Sunday, 10 April 2016

On Things Heating Up

from ’20 U.S Cities ‘Optimum Sanctuaries’ For Migrants’ - Leo Hohmann - April 10

(quoting in full:)

"Bob Iger, Rupert Murdock, Michael Bloomberg and Bill Marriott are just a few of the corporate execs working to help cities become sanctuaries for migrants – legal and illegal – while offering money to propagate a rosy view of immigrants’ impact on the economy.

The corporate honchos led by Bloomberg and Disney’s Iger have teamed up with the nation’s mayors in an organization called the Partnership for a New American Economy.

PNAE announced March 29 it has picked 20 cities from among dozens of competing applications for a grant program based on their “welcoming” attitude toward immigrants, refugees and other “New Americans.”

The 20 cities awarded the “Gateways for Growth Award” are:

• Akron and Summit County, Ohio
• Anchorage, Alaska
• Birmingham, Alabama
• Brownsville, Texas
• Columbus, Ohio
• Detroit
• Fargo, North Dakota
• Houston
• Indianapolis
• Kansas City, Kansas/Missouri
• Lancaster, Pennsylvania
• Los Angeles
• Macomb County, Michigan
• Nashville, Tennessee
• New Orleans
• Phoenix and the state of Arizona
• Pittsburgh
• San Jose, California
• Salt Lake County, Utah
• Upstate New York region (Syracuse/Buffalo)

At least half are already considered “sanctuary cities” and the others will be moving in that direction based on their willingness to compete for a grant that requires greater “inclusiveness” and cultural diversity.

To be eligible for the grants a nonprofit had to partner with either a local government or Chamber of Commerce. The grants are to be used primarily for “educating” the public on the merits of expanded immigration.

PNAE works with the George Soros-funded groups National Immigration Forum and Welcoming America to educate Americans about the wonders of mass immigration. They say it creates economic growth and vitality and the more immigrants and refugees that flow into a city, state or county the more prosperity they can expect to enjoy.

“These communities are leaders in the broader and growing trend to be more inclusive, countering the narrative often heard in the mainstream news,” says David Lubell, who started Welcoming America in Nashville several years ago with seed money from Soros. “Inclusive economic growth strategies that take into account both U.S. and foreign-born communities make cities more vibrant, attractive places for all residents to live, work, and thrive.”

David Lubell of Welcoming America works closely with the White House to soften up the soil in cities targeted to receive an influx refugees, UACs and other migrants.

Lubell’s organization is hosting a national strategy session April 19-21 in Atlanta in which it will share techniques on how to “build welcoming community campaigns.”

“The Welcoming movement continues to grow, and hundreds of national and international leaders will gather in Atlanta to exchange ideas and forge relationships,” according to Lubell’s website. “In an election year, heated political rhetoric brings new challenges, but together, we’ll explore how to overcome the divisiveness and make the most of this welcoming moment.”

Lubell is also a consultant in the Obama administration’s “Building Welcoming Communities Campaign.”

Full-on propaganda assault expected

Critics of Lubell, the PNAE and their funders warn Americans in the 20 chosen cities to expect a massive propaganda campaign which will likely include some of their own elected officials.

Part of the strategy of Lubell and the White House is to co-opt local mayors and city councils and brainwash them with doctored studies and flawed data that suggests refugees and illegal immigrants will bring economic prosperity when in fact they are a drain on the local taxpayers, say critics.

Study after study both private and public has shown that refugees, especially those from the Middle East, are heavy welfare users. And the burden on school systems is also well-documented.

A government report issued in June 2015 by the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement shows the unemployment rates of refugees in 2014 well above those found in the general population. The jobless rates for refugees range from 38 percent in Minnesota to 53 percent in Michigan, 54 percent in Texas, 62 percent in Florida, 68 percent in Ohio and 69 percent in California, according to the report. (See employment rates in map below)


And many of those who have jobs do not make enough to sustain their families so they must turn to food stamps and other programs to fill in the financial gaps created by their low-wage jobs.

So with PNAE’s money and Welcoming America’s public relations expertise, the 20 cities will be working hard to foster a different view of the recent immigrants who have flooded across the border from Central America, or been shipped here compliments of the Obama administration from a United Nations refugee camp in the Middle East.

“They want to manipulate the minds of the community and get Americans to believe mass immigration is going to be good for them, that they’re all going to benefit from the influx of more and more migrants,” said Ann Corcoran, author of the Refugee Resettlement Watch blog. “It’s a mind game to soften up the receiving communities.”

The mayors and CEOs have different reasons for championing migrants, neither of which have much to do with humanitarian zeal.

The mayors know that by attracting new immigrants, legal and illegal, they will boost their political clout in the state legislatures and in Congress. That’s because the prevailing method of setting congressional districts – a process called apportionment – is based on a head-count of a city’s total population, rather than counting only American citizens or registered voters. This method was challenged by the state of Texas but was upheld last week by a unanimous decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Mayors are also looking for ways to replace Americans who are not reproducing as fast as they once were.

“This is one method by which you can expand the economy and fill economic bubbles by pumping in foreign migrants on top of the rapidly dying and shrinking people of America,” said William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration or ALIPAC. “It fixes many businesses and industries on paper while contributing to the factors that are behind the implosion of America’s current native population. Americans are currently dying more than we are reproducing.”

Following the European model

This is the same dilemma European countries have been grappling with for a much longer period, since World War II. To replace their dying native populations and prop up their pay-as-you-go retirement systems, political leaders imported young immigrants from Turkey, Morroco, Pakistan, Syria, Somalia and Afghanistan.

A recent demographic study shows that American white men and women ages 45 to 54 years old have been dying at “alarming rates” between 1999 and 2013, the Washington Post reported.

“Drugs and alcohol, and suicide … are clearly the proximate cause,” said Angus Deaton, the 2015 Nobel laureate in economics, who co-authored the paper with his wife, Anne Case. Both are economics professors at Princeton University.

Mark Steyn referred to this phenomenon in his book “America Alone” and postulated that it is leading to the death of Europe. The continent has entered a period of “civilizational exhaustion,” Steyn said, where the native population loses the will to reproduce and defend its borders.

Now the Obama administration, with the help of Soros and his army of well-funded non-governmental organizations, is working to “spread the wealth” of immigration from traditional gateway cities like New York, L.A., Chicago and Miami to smaller cities and counties like Nashville, Tennessee; Brownsville, Texas; Fargo, North Dakota; and Macomb County, Michigan.

Global elites have been accused of fomenting the decline of Western Civilization by promoting abortion and sterile same-sex relationships, then replacing the missing bodies with people from the Third World in a massive population shift.

“This is a takeover, a socialist overthrow of the United States,” Gheen said. “And these stronghold cities will give them political dominion over all conservatives and what remains of the countryside, and once this plan reaches a certain level there is no turning back and every socialist dream they ever had will take place, including locking up conservatives that say things they don’t like.”

The CEOs involved in PNAE are happy to work with the mayors to flood cities with immigrants. But they may have different reasons for buying into the same multicultural vision.

Big corporations are in constant search of cheap foreign labor and they’re willing to go to great lengths to ensure access to the most affordable “human capital.”

This is where the United Nations comes in with its plan for global wealth redistribution masked as “inclusiveness” and “sustainability.”

The current massive population shift is seen by the U.N. as a way to redistribute the wealth from the industrialized nations to the developing world.

In U.N. documents, as well as those coming out of the IMF, World Trade Organization and World Bank, the globalist elites often talk about the need to encourage the “free flow of labor” or “labor mobility” across borders. The U.N. delved into this issue for the first time in its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, signed by some 190 heads of state last fall in New York City.

Mass migration part of plan for ‘sustainability’

The U.N.’s “2030 Agenda,” which buttresses the now outdated “Agenda 21,” sets forth 17 goals to be reached worldwide by 2030 with the overarching mission of eliminating poverty through a massive program of wealth redistribution. The process is described by the U.N. as nothing short of a “global transformation” of world systems to bring them into balance, as defined by the U.N. globalists.

Goal 10 is to “Reduce inequality within and among countries.”

Goal 10.7 states: “Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.” (This suggests that the mass migration into Europe and the U.S. is not an accidental “crisis.”)

10.a lays out the preferential treatment to be given to Third World nations: “Implement the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, in accordance with World Trade Organization agreements.”

The redistribution of wealth is further called for in the following targeted goals:

  • 10.b “Encourage official development assistance and financial flows, including foreign direct investment, to States where the need is greatest, in particular least developed countries, African countries, small island developing States and landlocked developing countries, in accordance with their national plans and programs.”
  • 10.c “By 2030, reduce to less than 3 percent the transaction costs of migrant remittances and eliminate remittance corridors with costs higher than 5 percent.”
The initial plan was set forth in a December 2014 document entitled “The Road to Dignity by 2030: Ending Poverty, Transforming All Lives and Protecting the Planet.”

The document describes a “universal call to action” to “transform our world” with “inclusive economic growth” that “leaves no one behind.” It speaks of a transformation that will sweep away the old capitalist order and replace it with a new managed economy, which some see as pure socialism but others see as technocracy.

Whatever one calls it, the U.N. authors promise us it will be different than anything we’ve ever seen or experienced.

“Transform is our watchword. At this moment in time we are called to lead and act with courage. We are called to embrace change. Change in our societies. Change in the management of our economies. Change in our relationship with our one and only planet,” the document states.

Using data to transform the world

The U.N.’s 2030 document also calls for a “data revolution” for sustainable development by which unelected technocrats will use data to manage and engineer the flow of labor and other means of production to assure growth is occurring in an “inclusive” manner.

“Mechanisms to review the implementation of goals will be needed, and the availability of and access to data would need to be improved, including the disaggregation of information by gender, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability, geographic location, and other characteristics relevant to national contexts,” the document states in Goal 46 on page 13.

The U.N. document “demands policy coherence” by all nations in compliance with the “global common good.”

To assure that the level of change takes place, the document makes it clear that special focus will be placed on cultivating young minds.

“Young people will be the torch bearers of the next sustainable development agenda through 2030. We must ensure that this transition, while protecting the planet, leaves no one behind. We have a shared responsibility to embark on a path to inclusive and shared prosperity in a peaceful and resilient world where human rights and the rule of law are upheld.”

The U.N.’s call for a “data revolution” to bring about a radical transformation can be seen in several policy initiatives put forth by the Obama administration, from open borders to free Obamaphones (a great source of data collection), to Common Core and its obsession with mining data on student attitudes and beliefs, to the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing plan in which cities and counties receiving block grants will be required to build low-rent housing in the middle of affluent suburbs. The local governments will be held to account through new data-collection programs and face lawsuits or even the rewriting of their zoning laws if they do not comply with the new housing quotas.

This transformation will take place at the national, regional and global levels, the U.N. document states:

“They have called for a data revolution to make information and data more available, more accessible, and more broadly disaggregated, as well as for measurable goals and targets, and a participatory mechanism to review implementation at the national, regional, and global levels.”

The role of expanded migration can be seen in PNAE’s lobbying Congress for an increased cap on H-1B visas, which allow foreign “guest workers” to come and stay up to six years. Companies like Disney have used the H-1B visa to replace hundreds of American tech workers with cheaper versions from India, China, Pakistan and elsewhere. Again, this represents a redistribution of wealth from middle class America to the Third World.

Patrick Wood, an expert in technocracy and global governance, said it’s highly significant that the U.N. included the migration issue in its 2030 Agenda.

Wood recently authored an article, “Sustainable development, migration and the multicultural destruction of the nation state” in which he laid much of the blame for Europe’s migrant invasion at the feet of Irish billionaire Peter Sutherland, the E.U. and the U.N.

Sutherland is the European equivalent of George Soros in many ways. A wealthy banker/investor who believes in open borders and is not afraid to invest in others who will work toward that same goal.

“The 2030 Agenda has for the first time included migration directly. I think that’s significant and something that few have picked up on,” Wood said.

Sutherland, the former chairman of BP who was also an executive with Goldman Sachs, said a multicultural society is the “pathway to sustainable development.”

Lakshmi Puri, the deputy director of the U.N. working group on women, affirmed that in a speech last week in which she said the 2030 Agenda “will be crucial for the economic empowerment of all migrants.”

“She was speaking to a convention about migration and she definitely ties the 2030 Agenda into migration and also into the sustainable development movement,” said Wood, an economist who authored the book “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation.”

Wood said Puri was channeling the dictates of Sutherland, a globalist who has been one of the architects of multiculturalism in Europe.

“The other thing I picked up on was her comment about the need to ‘leave no one behind.’ That’s a central theme of the 2030 Agenda but they never used it in the context of migration until now,” Wood told WND.

Puri said, “It’s our collective responsibility to deliver on the pledge of the 2030 agenda to leave no one behind.”

It’s also worth pointing out that George W. Bush used this same language when he championed the “No Child Left Behind” legislation. Was it a coincidence? Perhaps so, but he also spoke of Islam as the “religion of peace” that is not to be feared as he imported thousands of Muslim refugees from Iraq and Somalia.

“These people are determined to get 100 percent of the citizenry on board with everything they’re proposing — we see in education, we see it in immigration, and we see it in the move to go cashless,” Wood said.

“And yet you cannot point to a single multicultural society in the world that has been successful,” he added. “Look at Sweden. Look at France, Belgium. They’re all a train wreck.”

kibitzer3 14 minutes ago (April 10)

Thank you for this detailed heads-up, Leo.

My response:

Not my country, you won't.

And just so, does the race to the bottom start in earnest for America.

And interesting how all of this ties in with the Establishment trying to keep the ineligibility of Ted Cruz for the office of POTUS swept under the rug.  Cruz - besides his situation drawing attention to the ineligibility of the Usurper in the Oval Office already - being a harbinger of the New World Order, of a) ‘immigrants’ taking over America, and b) the end of the federal constitutional republic of the U.S.A., and its ‘fundamental transformation’ into a legislative democracy, with a demagogue in power, with the help of some of his good crony-capitalist friends, whether it be the current criminal, kept in place by a constructed ‘state of national emergency’ and consequent declaration of martial law (thus destroying the Constitution in one fell swoop, rather than by simply ignoring it, as is the M.O. going on now) or a ’new wave’ character, like Rafael Edward ‘Ted’ Cruz.

As to the latter scenario; see:

from ‘Ted Cruz Has No USA Citizenship Of Any Kind- One Week To  Drop Out’ - Rick Wells - April 10/11

Sometimes people are willing to allow themselves to be deceived in spite of the most obvious of evidence that it is taking place. Ted Cruz supporters can see that their candidate is playing Hussein Obama’s game and sealing his records for the same reason that Obama did. They won’t allow themselves to consider why he’s going to so much trouble rather than simply producing what every citizen and legal immigrant have to produce when they go to work in the US, proof of eligibility. They were critical of Obama’s $4 million spent hiding who he is but don’t give a second thought when Cruz does exactly the same thing.

Cruz is a foreigner, quite possibly an illegal alien, with no legitimate ability to run for president of the United States. At issue is not only the requirement that a president be natural born, it is clear that Cruz is probably not even an American citizen of any description. He has offered no paperwork to substantiate his citizen claims, a process and product for foreign born Americans provided by the States Department. For those of you who think it citizenship documents just magically appear as part of the placenta, they don’t. There is a process; documentation must be provided to the State Department and official documents of citizenship issued in return by the federal government. There is no short cut and it is not automatic.

Cruz was born in Canada and no naturalization or any other documentation has taken place since. Those who fail to register a foreign birth by the age of 18 are out of luck; their window of opportunity is slammed shut and birthright citizenship is no longer available. That’s why Cruz has refused to provide his information. Just as with Hussein Obama, he can’t provide what doesn’t exist.

On the April 3rd edition of the Podcast of the North American Law Center, host JB Williams put Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz on notice, that he had two weeks to quit the race voluntarily or he would spill the beans. Williams has evidence that Cruz is attempting to become our second consecutive imposter president. One week has passed without action from the candidate.

Constitutional Attorney Steven Pidgeon joined JB Williams for a discussion of the threats to our Constitution and our sovereignty from the Globalist cabal who, if we fail to stop them this election, will have succeeded in stealing the country from the American people. Cruz is chief among those globalist threats.

Williams says, “For years we’ve been talking about election fraud, we’ve been talking about dead voters, we’ve been talking about felon voters, we’ve been talking about illegal alien voters, okay? We’re not talking about that anymore, we’re talking about stupid voters. We’re talking about people who are American citizens, who do have a right to vote and are not smart enough to tie their own shoes if they think a guy whose Canadian born is eligible to be a US president, without any documentation whatsoever.”

Williams puts the campaign on notice, saying, “If Ted continues on, within the next two weeks, I’m going to make a prediction. Within the next two weeks, if he is still in this race, we are going to release the files we have. Two weeks from tonight and we will bury Ted Cruz forever in American politics.”

He says, “I’m sick of it, I can’t believe we actually have to take this guy down this way, I cannot believe the American people are not smart enough to figure this out on their own, but they’re not; so we’ll figure it out for them.” He adds, “If we have to expose this guy, if we have to expose this guy in order to stop him from defrauding this nation then we are going to do that. I hope somebody with Ted is listening tonight, I hope you go play this for him, send him the podcast, make sure he understands he’s got two weeks to come clean with the American people or we’re taking him down.”

That broadcast was a week ago, and no action has yet been forthcoming from the Cruz campaign. If anything he’s upped the tempo of the dirty politics, lies and underhanded delegate manipulation and theft and questionable election results.

Attorney Steven Pidgeon added, “There is absolutely no chance, following this election, to recover the American Constitution. No chance, if we don’t do it here, there’s no chance. The next opportunity you’re going to have is going to be with a Molotov cocktail against a tank, with a FEMA camp behind it. People need to understand how close we are to a total socialist overthrow.

Cruz now has one week, the truth will be revealed on April 17th if Lyin’ Ted hasn’t come clean with the American people by that time. The compelling arguments are also posted on the North American Law Center website and are worth reading.”


Have at it, gentlemen. And don’t spare the horses.

(The NALC website:)

© 2016  JB Williams

The debate over whether or not Senator Ted Cruz is eligible for the U.S. Presidency is about to end. It has now been confirmed that Senator Ted Cruz is neither a “U.S. natural born Citizen” or a “legal U.S. citizen.”

According to all relative legal citizenship documentation available at present, Senator Ted Cruz was born Rafael Edward Cruz, a legal citizen of Canada on December 22, 1970 and maintained his legal Canadian citizenship from birth until May 14, 2014, 43 years later.

The Cruz Campaign for the U.S. Presidency has claimed that Senator Ted Cruz was a “citizen at birth” via his U.S. mother and a “dual citizen” of both Canada and the United States in 1970 and that by renouncing his Canadian citizenship in 2014, he would become eligible for the Oval Office.

There are several problems with this claim… which make the claim false

  1. “citizen at birth” is a 14th Amendment naturalization term based upon “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

  2. Senator Cruz was born in Canada, subject to the jurisdiction of Canada. Further, any U.S. citizen by virtue of the 14th Amendment only, is a “citizen” and not a “natural born Citizen,” as you will see below. (Source is Cornell Law on the 14th)

  3. “dual citizenship” was prohibited in Canada in December 1970. (Source is Canadian Law)
From May 22, 1868 until December 31, 1946, all residents of Canada were British subjects. There was no such thing as a Canadian citizen or Canadian citizenship until January 1, 1947.

From January 1, 1947 until February 15, 1977, Canadian law prohibited “dual citizenship.” Foreign parents giving birth to a child in Canada in 1970 were forced to choose between Canadian citizenship only, or citizenship in another country, and to declare that with Canadian officials at the time of birth. The parents of Ted Cruz chose and declared “Canadian citizenship” for Rafael Edward Cruz.
  1. United States laws make it possible to be a legal U.S. citizen by only the following means…
a) NATURAL BORN CITIZEN – “As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent.” (The Natural Law as understood by the Founders in Article II of the US Constitution)

b) NATIVE BORN CITIZEN – All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. (The 14th Amendment definition for “citizen”

c) NATURALIZED CITIZEN – the legal act or process by which a non-citizen in a country may acquire citizenship or nationality of that country. It may be done by a statute, without any effort on the part of the individual (aka anchor baby), or it may involve an application and approval by legal authorities, (such as a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA) form filed with the US State Department at the time of birth). (This includes “anchor baby” or “citizen at birth” born here or abroad, under the 14th) Source is U.S. State Department.
  1. “dual citizens” are prohibited from being “natural born Citizens” as it pertains to Article II requirements for the Oval Office.
As the stated purpose of the Article II “natural born Citizen” requirement for the Oval Office is to prevent anyone with foreign allegiance at birth from ever occupying the Oval Office, and all “dual citizens” at birth are born with “dual national allegiance” at birth. The mere condition of “dual citizen at birth” would be a direct violation of the known purpose and intent of the natural born Citizen requirement in Article II. Source is a letter from Founder John Jay in proposing the NBC requirement for the Oval Office.

Now, Senator Ted Cruz has repeatedly stated that he has never “naturalized” to the United States, which eliminated the possibility that Ted Cruz is a “naturalized” U.S. Citizen.

Senator Ted Cruz has also documented the fact that he was not a “native born citizen” of the United States, but rather a “native born citizen” of Canada on December 22, 1970, who maintained his legal Canadian citizenship until May 14, 2014.

All of this explains why Senator Ted Cruz has no legal U.S. citizenship documentation of any kind…

The Harvard opinion letter written by two of Senator Cruz’s Harvard friends, Neal Katyal & Paul Clement, a mere “commentary” on the subject, relies upon the 14th Amendment naturalized citizen at birth concept, despite the fact that Ted Cruz was not “born in or under the jurisdiction of the United States,” was never “naturalized” to the United States, and completely ignoring the fact that Canada prohibited “dual citizenship” in 1970, as well as the fact that “dual citizenship” alone would prevent him from “natural born U.S.” status.

All of this explains why Senator Ted Cruz has no legal U.S. citizenship documentation of any kind. He is not a “natural born” – “native born” or “naturalized” citizen of the United States. Because someone must be one of the three in order to be a legal citizen of the United States, Senator Ted Cruz cannot possibly be a “legal U.S. citizen” of any form.

Only days ago, a 17-year-old first time voter at a New Hampshire town hall meeting for Senator Ted Cruz asked a very reasonable question… “How and why, until recently, were you unaware that you were a Canadian citizen?”

As the young man explained, this is not an eligibility question, but a credibility question… which Senator Cruz refused to answer, preferring instead to regurgitate the talking points carefully crafted by his Harvard friends and eventually, shouting the young man down, after a Cruz fan in the audience shouted “better a Canadian than a Kenyan!” (VIDEO) Meanwhile, a growing number of Constitutional Law Professors agree, “Cruz is NOT eligible.”

Of course, Senator Marco Rubio is also “ineligible,” as a “native born citizen at birth” by virtue of 14th Amendment “anchor baby” policies only.

In the end, the only possible way to consider Senator Ted Cruz eligible for the Oval Office is if every “undocumented resident alien” is eligible for the Oval Office, which I personally believe is the real agenda of both political parties, as they work to meld the USA into the global commune where there is no legal difference between “natural born Americans” and “undocumented aliens.”

The fact that so many Americans do not know or care to know the truth about the Constitutional “natural born Citizen” requirement for the Oval Office, demonstrates just how far down the road of “hope and change” for the destruction of the Constitutional Republic, the enemy within has already achieved.

Soon, “natural born Americans” will be in the American minority… and they will be ruled by foreigners who have no legal U.S. citizenship at all.


JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner. He is co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization preparing to take on American’s greatest legal battles. Williams receives mail

I emailed him thusly:

Dear JB:

Thank you for this information, and statement, and research.  I have one quibble.

You didn’t make it clear that to be a 14th Amendment citizen, the person needs to have been “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.  Illegal aliens in this country are not "subject to the jurisdiction” of this country; they are here illegally, and therefore are still “subject to the jurisdiction” of their home countries. And thus, so are their children, whether born here or not.  As you pointed out, from de Vattel: “...those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers…”

And please, don’t overlook the first part of that sentence, from de Vattel, Book One, Ch. XIX, Sect. 212:

“…the natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens…”  It is not just a matter of jus sanguinis.  It is also a matter of jus soli.  Both conditions are necessary. 

Please keep up the good work.  I look forward to the end of the 2-week period, that you have graciously allowed Cruz and his camp to come clean by.  Before doing your job, as a good American citizen.  Naturally born, natively born, or naturalized…


Things are, indeed, heating up………


A closing note:

It's obvious that we are in - very close, now - for a major separation of the sheep from the goats.  As to that concept, that there are in fact such things as 'sheep' and 'goats':

* There are those who are in alignment with the will of the Creator - the Creator of this universe, and the Prime Creator of all the universes, the All That Is - and those who are not (so yes, there is such a division); and

* I'm inclined to believe that hell is a state of being in willful separation from your Creator; so that to that extent, there is indeed such a 'place'.

Just an observation.  As we approach

Crunch time; and


Including Gaia Herself.

So that those in willful separation - who choose to remain in willful separation from their Source, even after The Play itself is discontinued, and others drop their darkside roles, seeing them for what they have in fact been - will have to continue their rebellion elsewhere.

The rest of us have other work to engage in, now, than the petty schemes of mice and men.  That - as the poet said - gang aft agley.

No comments: