Posted on 06/10/2009 5:13:51 AM PDT by real_patriotic_american
We've all seen the e-mails about Barack Obama's citizenship. This is a new twist we hadn't known. Interesting. More questions. And this time some good questions.
It can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did you use when you were shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi?
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later? And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta and Karachi ,what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?
The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers.
It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A: Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under
A: There are only three possibilities. 1. He traveled with a U.S. passport, 2) He traveled with a British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no-travel" list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981, he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport. If he was traveling with a British passport, that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on Aug. 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he was traveling with an Indonesian passport, that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian stepfather in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" U.S. citizen between 1981 and 2008.
Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
Count me in as one of those inquiring minds who'd at least like to know the answers to these easily answered (by Obama) questions.
> Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981, he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport. If he was traveling with a British passport, that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on Aug. 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims.
Why is that so? I have a British passport that I acquired thru being born to a British parent. I applied for it and received it in the country where I was born, which was not the United Kingdom. Why could Obama not have done something similar?
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t believe he was born in Hawaii and it would be great to prove he was born elsewhere, but traveling on a British passport isn’t going to necessarily prove he was born in Kenya. He and I are about the same age and the same rules for eligibility for a British Passport are likely to have applied to both of us.
(DRAT! Back to the drawing board for you, mate!)
His father was a Kenyan citizen (British Colony citizen) and his mother to young to pass along American citizenship. Thus, he needs to prove otherwise that he is eligible to serve as President.
> His father was a Kenyan citizen (British Colony citizen) and his mother to young to pass along American citizenship. Thus, he needs to prove otherwise that he is eligible to serve as President.
Fine, but why could he not have been born in Hawaii, and apply for his British Passport from there? You do not have to be born in Britain or a British Colony to qualify for a British Passport — all you required back then was a British parent. In my case, I applied thru my father. Why could Obama not have done the same thing?
(Answer: there is no reason why he couldn’t have)
If he was born in hawaii, he’d have dual citizenship, which would account for the passport issue.
If he attended as a foreign national then he claimed foreign citizenship, raising a myriad of questions. If he did, and now claims he was not a foreign national, then he is guilty of embezzelment.
My point is that Obama is not a natural born American citizen which is a requirement to serve as President.
> If he was born in hawaii, he’d have dual citizenship, which would account for the passport issue.
Which is what I have: one passport by birth, and different one thru my Dad (and yet another one by naturalizing in a third country).
The hurdle to get past is “was he born in the US?” I don’t see any other way around it.
Dual citizenship? Isn’t that not allowed for the President?
You make a great point here.
Re: “Did he attend college as “a foreign national” and did he receive aid as such?
If he attended as a foreign national then he claimed foreign citizenship, raising a myriad of questions. If he did, and now claims he was not a foreign national, then he is guilty of embezzelment.”
> My point is that Obama is not a natural born American citizen which is a requirement to serve as President.
I understand that. You’re trying to prove that point by saying that if he traveled on his British passport to Pakistan he therefore could not have been born in the US. I am disagreeing with that premise. He could have a British passport easily, AND still have been born in Hawaii.
This is not true. There was no travel ban to Pakistan in 1981.
It falls apart right there. Pakistan was not and has never been on a State Department "no-travel" list. As Freepers who travelled there in the 70's and 80's have attested. Obama could have easily gone there on a U.S. passport.
If he was born in Hawaii then he became a natural born citizen in 1961.
What law or clause of the Constitution forbids it?
My understanding is that Reagan lifted travel restrictions to Pakistan in 1981, however the State department issued a travel advisory:
http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/travel/cis/southasia/TA_Pakistan1981.pdf
The reality was, however, that Pakistan was only issuing 30-day visas to the press, diplomats and those willing/able to provide large bribes. They did not want Americans there.
I travelled to Pakistan multiple times during that period. The State Department travel advisory addresses specifically airport visas, which were being issued only for 30 days. If you obtained your visa prior to entering the country, you could get a longer period of time, no bribes involved.
That is PRECISELY what the “natural born citizen” clause in the Constitution is all about.
Perhaps people today don’t get it directly because the phrase is not one in common use, but it sure was well understood in the 18th Century, and the Founders knew PRECISELY what it meant, and believe me, they were VERY concerned about individual with divided loyalties through their birth circumstances.
People who, like Barack Obama, had dual citizenship at birth, were precisely the people this clause was directed at. To be a “natural born” citizen, one must be born in the United States and have a US Citizen father. That’s what was understood by the Founders, and that’s what they meant when they wrote the Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.