what was the final ruling in court for obama being born outside US territory?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
listen i know this is controversial, i just need to know ,

yesterday was his last day to produce evidence of being born on US soil right? he had since august...

if he wasn't hiding anything i want to know, anyone know?

**i don't want anyones opinion of whatever, i just want news articles and cites to judge rulings on this matter**

the case should be closed by now, all he had to do was show some papers that every us citizen has




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by indigothefish
 


It was not the last day. The judge still has not signed off on Bergs filing. The lawsuit is at a stand-still now.

Since the judge did not sign the order, Obama is under no legal obligation to show any paperwork to anyone.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Threre are now, 3 different lawsuits addressing this issue..
I an others posted links somewhere in this topic already discussing it..
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by MissysWorld
 


There are only 2.

The Berg case where a voter attached his application and motion to Berg's existing case, and the case in Washington state which was filed by a citizen.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
seriously this court case is joke.....

We all know full well that Obama was born in the US, the only people making a fuss about his birth certificate are die-hard anti-Obamanians.. hardly the kind of people you'd take serious in this matter.

This courtcase was going to be a nail in a back from the rightwing (the person whos filing this is obviously a plant). The original plan here was to leave this court case long enough to convert some voters to the right and leave some questions even with its pending failiure when Obama cert will be found authentic, though the right didnt count of the lack interest in this court case and obviously nobody was going take this seriously.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Look, I don't want this to come off the wrong way. But this man is running for the Presidency of the United States of America. And he's doing damn good at it too. I'm sure if there was something he was hiding that could get him kicked off the ticket, it would had already been found out by now. You better beleive the C.I.A/N.S.A or who have you, has already backround checked every living second of his life.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Look, I don't want this to come off the wrong way. But this man is running for the Presidency of the United States of America. And he's doing damn good at it too. I'm sure if there was something he was hiding that could get him kicked off the ticket, it would had already been found out by now. You better beleive the C.I.A/N.S.A or who have you, has already backround checked every living second of his life.


Exacally, I read an article yesterday that said there was no doubt about it. He has an American birth certificate from Hawaii. I saw a picture of it too...raised seal and all.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 02:57 PM
link   
I have seen people discussing this and I am still very confused. Answer this for me:

If my mom, an American from Ohio, travels to China and has my little brother or sister, are they not American!?!

Well, they are.

I hear his family witnessed his birth in Kenya or whatever then the mother brought him to Hawaii to register him. Well ya, thats what any citizen would do....

So correct me if any of the above is wrong, but doesn't that all make sense? He is a citizen...



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I am curious about this too. I have seen the documentation and the aguement supplied to the court and the alterered and false birth record from Hawaii, should be a emothional release likde never before if he can not run. And since he has dual citizenship he should be disqualified just for that. Can't be seriously ingaged in a dupute with the country he has a citizenship in. So, I find this to be interesting, since the court case is REAL, and the documentation for his inocents has not been proven either way.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Why haven't the court cases been dismissed?

Due process isn't a matter of convenience.

I have no problem that he was born in the U.S., but why can't he just provide the material and be done with it?

As far as being revealed by now if he wasn't - that's just not true.

How long did it take to reveal the Bush Family fortune came from investing in Nazi Germany? How long was it virtually unknown that McCaine's antics on the USS Forrestal were no doubt criminally reckless? Why do people still seem blissfully unaware that McCain's dad participated in the whitewashing of the USS Liberty incident?

I don't trust any of them. I want to see a court ruling clearing this case. Not some Obama supporters claiming it's all fake and 'that's that!'



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by vapedson
 


Not according to the laws that were in place at the time he was born.




Prior to 14 November 1986, the physical presence requirement in this case was ten years (instead of five) -- including five years (instead of two) spent after the parent's 14th birthday. The requirement was reduced in 1986, but the change did not retroactively make US citizenship available to people born previously who did not meet the old requirement. (Congress's intent not to make this change retroactive was affirmed in 1988 with the passage of Public Law 100-525, § 8(d), 102 Stat. 2619).

Source


The controversy (if there is one) about Obama being born overseas (if he was) is based on his mother's age; she was 18 when she had him, hence the conditions of the law for natural born citizenship status at the time of Obama's birth were not met (if in fact, he was born overseas).

And, this is all a big ''if''.....but I still think he should just produce the documentation. If there is nothing to hide, why not?


[edit on 10/16/2008 by skeptic1]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by vapedson
 


The major point in the case comes down to the requirements to become president. To qualify for presidency, one must be a natural born citizen, which means they must be born on US soil (which would be anywhere inside of the US or any US owned territory, i.e. military bases in foreign countries, etc...). If he was, in fact, born in Kenya, this would disqualify him for presidency. That is what this case is mostly based on.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
yes.. they found a loophole.. this 'issue' should have NEVER came up in the first place...

someone behind the scenes are manipulating the race.. IMO..



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
but why can't he just provide the material and be done with it?'


Good question. He leaked a 'certificate of birth', that may or may not be fake, through the left wing mouthpiece - Daily Kos.

If Obama would just release his original certificate then all this would go away. Kinda makes ya' wonder what he's hiding. (add it to the list)



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 09:50 AM
link   
I really don't get this. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. If one claims that Obama is not eligible for POTUS, then they should have documentation to prove it. Where are the documents? Where are the pictures? Show me something as opposed to suggesting that there is a coverup of immense proportions not only at the state and federal level, but internationally as well. Why didn't Hillary knock him out early on? Why do top investors (Buffet/Soros)risk their reputations by advising and associating with him? Why hasn't McCain wrapped up this election with such information? I just can't see Obama's financial and political backers being so negligent as to miss something of such obvious magnitude.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ORIPEIA
I really don't get this. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. If one claims that Obama is not eligible for POTUS, then they should have documentation to prove it. Where are the documents? Where are the pictures? Show me something as opposed to suggesting that there is a coverup of immense proportions not only at the state and federal level, but internationally as well. Why didn't Hillary knock him out early on? Why do top investors (Buffet/Soros)risk their reputations by advising and associating with him? Why hasn't McCain wrapped up this election with such information? I just can't see Obama's financial and political backers being so negligent as to miss something of such obvious magnitude.


He is not accused of anything. There are forms of due process that are all part and parcel with the privilege of running for the Executive Office. No one is asking for blood, or a pulled tooth. Just a simple document.

And as for the rest of your comment; these people don't feel alive unless they are 'getting away with' something. That's the reason the rules are in place.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Obama taught Constitutional law, he knows damn well whether or not he is a natural born citizen. He also knows that every American citizen has a "right" to know. Clearly, by denying us our right to know, he is ignoring the very Constitution he is sworn to protect. Does he have the right to deny us the freedom to verify his eligability for President of the United States of America?

To me, none of this should even be considered in the light of an "attack" issue at all. He should be happy to do it! He's in the running to be our most important "public servant".



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
can someone please explain to me why the birth certificate thats on his website is invalid?

It's up there for the world to see, he's not hiding diddly squat.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Telafree
 


While, there are people claiming that the Certificate is a forgery, I want to make it clear that I am not in that "camp" before I explain.

Hawaii, at least in the 1960's, allowed for an out of country (USA) birth to be REGISTERED in the state. Once registered with the state, a CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH would be issued.

Only the vault or long version of a Hawaiian birth certificate has the name of the hospital and the signature of the delivery doctor.

If a birth from out of the country was registered, there is no vault or long version of a birth certificate, but there is the application with the information about what country, the child was born in.

This is why the request for the vault or long version is before the courts.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Telafree
 


I can tell you my questions about the one listed on his anti-smear site. It does not include the back and without the back it would not be accepted as legal proof. The back contains such things as foot prints, a doctor's signature as a live birth.

In addition, in order for it to be a form of complete identity any certificates of name change or adoption legally filed must also be included. He's had name changes, where are they? He should also have proof of citizenship.

What he has provided would not even get him into Canada to cross the border.

Other possible points of interest others have mentioned, but I have not verified are:

This copy was issued in 2007. Some who have examinined the posted copy have suggested it was forged. Factcheck.org is owned by Annenberg the board that Obama and Ayers sat on together. Factcheck supposedly examined the certificate and verified it's authenticity.





top topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join