supreme court to determine obama presidential eligibilty
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
http://dailykenoshan.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=63&topic=53329.msg57474;topicseen
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
overnight fedex supreme court w/ your concerns; only way to reach them:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82449
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=supreme+court+obama+eligibility&aq=1&oq=supreme+court+obama+eli
max
"AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
dipshit.
--
This signature can be appended to your outgoing mesages. Many people include in
their signatures contact information, and perhaps a joke or quotation.
Dave
"max" <beta...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:betatron-D48844...@news.ftupet.com...
> In article <y4DZk.2657$us6....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > it's all over the blogs.
> >
> >
http://dailykenoshan.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=63&topic=53329.msg5
74
> > 74;topicseen
> >
> > http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
> >
> > overnight fedex supreme court w/ your concerns; only way to reach them:
> >
> > http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82449
> >
> >
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=supreme+court+obama+eligibility&aq=1&oq
=s
> > upreme+court+obama+eli
>
> dipshit.
>
What? This is a real court case that the supremes are going to have to rule
on. I for one am interested in what the supremes have to say on the
atter. -Dave
John A. Weeks III
"AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> it's all over the blogs.
Yeah, that is like saying that everyone at the truck stop was talking
about it. Space aliens, 100 mile per gallon carburetors, and Obama's
birth certificate, please pass the ketchup.
-john-
--
======================================================================
John A. Weeks III 612-720-2854 jo...@johnweeks.com
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
======================================================================
Jeff
> it's all over the blogs.
Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Jeff
Dave
"John A. Weeks III" <jo...@johnweeks.com> wrote in message
news:john-D208EF.1...@news-3.octanews.net...
> In article <y4DZk.2657$us6....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > it's all over the blogs.
>
> Yeah, that is like saying that everyone at the truck stop was talking
> about it. Space aliens, 100 mile per gallon carburetors, and Obama's
> birth certificate, please pass the ketchup.
>
> -john-
>
John - I'll only state this once, as many people who SHOULD know better have
a tendency to flame me when I point this out...
Obama was a citizen of Indonesia at one time in his life. Only Indonesia.
No dual-citizenship allowed there, at the time.
Now review the "natural born citizen" clause, which is one of the
requirements to be President.
If you are a citizen of Indonesia and only Indonesia today, you can not
tomorrow, or at any time in the future, be a natural born citizen of the
U.S. or any other country, other than Indonesia.
I don't think the case that the Supremes are considering will amount to
much. The odds of the Supremes ruling against their supreme commander (!)
are slim and none.
But only a fool would dismiss the court case outright, as it can be argued
that the case has REAL merit. Either you are a natural born citizen, or you
aren't. There is no dispute that Obama is a citizen, but being a citizen
does not qualify one to be President of the U.S. -Dave
Dennis
>AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>> it's all over the blogs.
>
> Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
>president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
reasoning possibly be?
(And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
political area.)
Dennis (evil)
--
An inherent weakness of a pure democracy is that half
the voters are below average intelligence.
Marsha
> I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
> million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
> paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
> reasoning possibly be?
>
> (And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
> Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
> political area.)
>
> Dennis (evil)
True, but you would think Hillary's camp would have fought this to the
bitter end a long time ago. Then again, Obama has fought to keep a lot
of things under wraps.
Marsha
Dennis
I agree -- I can't imagine that the brass at the DNC would field a
presidential candidate with that kind of glaring fatal flaw in his
resume. So why the big showdown over cooperation? I'd hate to think
that it's the same old arrogance that we saw from Bill Clinton during
the whole Monica mess. Great way to start an administration that ran
on a platform of change...
:-(
Daniel T.
They already dismissed it.
Marsha
We could use the same excuse the Dems had for Palin - Obama wasn't
properly vetted :-)
Marsha
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"Daniel T." <dani...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:daniel_t-857148...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
i think that was a federal judge. i don't think they're looking at this
until friday
hchi...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 18:19:30 -0500, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>
>>AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>>> it's all over the blogs.
>>
>> Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
>>president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
>
>I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
>million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
>paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
>reasoning possibly be?
>
>(And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
>Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
>political area.)
>
>Dennis (evil)
The whole thing is stupid, and has been around for ages. He has a
mother who was a U.S. citizen.
Who was it that was born in the Panama canal zone and would have had
even less legitimacy in a court case? McCain.
IIRC there are a couple of other instances of "questionable"
qualifications like this through the years that were contested and
laughed out of court. Goldwater was one, I think.
Besides, it is pretty obvious by now that everyone in Washington and
the states will be on the cabinet and part of the Presidency. I
wouldn't be surprised to see Rush apply for the job of drug czar.
JonL
> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>> it's all over the blogs.
>
> Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
> president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
>
> http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
>
"factcheck", brought to you by Annenberg Foundation (Obama sat on their
board in Chicago)
Inquiring Mindz want to know:
When he was in Hawaii not long ago, he could have produced/released the
vault copy of his birth certificate, if one exists....why didn't he??,
All we've seen was this Certificate of Live Birth, which only proves
that a live birth occurred....somewhere, not necessarily in Hawaii.
(Israeli experts pronounced it a crude forgery)
Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
"birthplace of President Barack Obama".
The only celebration is in Kenya, where his grandma said she's so proud
cuz she witnessed his birth (at Coast Province Hospital in Mombasa).
He could still qualify as natural born if Stanley moved back to the US
for 5 yrs.
I guess "factcheck" forgot he was adopted (new name Barry Soerto) and
became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
How'd he manage to get into Pakistan when it was on the State
Department's Forbidden list, or whatever it's called (Pak was under
martial law)
My guess is, he had an Indonesian passport.
I also suspect he registered at Columbia and Harvard as a foreign student.
JonL
Just a few things under wraps:
Original, vault copy of Certificate of Live Birth in the USA -- Not
Released
a Certificate of Live Birth -- Released – Proven Counterfeit
(www.ObamaFiles.com)
Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro adoption records -- Not released
Fransiskus Assisi School application -- Released
Punahou School records -- Not released
Selective Service Registration -- Released – Proven Counterfeit
Occidental College records -- Not released
Passport -- Not released
Columbia College records -- Not released
Columbia thesis -- Not released
Harvard College records -- Not released
Harvard Law Review articles -- None (maybe 1, Not Signed)
Baptism certificate -- None
Medical records -- Not released
Illinois State Senate records -- None (Locked up to prohibit public view)
Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost (All other Illinois state
senators' records are intact)
Law practice client list -- Not released
University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
===========================n:
My addition:
graduated from Zbigniew Brzezinski's Manchurian Candidate school --- no
records released
JonL
I can see change already. He went from:
Change you can believe in
to
Change you won't OD on
to
Change......? I changed my mind
Daniel T.
> Jeff wrote:
> > AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
> >> it's all over the blogs.
> >
> > Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
> > president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
> >
> > http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
> >
>
> "factcheck", brought to you by Annenberg Foundation (Obama sat on their
> board in Chicago)
>
> Inquiring Mindz want to know:
>
> When he was in Hawaii not long ago, he could have produced/released the
> vault copy of his birth certificate, if one exists....why didn't he??,
No, he can't. He isn't authorized to do so. Even if he could, who should
he release it to? How many certified copies does he need to buy? One for
each person who didn't vote for him, or just one for each person who
voted for McCain?
> All we've seen was this Certificate of Live Birth, which only proves
> that a live birth occurred....somewhere, not necessarily in Hawaii.
> (Israeli experts pronounced it a crude forgery)
Since when are israeli's experts on Hawaiian birth certificates? When
did they examine it? Did they also examine the birth announcement in
news paper?
> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
Where was Regan born? What hospital specifically? Any plaque? What about
either Bush? What about Clinton and Carter? What about any other
president? Why are you making such unreasonable demands?
> He could still qualify as natural born if Stanley moved back to the US
> for 5 yrs.
Really? What exactly is required to be a "natural born citizen"?
> I guess "factcheck" forgot he was adopted (new name Barry Soerto) and
> became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
How would that affect his "natural born citizen" status in the USA? Even
if he renounced his citizenship and then took it up again?
> How'd he manage to get into Pakistan when it was on the State
> Department's Forbidden list, or whatever it's called (Pak was under
> martial law)
> My guess is, he had an Indonesian passport.
When did he go to Pakistan as a private citizen? (Obviously a member of
the senate could go.)
> I also suspect he registered at Columbia and Harvard as a foreign student.
What proof do you have?
max
> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
HOLY CRAP!!!!
IM CALLING FOR A SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION!!!!!!
I AM SOOOOO CONVINCED!!11!!1!11!!!11
max
dipshit
Vic Smith
>In article <49379E1...@Mayday.com>, JonL <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote:
>
>> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
>> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
>
>HOLY CRAP!!!!
>
>IM CALLING FOR A SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION!!!!!!
>
>
>I AM SOOOOO CONVINCED!!11!!1!11!!!11
>
>
>
>
>dipshit.
I second that.
--Vic
Vic Smith
>In article <4937A1C8...@Mayday.com>, JonL <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote:
>
>> Marsha wrote:
>> > Dennis wrote:
>
>dipshit
I second that.
--Vic
JonL
"Insults are the arguments of those who have no arguments."
~Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, (1712-78), French philosopher and social critic
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"JonL" <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote in message news:49379E1...@Mayday.com...
the only question now is whether the sc can stomach the thought of mass
rioting. and if that occurs, will that preclude the current potus from
departing in jan?
JonL
>>
>> When he was in Hawaii not long ago, he could have produced/released the
>> vault copy of his birth certificate, if one exists....why didn't he??,
>
> No, he can't. He isn't authorized to do so. Even if he could, who should
> he release it to? How many certified copies does he need to buy? One for
> each person who didn't vote for him, or just one for each person who
> voted for McCain?
Sure he can. It's done routinely, if it's Your certificate. Release it
to the Supremes before having the opportunity to alter it.
>
>> All we've seen was this Certificate of Live Birth, which only proves
>> that a live birth occurred....somewhere, not necessarily in Hawaii.
>> (Israeli experts pronounced it a crude forgery)
>
> Since when are israeli's experts on Hawaiian birth certificates? When
> did they examine it? Did they also examine the birth announcement in
> news paper?
Doesn't take much of an expert to notice they used a 2007 border with a
2008 seal and sig-stamp. (they're changed every year for security
reasons) The bogus copy also has African as race. The legal term for
blacks on all docs back in 61 was Negro.
Announcements in the paper can be done by anyone. Often 1-2 weeks after
birth.
>
>> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
>> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
>
> Where was Regan born? What hospital specifically? Any plaque? What about
> either Bush? What about Clinton and Carter? What about any other
> president? Why are you making such unreasonable demands?
Never any question about the others. Something fishy about this guy.
<snip>
In the litigation business, one quickly learns that if somebody has a
document that will be good for them, they can't wait to give it to you.
And if somebody has a document that will hurt them, they'll be tap
dancing faster than Richard Gere in Chicago to keep you from getting it.
Obama is tap dancing.
The Great Obama Swindle of 2008
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
> JonL <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote:
>> > http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
>> >
>> "factcheck", brought to you by Annenberg Foundation (Obama sat on their
>> board in Chicago)
>>
>> Inquiring Mindz want to know:
>>
>> When he was in Hawaii not long ago, he could have produced/released the
>> vault copy of his birth certificate, if one exists....why didn't he??,
>
> No, he can't. He isn't authorized to do so. Even if he could, who should
> he release it to? How many certified copies does he need to buy? One for
> each person who didn't vote for him, or just one for each person who
> voted for McCain?
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.1614/pub_detail.asp
how about just the scotus?
>> All we've seen was this Certificate of Live Birth, which only proves
>> that a live birth occurred....somewhere, not necessarily in Hawaii.
>> (Israeli experts pronounced it a crude forgery)
>
> Since when are israeli's experts on Hawaiian birth certificates? When
> did they examine it? Did they also examine the birth announcement in
> news paper?
newpaper article is so easily forged. so effin easy. i'm guessing there
aren't too many copies of the newpaper hanging around.
>
>> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
>> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
>
> Where was Regan born? What hospital specifically? Any plaque? What about
> either Bush? What about Clinton and Carter? What about any other
> president? Why are you making such unreasonable demands?
he's the first black (i really hate hyphenated-american descriptions). a
first.
seems somewhat reasonable that a hospital would want to claim it.
>> He could still qualify as natural born if Stanley moved back to the US
>> for 5 yrs.
>
> Really? What exactly is required to be a "natural born citizen"?
this is why the scotus needs to delve into this matter. the constitution
sets forth
the requirements, but it can be interpreted in 3 ways: born in one of the
u.s. states;
je suis: born of u.s. parentage (my cousins born of 1 american and 1
foreigner around
the same time had to come to this country after grad hs and stay for a
certain number
of yrs in order to assert their u.s. residency status, else they would not
have been
considered a resident; those born of 2 usa parents anywhere in the world are
granted
auto u.s. citizenship via je suis (by blood); it may not make them eligible
to be prez); or
a non csection birth :). csection birth is not a natural born birth :)<<<<
just kidding.
>> I guess "factcheck" forgot he was adopted (new name Barry Soerto) and
>> became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
>
> How would that affect his "natural born citizen" status in the USA? Even
> if he renounced his citizenship and then took it up again?
have to investigate the laws on this.
>
>> I also suspect he registered at Columbia and Harvard as a foreign
>> student.
>
> What proof do you have?
only a suspicion as in "suspect".
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"JonL" <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote in message
> Daniel T. wrote:
>>>
snip
>> Did they also examine the birth announcement in news paper?
snip
> Announcements in the paper can be done by anyone. Often 1-2 weeks after
> birth.
and the newspapers just accept what's sent in. no fact checking there.
newspaper article is absolutely no proof of anything. but then, we are and
have been raising idiots in this country for quite some time. all the
easier to
manipulate them and baffle them with bullshit.
> <snip>
> In the litigation business, one quickly learns that if somebody has a
> document that will be good for them, they can't wait to give it to you.
> And if somebody has a document that will hurt them, they'll be tap dancing
> faster than Richard Gere in Chicago to keep you from getting it. Obama is
> tap dancing.
>
>
> The Great Obama Swindle of 2008
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6f48l7
yes jon, that would be THE relevant section from that article. but the tap
dancing part - what a stereotype :)
oh, and how many of you are aware that bo was NOT the first black candidate
on the national ticket?
JonL
>
>> He could still qualify as natural born if Stanley moved back to the US
>> for 5 yrs.
>
> Really? What exactly is required to be a "natural born citizen"?
Title 8 of the U.S. Code explains what "natural born citizen" means:
* Anyone born inside the United States.
* Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a
citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of
the tribe.
* Anyone born outside the United States, both of whose parents are
citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
* Anyone born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen
and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a
U.S. national.
* Anyone born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and
lived in the U.S. for at least one year.
* Anyone found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage
cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not
provided by age 21.
* Anyone born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien
and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in
the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service
included in this time).
* A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of
an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
ps: McCain was considered a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c):
"a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions
of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of
whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying
possessions, prior to the birth of such person.
max
you googled and pasted that.
dipshit.
Dennis
>On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 23:52:22 +0000 (UTC), Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 18:19:30 -0500, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>>
>>>AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>>>> it's all over the blogs.
>>>
>>> Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
>>>president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
>>
>>I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
>>million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
>>paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
>>reasoning possibly be?
>>
>>(And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
>>Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
>>political area.)
>>
>>Dennis (evil)
>
>The whole thing is stupid, and has been around for ages. He has a
>mother who was a U.S. citizen.
Not stupid at all. The law is the law and the Constitution is the
Constitution.
Both my parents were US citizens, but they had to register my foreign
birth with the US consulate for my US citizenship to be valid. I have
the orginal documents. It's not automatic.
All my life, every bureaucrat that I encountered pointed out to me
that I couldn't run for US president since I was not born in the US
(or a few other special places).
My brother is a US citizen, his wife was not (originally -- she has
since naturalized). Their foreign-born children were not
automatically US citizens -- the one who stayed in the US had to
naturalize to become a citizen.
What is stupid is withholding the documents that would settle the
issue quickly and quietly.
>
>Who was it that was born in the Panama canal zone and would have had
>even less legitimacy in a court case? McCain.
Who produced the necessary documents as soon as it was raised as an
issue? McCain.
>
>IIRC there are a couple of other instances of "questionable"
>qualifications like this through the years that were contested and
>laughed out of court. Goldwater was one, I think.
>
>Besides, it is pretty obvious by now that everyone in Washington and
>the states will be on the cabinet and part of the Presidency. I
>wouldn't be surprised to see Rush apply for the job of drug czar.
Was he in the Clinton cabinet too? If not, he wouldn't represent
sufficient "Change". :-)
Dennis (evil)
--
"There is a fine line between participation and mockery" - Wally
JonL
>
>> I guess "factcheck" forgot he was adopted (new name Barry Soerto) and
>> became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
>
> How would that affect his "natural born citizen" status in the USA? Even
> if he renounced his citizenship and then took it up again?
If he had US and/or British citizenship, he had to surrender them. He
could have reapplied in the US if he'd already been a cit.
Complicating matters further, he's automatically a British subject at
birth (regardless of where the birth occurred) cuz Barack Sr was still a
Brit subject. Think if Stanley lived back in Hawaii for 5 years he'd be
considered a US cit, but also a dual cit, according to the Nationality
Act of 1948, governing Kenyans (British subjects).
The Founding fathers were afraid of dual-cit, potential "subversives",
especially British subjects.
>> How'd he manage to get into Pakistan when it was on the State
>> Department's Forbidden list, or whatever it's called (Pak was under
>> martial law)
>> My guess is, he had an Indonesian passport.
>
> When did he go to Pakistan as a private citizen? (Obviously a member of
> the senate could go.)
After a stint at Occidental college near L.A., and before entering
Columbia. Guess he wasn't just a po' student surviving on
grants/loans, after all.
The reason his relatives were so open about having witnessed his birth
in the delivery room (in Kenya), was, they had no clue about the
"natural born" provision before the election . They were unaware of
the potential harm to Barack.
Even the Kenyan ambassador blew it:
Mike Clark, host of WRIF Radio’s Mike in the Morning Show, called the
Kenyan Embassy to learn the reaction in Kenya to Obama becoming elected
President of the United States as he jokingly congratulated Kenya on
becoming our 51st state.
Clark’s call was put through to Kenyan Ambassador to the U.S. Peter
Ogego, who told Clark Kenya had already declared a public holiday that
Thursday in Obama’s honor.
Visit http://my.wrif.com/ mim/?p=916 to listen to the on-air interview.
Approximately 12 minutes and 30 seconds into the interview, Clark's
co-host asks Ogega, “President-elect Obama's birthplace over in Kenya,
is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?”
Ogego answers, “It’s, uh, already an attraction. His, his, uh, paternal
grandmother is still alive …"
When Ogego was asked, “But his birthplace, they'll put up a marker
there?” he responded, “It depends on the government; it's already well
known.”
JonL
Which ones are untrue???
With your lack of an Inquiring Mind, you cudda been a good journalist.
Vic Smith
wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:39:44 -0600, hchi...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 23:52:22 +0000 (UTC), Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 18:19:30 -0500, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>>>>> it's all over the blogs.
>>>>
>>>> Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
>>>>president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
>>>
>>>I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
>>>million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
>>>paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
>>>reasoning possibly be?
>>>
>>>(And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
>>>Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
>>>political area.)
>>>
>>>Dennis (evil)
>>
>>The whole thing is stupid, and has been around for ages. He has a
>>mother who was a U.S. citizen.
>
>Not stupid at all. The law is the law and the Constitution is the
>Constitution.
>
It's stupid. BTW, how about a cite, and not from the nutjobs pushing
this - but something that can be believed, to back up your claim
above about,
"I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost
a million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
paper that would put this whole issue to bed."
Hey, are you a fan of the "History" channel' Nostradamus and Bigfoot
series?
When you pile bullshit on bullshit it starts to add up - to a big pile
of bullshit.
Here, look at this,
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
But now you want a personal copy?
But wait, that would only be a copy.
And on and on.
Stupid. No. Fucking stupid.
--Vic
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"JonL" <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote in message news:49381F6...@Mayday.com...
was this title in effect when bo was born? those are the rules that apply,
the ones
if effect when he was born. i think (?)
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UVVZk.2805$us6...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
some sort of expert mentioned here says it's fake:
max
"AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
dipshit
Dennis
>Daniel T. wrote:
>>
>>> He could still qualify as natural born if Stanley moved back to the US
>>> for 5 yrs.
>>
>> Really? What exactly is required to be a "natural born citizen"?
>
>
>Title 8 of the U.S. Code explains what "natural born citizen" means:
>
> * Anyone born inside the United States.
>
> * Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a
>citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of
>the tribe.
>
> * Anyone born outside the United States, both of whose parents are
>citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
>
> * Anyone born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen
>and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a
>U.S. national.
>
> * Anyone born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and
>lived in the U.S. for at least one year.
>
> * Anyone found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage
>cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not
>provided by age 21.
>
> * Anyone born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien
>and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in
>the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service
>included in this time).
Elsewhere I have read that this requires five years residence in the
US after reaching age nineteen. This would explain why my brother's
foreign-born children were not US citizens even though he is -- he had
not met this requirement. Wasn't Obama's mom also a teenage parent?
Interesting...
--
It looks like freedom
But it smells like death
It's something in between,
I guess
It's closing time - Leonard Cohen
Dennis
Clearly it's not. The issue has made it to the SCOTUS, who will
(reportedly) look at whether they want to delve into it or not on
Friday. I bet the SCOTUS could look at your website too, so it
doesn't seem like the ironclad proof you suggest it is.
BTW, some of what I have read indicates that the certificate on
display on your website only documents that the birth was registered
in Hawaii. Apparently Hawaii allowed foreign births to be registered.
The certificate on your website does not list the hospital nor the
physician involved with the birth like a native birth certificate
would.
I don't know one way or the other -- as I said I only find the whole
thing interesting. I certainly hope that it gets settled quickly
since the last thing we need right now is some kind of Constitutional
crisis.
Oh, and just to make things even more interesting, apparently the
document for Obama's draft registration is also being questioned! Woo
hoo!
Hey, got any bread to go with this circus?
JonL
Oh, right,,,,Factfree examined it.
Update Nov. 1: The Associated Press quoted Chiyome Fukino as saying that
both she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have
personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original
birth certificate.
Fukino said she has “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State
Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on
record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
--------------------------------
notice:
1. Fukino is NOT stating that the original birth certificate is a US
birth certificate.
2. Fukino is NOT stating that is not a Kenyan birth certificate.
3. Fukino is only stating that a birth certificate (which could be
Kenyan) is filed in accordance with the rules.
4. Fukino is NOT saying that Obama’s record is not filed according
to Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 that allows “registration” of birth in
Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a
year preceding the child's birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of
residence.
5. Fukino’s statement, therefore, does not rule out that Obama could
have a Kenyan birth certificate but still filed according to Hawaii
Revised Statute 338-178 that allows “registration” of birth in Hawaii
for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year
preceding the child's birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence.
6. Fukino’s statement, also does not rule out registration of birth
of a child born outside the US but registered in Hawaii.
JonL
they're still on the books. He was born a British subject (regardless
of where), then became naturalized in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro. Most
likely is a nat cit of US, now.
Dennis
I reread the reference and I had scrambled the details. The actual
requirement is five years residence after age fourteen. Same end
result for both my brother and Obama's mom, though: FAIL.
Dennis (evil)
--
What the government gives, it must first take.
Daniel T.
> Daniel T. wrote:
>
> >> When he was in Hawaii not long ago, he could have produced/released the
> >> vault copy of his birth certificate, if one exists....why didn't he??,
>
> > No, he can't. He isn't authorized to do so. Even if he could, who should
> > he release it to? How many certified copies does he need to buy? One for
> > each person who didn't vote for him, or just one for each person who
> > voted for McCain?
>
> Sure he can. It's done routinely, if it's Your certificate. Release it
> to the Supremes before having the opportunity to alter it.
Really? Then do it. Provide us with your actual birth cert. Not some
copy but the one held in the records office of the hospital or county
courthouse where you were born. Give it to all of us, we all want to
examine it personally.
You can't do it.
> > > All we've seen was this Certificate of Live Birth, which only proves
> > > that a live birth occurred....somewhere, not necessarily in Hawaii.
> > > (Israeli experts pronounced it a crude forgery)
>
> > Since when are israeli's experts on Hawaiian birth certificates? When
> > did they examine it? Did they also examine the birth announcement in
> > news paper?
>
> Doesn't take much of an expert to notice they used a 2007 border with a
> 2008 seal and sig-stamp. (they're changed every year for security
> reasons) The bogus copy also has African as race. The legal term for
> blacks on all docs back in 61 was Negro.
All that was explained already. Got anything new?
> Announcements in the paper can be done by anyone. Often 1-2 weeks after
> birth.
So you are seriously claiming that Obama's parents or grand-parents
published an announcement of his birth in Honolulu "one to two weeks
after" the birth (it was actually 9 days after,) just in case the kid
got to run for president one day?
> > > Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
> > > "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
>
> > Where was Regan born? What hospital specifically? Any plaque? What about
> > either Bush? What about Clinton and Carter? What about any other
> > president? Why are you making such unreasonable demands?
>
> Never any question about the others. Something fishy about this guy.
Never any question about whether or not they became president? No
hospital has put up a plaque "birthplace of President John Kennedy"
but is that relevant? Of course not.
Your fishing. If some hospital did put up a plaque, you would say
"that proves nothing" but if they don't then you say "that proves he's
not a citizen."
> <snip>
> In the litigation business, one quickly learns that if somebody has a
> document that will be good for them, they can't wait to give it to you.
> And if somebody has a document that will hurt them, they'll be tap
> dancing faster than Richard Gere in Chicago to keep you from getting it.
> Obama is tap dancing.
Give it to who exactly? You?
Dave
rule
> > on. I for one am interested in what the supremes have to say on the
> > atter. -Dave
>
> They already dismissed it.
You're confused. It was dismissed (wrongly) by a judge in PA. -Dave
Daniel T.
> "JonL" <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote:
> > Announcements in the paper can be done by anyone. Often 1-2 weeks after
> > birth.
>
> and the newspapers just accept what's sent in. no fact checking there.
> newspaper article is absolutely no proof of anything.
But if there were no announcement, then you all would be yelling "Why no
announcement? That proves he was born elsewhere!" Just more fishing.
The real question is why did anybody put the announcement in the paper
in the first place if it wasn't true? Where they expecting that Barack
would one day run for president?
How deep is this conspiracy?
Vic Smith
As deep as it takes to keep it going.
Pure bullshit. Lots of it out there.
--Vic
Cheapo Groovo
der...@hotmail.com says...
> it's all over the blogs.
>
>
> http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
>
> overnight fedex supreme court w/ your concerns; only way to reach them:
>
> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82449
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=supreme+court+obama+eligibility&aq=1&oq=supreme+court+obama+eli
>
>
this is a frugal blog - where is claims casino now?
Dennis
wrote:
>In article <olHZk.2660$QX3....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
> "AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Daniel T." <dani...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:daniel_t-857148...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
>> > "Dave" <now...@noway2.not> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "max" <beta...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:betatron-D48844...@news.ftupet.com...
>> >> > In article <y4DZk.2657$us6....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
>> >> > "AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > it's all over the blogs.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> http://dailykenoshan.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=63&topic=53329.msg
>> >> 5
>> >> 74
>> >> > > 74;topicseen
>> >> > >
>> >> > > http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
>> >> > >
>> >> > > overnight fedex supreme court w/ your concerns; only way to reach
>> >> > > them:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82449
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=supreme+court+obama+eligibility&aq=1&o
>> >> q
>> >> =s
>> >> > > upreme+court+obama+eli
>> >> >
>> >> > dipshit.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> What? This is a real court case that the supremes are going to have to
>> >> rule
>> >> on. I for one am interested in what the supremes have to say on the
>> >> atter. -Dave
>> >
>> > They already dismissed it.
>>
>> i think that was a federal judge. i don't think they're looking at this
>> until friday
>
>It was Justice Souter. Here's the link ...
>
>http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a391.htm
>
>end of story.
Um, no:
CHICAGO The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take
up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama's U.S.
citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some
opponents of Obama's election.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6145787.html
Dennis (evil)
--
What government gives, it must first take away.
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
> "AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "JonL" <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote:
>
>> > Announcements in the paper can be done by anyone. Often 1-2 weeks after
>> > birth.
>>
>> and the newspapers just accept what's sent in. no fact checking there.
>> newspaper article is absolutely no proof of anything.
>
> But if there were no announcement, then you all would be yelling "Why no
> announcement? That proves he was born elsewhere!" Just more fishing.
no. not everyone puts a birth announcement in the papers. they mean and
prove
zip.
>
> The real question is why did anybody put the announcement in the paper
> in the first place if it wasn't true? Where they expecting that Barack
> would one day run for president?
put it in upon return to hawaii just to let friends there know? no need to
expect
bo to do anything spectacular. just a late announcement. then again,
maybe
she wanted "proof" that he was u.s. born. nice to be even if not running
for prez.
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"Cheapo Groovo" <cc...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.23a321cf8...@news.wowway.com...
it went to hell a long time ago. this is the stuff that's being discussed.
Daniel T.
Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Update: The Supreme Court did not grant certiorari in the case.
Don't even pretend to think the conspiracy theorists will give up though.
Dave
>
> What case are you referring to? The only case I see on the Surpreme
> Court's docket involving Obama was dismissed by Justice Souter on 11/3.
Different case:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/12/obama-birth-cer.html
Daniel T.
OK, I found it. No. 08A407. But this suit accepts that Obama was born in
the USA and was an American citizen at birth.
Dave
> >
> > Different case:
> > http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/12/obama-birth-cer.html
>
> OK, I found it. No. 08A407. But this suit accepts that Obama was born in
> the USA and was an American citizen at birth.
And? Again, a citizen is not eligible to be President. -Dave
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
"Dave" <now...@noway2.not> wrote in message
news:ghh8se$c4q$1...@news.motzarella.org...
qualify one to be prez
JR Weiss
>
>>> OK, I found it. No. 08A407. But this suit accepts that Obama was born in the
>>> USA and was an American citizen at birth.
>>
>> And? Again, a citizen is not eligible to be President. -Dave
>>
> correct. american citizenship does not automatically constitutionally qualify
> one to be prez
However, an American citizen who achieved that citizenship by virtue of being
born in the US IS a "natural born" citizen, and therefore meets the basic
criterion!
Daniel T.
So only non-citizens can be President of the USA? You might want to
rethink your logic.
Dave
"JR Weiss" <jrw...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:ghhodm$fdj$1...@news.motzarella.org...
Unless you become a citizen of another country where you can not hold dual
citizenship.
Or unless your grandmother swears that you were born in another country.
Or unless...
Too many unanswered questions. We'll have to wait for the Supremes to
ule. -Dave
Dave
You have to be a "natural born" citizen to be President. As I've stated
before, the (well disputed) birth certificate is a red herring. There is a
good chance Obama was a citizen of Indonesia at some point. If that is so
(probably is, but the Supremes will rule on it) then Obama is not a natural
born citizen of the U.S. -Dave
sgall...@rogers.com
> "JR Weiss" <jrwe...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>
> news:ghhodm$fdj$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>
> > "AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote ...
>
> >>>> OK, I found it. No. 08A407. But this suit accepts that Obama was born
> >>>> in the USA and was an American citizen at birth.
>
> >>> And? Again, a citizen is not eligible to be President. -Dave
>
> >> correct. american citizenship does not automatically constitutionally
> >> qualify one to be prez
>
> > However, an American citizen who achieved that citizenship by virtue of
> > being born in the US IS a "natural born" citizen, and therefore meets the
> > basic criterion!
>
> Unless you become a citizen of another country where you can not hold dual
> citizenship.
Only if that other country requires you to go to the officials of your
original country and formally renounce citizenship according to the
original country's laws, and then return to them with proof that you
really did renounce your original citizenship. Otherwise, the fact
that this other country does not allow dual citizenship would have no
effect upon a person's US citizenship.
Daniel T.
> > > > > Different case:
> > > > > http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/12/obama-
> > > > > birth-cer.html
> > > >
> > > > OK, I found it. No. 08A407. But this suit accepts that Obama
> > > > was born in the USA and was an American citizen at birth.
> > >
> > > And? Again, a citizen is not eligible to be President. -Dave
> >
> > So only non-citizens can be President of the USA? You might want
> > to rethink your logic.
>
> You have to be a "natural born" citizen to be President. As I've
> stated before, the (well disputed) birth certificate is a red
> herring. There is a good chance Obama was a citizen of Indonesia at
> some point. If that is so (probably is, but the Supremes will rule
> on it) then Obama is not a natural born citizen of the U.S. -Dave
What do you think "natural born citizen" means if it doesn't mean they
were born in the USA?
If Marie Elizabeth Elg was a "natural born citizen" despite the fact
that both her parents were foreigners and despite the fact that she
spent most of her childhood on foreign soil, why would you think that
Obama is not?
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=307&invol=3
25
Vic Smith
>Too many unanswered questions. We'll have to wait for the Supremes to
>ule. -Dave
There are no unanswered questions. Just bullshit.
The "case" only got to SCOTUS because the wackos pushing it have the
finances to buy lawyers to get it kicked out of every court up to
SCOTUS, where they then have to "entertain" it.
SCOTUS will kick it out too. Like swatting a fly.
But the wackos will use the fact that it got to SCOTUS to perpetuate
the bullshit. There's money to be made in books, TV interviews, etc.
Think UFO's, Bigfoot, Loch Ness monster.
Same thing. Bullshit.
Hey, some people like that stuff.
--Vic
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
<sgall...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:76db2928-59db-4684...@j32g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
the u.s. didn't allow dual citizenship except with israel at that time. i
pretty sure.
i think it may have changed, but i know that when my youngest was born
overseas,
we had to take steps to register him for a u.s. state department bc. so,
even if
the other country allowed dual citizenship, i don't think the u.s. allowed
it then
and maybe not now, except for israel.
Dave
> What do you think "natural born citizen" means if it doesn't mean they
> were born in the USA?
>
> If Marie Elizabeth Elg was a "natural born citizen" despite the fact
> that both her parents were foreigners and despite the fact that she
> spent most of her childhood on foreign soil, why would you think that
> Obama is not?
>
> http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=307&invol=3
> 25
I'm going by reports that Obama was a citizen of Indonesia and only
Indonesia at some point in his life. If that is true, then...
while he was a citizen of Indonesia, he was not a citizen (natural born or
otherwise) of any other country, to include the U.S.A.
So then logically, if you become a citizen of the U.S.A sometime AFTER you
are born, you can not be a "natural born" citizen of the U.S.A., even if
many years earlier you WERE a "natural born" citizen of the U.S.A.
That is why I believe the much-disputed birth certificate is a red herring
anyway. Even if it was released and authenticated, it would only prove that
Obama was a citizen at some point. And it wouldn't matter. -Dave
sgall...@rogers.com
wrote:
> <sgallag...@rogers.com> wrote in message
>
> news:76db2928-59db-4684...@j32g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 7, 7:44 pm, "Dave" <no...@nohow.not> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "JR Weiss" <jrwe...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>
> >news:ghhodm$fdj$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>
> > > "AllEmailDeletedImmediately" <der...@hotmail.com> wrote ...
>
> > >>>> OK, I found it. No. 08A407. But this suit accepts that Obama was born
> > >>>> in the USA and was an American citizen at birth.
>
> > >>> And? Again, a citizen is not eligible to be President. -Dave
>
> > >> correct. american citizenship does not automatically constitutionally
> > >> qualify one to be prez
>
> > > However, an American citizen who achieved that citizenship by virtue of
> > > being born in the US IS a "natural born" citizen, and therefore meets
> > > the
> > > basic criterion!
>
> > Unless you become a citizen of another country where you can not hold dual
> > citizenship.
>
> Only if that other country requires you to go to the officials of your
> original country and formally renounce citizenship according to the
> original country's laws, and then return to them with proof that you
> really did renounce your original citizenship. Otherwise, the fact
> that this other country does not allow dual citizenship would have no
> effect upon a person's US citizenship.
>
> the u.s. didn't allow dual citizenship except with israel at that time. i
> pretty sure.
At the time, the US policy was strongly against dual citizenship, but
it was not outrightly prohibited. There were also several ways that a
person could lose US citizenship back then, ways that no longer
exist. Many of those ways of losing US citizenship ended up being
removed due to the Supreme Court decision of Afroyim v. Rusk in 1967.
Because this decision was based on a Constitution interpretation,
people who were told, prior to that decision, that they had lost their
citizenship were able to have their cases re-adjudicated and their
citizenship restored, if they wished. Others who may have performed
an action that would have resulted in loss of their US citizenship,
but who were never formally told that their
citizenship was revoked, don't have to worry about it ever having been
lost. By the way, there was no special allowance for dual citizenship
with Israel. It's just that Israeli nationality law was written in
such a way that it did not invoke any of the provisions that caused
loss of US citizenship. For example, at the time, swearing alleiance
to a foreign country or applying for that country's citizenship would
normally cause loss of US citizenship. Israeli law conferred Israeli
citizenship upon any Jew who immigrated there under Israel's law of
return, without that person having to actually apply for the Israeli
citizenship or to swear any oath of allegiance to Israel. Since,
other countries did not do this, it meant that for many years, Israeli
citizenship was the only one that could be acquired by a US citizen
(after birth), that would not cause loss of US citizenship because
acquisition of Israeli citizenship did not trigger any of the ways
that caused loss of US citizenship.
But, a person who was born with both US and other citizenships, was
allowed to keep both citizenships as long as he didn't violate any of
the parts of law that would cause loss of US citizenship.
Jeff
> max wrote:
>> In article <49381198...@Mayday.com>, JonL <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote:
>>
>>> max wrote:
>>>> In article <4937A1C8...@Mayday.com>, JonL <Jo...@Mayday.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Marsha wrote:
>>>>>> Dennis wrote:
>>>>>>> I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent
>>>>>>> almost a
>>>>>>> million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
>>>>>>> paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
>>>>>>> reasoning possibly be? (And don't even try to suggest some
>>>>>>> mythical "right to privacy".
>>>>>>> Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
>>>>>>> political area.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dennis (evil)
>>>>>> True, but you would think Hillary's camp would have fought this to
>>>>>> the bitter end a long time ago. Then again, Obama has fought to
>>>>>> keep a lot of things under wraps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marsha
>>>>> Just a few things under wraps:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Original, vault copy of Certificate of Live Birth in the USA -- Not
>>>>> Released
>>>>>
>>>>> a Certificate of Live Birth -- Released Proven Counterfeit
>>>>> (www.ObamaFiles.com)
>>>>>
>>>>> Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Soetoro adoption records -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Fransiskus Assisi School application -- Released
>>>>>
>>>>> Punahou School records -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Selective Service Registration -- Released Proven Counterfeit
>>>>>
>>>>> Occidental College records -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Passport -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Columbia College records -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Columbia thesis -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Harvard College records -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Harvard Law Review articles -- None (maybe 1, Not Signed)
>>>>>
>>>>> Baptism certificate -- None
>>>>>
>>>>> Medical records -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> Illinois State Senate records -- None (Locked up to prohibit public
>>>>> view)
>>>>>
>>>>> Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost (All other Illinois state
>>>>> senators' records are intact)
>>>>>
>>>>> Law practice client list -- Not released
>>>>>
>>>>> University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ===========================n:
>>>>>
>>>>> My addition:
>>>>>
>>>>> graduated from Zbigniew Brzezinski's Manchurian Candidate school
>>>>> --- no records released
>>>> dipshit
>>>>
>>> "Insults are the arguments of those who have no arguments."
>>> ~Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, (1712-78), French philosopher and social critic
>>
>> you googled and pasted that.
>
> Which ones are untrue???
Who cares?
It's an obsession that nothing will ever come of. You probably had a
similar obsession with Clinton's dick.
And yet, you care not one whit about the crimes that have been
committed and covered up by Bush, Cheney and company.
Or, 5 trillion dollars further in debt, an unfinished neglected war
in Afghanistan that the commander on the ground says is dire, 8 years
and nearing a net job loss. Nearly a trillion dollars pumped into a
failing banking structure.
And what are you worried about? How to keep Obama out of office at
any cost.
The electorate has spoken, if the Republican party was dog food it
would be taken off the shelf.
Obama is not an idealogue like yourself. He's a deeply pragmatic
president elect who is committed to getting a collapsing government and
country working again. But you don't give a rats ass beyond beyond your
hatred of Obama. Good luck selling that to anyone who doesn't have your
blinders on.
Jeff
>
> With your lack of an Inquiring Mind, you cudda been a good journalist.
>
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
<sgall...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:f8c6ac2a-1fae-4cfa...@t11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
---------
thanks for all the hard work. this is all part of what i hope the sc will
choose
to wade thru. bo should demand it, because w/o it there will always be a
whiff.
if the sc finds in his favor, as in actually reviewing it and not dismissing
it, then
that's that. the highest court has annointed him and anyone w/suspicions
otherwise
will have to just accept that decision.
JR Weiss
>
> the u.s. didn't allow dual citizenship except with israel at that time. i
> pretty sure.
Also Switzerland.
NoSpa...@lousyisp.gov
<snip>
> By the way, there was no special allowance for dual citizenship
>with Israel. It's just that Israeli nationality law was written in
>such a way that it did not invoke any of the provisions that caused
>loss of US citizenship. For example, at the time, swearing alleiance
>to a foreign country or applying for that country's citizenship would
>normally cause loss of US citizenship. Israeli law conferred Israeli
>citizenship upon any Jew who immigrated there under Israel's law of
>return, without that person having to actually apply for the Israeli
>citizenship or to swear any oath of allegiance to Israel. Since,
>other countries did not do this, it meant that for many years, Israeli
>citizenship was the only one that could be acquired by a US citizen
>(after birth), that would not cause loss of US citizenship because
>acquisition of Israeli citizenship did not trigger any of the ways
>that caused loss of US citizenship.
Yes, yes, but this wasn't just Israel. A person born in the UK is a UK
citizen by birth regardless of how and why they acquired US
citizenship. About 7 years ago my wife was naturalized in the US
(along with myself) and she now goes out of the US on her US passport
and into the UK on her British one, something that saves time at the
immigration check-in. Same deal in the opposite direction and for the
same reason. The immigration agents are well aware of this as
apparently lots of people do it frequently. Nothing illegal about it
although I wonder how they match her up in their records. Maybe she's
still in the air (many times).
In Ireland (my case) you were an automatic Irish citizen if you had a
grandparent born in the country (or in my son's case, a parent who was
Irish by descent). All that you had to do was to pay to have the fact
registered (and prove it) and you could get an Irish passport. You
might ask why one would want an Irish passport? Because Ireland is in
the Common Market (or whatever they call it now) and all citizens of a
Common Market country are entitled to work anywhere in the EU they
like. US and other nationals get the bum's rush. Like with the British
it helps with immigration at the airport too.
I imagine there are lots of other countries.
Daniel T.
> >
> > What do you think "natural born citizen" means if it doesn't mean they
> > were born in the USA?
> >
> > If Marie Elizabeth Elg was a "natural born citizen" despite the fact
> > that both her parents were foreigners and despite the fact that she
> > spent most of her childhood on foreign soil, why would you think that
> > Obama is not?
> >
> > http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=307&invol=3
> > 25
>
> I'm going by reports that Obama was a citizen of Indonesia and only
> Indonesia at some point in his life. If that is true, then...
No reason to go past here... First you must prove that is true.
Dave
>> Indonesia at some point in his life. If that is true, then...
>
> No reason to go past here... First you must prove that is true.
I'm not applying to be President of the U.S. Let someone who wants that job
do the proving that he's eligible. -Dave
sgall...@rogers.com
> "sgallag...@rogers.com" <sgallag...@rogers.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > By the way, there was no special allowance for dual citizenship
> >with Israel. It's just that Israeli nationality law was written in
> >such a way that it did not invoke any of the provisions that caused
> >loss of US citizenship. For example, at the time, swearing alleiance
> >to a foreign country or applying for that country's citizenship would
> >normally cause loss of US citizenship. Israeli law conferred Israeli
> >citizenship upon any Jew who immigrated there under Israel's law of
> >return, without that person having to actually apply for the Israeli
> >citizenship or to swear any oath of allegiance to Israel. Since,
> >other countries did not do this, it meant that for many years, Israeli
> >citizenship was the only one that could be acquired by a US citizen
> >(after birth), that would not cause loss of US citizenship because
> >acquisition of Israeli citizenship did not trigger any of the ways
> >that caused loss of US citizenship.
>
> Yes, yes, but this wasn't just Israel. A person born in the UK is a UK
> citizen by birth regardless of how and why they acquired US
> citizenship.
Absolutely. But, there was a unique aspect about Israeli citizenship
in that it was just about the only citizenship that could be
voluntarily acquired by a US citizen, after birth. Not because of any
special arrangement between the two countries, but simply because
Israel's laws allowed acquisition of Israeli citizenship in a way that
did not trigger any of the provisions in US law that would cause loss
of US citizenship.
So, yes, a person could be born with both UK citizenship and US
citizenship (and even be born a UK citizen and later acquire US
citizenship - more on this later) and keep both. But, it was not
possible at that time for a US citizen to voluntarily acquire UK
citizenship because it involved actually applying for the citizenship
and swearing an oath of allegiance to the crown - acts which would
cause loss of US citizenship. On the other hand, Jews who immigrated
to Israel under the Law of Return were granted Israeli citizenship
without having to request it or swear any oath of allegiance. It was
simply granted when that person immigrated to Israel.
That was the difference that existed at that time.
> About 7 years ago my wife was naturalized in the US
> (along with myself) and she now goes out of the US on her US passport
> and into the UK on her British one,
That's correct. While many people will state that you are no longer
British due to the renunciatory statement in the US naturalization
oath, in reality only British law can determine whether or not you are
British, and British law does not view the US renunciatory statement
as having any effect under British nationality law. So, you are still
British, as well as now being US citizen.
> something that saves time at the
> immigration check-in. Same deal in the opposite direction and for the
> same reason. The immigration agents are well aware of this as
> apparently lots of people do it frequently. Nothing illegal about it
> although I wonder how they match her up in their records. Maybe she's
> still in the air (many times).
>
> In Ireland (my case) you were an automatic Irish citizen if you had a
> grandparent born in the country (or in my son's case, a parent who was
> Irish by descent). All that you had to do was to pay to have the fact
> registered (and prove it) and you could get an Irish passport.
True, although in this case, Ireland did not consider the person with
the Irish grandparent to be Irish unless and until the registration
took place.
I am a multiple citizen myself, US by birth, British by descent, and
Canadian by naturalization. I hold passports from all three countries.
Dennis
>I am a multiple citizen myself, US by birth, British by descent, and
>Canadian by naturalization. I hold passports from all three countries.
I also have dual citizenship. I am a New Zealand citizen by virtue of
being born there and a US citizen by having two US citizen parents who
registered my birth with the US consolate. However, I've never
bothered to get a New Zealand passport.
BTW, all my life, every SS, border, customs and other bureaucrat that
I have encountered has made it a point to tell me that I could never
run for US president since I was not born on US soil (or other special
cases). So if it is not actually the law, it is a very commonly held
notion.
Dennis (evil)
--
What the government gives, it must first take.
Daniel T.
It seems to me that the one making the accusation is the one who needs
to do the proving.
Dave
>> job
>> do the proving that he's eligible. -Dave
>
> It seems to me that the one making the accusation is the one who needs
> to do the proving.
When was the last time you wanted a job where you did not have to prove
yourself eligible and capable of doing the job? -Dave
Daniel T.
He's already done that... Next?