Sunday, July 19, 2009

Washington Times National Weekly, 20 July 2009 issue - Advertorial on Page 9

Newest version of Advertorial Series 2 inserted in tomorrow's issue of the Washington Times National Weekly edition, on page 9. This one introduces to the readers of the paper and points out that Obama was a British Subject at birth in 1961. With citizenship of another country at birth, i.e., in Obama's case British citizenship at birth he is not, and can never be, a natural born citizen of the USA. Also this insertion points out that the framers such as Franklin, Jay, Washington, and others used Vattel in the drafting of the founding documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

To help the cause and do more such advertorial insertions in national newspapers see: And to all the patriots that have helped to-date, I thank you.

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
CDR USNR Retired
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress


jayjay said...

It's good to see that donations to continue the advertorial/education campaign are beginning to come in!!

The word is beginning to "get around" - especially so when a few of the highlighters in the MSM are picking up on the eligibility issue.

It's good to distinguish that it IS an eligibility issue and not a BC issue as so many assume (incorrectly).

Anonymous said...

good job mate. but remember this one the ramification that I sent to thee only works if thou had a loop hole to connect between Indonesian law and American law. Remember also to seek indonesian immigration law principle especially on uu no.62 tahun 1958 ( bill/law no.62 year 1958).

jayjay said...


I've read several of your posts and I think I get the general ideas that you present (and they look both interesting and helpful), but is it possible you might have a friend who could help you in translating to English.

My concern is that Mr. Apuzzo may not be able to grasp the points unless they are explained in more detail. But PLEASE do not take that as any sort of affront - I merely wish to see Mr. Apuzzo be able to form the ideas into s useful set of legal principles.

I really do believe you have some worthwhile information for him ... ust trying to help get it in a form he can understand and use (but perhaps he already has gotten the useful information).

Anonymous said...

Please pass this information around:

Citizens Taking Obama to Task!

Obama is not qualified to be president (not born on US soil). Therefore, everything he does acting in the capacity of president is ILLEGAL. Every bill he signs, every speech he gives, every order he issues to any soldier in the U.S. armed forces is null and void! And if we remain silent, we basically become a partaker in this crime against the United States.

So while the media and our government officials are remaining silent on this...

Our goal is to present indictments in every jurisdiction of the union:
Please take a moment to read this: This website has a specific purpose in mind. can HELP YOU if are looking to start, organize and manage a Citizen's Grand Jury.

Even if the American Grand Jury were ignored, and deemed legally impotent, we can still expect a powerfully awakening increase in awareness and outrage on the part of the citizens. There are many potencies beyond the legal system. However, it is highly unlikely that not even one jurisdiction will take action on the indictment. All we need is one jurisdiction to order “Discovery.” The case against AKA OBAMA is unique because it will be over in the Discovery phase, as the first step in a criminal complaint. The goal of the project I support is not to convict and punish AKA Obama but to discover what AKA OBAMA doesn’t want us to know, and why he doesn’t want us to know it. Our goal will be achieved without a trial or a verdict.
Our goal is to present indictments in every jurisdiction of the union:

* 50 States
* 3,007 entities named “County”
* 16 Boroughs in Alaska11 Census Areas in Alaska (areas not organized into Boroughs)
*64 Parishes in Louisiana
* 42 Independent Cities (1 in Maryland, 1 in Missouri, 1 in Nevada, and the remainder in Virginia)
* 1 District - the Federal District or District of Columbia.

For a total of 3,191 opportunities to bring criminal charges against offending politicians.

Even if an independently convened grand jury is mistakenly seen as merely people assembling to exercise their Constitutional right to “redress their grievances,” or report crimes, that is no small thing. Hundreds of people in such “assemblies” will be examining evidence and presenting the results of their investigation to appropriate county, state, and federal authorities, some of whom will almost certainly form more conventional grand juries to indict AKA OBAMA. Can one honestly surmise that there is not one prosecutor or judge in the entire nation who questions AKA OBAMA’s eligibility to be President?

Once the American Grand Jury presentments are made, it is likely that many prosecutors and judges will want a copy of the evidence. [the original birth certificate]

The American Grand Jury organization with which I am affiliated is using recognized expert witnesses with a long professional history of forensic testimony. The guiding principles for the project are the usual protocols of epistemology, scientific methodology, and rules of evidence.

Any prosecutor or judge who ignores such evidence and testimony is at risk of being seen as acquiescent.
An excellent article by international columnist Mark S. McGrew will help the reader to understand the Grand Jury story.

-Rev. Sewell, an ordained Christian clergyman, a Pastoral Psychotherapist, a member of Mensa, a U.S. Navy Veteran, and a Member of the Association For Intelligence Officers. He is a frequent commentator on religious and political issues.

Press Contact – Media only please:
Sam Sewell, National Spokesperson for



Anonymous said...

Nice Ad, and very timely. I concur.

Anonymous said...

As posted on the DRUDGE REPORT:
“Congressman’s town hall erupts over Obama birth certificate…”

jayjay said...

We need to ALWAYS point out that this is not a "birth cetificate issue" but an "eligibility issue" with the BC being merely the starting point of the man's proving he is - as he has proclaimed under oath, signed, and in writing (and jurat notarized) - that he IS a "natural born citizen" and that he fulfills the eligibility required under the Constitution.

He's talked the talk, now we just want to see him walk the walk by proving it.

Don't let the spinners get away with "it's a birth certifiate issue"!!!


After the response is filed by August 3 how long does the judge have to rule on the motions?

Anonymous said...

I agree with JayJay... The issue is an "eligibility issue".

The eligibility issue is not whether Obahmadinejihad is a "citizen" of the United States, the eligibility issue is whether Hugo Obama is a "natural born citizen" of the United States, which he isn't, as his father wasn't an American citizen.

As posted on the
"Birth Certificate Issue Bubbles Up"

jayjay said...


Your full link was clobbered somehow; here 'tis:

Also - "Obahmadinejihad" ... quite apt!!

The Stacker said...

The fact is, this is a birth issue FIRST, and then an eligibility issue. While I agree with you that NBC means 2 American parents, you definitely won't get to bring that in front of anyone; it is a guaranteed loser as far as Obama goes.

He is almost certainly not born in this country, which makes him automatically ineligible. That is the first issue. Everything else is just too much, too fast. Sorry to break it to you, but people think we are nutty enough by just presenting the shady facts of him hiding his birth certificate. I think a President's documents to prove who he is come before the NBC ... because no one is going to admit foreign birth and then concurrently say I'm a NBC. Got it?

jayjay said...


You may have completely missed the fact that Mr. Obama has ALREADY stated that - at birth - his father (a Kenyan) was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 and that he (Obama Jr.) was also governed by that same Act.

No matter where he was born then (even if it were atop Stone Mouintain, GA) he can NEVER be a "natural born citizen". Obviously it he were found to have been born, say, in Kenya there will still the 20% of those who voted for him that will still cry out "it doesn't matter, he's The One". That, however, won't hold up in a court of law.

I'd suggest you do some more research of the writings on this website - they are quite informative.

jayjay said...


Goodness gracious!! My "unclobbering" of your clobbered link got clobbered, too. Sounds like a blogger bug.

The Stacker said...


I don't need to do more research. I know all the details. I'm talking about effectiveness and method of choice, currently. It is arguable (and will be argued) that if he were born in the US even to two parents who weren't BOTH American citizens, he would have NBC status, due to the 14th amendment. That is precisely what is being argued right now. If your NBC argument is SOOOOO persuasive, how come no one is really talking about it (except for us)? It could be due to their ignorance, but here's the point:

If he were not born here, it is inarguable that he is not "natural born."

The same can't be said for what he claims because that's where we are, and no one really seems to care. What do they care about? Where he was born.

Put more succinctly, NBC is NOT DEFINED. Mario does a great job explaining what it means. But all people realize that natural born means at least being born here --- that much is inarguable. If that came out, he's gone, no matter who you are, and he's gone immediately.

Anonymous said...

British Nationality Act 1948

Part II

Citizenship of the United Kingdom and Colonies.

Citizenship by descent.

5.—(1)...a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth...

sjc said...

This may be slighltly off topic, but prior discussions introduced the possibility of Obama, being the illegit son of say Malcolm X or Frank Marshall Davis.

If that happened to be the case, why would he take the name Barak Obama jr. Would his mother pregnant by another put "FATHER UNKNOWN" if she didn't want to declare the actual father. That is extremely common is cases of unwed mothers. If she was preggers at the alter Barak sr may have put his name down as father. Or then again maybe he was actual the father. Is a DNA test in order in Kenya?? Should Obama Sr be exhumed and tested?? Think they beat us to that one, and hid Obama sr's body??

Are there any candidacy forms that require a swearing of an oath ,or notarizations wherby perjury invalidates the form? If Obama shows a different name on his long form BC, and has assumed the alias of Obama jr would that bear on the issue?

Mick said...

To Lemon,
There are 2 issues. The one that is known is that Barack Obama was BORN with dual citizenship (unles, maybe if BO 1 was not his father, but let's believe that story for now). Number 2, unknown, is wheter he has a domestic BC. The mere fact that those in the media, acting as BO lackeys are trying to focus on the BC is the reason that the issue should be focused on both aspects. BO seeks to narrow the scope of the argument. If you think that Gibbs has been calling on Kensalving
(WND) out of fairness, think again. If you think that CNN had Taitz and Keyes on ecause they are suddenly interested, THINK AGAIN. The end game is most surely in play, and that is to narrow the argument, and then produce an immaculate BC, and assume the close of the argument. Whether the populace is astute enough to absorb and understand the dual citizenship issue is irrelevant. Whether people think it's "fair" is irrelevant. The argument cannot be allowed to be narrowed to the issue which is unknown, that plays into BO's hands.
As far as the 14th A making anyone born in the US a NBC. Totally wrong. Marbury v. Madison holds that any clause in the constitution is deemed to have an effect, and any argument that seeks to make that effect moot is INADMISSABLE. If a Born Citizen of the 14 A is a NBC then A2S1C5 Natural Born Citizenis moot, and that argument is inadmissable.

jayjay said...


You points are well taken about the end game being "on". I've no doubt that's why the websites and corresponding content are disappearing after being heavily used to fool anyone gullible enough.

The 14th Amendment information you present is quite on the money, too.

Keep in mind that this is a man who has sworn in a written, signed, jurat-notarized statement that he was not only a "natural born citizen" but also that he met the Constitutional eligibility requirements. We'll see, won't we???

Mick said...

To Jay Jay,
The fact that he signed affidavits stating that he was indeed qualified are pretty much useless, since he can always say that he THOUGHT he was qualified, and Pelosi can also say that she THOUGHT he was qualified. It would be hard to prove criminal intent, especially when most of the population believes he is qualified. The only avenue left is Quo Warranto. Think about the evil of a man who would swear on a bible to protect the constitution when he knows that he is tearing it up. He knows good and well that he is not qualified. Both sides of the NBC requirement need to be hammered home with American people, but amazingly, I find a lot of resistance to the 2 US Citizen birth parents requirement, even among those that simpathize. Somehow they think that it is an unfair technicality, like being called out after a towering Homerun because you didn't touch first base. Such is the Cultural and constitutional Relativity that infects the body politic.

jayjay said...


And that's why the founders did things like the NBC clause (among other things).

As a constitutional lawyer and teacher of that he'd have to also claim that his stating that he was governed at birth by the BNA48"didn't matter".

There may be some courts willing to swallow such a line, but I think quite a few would look askance.

The issue may be come academic IAE if and when the American public become aware that they've been lied to and defrauded big time by the guy should a court find him ineligible.

The danger, of course, is that if what you outline should happen we will have descrnded into a "democracy" as opposed to a "constitutional republic" and our laws are meaningless. I think there must be some in the Judiciary who would find that troubling since, aster all, they'd not be needed anymore.

But we'll see. At any rate it's a good idea to keep refuting the "BC" issue since it is properly an "elibibility" issue.

And my experience with others is quite different from yours since many I chat with understand the 2 generation American argument quite well as being a protection for us and the country.

We'll soon see.

jayjay said...


It's not worth pursuing at this point, but I think that should the man (and/or Pelosi) be in some serious sort of proceeding such as a criminal trial, I'm not so sure that ignorance of the law (or I didn't think I was breaking the law) would fly - especially for a "constitutional lawyer" and IAE the signed document could be very well considered perjurious.

I imagine a lot would depend upon both the court and how the general public (and the MSM) would respond to being gulled and hoodwinked as well as lied to. Maybe even some judges wouldn't take too kindly to that either.

We'll soon see.

Sheikh yer Bu'Tay said...

Yes, most Americans believe NBC is a 14A native born citizen. They have never heard of the two birth parents have to be citizens, and child born on US soil. They actually get angry and say the NBC requirments are unfair, or out of date, or it's not Obama's fault he is just a victim of circumstances. We definitely need to educate the public on what an NBC is.

One very conservative soldier told me last night it is too sensitive an issue to go back on now. It is a matter of national security to avoid the anarchy that would follow if Obama was removed from office. I have known this soldier many years and was shocked to hear him say this. My reply was, yes, there may be blood in the streets... but after Obama & the Obots completely debase the Federal Reserve Note, there is going to be blood in the streets anyway. Better to follow the Constitution and the rule of law now and have much less uproar, than wait for a complete breakdown of our society.

Sheikh yer Bu'Tay said...

Mr. Apuzzo,

We don't get the Washington Times out here in Oklahoma. The local rag, the Tulsa World, recently ran an editorial belittling the "Birthers". The Tulsa World is a very left leaning newspaper and I have given up trying to voice a conservative opinion in their letters to the editor section.

There is an conservative alternative newspaper here in Tulsa, The Tulsa Beacon. It is a weekly newspaper and is struggling to compete with the Tulsa World. Their web-site is:

I called them today and it only costs $600.00 to run a full page ad! It would be terrific if more Tulsans learned the truth about Natural Born Citizens. I would like to place your advertorial in The Tulsa Beacon. I AM WILLING TO PAY THE $600.

May I have your permission to run the ad?

cfkerchner said...

Hello Sheikh yer Bu'Tayz:

Please visit the advertising and educational project website and send an email using the 'Contact' email link there to discuss your proposal in more detail. Here is the link to the website:

Charles Kerchner
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress