[PugetSoundSoldier]

Can you argue against the statements of the Court in Carlisle v. United States where the Court explicitly stated that:

Every foreigner born residing in a country owes to that country allegiance and obedience to its laws so long as he remains in it...

While in this country, the foreigner owes allegiance and obedience to the laws of this country. That would be jurisdiction, no?

Or is this wrong because you feel it is wrong?

[little jeremiah]

Obviously anyone residing within the borders of a country - or even travelling through - has to follow the laws.

That has nothing to do with being a natural born citizen.

And 0thugga said himself that he was governed by British law when he was born even though he was not born (supposedly) in Kenya. So that is another situation entirely.

Plus, add to that, there is the strong likelihood that he was indeed born in Kenya.

So you are conveniently mixing up a bunch of different things to make yourself/your arguments look really legal and smart. But you are soundly defeated by legal minds and dedicated researchers on FR who are not 0thugga toadies and sycophants.

:-)