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.

 

Proof of a DNC Conspiracy to Elect an Ineligible Obama

page: 10
137
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 06:33 PM
link   
I did not read this whole thread so someone else may have already pointed this out:

IMO the reason the two documents are different is because one is a federally filed document and the other is for all the States.

The criteria for each state may be different and most likely does not require the reference to the constitution as all states have their own laws.

I'm sure they filed these exactly as they were supposed to. Give me a break. The people filing papers for the President are going to make a mistake? I don't think so.




posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don't Lie. In an amazing article, blogger JB Williams ...


I stopped taking this seriously at blogger. The forms that are "proof" can probably be downloaded very easily off of whatever gov't site they were obtained. Signatures of politicians are also very easy to find online as well. It isn't hard to fake a form. If I had an original to look at I could recreate it with the right assets in photoshop in under 5 minutes.

Not to mention the source is a blog called right side news, hardly bipartisan. The right have been making up fairy tales ever since Barack Obama became a serious candidate for presidency.

It's called mourning and the first stage of mourning is denial.

The republicans / neo-cons / negative elite are mourning the demise of their powerstructure and are coming up with nonsensical stories to feed to the public via Faux News as a last ditch attempt to spread paranoia and fear.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by antithesis.
 





I stopped taking this seriously at blogger. The forms that are "proof" can probably be downloaded very easily off of whatever gov't site they were obtained. Signatures of politicians are also very easy to find online as well. It isn't hard to fake a form. If I had an original to look at I could recreate it with the right assets in photoshop in under 5 minutes.


Well, you need to read the whole thread, my friend, as we are, as a group, getting the original documents from each state. And guess what????



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
I was going to stay out of this, for personal reasons.

I just have to say, I've really appreciated and enjoyed the manner (for the most part) in which the debate in this thread has gone. BH, TA, IAOH and others are presenting evidence and logical arguments in the true spirit of an ATS debate -- without rancor or insults, and with the occasional nod to their opponents points.

This has been a truly refreshing read for me, particularly in light of how many of the other "challenge to President Obama's birthplace" threads have degraded into slurs and insults.

Big time kudos from me (for whatever that's worth or not) to those that have stayed on topic and have sought out evidence and truths, regardless of where they lead. This is the kind of work and exchange that drew me to ATS in the first place.

Thank you all



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
How is Obama a natural born citizen?

He was born a duel citizen, not a natural born citizen.

At birth his father was a citizen of Kenya which was a British Colony.

A natural born citizen has two parents who are American citizens at the time of birth.

This is why the Founders had to grandfather themselves into the Constitution so they could be eligable to become President.

The Constitution says:


No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.


The Founders said a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. This is because some of them were dual citizens and this allowed them to be President.

The Founders wanted natural born citizens to be President not dual citizens. Obama was a dual citizen at birth who probably used the name Barry Soetoro to get into Occidental College as a foreign student as well as travel to Pakistan.

Obama is cleary not eligible to be President because he was born a duel citizen and not a natural born citizen.

The term natural born citizen has to do with natural law. The Founders didn't want a President with duel allegiance.

This is from Fact check one of the Democrats favorite websites.

Q: Does Barack Obama have Kenyan citizenship?

A: No. He held both U.S. and Kenyan citizenship as a child, but lost his Kenyan citizenship automatically on his 23rd birthday.

This means Obama was born a duel citizen and not a natural born citizen.

Obama held both as a child, this means he was born a duel citizen.

Good article.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by liveandlearn
 


Here's the pdf file I've uploaded to ATS media as "2008 Certification."

This is exactly what the IN Election Commission sent me.
(Note, this one has a signature line for the State Democratic Chairman.)


Seeing is believing. Will add the others (TX and 2004) as they arrive.

jw

[edit on 12-9-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


By right of Jus Soli Obama is a natural born American citizen. The framers of the constitution did not want people that weren't born on American soil presidents because they may not have loyalty to this country.
 


As of yet I have not found a single law that says that the DNC had to put in that line to every single form they submitted to each and every state. I wonder if when you request these forms do you ask if they require that line to be on the form?

That is the question I guess that is at the heart of this debate..

"and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."

Is the above quote required by law in each state? And what is that law? Which statute is it?



[edit on 9/12/2009 by whatukno]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Nope, the founders didn't want duel citizens to be President.

This is why they grandfathered themselves into the Constitution. They were not natural born citizens so they said:


No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President


A natural born citizen is a person who's parents are both United State citizens at birth.

Obama might be a citizen and he might be native born but he was born a duel citizens and not a natural born citizen.

The Founders were big on natural law and they knew a child would naturally take on the citizenship of his father at birth.

So Obama was born a duel citizen and not a natural born citizen.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wormwood Squirm
IMO the reason the two documents are different is because one is a federally filed document and the other is for all the States.


This makes sense. The original source assumes that having 2 different documents naturally means that one is "fake" or a fraud or means something is afoot. That isn't necessarily true at all.

It may turn out that Hawaii is the only one with the Constitutional Language because it's the only one that requires it, seeing as that's his birth state.


Originally posted by whatukno
As of yet I have not found a single law that says that the DNC had to put in that line to every single form they submitted to each and every state.


A distinct possibility. The one jdub297 posted has a different Nancy signature than we've seen before - plus another line for a signature. I am beginning to think that each state might have its own requirements, but only one must contain the Constitutional language - for the state of birth.

I'm a little embarrassed not to have thought of this myself


I hope to get New Mexico's Monday, but I expect to see no Constitutional Language on it. I asked for 2004, too.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Could we please not have that discussion in this thread? This is about this particular document and I'd hate to see the information we're discussing get lost in pages and pages of what we all know has been discussed to death in other threads? Please? I'm just asking.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


This is talking about the document.

The reason Pelosi and the DNC did this is because Obama CAN'T BE a natural born citizen.

He can be a citizen and a native born citizen but there's no way that he can be a natural born citizen because his father was Kenyan at birth and Kenya was a British Colony.

There's a reason why these documents would be doctored and why everything about Obama is sealed.

Obama has been a citizen of America, Indonesia, Kenya and Britain and this is an obvious fact.

[edit on 12-9-2009 by Matrix Rising]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
How is Obama a natural born citizen?

He was born a duel citizen, not a natural born citizen.


There is nothing in the constitution that specifically addresses dual citizenship, neither does it state disqualification for US born citizens by merely inheriting citizenship from other nations. As US law also does not recognize Kenyan foreign laws and Kenya does not recognize dual citizenship for adults your argument falls apart right there.

There is nothing in the constitution that disqualifies natural born citizenship in regards to inheriting citizenship from other nations when born on US soil, no such statement.

Heres the constitution for you:
www.law.cornell.edu...
put the constitution where your mouth is.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Yes, the Constitution addresses dual citizenship and the Founders did not want those with dual citizenship to be President.

You need to read the Constitution. It says:


No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.


The statement, "or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution" is a clear statement.

At the time, none of the Founders could be President because they were not natural born citizens.

This means both parents born in the United States.

The Founders had to grandfather themselves in because they were not natural born citizens.

Obama was a duel citizen at birth. A citizen of Kenya and a British subject.

He then took on Indonesia citizenship as Barry Soetoro. He just dropped this name and started calling himself Barack Obama because Barry Soetorop would have to become a naturalized citizen.

Obama is not a natural born citizen because he had duel citizenship at birth.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Do you have any legal precedent to back up your assertions?
Or are you just another amateur lawyer?


[edit on 12-9-2009 by OldDragger]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
Yes, the Constitution addresses dual citizenship and the Founders did not want those with dual citizenship to be President.

You need to read the Constitution. It says:


No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.


It doesnt mention anything regarding dual citizenship Matrix. I dont want your personal assuptions of what you think they ment, I want a direct reference from consitution regarding dual citizenship.


This means


This is your personal understanding.


both parents born in the United States.


Lie. The only part in the constitution where it mentions both parents is when addressing children born overseas. It does not state any thing regarding US born citizens, so, if your going to go on with me again about both parents put the constitution where your mouth is and reference it directly out of it.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


I'm just stating the Constitution.

The Founders had to make themselves eligible to be President because they were not Natural Born Citizens.

This is why they said this:


No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.


If they didn't add citizen of the United States at the adoption of the Constitution then none of them could be President because they were not natural born citizens.

Unless Barack Obama was a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution he's not eligible to be President because he was born with duel citizenship.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


It's not an assumption, it's a fact.

Do you know what natural law means?

The Founders had to grandfather themselves into the Constitution because they were not natural born citizens of the United States.

Natural law gives a child the citizenship of his father at birth. Obama CANNOT BE a natural born citizen just like the Founders were not natural born citizens.

The Founders did not want a person being President who had allegiance to another country. This is why they didn't say natural born citizens or any citizens. They said citizens at the adoption of the Constitution so they could become President. They wanted future Presidents to be natural born citizens. This term has to do with natural law. Naturally a child will be born with the citizenship of his parents. Barack Obama Sr. was a citizen of Kenys and a British subject and so was Barack the son at birth.

[edit on 12-9-2009 by Matrix Rising]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Unfortunately you are making stuff up and you are confusing your interpretation with the law of the land


In 1964, the Supreme Court seemed to say, without deciding, that "natural born" meant born inside the United States. In an opinion on an unrelated issue, the court observed, "The rights of citizenship of the native born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the 'natural born' citizen is eligible to be President." But that language is not legally binding, and the Supreme Court has never ruled on what "natural born" means.

source: www.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
It's not an assumption, it's a fact.


If its fact and not your assumption why can you not pull it out of the constitution?

Heres the constitution for you:
www.law.cornell.edu...

Here, I'll make it easy for you. "All children born on US soil to two US parents are natural born citizens". Find that statement in constitution then it will be fact.

The comment of "two parents" was added as an ammendment to the constitution in 1790 to address children born abroad, and that was all it was added to. The ammendment did not apply to children born on US soil and it never stated so in the constitution, something you continue to ignore. The mere fact they added "both parents" only to the case of children born abroad is evidence enough.

Now, where does it say both parents in the case of US born citizens? The constitution is above there, go to the link and reference it for me. I dont want your half assed reply about it "being fact", I want it taken directly from the constitution, so where does it say so?


Natural law gives a child the citizenship of his father at birth.


That law does not apply to children born on US soil. Get that law out of constitution to prove your point.


The Founders did not want a person being President who had allegiance to another country.


Lie. There is no such statement in the constitution, and Obama does not claim allegiance to any country other than the U.S. Kenya does not allow dual citizenship to adults.

So please, the next time you reply, reference the constitution otherwise I have nothing more to debate you on.

[edit on 12-9-2009 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
As much as I would like to stand up and say with certainty that Obama is not a US citizen I cannot do that.

After the post referring to Jus Soli, I have done some research and it is very confusing, I suspect even for those well versed in constitutional law.

Sorry this is wikipedia, but it gives the best rundown of my research without doing an excess of links that will likely not be followed.

For those who are truly interested in this subject and getting to the truth.
Jus Soli from Wikipedia

edit for spelling

[edit on 12-9-2009 by liveandlearn]



new topics

top topics



 
137
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join