This is from Chapter IV, Sec 17 of what you sent me that you said was the Hague convention.
What you quote here is the text from Article 17 of the Hague convention on INTERNATIONAL ADOPTIONS. What I cited, was the Hague convention on NATIONALITY. The Hague convention on INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING regarding the nationality or citizenship of adopted children.
Let's go back to the beginning.
Here's what you wrote:
The US is a signatory to the Hague Convention’s standards for international adoption, and those rules do allow the legal parents and guardians to renounce any former citizenship of a custodial minor.
That's absolutely INCORRECT.
There is absolutely NOTHING in the Hague convention on international adoption concerning nationality or citizenship. NOTHING. I previously provided you a link to the full text of the Hague convention on international adoption, and you will not find a single instance regarding nationality or citizenship.
What governs nationality is the Hague convention on nationality. And with regard to nationality and adoption, it clearly says that a child may lose their nationality due to adoption ONLY OF THE STATE THE CHILD IS BEING ADOPTED FROM ALLOWS A CHILD TO LOSE THEIR NATIONALITY DUE TO ADOPTION.
The United States, under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, had NO PROVISION FOR A CHILD TO LOSE THEIR US CITIZENSHIP DUE TO ADOPTION.
So let's summarize.
1. The Hague convention on international adoption says absolutely nothing regarding a child losing their citizenship as a result of being adopted.
2. The Hague convention on nationality says that a child may lose their citizenship as a result of adoption if the state the child is being adopted from recognizes loss of nationality due to adoption. If it does not, then the child cannot lose their nationality as a result of adoption.
3. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 contains no provision for a child losing their US citizenship as a result of being adopted.
You get it now?
It means that even if Obama were adopted, he COULD NOT have lost his US citizenship.
OK, lets go to a couurt of law and test all this. Hussein probably WAS adopted. Indonesian law said that he can’t have dual citizenship if he resided there for as long as he did, buty he did reside there. YOU say US Immigration law forbids him losing his citizenship by adoption. Haul out his BC, and argue it in a court of law. I say enough doubt exists for a judicial precedent to be established. None of this has ever happened before. We deserve to have precedent established. But again you don’t feel that it is necessary to see the evidence that establishes whether or not he was ever granted INDONESIAN citizenship. If he had been, than he CANNOT be a natural born citizen, especially after having been BORN a British citizen, and a Kenyan citizen, and a a US citizen.