It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Brandon88
Let's try to explain this again. A person must have spent five years of their life living in the US to confer citizenship. At least two of those years must come after the age of fourteen. If a person did not live in the US until the age of 14 they would need to wait five years before being able to confer citizenship if they gave birth outside the country and its territories. If a person spent their whole life in the US up until the age of 14 they would still need to live in the US for two more years before being able to confer citizenship on a child born abroad. That is what the line you have isolated means. Ann Dunham lived in the US from the time of her birth until 1967. When she gave birth to Obama she had lived in the US for 18 years. Since she had lived in the US for 18 years and was only 18 years old it would mean that she had lived in the US for at least two years after the age of 14. In this case she had lived in the US for four years after the age of 14. Last I checked four was at least two.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by jibajaba
Hey look you posted a link to Minor v. Happersett. Care to explain what that has to do with this? It was a case about women's right to vote. The Justices even say in their decision that after determining Minor was a citizen they had no other reason to investigate that issue as it was not the focus of the case. All that was said that in the case of Minor's circumstances (born on US soil to two US citizens) she was a US citizen. They do not make any generalized claims regarding citizenship and they make sure this is made clear in the majority opinion. Of course who can expect birthers to actually look at the facts.
Originally posted by yorkshirelad
Originally posted by kerazeesicko
FACT: The republicans would have been all over this if there was any validity to this.
That's a huge DUH from me, sitting here in the UK laughing at how pathetic this birther stuff is. What I find astonishing about the birthers is that most don't even know what is says in your constitution about being eligible for presidency! Even I can read that!
But yes anything proveable would have been jumped on by the republicans, if not in the last election then certainly in this. If Obama is proved to be ineligible then the republicans could field a monkey and win. If anyone wishes to explain that away with calls of cover-up has clearly got cotton wool between the ears : A black democrat president would have to have more influence than white established republicans!!!!!!!!!!!!!! no way in freaking hell!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry but racism in the system would ensure that this would never happen, Remember you would have to have ZERO racism from top to bottom in every single relevant department in order to keep the lie alive. Yeah right!
Quite ironic that racism is clearly the driving force behind the birthers agitation and yet racism proves he is genuine
Originally posted by mrgregbusybee
Thank you... I've been waiting to see if someone was going to key in on what's really happened here...and it's the people's fault for not listening 3 1/2 years ago. The man was a senator for 2 years...that was his political experience in our US government, yet received the backing and funding to make a presidential campaign run. Follow the money...he's only a puppet. The families of the Federal Reserve if I was a gambling man, pulled the strings to make this happen. His blatant and arrogant changes and violations of our Constitutional rights have steadily been increasing to what we see now, even today...attacking citizens in his campaign. It certainly appears to me that he has a different agenda and that's to invoke anger amongst the people. He seems to keep pushing. I personally think it all lines up...from the Patriot Act of Bush right up to NDAA and now the attack on the internet. It appears to me he is taking away our 1st Amendment rights by using "Fear", attempted to reduce our capabilities for our right to bare arms by using Fast & Furious, has FEMA funded more now than at any other time in it's history, no jobs, no money....it all can NOT be a coincidence. So in my opinion, you have to follow the money here. What's this have to do with his birth certificate and if it's fraudulent or not....it really doesn't matter now. He's there for a reason and people behind the scenes have put him there for a reason that is quickly showing itself now. He's as bold as saying he has 5 more years...why would he do that...? Because he knows it. It wouldn't surprise me if we didn't see an election this year. Martial law is on our horizon. Think about his recent actions alone...in the past month. He has pissed off the Catholics that he knows and was strongly advised that he needs their votes but went ahead and pissed them off on purpose, he's pissed the american people off about gas prices and what's he offer to help....nothing. there's no silver bullet...but by God there was 3 1/2 years ago...he's been as bold to let his Energy man say the administration has no intentions of trying to lower gas prices which is going to kill our economy and he knows that....but he said that anyway? Now he's pissed off military supporters by apologizing for soldiers burning Korans that were already damaged by prisoners...but he apologized and said it's worked at smoothing things over...and the protests are still violent and our soldiers have been killed because of the protests...where's his demand for an apology to those families? My point in all this is that it doesn't matter. He knows what he's doing. He knows he's pushing the American people further and further...and the birth certificate doesn't matter anymore because it's too late. Whatever the powers that be that run this world are working towards is already in motion and it's too late. I hope I'm wrong...but there's too much that adds up towards a totalitarian takeover to ignore or think is a coincidence. Does anyone else connect all these dots and feel similar as I do right now?
Not true. His mother was only 18. According to laws at the time, she could not confer automatic citizenship with a foreign father and the O being born out of the country. If both parents were citizens, he would be a citizen. If he were born in the US with is parental configuration he would be a citizen. However born out of the country with a foreigner as a father and mother only 18(under the laws at the time) he would not be a citizen. That is fraud and he should go to jail.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by anon72
An illegal immigrant? Really? So now you're suggesting that his mother, his grandparents, and everyone else on his mother's side of the family forged their birth certificates as well? As long as the mother of a child is a US citizen that child is also a US citizen regardless of where they're born. Of course I'm not seeing anything here that wasn't addressed when the birth certificate was first posted so all of that is a moot issue as Obama was born in Hawaii.
Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Xcalibur254
An interesting bit of that section you didn't post, however:
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
If someone could please work through the legalese with me to clarify, it seems this definition of Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter III, Part I, § 1401 does not qualify Obama's mother to confer natural-born citizenship to Barack.
Additionally, and I may have just missed updates here, this does not address the issue with his Indonesian citizenship (which, as I understand, would have required a revocation of Obama's US citizenship due to the state of war at the time not allowing indonesian citizens to hold dual citizenship), which seems to require that he be re-naturalized through US immigration policies, and hence no longer a holder of natural-born status (I welcome the opinions of any immigration experts or attorneys to confirm or deny this).
That said - his birth in Hawaii is still very much open to dispute, sadly or no.edit on 3/1/2012 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)
Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
Originally posted by lpowell0627
What amazes me is that after discussing this freaking issue for more than 3 - 4 years now people STILL do not know the difference between being:
A US citizen
Natural born citizen.
It doesn't matter whether you think Obama's birth certificate is legit or not.
Can't we at least get that one distinction settled?
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by DarthMuerte
No. Under the laws at that time birthright citizenship would be conferred on a child born abroad with one parent as an alien if the citizen parent had spent a total of five years in the US with two of these years being after the age of 14. Time spent living on US military bases abroad our in the home of a US government employee working abroad also counts. Ann Dunham had lived in the US for 18 years. Last time I checked 18 was greater than five and four of those ears were after the age of 14. So according to the law at the time Ann Dunham was capable of conferring birthright citizenship on Obama if he were born abroad.
Now this proviso did change in 1986. The law now states that the citizen parent must have spent a total of ten years living in the US with five of those years being after the age of 14. However, as this was not a retroactive amendment the original 1952 proviso would have applied to the birth of Barack Obama if he were born abroad..edit on 3/2/2012 by Xcalibur254 because: (no reason given)