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 ...
Major university libraries have extensive microfilm newspaper libraries. I was doing some microfilm research at a university a while back, and the guy next to me was looking at Czech newspapers of the 1950s.
Doh! I should have remembered. Thanks.
Natural born status is defined by federal law, specifically § 1401 of the U.S. code. Link
I’ve read them both and neither defines natural-born citizen, or implies more than two forms of citizenship.
I know all about Lieutenant or Colonel, is that filegate? I would have thought it to be called Passport Gate.
Thanks for your response.
And with that, birthers hit rock bottom.
Ah, the McCaskill resolution:
"...There is indirect reason to believe that this may be true. “2d Session S. RES. 511: Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.: In the Senate of the United States.” was Sponsored by Senator McCaskill and co-sponsored by Senators Leahy, Obama, Coburn, Clinton and Webb. Why? Why were Democratic Senators trying to pass a Resolution making Senator McCain undoubtedly Legally Eligible when this issue had already been cleared up in 2000 and again in 2004? And why did Senators McCaskill and Obama reportedly insert the following Clause?
“Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President;”
This Clause has no particular relevance to McCain and the following Clause, which it is reported McCaskill and Obama attempted to REMOVE shows that:
“; and Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936:”
It seems clear that McCaskill and Obama were attempting to create a blanket Resolution covering ALL Foreign Born candidates. Why do that if not to benefit a Foreign Born Democratic Candidate, who did not have a US Military background?
McCain did not need this resolution, Richardson did not need this Resolution, so far as I can see nobody needed this Resolution unless somebody in the race was born outside the USA and was “Covering his/her Ass” and the only individual in the race that that could apply to was Senator Obama!"
I'm also given to understand that someone attempted to expand "the children of active duty US military" to "the descendants of active duty US military". That would cover The Onointed one via his granddad...
So how do we define the term? Isn’t it fair to ask the question, which in so many minds, either doesn’t matter or there is a difference of opinion.
I mean, it is not like we cannot without certainty understand, recognize and prove 35 years and 14 years.
Is Barry O. 35+? Probably. Has he been in the US for 14 years? Probably.
How do we define and prove NBC?
LOL I can’t keep track of all of the dems crimes. I must have had a flashback into the Clinton days and typed filegate instead of PassportGate.
Thanks.I have to go correct this.
Swiss Opinion sounds funny.
There is joke in there, to be used in other arguments or plain jest, so I am going to find a way to use it today for grins.
It will have nothing to do with Vattel but require someone to stop and think.
Later.
He throws like a girl. What more proof do you require?
Could his real name be: Barack Hussein Ostrich?
I too thought I was in a time machine and you might be talking about a document on a coffee table. LOL
Oops! Now you've done it! Prepare to incur the wrath of the "dual citizen" birthers who believe that the man popularly elected as President will get thrown out of office (and preferably imprisoned and then deported) based on the 18th century musings of a Swiss philosopher.
1401 is newer than the the laws in place, at the time of Barry O.’s Birth. I would think the laws in place, at the time of his birth are the relevant laws.
Also, since there is a question as to where Barry O. was actually born, if he was born outside the U.S. then his NBC status fails on Point G.
We need to prove that he was indeed born here and then the question is pretty much moot, except for the divided nationality issue.
thanks again.
You answered your own question in #103.
What question did NS ask in 103? and then the answer?
He is in opposition to the birther questions but has great answers or debating points.
I just need to think of a way overcome him. LOL
Yeah. The only reason very gravid Mexican women risk sneaking through the desert to drop an anchor baby in Del Norté is so the kid can grow up to be el Presidenté some day.
I would call you an idiot, except as you have cleverly raised this strawman before, and been shot down before, I can only conclude that you are simply an evil man under the pay of other evil men to do your bit to destroy America.
What price treason, these days?
Ping.
Don’t step in the troll.
The other side of the coin is, why should he produce it if it will be harmful to him? I wouldn’t. Unless you made me.
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.
Birthers are one of the few distractions BHO has left.
Hear! Hear!
I can barely find any real news about Barry's hijinks because the wall-to-wall birth certificate coverage.
Are you really that, that, that... well, you know...
rope
As a U.S. citizen, his mother could have at least had him naturalized upon return to the States, something the Mexican woman in your example couldn't have done. That is all I'm saying.
Well do it and we'll see what happens.
Personally, I don’t think it was rape, but everything else sounds right.
I wonder why she dumped her son on ole granny, but kept her daughter with her always? The same year Frank got a divorce and his wife moved out, Anne hauls as* back to Hawaii and dumps Barry on granny and Frank becomes his mentor. How odd.
You are right, none at all. A couple of old newspapers, in the hands of an attorney who is building a case, would blow that microfilm right out of the water. Why weren’t the Nordyke twins in the paper? They were born on the same day, supposedly in the same hospital. If they are generated automatically, why is theirs missing from all the papers?
Yes.
But then he wouldn't be an NBC, would he?
NS worships Barry. You are wasting your time. He is here to demean fellow Freepers and protect his butt buddy Barry.
Sure he was.
As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948.
That's right. And had he robbed a bank they would have arrested his sorry ass and thrown it in jail. That's what 'subject to the jurisdiction of' means. Only those who are not subject to U.S. laws, i.e. foreign diplomats, foreign heads of state, those enjoying diplomatic immunity, would not be covered by the federal statute.
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.
Yes you can. If you live here, legally or illegally, then you are subject to our laws. With the exceptions mentioned earlier.
Do you think the Founders would have considered this kosher?
I'm not aware of anything they said indicating otherwise.
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.