Posted on 11/24/2009 9:55:42 AM PST by STARWISE
It is a popular topic of discussion in political circles these days, and as the weeks pass more and more people are asking, “Is Barack Obama really a natural born citizen of the United States?
Is he eligible to serve as President, or isn’t he?”
If he is, then so be it. We’ll just have to grit our teeth until this long dark nightmare comes to an end… one way or another.
But what if he is not eligible? What then? Well, in that case we have a problem… a very large problem, the solution to which could tear asunder the fabric of American society.
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that, “No person except a natural born citizen… 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.”
That’s pretty straightforward, yet, when confronted with the possibility that the man who sits in the Oval Office may be a usurper, a great many otherwise patriotic Americans can be heard to say, “What difference does it make? The election’s over; the people have spoken. Get over it!”
Well, it’s not quite as simple as all that and the sooner we can all be satisfied that Obama is or is not a natural born citizen, the better. To postpone that finding for a year or two and then find, conclusively, that Obama is not eligible to serve as president would be disastrous.
Every new law and every executive order he had signed, every political appointment, every judicial appointment, every order he had given to the military, and every act and every decision of all of his appointees would immediately become null and void. How could we ever undo all of that?
*snip*
So it is well established that Obama did travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in 1981.
What is not established, and what is critically important, is what passport he used during that trip. There are only three possibilities:
Obama could have traveled under a U.S. passport… a passport first issued when he and his mother moved from Hawaii to Indonesia in 1967; he could have traveled under an Indonesian passport, issued following his adoption by his Indonesian stepfather; and it is conceivable that, if he was, in fact, born in Kenya in 1961, he could still have been a British subject, traveling with a British passport.
So which is it?
Unfortunately for Obama, in the present circumstance, Pakistan was under martial law in 1981 and certain undesirables… Christians, Jews, and Americans… were prohibited from entering the country. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list, making a U.S. passport no more valuable than an empty chewing gum wrapper at the Karachi Port of Entry.
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?
And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi, what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration? The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers.
It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
. A: Yes, by his own admission.
. Q: What passport did he travel under?
. A: There are only three possibilities.
. 1. He traveled with a U.S. passport,
. 2) He traveled with a British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesian passport.
. Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. passport in 1981?
. A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he was traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he was traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008. Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better. Is he a “natural born” citizen, or isn’t he?
It seems pretty clear from the available evidence that he is not. If that proves to be the case he should minimize the damage to the country and follow the Nixon example; he should simply resign from office so that we can begin to clean up the mess he leaves behind.
Arguing dirty is telling and/or repeating lies, and saying that anybody who doesn't go along with the lie doesn't think the cause is important.
The fact is that there was no State Department “travel ban” on Pakistan in 1981. Hopefully you can totally oppose any misstatements, nonfactual statements, mistakes and outright lies on that point.
I answered your question by showing its idiotic and unethical implication; but in case that was too subtle for you here is it answered directly.......
Of course I think the eligibility of 0bama or ANY President or Presidential candidate is more important than if the State Department had a “travel ban” or a “travel advisory” on Pakistan in 1981.
PLEASE ping me so that I don't miss it. I would much appreciate it.
Have not yet seen official confirmation of that; but there’s this:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On 05 June 2002 the United States and Britain upgraded official warnings to their citizens in India and Pakistan, telling people to leave now. The raising of the status of travel alerts came after Pakistan rejected an offer from India for joint border patrols in the disputed territory of Kashmir.
The US State Department issued new advice to the 60,000 Americans in India and several thousand in Pakistan, saying: “Tensions have risen to serious levels and the risk of intensified military hostilities between India and Pakistan cannot be ruled out.”
The updated travel warning said it “strongly urges that American citizens in India depart the country”. Previous advice to Americans merely “urged” them to leave.
In early June 2002 Pakistan agreed to immediately halt infiltration along the Line of Control, and eventually to dismantle Kashmiri militant training camps. Indian officials lifted a ban on overflights by Pakistani aircraft, pulled back warships from the Pakistani coast and selected a new ambassador to Islamabad.
India awaited further steps by Pakistan, including the dismantling of militant training camps in the portion of Kashmir under Pakistani control and the severing of financial support for militant groups.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/kashmir-2002.htm
~~~~~~~
“On 05 June 2002 the United States and Britain UPgraded official warnings” ... “Previous advice to Americans merely “urged” them to leave..”
Doesn’t sound like the peachiest timing for an American to vacation there.
No attacks from me...I don't know if I am a "birther" or not, all I want to see is the zer0's crededtials.
2002 was some 20 years AFTER 1981, when the Zero visited Pakistan. I don’t think there IS or WAS a “peachy” time to visit Pakistan.... ever.
The fact is, is that plenty of other freepers agree with my opinion on Certifigate, and I've read their comments over the year and a half threads about the Kenyan have been posted. I also know that Ann Coulter is utterly derisive about Certifigate.
Anyway, if you believe that MY opinion should NOT be posted on FR messagethreads, then I advise you to Hit the Abuse Button and discuss it with a moderator.
Meantime, until Jim Robinson informs me differently, I have the freedom to express my opinions on his website, just like all other freepers.
Understood .. I was responding more to non-sequitur’s statement:
“Pakistan was not and never has been on any ‘no travel’ list issued by the State Department.”
‘Strongly urged to leave’ is a clear warning of lack of safety, even if not precisely termed ‘no travel.’
I look forward to reading your findings.
Thanks.
HP
Have you found a credible link to an official State Dept. doc
covering this for 1981?
Also, hasn't there been a ban on travel to Cuba for decades, and yet Americans travel there, from South America I believe, ALL THE TIME. Right? Absolutely no consequences upon return to the USA.
Is there actually any such thing as a, "complete travel ban"??
Thanks.
HP
I wouldn't jump at the chance to vacation in Pakistan at any time, but that's just me.
Be that as it may, what does an alert in 2002 have to do with how Obama traveled there 21 years earlier? And how does that make my statement that there has never been a 'no travel' ban to Pakistan issued by the State Department false?
I seriously doubt he has any of those “simple” pieces of paper.
Hit on 1981 and you will get a pdf of the exact language of the travel warning for Pakistan issued in 1981.
Can you provide ANY evidence, ANY AT ALL, that there was a “travel ban” in place for that time?
Are you interested in doing so?
AND since when are people not allowed to share their opinions on Free Republic?
Huh????
WHERE in that posting did I not mention "...my reaction is..."
Since when do YOU decide when and where and how that I express my opinion on Jim Robinson's website??
HUH????
And I'm not even sure if a Travel Ban exists for a place like Cuba??? As elsewise, how do so many Americans take jaunts there?
That site isn’t working right, and some years freeze my computer. I started at the bottom, and all the years except 1983 have this for their year:
Not Found
The requested URL /ERC/travel/cis/southasia/TA_Pakistan1985.pdf was not found on this server.
This is the only year that works:
http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/travel/cis/southasia/TA_Pakistan1983.pdf
The site was created by Dominican University students ... at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
I’ve yet to see an official State Dept. document describing the circumstances in that timeframe.
BTW, you act like I’ve somehow trampled on your sensibilities or maybe ruffled your feathers?
So be it.
Your outrage is misplaced.
Barack Hussein Obama (Barry all his life until college) has the most constructed, concealed and radical past, filled with outright sealed, off limits, deceitful, purposely vague, obscured, missing, radical and questionable personal information, alliances and history of any resident of 1600 Pennsylvania ever.
Moreover, he has his high paid henchmen threaten media networks, doubters and anyone for daring to ask questions about his past in court and otherwise.
No, Pakistan certainly wasn’t a garden spot for a vacation in that timeframe .. so it is curious and deserves thorough checking, especially since he freely admits he did drugs and was attracted to and mainly hung around with radicals and fringe groups.
The passport question’s not been answered that I’ve seen.
Do you know what country’s passport he held in 1981? Do you care ?
The president of your country has written this and has obviously proven already how naturally unAmerican he is in his core. Do you not believe he deserves the utmost thorough attention to every detail of his past and motives?
“I will stand with them (Muslims/Arabs) should the political winds of war shift in any ugly direction. . .” (AUDACITY OF HOPE)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“But it’s precisely the shortage of details that worries some, like veteran security analyst Bahukutumbi Raman, a former Indian counterterrorism chief.
Mulling how a President Obama would deal with each of South Asia’s historical foes, Raman said that as an Indian, he naturally felt troubled that Obama had not disclosed the Pakistan visit earlier.
“Why did he keep mum on his visit to Pakistan till this question was raised?” asked Raman, who is the director of India’s Institute for Topical Studies.
“Has he disclosed all the details regarding his Pakistan visit? Was it as innocuous as made out by him – to respond to the invitation of a Pakistani friend or was there something more to it?”
Raman continued, “As I read about Obama’s visit to Pakistan in the 1980s, I could not help thinking of dozens of things. Of the Afghan jihad against communism. Of the fascination of many Afro-Americans for the jihad. Of the visits of a stream of Afro-Americans to Pakistan to feel the greatness of the jihad. Of their fascination for Abdullah Azzam …”
Raman said although having such thoughts may seem “morbid,” it was “understandable when one has a feeling that one has not been told the whole story, but only a part of it.”
“It is the right of the Americans to decide who should be their president,” he said. “It is my right to worry about the implications of their decision for the rest of the world, including India.”
http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=38624
updated 4:25 p.m. EDT, Mon April 13, 2009
Obama eases Cuba travel restrictions
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/13/cuba.travel/index.html?eref=rss_latest
Americans ‘strongly urged’ to leave Pakistan, India
###
- As expected, the U.S. State Department issued a new travel warning Tuesday for India and Pakistan, “strongly urging” U.S. citizens to leave both countries.
The new warning updates existing advisories issued over the past few weeks, which carry a milder tone, “urging” citizens to leave.
“Tensions between India and Pakistan remain at serious levels and the risk of intensified military hostilities cannot be ruled out,” the warning said.
A State Department official said the stronger warning to Americans to leave India and Pakistan was prompted in part because few Americans have left under the current warnings, as relations deteriorate between the two nuclear powers.
The warning was issued in coordination with the British embassies in the region, who are expected to issue similar advisories soon.
“People don’t seem to be taking this seriously,” the official said, noting that the United States is concerned about American citizens potentially getting caught in any crossfire of fighting between India and Pakistan. “We want them to take the warning more seriously.”
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/06/04/india.pakistan.travel/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What do you think ? If they’re strongly urging Americans to leave, would they say it’s fine and dandy to travel there???
Duh.
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.