Replies

Wrong as usual. IIRC, the time ‘naturel’ was translated natural born, the phrase was ‘subjects natural’ - only French (sujects naturel???). THAT phrase was translated NBS for the English government, and NBC for the American government.

Here's the sentence from the 1781 Journals of the Continental Congress: "Les consuls et vice consuls respectifs ne pourront être pris que parmi les sujets naturels de la puissance qui les nommera." It was translated "The respective Consuls and Vice Consuls shall only be taken from among the natural born subjects of the power nominating them."

"Naturels" is translated to mean "natural born." Thus, when Vattel says "Les Naturels ou indigènes," he would have been understood by these founders to mean "natural born or natives" which is how the terms came to be formally translated 16 years later.

The legal battle lines are well drawn up, which boil down to "founders' original intent," vs "amendments,precedents, practices, and politics." The only real battle has been on this site, because the issue has not made to any court on its merits. So, let's get ourselves back to the original article posted for the thread, although the thread-title is slightly misleading, as written by WND.
That is, DuJan's exposition of his thoughts on WHY Team Obama has taken such drastic steps to prevent the Birth Certificate from being made part of the public record. I think we all can agree that (a) the steps are indeed drastic, or at least very expensive (b) and raise a few questions.

DuJan points out that when the Obama boy was adopted by Mr. Soetoro, his name was changed, and that if normal protocols were followed, the Birth Certificate would have been amended, and the original sealed. This is fairly standard in most states.

DuJan thinks that this indicates that our POTUS has been operating under a name that is not, or no longer, legally his. IOW, our POTUS never took the step of legally changing his name BACK. This is WHY Team Obama wants the record kept out of public view. as DuJan puts it

"The reason Obama has spent so much time and money hiding
his original birth certificate
is because his adoption in the 1970s, and the bizarre,
Klingon-sounding name “Soetobakh” are just so
strange and difficult to explain to Americans.

..... myriad very messy constitutional and legal issues arise from
the fact the current US President has engaged in an orchestrated conspiracy
to hide his long form birth certificate and actual legal name.
THAT is why so much money and energy has been
lavished on the efforts to keep his secret."

To repeat some additional background: We know that he neglected to tell the Illinois Bar Committee that he had used another name. A stronger way to put that: he lied about ever having an alias, and about drug use, and traffic violations on his application. He was not disbarred. He left voluntarily after an inquiry. In exchange, nobody say anything for evermore. Typical lawyer disciplinary case.

No matter what we, or indeed the court, thinks about Natural Born Citizenship, is not at law at the moment. What the conference about is recusal of the Obama appointees and the possible effects of POTUS' use of a name not legally his.

Lawyer Hemenway has pulled of quite a coup here. Can't wait to see the result of this conference. It's a potential win-win for the SCOTUS in that they can continue to avoid the Natural Born Citizen legal hot potato, and we can get farther toward the bottom of this VERY weird situation.

Actually, it was ‘naturel’ that was translated native, and indigenes that was translated NBC. You will note the 1760 & 1787 translations had “The natives, or indigenes...”, so it seems reasonable to conclude the 1797 translation (”The natives, or natural-born citizens...”) translated indigenes as NBC.

However, “les sujets naturels” is a phrase, and a phrase can properly be translated differently than word for word. Thus the English equivalent was the legal term “natural born subjects” - which we know included the children of alien parents! Or do you deny that the children of alien parents were still considered NBS?

If Vattel had used “Les sujets naturels ou indigènes...”, your point would be valid. But that is NOT what Vattel wrote. And no, indigenes is NOT correctly translated NBC.