Was Obama an Indonesian citizen? Evidence raises concerns over presidential qualification.

Klein Online ^ | 8 29 2011 | Aaron Klein

[tutstar]

Evidence continues to mount that President Obama was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, raising concerns over his presidential eligibility.

Obama’s American mother, Ann Dunham, separated from her first husband, Barack Obama Sr., in 1963 when the president was 2 years old. Dunham and Obama Sr. are reported to have later divorced.

In Hawaii, Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian, in 1965 and moved to Indonesia in October 1967.

Divorce documents filed in Hawaii on Aug. 20, 1980, refer to Obama as the “child” of both Soetoro and Dunham, indicating a possible adoption in the U.S.

The divorce records state: “The parties have 1 child(ren) below age 18 and 1 child(ren) above 18 but still dependent on the parties for education.”

[Fantasywriter]

If you were a Founder, would you or would you not want to codify the right of foreign, non-citizen enemies of the Republic to father future presidents?

[DiogenesLamp]

You sound like you are new to this particular aspect of the debate. Several Freepers have already traced all the cites back to a single source. You can go look for it. I recommend using Google.com to search FR to find the threads where those materials are already posted.

I suggest you try to drain the Ocean with a teacup.

[DiogenesLamp]

Funny, I supplied you with far more than three in our last discussion of the matter. Have you forgotten already?

You supplied nothing which I regarded with any credibility. Kleon supplied the last believable reference which I have seen.

[ilovesarah2012]

I responded to a question about the law. I posted the law. End of story.

[Fantasywriter]

It’s not deviating from ‘birther orthodoxy’. It’s that posters—and please don’t infer who I am or am not talking about; I’m leaving that space purposefully blank—come at this issue from two different perspectives. One group starts with the realization that Obama lies every time he opens his mouth. We therefore try to get to the bottom of his fraud and try to figure out, given all the deceptions he’s perpetrated, where the truth lies.

The other group, for reasons known only to themselves, seem never to acknowledge Obama’s propensity to lie about ***everything***. In fact, some appear invested in defending Obama’s version of the ‘truth’ despite the parts we already know beyond the shadow of a doubt to be lies. I personally have been attacking pretty harshly [by an anti-birther] for no greater crime than calling Obama a liar.

Maybe if the anti-birthers occasionally acknowledged what a screwed up, snake-oil, lying shyster snake-in-the-grass Obama is, the so-called ‘birthers’ and anti-birthers could find more common ground.

Just a thought.

[DiogenesLamp]

We can add Rogers vs. Bellei to your list

We thus have an acknowledgment that our law in this area follows English concepts with an acceptance of the jus soli, that is, that the place of birth governs citizenship status except as modified by statute.

___________________________________________________________

The result of the principal case is to limit the category “natural born” to those who become citizens under the doctrine of jus soli; this makes it co-extensive with the term “native born.” Of importance in this problem is whether these children took the nationality of their parents at common law, for if they are citizens by virtue of their birth and without the aid of statute, then certainly they are “natural born” and not “naturalized” citizens. In most continental European countries the doctrine of jus sanguinis is applied. England follows the same rule, both by virtue of the common law and under a declaratory statute of 1350 guaranteeing such application. As a result, it is generally concluded, despite occasional dissent,” that jus sanguinis was the common law doctrine. (8 1 Willoughby, The Constitution §202 (1922); Flournoy and Hudson, Nationality Laws (1929); Harvard Research in International Law on Nationality, 23 AM. J. INT. L., Spec. Supp. 80 (1929).

[SoJoCo]

From the Evidence i've seen, it is quite likely he was adopted under Indonesian law.

But even if he was, the Indonesian laws in effect at the time would not of automatically granted Obama Indonesian citizenship.

The Question is, was he adopted under Hawaiian Law? When his mother abandoned him in the early seventies, and he lived with his grandparents during that time, it is likely that he WAS adopted under Hawaiian law, if not earlier by Lolo Soetoro, than later by them.

With respect, that makes zero sense. Obama was back in the states by 1971 and never lived with Soetoro after that, so why would Soetoro go to the trouble of adopting him in a foreign country? A country he was not living in and had no plans on living in. And why would grandparents formally adopt a grandson? To what purpose?

[In Maryland]

"Let us say that next February, undeniable and unshakable, proven public proof that Obama was not only ineligible to even run for President, but calls into question his eligibility to run for his former Senate seat as well. Then what?? Someone explain to me exactly what they think would happen next, if anything. I don’t think there would be any more support for Premier Hussein’s impeachment beyond the Republicans in the House, and I am not convinced that all of them would vote to impeach. Even if they did, the Democrats and all of the RINO Republicans in the Senate would never in a million years vote to convict.

If there was truly "undeniable and unshakable, proven public proof", I think most representatives (aside from those from liberal moonbat districts) would vote to impeach and all the Senators up for election in 2012 WOULD vote to convict. Obama has not endeared himself to congressional democrats and they might well make the (IMHO correct) calculation that it is "him or me". Political survival will trump party loyalty.

Now whether the Republicans (excluding Snowe and her like) and the democrats up for re-election would come to two-thirds, I'm not sure. If it's close, I'm sure a RAT or two will be convinced to "retire", which would leave them free to vote against conviction.

But, yes - the prospect of a President Biden is truly terrifying.

[SoJoCo]

At the moment, I only know of THREE references that indicate otherwise.

But two of them are William Rawle and James Kent. Men considered to be among the foremost legal and Constitutional scholars of their day and whose books and lectures were widely quoted in the courts.

[butterdezillion]

If he was born here then why has he documentably forged 2 birth certificates?

Why is the Hawaii DOH failing to tell the world that what Obama posted as a long-form is NOT legally certified since it does not display either the official 2 1/4-inch official DOH seal or the State of Hawaii seal (one of which is required to be displayed on the paper for a birth, death, or marriage certificate to be legally certified, according to Public Health Regulations, Chapter 8b)? We know the vestiges of a “seal” on the document Obama posted cannot be the official DOH seal because it is the wrong size and it is not accompanied by the DOH Director’s signature as required by Title 11-1.

There are a host of other questions as well - such as why EVERY supposedly official document for the guy actually shows signs of manipulation BY GOVERNMENT SOURCES: SSN from CT when he never lived there, passport file breached 3 times while DOS officials winked, selective service registration form forged by somebody in that office, Certification of Nomination lacking the required statement by the Hawaii Democratic Party saying that Obama is specifically the candidate of the HDP...

To say that Obama was born in Hawaii as if it was fact is a leap of faith far beyond anything Jim Jones’ followers ever did.

[butterdezillion]

...and Obama would be proven to have forged both of the birth certificates he has presented, which makes him a felon, along with all the other jerkwads in our government who committed misprision of his felonies.

But why would he commit felonies rather than just say (as his sister allegedly did) that he had been adopted by Soetoro - especially if that adoption would not disqualify him from being eligible?

He may well have been adopted by Soeotoro, but I seriously doubt whether that explains the whole problem. Ultimately, the only credible reason for Obama to hide GENUINE official documentation from Hawaii is if there isn’t any that says he was born in Hawaii - which is what his friend, Neil Abercrombie, has already said.

[butterdezillion]

Exactly. If he would lie to us about all that - to the point of committing felonies in order to lie - then why should we believe anything he says?

And THAT is a serious problem. He is the boy who shouted “Wolf” - aided by an entire bureaucratic, judicial, military, legislative, law enforcement, and media cabal who knew he was lying - and the country is relying on that same system to protect us from real wolves.

We are so screwed.

[Kleon]

I doubt they considered the possibility of a child being Raised by American Hating parents and transported at a very young age to live in a non American environment for many of his formative years.

Even under the strictest definitions of natural born citizen we can dream up scenarios where a child can be raised in an anti-American environment. We have plenty of anti-Americans living among us--they're called progressives.

[MamaTexan]

The definition of the term, “natural born citizen”, was entered into the Congressional record of the House on March 9, 1866, in comments made by Rep. John Bingham on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was the precursor to the Fourteenth Amendment. He repeated Vattel’s definition when he said:

“[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. . . . ”
— John A. Bingham, (R-Ohio) US Congressman, March 9, 1866 Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866), Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes (1866).

-----

Should a person be born here and their parents DO owe allegiance to a foreign sovereignty, they are native born.

Many FReepers like to quote the case of Wong Kim Ark as 'proof' that all one needs to be Constitutionally qualified for the office of President is to be born on US soil, but there's one little detail-

Wong Kim Ark petitioned the court as a NATIVE born citizen, not a natural born one.

[SoJoCo]

To say that Obama was born in Hawaii as if it was fact is a leap of faith far beyond anything Jim Jones’ followers ever did.

I'm sure that you are convinced of that, judging from your past posts that I've read.

[Dakkster]

If it is to be proven that Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, it first has to proved that the ‘Dreams from My Father’ Lolo Soetoro narrative is actually true.

Therefore, these discrepancies/oddities have to somehow be explained away:

1. When did Ann & Lolo get married? This simple question is impossible to correctly answer.

2. Why is there a 3rd grade photo of Barry in Hawaii?

3. Why is there the mathematical oddity that ALL of Barry’s Indonesia photos are black-and-white?

4. Why did Ann choose not to receive child support from Lolo, even though Lolo was wealthy?

5. Why are there NO pictures of Lolo & Maya together after 1971?

6. Last but not least, why is there a STRONG resemblance between Maya & Frank Marshall Davis?

[kabar]

LOL. Birthright citizenship (jus solis) is the law of the land. The anchor babies are citizens who are entitled to every benefit you are. They get American passports. I could care less what Will and Coulter believe. Unless the law is changed or a Constitutional amendment enacted, we will continue to make these people US citizens.

I am opposed to birthright citizenship, but debating it with you changes nothing.

[kabar]

Obama has a US passport. He is a US citizen who sits in the WH as President of the United States of America. That much I know for sure.

[butterdezillion]

To believe he was born in Hawaii even though the documentation of it is actually forged would be to believe AGAINST the evidence. The only reason to forge documentation is if you don’t have anything genuine that says what you want it to say. Forgery is thus evidence that what is claimed on the forgery is NOT true.

And when EVERY document is forged, a person denying the problem is basically living in la-la land, far beyond what any of Jim Jones’ followers did. It is an act of blind faith in spite of consistent evidence to the contrary.

[Fantasywriter]

I see you on these threads relentlessly. Always defending Obama. Whatever floats your boat.

Just out of curiosity, which of Obama’s lies do you find most troubling? Are you aware that he lied about his basic childhood facts? Does that bother you at all? Does the fact that he fits the profile of a pathological liar to a tee bother you? If so, could you give me a link one of your expressions of concern [re: Obama’s honesty and integrity (particularly re: his lies about his childhood)]? I grant I could well have missed it. I would find it fascinating reading, though, so if out of courtesy you could provide a link, I’d appreciate it. Thank you in advance.