Obama – Making Democracy a Dirty Word - U.S. Military Kerry Trumps Rent-A-Cop for Saudi Arabia

Obama – Making Democracy a Dirty Word
U.S. Military Kerry Trumps Rent-A-Cop for Saudi Arabia

When Secretary Of State John Kerry was asked about wither Saudi Arabia was willing to pay for the cost of a military strike and invasion on Syria he said, “Very much so” essentially stating the United States military was a for-hire-security force or rent-a-cop. The Democratic Party War-Dog Obama continues pushing for bombing Syria against more and more Republicans opposed to taking either side in the Civil War of Syria.

When considering the “rules of engagement” in the Middle East when it comes to our Military, “rent-a-cop” is, unfortunately, an even more appropriate description of the United States Military’s dissension into the police force of the world.

We shouldn’t forget that the Constitution provides the means for Congress to raise, support and maintain an army to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. (USC Art.I,Sec 8.), and Syria’s Civil War neither poses a threat to the United States or a cognizable threat to the United States welfare.

In the recent furlough cutbacks I’ve noticed impacting local businesses, there is no doubt the question of money and who should pay for the military option on the table? In my proposed Stong Defense Military Initiative, largely coming as the consequences of Iraq and Afghanistan wars that have run into the Trillion dollar mark for the American Tax Payer, its assumed that if the U.S. Military is indeed used on a particular side of a conflict, that victory should reimburse the use of force through the natural resource or tax and duty of that Country.

In Syria’s case one must ask, if we were to be involved on Al Qaeda’s side with the Muslim Brotherhood in toppling the Assad Administration, isn’t that a bit of a slap-in-the face to American’s who are right now in the very process of re-living 9-11 where the aforementioned groups were involved in the slaughtering 5,000 Americans?

I’m curious about when Al Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood repaid America for that cost? When did Obama negotiate the terms of the treaty with those groups as we did with Japan for Pearl Harbor? I’m very curious as to why Saudi Arabia is left out of the “Allie list” with France and Turkey, but they will finance it Syria?

Now Assad has said “no way” to the desired Saudi Arabia financed pipeline through Syria, and Russia with Assad’s Syria has not wanted the competition of oil that would bring. What’s important to understand is that an “investor” doesn’t plan on an investment unless there is a plan to make money on the investment. This begs the question, should the U.S. Military be used for Saudi Arabia’s plan on making money in an investment return?

Obama’s biggest argument for strikes in Syria is that if we don’t it will send a message to the rogues of the world that they can use weapons of mass destruction. Oh, you mean rogues like Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood we would be doing the work for in toppling Assad’s Administration in Syria?

Let’s be clear here, the U.S., if bombs drop on Syria, has taken a side and we are doing a work that ordinarily would take opposition years to do. We will be taking sides with the rebels who are not interested in Syria becoming the 51st State of the Union.

Now, Obama’s argument is that if we do not respond a dangerous precedent will be set to whom? I’m not sure when Russia or China or any Country in the U.N. last decided to use chemical weapons on their populations, but with Obama’s argument they’ve just been waiting for the go ahead? What sense does that make?

Doesn’t it make more sense to understand that the rogue forces that permeated 9-11 upon America like Al Qaeda, and the Muslim Brotherhood, have much more to gain by releasing chemical weapons onto their population to gain U.S. military support? That is in fact what Russia, China, and even Britain’s parliament have stated with their opposition to U.S. military force acting in Syria.

It is interesting what happened in Libya after the United States Military used by Obama to the tune of billions of dollars to topple Muammar al-Gaddafi Government, or in Egypt where the “Democratic Leader” elected in fact instituted Sharia law, and set about the business of a theocracy so unrestrained that the people literally supported a military coup?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlLCIMOd-Uk



Does or has the use of our U.S. Military involved in other country’s change the people mentality? The answer is no. What strange phenomena occurred in the United States Revolution with England that proved successful if it wasn’t the fact that it wasn’t a war where a particular “religion” was recruiting warriors for, but a war for independence from a particular religion dominating the government?

In America, even the Muslim’s celebrate our freedom of religion and choice and tolerance, but as a tell, do we see Muslims’ in the Middle East recruiting Christian’s in Syria, or say burning their churches and killing them? I think Glenn Beck noticed over 25 Christian Churches and even schools have been burned in the last month by the "free Syrian Army"?

We must all solemnly understand and ask the question, “How can the U.S. Military be used in a fight for a particular religion without destroying the United States?”, and, “Wouldn’t that be a brilliant plan for the enemies of the United States to employ?”

Obama’s use of military force in some 6 countries is threatening to grow, and in the wake of the U.S. Military deployments in foreign affairs we see a very noticeable offense for a particular religion rather than an institution of religious tolerance that might resemble our own. The world in large part has become much more tolerable of the freedom of conscience and men’s ability to worship how, who, or what they may with respect to the differing Governments. That is amazing progress by example the United States has orchestrated and proven possible.

The spoil of that is very clearly what Obama has set his site on with the support of the U.S. Military bombing over 6 countries since he’s been in the White House office and he’s threatening more based on questionable intelligence that really doesn’t make much sense. The difference we make on the world is ruined when we go in a set up “pretend democracies” rather than showing by example the truth of a Constitutional Republic like the one in which we take a stand.

In fact Obama has almost underhandedly made Democracy a Dirty Word. He uses it as a Usurper of the Law requiring a ‘natural born citizen’[ born in the U.S. to Citizen parents] which he a walking talking violator is of. Should the majority rule? Should a gang getting together that propagates, pushes, and bullies minorities around be allowed to rule?

In the United States the Constitution was created as a protection for minorities: Minorities who were weaker such as women, different races, and different colors. Obama continues his fraud insisting "helpless victims" are the one's we should drop bombs for. If he was so serious he would consider the Constitution sacred for minorities rather than occupying the White house as a fraud.

So, does Obama’s push to strike Syria employ the necessary desire for equity for all? No it doesn’t. In fact he declares this himself when he says “There will be no boots on the ground”! If there’s no boots on the ground there’s a good sign in and of itself that there is no equity or defense for minorities and that it’s a bully tactic, or a fraudulent cause.

This is Obama’s race card as a fraud himself. He’s not a natural born citizen qualified for the Office of the President, yet he sees himself above the Constitution of the United States elected based on the knowledge he pushed and bullied the people with tactics based on democratic bully methods rather than the principles of the Republic for which we stand.

Obama can’t help himself. He is who he is and what he is not is a defender of the Republic for which we stand. He has consistently shown us himself subservient to Saudi Rulers bowing to them. He has largely been responsible aside from Congress in instituting the force necessary for a successful Arab Springs Campaign which with Egypt’s example we could also name the Muslim Springs Campaign.

Is Obama to blame for this? How can we blame Obama when we in our individual districts of Congress have elected leaders who support him and the long form fabrication he handed out from the White House Press core room?

Is it Congress’s fault that we have an ineligible candidate in the White House using our Military to destabilize the Middle East and in so doing, making enemies out of our former allies? What allies does Obama have of the great supporters which have fought for and with us in WWII? France? Turkey?

What is going on Congress? Why don’t you have the courage to take a stand for the Constitution?- For the Republic for which we stand? Why don’t you have the courage to take a stand for the minorities our law protects?
How can you stand for Obama who isn’t any more qualified for the Office of the President than Putin is? How can you embarrass us like this in front of ALL THE WORLD and not expect the ire of the American Public? My law suit in the United States Supreme court was all about our LAW. Judy v. Obama 12-5276. 2012. 2013

You know what Congress? Minorities are going to get this? Yes, women voters, Hispanic voters, black voters, white voters, they are all going to get this and you with Obama will be removed from our government because we all want the law, we all need the law to stand against the usurpation of the law your representing supporting Obama.

In an effort to pursuade Obama to come clean on his Fraudulent Identification, I'd like to dedicate my most popular song "Take It Off" to revealing Obama as the Naked Emperor usurping the Office of the White House contrary to the Supreme Law of the Land our Constitution. Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0V28rwXFf4




Sincerely,
Cody Robert Judy
www.codyjudy.us
www.codyjudy.blogspot.com
YouTube: CODY JUDY / CODE4PRES

Double Down Double Cross on Syria

Double Down Double Cross on Syria

If it were not for the Main Stream Media within the United States you’d think bombing Syria was a bad idea; however that is not the case, so we must ask the question why has our Government all of a sudden decided war in the name of intervention was the best option?

Boehner, McCain, Kerry champions for Obama in an assessment that interference between religious factions within Syria is absolutely necessary and within the scope of the United States vital interest, may come as a surprise to the National Security Council and the United Nations, but when considering the agenda of destroying America as a superpower, should not come as any surprise.

Making the United States the laughing stock of the world, Obama in Sweden, makes the case for a military strike on Assad’s Government in Syria for chemical weapons use that Secretary of State John Kerry bellows is without question the responsible party for firing, leading to the deaths of some 1,400 people. (?)

At the same time, as the Rush Limbaugh Show reminded us yesterday, last summer Rebels in Syria against Assad actually took over a chemical weapons plant around the same time John Kerry was dining with Bashar Assad and Britain was selling chemicals to Syria with U.S. knowledge of that.

So the question is, “Would the Rebels we know are led by Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, release the poison gas as a tactic to gaining the United States Air force and Navy as an ally in toppling Assad through the use of bombs and missiles they carry, because Obama announced to them the only way of getting the U.S. on board would be to cross the red-line of chemical weapons use on their populations?”

What exactly is the boots-on-the-ground reasoning from other Countries with interest regarding Syria?

Russia’s President Putin announced yesterday a delegation to the U.S. Congress was “timely”, in the face of Secretary of State Kerry’s testimony to U.S. Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, to influence them against a military strike in Syria. Russia has as big of an investment in Syria as the U.S. has in bases in Iraq. Putin made the reasonable argument it would be military suicide for Assad to be using “chemical weapons” on his population when his own military is advancing in the same territory. It would be akin to killing his army.

China’s Leadership reasoned that interference in Syria’s religious war was unwise. Dependent to the tune of about 75% of their oil coming from the region, China does not want to destabilize that pipeline and reasons; containment of civil war or disagreement would be broadened with the destabilizing factor of outside interference for either side that it would stabilize itself if left alone.

Britain’s Prime Minister Cameron announced Parliament’s vote in England to stand down in supporting a military strike in Syria leading military commanders for the U.S. excusing England’s military Commanders from sensitive military planning strategy briefings. England sold Syria chemicals with U.S. knowledge of that.

Obama now is making argument for military action in the Syria Civil War, with some very interesting reasoning, that if we considered relevant and the tables turned on him, would certainly kick him out of the White House as a threat to our vital interest and a national security threat as ineligible for the Office of the President because he’s not a natural born citizen.

Obama says:
1) His reputation is not on the line – it’s the international community’s reputation that is on the line.
2) His authority supersedes the Security Council’s and the United Nations.
3) International law prohibits chemical weapons use upon populations.
4) 98% of Governments agree with International Law.
5) Profound and dire implications from not acting would result encouraging more violations.


In relation to Obama’s own ineligibility to be President of the United States based on law we would say:

1) Obama’s reputation was more important to him than the United States reputation for its own Constitution.
2) His usurpation of the Office of the President superseded any law within the Constitution demanding a Natural Born Citizen and by an ignorant democratic bully majority instituted him with his foreign birth and foreign parentage against the law of the Republic for which we stand.
3) The United States Constitution is the Supreme Law of the United States and has different qualifications for President, Senator, and Representative that prohibit usurpation by unqualified persons.
4) 100% of the population of the United States is under the ruling law of the Constitution and to amend the Constitution certain regiments and rules must be followed.
5) Obama has bombed 6+ countries without Congressional approval, yesterday called the U.S. military “My” military instead of “Our” as a representative for The People of the U.S., and has handed out from the White House Press Core room a long form fabrication pertaining to his own identity.


The People of the U.S. ,as well the world ,are witnessing the profound implications and dire consequences of the U.S. military in the hands of someone who is not eligible or qualified for the Office of the United States President as a natural born citizen.[ *1 Born in the U.S. to Citizen parents]

Not adhering to this qualification and eligibility requirement has fostered and will encourage more violations of our Constitution most notable recognized as “policing” other countries through force, and instigating the destabilization of Countries including Syria; potentially within three months destabilizing the largest Countries into World War Three.

How important is the qualification of the Office of the President for the U.S. and for the world? Judy v. Obama 12-5276 in the United States Supreme Court, one of the greatest cases ever filed in Court, concerned this vital interest on our U.S. National Security unbelievably receiving no hearing or attention.

Congress now has the responsibility, power, and moral duty to act on Obama as a “disability” [U.S.C. Amend 14, Sect.3] holding hearings on his eligibility to even wield the powers of the United States Presidency or risk the unrestricted powers of war acting as a scourge consuming the world as a profound consequence of their error.

With the sound reason and factual evidence advocating no military action in Syria necessary, the agenda of war seems on its face value the overwhelming desire of the U.S. Government in the hands of your elected officials passing amnesty and leaving the southern border exposed to Iran’s silent army recruitment poised to infiltrate the soft southern border of the United States, especially exposed with our military involved in foreign affairs.

In the spirit that ignorance is war’s best friend while wisdom and understanding are the companions of peace; the best defense from this agenda is your passing on this knowledge to your neighbor, because the two dozen scandals of Obama's Administration in 5 years seem to be collating the OBAMA FRAUD, and that's no LOVE COMMOTION.

ENJOY my latest song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIOxJaVeX60



Sincerely,
Cody Robert Judy
www.codyjudy.us
www.codyjudy.blogspot.com
YouTube: CODY JUDY / CODE4PRES



*1
Minor v. Happersett
"it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens.."