Posted on 12/11/2009 1:04:21 AM PST by Electric Graffiti
STAR BULLETIN EDITION OF AUG. 14TH, ON FILE AT BERKLEY IDENTICAL TO PUBLISHED IMAGES by John Charlton
The Post & Email has just received PDF files from a highly credible source, establishing that the birth annoucement in the Star Bulletin Edition of Aug. 14, 1961, for Barack Hussein Obama, is authentic.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
No, it wouldn't put an end to anything. Those who believe he was born in Kenya, Indonesia or Canada would simply move to the issue of dual citizenship, as many already have done. That's why I find it strange when people say he can release his birth certificate and "make all this go away."
Well, American Citizenship USED to be a valuable gift in and of itself.
ZERO. A newspaper announcement isn't a long form birth certificate suitable to prove eligibility as a natural born citizen. Anybody can post such announcements.
Since one is supposed to be a microfilm image of the other, any differences would show that at least one of them has been altered.
Nah, I believe in the evil twin theory (I am Jim Kirk after all). The real Barack Obama is a Taft Republican now imprisoned in the a sub-basement at the headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Nah, I believe in the evil twin theory (I am Jim Kirk after all). The real Barack Obama is a Taft Republican now imprisoned in the a sub-basement at the headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations.
The truth works fairly well.
If you want to enrage a conservative, lie to him.
If you want to enrage a liberal, tell the truth...
The difference, of course, is that Obama's mother was a citizen, so citizenship of Barry was never an issue. A Mexican woman can't just give birth in Mexico and bring their baby into the U.S. and expect it to be naturalized.
Hawaii has a Republican Governor, Lt Governor and Attorney General.
Think they’re in on it?
“(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;”
zer0 admittedly was NOT “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.
***********
As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948.
That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children.
source: factcheck.org and fightthesmears.com
************
You can Not be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States if you are subject and governed until the age of 23 by another country. Do you think the Founders would have considered this kosher?
So - zer0 did not swear allegiance to Britain or Kenya (that we know of - although he campaigned for Odinga)
We sure as hell know that he hasn’t sworn allegiance to the US either.
The simple fact that certain members of his opposition have worked themselves into a tizzy over this and present a very bad image that the left can exploit is one of the few things he has to his advantage right now.
Why on earth would he want that to go away?
Birthers are one of the few distractions BHO has left.
“It’s now up to two million.”
You should know full well by now that this is not correct.
If he was a citizen, then he most certainly was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, regardless of what some foreign nation says.
A newspaper announcemnt does NOT proove he was born there.
In 1961, a "relative" who was in residence for 1 year could state the child was born there in HI, and a foreign born child could then be entitled to a short form bc which would then be transmitted to the newspapers. And no, I'm not refering to the 1982 revised statue. The one in affect in 1961 provided the same, and will become known.
Newspaper announcement does not equal a Long form.
Oh, and by the way, he was born with foreign citizenship. No way he could be a US NBC.
LOL, what a joke. This proves NOTHING.... NOTHING! But a couple of old newspapers prove a lot.
Actually, no.
Under the laws in place at the time, a child born of a Bumfuqistani in Bumfuqistan is a Bumfuqistani.
Think that one through, if a single American parent qualified a whelp to be an American, every kid born within 100 km of an overseas US base would be claiming that daddy was a US Sailor (named joe).
Further, merely being a citizen does not qualify one to be president.
The Founding Fathers reserved that for a very special status, one that appears nowhere else in American law: That of NATURAL BORN citizen.
They wanted the President to be free of any hint of divided loyalties. (Imagine McCain was elected, and the mess in Honduras was in Panama. Would any decision he made with regards to a Panamanian constitutional crisis be subject to second guessing because of his birth ties? You bet it would!)
In my opinion, and in agreement with the source documents the Founding Fathers were using (Vattel and Blackstone) a natural born citizen was clearly, unquestionably and obviously only someone who was born within a country, of that country's citizenS.
CitizenS. Plural. As in BOTH parents.
Well, he was also most certainly subject to the jurisdiction of Britain.
I can produce my Birth certificate on demand. Why cannot the President simply do the same?
That makes utterly no sense. They cannot produce the Birth Certificate, only the person who the Birth Certificate is for can do that.
Neither the Governor, Lt Governor or Attorney General can make me produce my birth certificate. They are wholly irrelevant to the issue
So what if some attorney somewhere has managed to find a few old newspapers. Not microfilm, the actual newspapers, and the Nordyke twins, born on the same day, are in the papers, and Barry’s is missing? Big oops and enormous conspiracy going on.
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.