Posted on 04/27/2011 9:55:15 AM PDT by rxsid
"Bon Appetit Birth Certificate…
I predicted multiple times that President Obama would produce the original long form birth certificate when it best served him to do so. Today that prophecy was fulfilled. I have always maintained that the birth certificate issue was a red herring smoke screen protecting Obama from facing the true issue of his ineligibility – dual nationality.
Like Chester Arthur before him, Obama was protected from genuine questions regarding his birth status having been governed, as he admits, by the United Kingdom via the faux BC issue until October 27, 2008 when I instituted my law suit against the New Jersey Secretary of State alleging that neither Obama nor McCain were eligible.
I predicted over and again that when it served Obama best, he would feed you an original birth certificate on national TV. Bon appetit to those who allowed this conspiracy theory to take precedence over the genuine legal issue: how a person born owing certain allegiance to a foreign nation can be a natural born citizen of the United States?. Since the BC was played so perfectly by the Obama team, the genuine legal issue will now be more marginalized than ever.
They simply played a better game of chess. And due to this sick game, Obama now sets a precedent that anyone who hates this country, from Osama Bin Laden to Kim Jong Il, can have a child with an American woman and that child can be President. Obama’s defeat of the dual nationality issue, in both the courts and the media, means that the President’s parents do not have to be US citizens. If that is true, then the natural born citizen requirement in Article 2 Section 1 of the Constitution is basically rendered meaningless.
If a person born with dual allegiance can be President, then I don’t see the difference between a citizen and a natural born citizen. To become naturalized as a US citizen, one must at least swear an oath of allegiance to the US by renouncing all other allegiances. But a person such as Obama, who was born with dual allegiance is apparently not even required to renounce all previous allegiances under oath.
The BC was a conspiracy theory. The dual nationality issue is a legal question. Obama always controlled the issue of whether or not he would produce the BC. But the legal issue was never under his control. So he exercised as much control over it as possible by allowing the birth certificate to fester casting a huge shadow over his dual allegiance. Well played, sir.
by Leo Donofrio, Esq."
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/bon-appetite-birth-certificate/
We pointed out the same thing on the web site we set up. The cynicism of the game played is quite disturbing, not to mention the falsehood engaged in by representing that the COLB was the birth certificate. Of course the certificate of live birth is not an actual 1961 era birth certificate such as that posted on line for one of the Nordyke twins and here for the poster Danae. The reason for the recent change to not allow the actual birth certificate rather than the certificate of live birth to be duplicated is part of the puzzle. D’onofrio is certainly correct that it will make judges even more reluctant to examine the actual issue raised by the dual nationality. It will be interesting to see if any state creates a procedure to enable that question to be examined in the future.
You may be on to something.
May I ask why you believe Barak Hussein Obama II was born with a different name and what that name is? (Did you leave the “c” out of his first name on purpose, or was it a typo?)
Zero or whomever pays his bills didn’t spend millions to hide this! Hello people.
Agree.
I heard on the radio today that zero released the long form for the Pope and all to see... and that since HI has a hard and fast law that no one, not even TOTUS, can have their long form to have and to hold, only view it, purple lips had to use his outside law firm (and his own "Dear Hawaii" request on WH letterhead) to request HI officials release a copy of the long form to him so he may show it and he could get back to the real issues at hand (vacations and golf). And of course, HI complied.
Anyway, I know for a fact that I, along with multiple Freepers, went to the gov of Hi website and cut and pasted their own regulation for (and I am trying to recall here) the presentation of only the long form when applying for land ownership????? (It had something to do with registering as a land owner, if not exactly that). I am paraphrasing, but I recall the site stating something to the effect of "you must present the LF...short forms will not be acceptable proof when applying for land ownership". Sorry...again, exhausted, but that is bothering me.
Why is it I am hearing now that no one, God included, can get a long form BC from HI, yet it was required to register as a land owner in a current 2008 regulation posted on their own government website?
When was the law "conveniently" changed that none shall have?
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.