If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by Sharon Rondeau

The U.S. Constitution was written on the principles of “natural rights” during the Age of Enlightenment

(Apr. 1, 2014) — On Friday, The Post & Email published the first part of an interview with a constitutional scholar, Tea Party member and public speaker who enjoys speaking on American history, the founding documents, and in particular, the subject of natural rights.  Mitch Van Biljon came to the United States from his native South Africa in 1995 after more than six months of researching various countries to which he could relocate after violence in his home country convinced him to leave.

Van Biljon appeared as a special guest on the WheresObamasBirthCertificate (WOBC) radio show on Friday evening hosted by founder Mike Volin and guest host CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret.), both of whom have been deeply involved in researching the eligibility and life story of Barack Hussein Obama since 2008.

For the past two and one-half years, the Maricopa County, AZ Cold Case Posse has investigated the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website, concluding that it is fraudulent, along with Obama’s Selective Service registration form. On March 1, 2012, a formal press conference was held to announce the conclusions of the investigation, after which the media failed to act.

The Selective Service form bearing Obama’s name was one of the topics discussed on the March 21 edition of the WOBC radio show as it related to FOIA requests following the revelation that any such requests encompassing “White House equities” were sent to the White House for review before a response was provided, if one was provided at all.

Cold Case Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio gave a second press conference on July 17, 2012 in which they stated that the documents were forgeries beyond the standard of probable cause, calling upon Congress to launch its own investigation.

In the case of Obama’s purported Selective Service documents, there are at least two different versions released to members of the public, including The Post & Email.  The posse determined that the registration form is fraudulent because of the two-year date stamp where a four-year date stamp appears on all other forms from the same era which were examined.

For the past two months, Zullo has reported that a “universe-shattering” announcement stemming from an independent investigation undertaken by Arpaio will be made in the near future.  On Sunday, PPSimmons News & Ministry reported that “PPSimmons will know first” of any new information directly from Zullo.  Several days ago, internet rumors and posts appeared making various claims and invoking Arpaio or the posse’s work, about which Zullo told The Post & Email, “If you don’t hear it from me, it isn’t true.”

During our interview with Van Biljon, he shared with us that “reliable sources” have led him to believe that Arpaio will reveal that Obama’s parents are not those who Obama has identified since he entered public life in 1995.

In Part 1, Van Biljon cited four U.S. Supreme Court cases which he said define the presidential requirement of “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, all of which arose in the 19th century.  “It seems that people have a question about the definition because there hasn’t been a recent Supreme Court ruling on the term,” we told Van Biljon, who responded:

I have these discussions from liberals from Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and they always say the same thing to me: “There’s no recent Supreme Court decision…” and I say, “What you have to do is always consider two things when trying to understand the definition:  one is that you have to look at what the Founders intended, and the best way to find what the Founders intended is to look at the Congressional records.  Simple.

In 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark, who was born in the U.S. to Chinese-citizen parents, was a U.S. citizen

Number two:  If you’re concerned about the latest court case defining citizenship, the Wong Kim Ark ruling in 1898, I always say that people living then were closer to the founding era; they understood the sentiment far better than we do today.  As you know, our educational system is so pathetic that they don’t teach our kids detailed analysis.  They don’t educate our children at all; they just feed them propaganda.  There’s no requirement for deep analysis.  So after all my research of the Supreme Court rulings and the congressional records, it’s patently clear that Barack Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States.

I think sometimes we confuse the issue when we talk about where he was born.  I don’t care if he was born in Washington, DC or Hawaii. All I’m interested in is what the definition is, what the Supreme Court rulings are on the matter, and what the congressional records show.  We need to be careful not to muddy the waters because it just confuses people.

The Post & Email then said, “You are launching a new website on politics, government and our founding documents.  What is your reason for doing that?”

I understand that people are extremely busy.  They have so many demands on their time; they’re trying to provide a living for their family, especially in these difficult times, working long hours.  In addition to that, not everybody has a passion for politics.  They’re not going to spend hours and stay up until 12:00 or 1:00 in the morning studying politics.  So what I decided to do, rather than have all of the information that’s out there, was to create slide presentations on a number of areas that people can go to and look at on a summary level with the appropriate information that supports and validates the truth of what is being said.  So as I look through those Powerpoint presentations, which will also be HTML-formatted, it could be a 52-page slide, as an example, on the passage of the 16th Amendment.  There are 52 different slides; it has all the important content with a short amount of text per slide, and it would take you literally ten minutes to go through each of the slides.

I always come back to the foundation.  You cannot talk about the Constitution unless you understand natural rights.  If you understand natural rights, then you understand the principles of the Constitution.  I have included “Natural Rights with the Constitutional Principles;” “The Proper Role of Government;” “Principles of Correct Government;” then I go to the story of the Declaration of Independence; I talk about the various amendments in the Constitution.  I talk about contemporary issues such as welfare, because you have people talk about the “General Welfare” clause in the Constitution who say, “That justifies the spending on welfare programs.”  That’s totally immoral; it’s theft of another person’s income.  There is no moral right that tells the government to take money from “A” to give to “B” to help “B” in his quest for the pursuit of happiness.  There’s no such moral principle.

From my own religion, I can take my own income and distribute it to those in need because I love them, they are my brother and sister in terms of the Christian teachings.  However, nobody has the right to authorize the theft of my money.  If I as an individual cannot go to “B” to steal from his wallet, I cannot authorize a government to have a power that I as an individual do not have.  I can’t give a government power that we don’t ave as individuals, so therefore, they cannot do that which we cannot do.  But our government lies to us, they deceive us, and they break every moral principle in terms of execution of government.  So the “Welfare” presentation is to make people understand what “general welfare really is:  it’s that which benefits every single American, not a specific group, not a specific class of people based on economic position; purely that which benefits every single American.

So an example might be the defense of the country from foreign invasion?

Correct.  The purpose of government is very simple.  Its role is only to protect life, liberty and property.

What about protecting an earthquake-prone section of the country or other natural disasters?

No.  The federal government has no authority whatsoever to take money to do that.  While the cause and intent are good, they do not have that power.

The American people are the most generous people I’ve come across, so if there’s a natural disaster, every American – they’ve proven it over and over again – will dip into their pocket, they will pull out money and donate it to those in need.  They will do it of free will.

Coming back to your question about infrastructure, the Founding Fathers in the First Congress actually rejected funding for a road in a local community, and another vote came up to put up a lighthouse on the East Coast.  There was great debate about that investment, and the founders quickly turned around and said, “That lighthouse affects key traffic and the trade for goods which all Americans need; that is justified; everybody benefits from that.”  But a local road in a city that no one else uses is not used for interstate commerce and is not a function of the federal government.

In regard to Obama’s eligibility, and you’ve explained why he doesn’t qualify constitutionally, how do think the meaning of “natural born Citizen” morphed into a simple birth in the country?

Ignorance. You have all these professors and liberal or progressive ideology, which always undermines the very thing that makes America great, the very thing that secures America.  Whether it is changing the definition of a “natural born Citizen” or something else, they always are going to push for that; that’s historically been the case.

The parallel to that has been the removal of Christ, of Christian doctrine and theology from every public sphere, which is also totally false.  But if they’re able to remove God, if they’re able to undermine the foundations of America;,then you can have a foreign individual come into this country who doesn’t have allegiance to the country and become president of the country and then – I was going to say “do more damage than Barack Obama,” but that’s going to be pretty difficult.

Do you believe Obama was born in a foreign country?

I believe he was.  First of all, in the records, they can find no microfiche documentation of his birth.  The hospital that he defines in his long-form birth certificate does not exist; it had a different name.  So absolutely.  To me, every time Obama opens his mouth, he lies.  I don’t trust him at all, and his whole past, his history, is a fraud.  I don’t want to make aspersions about the man, but there is the rumor – and that will be validated by the Cold Case Posse, or they have validated it and they just need to get that to the general community – but I’m hearing that his parents, as defined in his long-form birth certificate, are not his parents.  There is that speculation.

You said that you are hearing this from reliable sources, correct?

Yes.  My mother always said, “If someone lies to you once, then you’re a fool to continue to believe them.”  Once an individual has lied, you must validate everything he says, because you can’t accept it to be true.

On April 27, 2011, the image above was uploaded to the White House server in an apparent attempt to convince the public that he was a “natural born Citizen” and therefore constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States

Obama has lied about Benghazi and Obamacare, and The Post & Email has been asking for years why it is therefore so difficult for many to believe that the birth certificate is a forgery.

It all comes back to the human spirit, which doesn’t believe the negative.  It always wants to believe the positive.  So we give people the benefit of the doubt again and again, and then ultimately, we realize, no, this person is not honest.

The other day, you mentioned that when you were in South Africa, you were told that someone like Obama would become the U.S. president.  Can you elaborate more on that?

I can give you a very general reference to the source, which was South African military intelligence.  The indications were in the early to mid-80s that there was a Muslim communist being educated at an Ivy League school within the United States of America, and the word was “would” become president of the United States of America.   At the time, it didn’t bother me, because it was too early; things hadn’t changed to the degree that warranted my getting out of the country.  At the time, South Africa had a very strong Christian ethic.  I loved the people, I loved the country, I loved the value system, although I did not like the parliamentary form of government.  But in the mid-80s I had no intention of leaving the country, although what happened to Zimbabwe and Rhodesia I could see would come to South Africa eventually, and indeed it did.

Did you serve in the South African military?

Graduating from high school at 18 years of age, it was mandatory at the time that all South African young men delay their entry into university by serving for two years, and after the two years, you would then be called to serve for three months a year for eight years thereafter.

Was that the case with you?

Yes, absolutely.

Did you work in military intelligence?

The unit I worked in was one that was closely associated with the Eleven Command, which is one of the units engaged in military intelligence, but the information did not come through that form.  I heard things there as well, but it was through another source that I learned that a communist Muslim would be serving as president of the United States.

When do you think our educational system began to become inferior?  Did it start with the Common Core curriculum or long before that?

I always come back to parents.  Parents always want the greatest education for their children, and when we relieve parents of that responsibility – to be engaged directly in education at a local level – we’ve lost the battle of education.  When the Department of Education was instituted in this country, that was the means to make the change at the national level which affected everybody.  So Common Core is just a continuation of that.  There will be another program down the road.  Once Common Core is defeated, the liberals will come up with another program to destroy the education of our children.  To me, that’s the second component in the 16th Amendment:  the minute we give the federal government authority to take money from us directly, we lose control.

I had a chance to chat with Mike Lee, the senator from my state of Utah, and I said, “There’s only one way that the American people will save this country, and that is to go and pass a law within each respective state that prevents the withholding of any federal income tax from any employee in the state, and then, revert back to the old methodology where the federal government then sends to the state legislature and governor of the state a bill for services rendered on behalf of it.  The treasurer will then meet with the governor; they will go through that list of expenses; they will define, based on Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, what is justifiable as a federal expenditure, and will reimburse only that which is authorized by the Constitution.  After they return that amount, they will reach out to the residents of that state, and will then have each resident pay, on an apportioned basis, his share of those taxes.

What did you find when you first arrived in America as compared to what you see now?

I think the American people are tired of the fact that they cannot trust government.  Having said that, I think the spirit, while they’re tired, is showing more of a firm commitment to stand against the federal government according to the Constitution.  In terms of the overall decline of the American political environment, it’s just a continuation…  Every couple of decades, a new voice arises which “fundamentally transforms America,” whether it’s the New Deal and FDR, Social Security and Medicare, Medicaid; the Department of Education under Carter; and now Obamacare…these are all steps. The people who plan to take control of the country are very patient.  They don’t care if it takes ten years or 50 years, but they are going to get their ideology implemented, and it’s one step at a time.  It’s one additional brick being built on the wall of liberty that is being perpetrated on us.

I don’t see a change in the overall trend, but what I do see is Americans starting to recognize that it has gone too far.  Now they want to rebel.  But you cannot rebel unless you have a foundation of knowledge.  What foundation are you using to validate the reasons for your revolution?

Who do you think is behind the push to “fundamentally change the United States of America?”

It is my religious belief that it’s Satan.  He seeks to remove all freedom.  Part of the requirement for us to live a Christ-like life is to have the ability to have agency and to use free choice in whether we follow him or not. Satan’s plan is to remove that agency and force obedience to government and to follow him.  Obviously, Satan works through certain individuals and organizations, and I can tell you that the greatest threat to this country is the Federal Reserve Bank.

The Post & Email responded, “Many people say that.”

There are other organizations such as CFR, the United Nations – also working to achieve a one-world government and principally gets our money, and the Federal Reserve is the entity that acquired that money through illegal means through the continual printing of U.S. currency, or quantitative easing, as they call it, which diminishes the value of the dollar.  For every dollar they print, they diminish the value of the dollar.  As an economist by education, you always go back and look at what justifies the printing of additional currency, and the only justification is a growth in wealth, whether it’s property, precious metals, or whatever.  That is additional wealth.  When the economy grows as the result of productive improvements made by organizations, that is real wealth.  If you disconnect the printing of currency to that real value-add in the economy, you undermine the value of the dollar, property, and people’s natural rights.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Great article;interview;and point on. What is so terrifically ironic is I’m the only one in the state of Utah,ran for U.S Senate in 2010 for Utah,who had held same beliefs. Against Sen. Mike Lee who flat out denies what Mitch Van Biljon has said here,although Mitch makes me very proud asserting the truth,the politics in Utah has not followed suit and remains opposed. I’d love it if I could testified differently.
    Unfortunately, conservative states have indeed funded Obama and we don’t have any Federal Offices elected in Utah who haven’t pacified Obama’s corrupt fraud in the Republican Party.

    Cody Robert Judy