Posted on 04/30/2010 7:45:37 PM PDT by Fred Nerks
Dr. Ronald J. Polland, PhD, has posted on YouTube a series of videos that are part of a book he has been writing for two years. The title is “Fraud in the USA: The end of the birth certificate controversy.”
As described in his, “About Me” video, Dr. Polland’s expertise is in Research and Program Evaluation, with over 31 years of post-doctoral scientific research experience. He is also the leading authority on scanning, photographing, (and videotaping) both sides of authentic, paper Hawaiian COLBs.
Because of YouTube length restrictions, Chapter 1 has been split over four parts (uploaded now) and Chapter 2 has been split over two parts (will be uploaded by 6pm EST). He has also posted an “About Me” video that has his full credentials and highlights important aspects of his career.
For those who wish to see it as one entire video, he will be posting the full-length version on Screencast.com and will be available tomorrow morning).
Because in 2000 McCain was useful to the MSM as a foil against Bush, and the MSM didn't want to upset the "Maverick Straight-Talk Express" story with the inconvience of an eligibility fight.
-PJ
Thanks... this makes sense.
It raises the issue why viewers/voters should be super-aware of which candidate(s) the MSM is backing during an election cycle and why: there could be multiple layers of usefulness, as we have seen here.
Agreed.
Of course, he was. The fix was in from the beginning. I've said for two years that the GOP didn't want this term and did everything they could NOT to win. They ran someone they knew couldn't win and did everything they could to hand the election to the RAT candidate. The reason they didn't want the WH was they knew the housing and economic crisis was on the horizon and they wanted to lay it all (with the exception of "Bush's fault" which was inevitable) in the Dimwits' lap. At every turn, they were bowing down to Hussein. Heck, the even had McLame campaigning for him; remember him telling us we shouldn't be afraid of Hussein. Look at how Hillary was treated. Sarah was supposed to be a joke and they tried their darnedest to slam her and had her shut up. Yep, the election was signed, sealed and delivered to the RATS. Think about it, what are the odds of having both parties run an ineligible candidate?
So who is Soros backing for 2010 and 2012? We should be aware and ready.
I’m going with U.S. statutes on U.S. citizenship.
about as thought...35, 40 tops. dry up sonny until you get a few years behind you. yeah, caps are very important. get hot with that. oops, sorry, that is prob. before your time also.
Thanks for the link to #210, makes sense to me.
Statutes cannot change the meaning of a Constitutional term. Much mischief would Congress make if they could do that.
Don’t look at his “about” (profile) page, that is as fake as what we looking for in his dear leader’s faked B.C.!!!
Sorry I wasn’t more thorough. Maybe this will be better.
There are only three types of citizenship and all have equal rights: native born citizenship; naturalized citizenship; and, citizenship-by-statute.
Note: “Natural Born Citizenship” IS NOT a type of citizenship. It is only a circumstance of birth required for eligibility to be President of the United States.
Native born citizenship (jus solis - by the soil) was created by the SCOTUS case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898): Wong Kim Ark was the son of two resident Chinese aliens unable to attain citizenship due to a treaty between the USA and the Emperor of China. Wong Kim Ark claimed U.S. Citizenship because of his birth on U.S. soil. He was vindicated by the Supreme Court on the basis of the 14th Amendment.
On the basis of the 14th Amendment the majority opinion coined a new definition for “native citizen”, as anyone who was born in the U.S.A. (jus solis) under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Court thus extended citizenship to all born in the country (excepting those born of ambassadors and foreign armies etc.) but it DID NOT extend the meaning of the term “Natural Born Citizen” to those whose parents were not citizens at the time of the child’s birth.
Naturalized citizenship is granted to immigrants who ‘naturalize’ as U.S.citizens. Gov. Arnold Schwarznegger is an example.
Citizenship-by-statute is granted to those born overseas to U.S. citizens (jus sanguinas - by the blood). There is a whole array of legal statutes covering this depending upon whether both or one parent is a U.S. citizen.
All three types of citizenship have the same rights.
Since there is NO RIGHT to be President, the eligibility requirement of Natural Born Citizenship, per the United States Constitution (jus solis + jus sanguinas: born in the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents), must be viewed as a means to prevent split allegience for any President of the United States.
That was Jim? It was the Admin Moderator. How are we supposed to know when it’s Jim if he’s logging in as the AM?
I guess this book was what he was up to.
***Cool. I’m glad he gets to make money off this episode in the destruction of our constitution. I was encouraging him to write a book about it. Good to see that when life gave him lemons, he’ll be making lemonade.
Where was the "U.S. soil" of John McCain? Near as I can tell neither one qualified under his definition.
Exactly what I think happened for exactly that reason.
There is a minor problem with your Citizen conclusion with respect to McCain--the statute under which that would have made him a citizen on that theory was adopted three years after his birth and was not retroactive by its terms. He may have gotten there by other methods.
McCain votes like a Liberal--how he got there is not completely clear. And at present, he is obviously running well to the right of his voting record.
Much better! :)
You should probably divide naturalized citizens into naturalized in the US, per the 14th amendment, and "naturalized at birth via statute". Even those conventionally considered "naturalized", are still subject to the naturalization statutes, just in a different way and different parts of the US Code.
It was always the Commie objective to get control of BOTH US political parties if possible. I think it is highly probable that McCain was brainwashed in North Vietnam. He is likely the “Manchurian Candidate”. That was the only way the Commies could get hold of both parties. Have their own creations as candidates for the same election.
You hear various stories about McCain as a POW, and it’s hard to know what to believe.
What we do know, however, is that later on, he became chair of the POW/MIA committee in the Senate and used his position and his status as a war hero to betray his fellow POW/MIAs in order to open the door to relations with the Communist North Vietnamese regime.
Without McCain leading the way and giving his seal of approval, it is doubtful that it could have been done. I’ve always thought that that was the single worst thing McCain ever did.
You clearly didn't read the statute:
Sec. 303. [8 U.S.C. 1403] Persons born in the Canal Zone or the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904
(b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
On or after February 26, 1904.
And that statute is a statute, not a theory.
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.