that invites ridicule.
2) The McCain/Palin campaign, aside from accusing Obama of "palling around with terrorists" and being a socialist, completely ignored the possibility that he might not be a citizen. And you want them to run the country (or Bob Barr, who also failed to suggest such a thing).
3) Some random lawyer from B.F.E., Pennsylvania is the smartest guy in the country.
As an A's fan, I know what it's like to give up hope for your guys and just wish for your opponent's worst case scenario to unfold. However, I've also learned to know when the other team has played good baseball and my team just didn't have what it took. I admire your tenacity, but sometimes you just have to face the facts and accept a rebuilding year (or 4). And, like much like the prospect of resigning Giambi, I strongly recommend reconsidering any ideas you might have about Palin 2012. It'll sell shirts and tickets, but it won't win anyone a ring.
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 3
Well it's Dooms-Day for America and Cpt_America has come to defend her from the Bulshevics once again!
It's news already, though well off the radar today, that Obama has avoided a near assassination attempt. Why are the Dems pushing him so hard to his possible death? Will he become their new JFK (the first black JFK) and usher Biden in as the President just as Johnson was?
I feel sorry for this man and his family, he would have served his country better as Senator or even as a Governor rather than stick his neck out there for some crazy person to try and take him out.
And who really benefits if Obama is out of the picture? That's the real question...
- Cpt_America
Joined: Jul 2008
Current Posts: 377
Clayton, either your a failed republican shill or a plant to spew out right lies and republican hate propaganda and misinformation or just a seriously deranged and politically blind ***hole.
Either way, **** you.
Done wit it!~
later loser!
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 470
don't throw rocks
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
What's the problem exactly? I don't understand why you would expect the DNC to spend money investigating a claim that they don't think has merit. Did the RNC launch a proactive investigation into claims of Bush's unsatisfactory national guard service? Of course not. In this case, such an investigation is the job of police and immigration enforcement. Counter to what was implied by Clayton, the move to dismiss Berg's unlikely charges has not been denied, and it may well be dismissed in the days ahead. But by all means, keep avoiding the real political issues in favor of cartoonish conspiracy theories. I knew I missed something about the Clinton years...
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 1
Why isn't the U.S. media investigating and reporting on this matter and the future civil disrest it could potentially cause? Why isn't Obama putting this to rest? Is there another motive at play here?There are too many questions not being asked let alone answered!
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 109
What we don't need is to make a martyr out of this clown. We just need to neutralize him through electing good conservatives to the congress. That's the goal for 2010.
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
Better figure out a way to get your party off life support first.
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 109
Newt is coming back. We are starting right there!!! This illegal B. Hussein Obama Bin Laden can go back to Indonesia where he came from.
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
That sounds rather racist to me.
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 109
Indonesia. Where he was born. It's why he can't produce a birth certificate. The guy is an illegal alien. And anyway, what is wrong with being racist? Is there some law against it? Last time I checked it was an opinion or a view.
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 28
That's a good question. What is so bad about being a racist? Isn't everyone supposed to dislike white people? What's the problem with that?
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Again, you are entitled to dislike (or hate) anyone you want, and for whatever reason you want to. And you better watch what you wish for ... only 75% of the electorate in 2008 was white. People have long memories, and (according to a business leader who used to train us about how to influence and effect change in our company) have an infinite capacity for getting even. In a rational society, most people recognize that skin pigmentation is not much of a basis for disagreement. Over 54% of the American electorate agreed that pigmentation wasn't an important criteria, and that other issues were far more critical. Whether you like it or not, the days of white supremacy are at an end. Racism will be self-defeating (and might engender an emerging feeling of contempt from the new majority).
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 28
It’s a little difficult for me to understand to what you are responding. It’s possible that we’re actually talking about different things. Perhaps if we could have, and all agree upon a definition for the term ‘racism’, that would help. Do we have a common definition?
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
I am responding to your question, "What is so bad about being a racist?"
My response was complicated because you also asked, "Isn't everyone supposed to dislike white people?" ... which may have been presented tongue-in-cheek, but since there is no way for print on a white screen to indicate sarcasm, I assumed it was not. With that clarification, I think my response stands as written.
As to a definition of "racism", may I suggest the following? A belief that all members of a race possess (or lack) characteristics or abilities specific to that race, particularly to distinguish all of its members as being inferior or superior to another race or races. In this sense, "racism" has a negative connotation, and is synonymous with other words like "prejudice", "discrimination", "division", "separatism", "exploitation" and the like. It furthermore gives rise to practices or beliefs that are generally regarded negatively.
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 28
Good, at least we have a tentative definition of ‘racism’. You suggested: “A belief that all members of a race possess (or lack) characteristics or abilities specific to that race, particularly to distinguish all of its members as being inferior or superior to another race or races.”
However, there is a problem with applying this definition to any of the statements above. You may have reason to believe that some of these responses are issued by ‘racists’, ‘white-supremacists’, ‘neocons’, etc. – but I don’t see anything in the preceding comments that refers to race, or the characteristics of that race. I suspect that part of the problem we are having as a nation, part of the divisiveness, is due to the tendency to issue epithets. In this case it’s ‘racist’, but people of all perspectives seem to be all too quick start with these negative characterizations. I suppose that if all we really want to do is lecture or ‘yell’ at each other, then this seems to be the method for achieving that. Just cheerlead for our own side so to speak. If we want to communicate with each other, learn from each other, and analyze issues, I think these practices are counterproductive. I’ve always been able to learn something from almost anyone – and I’ve known some pretty uneducated and ignorant people. This includes people all the way through the university.
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
However, there is a problem with applying this definition to any of the statements above. You may have reason to believe that some of these responses are issued by ‘racists’, ‘white-supremacists’, ‘neocons’, etc. – but I don’t see anything in the preceding comments that refers to race, or the characteristics of that race.
I cannot speak for anyone but myself. Before you asked me to define "racism" (the post to which your response has led to this one), I had replied to two different people -- one of them you -- who had asked, in effect, "what is wrong with racism?" The short version of my reply was that racism is a label and a generalization that is used to excuse (justify, rationalize, etc.) behaviors or beliefs that are applied broadly (and inappropriately) without consideration of specific details or facts. Not all racists are "bad" or "evil" people, but racism invariably leads to bad or evil actions. It has a negative connotation, in my book, and I am going to have a really hard time learning anything related to social values from a racist ... although a racist might be quite capable of teaching me quite a bit about algorithms or punctuation (etc.)
I do not wish to save this response so I can negotiate my way back through this thread and then come back to this comment box to verify what follows (so I rely strictly on memory), but I do not believe I called you or the first poster a racist. I took the two of you at your word ... that you found nothing wrong in racism, or being a racist. In short, I did not hurl any epithets at anyone. I may be wrong, and trust you to correct me if I did ... but my intention was to answer the original question.
As to having dialog with a racist, well, there are times that it might be productive and effective. But one of the basic characteristics of racism is the fact that practitioners tend to wear blinders, and either have narrow vision or just don't see the light at all. They are not particularly open to discussion, rational or otherwise, and so "dialog" amounts to not much more than -- as you describe it -- "yelling" at each other. Interested third parties, open to reading between the lines and/or objectively weighing the evidence, might find such an exchange informative. But that's about it.
There are exceptions, of course. Occasionally, one encounters a lucid, polite, and conversant racist from whom wonderfully illustrative and enlightening discourse emanates. They are few and far between, though.
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 28
Perhaps we need to back up a little. I’m not too sure about nuance or ‘reading between the lines’, but the question that I asked “What is so bad about being a racist?” was not rhetorical. I’m asking specifically for someone to define the negative consequences of practicing this behavior described as ‘racism’. The term is used casually, and in my opinion carelessly all the time – but I haven’t been able to find anyone to provide a definition that is both functionally applicable and logically consistent. In other words, a definition that is not so ambiguous that it can be misused to the extent that I have noticed over that past couple of decades. When someone, or some idea is labeled with this term it can be harmful. The label is destructive and can ruin lives and careers, and in my opinion should be applied with a little more prudence – especially if none of us can agree upon a common definition. For example, you state that you probably couldn’t learn anything from a racist, therefore if somehow you feel that the term applies you have already prejudged the situation. In the exchange above ScreenName seems to have used the term in the context of the suggestion that Obama should return to Indonesia. The term is all to frequently used as an epithet, and should only be applied with considerable caution and care.
I appreciate that you have given the start of a definition – but I still would have difficulty applying it. Is it possible to refine it a little?
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Cool, Redman. Thank you for taking the time, and showing the patience, to explain your intent. I try not to make assumptions on this board, but I suspect I rushed to judgment in your case. This thread is flowing from a post made by a gutless and anonymous contributor (gc4895) ... whom, incidentally, I label as "gutless" because he or she has not had the intellectual honesty to come back and defend comments clearly designed to incite rebuttal and to which others have (predictably) responded. CG4895 clearly, in my opinion, expressed racist sympathies. I responded to his (or her) question, and then you responded to me with basically the same question. I misunderstood your intent, but managed to exercise decorum in my response. I am glad I did, because that has allowed the conversation to move forward. Now you ask very penetrating and thoughtful questions.
Good!
So let me attempt to refine my definition of racism, and describe some of the negative consequences arising from the practice of racist attitudes. Again, my initial definition was ... A belief that all members of a race possess (or lack) characteristics or abilities specific to that race, particularly to distinguish all of its members as being inferior or superior to another race or races.
I could write a long academic treatise on this topic, but do not have the time nor inclination to do so. I will therefore keep my examples and evidence short and simple, for now.
Let's start with people who possess or are inclined to accept racist opinions, but who do not act upon them. Seems harmless enough, but is it, really? Stereotyping can be useful in broad applications, but it is a deterrent to understanding. Even very simple forms of racist belief can get in the way. Here are some examples:
To this day, a majority of white Americans are ignorant of, and probably would deny, the fact that Africa produced several high civilizations. Europeans, despite first-hand experience to the contrary, found it acceptable to enslave Africans because they were not really people. European scholars could not accept the fact that the ruins found in southern and eastern Africa were constructed by native societies. Instead, they must have been the remnants of some ancient (and possibly unknown) white civilization. And, while it is not a common expression today, when I was growing up it was not uncommon to hear people use the term "Timbuktu" whenever referring to a distant (maybe mythical) place, or to something so obscure that it might as well not even exist. And yet Timbuktu not only was the capital of a once powerful African kingdom, but also the site of one of the three greatest universities of the medieval Islamic world. The intellectual and material contributions of medieval Islam are also largely overlooked ... though technically not arising from racist misunderstanding (only from a dearth of historical background) ... but religious intolerance is almost as costly to understanding, peace and growth as is racial intolerance.
Intolerance, of course, often leads to action. Slavery is a classic example. Historically, slavery is not always associated with race ... but racial differences usually make it easier to distinguish who is a slave and who is not. Church officials wrestled for a long time with the basic humanity of African "savages" ... just as they did when they discovered savages already inhabiting the New World. Once confronted with the inescapable evidence of high civilizations in Mexico and Peru (and later in the American southwest and northwest), the Church conceded that native populations in the New World could not be enslaved (luckily, there were still Africans that they could use), but even after that, stereotypes and racial discrimination were largely responsible for the social structures and class relationships that developed (and continue to drive) most Latin American nations.
So, racial intolerance, combined with a sense of racial superiority (part of my definition) directly led to the suppression and exploitation of large-scale populations on three continents. As Europeans began making scientific, material, ideological and philosophical advances that led to the betterment of the lives of their people, they simultaneously excluded and denied the same advances to the rest of the world. Not good, in my book.
The same ignorance and intolerance colors our relationship with Asia, and Asians. I think the obvious is crystal clear, here, but will provide a couple of simple examples. We often are told (repeatedly) that the Chinese may have invented gunpowder, but were too primitive (stupid?) to use it for any purpose other than displaying pretties and making loud celebrative noises. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even cursory research reveals the murder and mayhem that the Chinese were able to extract upon one another and most would-be-invaders with rifles, cannon, rockets (multi-stage, long distance rockets; massive batteries of rockets that could continuously fire hundreds of rounds), wmds (mostly poison gas), and bombs. It was the Mongol invaders who took Chinese weapons with them to the west, where defeated armies took heed of this new type of armament and built upon it. In a related (military) vein ... had the Portuguese rounded the tip of Africa even 50 years earlier than they did, they would have encountered the largest naval fleet the world had known up to that time -- thousands of well-armed ships 10-50 times larger than anything Europeans could conceive of building, manned by literally thousands of well-armed marines. Inexplicably, the Emperor decided that he had properly impressed all residents surrounding the Indian Ocean, and he called his fleets home (some think they even came to the west coast of North and South America). Few people realize that the Chinese invented, and gave to the world, such things as gunpowder and related weapons, paper, iron-making (both wrought and cast-iron), bulkhead ship construction and the rudder, the compass, the plow, and hundreds of other common, everyday material things.
Of course, and just so you won't think I am anti-caucasoid, the idea of racial superiority also worked against the Chinese. It was they who felt that everyone other than Chinese were barbarians, from whom nothing could be learned. Unwilling to learn (or respect) Europeans, the Chinese ultimately became their servants. While as much cultural chauvinism as racism (though many would argue that such chauvinism is racially based), ideas of superiority definitely had negative consequences for the people of China. This, too, is not good.
Behaviors arising from racial intolerance and racism are much easier to demonstrate as having negative impacts. Slavery is submitted as the first bit of evidence. Jim Crow as number 2. Separate but equal may have been the rationalization at the end of the Jim Crow era, but it still exists today in a number of situations and settings. Our inner cities are defacto segregated. Inner city schools are predominantly black or hispanic, often segregated from one another. Separate is NOT equal, but especially so when schools assign the least experienced teachers to teach in the inner cities, when the materials at an inner city school are the hand-me-downs from suburban schools, and when the suburban schools are shiny new and maintained so they literally sparkle while inner-city schools crumble around the elbows of those working inside them.
The most recent version of virulent intolerance, though technically not race-based, still is connected to this discussion. I refer to homophobia, and the all-too-obvious parallels of discrimination and hate that accompany more traditional expressions of racism. Even blacks, who should no better, practice this type of discrimination.
So ... discrimination and intolerance are words that I have used a lot. Both make very little positive contributions to the people who practice them. Neither needs be applied exclusively to race (one can discriminate and be intolerant of just about anyone or anything). But discrimination and intolerance based on race -- even faulty notions of "race" (such as occurred in Nazi Germany) -- can be especially virulent and counterproductive.
Any questions?
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 28
Okay. Great. I think we’re making a sort of progress toward an understanding of our respective perspectives. However, you’ve given me a great deal of information is in the presentation of your definition and examples. In fact, my initial impression was that it might be overwhelming. I’ve subsequently revised my opinion – but there is still a great deal of data to process.
Therefore, it might be more expeditious to attempt to describe my particular viewpoint. It might help in alleviating future misunderstanding. So, basically I’m a skeptic. That is, I’m inherently skeptical of any dogma. This is probably more the case for that dogma seemingly represents a position with which I may essentially agree. And, I’ve been this way for most of my intellectual life.
Please understand that I’ve been in favor of racial justice, and equal rights since the Forties – and especially so during my time at Berkeley during the Sixties. So, I along with many of my peers at the time are probably more conversant with misinterpreted examples of ‘high cultures’ (Great Zimbabwe, Mali, etc.) than other members of white America. I’ve even been to Africa, and seen some limited examples of the Muslim culture there. But, I digress.
More to my point, and my primary reason for asking these apparently naïve questions is not as much to obtain an education replete with essentially anecdotal evidence that a lot of white people exhibit racist behavior – but to get to a common agreement that defines this behavior that can be applied to an event so that we can all concur that the event is an instance of racism.
Let me elaborate a little more on this. It was becoming more and more evident to me during the Seventies, and Eighties that fewer and fewer questions about what seemed to me to be an increasingly rigid belief system regarding this general issue. Skepticism and questions regarding basic premises were tolerated less and less. ‘Political Correctness’ was becoming the law in some of my circles. This was not to be easily dismissed when many of my friends and acquaintances actually carried little Red books around. I don’t think I need to explain the reference.
So, in the interest of mutual understanding, and intellectual tolerance, may I suggest a narrower, starting definition? What do you think about ‘Racism is the belief that all members of any race possess one or more characteristics in common, and that the common possession of these characterics is exclusive to the members of that race.’ I would more than welcome suggested revisions.
And, speaking of ‘narrower’, possibly we should begin a new thread. This one is becoming almost too narrow to read on my display. What do you think?
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
New Thread ... I have taken your suggestion and begun a new thread. To start it, I have copied the post (above) and pasted into a message that carries my name, but is properly attributed to you. In in, I also post the TWO definitions from which we are working. Hope this was okay.
Oh, yeah ... the topic is entitled "What is Racism?"
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
... what is wrong with being racist? Is there some law against it? Last time I checked it was an opinion or a view.
Wow, you are one sick puppy. With support such as yours, no wonder McCain/Palin lost.
As to racism ... it is, indeed, an opinion and you are certainly entitled to hold such beliefs. The only laws against racism are those that attempt to control behaviors that racist clowns are prone to commit and which act to deny rights, privileges, safety and security to others. Remember, all people are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights ...
Luckily, as this election has clearly demonstrated, we have moved beyond a time when racists held the majority opinion. You are in the minority ... and deservedly belong there.
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
Obama was born in Hawaii. He has produced a valid certificate of his birth. If you neocon types read the REAL media instead of blindly relying on the right wing propaganda web sites for your 'news' coverage, you would understand that this whole illegal alien/ Indonesian birth crap is just that... a fully discredited smear campaign designed to scare people away from voting for Obama. Well, time to wake up and realize the election is over and Obama won. By a significant margin. You neocon folks should be putting your energy into reviving the republican party, which, after major defeats in two successive national elections, has been relegated to the status of a minority party with little influence over national political issues and not much in the way of power to actually get anything accomplished other than to keep playing the obstructionist role in the U S Senate.
The fact that you would even attempt to justify your racist views confirms just how out of touch with mainstream America you and your cohorts really are. And, for your information, since you're obviously clueless, yes racism IS against the law insofar as it is prohibited as a basis for discrimination against ethnic and racial minority groups.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
Just to be sure, you do realize that Obama was born in Hawai'i before moving to Indonesia when he was past a year old and that, regardless of whatever claims you'll make about where he was born, his mom was an American citizen the entire time, right? Likewise, I'm hoping you're aware that McCain was born in Panama.
Beyond all that, you and RealAmerica and others in this thread have failed to explain or exhibit any knowledge about the vetting process that occurs when one is elected to state or national office. Do you honestly beleive there is no background check? You've also refused to define what reasons would have existed for McCain/Palin not to challenge Obama's citizenship during the election if it were a real concern with merit. I must assume this is because you cannot come up with a logical reason or statement from their campaign that supports your claim. As far as anyone can tell from reading your posts, you are willing to put all your faith in the opinion of a previously unknown lawyer from the middle of nowhere who has already had one motion in the process dismissed. If anyone's patriotism can be questioned here, it is yours - you show no faith in the country you live in or in any of your leaders. You are, more or less, an anarchist by default.
Also, in social terms, saying "Obama Bin Laden" is about as gay as kissing a man.
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 3154
brennymac & ScreenName, why do you waste your time trying to reason with delusional paranoid people? It's a waste of time and only gives them the attention here that they want.
Joined: Nov 2007
Current Posts: 1107
Speaking of delusionals, Clayton, Livermore, and OHSO have been strangely quite. They may return, but whats the odds that all three disappear off the board at or near the same time.
Clayton got quite when Livermore showed up. I'm sure Livermore and Clayton are the same. But what is the OHSO connection? Could we have been speaking to the "Three Faces of Eve" all this time?
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
Good question, though I suppose in the end it comes out of a hope that I can make them think through the logic of their arguments. Someone needs to usher back in the William Buckley form of conservativism that so recently disappeared. But you're probably right, it's not exactly a worthwhile use of my time...
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Why isn't the U.S. media investigating and reporting on this matter and the future civil disrest it could potentially cause?
Uhhh ... because they already did and found nothing more to report?
I prefer talking to people who want to speak about real crises ... God knows there are enough of them facing us ... without having to make stuff up to worry about and fear!
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
shays wrote - '... because they already did and found nothing more to report? ...'
Could it be instead that the same people who own the 'U.S. Media' are the same people who own Obama? The same media that has the gall to brazenly admit that its reporting on the election was blatantly biased? Only fools put their trust in the main stream media of today.
The U.S. Supreme Court has looked at what Berg presented, and dismissed his motion to hold off the elections, but ruled that Obama and other defendants must respond by Dec. 1st. So apparently Scott would have you believe that the media has better judgment over affairs that determine out lives than the Supreme Court of the United States. Can't get much more liberal than that!
It seems to be that it would have been a lot less expensive for Obama to return from Hawaii with his vault copy of his birth certificate and just show it to a SC justice than to pay all these attorney fees just to belittle 1 man (Berg). Most of my friends think this is odd behavior, as well.
You will find more recent and accurate status of the ongoing legal proceedings in the Americans being scammed by Obama... the alien??? forum.
http://forums.contracostatimes.com/node/20999/177200#comment-177200
RealAmerica
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
I can agree that the MSM is biased and not to be trusted ... but it has neither a liberal nor a conservative "bias" (I can point out as many faults as you can in terms of coverage that favored a particular candidate or point of view). It has a corporate bias, and exists to make money. Period. Ethics have been in the mud since Watergate ... and even that was a rare example of somewhat objective investigation and reporting.
The rest of your screed is a waste of time. There are REAL problems to address. Inventing issues only muddies the water.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
shays wrote ' ... I can point out as many faults as you can in terms of coverage that favored a particular candidate ... '.
Yeah, and you can probably beat up a 6-yr old, too. But if the MSM is stating numbers like 2 - 1, and other blogs showing 5 - 1, your argument shows no merit.
' ... The rest of your screed is a waste of time. ...'
I see you are awfully quiet about the Selective Service scandal. Hopefully you are doing a good job of researching it and will have something meaingful to report, instead of wasting our time with baseless opinion.
http://forums.contracostatimes.com/node/20999/177200#comment-177200
RealAmerica
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Okay, I'm game (though I am sure I will one day be sorry for opening this can of worms) ... what Secret Service Scandal?
Joined: Oct 2008
Current Posts: 65
First, you extremists say he is an illegal alien. It's proven that you're wrong.
Then, he's palling around with terrorists. This proves to be nothing.
Then, his faith is questioned. THIS proves to be nothing.
THEN he gets elected! NOW WHAT?!
WHEN will you people get it?! Do you people actually have meetings to decide what kind of debacle to make up to get him into? Or do you singularly make crap up on your own? I just don't get it.
Man, get a job at a freakin comic book store or something. Make use of those creative minds instead of creating havoc here in the real world. We got enough to deal with.
I am a huge supporter of Obama and his administration....but you guys are giving WAY TOO MUCH power to Obama by asserting all this crap! When he ran for Senator, do you REALLY think the background checks would have come up with some of this stuff?? Do you really think the media would have by-passed something as JUICY as this?! I THINK NOT.
THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. Then laugh at yourself, go have a beer, and enjoy your weekend.
Can we get on with life now?
(ugh, if only if were this easy.....)
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 3154
These talking points are generated by Limbaugh and Hannity and then all the dittoheads fall in line and spread it in the internet. Limbaugh needs red meat like this to keep the base salivating and fired up otherwise he'd be out of a job.
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Limbaugh and Hannity are both going to be out of jobs in the not too distant future ... either that or they are going to have to actually compete with folks for the right to express their insipid views over the publicly owned airwaves ... the days of right-wing monopoly over the radiowaves is coming to an end, just as Republican Movement Conservatism just died. We should celebrate the dawn of a new era.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
I don't know if they'll be out of jobs all that soon, though I dislike both of them immensely. I don't think that the fairness doctrine will actually pass, but I do think these two will be weakened when it is realized by Republicans and classic conservatives of the William Buckley variety that Palin and the Ayers issue were exactly what was wrong with the McCain campaign. On top of that, their disingenuous support, but support nonetheless, for Hillary in the primaries should haunt them and mark them as moral relativists since they both seemed sure that she was behind the death of Vince Foster. Their influence is an insult to America's intelligence, but their idiocy is entertaining from time to time.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Stacey_Debono wrote ' ... he is an illegal alien. It's proven that you're wrong ... When he ran for Senator, don't (sic) you REALLY think the background checks would have come up with some of this stuff?'
Do you even know who was responsible for vetting Obama when he was elected senator in 2004? (hint - it's not the guy at the comic book store.) Do you really attribute that much credibility to the media?
I HAVE thought a great deal about what I am saying. The possibility exists that a real birth certificate would show something different than a certificate of live birth. The fact that federal courts say I don't have standing to challenge a candidate's qualification is a de facto admission that my vote doesn't count in a national election.
' ... Then, he's palling around with terrorists ...'
Finally, a sliver of intelligence from your post. Most people weren't aware that his role in the economic terrorism that expedited the crisis that culminated in the Banking Buddies Bailout. As I predicted in prior posts, this was a raid on the last treasury of the U.S. - the home equitiy of the baby boomers. And I suppose that because YOU didn't read it in the media the threat of imposing martial law and suspending Constitutional rights wasn't made to members of Congress to force them to pass the aforementioned bill. You probably think it coincidence that it came four days after the deployment of U.S. troops here in America specifically to act against Americans in case of a 'crisis'.
So even thought you apparently don't get it, enjoy the nice warm afternoon - sit back, relax, and have another glass of Koolaid ... Don't worry, be happy ... We'll know on Dec. 1st one way or another ...
http://forums.contracostatimes.com/node/20999/177200#comment-177200
RealAmerica
Joined: Oct 2008
Current Posts: 65
I was born in the City of Oakland in California in 1968. At the top of my "birth document" (this is the same document for which Ive used to obtain my drivers' license, a passport, and a marriage licence, etc) it says CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH. It's the saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaame damn thing. The father doesnt need to sign the Certificate, at least not back then.
The SKY is NOT falling, Chicken Little. It really isn't!
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
You guys should appreciate this. Philip Berg (,Esquire), the brave lone soul who had the courage to stand up against the illegal alien president Obama is the same brave lone soul who took advantage of a 9/11 widow's grief to file a lawsuit against George W. Bush and compant for being involved and/or knowledgable of the conspiracy against America before it happened. I can't wait for December 1st when Berg is finally put in the nuthouse. Are you guys kidding me?
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.public-action.com/911/suit/mariani-berg1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.public-action.com/911/suit.html&usg=__WAVlrGwKOcNZO5iqZdsSpKzB6Xk=&h=240&w=360&sz=62&hl=en&start=17&sig2=arvJQkjsSwZYINDhQZFakg&um=1&tbnid=dlVXg65uclT87M:&tbnh=81&tbnw=121&ei=tdAhSfbBG5CksQPAs9HICA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dphilip%2Bj.%2Bberg%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Yeah ... I posted the details of that lawsuit in a different thread that Clayton started on this same topic. It disappeared (I have no idea how Clayton managed to make an entire topic disappear, but since only he and I were exchanging "ideas" in that topic, and I know that I did not make it go away, I am assuming he found some way to do it himself). That lawsuit was a hoot -- I believe there were over 40 people and organizations that Berg filed the suit against: GW Bush, GHW Bush, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condaleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz, the Republican National Committee, Karl Rove, the Air Force and many many more -- all because they conspired to either allow the planes to fly into WTC, or conspired to help make it happen.
But remember, Mr. Berg is a "Hillary supporter" ... and we know that this is code for something sinister, as well.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
shays wrote ' ... It disappeared (I have no idea how ...'
The same way the wings disappeared from the plane that supposedly crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11. If Bush could do that successfully, how hard would it be to bury evidence of his foreknowledge of 9/11 in the bowels of executive privilege, NSA, Homeland Security, Black Ops government contractors? So yeah, it seems crazy to take on a mountain of those proportions in a lawsuit, but I have more respect for a man that tries and fails than for whining sheople like screename and brennymac who waste our time with their shallow understanding of any topic at best.
http://forums.contracostatimes.com/node/20999
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
So, to review, you believe that the government attacked it's own people (and military) and that an illegal alien has actually been elected president. And you still live here? That seems odd. Your anxiety must be crippling.
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Far-fetched, to be sure. A more reasonable conclusion is that there was uncertainty that an attack was going to happen (there was a tremendous amount of mistrust between the outgoing Clinton/Gore crew and those who took their place) and a HUGE underestimation of the damage it would do. Things were allowed to happen and to go their own course because of the strategic opportunities such an attack would bring ... but I do not think anyone expected the two buildings to actually collapse.
As to the Obama thing ... hey, the conservatives have a REAL conspiracy to cover up ... does it surprise you that they would have to invent a few in order to have some talking points to offer up in rebuttal?
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
I doubt very much that the Bush Administration made Clayton's topic disappear from these message boards. A much more likely scenario is that Clayton made them disappear (definitely, if you make a post you can edit it and make it go away; apparently, if you start a topic you can do the same thing). As to whether or not the Bush Administration orchestrated, planned, simply let happen, or was just horribly incompetent is a question that most of us would like to have answered. I don't think it ever will be answered (except by some historians 50-100 years in the future ... and when THAT happens, they'll either not be believed, accused of being "revisionist", or possibly revered for revolutionary new insights). There are much simpler questions that don't get answered, so I don't hold my breath expecting any truth or honesty from practitioners.
Joined: Dec 2005
Current Posts: 1247
i am just stunned, that i as a first generation immigrant have to present and proof my live, from birth over school, health and so on, but obama who is now president elect is exempted from that process because the democratic party has done the?
i can't wait for december
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
Wow, have you ever been brainwashed.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Best Defense is Good Offense
In a way I admire the polital Chutzpah of Obama. It's hard to stop a speeding locomotive. But folks, we take for granted that our civilization exists because we adhere to our laws. Just look to our neighbor south of the border. One of our laws is that unauthorized persons may not negotiate with foreign powers, especially if they are elected officials (the Logan Act). And in the news today we have Sen. Obama clearly flouting that law by explaining to the mainstream infotainment that he called the Prime Minister of Iraq yesterday and talked about how things will go down after he is inaugurated. But he still has to be selected by the Electoral College on December 15th, and until then cannot claim the title of President-elect. And there is the possibility that the Supreme Court of the U.S. (SCOTUS) will weigh in to see if he is, in fact, an illegal alien.
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=40277
RealAmerica
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
Keep posting this nonsense if it make you feel better, but the vote of the Electoral College is only a formality given the election results, and the only issue that the Supreme Court could possibly "weigh in" on is whether the plaintiff(s) in the case before it has legal standing to bring the lawsuit, as that was the basis on which the lower court ordered it to be dismissed.
And do you seriously think that cnsnews is a credible news source? Really?
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
I can call the President of Iraq if I wish and chat with him until he is blue in the face (assuming he would accept my call). I can talk to him about anything I want, including my plans for how I think his country and my country should get along. That is not negotiation. Now, it is far more likely that the President of Iraq would accept a phone call from the president-elect of the US and have a pleasant conversation with him, including on topics involving what might "go down" after the inauguration. That, too, is not "negotiation". It is about as solid a legal question as are questions about the Senator's nationality.
Grow up. Address issues of real concern. It's not like we don't have enough of them.
Oh, just as a reminder to me ... just when it is that the Supreme Court is going to hear evidence on the question of Mr. Berg's legal standing to file a lawsuit challenging the citizenship of the President-elect.
Joined: Jul 2008
Current Posts: 377
Get a grip.
This kind of lame propaganda only works on the willing and weak.
By comparison, what Mr. Bush and his chronies have been up to is completely illegal and their cover all excuse of "No its not." is about to come crashing down.
Save your putrid rage and pedantic irrationalities. why aren't you angry at these?
July 10, 2007 "Bush defies Congress, refuses to let aides testify"
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/07/10/MNGRJQTNES1....
Or this?
July 10, 2008 one year later to the day:
"Rove ignores Government committee subpoena, REFUSES TO TESTIFY"
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/10/rove.subpoena/index.html?eref...
We ALL know this administration wiped its a** with the Constitution and abused executive priviledge for the benefit of the super wealthy.
They raped the American cofers and are trying to convert the world into a Chinese Democracy.
Your petty, weak and reletively ridiculous "outrage" is nothing compared to what we've suffered uder Bush Cheney.
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
You are correct, of course. But what they're going to tell you, in the most articulate and high-minded of ways, is "Waaaaaaaa ... you did it first!"
They will be referring to the 8 years of anti-Bush rhetoric that they only selectively remember. Of course, this means that they will have to completely ignore eight years of recorded criminality ... or the fact that originally it was only a few who protested and complained while the rest spun around on the fingertip of Rovian manipulation, believing in their President and trusting that the things critics said about him could not be true. But, over those eight years ... and despite continuing efforts to keep a lid on things by refusing to obey the law and allowing those in high places to testify on critical questions and concerns, despite a hard clamp on openness imposed by this administration to cover up its nefarious and often illegal actions ... stuff has leaked and trickled out so that gradually, the tide has shifted and the number of critics and skeptics far outnumber those who are still true-believers.
And this very deep skepticism and mistrust has been well-earned. We have merely watched Bush and Co. in action. They have actually done things, committed possibly many crimes, and steered our economy and our society off a cliff.
But it does not matter that the criticism is warranted. Because critics of Bush exist, those who do not like Obama (for whatever reason) feel they are entitled to be nasty and critical of him, even though he has yet to make a single decision which affects their lives or about which they can truthfully say is steering us further down the road to ruin. They, in fact, have to make stuff up in order to be critical. First, of course, it was that he had no record and he lacked experience so he was unqualified. Suddenly, the record that he does have must be false ... or he must be covering something up because he can't disprove a negative.
People have a way of reflecting back what they hold inside ... many who know, for example, that they owe their wealth and comfort to shady deals, questionable practices, and/or to others who actually did all the work are the very people who assume that everyone else (especially the poor and unfortunate) is "naturally" trying to scam the system and cheat their way to the top. As a result, those who have things in their past that they cover-up, gloss-over, or beautify with tall-tales (or minor exaggerations) are the very people who suspect that everyone else does the same.
Joined: Nov 2008
Current Posts: 470
you've forgotten about security and how clinton allowed the evil terrorists into this country to plan 9/11
and how bush kept you from harm his whole administration
and my guess is when obama takes office the attacks will be allowed to continue, american soil is about to be hit again
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
So 9/11 was all Clinton's fault and the lack of a large scale terrorist attack since then should be entirely credited to Bush? What ridiculous and patently partisan nonsense!
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
From a blog -
Payback
Obama’s top terrorism and intelligence adviser, John O. Brennan, heads a firm that was cited in March for breaching sensitive files in the State Department’s passport office, according to a State Department Inspector General’s report released this past July.
The security breach, first reported by the Washington Times and later confirmed by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, involved a contract employee of Brennan’s firm,
During a State Department briefing on March 21, 2008, McCormack confirmed that the contractor had accessed the passport files of presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John McCain, and that the inspector general had launched an investigation.
Sources who tracked the investigation say that the main target of the breach was the Obama passport file, and that the contractor accessed the file in order to "cauterize" the records of potentially embarrassing information.
"They looked at the McCain and Clinton files as well to create confusion," one knowledgeable source said. "But this was basically an attempt to cauterize the Obama file."
At the time of the breach, Brennan was working as an unpaid adviser to the Obama campaign.
RealAmerica
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Be careful of the can o' worms you open when you start trying to track the connections within the fascist corporate states of America:
John Brennan, CEO of the Analysis Corp (a national-security consulting firm), was also a consultant on intelligence and foreign relations to the Obama campaign. The employee of Analysis (so far, unnamed) has not been disciplined. Reasons for the lack of discipline are not given, which of course opens the door for all sorts of speculation ... ranging from whacked out paranoid conspiracy theories to something as simple as he did nothing "wrong". Two other employees of a separate intelligence-contracting firm (Stanley) have been fired. Official explanations from the State Department and the two companies state that the three employees were "curious", but harmless.
Meanwhile, John O. Brennan is a career CIA agent, who spent 23 years with the agency. He did everything (specializing in Middle Eastern counter-intelligence) and was appointed Deputy Executive Director (under George Tenet) by George W. Bush. He served in that capacity from 2001-2003, when he was named by Bush to serve as Director of the Terrorist Threat Interrogation Center. That agency was consolidated with a few others and renamed the National Counterintelligence Center, and Brennan served as its Interim Director from 2004-2005. As correctly identified by your blogger pal, he is currently the President and CEO of the Analysis Corp, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Global Strategies Group (North America) LLC. Rumored to have been President-elect Obama's first choice to head the CIA (good thing he went for an "outsider" rather than a professional spook, as far as I am concerned), he has now been mentioned as Homeland Security Advisor and Deputy National Security Advisor for Counterterrorism.
Clearly, John O. Brennan has his bread buttered on both sides, and has close connections to some very powerful people.
Even more interesting is the above referenced fact that Brennan's consulting firm (The Analysis Corp) is owned by a British outfit called the Global Strategies Group (GLOBAL). The U.S. operations of Global Strategies (Global Strategies Group (USA) LLC) is headed by a fellow named John Hillen. Hillen is a retired career State Department executive, and served as Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs from 2005-2007. He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and the Heritage Foundation, a contributor to the National Review, and an advisor on defense policy for the 2000 George W Bush campaign. Global Strategies lists as clients just about every intelligence-related US agency and department that you might imagine (including the Food and Drug Administration (?), the Federal Highway Administration, and one Air Force Base).
Learn about SFA and Global Strategies at their ever so cleverly coded website at http://www.sfa.com/
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 85
Thank goodness conservatives can look past the "Mainstream Media" to the inherent truthiness of anonymous sources who achieved something as vague as having "tracked the investigation" (in the same way I "track" the Oakland A's every season). I am amazed that RealAmerica has yet to buy the Brooklyn Bridge from someone. Be an adult, already.
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
We're living on the shadow of a dream, here ... In America, electronic media allows like-minded folk to talk to one another to confirm their mutual suspicions; mutual confirmation in turn satisfies the dilettante's benchmark for "multiple sources", thereby creating a "credible source". Most of what passes for journalism in the blogsphere does not rise above this threshold, but it is the most common form of propaganda dispersal on both the right and the left. I suspect there are (probably padded) rooms in the bowels of conservative and liberal think tanks (take your pick, though there are five to six times as many conservative as liberal ones) where people sit around and invent scenarios to stir the pot, much as folks get paid to sit around in the offices of the National Inquirer, World News Daily, the Onion, and the National Lampoon to make up such stuff for profit. Once such scenarios are hatched, they are then distributed to one or two trusted bloggers (who fawn around the idea that they have such intimate and important connections with the "powers that be") who then spread them across their own networks in an elaborate game of "Telephone".
I suspect there is a PhD just waiting out there for someone who wants to take the time to track the various networks of this modern electronic guerilla warfare.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Payback is a Botch!
Ya gotta wonder -
Cybersecurity director resigns amid turf battles
White House got heads up before FBI raid
WASHINGTON—The White House says it got a heads up before FBI agents raided the former offices of a new Obama administration technology official.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says the Department of Justice told the White House on Thursday morning of its planned raid at the offices of the District of Columbia's chief technology officer. Vivek Kundra recently left that post to take a job in the White House. Gibbs declined to say if administration officials knew about the ongoing investigation of the D.C. technology office when they hired Kundra.
Kundra earlier this month was hired to oversee federal government computers as the administration's chief information officer. Kundra is also in charge of security for the vast federal information databanks.
Gibbs declined to comment on the investigation, calling it a serious matter.
Source: Obama official on leave after FBI raids
The charges were lodged against the two men at a federal court hearing as the FBI finished searching the city's technology office, which was led until recently by Obama's new computer chief, Vivek Kundra.
Kundra is on leave from his White House job until further details of the case become known, according to a White House official speaking on condition of anonymity because the official did not want to publicly discuss personnel matters.
At the court hearing, Yusuf Acar, the acting chief security officer in the city's technology office, was ordered held without bond pending a hearing Tuesday. Prosecutors said $70,000 in cash was found during a search of Acar's Washington home and that he posed a serious flight risk.
Technology consultant Sushil Bansal of Dunn Loring, Va., was released but was ordered not to conduct overseas financial transactions or leave the Washington metropolitan area. Bansal is due back in court on April 21, and prosecutors said they were hopeful that a plea agreement could be reached in his case.
Acar worked under Kundra, Obama's pick to coordinate federal computer systems. Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs would not say whether the White House knew the investigation was under way when it named Kundra last week, but called the case "a serious matter."
Mafara Hobson, a spokeswoman for Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty, said she was "very confident" Kundra is not a target of the investigation.
Bansal's lawyer, David Lamb declined to comment. It was not immediately clear who would represent Acar in the case.
Acar, a 40-year-old native of Turkey, had a $127,468-a-year position purchasing the city's computer equipment and lining up contract workers for numerous city agencies, according to court documents.
Authorities say Acar and Bansal, along with others, defrauded the government through a variety of schemes, including billing the city for items that were never delivered and "ghost" contract employees who did not work. The scheme involved Acar approving falsified bills and splitting the money with vendors including Bansal, who submitted them, court documents alleged.
Bansal, a native of India who turns 42 next week, is a former city employee and the founder and chief executive of Advanced Integrated Technologies Corp. The company has offices in Washington and India and did more than $13 million in business with the District of Columbia government in the past five years, according to court documents.
One contract involved providing computer support for the city's Department of Motor Vehicles. The company also was given a contract to upgrade the city's human resources computer records and sold virus detection software to the city.
In August Bansal was named entrepreneur of the year by the Association of Indians in America.
An FBI affidavit supporting the arrest warrants indicates that several other businesses and individuals were involved in the alleged schemes, but the other people are identified only by their initials.
The FBI worked with another employee in the city's technology office, who was in on the scheme and secretly recorded conversations with Acar and Bansal as part of the investigation.
In 2007, federal investigators uncovered a massive embezzlement scheme in the city's tax office.
Men and women dressed in suits and wearing latex gloves could be seen entering and leaving the glass-enclosed lobby of the Office of the Chief Technology Officer on Thursday afternoon.
Even as the raid was taking place, Kundra was giving a speech at FOSE, an annual government technology expo. Kundra said part of his focus is to change the way the government buys technologies from vendors.
————
Associated Press writers Philip Elliott, Donna Borak, Brian Westley and Brett Zongker contributed to this report.
RealAmerica