Again, Jojo, you are neither representative of Christianity, nor able to speak for Christians. It is arrogant -- and revealing -- for you to suggest that you do.
On Jan 2, 2013, at 4:11 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: > That is where you are wrong my friend. A TRUE Christian will not find a call > to Idolatry beautiful. A muslim call to prayer is a call to pray to a false > god (allah the moon god) in front of an idol (kabah - a meteroite stone.) > > > Jojo > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "de Bivort Lawrence" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 12:22 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies > > > Jojo, you do not speak for "true Christians." I know many Christians and > others who find the Muslim call to prayer beautiful. > > > On Jan 1, 2013, at 12:44 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: > >> Other than what he wrote in his autobiography, no. But his autobiography is >> a revealing work into his psyche. >> >> He mentioned that the muslim call to prayer was the "most beautiful" sound >> he has heard. High praise from a supposed "Christian". Beautiful in that >> the music or melody is beautiful, but beautiful in the sense of worship it >> inspires. >> >> I can tell you now that a true Christian will NOT find a call to prayer to a >> moon god "beaustiful" and inspiring. >> >> >> >> Jojo >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "de Bivort Lawrence" <[email protected]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 12:39 AM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies >> >> >> This is incorrect, Jojo. >> >> Do you have any evidence for your assertion that President Obama is a Muslim? >> >> >> On Dec 30, 2012, at 10:17 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: >> >>> His own autobiography says that he went to muslim school in Indonesia. You >>> can't go to muslim school unless you're muslim. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Jojo >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "de Bivort Lawrence" >>> <[email protected]> >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 12:14 AM >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies >>> >>> >>> On what evidence do you base your assertion that President Obama is a >>> Muslim? >>> >>> >>> On Dec 29, 2012, at 9:39 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: >>> >>>> No, I am not stating that the "President" is a muslim. I am stating that >>>> the Usurper is a muslim. We currently don't have a legitimate president; >>>> we have a usurper sitting on the throne. >>>> >>>> Why doesn't he just come clean? He could do this with a single 2 minute >>>> phone call to the Hawaiian authorities to open access to his vault BC. He >>>> can quickly end this controversy, establish his legitimacy, kill the >>>> Birther movement and start the healing of the nation. He can do all that >>>> in 2 minutes, yet he spends over 4 million dollars of Tax payer's money to >>>> block access to this vault BC. Why block access to such an innocuous >>>> document? WHY indeed? >>>> >>>> He won't because he can't. This is the pattern of a corrupt leader proped >>>> up by a corrupt shadow government strengthened by corrupt demonic forces. >>>> >>>> >>>> Jojo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "de Bivort Lawrence" >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 12:40 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies >>>> >>>> >>>> Are you stating that the President is Muslim? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 27, 2012, at 9:27 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: >>>> >>>>> Lomax does not understand that this Executive Order covers anything >>>>> related to previous and current presidents. Anything about this current >>>>> president is covered by this order. IF anyone wants to release >>>>> information about Obama's BC, they have to go thru Eric Holder (the >>>>> corrupt right henchman) or thru the Presidential counsel; for approval. >>>>> This is the veil of corruption surrounding this usurper-in-thief and >>>>> people like lomax are gving him a pass. I'm not surprised as lies are OK >>>>> for Lomax as long as it helps prop up his illegitimate usurper muslim >>>>> president. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Jojo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" >>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> >>>>> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 6:59 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Birther Myth? or Lomax lies >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> At 03:50 AM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: >>>>>>> Here is the actual Executive Order that Obama issued immediately after >>>>>>> he took power. The Media spins this as rescinding a Bush Executive >>>>>>> Order 13233. But in fact, it is a new Executive Order to specifically >>>>>>> require his approval before release of any information, obstensively >>>>>>> because of "Executive Privelege". >>>>>> >>>>>> Obstentively? Took me a moment. Ostensibly. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Release of any information." Sure. "Any information" of what type, >>>>>> where located, and by whom? >>>>>> >>>>>>> Now, Lomax, who is lying now. Do I get my apology now? What exactly >>>>>>> have you debunked? .... you blatant liar. >>>>>> >>>>>> No, no apology, unless you show that the Executive Order does what you >>>>>> claimed. I not only never claimed that this *particular* Exectuive Order >>>>>> did not exist, I linked to it and discussed it specifically. >>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> Go Ahead, take you best spin shoot. Let's see what spin and lies >>>>>>> you'll come up next. >>>>>> >>>>>> You've acknowledged all along that what you are doing is spinning. You >>>>>> have acknowledged that you say things that aren't true to create a >>>>>> dramatic image. That's "spin." But I'll give you a fair chance here. >>>>>> >>>>>> You claimed that this document is an Executive Order which blocks access >>>>>> to Obama's vault BC. Below, I quote a bit of what I wrote, to which you >>>>>> are responding. I wrote, in more than one way, "If he fails to >>>>>> apologize, or point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, >>>>>> effectively, a liar." >>>>>> >>>>>> Okay, how does this Order do that? What would cause this document to >>>>>> apply to birth records held by Hawaiian state officials? It's all here >>>>>> right in front of us, no more research should be necessary. >>>>>> >>>>>> But, also for the record, I'll say it again: There is no Executive Order >>>>>> that blocks public access to the "vault" birth certificate. That access >>>>>> is blocked by Hawaiian law on the privacy of records (as is true, I >>>>>> think, in all states). Some access to records is blocked by HIPAA, a >>>>>> federal law relating to the privacy of medical records, and there are >>>>>> other laws protecting the privacy of certain records, but no relevant >>>>>> Executive Order that does what Jojo claims. >>>>>> >>>>>> He lied, and he is continuing to lie. But ... his turn. >>>>>> >>>>>>> THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For Immediate Release January 21, 2009 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 - - - - - - - >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS >>>>>>> >>>>>>> By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the >>>>>>> laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish >>>>>>> policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege >>>>>>> by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of >>>>>>> Presidential records by the National Archives and Records >>>>>>> Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, >>>>>>> it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For purposes >>>>>>> of this order: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (a) "Archivist" refers to the Archivist of the United States or his >>>>>>> designee. (b) "NARA" refers to the National Archives and Records >>>>>>> Administration. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (c) "Presidential Records Act" refers to the Presidential Records Act, >>>>>>> 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (d) "NARA regulations" refers to the NARA regulations implementing the >>>>>>> Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (e) "Presidential records" refers to those documentary materials >>>>>>> maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including >>>>>>> Vice Presidential records. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (f) "Former President" refers to the former President during whose term >>>>>>> or terms of office particular Presidential records were created. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (g) A "substantial question of executive privilege" exists if NARA's >>>>>>> disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security >>>>>>> (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the >>>>>>> deliberative processes of the executive branch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (h) A "final court order" is a court order from which no appeal may be >>>>>>> taken. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a) When the >>>>>>> Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his >>>>>>> intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of >>>>>>> the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by >>>>>>> the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific >>>>>>> materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial >>>>>>> question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is >>>>>>> intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to >>>>>>> invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by >>>>>>> the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall >>>>>>> be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) >>>>>>> and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for >>>>>>> the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former >>>>>>> President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated >>>>>>> representative. (b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the >>>>>>> incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose >>>>>>> Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records covered by >>>>>>> the notice, unless during that time period the Archivist has received a >>>>>>> claim of executive privilege by the incumbent or former President or >>>>>>> the Archivist has been instructed by the incumbent President or his >>>>>>> designee to extend the time period for a time certain and with reason >>>>>>> for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a shorter period >>>>>>> of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section >>>>>>> 1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the >>>>>>> notice. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President. (a) Upon >>>>>>> receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the >>>>>>> Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General >>>>>>> for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall >>>>>>> review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and >>>>>>> consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive >>>>>>> agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of >>>>>>> executive privilege is justified. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the >>>>>>> exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and >>>>>>> consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly >>>>>>> determine that invocation of executive privilege is not justified. The >>>>>>> Archivist shall be notified promptly of any such determination. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President >>>>>>> believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive >>>>>>> privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel >>>>>>> to the President and the Attorney General. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the Counsel >>>>>>> to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and >>>>>>> the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the >>>>>>> specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such >>>>>>> notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless >>>>>>> directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sec. 4. Claim of Executive Privilege by Former President. (a) Upon >>>>>>> receipt of a claim of executive privilege by a living former President, >>>>>>> the Archivist shall consult with the Attorney General (through the >>>>>>> Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel), the >>>>>>> Counsel to the President, and such other executive agencies as the >>>>>>> Archivist deems appropriate concerning the Archivist's determination as >>>>>>> to whether to honor the former President's claim of privilege or >>>>>>> instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim >>>>>>> of privilege. Any determination under section 3 of this order that >>>>>>> executive privilege shall not be invoked by the incumbent President >>>>>>> shall not prejudice the Archivist's determination with respect to the >>>>>>> former President's claim of privilege. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (b) In making the determination referred to in subsection (a) of this >>>>>>> section, the Archivist shall abide by any instructions given him by the >>>>>>> incumbent President or his designee unless otherwise directed by a >>>>>>> final court order. The Archivist shall notify the incumbent and former >>>>>>> Presidents of his determination at least 30 days prior to disclosure of >>>>>>> the Presidential records, unless a shorter time period is required in >>>>>>> the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations. >>>>>>> Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to >>>>>>> the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney >>>>>>> General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal >>>>>>> Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be >>>>>>> delivered to the former President or his designated representative. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be >>>>>>> construed to impair or otherwise affect: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (i) authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head >>>>>>> thereof; or (ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>> and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and >>>>>>> subject to the availability of appropriations. (c) This order is not >>>>>>> intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or >>>>>>> procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the >>>>>>> United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, >>>>>>> employees, or agents, or any other person. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is >>>>>>> revoked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> BARACK OBAMA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> THE WHITE HOUSE, January 21, 2009. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" >>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 5:51 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Conclusion, there is no such Executive Order. It appears that Jojo >>>>>>>> Jaro believes birther myths, long after they have been conclusively >>>>>>>> and with evidence debunked. If he fails to apologize, or point to an >>>>>>>> actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar. >>>>>> >>>>>> Notice, the above is in reference to what was said below. Jojo doesn't >>>>>> actually read what he responds to. It was a reference to an "Executive >>>>>> Order to block access" to "vault records," i.e., the Hawaiian vault copy >>>>>> of the original long form certificate. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>> At 02:24 PM 12/26/2012, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: >>>>>>>>> At 01:07 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a >>>>>>>>>> democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther >>>>>>>>>> movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault >>>>>>>>>> BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption >>>>>>>>>> Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there >>>>>>>>>> an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Fascinating. Is there such an Executive Order? That would be quite >>>>>>>>> odd. Legally, the President has no authority over Hawaiian officials, >>>>>>>>> unless a federal issue could be shown. and this would not qualify. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jojo went on to repeat the Executive Order claim that Obama is >>>>>>>> preventing access to the vault certificate. Is that true? Is there an >>>>>>>> "Executive Order to block access." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What can be found on this? >>>>>> >>>>>> and then I went into detail, with links.... >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
