It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was Obama actually a legal US citizen if his Daddy was already married to someone else?

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:


posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: rupertg

originally posted by: ketsuko

You don't have to be born in the US, only on US soil. So it's valid if you are born on a US military base or embassy ground.


Yep,
Like John McCain being born in a US military base in Panama.

The Birther movement was never about the constitution
Just 110% political.



There was never any question about John McCain being a citizen of Panama, either.

The US government leases the land of military bases. The land of those bases is temporarily sovereign US territory. So, yes, John McCain is born in the US even though that base was in Panama.

We are not questioning where Obama was born, and I'm not questioning whether or not his mother was a citizen.

However, I am interested in what happened with his second father. Did his step-father adopt him and did he take Indonesian citizenship? This would give him dual citizenship and was that ever renounced?



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko



As of 2012, Obama still hadn't released his transcripts.

And W never did either. They were leaked.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Oh, well ... that makes it all OK then.




posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
Irrelevant

The newest falsehood goes like this: Obama was legally adopted by his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, and thus lost his American citizenship in favor of Indonesian citizenship. Sorry, that’s bogus, too. Because Obama was born in the U.S., he could not lose his citizenship as a child. It could be revoked only if he became a citizen of another country as an adult, and if that country didn’t permit dual citizenship.

www.factcheck.org...



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

It means that nothing was done to "seal" the records. Your claim is bogus.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
pretty convenient nobody was prosecuted for faking documents



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: gmoneystunt
a reply to: ketsuko
They said his fake ssn's were a mistake. I had heard of this happening to others as well

SS numbers are reused. This thread is getting to be another rant by Orly Taitz. Just the same birther crap over and over that has been proven wrong time and again.


That is outright not true. The SS Administration NEVER reuses SSN's. EVER. From their own website, question #20.
www.ssa.gov...



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

From what I know about the US constitution, it doesn't matter where the parents are from, if the child is born on American soil then they are either an American citizen or hold duel citizenship. I'm not really into Obama so tend not to pay much attention to his history and backstory that has been crafted and rewritten more times than an American School Text Book, so I dont know where he was born but I'm sure he said it was Hawaii so would be an American.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Danny85
a reply to: yuppa

From what I know about the US constitution, it doesn't matter where the parents are from, if the child is born on American soil then they are either an American citizen or hold duel citizenship. I'm not really into Obama so tend not to pay much attention to his history and backstory that has been crafted and rewritten more times than an American School Text Book, so I dont know where he was born but I'm sure he said it was Hawaii so would be an American.


There is a different between citizen which is what you are describing and natural born citizen which what you need to be to be president.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:35 PM
link   
But I think all of this thread is just whistling past the real problem - This all underlies the skepticism people have in our government to tell us the truth and be up front, our media to actually do due diligence and report the facts in an even-handed way, and our elected officials to even tell anything that bears a passing resemblance to the truth.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: gmoneystunt




What could be the reason?

People really, really don't like the President and came up with a silly notion about his citizenship then produced fake documents.


Personally I feel that this whole issue has come about because of Obama's Occidental full scholarship that was not based on merit or athletics, so it really aligns with him claiming Kenya as his citizenship to receive an international student scholarship. This is something that will not really come to light anytime soon, one way or the other, since most universities would not be stupid enough not call out an alumni that became president if they lied and were not eligible for a scholarship.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Obama is Natural Born Citizen, born on American soil to an American citizen. There is nothing in the law that states otherwise.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck



He could be native born (in the U.S.A.) but not naturally born (both parents being American citizens).

There is nothing that says both parents have to be citizens.


Another untruth.

www.govtrack.us...


Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the natural born Citizen clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress's own statute defining the term natural born Citizen;


This paragraph clearly states when and where the definition of "Naturally Born" has been defined.

www.resonoelusono.com...

The text of the first Congress' definition can be seen here, along with a definition and explanation of the confusion between the terms of "citizen" and "naturally born", and what happened with McCain.

Notably, the definition, once again, is "parent's", plural, meaning BOTH mother and father, which a single Ann Dunham did not meet the standard.

One of the other arguments was, at the TIME of Obama's birth, citizenship could not be passed on until the mother of the child reached the legal age of 18 and has been legal for 4 years; ie: gives birth at or after age 22. Since Obama was born in under the 4 year window, even under the 14th Amendment, he still failed to pass the "naturally born" test. Obviously, that has changed, and any child obtains US Citizenship now, at the moment of birth, regardless of the parent, or parent's, citizenship.

The high bar for "Naturally Born", however, remained until the McCain resolution. An explanation can be found in the second link.

The real problems came in when people like Taitz attempted to complicate the issue with false claims of foreign birth certificates, which were fake. Obama was born in Hawaii, and is a US Citizen. This still does not reach the high bar that was intended to be set by the framers, for "naturally born", of two "parent's", plural. Nor would "naturalized", which would be of two parents that became US Citizens, or one US citizen that married someone who later became a US citizen.

The only exclusions in the Constitution were for the framer's themselves, as they could, in no way possible, meet that standard, having just established and written the Constitution. Having come from a foreign land, had they not excluded only themselves, we would have waited a longer time to have a first president, until the bar of "Naturally Born" could be met. The reasons for the exclusions are glaringly evident.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

My daughter, born on American soil, to me, an American citizen, received a scholarship based on the fact that her father was a refugee from Columbia. That fact has no effect on my daughter's American citizenship.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Libertygal




Notably, the definition, once again, is "parent's", plural, meaning BOTH mother and father, which a single Ann Dunham did not meet the standard.


At the time that was written, many American citizens were foreign born from England, France, Sweden, Ireland, etc. Only white men who owned land were granted citizenship and their wives gained their's ONLY through marriage. By your reading of the definition of "Natural Born Citizen" Obama would have been disqualified based on his color.

Today, men can gain American citizenship through their wives.

Also, American citizenship is passed on to the citizen's children automatically, and not postponed until the age of 18. Even so, the law allows for the grandparents' American citizenship to be passed on to grandchildren when parentage is in question.


edit on 28-2-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: yuppa




I remember seeing he had one that was made in kenya too.

Don't believe everything you see on the internet. Especially if it comes from Orly Taitz.


Before Obama was made into POTUS, I had seen the media proclaim proud things about this Illinois senator from Kenya.

Then when he became POTUS, I began to see this stuff all over the internet, that he is really US born, and all the previous books and stories were just mis-prints or misunderstandings...

Should I believe this thing I heard all over the internet?

# 370



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xtrozero

My daughter, born on American soil, to me, an American citizen, received a scholarship based on the fact that her father was a refugee from Columbia. That fact has no effect on my daughter's American citizenship.


You are absolutely correct. Your daughter is an American Citizen.

As to whether or not she would be considered "naturally born" may be another question, however.

There *is* a difference, otherwise, it would not have been specified in the Constitution, set apart from American Citizenship, as it was.

People argue, repeatedly, that there is no difference. I simply ask, if there is no difference, then why set it apart as a separate portion of the Constitution? Even though it was not defined, the *intent* is understood, and has been written about many, many times.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Libertygal
Sorry but I am not wrong as it states in your first link the constitution does not define what a natural born citizen is so your second link is a load of BS. Besides his father after he married his mother became a citizen of America. That happens when a person marries an American citizen. Funny how the birthers forget this little fact. Also do a little fact checking The book your second article refers to has nothing to do with Article I, Section 8, #10 of the Constitution. This is what it means.
Define and Punish Clause


When the Define and Punish Clause was being drafted, James Wilson expressed concern about the implications of Congress's power to "define" the law of nations: "To pretend to define the law of nations which depended on the authority of all the Civilized Nations of the World, would have the look of arrogance, that would make us look ridiculous." Gouverneur Morris responded: "The word define is proper when applied to offenses in this case; the law of (nations) being often too vague and deficient to be a rule." (In contrast to piracy, Justice Story wrote in United States v. Smith, "Offences, too, against the law of nations, cannot, with any accuracy, be said to be completely ascertained and defined in any public code recognized by the common consent of nations."

When it said law of nations it wasn't referring to a book but rather the laws of other nations. I would lean towards believing a law professor than I would a person actually stupid enough to say Orly Taitz is right.







 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join