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.

 

Corsi To File Criminal Charges Against White House Over Obama Birth Certificate

page: 14
35
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
So Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Hoover were "grandfathered" in? Herbert Hoover was president from 1929-1933.. I think it would be a bit hard for them to be grandfathered in without some type of time machine...




posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Then there is John Bingham in 1866


Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.[10]


There is the evidence that those who are born of parents who owe their allegiance to a foreign power are not eligible. Barry's father was a British subject born in Kenya, and never a citizen of the US.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Are your arguments going to continually cite birther blogs which in turn cite other birther blogs or opinion articles and not law? The fact of the matter is that the Constitution definition was loose and has been interpreted by congress many different ways, most recently as the resolution resulting in McCain's eligibilty. Furthermore it is out the courts hands to declare a President ineligible only congress can do that.
edit on 25-5-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)


Well, one of them was Leo Donofrio, one of the attorneys filing birther lawsuits.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Once again, as other liberals have used that same argument, you are attempting to declare that Native Born is equal to Natural Born.
The “same argument” must be telling you what the law is, because I limited my posts to citations of the relevant and controlling Supreme Court case, and to the Department of State’s own explanation of the law.

“Other liberals”? You have no credibility left in this discussion.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Basically, it was worded that way, at that time, because of Native Americans. At this time, they did not want openly hostile "injuns" to be able to produce future US citizens. Obama's father was a British Citizen. So was Woodrow Wilson's father. The wording also states "parents" with an S, as in plural. If you're gonna play semantics...



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syyth007
So Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Hoover were "grandfathered" in? Herbert Hoover was president from 1929-1933.. I think it would be a bit hard for them to be grandfathered in without some type of time machine...


www.peoplespassions.org...

This essay will discuss the eligibility of every President who had parents born abroad. As long as the parents had the future President on US soil after they became citizens, then that person is a natural born citizen.


WOODROW WILSON
Born December 28, 1856 - the 28th President, born in Staunton, Virginia.

Wilson’s mother was from Carlisle, England. His father was a US citizen from Ohio. Wilson’s mother gained US citizenship when she married his father according to a congressional Act of February 1855, which stated,

“any woman who might lawfully be naturalized under existing laws, married, or shall be married to a citizen of the United States, shall be deemed and taken to be a citizen.” [Act of February 10, 1855, 10 Stat. 604, section 2]

This was called derivative citizenship. This act was enacted in 1855. Woodrow Wilson was born in December 1856. He was born in the US, both parents were US citizens - natural born citizen.

HERBERT HOOVER
Hoover was born in Iowa, 1874. He was the 31st President. His father Jesse was from Ohio, a US citizen. His mother Hulda Minthorn was from Ontario, Canada. They were married in 1870. According to the 1855 act, which was in effect until 1922, Hoover’s mother became a US citizen automatically when she married Jesse.

So, Hoover was born in the US, both parents were citizens - natural born citizen.





posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Once again, as other liberals have used that same argument, you are attempting to declare that Native Born is equal to Natural Born.
The “same argument” must be telling you what the law is, because I limited my posts to citations of the relevant and controlling Supreme Court case, and to the Department of State’s own explanation of the law.

“Other liberals”? You have no credibility left in this discussion.


what , because you used the same Wong Kim case that all the members of Politijab used in their pro Obama blog?

And again, Wong Kim was about citizenship but does not establish Natural Born Citizen. It uses the 14th amendment and not the Article II of the Constitution.

And again, the 14th Amendment was to allow for blacks to be citizens, but it does not override the Article II declaration of Natural Born eligibility for POTUS

www.usconstitution.net...
edit on 25-5-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


honest question. you can't use the cop out "they are all in on it" excuse.

with respect to the definition of "natural born" considering there are probably tens of thousands of consitutional scholars, probably hundreds of law school professors and 9 supreme court justices in washington DC, why hasn't anyone brought this up to the floor of congress ?



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:02 PM
link   
The John Bingham quote doesn't even really matter in this case anyway, as his mother was a natural born citizen. His parentS did not owe allegiance to any foreign sovereignty, just his father. He was born, in the United States of America, to a natural born citizen. I would love to see any type of proof that a child born of a natural born US citizen isn't a natural born citizen themselves. It's quite clear from the quote you posted that Obama does not meet those specific "diss"qualifications.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Something else that needs to be considered and addressed about the SSN numbers that obama has thefted was his ability to circumvent selective services from ever inducting him into the military, so he wouldn't have to serve and be placed at risk in any armed conflicts...which also makes him a coward



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
what , because you used the same Wong Kim case that all the members of Politijab used in their pro Obama blog?
I ‘used’ the Wong Kim Ark case because it’s the freaking law.

I’m waiting for your citations of other Supreme Court cases, US statutes, acts or regulations that support your definition of natural born citizen. So far you have presented zero.

You don’t like Wong Kim Ark? Here.

Nwankpa v. Kissinger, United States District Court, M. D. Alabama, 1974—

The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.

Diaz-Salazar v. INS, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 1983—

Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. ... The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, 1999—

Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.


And again, Wong Kim was about citizenship but does not establish Natural Born Citizen. It uses the 14th amendment and not the Article II of the Constitution.
You have no idea what you’re talking about.

I’ll be waiting for your citations of US law supporting your argument.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   
MORE misinformation.. anyone who was born 57'-61' did not have to register.. there is a reason why, and all one has to do is a bit of "research".. but it's easier to take the word of a "lawyer" who received their "diploma" from an unaccredited online "school", right?



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syyth007
His parentS did not owe allegiance to any foreign sovereignty, just his father.
His father didn’t “owe allegiance to any foreign sovereignty.” Allegiance was a legal term of art.

From Wong Kim Ark

But the children, born within the realm, of foreign ambassadors, or the children of alien enemies, born during and within their hostile occupation of part of the King's dominions, were not natural-born subjects, because not born within the allegiance, the obedience, or the power, or, as would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction of the King.

When Obama’s father was in the United States he was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and his foreign citizenship was immaterial.

Of course ThirdEyeofHorus would know this if he actually studied the relevant cases and knew the law, instead of just regurgitating what some anonymous person posted on his blog.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Thank you for the clarification. I don't speak Legalese, as I believe most do not. It seems some would like to use this "obscure" wording to twist it's meaning to support their agenda.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   
3rd eye:

You have no concept of Constitutional law and really shouldn't be quoting it - *just* like the blogs and Orly Taitz you quote from shouldn't be (btw notice she's dropped the Father=Kenya aspect and has moved on to another attack?).

It's very simple - even for you - United States Code CANNOT conflict with Constitutional law. No "ifs" "ands" or "buts"

Title 8 section 1401a - born on US soil = citizen (NOT "naturalized") = Obama
Title 8 section 1401c - born on foreign soil with two parents who ARE american citizens is citizen = McCain.

THIS was the problem with McCain - State Dept rules defined the Panama/Panama military base as NOT US soil and thus conflicted with Constitutional and US Code rules - NON-binding judgement by Senate makes McCain elligible. Of the three entities reviewed in this issue - the State Dept comes in a distant third in authority.

1401a = supported by Wong Van Ark which supercedes (in ALL respects) Bingham. Bingham's opinion was just that - an opinion and not the basis of the definition of the term "natural born" - except to those who wish to overrule the SCOTUS with opinions they prefer, as opposed to those which are legally recognized. (You WILL notice that Bingham's definition in NEVER spelled out in the 14rth?) Don't believe me? Explain how title 8 section 1401a in ANY WAY supports Bingham's OR Vattel's vision of "Natural Born"

Try bringing up John Jay while you're at it - 'cause THAT dog won't hunt either...

BTW - The Vattel argument is also a non-starter and you should know this as this as I *believe* (maybe incorrect) you've been part of the threads where this was directly refuted. Vattel was NOT the most influential Jurist on our founding fathers - Blackstone was - as is evidenced by current legal scholars (Google for yourself). Further, let's apply a little common sense: the founding fathers only *ever* knew English common law. Why would they not take that as the basis of their law for a new nation - but with improvements? Why would they choose to use a Swiss jurist?
edit on 25-5-2011 by userid1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
And again, the 14th Amendment was to allow for blacks to be citizens, but it does not override the Article II declaration of Natural Born eligibility for POTUS


Conversely, it *also* cannot conflict with Article II. Is that what you're suggesting?


Be very careful here...



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   
During the 14th Amendment debates, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and author of the citizenship clause, says

The provision is, that “all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” That means “subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.” What do we mean by “complete jurisdiction thereof?” Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.
The Senator elaborates—

Can you sue a Navajo Indian in court? Are they in any sense subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States? By no means. We make treaties with them, and therefore they are not subject to our jurisdiction. If they were, we wouldn’t make treaties with them. It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens; and there can be no objection to the proposition that such persons should be citizens.

From Wong Kim Ark

The jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessarily exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation not imposed by itself.

Could you sue Obama’s father in court? Yes. Could he be deported by US authorities? Yes. Could he be arrested for crimes? Yes. He was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

The two citizen parent requirement is crank constitutional theory.



edit on 25-5-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by anumohi
 





Something else that needs to be considered and addressed about the SSN numbers that obama has thefted was his ability to circumvent selective services from ever inducting him into the military, so he wouldn't have to serve and be placed at risk in any armed conflicts...which also makes him a coward


Very good point for consideration!
That could mean he was deliberately looking for and
acquired a SS card with the sole intent of avoiding
military service. Or was it because he was trying to hide
something from his past, or perhaps both?



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by micpsi
 





Simple. The deception that put Obama into the White House is being deliberately exposed by those MORE powerful men. All part of the plan, you see, to create social and political chaos .......


This is an intriguing perspective. I read this post earlier, but had to mull it over for awhile.

It has the potential of explaining why more pieces of the 'Obama Puzzle' seem to surface everyday.

Do you think it was designed with the intention of creating civil unrest to the degree that the government could use that as an excuse to intervene on massive levels to control the population? Is this what they will use to strip away the final vestiges of freedom in order to impose outright tyranny?

You have raised a lot of questions in just a few words. Stars for you!



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ShakaDoodle
 


The SS, and selective service BS has been addressed, not only in other threads, but actually in this thread. Those "16" SS#'s are from a search for property associated with Barack Obama, his family, anyone with the name Obama, and those with similar names. It's very misleading, and actually a lie to say all of thse numbers are associated with Obama.

As for the "draft" dodging.. They discontinued the draft in '75. Selective service registration started in '80. Those born between '57-61 did not have to register. But, I'm sure this will all be forgotten, and your deceptive statements will be posted in a different thread in the future, posted as fact.. It only takes a few minutes to look into these claims and see that they are complete BS. You accuse the POTUS of being dishonest, while repeatedly repeating untrue statements, and being purposefully deceptive. The end does not justify the means.

Birther's apparently can't see the irony in using lies and deception in order to expose lies and deception.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join