The Injury Board Commentary - Miscellaneous - Most Commented

Experts Claim Pit Bulls a Threat

Beth Janicek — Tue, 10 May 2011 10:27:00 GMT

San Antonio nurses and doctors recently released a report which found that attacks by pit bulls were more likely to kill people then those by other breeds. All three deaths resulting from dog attacks seen at University Hospital of San Antonio over the last fifteen years came from pit bull attacks. The victims included two children and a 90-year old man. Another fatal attack that was not treated at University was also caused by a pit bull.

The study also found that pit bulls caused more serious injuries when compared to other dogs, and that pit bull victims accrued higher amounts of medical bills than others. Other stats found that pit bulls were responsible for 65 percent of all fatal US dog attacks in 2008. In 2007, 7 out of the 8 deaths in Texas were caused by pit bulls.

The study, published in the scientific journal April edition of Annals of Surgery, states that “there seems to be a distinct relationship between the severity and lethality of an attack and the breed responsible.” The study goes on to call for pit bulls to be regulated similarly to wild animals.

Pit bull advocates disagree, arguing that it is the owner, not the dog, which causes the propensity for violence. During the last legislative session, Texas lawmakers considered a law permitting local bans on certain breeds of dogs, but the law did not pass.

An owner of a dangerous dog can be subject to civil liability if a dog causes injury. Under both the theory of negligence or strict liability, an injured person may have a cause of action against an owner of a dangerous dog. In order to prove strict liability, a plaintiff must show that: 1) the defendant was the owner or possessor of the animal; 2) the animal had dangerous propensities abnormal to its class; 3) the defendant knew or had reason to know the animal had dangerous propensities; and 4) those propensities were a producing cause of the plaintiff’s injury.

Currently, a bill is pending before the Texas legislature which would increase criminal penalties for an owner of a dangerous dog which causes death to a child or elderly person.

Everyone should be aware of the danger posed by pit bulls and other aggressive dogs. Potential owners should consider how a pit bull could affect those around them, while the general public should be cautious, particularly with children and aggressive dogs.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Beth Janicek

H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine, Possible Side Effects and the Potential Dangers of Squalene

Teresa Allen — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 01:33:59 GMT

UPDATE: November 13, 2009

The NVIC has just posted a Vaccine Ingredients Calculator for the H1N1 vaccine and the seasonal flu vaccine. You put in your weight, age etc. and the vaccine and click 'calculate'. It will tell you how much mercury the EPA states is acceptable for you.

Click here to go to the VIC.www.vaccine-tlc.org/calc.html

I put my info in and it said that based on the EPA standards of mercury that I can handle would be 8 micrograms. The H1N1 vaccine has 25 micrograms.

UPDATE: November 10, 2009

Thank you, Anais, for sharing this.

A brave and highly educated spanish nun,doctor and theologian, living in a monastery, but very much involved in the matters of the world, explains the H1N1 flu. This is the clearest and most sensible information I have been able to find. Hope it helps everybody to make an informed and free decision.
More ...

The youtube version is in 6 parts here.

UPDATE: November 3, 2009

Please go and listen to this interview! Very informative! Very good interview with Dr. Russell Blaylock: (Dr. Blaylock is a board certified neurosurgeon, author and lecturer. For the past 25 years he has practiced neurosurgery in addition to having a nutritional practice. He recently retired from both practices to devote full time to nutritional studies and research.) http://articles. mercola.com/ sites/articles/ archive/2009/ 11/03/What- We-Have-Learned- About-the- Great-Swine- Flu-Pandemic. aspx Just a couple of things from the interview:

UPDATE: October 27, 2009

The shocking truth about why Obama announced a National Public Health Emergency in the US this weekend.

October 21, 2009
ALERT: Special Swine Flu Update

*UPDATE: 10/14/2009* -

(Taken from Peninsula - Palo Alto Daily News )

"...the current stock of U.S. swine flu vaccines does not contain adjuvants, according to Anne Schuchat, MD, in an informational video produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Schuchat does acknowledge that there is an emergency provision to use them — should the pandemic accelerate."

*UPDATE: 10/5/2009* - According to the CDC, neither the 2009 H1N1 vaccine nor the 2009 seasonal flu vaccine used in the United States contains squalene.

A Glimpse into the Scary World of Vaccine Adjuvants

The U.S. government has contracts with several drug companies to develop and produce swine flu vaccines. At least two of those companies, Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline, are using an adjuvant, Squalene, in their H1N1 vaccines.

Meryl Nass, M.D., who is an authority on the anthrax vaccine, states

“A novel feature of the two H1N1 vaccines being developed by companies Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline is the addition of squalene-containing adjuvants to boost immunogenicity and dramatically reduce the amount of viral antigen needed. This translates to much faster production of desired vaccine quantities.”

There is a difference between 'good' and 'bad' squalene. The difference is the way it enters the body. Injecting squalene is an abnormal route of entry. Injecting squalene into the body causes your immune system to attack ALL of the squalene in your body, not just the vaccine adjuvant.

According to the European website Without Concent :

What you don't know can hurt you.

WithoutConcent is about informed concent. We promote transparency in the pharmaceutical industry and the governments that regulate it...because you can't make good choices with bad information - or no information at all.

Clinical trials with "fast-track" swine flu vaccines that contain and adjuvant - substance that turbocharge the immune system's response to the vaccine - are underway on four continents. The adjuvant is an oil called squalene, which causes incurable autoimmune disease in animals. Autoimmune diseases occur when the immune system attacks the body instead of defending it.

Over the past 35 years, scientists in laboratories like UCLA Medical Center and the Karolinska Institute, which awards the Nobel Prizes in Medicine and Physiology have published papers showing how squalene injected into rodents will cripple them. They used squalene to induce diseases like rheumatoid arthritis in animals (the animal version is called "adjuvant arthritis") in order to search for a cure in humans.

This website also states:

The European Medicines Agency report on GlaxoSmithKline's new swine flu vaccine called "Pandemrix" says on pg. 17 that it contains 10.69 milligrams of squalene.

An appendix to the report says on pg. 29 that subjects injected with the vaccine suffered "Headache, Tiredness, Pain, redness, swelling or a hard lump at the injection site; Fever, Aching muscles and joint pain." It says these complaints were "very common" - occurring with more than 1 in 10 doses of Pandemrix.

In 1 out of 1,000 doses, subjects reported "Allergic reactions leading to a dangerous decrease of blood pressure, which, if untreated, may lead to collapse, coma and death; Fits, Severe stabbing or throbbing pain along one or more nerves and Low blood platelet count which can result in bleeding or bruising." In 1 in 10,000 doses, volunteers reported "Temporary inflammation of the brain and nerves causing pain, weakness and paralysis that may spread across the body; and Narrowing or blockage of blood vessels with kidney problems."

We're not going to tell you what to do about this - except to get informed. Your health could depend on it.

According to Jeffry John Aufderheide of justgetthere.us

"As to my knowledge, this information is the first of its kind validating the ingredients and the intent to use them on the population. Buyer beware of this vaccine as we are likely to see an onslaught of damaged men, women, and children if there are forced vaccines. The ‘new’ experimental vaccine is certainly unlike any other that we, as Americans, have been exposed to in the past."

On Fox News, a Doctor recently said that the H1N1 Swine Flu virus is losing its virulence and the vaccine has levels of Squalene, even going so far as to say you would rather get Swine Flu than seasonal flu.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1z7KSEnyxw

More video from the National Vaccine Information Center

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5wHP5zLcP4

I, for one, will not be getting the H1N1 vaccine. However, no matter what you decide to do, please be sure to educate before you vaccinate.

I have removed the 'side effects' listed in the vaccine insert. Please do your own research into this.

..."Vaccine Safety Testing Only Done for ONE Week Now we are being told that this new fast tracked, poorly tested vaccine is very safe and effective. The results of the testing on this vaccine were reported in the New England Journal of Medicine.39 It is instructive to learn that the tests for safety and to assess complications lasted only 7 days after the vaccine, an incredibly short period of follow-up. Gullian Barre paralysis can occur even months after a vaccine as can seizures, behavioral problems and neurodevelopmental disorders in children. It is interesting to note that the authors of the safety study for our swine flu vaccine were all employees of the maker of the vaccine CSL Biotherapeutics and eight held equity interest in the company.39 This admission is part of the disclosure policy of the New England Journal of Medicine. It is always important to keep in mind when you hear about this vaccine being safe and produced just like the seasonal flu vaccine -- What else do they not know about this vaccine that they will discover months, years or even decades later. Once injected with the vaccine and you develop a complication there will be little that can be done to treat the life-long degenerative disorder it produces. You will just be a sad story on 60 minutes."

For the amount of mercury given in the vaccines to be considered safe, I would have to weigh a minimum of 551 pounds (250 kilograms).

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Teresa Allen

Obama Citizenship Lawsuit Headed to U.S. Supreme Court?

Brian W. Smith — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 23:48:35 GMT

DISCLAIMER: The author is a registered Independent and does not have an opinion as to the truth and/or veracity of the allegations of the lawsuit referenced in this blog or the information contained at the web sites cited.

Philip J. Berg, the lawyer who filed suit against Barack Hussein Obama, challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that he is immediately appealing the dismissal of his case to the United States Supreme Court.

Yesterday, Judge R. Barclay Surrick dismissed the suit brought by Berg, ruling that Berg did not have standing to bring the suit. In his lawsuit, the Plaintiff, Berg, a Philadelphia attorney, alleged that Defendant Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible for the Office of the President because Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen and naturalized in Indonesia. Plaintiff further alleged that Obama followed her naturalization and failed to take an oath of allegiance when he turned 18 years old, to regain his U.S. citizenship status. The lawsuit raises not only the Indonesian citizenship issue but also questions whether Obama was a citizen of Kenya.

Mr. Berg has stated that if Barack Hussein Obama will produce a certified "vault" birth certificate, a copy of his Certificate of Citizenship and a copy of his Oath of Allegiance to the United States, that he (Mr. Berg) will dismiss his lawsuit voluntarily. To date, Obama has refused to comply with Mr. Berg's request.

Berg said, "I am totally disappointed by Judge Surrick's decision and, for all citizens of the United States, I am immediately appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States - the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does?.....What happened to ‘...Government of the people, by the people, for the people?"

Berg's lawsuit is not the only one filed, challenging Obama's eligibility. There are apparently as many as 8 lawsuits currently pending.

In Honolulu, Andy Martin, a longstanding critic of Mr. Obama, filed a lawsuit, asking the Hawaiian Department of Health to release Mr. Obama's birth certificate records.

In the state of Washington, Steven Marquis, a resident of Fall City, Wash., a town about 30 miles southeast of Seattle, has filed a lawsuit against Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed, demanding that Mr. Reed verify Mr. Obama's citizenship status. The complaint seeks specifically that the office of the Washington Secretary of State verify and certify that Mr. Obama is or is not a "natural born" citizen by producing original or certified verifiable official documents. The lawsuit argues that this certification should take place before the election to preclude a constitutional crisis.

The interesting question to be possibly answered by the U.S. Supreme Court is whether voters, whether Republican, Democratic or Independent, have a right, under the Constitution, to challenge the eligibility of a presidential candidate. Hopefully, if that question is to be addressed by the Supreme Court, it will be decided before the election on November 4.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brian W. Smith

The Hypocrisy in Medical Malpractice Debate

Mike Bryant — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 09:27:00 GMT

There are so many things to look at in the ridiculous claims that are often made by tort reform proponents who call for medical malpractice changes. Two areas that often come up are cost savings and the argument that doctors get sued all the time.

A couple of recent items caught my eye concerning each of these topics:

- There is so much fraud out there in the health care system. Sure there can be cost saving if you simple rewrite the Constitution and take away people's right to sue. You would still have society having to pay for all of the damage that was left behind. But, shouldn't we start with the Medicare fraud that is out there?

The Washington Post recently reported that :

Miami health-care executive Larry Duran orchestrated one of the largest Medicare frauds in U.S. history, submitting more than $205 million in phony claims and landing a record-breaking 50-year prison sentence for his crimes.

But another piece of Duran’s scheme also caught the eye of prosecutors. They say he extended his fraud through his lobbying efforts, all aimed at getting official Washington to make it easier for mental health centers such as his to make money.

An advocacy group he helped set up, the National Association for Behavioral Health (NABH), has spent more than $750,000 on lobbying efforts over the past five years, including staging “fly-ins” on Capitol Hill and providing advice to group members on how to get around Medicare denials, according to the Justice Department. The group also held fundraisers for lawmakers such as Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and former congressman Kendrick B. Meek (D-Fla.), records show.

There is a lot of money out there that is simply being stolen and doesn't seem to be as important to the tort reformers. There needs to be a crack down on the real problems in the system.

- Poptorts took a look at how doctors aren't really afraid of the courtroom as long as they are suing. Including a United States Supreme Court case where they are fighting to have the right to bring the suit. As is pointed out:

Imagine not being able to bring a lawsuit in a situation like this, when doctors have clearly been wronged, and when the poor are going to suffer for it, right?

If only the ER docs saw the same value helping poor folks get proper treatment like this as helping some of those same patients who are negligently injured. For example, last November, we wrote about Florida legislation that would give ER doctors who treat Medicaid patients "sovereign immunity," and cap their liability for committing medical negligence against the poor at $100,000.

I wonder if they really understand the hypocrisy and simply don't care?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Second Citizenship Lawsuit Filed Against Barack Obama

Brian W. Smith — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:40:27 GMT

A second lawsuit has been filed against Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama over his lack of evidence of U.S. citizenship.

Steven Marquis, a resident of Fall City, Wash., a town about 30 miles southeast of Seattle, has filed a lawsuit against Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed, demanding that Mr. Reed verify Mr. Obama's citizenship status. The complaint seeks specifically that the office of the Washington Secretary of State verify and certify that Mr. Obama is or is not a "natural born" citizen by producing original or certified verifiable official documents. The lawsuit argues that this certification should take place before the election to preclude a constitutional crisis.

Mr. Marquis argues the secretary of state has the authority and duty to not only certify the voters but also and most importantly the candidates and in so doing prevent the wholesale disenfranchisement of voters who would had had an opportunity to choose from qualified candidates had the certification preceded the election process.

Mr. Marquis' lawsuit is the second to be filed seeking proof that Mr. Obama is a U.S. citizen qualified to run for the office of U.S. president. Philip Berg, an attorney who wants Mr. Obama to produce his original birth certificate, filed another suit in Pennsylvania earlier this year.

"At this point, Mr. Obama has not allowed independent or official access to his birth records nor supporting hospital records," wrote Mr. Marquis in a statement. "The Hawaii Health Department has violated Federal law by ignoring formal Freedom of Information requests for the same. Due to the facts and numerous other allegations that would challenge Mr. Obama's fundamental qualifications for office, a Federal lawsuit was filed and is currently being heard in District Court, Pennsylvania."

The Pennsylvania case is being heard by Judge R. Barclay Surrick, who has not made any ruling in the case.

The Washington lawsuit demands injunctive relief directing Mr. Reed to carry out the duty of his office in this regard answering the formal complaints for verification of Mr. Obama and any other candidate appearing on the ballots issues through his office for which formal complaints have been received. The State of Hawaii has refused to release copies of Mr. Obama's birth certificate, because the privacy statutes of the state prevent them from doing so.

In Honolulu, Andy Martin, a longstanding critic of Mr. Obama, filed a lawsuit on Oct. 17, in an attempt to get the Hawaiian Department of Health to release Mr. Obama's birth certificate records.

"One of Mr. Obama's most controversial and contentious issues that he has allowed to fester for years is the question of his birth certificate," said Mr. Martin in a statement. "Mr. Obama has posted at least two versions, maybe more, of a 'certificate' on the Internet. "I want to see a certified copy issued by the State of Hawaii, not one issued by the State of Mr. Obama," he continued. "Why Mr. Obama won't allow direct access to his birth records is beyond me. But the closer we get to discovering the truth about Mr. Obama the more we understand why he is terrified of that truth."

According to the U.S. Constitution, "no person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of 35 years, and been 14 years a resident within the United States."

The parties (and the country) await decisions by the judges in these cases. See affliated blogs on this subject at this link and this link and this link.

UPDATE: Brian Smith has been asked to appear on Roy King's radio show this afternoon (Saturday) at 4:30 Eastern, to discuss the Berg lawsuit and these blogs.

The show can be heard at this link: http://www.newstalk980.com/personality/roy-green

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brian W. Smith

U.S. Supreme Court Asked to Delay Presidential Election

Brian W. Smith — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 00:33:47 GMT

According to a press release from attorney Philip J. Berg, he filed a request with the United States Supreme Court on Thursday afternoon, for an injunction staying the presidential election until the Supreme Court determines whether Barack Hussein Obama is eligible to be President of the United States.

According to Mr Berg, he has filed two documents:

Application for an Immediate Injunction to Stay the Presidential Election of November 4, 2008; and
Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Berg stated, “I am hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court will grant the Injunction pending a review of this case to avoid a Constitutional Crisis by insisting that Obama produce certified documentation that he is or is not a “natural born” citizen and if he cannot produce documentation, that Obama be removed from the ballot for President".

Berg’s original lawsuit, Berg vs. Obama, was dismissed by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania last Friday, for lack of standing. Berg questions the logic of the District Court's decision:

"This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States - the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does?"

With the presidential election a mere five days away, the Supreme Court will need to act quickly. It is unknown whether Berg asked for an emergency hearing.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brian W. Smith

Obama Files Motion in Citizenship Lawsuit

Brian W. Smith — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:34:45 GMT

Attorneys for Barack Hussein Obama filed a motion in Federal Court in Pennsylvania on Monday, asking the court to dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by Philip J. Berg. The lawsuit filed by Berg challenges Obama's eligibility to take the office of the President of the United States. The motion to dismiss filed by Obama and the Democratic National Committee, echoes Obama's prior motion to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

In his lawsuit, the Plaintiff, Philip J. Berg, a Philadelphia attorney, alleged that Defendant Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible for the Office of the President because Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen and naturalized in Indonesia. Plaintiff further alleged that Obama followed her naturalization and failed to take an oath of allegiance when he turned 18 years old, to regain his U.S. citizenship status. The lawsuit raises not only the Indonesian citizenship issue but also questions whether Obama was a citizen of Kenya.

Mr. Berg has stated that if Barack Hussein Obama will produce a certified "vault" birth certificate, a copy of his Certificate of Citiizenship and a copy of his Oath of Allegiance to the United States, that he (Mr. Berg) will dismiss his lawsuit voluntarily. To date, Obama has refused to comply with Mr. Berg's request.

The parties (and the country) await a decision by Judge R. Barclay Surrick on the motions to dismiss and a motion to block discovery, filed by Obama.

See affliated blogs on this subject at this link and this link

UPDATE: Brian Smith has been asked to appear on Roy King's radio show this afternoon (Saturday) at 4:30 Eastern, to discuss the Berg lawsuit and these blogs.

The show can be heard at this link: http://www.newstalk980.com/personality/roy-green

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brian W. Smith

Reserve Yield Plus Fund (RYPQX) -- Investors Fight Back

NBR Law — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:33:46 GMT

TDAmeritrade sold the Reserve Yield Plus Fund (RYPQX) to its clients, claiming it was a "money market" fund. Of course, the fund is not technically a money-market fund, but it was presented to clients as one...and in lies the potential liability.

Investors that purchased the Reserve Yield Plus Fund have formed an Internet group to trade evidence and explore legal options. Attorney Vincent Imbesi is leading the charge. He plans to file multiple arbitration claims with FINRA, this week, against TDAmeritrade.

"Some of the stories are heartbreaking. Some elderly clients invested their entire life savings in the Fund, and they cannot afford to their daily living expenses, because their money is completely frozen," Mr. Imbesi explained.

If you have purchased the Reserve Yield Plus Fund or Reserve Primary Fund, please call or e-mail Vincent Imbesi.

Vincent Imbesi is the head securities attorney at Napoli Bern Ripka LLP. He has recovered millions of dollars for individual investors. He provides a free consultation for investors with potential claims of stock fraud or negligence.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by NBR Law

Don't Be Fooled by Phoney Town Hall Unrest on Health Care Reform

David Mittleman — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:14:00 GMT

Yesterday I blogged about a new tactic that a plastic surgery firm was using to entice consumers to try their facelift procedure: by having their own employees post positive internet reviews of the plastic surgery procedure, Lifestyle Lift hoped to get more customers. That technique, aptly named “Astroturf marketing”, has now spread into the healthcare reform debate, too. “Grassroots” protestors, led by the conservative website FreedomWorks, have cropped up at town hall meetings on reforming the health care system. The only problem is, the “grassroots” protestors aren’t really homegrown at all—instead they are “Astroturf” protestors led by conservative lobbying groups.

The main orchestrator of these “grassroots” protests is FreedomWorks, which is run by former Republican Majority Leader, Dick Armey, who is known on The Hill as one of the top ranked ‘hired guns’. In other words, he is a corporate lobbyist with a history of directing FreedomWorks to support the goals of his lobbying clients. In fact, he has a long history of supporting the following industries (some of which have a vested interest in keeping health care reform off of the table):

Armey’s FreedomWork’s is actively organizing against health care reform because his lobbying firm represents pharmaceutical companies, such as Bristol-Myers Squibb, that oppose the comparative effectiveness research of the health reform plan because it may cut into their revenue for name-brand drugs.
Armey’s lobbying firm also represents the trade group for the life insurance industry: FreedomWorks mobilizes its members for deregulated life insurance reform.
FreedomWorks is currently lobbying for maintaining the U.S. reliance on fossil fuels on behalf of the domestic oil companies and on behalf of the Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates, Sheik Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum.

Last year, the Wall Street Journal exposed FreedomWorks for building ‘amateur-looking’ websites to promote the lobbying interests of Armey. It appears as if Armey doesn’t really care, though. Indeed, other lobbyist-run groups such as Americans for Prosperity, run by a former associate of Jack Abramoff, are joining forces with Armey to orchestrate the tea party protests. In fact, these lobbying websites are instructing members to infiltrate town halls and harass Democratic members of Congress. Although some news coverage has depicted these “grassroots” movements as real, it is yet again, another familiar Republican attempt to look like a party who actually cares about the average American family. Don’t be fooled.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Obama Citizenship Lawsuit To Be Amended To Add Defendants

Brian W. Smith — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:02:40 GMT

Philadelphia attorney Philip J. Berg has sought court approval to amend his complaint in a lawsuit styled Berg v. Obama. The amended complaint would add the Pennsylvania Department of State, the Secretary of the Commonwealth Pedro A. Cortes (in his official capacity), the U. S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, and Senator Diane Feinstein (in her official capacity as chairman) for their failure to exercise due diligence with respect to Barack Hussein Obama's constitutional qualifications to be elected and serve as President of The United States, and for his inclusion on the ballot in Pennsylvania as a candidate for President of the United States.

In his original complaint, Mr. Berg alleged that Defendant Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible for the Office of the President because Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen and naturalized in Indonesia. Plaintiff further alleged that Obama followed her naturalization and failed to take an oath of allegiance when he turned 18 years old to regain his U.S. citizenship status.

According to a web site maintained by the Plaintiff, the amended complaint is intended to clarify issues regarding the plaintiff's standing to bring the lawsuit and supplement the lawsuit with additional relevant facts. Those additional facts are summarized at that web site.

According to the Washington Times, the Obama campaign has firmly said the Illinois Democrat is a natural-born citizen. Last month, the campaign posted on Obama's Web site a copy of his certification of live birth. It says he was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961. The Obama web site, commenting on questions regarding whether Obama is a citizen of Kenya, cites FactCheck.org as follows:

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

The issue of Obama's citizenship have been the topic of internet sites for months. Documents and photographs, claiming that Obama was registered in schools in Kenya under the name of Barry Soetoro, have been circulated through a variety of blogs and web sites which has fueled the debate. The Berg lawsuit raises not only the Kenyan citizenship issue but also questions whether Obama was a citizen of Indonesia. According to the allegations of the Plaintiff, Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen, Lolo Soetoro, who legally “acknowledged” Obama as his son in Indonesia and/or “adopted” Obama, which caused Obama to become a “natural” Indonesian citizen.

The parties are waiting on the court to rule on a motion to dismiss filed by Barack Hussein Obama. Lawyers for Obama and the Democratic National Commitee have also filed a motion for a protective order staying discovery in the case until the court rules on the motion to dismiss.

See an affiliated bog on this subject at this link:

UPDATE: Brian Smith has been asked to appear on Roy King's radio show this afternoon (Saturday) at 4:30 Eastern, to discuss the Berg lawsuit and these blogs.

The show can be heard at this link: http://www.newstalk980.com/personality/roy-green

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brian W. Smith