Being born in the United States does not even make one a 'NATIVE' citizen.

nobarack08 | Feb 12, 2010 | syc1959

[syc1959]

Being born in the United States does not even make one a 'NATIVE' citizen.

Immigration and Citizenship: Process and Policy fourth edition Under Jus Soli, the following is written "The Supreme Court's first holding on the sublect suggested that the court would give a restrictive reading to the phrase, potentially disqualifing significant number of persons born within the physical boundries of the nation. In Elk v. Wilkins 112 U.S. 94, 5 S.CT. 41, 28 L.ED. 643 (1884), the court ruled that native Indians were not U.S. citizens, even if they later severed their ties with their tribes. The words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," the court held, mean "not merely subjct in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiange." Most Indians could not meet the test. "Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of, and owing immediate allegiance to, one of the Indian Tribes, (an alien through dependent power,) although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more 'born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,'*** then the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government ***. Id. at 102. It continues that Congress eventually passed legislation with the 'Allotment Act of 1887, that conferred citizenship on many Indians.

The fact remains, the Court held, complete and sole Jurisdiction. As I have held that being born anywhere in the United States, jurisdiction is required, sole and complete, and Barack Hussein Obama was already claimed by British jurisdiction under the British Nationailty Act of 1948, and as such fails the United states Constitutional requirement of a Natural Born Citizen.

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Barack Hussein Obama did not have sole jurisdiction under the United States.

Title 8 and the 14th Amendment clearlt state the following;

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof

Note: 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof'

[Danae]

LOL

[MHGinTN]

Oh I’m sure you can imagine lots of things in that big left field where you flop around.

[EnderWiggins]

Yep. And one of them is even true.

[Danae]

Heah heah... LOL The United States is the place of Obama’s Birth (most likely) but it is not his country. His country is that of his father, Great Britain. Obama was not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States at birth.

I look forward to the day this case hits SCOTUS and Obama is disgraced forever.

[MHGinTN]

Do you post as Drew88 or Drew68 also?

[syc1959]

You still failed as usual to answer a direct question;

With a foreign father and under foreign law, how much was Barack Hussein Obama under United States jurisdiction?

[EnderWiggins]

Nope.

[EnderWiggins]

I have answered that question several times now.

As long as his father was not a foreign diplomat or a member of an occupying Army, Obama was under sole and complete jurisdiction of the United States at his birth.

[MHGinTN]

False on the face of it. Your messiah stated he was born with Kenyan/British citizenship. That shoots your mindless drivel of ‘sole’ right out of the sky, simpleton.

[syc1959]

so your claim that Barack Hussein Obama as a British subject, under British law, can be under complete jurisdiction of the United States.

Wow, and they say a wiggiefool and his mind as soon departed.

[usmcobra]

Then you don’t have a problem with someone that has split allegiances running the country?

And what If I said that Obama’s allegiances to Kenya caused him to knowingly break Federal law?

Is his multiple citizenship in up to four countries still make him eligible for the Office of the presidency if he broke our laws in illegally assisting one of the countries he has citizenship with

[syc1959]

Here is the 14th Amendment and Title 8 of the US Code; you [wiggieFool] lose. Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights <> 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Title 8 US Code § 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth How Current is This? The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: (a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; (b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property; (c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person; (d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States; (e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person; (f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States; (g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and (h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.

[EnderWiggins]

Not according to 500 years of Anglo-American common law, and the explicit decision of the US Supreme Court.

[EnderWiggins]

"so your claim that Barack Hussein Obama as a British subject, under British law, can be under complete jurisdiction of the United States."

Syc, you're like a snake trying to swallow himself tail first.

He was not under British law at all. British law has no authority in Hawaii.

Why do you keep insisting that the United States is not really a sovereign nation?

[STE=Q]

Well... how to spell "honor" for starters.

Thanks for bringing that typo to my attention.

Below is the corrected version.

Thanks again for the alert!

____________________________________________________________

"And watch... when we do, Birthers will get not one lick of credit, because he will still be an NBC when we vote him out."

Why are you concerned with who gets credit?

How about God has answered our prayers... and saved our country from an incompetent -- DANGEROUS -- American hating impostor: groomed by those who are worse than he is!

Whether he leaves under the(ostensible)umbrella of NBC... We don't care, as long as he leaves!

He can join the UN or become "a citizen of the world."

Unlike some, I wish him no personal ill will.

I want what's best for America.

That's where the rubber hits the road. Instead of expending energy, feeding your ego by arguing with "birthers," go and organize to "vote him out?"

No one here is standing in your way... and many would help you, I'm sure.

Obama's plan is to divide and conquer... if you also want him out why do you play into his hands by arguing with others, that also want him gone?

Why don't you turn your low order sophistry and mediocre dialectics on the enemy, instead of being a nuisance on these threads?

Don't give me that crap about "principles" and "honor"... people that disagree with you can also have "principles" and "honor".

What did you learn at the academy?

Did you learn leadership?

We are at war and you are giving aid and comfort to the enemy -- under the guise of defending the constitution.

The Problem is if this guy turns out to be as "dirty" as we think he is there soon may not be a constitution to defend.

Now go "vote him out" ... do something constructive ... we got other things to do besides arguing with a "wall" ... someone that can't tell the difference between friendly and enemy fire.

STE=Q

[EnderWiggins]

"Then you don’t have a problem with someone that has split allegiances running the country?"

It doesn't matter what problems I have with it. It only matters what the Constitution says. But since I know for a fact that dual citizenship has essentially nothing to do with "split allegiances" I would say that I do have a problem with the latter, but I have no problem whatsoever with the former.

"And what If I said that Obama’s allegiances to Kenya caused him to knowingly break Federal law?"

I'd suggest you file that criminal complaint right this very movement!!!

"Is his multiple citizenship in up to four countries still make him eligible for the Office of the presidency if he broke our laws in illegally assisting one of the countries he has citizenship with"

Was that supposed to be a question?

[syc1959]

Obama himself states that he’s a British subject, under British law. Are you calling your god a liar?

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

Get out that prayer rug of yours - wiggie, time to bow

[usmcobra]

So according to you The US constitution allows someone with multiple citizenships to be the President of the United States.

Please quote the article of the US Constitution that says exactly that.

[little jeremiah]

That’s where the rubber hits the road. Instead of expending energy, feeding your ego by arguing with “birthers,” go and organize to “vote him out?”

---

Because he’s a hireling.

[BP2]

> I am myself a natural born citizen and a dual citizen at the same time.

The only way this may happen is if you are born with TWO American
citizen parentS, and then assume a second citizenship afterward.

If you are like Obama Jr, with ONE American parent citizen
and ONE British parent Subject, you will be an American
citizen with a dual citizenship to the UK, but not a US Natural
Born Citizen. You have DIVIDED LOYALTIES, which is EXACTLY
what the Framers feared the MOST of their Commander in Chief.

Once a British Subject, always a British Subject.

As we’ve shown you many times over on this thread, both Vattel
and Blackstone are pretty clear on this issue.