US State Dept Confirms: Obama “NOT” a US Citizen Prior to & in 1968; UPDATE: Important historica

page: 1
52
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+25 more 
posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com...


Not that our elected officials who refused to do their job in the fall of 2008 before the election and everyday since then will do anything, but these official documents from Obama’s mothers passport files are proof positive that Obama was ”NOT” a US citizen prior to & in 1968. Even after an order from a federal judge, the US State Dept is still withholding all of Stanley Ann Dunham’s passport records prior to this 1968 renewal she submitted at the Jakarta, Indonesia consular’s office. So the question begs to be answered…

Where is the affidavit of Obama’s foreign citiznship that was submitted with this application & when did Obama or his mother formally renounce this foreign citizenship that has now been verified by the US State Dept? Where are those records?


Thanks to ATS member Stormdancer777 for sending me this in PM. I dunno what you all did to piss em off, but you did.

Anyway, it appears this critical document has slipped through Obama's cracks. Bring on the flames, the claims of forgery, and what have you.



I decided to host the image here, for archiving sakes, but it is also at link.




posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Also, important- Related discussion and comments are ensuing here:

www.freerepublic.com...



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Oh you birthers.

Just thought I would get that out of the way.

Now any follow up need not state that again.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Seems like no portion of the statement was struck out, therefor the application confirms Obama's mother was still a US Citizen in 1968.

His name was struck out but that's not what the text demands.

Obama would have been 6 - 7 years old, too young to have gained any other nationality.



edit on 9/27/2010 by mythatsabigprobe because: added line about his age.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   


Here is a link to my thread from two years ago.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is one of my comments...


Do you think Barack Obama is that guy
who has secretly been alive for thousands of years
guiding the course of western culture all this time and now
he has finally found a generation that is worth leading personally?


Confusion about his birth certificate only makes sense.
He would have adopt a new identity every so often.
But that in no way denies him American
citizenship, hell he may have helped
found this country from France.

Crazy I know.


David Grouchy



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Can you tell us what this is about? I cannot read that small print. What are we seeing here? Can you explain?


+5 more 
posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I think Obama's citizenship is the least of our worries, as it wouldn't really matter much anyway. Even if we had absolute proof, it wouldn't matter. The power no longer lies with the people, as it is completely out of our control. If TPTB want Obama to be the President puppet, then he is going to retain that title and there isn't much we can do about. Even if we did get Obama out of office, we would just get someone equally as bad in his place.

Anyway, S&F for the find.


--airspoon

edit on 27-9-2010 by airspoon because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Can you tell us what this is about? I cannot read that small print. What are we seeing here? Can you explain?


Where is the affidavit of Obama’s foreign citiznship that was submitted with this application & when did Obama or his mother formally renounce this foreign citizenship that has now been verified by the US State Dept? Where are those records?



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Did the US State Dept. confirm this, or did an independent researcher find evidence and confirm this?

edit on 27-9-2010 by xiphias because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by xiphias
Did the US State Dept. confirm this, or did an independent researcher find evidence and confirm this?


Umm, the document kind of speaks for itself, doesn't it? And the pertinent, unanswered questions I reiterated above in bold seal the deal.

We know he's covered up so many other records, but here is a loose cannon that made it through the mess. He's busted.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Obama would have been 6 - 7 years old, too young to have gained any other nationality.
edit on 9/27/2010 by mythatsabigprobe because: added line about his age.



Nope, not too young. That is, not if he was adopted by his step-father.


+1 more 
posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Where is the affidavit of Obama’s foreign citiznship that was submitted with this application & when did Obama or his mother formally renounce this foreign citizenship that has now been verified by the US State Dept? Where are those records?


What makes you think that exists???

What I see is a form. Basically, Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro signed a statement saying that she had never been a citizen of a foreign state, never been naturalized as a citizen of a foreign state, taken an oath of allegiance to a foreign state, or served in the armed forces or voted in or been convicted of a crime in a foreign state, etc.

If any of the above mentioned ACTS HAVE been performed by anyone on this paper, cross it out above and explain.

That means, if someone on this application HAS served in the armed forces of a foreign state, cross out the above bolded words and explain on another sheet of paper, which will be attached to this one.

Now, where do you get the idea that an affidavit of Obama's foreign citizenship exists?

The instructions don't call for anyone's NAME to be struck out. It calls for ACTS or CONDITIONS to be struck out if they don't apply.


edit on 9/27/2010 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Umm, the document kind of speaks for itself, doesn't it?


No, It doesn't. Why don't you tell us what you think it says and why?


Originally posted by SourGrapes
Nope, not too young. That is, not if he was adopted by his step-father.


Please see this post. It doesn't matter if he became a citizen of Indonesia. He didn't renounce his US citizenship.

US Citizenship Law



A person wishing to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship must voluntarily and with intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship:

1. appear in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer,
2. in a foreign country (normally at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate); and
3. sign an oath of renunciation
...
Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
BH, I could be wrong, but the way I am reading this, the document calls for anyone who has been naturalized to a foreign country- for that information to be blocked out. And then it shows Barack Hussein Obama's name blocked out on the second page. Meaning that he renounced his citizenship. And so the questions in bold now apply.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
BH, I could be wrong, but the way I am reading this, the document calls for anyone who has been naturalized to a foreign country- for that information to be blocked out. And then it shows Barack Hussein Obama's name blocked out on the second page. Meaning that he renounced his citizenship. And so the questions in bold now apply.


You are reading it wrong if that's what you got. I explained it earlier. If you slow down and read what it says without preconceptions (I know that's hard since wordpress wants you to think something else) you'll see what it actually says and how people have gone guano crazy over absolutely NOTHING.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Here's another comment I think you might want to address:


1939, Perkins v. Elg clearly lays out the scenario of repatriating ones self or for the parents to do so. The fact is, Obama’s mother renounced his US citizenship or he either never had it. Only the passport files of Dunham prior to 1968 will be all telling as to this.

Obama is supposedly a constitutional scholar & lawyer. A lawyer of the “LAW”. There is a reason everything prior to 1968 is being withheld.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Here is the text on the document that she signed:



I have not (and no other person included or to be included in the passport or documentation has), since acquiring United States citizenship, been naturalized as a citizen of a foreign state; taken an oath or made an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state; entered or served in the armed forces of a foreign states; accepted or performed the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or political subdivision thereof; voted in a political election in a foreign state...

(If any of the above-mentioned acts or conditions have been performed by or apply to the applicant, or to any person included in the passport or documentation, the portion which applies should be struck out, and a supplementary explanatory statement under oath (or affirmation) by the person to whom the portion is applicable should be attached and made a part of this application.)


If "any of the above-mentioned acts or conditions had been performed by or apply to the applicant" or any person included, then Stanley couldn't truthfully sign it. So, the passport office provides the option to strike out anything in that first paragraph that applies to the applicant (say they once voted in a foreign state) so they can cross that part out and then sign an ACCURATE statement. The instructions are for the applicant to strike out the portion of "the above-mentioned acts or conditions" that do apply, redacting those portions of the oath, so that the applicant can then sign an edited and accurate oath.

You'll notice that NOTHING is crossed out.

Why Obama's name is crossed out on the next page, I have no idea. It could have been easily done by birthers to confuse the people.

You're smarter than this, TA.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


That's based on the false, and probably intentional, misreading of the passport document. I will not address it.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Hello my friend TrueAmerican, I just read this: Dem Whip: GOP majority will issue birther subpoenas.
At : thehill.com...
Basically Stateing: House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) warned Republicans will investigate President Obama's birthplace if they take over Congress.

Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House, said Republicans will grind the government to a halt by issuing subpoenas against the Obama administration over a number of issues if they take power. He predicted that "gridlock" in Congress would "define" Obama's first term if Republicans win the House, but expressed confidence his party would prevail.

More reading of this story can be done here: www.drudgereport.com...
Dem Whip: GOP majority would issue 'birther' subpoenas...



edit on 27-9-2010 by guohua because: Spell Checking, I think



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by guohua
 


Well anyone could have seen that coming.

Republicans will impeach Barack Obama – on any charge they can find!

Republican tactics 101: Try to do in court what you cant do at a ballot box.

They just love to Impeach and investigate and try to get the Winner out of office because they cannot win an election fair and square.

But you can be assured that either way it goes they will do all they can so that his legacy is tainted in scandal.




edit on 9/27/2010 by frimilden because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
52
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join