Barack Obama Was A Foreign Student – American Media Threatened Into Silence

The Western Center for Journalism ^ | April 2, 2012 | Dianna C Cotter

[musicman]

Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[MasterGunner01]

It is my understanding that Barry Soetoro attended school in the U.S. under a Fulbright Scholarship. These scholarships are only given to FOREIGN nationals; no American citizen may apply.

[mamelukesabre]

really?

Does this prove he is not a citizen or does it prove he committed fraud to get a scholarship he wasn’t entitled to?

[STE=Q]

... "Hulton’s story and sworn affidavit would confirm that Barack Obama renounced what American citizenship status he had as an adult over the age of 18, by attending college as a foreign student USING A FOREIGN PASPORT"

(Emphasis mine)

Here's the whole package, as follows:

(NOTE: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE OF THE WORDS "INTENTION" INTENT" "INTEND(S)"AND "INTENDING" THAT I HAVE PUT IN CAPITAL LETTERS)

Advice about Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality

httptravel.state.govlawcitizenshipcitizenship_778.html

The Department of State is responsible for determining the citizenship status of a person located outside the United States or in connection with the application for a U.S. passport while in the United States.

POTENTIALLY EXPATRIATING ACTS

Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the INTENTION to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:

(1)obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);

(2)taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);

(3)entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec.349(a)(3)INA);

(4)accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) an oath or declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);

(5)formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);

(6)formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only under strict, narrow statutory conditions) (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);

(7)conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA). ADMINISTRATIVE STANDARD OF EVIDENCE

As already noted, the actions listed above can cause loss of U.S. citizenship ONLY if performed voluntarily and with the INTENTION of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens INTEND to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government.

DISPOSITION OF CASES WHEN ADMINISTRATIVE PREMISE IS APPLICABLE

In light of the administrative premise discussed above, a person who:

is naturalized in a foreign country;

takes a routine oath of allegiance to a foreign state;

serves in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accepts non-policy level employment with a foreign government, and in so doing wishes to retain U.S. citizenship need not submit prior to the commission of a potentially expatriating act a statement or evidence of his or her INTENT to retain U.S. citizenship since such an INTENT will be presumed.

When, as the result of an individual's inquiry or an individual's application for registration or a PASSPORT it comes to the attention of a U.S. consular officer that a U.S. citizen has performed an act made potentially expatriating by Sections 349(a)(1), 349(a)(2), 349(a)(3) or 349(a)(4) as described above, the consular officer will simply ask the applicant if there was INTENT to relinquish U.S. citizenship when performing the act. If the answer is no, the consular officer will certify that it was not the person's INTENT to relinquish U.S. citizenship and, consequently, find that the person has retained U.S. citizenship.

PERSONS WHO WISH TO RELINQUISH U.S. CITIZENSHIP

If the answer to the question regarding INTENT to relinquish citizenship is yes , the person concerned will be asked to complete a questionnaire to ascertain his or her INTENT toward U.S. citizenship. When the questionnaire is completed and the voluntary relinquishment statement is signed by the expatriate, the consular officer will proceed to prepare a certificate of loss of nationality. The certificate will be forwarded to the Department of State for consideration and, if appropriate, approval.

An individual who has performed any of the acts made potentially expatriating by statute who wishes to lose U.S. citizenship may do so by affirming in writing to a U.S. consular officer that the act was performed with an INTENT to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Of course, a person always has the option of seeking to formally renounce U.S. citizenship abroad in accordance with Section 349 (a) (5) INA.

DISPOSITION OF CASES WHEN ADMINISTRATIVE PREMISE IS INAPPLICABLE

The premise that a person intends to retain U.S. citizenship is not applicable when the individual:

formally renounces U.S. citizenship before a consular officer; serves in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities with the United States; takes a policy level position in a foreign state; is convicted of treason; or performs an act made potentially expatriating by statute accompanied by conduct which is so inconsistent with retention of U.S. citizenship that it compels a conclusion that the individual INTENDED to relinquish U.S. citizenship. (Such cases are very rare.) Cases in categories 2, 3, 4 and 5 will be developed carefully by U.S. consular officers to ascertain the individual's INTENT toward U.S. citizenship.

APPLICABILITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE PREMISE TO PAST CASES

The premise established by the administrative standard of evidence is applicable to cases adjudicated previously. Persons who previously lost U.S. citizenship may wish to have their cases reconsidered in light of this policy.

A person may initiate such a reconsideration by submitting a request to the nearest U.S. consular office or by writing directly to:

{SNIP}

Each case will be reviewed on its own merits taking into consideration, for example, statements made by the person at the time of the potentially expatriating act.

DUAL NATIONALITY

Dual nationality can occur as the result of a variety of circumstances. The automatic acquisition or retention of a foreign nationality, acquired, for example, by birth in a foreign country or through an alien parent, does not affect U.S. citizenship. It is prudent, however, to check with authorities of the other country to see if dual nationality is permissible under local law. Dual nationality can also occur when a person is naturalized in a foreign state without INTENDING to relinquish U.S. nationality and is thereafter found not to have lost U.S. citizenship: the individual consequently may possess dual nationality. While recognizing the existence of dual nationality and permitting Americans to have other nationalities, the U.S. Government also recognizes the problems which it may cause. Claims of other countries upon dual-national U.S. citizens often place them in situations where their obligations to one country are in conflict with the laws of the other. In addition, their dual nationality may hamper efforts to provide U.S. diplomatic and consular protection to them when they are abroad.

I am not sure that "USING A FOREIGN PASPORT" to attend college as a foreign student(a POTENTIALLY expatriating act) -- in and of itself -- would be enough to cause a loss of citizenship.

STE=Q

[WaterWeWaitinFor]

IMHO it’s obvious to be George Soros.

[STE=Q]

“Does this prove he is not a citizen or does it prove he committed fraud to get a scholarship he wasn’t entitled to?”

---

Maybe the former or maybe only the latter or both!

If either case were true — and came out in the MSM — it would certainly not be good for Bongo’s chances of re-election.

See my post above.

STE=Q

[STE=Q]

“by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality
Read it again.”

---

See my post above.

[LucyT]

How can the American media possibly pass on a story so huge, and so important – fraud committed by a sitting president? – Simple, it has quite simply been threatened into silence, and law enforcement is now well aware of it.

Those who are threatening the media are apparently dead serious: to the extent that no member of the media who has been threatened is willing to admit publically to it. – However, there are several who have given their witness testimony, but have done so under the very strictest of confidentiality agreements. – Collectively they are afraid of losing their jobs, or of their employees being further threatened.

This is no game, this is no rumor. – Sheriff Arpaio and the Cold Case Posse have the information directly from witnesses who have specific knowledge of the threats, and there are a significant number of informants. – Whoever is making these threats has the power to make those threats happen. It is being taken so seriously that no major media outlet has dared to break the silence.

Lead investigator Zullo, mirroring the comments of Sheriff Arpaio commented, “This is probably one of the most concerning aspects of this investigation.” – When asked if this was thuggery, the reply came without hesitation, “That’s exactly what it is.”

Media moguls at the levels of a Rupert Murdoch are justifiably nervous. The implicit threat – beyond the direct threats made to their employees – involve investigations of media outlets along with their websites and their parent companies by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

. . . . ! Check out Article, and # 29 .

Thanks, Seizethecarp; good find.

[onedoug]

And we’ll be blown to kingdom come if he can pull it off, which he’s done just fine with up to now.

[hedgetrimmer]

Its time to repeal the telecommunications act of 1996 and end foreign ownership of our media.

[STE=Q]

I’m going to report you to the Admin if you don’t add me to the list!

STE=Q

[null and void]

Welcome Aboard!

[Enough is ENOUGH]

“These federal agencies can yank broadcasting licenses, or take a variety of other actions which have the effect of making it impossible to do business let alone broadcast. It’s a brutal quid pro quo: don’t breathe a word on Barack Obama’s citizenship issues or constitutional qualifications for the office he has usurped, and we will let you stay in business.”

I see Barack is using the same kind of life threatening intimidation techniques as his hero Vladimir used to get re-elected.

Look, we are in a constitutional crisis. We have a deceptive Marxist communist for a president. He has on several occasions intimidated the USSC. His party has refused to submit a budget as required by the U.S. Constitution for the past three years. He is bypassing congressional approval with his executive orders and party directed regulations not to mention making a mockery of congress with his recess appointments and ramming socialist legislation down our throats with behind the scenes briberies and intimidations of both the senators and house reps. He controls the media through intimidation as reported, above. He has hid everything about his past on a grand scale. One of his favorite communists is Saul Alinsky.

Don’t tell me we are not in a similar position as nazi Germany was in during the year 1933.

[little jeremiah]

There were some threads about it and one freeper took notes. I was pinged to the thread and tomorrow I can try to find it and ping you to it. If you don’t hear from me and don’t find any (I think there were 2 or 3 threads), freepmail me.

[little jeremiah]

Great article.

[Lancey Howard]

Great post!

[Lancey Howard]

By the way, one problem with this article - - the Democrat “mainstream” newsrooms did not need to be “threatened” into spiking the truth about Ubama. They did so knowingly and joyfully.

[867V309]

When half your electorate is illiterate, what chance does a nation have?

A 50% chance of working in the Hussien Administration?

[TigersEye]

Bookmarked.

[nuconvert]

I thought it was generally accepted that he had 2 passports?

Lying and applying & attending school as a foreign student when he had a U.S. passport would be an explanation for why he won’t allow his college records to be opened up.