Posted on 08/02/2009 1:35:53 AM PDT by rxsid
Edited on 08/06/2009 12:10:02 AM PDT by John Robinson. [history]
Attorney Taitz filed a NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Expedite authentication, MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory for authenticity of Kenyan birth certificate filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD.
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/ (site has been the target of hackers, proceed with caution — John)
******
Yes. Why doesn't the mainstream press come out and challenge Obama by asking him if Ayers or somebody else helped him write his book?
My point is this: What is so special about Obama that makes the press so scared to ask him sensitive questions about his past?
I thought that the job and duty of the press was to ask the president tough questions, even if the question is about a controversial topic.
You really are dense, aren’t you?
“That is a misreading of Hawaii law.”
Ha ha!
|
|
I have a web site and know there are ways to get into hidden files if you know their addresses but as far as gaining access to log files you have to have admin permission. I thought I'd ask as the learning never stops. |
|
|
To be clear, that image was undated. But I did check out Stanley Armour for age with other images I have saved. And the assumption that the image relates to obama sr’s arrival appears to be about right.
“The unhappy attitude of the Dunhams ( guess they weren’t such liberated hippies after all ) lends credence to Grandma trying to legitimize an embarrassing situation by calling in a birth announcement.”
Didn’t help that Grandpa Obama sent them a letter telling them how upset he was that his bloodline would be sullied with a white girl.
And just where did you learn that dribble?
Section (e) doesn’t apply to Obama if he was born in Kenya. The section you want is section (g). But yes, the law in 1961 was different than today’s law — what it required was five years after the age of 14. In 1961, Ann would have had to be 19 years old to pass her citizenship to her son if he was born in Kenya.
It’s very hard to find something online that shows what the applicable statute (Section 1401, which I posted) provided in 1961, but I did find it once and others have also. The requirements are less today than they were then. It’s no longer five years but two, as you see in the present (g).
I hope this helps.
I thought that the job and duty of the press was to ask the president tough questions, even if the question is about a controversial topic.
Presumably, that's a serious question.
The press is "scared" to ask Obama tough questions only because they fear that his answers might diminish him.
The press is partisan! They are liberal Democrats to the core. It is "their job" not to ask tough questions of the president, but to a.) gain him election, then b.) support his policies and c.) attack his enemies.
The press is no longer interested in the truth, nor in some form of abstract justice. They haven't been for over thirty years. Their primary interest today is the liberal agenda.
PA engineer, daughter figured it out...Photo shop somehow shows the layers (6) and what was added each time. over on Calpernia’s thread.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/10313894/The-Myth-of-Barack-Obamas-Early-Life-Leahy-Cached
I thought so. :o)
but you do not have to be a natural born citizen to qualify for POTUS.
________________________
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
There are three requirements to be eligible to the Office of President. One of those is being a natural born citizen.
The grandfather clause expired long ago. The reason it existed is because there were no natural born citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. Most were British Subjects so they had to write themselves in. After that clause expired, those who were born British Subjects were no longer eligible because they weren’t natural born citizens.
On Obama’s, “Fight the Smears” website, it acknowledges his British citizenship via the British Nationality Act of 1948. He was born with British citizenship. He is, at a minimum, a dual citizen at birth and his eligibility is questionable.
Our Founding Fathers just fought to free us from the King. The last thing they would allow is a British Subject to run the country, particularly the military. Over their dead bodies...
Does a wild bear sh8t in the woods? :P
If you were born in Kenya, say in 1961 to an American citizen, you are an American citizen, not a natural born citizen, but still eligible for POTUS if you subsequently grow up on US soil.
_____________________________
Can you direct me to where this is stated in the Constitution? My copy seems to be missing this.
Well, what I would call dense is not seeing the reality of the matter at hand — that Obama and any other candidate has *no legal requirement* to show his birth certificate and being unable to figure out what to do about it... that’s the real problem...
Of course, even after being presented with the solution of making it *legally mandatory* for a candidate to show his birth certificate or not be on the ballot, in a state law — and still not being able to figure it out... well... that’s even more so... :-)
Don’t you realize you are looking at a phoney copy on the other thread; one posted by The Daily Kos to discredit?
Keep being their foot soldier, THEY appreciate it.
Well, these woods are a bit dense for some around here... LOL...
I would think that it would be a whole lot plainer when someone figures out that there is *no legal requirement* for a candidate to show a birth certificate — that one would get on that state law that makes it *legally mandatory* to produce a birth certificate or else they cannot be on the ballot in that state...
But, the woods are definitely too dense there... :-)
I think it best if I refrain from saying whether the Australian birth certificate is genuine or not. For what it is worth though and my hobby is family history, I checked on the names of his parents.
Alaric Edgar Robert Bomford.
Doreen Betty Bomford (formerly Loxton).
I find Doreen Betty Bomford (Loxton) 1928-2002) is interred at Houghton Cemetery in Australia. Her husband is Al Bomford and various children are named including David. I had thought I was onto something when I could not find any Alaric Bomford. Yet, Alaric was the name of a fierce Germanic leader who helped destroy Rome in the fifth century. Not a name that would have gone by without some jesting in that country, Australia.
Sufficient to say, I guess "Al" does it. I merely offer this for what it is worth. Again, America deserves better of the Presidency. A more open Presidency.
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.