Obama's Motion to Dismiss Berg's lawsuit denied!?

reply to post by Aggie Man

---

What you say is true. Senator Obama does have to be BORN on U.S. soil or soverign place to be POTUS. I understand his not wanting to play into the BS by giving the lawsuit credence, but why, oh why, won't he just give up the longform?

ahhhhhh. It probably doesn't matter. I imagine we'll still be asking these questions election day.

reply to post by argentus

---

Show me the Article that states he must be born in the US. I know for a fact what I say is true.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're going to be involved in government in the United States, citizenship is a must. To be a Senator or Representative, you must be a citizen of the United States. To be President, not only must you be a citizen, but you must also be natural-born. Aside from participation in government, citizenship is an honor bestowed upon people by the citizenry of the United States when a non-citizen passes the required tests and submits to an oath.

Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

* Anyone born inside the United States
* Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
* Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
* Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
* Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
* A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

www.usconstitution.net...

[edit on 23-10-2008 by Aggie Man]

However, when Obama was a young boy he went to live with his father in Indonesia and even if he was born on U.S. territory, in order to attend school in Indonesia at that time you were required to be an Indonesian citizen. His father adopted him so he would qualify for Indonesian citizenship. He became an Indonesian citizen and held dual citizenship to both United States and Indonesia. Though here lies the problem. The U.S. allowed dual citizenship but Indonesia didn't. He was required to RENOUNCE his U.S. citizenship at the time he became an Indonesian citizen.

At the time of his return to the United States he was an Indonesian citizen.
Even if he applied for legal residency which there is no record of he is not eligible to run for President. He very well may be an illegal alien

This is the law suit in a nut shell. Barrack Obama is not a U.S. citizen even if he says he was born here.

reply to post by paxnatus

---

A MINOR CANNOT RENOUNCE THEIR CITIZENSHIP NOR CAN THEIR PARENTS DO IT ON THEIR BEHALF.

Jesus freaking Christ, do you people even read the Constitution, US Codes, etc.

You are beating a dead horse here

reply to post by Aggie Man

---

Here's Bergs explanation as well as the points made in the suit. Prooif is needed here. Concrete proof and if this where McCain the media would be pounding down any door in their way to expose this. Oh. and by the way. parents do have the right to sign agreements to exculp citizenship for minor children.
sayanythingblog.com...
forgot the link!
Zindo

[edit on 10/24/2008 by ZindoDoone]

Ummm, no they don't. Prove it. Show me where in the Constitution, Articles, Amendments or the US Code it says that.

This is the blind leading the blind. Don't like Obama, Just jump on the bandwagon with the crazies and do no research on your own.

If his citizenship were in question they by DUE PROCESS this bogus Berg case would have already been heard and a judgment made.

I think it was all planned from the beginning... either he becomes President and that would open the door for Arnold... a real Nazi...
or If it doesnt fly then Hillary would be by default the DNC's next choice...
I say screw them all.... I am voting for the right man for the job... RON PAUL... Dennis K. and that Baldwin dude... any ole American will do... but not Hillary... too much Clinton Bush crap.... I say lets write in RON PAUL we know thats a safe choice... the man has his head screwed on right... but if he takes office... we need to replace the SS and the CIA.... they have a way of dealing with honest Americans.... and this has to end...

reply to post by Aggie Man

---

Then why is it that the Obama camp keeps trying to delay the proceedings instead of producing the documents (the vault copy) ? Its them that keep introducing delay tactics instead of compluying with the judges order!

Under SEC. 349. [8 U.S.C. 1481] a parent may institute a declaration of renouncement for minor children unless the child is over the age of 14. At the age of 14, the child must declare before a diplomatic council of the US that they wish to renounce citizenship. I believe Obama was under the age of 14 at the time of his residence in Indonesia. As he was adopted by Mr. Sotero, he and his mother had the right to renounce his citizenship to allow him to attend school under the laws of Indonesia!

Zindo

reply to post by ZindoDoone

---

Then, why, as an illegal alien, was he allowed back in the US with his mother if he was not a citizen? Why was he given a social security number and allowed to serve on the US Senate? Perhaps his mother/adopted father renounced his US citizenship to Indonesia, but where is the renouncement document sent to the US to let the US government know his mother was renouncing his citizenship? I would call that a coerced renouncement at best, as the poor child had to get an education. I still say he was born on US soil and it will be proven...Hell, I don't care if he was African, spoke in clicks and grunts, and had a bone through his nose....he is a better choice than McCain.

reply to post by ZindoDoone

---

Please provide a link for your US code quoted above, as I do not find it anywhere. Here is the REAL VERSION (for anyone who cares):

§ 1481. Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if
(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or
(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or
(4)
(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or
(B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or
(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or
(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.
(b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this chapter or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.

www.law.cornell.edu...

[edit on 24-10-2008 by Aggie Man]

reply to post by Aggie Man

---

Try section 8. You only posted to section 7. Also under the revision of 1996, which in Obamas case, comes before that date, there is no provision for those renouncing previous to that date, only after. Look it up yourself, I ain't doin your research!
And that Sir, is what this suit is all about, isn't it? I realy don't care one way or the other if he's elected as a legal citizen. I'm interested in how he got where he is and the powers behind his rise to messiah status. Guess only time will tell! The suit is NOT going away, regardless of the stall tactics of those fighting Berg. He will take it to the limit I assure you!


Zindo

[edit on 10/24/2008 by ZindoDoone]

reply to post by ZindoDoone

---

How about you post a link to waht you are quoting, per ATS rules. I still dont see where you got that rubbish.

reply to post by Aggie Man

---

This is why he cannot be president, and it doesn't matter how many names you call us or how stupid you think we are, the fact is Obama cannot and should not be running.



have a nice day. Can't wait for the impeachement!

[edit on 24-10-2008 by deathhasnosound]

Again, prove it! No wait! That's not a requirement. Where do you guys come up with this crap? See my post above that list requirements for citizenship. None of that rubbish is true!

Besides, I can't wait to see him pardon himself. Whatcha gonna do? Huh? Huh?

[edit on 24-10-2008 by Aggie Man]

why do you think he is in hawaii? to see his grandmama?

the truth will come out.

reply to post by deathhasnosound

---

I like how ALL of you CAN NOT QUOTE and PROVIDE A LINK to anything. Where do you get your information? Off a Cracker Jack box?

reply to post by Aggie Man

---

link:
wnd.com...

reply to post by deathhasnosound

---

Thank you! I read it and what yopu quoted is indeed in the article; however, the paragraph only mentions the "law on the books", but does not state which law it is. All I can say to that is the US Code TRUMPS any other laws. I have provided the US code FOR Citizenship and DENOUNCING citizenship. Based upon the US Code (THE LAW OF THE LAND), Obama is a Legal Citizen any way you slice it.

Good Day!

[edit on 24-10-2008 by Aggie Man]

My gosh!!! Calm down!!!! I don't know who renounced Obama's citizenship, but someone DID!!! He attended
An Idonesian elementary school there is documented proof of that. In order for him to have done that he had to be a CITIZEN of INDONESIA. Indonesia did NOT allow DUAL citizenship. Therefore he COULD NOT claim citizenship of another country ! Be it Africa or United States!!!! NO a 6 year old child didn't speak up for himself but SOMEONE DID.
Now, if that didn't happen then HIS FAMILY found some way
Around INDONESIAN LAW!

Wait a minute I know. They looked into Obama's future and said " this boy will one day be President of the United States! Give him a free pass!
He will be the one to bring about great CHANGE by enforcing SHARIA LAW on those corrupt, stupid Americans"

" He will be the MESSIAH of the world"

Yeah right!!! LoL!!

On the issue of law Professor Obama and his sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution. For a governor to release such a press statement on the state governor website, is significant.

State of Missouri-Governer's Press Announcements-2008

Gov. Blunt Statement on Obama Campaign’s Abusive Use of Missouri Law Enforcement

governor.mo.gov...

"JEFFERSON CITY - Gov. Matt Blunt today issued the following statement on news reports that have exposed plans by U.S. Senator Barack Obama to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics.

“St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.

“What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.

The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate,......

Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.”

Free speech for Obama, but not for you? hmmmm......?