Major General says president's eligibility needs proof

Originally posted by Afrosamurai
Once again, the document you claim "proves" he was an Indonisian native... SAYS HE WS BORN IN HAWAII! Get over it, a black man is in office no matter how much you hate black people.

I see this is your litmus test for finding out who hates black people LOL

You know what afro, if people hate Obama merely because he is part black, out of all the things their is to dislike about him,,

THAT wouldn't be at the top of our list

much less make the list

at all

Originally posted by PammyK
Exactly how old is this retired General, what's the state of his health? We don't have enough background info to really form an opinion.

I haven't had much luck in finding information about him. This army bio on him doesn't even have his date of birth:
www.ngb.army.mil...

reply to post by Aermacchi


And once again, the document you claim "proves" he isn't an American citizen says he was born in HAWAII! I guess it doesn't count if you're black huh?

Originally posted by Afrosamurai
reply to post by Aermacchi

 

And once again, the document you claim "proves" he isn't an American citizen says he was born in HAWAII! I guess it doesn't count if you're black huh?

What document I claimed? I never claimed any document

can you show me where I posted any documents claiming anything like that? Umm just out of curiosity afro,, do you know what race I am ?

I'd love to know if you are seeing a white guy in my posts and why.



[edit on 28-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by Afrosamurai
Get over it, a black man is in office no matter how much you hate black people.

Congratulations. Your efforts to derail the thread by attempting to bring race into it with your thinly veiled contempt for people who may or may not be white have earned you a spot on my ignore list. While I don't expect that to suddenly entice you to contribute with something other than comments on race, I do hope that you eventually learn to contribute something to conversations other than claims that anyone who disagrees with or dislikes Obama is racist.

Originally posted by Aermacchi
1) Clue Number one = When first asked for his vaulted BC, Obama claimed it was lost.

Source?

2) Clue Number two = When it was made known one existed and we requested it, it took 6 months before one was finally being shown and the daily Kos admitted it was a fraud.

When it was made known one existed? The Department of Health keeps all vital records (original birth certificates). If someone was born in said state, the only way the vault birth certificate doesn't exist is if there was some catastrophe and the records were lost.

People are usually given a copy of the original certificate but it is not uncommon for people to lose it, that's why you can request a certificate from the Department of Health later on.

The Daily Kos admitted it was a fraud? Daily Kos didn't admit it was a fraud as an entity, someone who blogs there probably did, but since when do you believe what some liberal writes on his blog? Ah wait, when it helps your point perhaps.

The will to believe a liberal blogger over Hawaiian officials goes to show how badly the lunatic fringe want this whole birth certificate non-issue to be a controversy.

3) Clue number 3 = Too take attention off of himself Obama's camp started asking McCain questions bout his birth and found he was born in another country Panama where a full investigation insisted upon by Obama was carried out.

Source?

The fact that he HAD a vaulted BC somewhere was never the question but the fact that he had one in a state that accepted a BC from anywhere at the time to be in file was making this issue even more suspicious.

This is a lie. Hawaii at the time didn't accept registration of children born outside the state has being born in Hawaii. The statute that allows this (§338-17.8) was enacted only in 1982.

The Date Filed by Registrar on Obama's certificate is August 8 1961. And since Obama's birth announcement shows up in the August 13's paper it's obvious his registration was filed, at the latest, August 13th 1961.

The announcements by the way, were received directly from Hawaii's Health Department, they weren't paid announcements.

Because he wasn't Born in the U.S.
THAT's WHY!

Prove it. We're still waiting for your evidence or at least a mediocrely compelling legal argument.

To say he is innocent of this is to me just another guy getting off like O.J. Simpson did and whenever we say he was guilty, someone says he was found innocent yet we all knew he was guilty.

Oh yes, this is exactly like a murder accusation...

The evidence you give is NOT evidence. Anyone can make a phoney COLB.

I'm sure anyone can, and yet the man that is the President of the United States and according to you has conspired with state, federal officials and agencies, including the intelligence community, hasn't been able to make a phony one to shut you guys up...

Originally posted by Jenna
It is relevant due to the fact that if you renounce your US citizenship, you can re-gain citizenship but not natural born status.

Can you please cite the statute, or Constitutional passage to support this, or is this merely your personal opinion?

So if he had US citizenship and it was renounced then he couldn't have regained natural born status.

I see that you wrote it was renounced rather than he renounced. Then I can safely assume you understand that it was either done for him by his parents, or when he was a minor.

As I stated before either one of those, or both, situations isn't valid to renounce US citizenship. US law is clear about this: you can only renounce your citizenship by your own application as an adult.

Also, the argument that his attendance at an Indonesian school is irrelevant relies on him being born in the US to begin with.

Yeah, and everything tangible that has appeared so far points out that this is the case.

reply to post by Wotan

This issue came up frequently in 2006 and the estimated number of retired generals then was 4,700 so I think big deal - so this guy wants to be a political activis and he has nothing to lose in doing so. I come from a career army family and mean no disrespect but this guy is no big deal.
Here's where I got my numbers from:
www.slate.com...

Originally posted by converge

Originally posted by Aermacchi
The evidence you give is NOT evidence. Anyone can make a phoney COLB.

I'm sure anyone can, and yet the man that is the President of the United States and according to you has conspired with state, federal officials and agencies, including the intelligence community, hasn't been able to make a phony one to shut you guys up...

Hah great point. Anyone who believes in this conspiracy must believe that Republicans, Democrats, Independents, CIA, DOD, the Mossad, the Federal Government, and the Hawaii state government all worked together to get Obama elected and keep the birth certificate issue hidden.

Anyone who believes in this conspiracy theory must also somehow believe that all of these powerful organizations couldn't come up with a fake birth certificate to kill this theory?

[edit on 28-2-2009 by Leto]

reply to post by Leto


You can't try and apply logic to their arguments, because there isn't any. There is belief though, reaching delusional levels now.


Anyway, since Aermacchi was claiming Daily Kos admitted the certificate was a fraud, here's a post by kos (the Daily Kos owner) speaking about the birth certificate and I quote:

Consider the latest batch of crazy internet rumors debunked.

I found it funny that Aermacchi would use the Daily Kos to help his point, so I decided to see if I could use one of the lunatic fringe website's to help mine.

A separate WND investigation into Obama's birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren't originally there. source

Thank you WorldNetDaily

Originally posted by converge
Can you please cite the statute, or Constitutional passage to support this, or is this merely your personal opinion?

Title 8
§ 1481. Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions
(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years;

US Constitution.net
When you lose your U.S. nationality, you are no longer under the protection or jurisdiction of the United States. When the United States considers you to no longer be of U.S. nationality, it in effect considers you to no longer be a citizen.

Once you renounce citizenship, or otherwise lose it, you are no longer a citizen. Only citizens are considered natural-born.

I see that you wrote it was renounced rather than he renounced. Then I can safely assume you understand that it was either done for him by his parents, or when he was a minor.

As I stated before either one of those, or both, situations isn't valid to renounce US citizenship. US law is clear about this: you can only renounce your citizenship by your own application as an adult.

Agreed. However, if he were naturalized in another country then that also would cause him to lose citizenship and as far as I am aware that can be done by the parents of a minor.

Yeah, and everything tangible that has appeared so far points out that this is the case.

That no court has dismissed a case for any reason other than lack of standing tells me that they didn't necessarily agree. Again, just because we believe he was born in Hawaii doesn't make it true. If there is even a smidgen of evidence that says otherwise it should be investigated. It would certainly not be the first time the country was lied to nor would it be the first time we fell for it.

Originally posted by Jenna
Agreed. However, if he were naturalized in another country then that also would cause him to lose citizenship and as far as I am aware that can be done by the parents of a minor.

It can? That's interesting because the law you just quoted says the contrary:

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years;

Originally posted by Leto

I'm sure anyone can, and yet the man that is the President of the United States and according to you has conspired with state, federal officials and agencies, including the intelligence community, hasn't been able to make a phony one to shut you guys up...

Hah great point. Anyone who believes in this conspiracy must believe that Republicans, Democrats, Independents, CIA, DOD, the Mossad, the Federal Government, and the Hawaii state government all worked together to get Obama elected and keep the birth certificate issue hidden.

Anyone who believes in this conspiracy theory must also somehow believe that all of these powerful organizations couldn't come up with a fake birth certificate to kill this theory?

[edit on 28-2-2009 by Leto]

No they couldn't kill it that way because we would then ask what state official it was that retrieved it then what courier gave it to what judge to see it and what time it was and where they drove all kinds of things that make a conspiracy hard to keep under wraps.

Then their is always the easy way to keep things under wraps without all kinds of FBI CIA NSA and state officials having to keep everything a secret and that is simply the same method of conspiracy Obama has used. It's commonly referred to in the military as "On a need to know basis" All Obama has to do is

NOT SHOW THEM HIS VAULTED BC TOO!

Simple isn't it

reply to post by converge

Citizenship and Naturalization of Children
Children can be naturalized as a result of parent’s naturalization if:
* The child is lawfully present in the U.S. at the time of naturalization;
* The child is under the age of 18 at the time of naturalization; and
* Both parents, or the parent with custody, are naturalized.

So a parent can naturalize a child in the US, but can't renounce it when they move to another country? Does that make sense to you?

I searched again and they now have some of the Indonesian laws online.

Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia
Article 2.

(1)A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child.

Article 13.

(2)The citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia acquired by a mother also applies to her children who have no legal family relationship with the father, who have not reached the age of 18 and are not married yet after they have resided and are in Indonesia.

He was adopted by his step-father, correct? If so then one or both of the above potentially apply. Which brings up the issue of dual citizenship, which Indonesia didn't recognize until recently.

As I said, there are a lot of questions that need to be answered if only to put all the controversy to rest once and for all.

Originally posted by converge

1) Clue Number one = When first asked for his vaulted BC, Obama claimed it was lost.Originally posted by Aermacchi

Source?

READ HIS BOOK!
Obama claimed in his memoir Dreams from my Father that he had in his possession a copy of his original birth certificate.

When it was made known one existed? The Department of Health keeps all vital records (original birth certificates). If someone was born in said state, the only way the vault birth certificate doesn't exist is if there was some catastrophe and the records were lost..

Source? ha ha read your own timeline at factcheck oh and you are right about two of those reasons. The third reason would be that HE WAS BORN SOMEWHERE ELSE!

Hence the reason he flew to hawaii

3) Clue number 3 = Too take attention off of himself Obama's camp started asking McCain questions bout his birth and found he was born in another country Panama where a full investigation insisted upon by Obama was carried out.Originally posted by Aermacchi

source

Asked and answered

Prove it. We're still waiting for your evidence or at least a mediocrely compelling legal argument.

I am not going to give you evidence. What I am giving you is clues to establish motive for supressing evidence. Evidence you and I both know would prove he is guilty of fraud.

You know it and

I know it

This is a lie. Hawaii at the time didn't accept registration of children born outside the state has being born in Hawaii. The statute that allows this (§338-17.8) was enacted only in 1982.

The Date Filed by Registrar on Obama's certificate is August 8 1961. And since Obama's birth announcement shows up in the August 13's paper it's obvious his registration was filed, at the latest, August 13th 1961.

The announcements by the way, were received directly from Hawaii's Health Department, they weren't paid announcements.

It ever occur to you WHY this law was enacted in the firsr place??

Here Ill help you.

It's because SO MANY PEOPLE WERE USING IT TO GET CITIZENSHIP VIA SPURIOUS MEANS!

Hence the reason for more protocols and legislation that had they had it when Obama was born, he wouldn't be President

My parents took an ad out in the Rolling Meadows News Paper to announce my birth but we had moved to another state. They did that for the same reason Obama's parents probably did.

Because they moved away.

Lots of folks did that sort of thing back then. Oh and by the way, Obama's neighbors don't recall seeing a little black baby ever living there.

I remember all the kids and parents where ever I lived all my life.

kinda strange they don't.

heheh

Prove it. We're still waiting for your evidence or at least a mediocrely compelling legal argument.!

Already addressed

To say he is innocent of this is to me just another guy getting off like O.J. Simpson did and whenever we say he was guilty, someone says he was found innocent yet we all knew he was guilty.Originally posted by Aermacchi

Oh yes, this is exactly like a murder accusation...

I never said it was like a murder accusation but you already knew that. hehe

I'm sure anyone can, and yet the man that is the President of the United States and according to you has conspired with state, federal officials and agencies, including the intelligence community, hasn't been able to make a phony one to shut you guys up...

I never said he conspired with anyone and fukino was just doing her job. She wasn't compelled to state a thing and do you know why??

Because OBAMA WOULDN'T GIVE HER AUTHORIZATION!

and do you know why??

Because he wasn't BORN HERE!


[edit on 28-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

[edit on 28-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by dankai
WE DON'T LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY! WE LIVE IN A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!!!!!!! SO WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS A GREAT SERVICE TO WHAT WE ARE!!!!!

In this Constitutional Republic the Constitutionally founded court system has examined this very issue and ruled on it, in favor of Obama (as there are no currently open substantive facts or law contrary to Obama's legitimacy). It is the right of the people to have the Courts examine the issue, and it has occurred.

By the way, since physical documents can be altered, the copy of a certificate in an interested party's hands would often be considered less determinative than the official certifications of the health department of the State. The courts have ruled that the latter, which has been provided, is sufficient to satisfy Obama's eligibility.

There are no open questions of fact or law. Direct and circumstantial evidence entirely supports Obama's eligibility. There is no evidence to the contrary. And there is no legal reason to suppose that the certification of the State health department is insufficient. Case closed.

There is 0% chance that this ruling will ever be reversed during Obama's term in office.

Now, a general talking to generals---and not to appropriate Federal Constitutional attorneys---about questioning the President's legitimacy for being elected really only serves to increase dissent and insubordination.


[edit on 28-2-2009 by mbkennel]

[edit on 28-2-2009 by mbkennel]

[edit on 28-2-2009 by mbkennel]

Originally posted by Jenna
He was adopted by his step-father, correct?

No he wasnt and could not have been according to Indonesian and US laws at the time.

Obama moved to Indonesia at the age of 6years and left at the age of 10. According the the Indonesian constitution and law at the time inorder to attain automatic citizenship from a married parent (mixed marriage as labelled under the constitution) the child would have had to be 5years and under or would have had to reside in Indonesia for atleast 6years to be legally adopted by Indonesian citizen or to apply for citizenship.

The laws during that time were very strict to mixed marriages (marriages by foreigns or different religions other than islam or different races) and in addition even at that US law did not recognize Indonesian laws or constitution at that time making any laws over Obama and his citizenship status irrelevant.

Originally posted by Jenna
So a parent can naturalize a child in the US, but can't renounce it when they move to another country? Does that make sense to you?

It's not a matter of making sense, it's a matter of knowing what the law actually says.

Here's a complete overview of it by a law firm that specializes in Immigration law.

Chang & Boos is a multinational relocation law firm practicing exclusively in the field of Canada Immigration law and US immigration law.

Loss of nationality, also known as expatriation, means the loss of citizenship status properly acquired, whether by birth in the United States, through birth abroad to U.S. citizen parents, or by naturalization. As a result of several constitutional decisions, §349(a) of the current Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") provides that U.S. nationality is lost only when the U.S. citizen does one of the specified acts described in INA §349, voluntarily and with the intent to give up that nationality. If any one of these requirements is lacking, nationality is not lost. ...

Loss of U.S. citizenship can result only from the citizen's voluntary actions. This is because termination of citizenship without voluntary action on the part of the citizen would deprive the citizen of freedom of choice and would likely be a denial of due process. ...

Closely related to need for voluntary action is the requirement that expatriation cannot be accomplished by a citizen who has not attained a specified age of maturity. This conforms with the common law maxim that an infant lacks legal capacity to undertake contractual obligations. Legal maturity generally considered to be the age of 21, unless a different age is specially stated. Paragraphs (1), (2), (4) of INA §349(a) specifically fix the age of maturity at 18. ...

Not only must the U.S. citizen perform an expatriating act voluntarily, but he or she must also intend to relinquish U.S. citizenship as a result of such voluntary act.

Additionally,

According to INA §349(b), whenever the loss of U.S. nationality is put in issue, the burden falls upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

In September, 1990, the Department of State ("DOS") issued a policy statement which dealth with loss of nationality. The policy statement indicated that DOS would presume a person intended to retain U.S. citizenship where:

1. the person was naturalized in a foreign country
2. took a routine oath of allegiance, or
3. accepted non-policy level employment with a foreign government.

source

I think it's pretty clear that under these circumstances Obama didn't lose his US citizenship.

I searched again and they now have some of the Indonesian laws online.

Again, in light of what US law states regarding this Indonesian laws are irrelevant in Obama's case.

If Obama was running for President of Indonesia then Indonesian law would be of some concern.

Originally posted by dankai

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
You apparently do not understand the influence or connections generals have with the active duty brass or even more interesting, the defense industries.

Oh, that is certain.

But not in a court-case to establish whether a President is legitimate (he is) and whether the military should follow his orders, his standing as a Major General means nothing. In fact, because he is retired, it may hurt the case.

Of course, what the Major General and Taitz are doing is a grave threat to democracy.

WE DON'T LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY! WE LIVE IN A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!!!!!!! SO WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS A GREAT SERVICE TO WHAT WE ARE!!!!!

Too bad more people don't understand this. Now if only the Major news outlets would put this up. Doubtful but who knows? Maybe we should make it a point to call all of our local radio talk shows and ask if they have heard of the story (if possible get on the air to spread the word).

Yeah, you'll find proof under the slimy rocky next to you. Who cares where Obama was born?....like that makes a freakin' difference!