ALLEN v. SOETORO - DISCUSSION (D. Ariz.)

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:55 pm

realist wrote:

New Docket Entries...

Quote:

09/21/2009 10 Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint by Kenneth L. Allen (BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

09/21/2009 12 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Kenneth L. Allen (BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

09/23/2009 11 MOTION to Amend/Correct re: Amended Complaint by Kenneth L. Allen. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Amended Complaint)(BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

It would be useful for this Birfoon to attach a copy of his proposed pleading, as required by the Rules. If he doesn't, the motion will be denied out of hand.

This is the kind of a mistake a pro per often makes. And one that Orly Taitz makes all the time.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23943

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

realist wrote:

New Docket Entries...

Quote:

09/21/2009 10 Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint by Kenneth L. Allen (BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

09/21/2009 12 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Kenneth L. Allen (BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

09/23/2009 11 MOTION to Amend/Correct re: Amended Complaint by Kenneth L. Allen. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Amended Complaint)(BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

It would be useful for this Birfoon to attach a copy of his proposed pleading, as required by the Rules. If he doesn't, the motion will be denied out of hand.

This is the kind of a mistake a pro per often makes. And one that Orly Taitz makes all the time.

He's done much better with filings than Orly has (though he has had one or two kicked back - but he cured them without ranting about it). He even managed to file the required Proof of Service (of course, he didn't have to go to Iraq to effect service :lol:

).

Jez · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:21 pm

In all seriousness, how would a person affect service on someone stationed overseas, such as Cpt. Rhodes? Would it be sent through the Chain of Command? I doubt that Baghdad has much in the way of professional document servers.

Just a question.

Tes · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:18 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

realist wrote:

New Docket Entries...

Quote:

***09/23/2009 11 MOTION to Amend/Correct re: Amended Complaint by Kenneth L. Allen. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Amended Complaint)(BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

It would be useful for this Birfoon to attach a copy of his proposed pleading, as required by the Rules. If he doesn't, the motion will be denied out of hand. ***

Uhm - he DID attach a copy of the proposed Amended Complaint and went further by "redlining" (via underscore) the changes that he made. See Exhibit 1, above.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:27 pm

Jez wrote:

In all seriousness, how would a person affect service on someone stationed overseas, such as Cpt. Rhodes? Would it be sent through the Chain of Command? I doubt that Baghdad has much in the way of professional document servers.

Just a question.

I was once retained in a real estate quiet title action many years ago, during one of the earlier Lebanon civil wars, and the key witness lived in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon. Her deposition had to be taken. And it had to be taken by an American lawyer (preferably a California-licensed lawyer) who could know what to ask her and how to follow it up.

I passed on the case.

Effecting service (quasi homophone alert on your "affecting") may not be easy. You can show best efforts to effect service via the mails and e-mail, sometimes Fax. The bottom line with service is not that the intricate formalities be followed, especially where they can't be, but that you have done everything you could to give proper "notice" to the affected [correct usage!] party.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:28 pm

Tes wrote:

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

realist wrote:

New Docket Entries...

Quote:

***09/23/2009 11 MOTION to Amend/Correct re: Amended Complaint by Kenneth L. Allen. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Amended Complaint)(BAC, ) (Entered: 09/23/2009)

It would be useful for this Birfoon to attach a copy of his proposed pleading, as required by the Rules. If he doesn't, the motion will be denied out of hand. ***

Uhm - he DID attach a copy of the proposed Amended Complaint and went further by "redlining" (via underscore) the changes that he made. See Exhibit 1, above.

Bizarre. I went on line and couldn't find the exhibit. Well shucks on me!

DaveMuckey · **Posted:** Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:28 pm

WTF? Allen suggests that Obama's first day in office was 1-26-09 in referencing an Executive Order. I hope to Christ that Cheney wasn't in charge between the 20th and the 26th.

cbreitel · **Posted:** Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:03 am

I wonder if he's the same Kenneth L Allen who shows up a bunch of times in Pima County Superior Court records.

http://www.agave.cosc.pima.gov/PublicDocs/

cbreitel · **Posted:** Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:13 am

I guess Allen and Orly were going to join forces to gang up on Chief Justice Roberts at the University of Arizona, weeks before her unethical ex parte confrontation of him in Idaho:

http://www.resistnet.com/group/talkradioresistance

Quote:

Comment by Angela Roy (aka LadyFyre) on February 1, 2009 at 1:59pm
ACTION ALERT - FOIA/SOS!!!

Kenneth Allen (Ken) is now working with Orly Taitz, one of the Attorney's that fled suit in SCOTUS. They have put together a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Campaign. Orly's office will be helping to format these documents and she will sign them. Ken is in the process of getting her a seat for Wednesday at the U of A for Justice Roberts' lecture. Ken and Orly are very excited about this as should we all be! Orly is sending out this SOS for all the support she can get. This means everyone, including every possible veteran.

Plains radio is already gathering donations for her, but we all need to send the FOIA's, especially to Janet Nappy, Homeland Security, State Department and to our own Secretary of State, Ken is working on the specific state FOIA regs for that last one, and I will update you on it when I have more info. In the meantime you may contact Orly at 949-586-8110 or fax her at 949-586-2082. She is trying also trying to locate the judge at Gitmo who told Obama to (basicallly), stuff it! If we can do ALL do this we can really have an impact.

Every answer from the FOIA is evidence. You may also call Ken at 520-514-9704 or email him at kenandbetseyallen@msn.com. We also need to send FOIA's to house committees and to senate committees. Every FOIA will be signed by Orly and notarized by the sender. Consider this a BLITZ.

Butterfly Bilderberg · **Posted:** Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:00 am

cbreitel wrote:

I wonder if he's the same Kenneth L Allen who shows up a bunch of times in Pima County Superior Court records.

http://www.agave.cosc.pima.gov/PublicDocs/

Doubtful. There is a prominent southern Arizona attorney who has the misfortune of sharing the same name (and middle initial) with this FOIA fool.

Tes · **Posted:** Fri Oct 02, 2009 2:23 pm

New Docket Entry:

Quote:

09/30/2009 13 Notice of Service by Kenneth L. Allen. (JEMB, ) (Entered: 10/01/2009)

(Nonevent - just notice that he served Motion to Amend.)

Tes · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:45 am

New Docket Entries!

Quote:

10/05/2009 14 ANSWER to 1 Complaint by Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, Barry Soetoro, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered: 10/05/2009)

Quote:

10/05/2009 15 MOTION to Dismiss Counts/Claims - Partial Motion to Dismiss by Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, Barry Soetoro, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Defs.' Exhibits A-J)(Bowen, Brigham) (Entered: 10/05/2009)

A Note: While the focus on Rhodes & Barnett (and Kerchner) is understandable, I think it's time to start paying attention here. When Barnett and Kerchner get dismissed, this case will be "rediscovered" by the birthers. The case is also somewhat different that the other birther cases IN THAT the cause of action is based solely on FOIA.

(At base, of course - Allen is like all the other birther cases, basing its claims on fear-based speculation about Obama.)

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:24 am

Interesting.

From the Answer, Para.20:

Quote:

To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of
the United States, or is or ever was a citizen of Kenya or a British subject, those
allegations are denied.

My emphasis

Para 20 in the amended complaint is full of errors but putting it to one side it does seem to me that President Obama was a British Subject from birth to December 1964 and a Kenyan citizen from December 1963 until probably his 23rd Birthday (although it may have ended earlier than that).

Could the statement in in the Answer cause a problem futher down the line?

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:33 am

Welsh Dragon wrote:

Interesting....
Could the statement in in the Answer cause a problem futher down the line?

Obama could have been a citizen of Jupiter. That would have no effect on his being a citizen of the U.S. The laws of a foreign country (or planet) do not override U.S. laws, although Birthers seem perfectly willing to countenance that in the singular case of Obama's eligibility. Anything to get the Black man out of the White's House.

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:39 am

TollandRCR wrote:

Welsh Dragon wrote:

Interesting....
Could the statement in in the Answer cause a problem futher down the line?

Obama could have been a citizen of Jupiter. That would have no effect on his being a citizen of the U.S. The laws of a foreign country (or planet) do not override U.S. laws, although Birthers seem perfectly willing to countenance that in the singular case of Obama's eligibility. Anything to get the Black man out of the White's House.

I've no concern on any effect on his US citizenship, my worry is that this statement may be seized on as a 'lie'. Remember who many time the birthers refer to Obama 'admitting that his birth was governed by the British Nationality Act 1948'.

MaineSkeptic · **Joined:** Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm **Posts:** 5295

Welsh Dragon wrote:

Interesting.

From the Answer, Para.20:

Quote:

To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of
the United States, or is or ever was a citizen of Kenya or a British subject, those
allegations are denied.

My emphasis

Para 20 in the amended complaint is full of errors but putting it to one side it does seem to me that President Obama was a British Subject from birth to December 1964 and a Kenyan citizen from December 1963 until probably his 23rd Birthday (although it may have ended earlier than that).

Could the statement in in the Answer cause a problem futher down the line?

That raises an issue I never understood about dual citizenship.

According to the State Department,

Quote:

U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another.

My question is, does the U.S. recognize that some people have dual citizenship? Or does it take the position that the U.S. considers them simply U.S. citizens, notwithstanding the fact that other nations may consider them their citizens?

If it's the latter, I can sort of see why it would be the State Department's position that Obama "[n]ever was a citizen of Kenya or a British subject," even if Kenya or Great Britain felt differently.

Justin · **Joined:** Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:20 pm **Posts:** 1362

The State Dept. does not officially recognize dual cititzenship, no. The latter, as you pointed out, may be their stance on the matter.

Paul Pieniezny · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:54 am

Welsh Dragon wrote:

Interesting.

From the Answer, Para.20:

Quote:

To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of
the United States, or is or ever was a citizen of Kenya or a British subject, those
allegations are denied.

My emphasis

Para 20 in the amended complaint is full of errors but putting it to one side it does seem to me that President Obama was a British Subject from birth to December 1964 and a Kenyan citizen from December 1963 until probably his 23rd Birthday (although it may have ended earlier than that).

Could the statement in in the Answer cause a problem futher down the line?

I am hoping (against hope) that they have been following the debate on dual nationality and are going to play rough and tough. YOU prove that Obama ever went to the British or Kenyan embassy. We have no record of him ever doing anything abroad or in the USA that claimed or pre-supposed British, Kenyan, Indonesian or - let us throw in the kitchen sink - French nationality. We do know that when in the USA he was under the full protection and jurisdiction of the United States. YOU may think that he was also Kenyan, British or Indonesian, but YOU will have to ask those countries, because as far as we are concerned there is nothing in your claim.

You may think this preposterous or counterproductive, but ask yourself what the answer would be if it were not about Obama, but about Eisenhower or Ford. Do you really think the answer would have been different. The USA claims full sovereignty over its subjects, and does not mind or care that other countries may have different ideas about that. Perhaps this could be interpreted as drawing a line on dual citizenship. NOT forbidding it, but NOT recognizing it on the territory of the United States. Perhaps they should ask Hillary the question when she is in Geneve. Yes, in Geneve. Vattel would have liked that.

(Just saw that Justin has raised my point, but more succinct and better)

Justin · **Joined:** Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:20 pm **Posts:** 1362

I'm in training at work. I have to be succinct (for a change).

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:33 pm

Justin wrote:

The State Dept. does not officially recognize dual cititzenship

Not sure that's true anymore:

Quote:

Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice
...
U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another
...
In order to lose U.S. citizenship, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign citizenship voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. citizenship
...
The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_t ... _1753.html

MaineSkeptic · **Joined:** Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm **Posts:** 5295

Yes, that's the point I was making above -- that "[t]he U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists" without officially recognizing dual citizenship.

That would enable it to say that, as far as the government is concerned, a U.S. citizen is a U.S. citizen, period, while recognizing that other countries' laws may reach other conclusions.

cbreitel · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:52 pm

Writing from a blackberry at an airport, so forgive typos.

Dual citizenship is an issue I'm intimately familiar with because I am a dual citizen (US-Canadian). I see misstatements on the issue often. Last week a bona fide immigration attorney told me that the US "requires" (through its naturalization oath) dual citizens to revoke all other citizenships, which is flatly incorrect though I chose not to argue with her. The US State Department did take an official policy of "opposing" dual citizenship, although there was no enforcement mechanism for this position so it had no real effect other than to scare a bunch of Canadians living here from applying for Canadian passport renewals. This position changed many years ago to the one quoted above.

As to Obama, a US-born American whose supposed dual citizenship is through laws passed in other countries, it's always been my view that as far as the US is concerned, a citizen is not a citizen of other countries unless he has taken some affirmative step to have that other citizenship recognized. A foreign passport, for example. I'm not aware of Obama ever having exercised his *right to be* a British or Kenyan citizen. Therefore he never has been one for purposes of US law.

Tes · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 1:10 pm

cbreitel wrote:

As to Obama, a US-born American whose supposed dual citizenship is through laws passed in other countries, it's always been my view that as far as the US is concerned, a citizen is not a citizen of other countries unless he has taken some affirmative step to have that other citizenship recognized. A foreign passport, for example. I'm not aware of Obama ever having exercised his *right to be* a British or Kenyan citizen. Therefore he never has been one for purposes of US law.

That's exactly how I understand the law.

lyssandri · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 2:43 pm

Welsh Dragon wrote:

Interesting.

From the Answer, Para.20:

Quote:

To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of
the United States, or is or ever was a citizen of Kenya or a British subject, those
allegations are denied.

My emphasis

Para 20 in the amended complaint is full of errors but putting it to one side it does seem to me that President Obama was a British Subject from birth to December 1964 and a Kenyan citizen from December 1963 until probably his 23rd Birthday (although it may have ended earlier than that).

Could the statement in in the Answer cause a problem futher down the line?

I wonder if maybe they're viewing it from the perspective that - while he had the potential of being a British and/or Kenyan citizen until he reached a certain age - neither Obama, nor his parents (acting on his behalf while he was still a child) ever accepted or made use of that citizenship. Since he would have had to take overt action to claim British/Kenyan citizenship - but did NOT have to make any such over act to claim his US Citizenship - effectively, he never was a British or Kenyan citizen. Would that make any sense legally?

Edit: Edit: After posting this I saw the other posts and see that this actually does make sense legally - thanks!

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2009 3:40 pm

thorswitch wrote:

I wonder if maybe they're viewing it from the perspective that - while he had the potential of being a British and/or Kenyan citizen until he reached a certain age - neither Obama, nor his parents (acting on his behalf while he was still a child) ever accepted or made use of that citizenship. Since he would have had to take overt action to claim British/Kenyan citizenship - but did NOT have to make any such over act to claim his US Citizenship - effectively, he never was a British or Kenyan citizen. Would that make any sense legally?

I never intended my original post to generate such debate!

I'm afraid that the idea that he only had the potential of being a british subject doesn't hold water. He was at birth a Citizen of the UK and Colonies(CUKC) by dint of the british law at the time it required no overt action by him or his parents. In contrast, his mother did have the potential to be a CUKC following her marraige but that would have required an overt act - she would have had to have gone to a UK consulate, register and swear an oath of allegiance.

This doesn't challlenge his US Citizenship at birth and unless there something amazing we don't know about he's got no British or Kenyan Citizenship now. The efforts by Mario and Leo to 'prove' otherwise are so flawed as to make me want to cry!

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

ALLEN v. SOETORO - DISCUSSION (D. Ariz.)

Who is online