Proof the Founders knew & accepted Vattel`s "naturels" to mean "natural born" (re:Obama eligibility)

puzo1.blogspot.com ^ | 10/08/2010 | Teo the Bear

[patlin]

PS...just how do you determine who you consider a researcher and who you don't? Inquiring minds want to know what it the method you use for work you steal from others and claim it as your own because you certainly didn't give credit to Leo either? You do there is such a thing as Internet etiquette when it comes to taking information from someones site & posting it at your own don't you?

[Kleon]

The only claim to being a NBC that would hold the weight of the law for Obama is if it was determined he was born in Hawaii to a very single mother AND IF he renounced his Indonesian citizenship within the time allowed by the law once he came of age as Miss Elg did in Perkins v Elg(1939). That is a pretty far fetched mountain to climb considering his documented on the record report of his nativity.

Maybe you've been to busy coming up with this nonsense to notice, but Obama's claim to being a NBC has held pretty well, seeing as he was elected, sworn in and all.

[bushpilot1]

Welcome to Free Republic.. please visit our numerous threads and if you have any questions regarding a Natural Born Citizen please do not hesitate to ask. We are here to help.

[patlin]

Show me where the Obama camp has ever claimed he was a NATURAL born citizen and those bogus HI press statements don't count, they hold no wieght in a court of law unless backed by documented evidence which thus far Obama has refused to let them release.

[Puzo1]

I never said that I did not want to share with you when I acquired the Morse article. Why do you invent such stories? I had not the time to research the matter so I told you that I did not know where I got it from. I have since looked into the question. Leo Donofrio and I received the Morse article from you on February 27, 2010. I also received the same article from Pamela Barnett (who got it from Ken Dunbar who got it from you) on March 12, 2010. The article that I received from you and Pamela is part of the great quantity of information that I receive on a daily basis. I could not tell you now which article I used in my April 2, 2010 court filing, yours or that sent to me by Pamela Barnett.

I do not understand why you say that I “took” the Morse article as mine. We know that Alexander Porter Morse wrote his own article. I never said to anyone that the article was mine. Also, you did not write it as an author would write a law review article. Your name is not on the article. Nor do I know your real name. I surely could not give you any credit for the article in my filing it with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals as part of my 28(j) letter on April 2, 2010. My filing it with the Court is the only thing that I did with the Morse article. I surely did not tell the Court that the article was mine. I did not write any articles about it in which I said that the article was mine. So where do you get this notion that I “took” the article as mine? I hope that you are not going to also accuse me of taking as mine all the cases and other law review articles that I cited to the Court.

Never did I ever say anything negative about Lt.Col. Lakin on the radio or anywhere else. Why do you fabricate such a story? You have failed to cite and identify any statement that you say I made attacking the Lt. Col. On the contrary, in my Petition for a Writ of Certiorari in the Kerchner case, I have asked the Supreme Court to take judicial notice of the Lt. Col’s court martial and the affidavit that Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney filed on his behalf, and have expressed to the Court, among other things, that making sure that Obama is legitimately occupying the Office of President and Commander in Chief is critical to our nation maintaining the proper military chain of command. See my Petition, page 15, footnote 4.

I do not understand your reference to the “Webster Treatise.” What do you mean when you say that that I only cited one reference in my case and that you want me to make a “stronger case.” Are you referring to the issue of standing or the meaning of a “natural born Citizen?” As you should know, the lower courts did not reach the merits of the question of the meaning of an Article II “natural born Citizen.” I have yet to fully brief that issue for any court. I did inform the Supreme Court in my petition that I did address the meaning of a “natural born Citizen” in the Third Circuit (which I did on a limited basis because the issue was standing and political question) and that I stood ready to fully brief that issue if the Court grants certification and desires to reach the merits of that question.

I hope to hear from you on better terms.

[patlin]

Mario,

Let's just put this behind us. I wished I had saved the very nice & appreciative responses you sent as I did not send the article to you immediately. I first e-mailed you an inquiry whether or not you had yet acquired the document. When you responded “no”, that is when I forwarded it to you with instructions that I had not yet formally received permission to distribute it, so I had only shared it with a select few. I know own a very nice PDF copy of it. Yes, I had to pay for it so I would hope that you can understand why it bothers me so much that others took the liberty to re-post it without accreditation to me. I also was working closely with Ken Dunbar & had been on the radio with him a few times, so at the time I had shared it with him also. I did not realize he was distributing it either & now his site is no longer active. I'll have to e-mail him to find out what's up there.

As far as sharing so trustingly, I won't make that mistake again. I have a purchased PDF copy of the “Presidential Timber” by Warren Freedman (1950) that is much more detailed (11 pages) & he cites Morse and so many more, including SCOTUS cases dating back to & prior to the revolution on citizenship & the definition of natural born US citizen as it relates to Presidential eligibility as well as the only form of natural US citizenship, all others are citizens by law and thus not qualified. Freedman was quite a renowned legal scholar & judge who I just learned passed away in Sept of this year.

Again, best wishes & God Bless, Linda

[patlin]

Leo has republished all his back articles...references can again be further researched

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/world-net-daily-exclusive-why-obama-is-ineligible-%e2%80%93-regardless-of-his-birthplace/

[Puzo1]

I thought we were done with this matter but I see that you have addressed another post to me. When you sent me the Morse article, you identified yourself as Linda. Your email says nothing about you having a blog called Constitutionally Speaking. Maybe you had yet to open your blog on February 27, 2009.

Also, Leo Donofrio thanked you because I assume he wrote that April 1, 2009 WND article in which he mentioned the Morse article that he had received from you on February 27, 2009. While he did not thank you in the WND article where people could see it in reference to his article, he did thank you in his blog. I do not know why he thanked you in that manner. But again, I wrote no essays on the Morse article. I only filed the Morse article in Court and I used either your version of the Morse article or that of Pamela Barnett. I could not thank anyone in my court filings, for to do so would be totally inappropriate. Nor could I thank you as the owner of any blog as Leo did because I knew nothing of Constitutionally Speaking when you sent me the article.

Totally on your own, you sent me the Morse article as part of a private email. Your email did not give any specific instructions on how I could use the 1904 article which is, in any event, in the public domain. I had no idea that 8 months later you would impugn my integrity by publicly complaining that I did not thank your for sending me the article.

Again, given all my work and that of Commander Kerchner in combating the Obama eligibility issue, given that I have just filed a Petiton for a Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on that issue which is currently pending a response from Obama and Congress, and given that we are supposed to be all patriots working together and supporting each other on this issue, I do not believe that you have treated Commander Kerchner and me fairly and appropriately. I am nevertheless willing to put this matter behind us.

[Dajjal]

obumpa

[Mr Rogers]

Vattel doesn’t USE the phrase “les sujets naturels” in his work, does he? The quote is different, as is the correct translation.

[rxsid]

From the journal of the Continental Congress FRIDAY, JULY 27, 1781: French "les sujets naturels" to English "the natural born subjects"

les = the
sujets = subjects
naturels = natural born

Vattel, in French, writting about about "natural" born citizens (he writes about "citizens" above this section): "Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pays, de parens citoyens" To English give: "the natural, or indigenous, are those born in the country, parents who are citizens"