Posted on 01/02/2011 1:00:02 PM PST by opentalk
Notwithstanding Obamas lack of constitutional eligibility for the office he occupies as a direct result of his fathers citizenship, Obama cant even prove he is an American. In fact the only thing we can confirm about Obama is that he is a foreignerforeign to America, foreign to the english language, and ignorant of our history. At this late date, after millions of dollars spent, people mysteriously dying, and the jailing of a decorated Army officerall of whom questioned Obamas legalityany so called birth certificate produced now is nothing more than suspect, and it is more than likely another faked document a worthless piece of paper just like all of Obamas so called credentials.
We know Obama was born British, is likely a Kenyan citizen, and is Indonesian; we know he was never naturalized as an American citizen; we know there is no record of his name change from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama, II; we know he lied on his Illinois bar form about his previous names; we know he is using a stolen social security number, and that he has multiple social security numbers, and we know that Obama has a forged selective service registration.
Who does this kind of stuff except an illegal alien?
One of the things Obama cannot prove is that he is an American. He wont release anything and asks us to believe him
as he robs our savings, our livelihood and our America.
(Excerpt) Read more at drkatesview.wordpress.com ...
Name another president who had a foreigner for a father.
Well off the top of my head, Chester Arthur’s father was an Irish citizen, Wilson’s mother was a British citizen, and Spiro Agnew’s father was a Greek citizen. There may be more but I don’t have time to research it tonight. Why don’t you look it up.
This is the most clear cut case of treason in our history, yet the SCOTUS
and various Judges won’t touch it with a 10 foot pole. With repeal of DADT watch what happens when the 2011 high school class graduates and the 2007 class ends their 1st hitch. Mass exitous and refuseal to enlist the 1st time? How many will just quit and walk away, tying up military Police and courts big time.
That would certainly come as surprise to Dave! Anyway that only applies to the FIRST generation born outside of Israel and ONE parent has to be a citizen of Israel AND a practicing Jew. Your strawman argument falls flat.
I doubt if your or your birther buddies are going to get SCOTUS or the US Congress to change over 200 years of legal precedence.
Wrong again retread.
2003 Supreme Court: For 200 years domestic law of the US recognizes the Law of Nations(Vattel)
You aren't worth the info you're being given. See ya zotbait.
I see you are still getting your legal advice from the birther lawyer clown posse.
Meantime, just posted editorial "Illusions", by Valeria Novodvorskaya from Frontpagemagazine which speaks elequently to 'consequences'. Our Leadership needs to be reminded and I fear 'often' about other aspects of our history being scripted. (And then there is the 'Muslim thing' - i.e. 'radical' - of course and in a manner of speaking/sigh. . .)
All issues - and by count, too many - that beg/demand our attention. . .and a sharing.
Agnew's father became a citizen and his mother was an American. TWO citizen parents.
As to Chester Arthur, an investigator, Hinman, tried to get evidence that Arthurs father became a citizen AFTER his birth in order to disqualify him. Arthurs father DID become a citizen.
So, when did Barrack Obama Senior become a citizen? Was he an immigrant? Again with apples and oranges.
I checked the law before I posted it zotbait.
Under Israeli law, all Jews born anywhere in the world are Israeli citizens and it does NOT only apply to the first generation born outside Israel
You're wrong. I checked.
I see you are still getting your legal advice from the birther lawyer clown posse.
And you are a retread. Night zotbait.
Obama can no more prove his citizenship than someone can prove the world is flat.
He is a lying bastard and a fraud. A true Manchurian Candidate.
Agnew's father did not become a US citizen until after Agnew's birth, much like Arthur. Why didn't anyone make this an issue in 1968? Probably it was not a violation of the law then, as it not today either, so no one cared.
Hinman’s research had to do with Arthur's birth place, not the citizenship of his parents. Arthur's father's citizenship papers were always on file and available for inspection then and today. No one back when Arthur was President cared about his father's citizenship, only about his place of birth. Geez, I wonder why? Maybe even a birther can understand that if you born in the USA, then you are a NBC.
Page 24.
When the United States declared their independence, they were bound to receive the law of nations, in its mod-ern state of purity and refinement. Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199, 281 (1796) (Wilson, J.). In the years of the early Re-public, this law of nations comprised two principal ele-ments, the first covering the general norms governing the behavior of national states with each other: the science which teaches the rights subsisting between nations or states, and the obligations correspondent to those rights, E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, Preliminaries §3 (J. Chitty et al. transl. and ed. 1883) (hereinafter Vattel)
I suggest you read up on the Israeli law on the Right of Return. You may actually learn something.
Give links and sources. I have. Otherwise retread you’re blowing smoke.
Give links and source if you think what I read was incorrect.
“TNTNT”
Could you check this new troll to see if he is a retread. Thanks.
Nachum and ZC, do either of you have the time or inclination to look at post 246? This newbie is discussing Israeli law, and I would like to know if he’s got it right. Thank you in advance.
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.