Posted on 10/15/2009 2:58:49 PM PDT by rxsid
Joe says:
Gorefan - My heritage includes the Adams of Massachusetts and the Herndons of Virginia. The Adams papers I am in possession of plainly state they looked to "Vattel's Law of Nations" for guidance in determining who might be qualified as a "natural born Citizen". (Yes, they capitalized "Citizen".) Do you actually believe there was no discussion of the topic by the Founding Fathers? Are you truly that ignorant of how well the Founding Fathers understood the law and its possible impact on future generations? It is very clear you haven't a clue how well educated and intelligent the Founding Fathers were. Most were conversant in Latin and Greek, plus Hebrew and Aramaic.
October 14, 10:48 PM
Joe says:
My family is in possession of over seven thousand files of Adams documents that have been passed from generation to generation. We know what our forebears intended, we are not guessing and jumping to conclusions. Every possible legal scenario was thoroughly discussed and carefully decided by the Founding Fathers. Contrary to prevailing opinion, they left NOTHING to chance. I will be sharing our documents with the best qualified attorneys working on the Obama eligibility cases. Get used to it, Obama is finished and he knows it. Obama is knowingly leading his blinded followers down the paths of deceit and directly into the darkened halls of shame.
October 14, 11:00 PM
Joe says:
My family also counts among our forebears King O'Leathlobhair (pronounced OWE LAL_OW_IR), who was ruler of all England in the third century A.D. The name O'Leathlobhair means "seeker of justice" and it is the original term from which the word "lawyer" was derived around the year 100 B.C. We've been well known as meticulous practitioners of the law since before the birth of Christ. In that time, I believe we have acquired a rather firm grasp of the basic ideas of how laws are to be properly formulated and administered. Obama shall not be allowed to continue to illegally retain the office of president.
October 14, 11:53 PM
"John says:
The Adams papers I am in possession of plainly state they looked to "Vattel's Law of Nations" for guidance in determining who might be qualified as a "natural born Citizen"."Joe - Please tell me you're kidding
October 15, 12:07 AM
Joe says:
John - This is an extremely serious matter, I do not "kid" about such issues.
October 15, 12:08 AM
Joe says:
My family and others have quietly observed and awaited the full winnowing of the wheat from the chaff in the legal matter of Obama's lack of eligibility. We are now preparing to act in unison to see that the law is enforced. The subject of "natural born Citizen" has never before been at issue during the term of a sitting president. The matter shall be decided fairly and equitably from information contained within very clear and meet and proper archived resources. The Lees of Virginia and other families also possess within their private archives a great deal of documentation regarding the intent of the Founding Fathers. Those who believe this issue was not debated and decided long ago haven't been previously afforded access to the existing documents.
October 15, 12:29 AM
John says:
Joe - I've been researching this subject for a year. Trust me, I know exactly how serious this is. I'd like to talk to you more but offline. If you're interested, email me at theoriginalist@rocketmail.com
October 15, 12:46 AM
Joe says:
The trump cards are face-up on the table for all to see. The "natural born Citizen" issue is neither mysterious, nor undecided. Always remember : Only patience, wisdom, and forebearance bring justice, the law shall not be hastened to conclusion. I must now depart. At noon today, a real estate closing demands my attention. I bid you all a good evening and may God bless America.
October 15, 12:52 AM
Joe says:
John - I shall contact you later today. Thank you for researching the issue and rest assured many families hold information that will prove vitally important to serious practitioners of the law.
October 15, 12:57 AM
and are in descending order (by date/time). The most recent comment being at the bottom of the quotes.
Who knows (aside from "Joe") if this is true that such papers exist. It is, however, very plausible that many documents from the founders are not cataloged in the L.O.C. or elsewhere in public view.
Could be of huge significance...
Okay, lawyers: Who becomes president if Barack Obama or whatever his real name is, is found to be a usurper? Not Joseph Biden? He is complicit, as is Nancy Pelosi. Does Mr. McCain? Senator Byrd? WHO?!!
This would sure help slam the door on the After-birthers that the Law of Nations written in the US Constitution refers to de Vattel’s works.
Check on whereabouts of "HistorianDorisKearnsGoodwad."
Obama’s Achilles heel — Natural Born Citizenship
Examiner.com | 10-15-2009 | Dianna Cotter
Posted on 10/15/2009 2:13:26 PM PDT by Danae
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2363369/posts
|
|
|||
Gods |
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
That question is why I cannot see the SC going with the Vattel definition no matter how convincing the evidence for it. Of course, that assumes it ever gets to them and I’m sure they will be content with district and/or appellate courts finding a lack of standing.
I hope they guard those documents with their lives plus make 20 copies and mail them to a number of the bloggers working this issue.
This could be a very important find.
If this guy John has the what he says he does, it’s goodbye Obama.
If I remember correctly, after the speaker of the house, the executive authority would move on to Senator Byrd, then to serving members of the cabinet. The first would be Secretary of State, Hillary Rotten Clinton. The next would be Sec of Treasury, Sec of Defense, the Attorney General, Sec of Interior, Sec of Agriculture, Sec of Commerce, Sec of Labor, Sec of Health and Human Services, Sec of Urban Development, Sec of Transportation, Sec of Energy, Sec of Education, Sec of Veterans Affairs, Sec of Homeland Security and then to some guy in a bar named “Phil”.
Vattel’s Influence on the term
a Natural Born Citizen
What is a natural born citizen? Where did the framers come up with this term? Where was it used before? So many questions, and the answers are right there if anyone wishes to search out the truth.
The term Natural born Citizen appears in our Constitution, in Article 1, Section 2, with these words, “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.”
Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise “the Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19,
§ 212. Of the citizens and natives.
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
“Please note that the correct title of Vattel’s Book I, Chapter 19, section 212, is “Of the citizens and naturals”. It is not “Of citizens and natives” as it was originally translated into English. While other translation errors were corrected in reprints, that 1759 translation error was never corrected in reprints. The error was made by translators in London operating under English law, and was mis-translated in error, or was possibly translated to suit their needs to convey a different meaning to Vattel to the English only reader. In French, as a noun, native is rendered as “originaire” or “indigene”, not as “naturel”. For “naturel” to mean native would need to be used as an adjective. In fact when Vattel defines “natural born citizens” in the second sentence of section 212 after defining general or ordinary citizens in the first sentence, you see that he uses the word “indigenes” for natives along with “Les naturels” in that sentence. He used the word “naturels” to emphasize clearly who he was defining as those who were born in the country of two citizens of the country. Also, when we read Vattel, we must understand that Vattel’s use of the word “natives” in 1758 is not to be read with modern day various alternative usages of that word. You must read it in the full context of sentence 2 of section 212 to fully understand what Vattel was defining from natural law, i.e., natural born citizenship of a country. Please see the photograph of the original French for Chapter 19, Section 212, here in the original French if you have any doubts. Please do not simply look at the title as some have suggested that is all you need to do. Vattel makes it quite clear he is not speaking of natives in this context as someone simply born in a country, but of natural born citizens, those born in the country of two citizens of the country. Our founding Fathers were men of high intellectual abilities, many were conversant in French, the diplomatic language of that time period. Benjamin Franklin had ordered 3 copies of the French Edition of “Le droit des gens,” which the deferred to as the authoritative version as to what Vattel wrote and what Vattel meant and intended to elucidate.”.
This is a good point. Most of the pro-usurper agitation comes from people who can't even read French, much less Latin or Greek. Ignorance is at a pandemic stage here in 2009.
Please ping me to further information on these papers, rxsid.
But these are big books. Where's the evidence that the Founders agreed with Vattel on this specific topic? As a continental thinker Vattel's views on this matter may be different from those of the British tradition that was the foundation of our system of laws. To get closer to the truth on this you'd have to look at other occurrences of the term "natural born citizen" -- Blackstone's for example. They many not coincide with Vattel's.
When he says he's got the Adams papers does he mean the set that was put out by the Harvard University Press or are we supposed to believe he's got the original documents lying around the house? And when somebody says they trace their ancestry from a Celtic Irish king it's one of those red flags that they're probably not all there or all right in the head.
Adams hand comes from the grave to strike down an Islamic Communist. How fitting would that be.
They specified age and minimum term of residence within the US. Why would they leave the term “Natural born citizen”, that’s in the same paragraph, up for intrepretation? Because they didn’t.
I hope this is the truth.
Is it possible that a single family really has such important documents in their possession and the government doesn’t know?
Having spent a fair amount of time tracking down my own early paternal genealogy in England, and apparently before that, Ireland, I cannot say "BS" loudly enough to this.
Are there papers extant, in private hands, that could shed light upon this matter? I don't doubt that it's a possibility.
But then, the poster goes on to claim some sort of ancient hereditary state of lawyerliness through an Irish clan that he says is English, from which he could not possibly have proved himself to have descended. At most, it's the legendary origin of his surname, if Lawlor. Very, very weird.
Someone is prone to flights of fancy, and self-aggrandizement. This throws the other familial claims, rather grand in and of themselves but not stretching credulity quite so far, into question.
It's just another colmado_naranja scammer, imho.
Interesting ... ultimately, the truth will not be denied.
~~~~~
Joe says:
Vattel’s “Law of Nations”, Chaper 19, § 212. Of the citizens and natives.
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children.”
October 14, 10:40 PM
~~~~~~~~~
gorefan says:
Joe - which founding father and which set of papers are referring to?
October 14, 10:39 PM
~~~~~~~~
Joe says:
John Jay’s letter to G. Washington - “New-York, 25th July, 1787.
Dear Sir,
Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.
I remain, dear sir,
Your faithful friend and servant,
John Jay.”
October 14, 10:36 PM
“WE” have traced roots to William and are in The Doomsday Book. After/before that we have only a rough guess of where we may have ccme from. Most of us have dark blue eyes which origionated in north of Denmark, most likely Norse.
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.