Birthers release forged Kenyan birth certificate for Obama, page 8

privacy

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 28 times

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:00 PM by Byteman

reply to post by xmotex

Then why did McCain only get vetted as Natural born due to BOTH of his parents being US citizens at the time of his birth, despite the fact that he was born out of country? (Senate Resolution 511)

If both of McCains parents had to be US citizens at the time of his birth for him to qualify to run for POTUS. The very same requirements must be applied to Obama.

Or did you miss the part of the US Constitution about equal protection?

Excerpt from website, commentary and text of Senate Resolution 511:
“Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen,” said Leahy. “I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate.”

“My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied.

From the Resolution itself:
Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.

leahy.senate.gov...

Notice how it is the plural citizenS. Indicating that BOTH parents must have been US citizens at the time of a persons birth to make that person a Natural Born citizen.

Senate resolution 511 isn't a "lie" as you put it. And Obama's fathers lack of a US citizenship is well documented.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:14 PM by Disinfo Agent

Originally posted by Byteman
From the Resolution itself:
Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.

leahy.senate.gov...

Notice how it is the plural citizenS. Indicating that BOTH parents must have been US citizens at the time of a persons birth to make that person a Natural Born citizen.

There's no indication that this is an exclusionary definition (the resolution does not say "this is the only way to be natural born citizen").

To put it another way, being born to two American citizens is sufficient, but not necessary, to be a natural born citizen.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:30 PM by xmotex

reply to post by Byteman

You are carefully cherry-picking quotes to support your creative interpretation of the law.

Yes, McCain is technically considered a natural-born citizen, because he was born to two American citizen parents, even though they were in another country at the time. That much is true.

However, notice nothing is said in what you quoted about a person born in this country, born to one parent who is a citizen and one who is not. In fact nothing is said about a person born to two non-citizens - who would actually also be a "born" citizen under US law.

Such a person is still considered a "natural born" as opposed to a "naturalized" citizen."

"Natural born" is a concept from English Common Law, meaning simply that a person was born within a given jurisdiction. Parentage was not even a consideration. This is precisely the legal conundrum that makes the "anchor baby" phenomenon such a difficult legal problem, BTW.

From here.

Birthright citizenship, as with much United States law, has its roots in English common law. Calvin’s Case, 77 Eng. Rep. 377 (1608), was particularly important as it established that under English common law “a person's status was vested at birth, and based upon place of birth--a person born within the king's dominion owed allegiance to the sovereign, and in turn, was entitled to the king's protection." This same principle was adopted by the newly formed United States, as stated by Supreme Court Justice Noah Haynes Swayne: "All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural- born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country…since as before the Revolution." United States v. Rhodes, 27 Fed. Cas. 785 (1866).

And perhaps you missed the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution, which states:

Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The Constitution recognizes only two classes of citizens: born and naturalized.

Obama was born here, to a US citizen.
He was never "naturalized", thus he is a "natural born" citizen.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:34 PM by Byteman

reply to post by Disinfo Agent

It still goes to equal protection. Everyone must be treated the same and held to the same standards.

Also, even though it's a moot issue as far as I am concerned. I still find it interesting that Mister Obama has not volunteered his original long-form birth certificate. It's not like someone could bring him harm from it's contents...it's only a Birth Certificate. Why hide it?

McCain produced his immediately.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:39 PM by Disinfo Agent

Originally posted by Byteman
Also, even though it's a moot issue as far as I am concerned. I still find it interesting that Mister Obama has not volunteered his original long-form birth certificate. It's not like someone could bring him harm from it's contents...it's only a Birth Certificate. Why hide it?

McCain produced his immediately.

I would guess it's because he doesn't have a copy himself, and the short form is what you get from the state of Hawaii when you request a birth certificate. For legal purposes a certified short form is equivalent to the original.

There's probably some politics involved too - watching the other party's base descend into conspiracy must be pretty satisfying for the Rahm Emmanuels of the world...

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:47 PM by xmotex

I agree with the idea that Obama may have declined to release it because the "birther" theories are useful in terms of making the opposition look dumb

I also suspect there is a bit of a giving of the finger in there, metaphorically - after he authorized the display of his COLB, the birthers claimed it was a forgery, and when that claim was disproven, they started demanding the long form - which Obama couldn't even get if he were an ordinary citizen and not President.

So at this point I suspect he kind of gets a laugh out of driving them nuts.

It might even get released, if they keep on going nuts, just to maximize the political damage when they fall on their faces.

That's my little "be careful what you wish for" theory

[edit on 8/4/09 by xmotex]

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:54 PM by SpacePunk

Originally posted by xmotex
reply to post by Byteman

The Constitution recognizes only two classes of citizens: born and naturalized.

Obama was born here, to a US citizen.
He was never "naturalized", thus he is a "natural born" citizen.

I was born in W. Germany to a US citizen, and have carried U.S. citizenship since birth. To listen to the birthers, I wouldn't be a 'natural born' citizen.

This whole thing is just an attempt by Taitz to redefine citizenship into a narrow view that fits her definition of 'natural born' in order to oust a president that doesn't support Israel in the way that Israel wants. She's sucked a bunch of followers into her guided delusion, and if she, her followers, and Israel has their way they will marginalize citizens that have held citizenship from birth but do not fit her narrow definition of 'natural born' as not being 'natural born'. The children of military men and women overseas, for instance. Granted that this might just be a way for her and her followers to get rid of the 'unwanted negro', but the redefinition of citizenship their way will only harm the country.

To put it bluntly, and untactful, Taitz and the birthers can kiss my butt. If they were honest they'd just come out and say that he is ineligible because he isn't a 'free white person'.

Neither Obama nor McCain are fit to be president, it's not a matter of their birth, it's a matter that they both are filthy career politicians, and will sell our country out to the highest bidder.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 08:59 PM by Byteman

reply to post by xmotex

Okay, since you want to make the place of his birth the issue.
Prove he was born in America.

The CLB is not proof, btw. Been proven a forgery already.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 09:10 PM by xmotex

Prove he was not born in the US

Hell, provide even a smidgen of believable evidence

There's not even any record that his mother ever left the US before 1967 - if she did so, she did so without a passport apparently.

The COLB, as Hawaii's official birth record, would constitute "proof" of his birthplace in any court in the United States, and you know it.

This entire debate is silly - which is why the "birthers" are seen as crazies, and are providing such tasty political fodder for the Democrats at the moment

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 09:11 PM by HunkaHunka

reply to post by Byteman

If you don't accept The State of Hawaii as proof, then we are on two different planets.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 09:53 PM by Animal

I don' think Obama is even from this planet.

You know, there is NO proof that he is NOT in fact an alien from zeta reticuli.

I challenge all you 'birther deniers' to prove me wrong.

PROVE to me he is NOT in fact an alien from another sphere.

You know you can't and therefor I am, as always, correct.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 10:41 PM by SevenThunders

The document is just another in an increasingly long line of fakes intended to prove Obama wasn't born in the U.S.

Actually the fakes started when the Obama campaign released a doctored birth certificate and then refused to release his long form. If that hadn't happened, then none of would be discussing this.

reply posted on 4-8-2009 @ 10:50 PM by Animal

Originally posted by SevenThunders
Actually the fakes started when the Obama campaign released a doctored birth certificate and then refused to release his long form. If that hadn't happened, then none of would be discussing this.

Really? The Obama administration released a FORGED or DOCTORED BC?

Proof please?

reply posted on 5-8-2009 @ 12:39 AM by Blue_Jay33

This is the ultimate slap in the face to the birthers that bought into this.

reply posted on 5-8-2009 @ 12:50 AM by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by SevenThunders

The document is just another in an increasingly long line of fakes intended to prove Obama wasn't born in the U.S.

Actually the fakes started when the Obama campaign released a doctored birth certificate and then refused to release his long form. If that hadn't happened, then none of would be discussing this.

This is a myth. Everything the Obama campaing has released has been verified by Hawaii...

what Obama's campaign released wasn't called a birth certificate; it's a certification of live birth. But there's no functional difference between the two: Ask Hawaii for your birth certificate, and you'll get the certification of live birth back.

"Our Certificate of Live Birth is the standard form, which was modeled after national standards that are acceptable by federal agencies and organizations," Okubo told the Honolulu Advertiser. "With that form, you can get your passport or your soccer registration or your driver's license."

reply posted on 5-8-2009 @ 01:06 AM by Lazyninja

Yeah that document is definitely fake, it says Barack Hussein Obama on it instead of Barry Soetoro.

reply posted on 5-8-2009 @ 02:20 AM by GingerR

Originally posted by Animal
I don' think Obama is even from this planet.

You know, there is NO proof that he is NOT in fact an alien from zeta reticuli.

I challenge all you 'birther deniers' to prove me wrong.

PROVE to me he is NOT in fact an alien from another sphere.

You know you can't and therefor I am, as always, correct.

Actually, I can prove he is an alien.

reply posted on 5-8-2009 @ 08:33 AM by Angus123

To all the folks trying to talk some sense into the birthers and use logic and facts to open their eyes....

You're wasting your time. It doesn't matter what the facts are, or what the laws are.
They hate him. Period. They want him run out of the Whitehouse. Period.

And after having read this entire thread I can tell you that your efforts will be about as successful as me trying to teach my cat how to play Yahtzee.

There are some things a limited intellect simply cannot fathom, especially when they go through life guided only by instinct and emotion, as those are the only assets they have to draw from.

reply posted on 5-8-2009 @ 08:44 AM by micpsi

Why the Australian and Kenyan birth certificates have similar formats:

216.221.102.26...(albeit-the-Seal-Deputy-Registrar-and-Commonwealth-Sym bol).aspx

The birth forms come from the British Registrar General for any nations using English Common Law and this Birth Registration Act (see section 25 of this Act).

I quote:

"Registers of live–births, still–births and deaths shall be in such form as may be respectively prescribed, and the Registrar General shall provide any such registers, and any of the forms hereafter mentioned for making certified copies of entries in registers, which may be required for the purposes of this Act"
www.opsi.gov.uk...-pb1-l1g29

That's why they are similar. Not because one was forged from the other but because the birth certificates for BOTH countries were supplied by the Registrar General of Great Britain.

Being ignorant of such matters is no excuse on a forum like this, which expects higher standards of research than knee-jerk reactions.

reply posted on 5-8-2009 @ 10:23 AM by HunkaHunka

reply to post by micpsi

You still haven't stated why they are identical in areas where they should be unique.