Posted on 12/16/2008 4:19:57 PM PST by briarbey b
Emmerich de Vattel was a Swiss jurist who attained world preeminence in international law. This was primarily the result of his great foundational work, which he published in 1758. His monumental work - The Law of Nations - applied a theory of natural law to international relations. His scholarly, foundational, and systematic explanation of the Law of Nations was especially influential in the United States.
The Law of Nations was so influnntial in the United States because his principles of liberty and equality coincided with the ideals expressed in the US Declaration of Independence. In particular, his definitions in terms of Law governing nations regarding citizenship, defense of neutrality, and his rules for commerce between neutral and belligerent states were considered authoritative in the United States.
Many have said that de Vattel's Law of Nations was THE primary reference and defining book used by the framers of the US Constitution. It is really not possible to overstate the influence of de Vattel's Law of Nations as the primary reference book in the drafting of the US Constitution. Emmerich de Vattel's Law of Nations is almost beyond comparison in its value as a defining document regarding US Constitution intent and interpretation. The Law of Nations, or the Principles of Natural Law, published in 1758, is the first, and ONLY, definitive work the Framers of the US Constitution used for the 'Natural Born Citizen' phrase they placed within the Constitution. It nails what the Constitution means by the "natural born citizen" phrase of Section 1, Article 2, of the US Constitution.
It is amazing how perfectly, precisely, and explicitly what Emmerich de Vattel, wrote in paragraph 212, of book 1, chapter 19, of The Law of Nations entitled CITIZENS AND NATIONS, applies to the Obama FRAUD. Quite clearly and explicitly it defines why Barry Soetoro, AKA Barack Heussein Obama Junior, can NOT possibly be qualified to be the President of the United States. Obama MUST be disqualified from the office of President of the United States according to the US Constitution Section 1 Article 2.
That is simply the only thing the Rule of Law could conclude. All US military personal and every other American under oath to protect and defend the US Constitution will be duty bound to remove the fraudulent usurper. This situation is REGARDLESS of votes, electors, media blackouts, high profile embarrassments, state court decisions, supreme court actions or inaction, birth certificates real or forged, or any other documents - Obama can NOT LEGALLY BE The US President. Fraud and illegality has become customary under the Bush-Clinton-Bush syndicate of sudden destruction.
Emmerich de Vattel's explanation of "Natural Born Citizen" given in his 1759 benchmark work, used, and so often quoted, by the framers of the US constitution, makes the understanding simple, explicit, clear, definite, exact, precise, and strict. In the CITIZENS AND NATIONS, paragraph #212, de Vattel says: "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society can not exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as a matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. THE COUNTRY OF THE FATHERS IS THEREFORE THAT OF THE CHILDREN."
No documentation is required. Everyone should understand and KNOW the answer to the question of what country is the country of which Obama was a natural born citizen. It is IMPOSSIBLE for Barry Obama, Barry Soetoro, or Barack Hussein Obama Junior, to be a natural born United States citizen. He can NOT POSSIBLY be a "natural born citizen" of the US because his father, Barack Hussein Obama Senior, was a Citizen of UK and/or Kenya. Barcak Hussein Obama Junior could be a natural born British Citizen or a natural born Kenyan Citizen. There is NO possible way Barack Hussein Obama Junior could be a natural born US Citizen; because, at the time of Barack Hussein Obama Junior was born, his father, Barack Hussein Obama Senior was a British and/or Kenyan Citizen. Whether Barack Hussein Obama Junior was born in Hawaii, Kenya, or the moon, is irrelevant. Birth documents, real or forged, are irrelevant. Yes, even VOTES ARE IRRELEVANT. Even Supreme Court action, or inaction, is irrelevant. It is simply FRAUD and illegal for Barack Hussein Obama Junior to be put in the office of US President by any means or reason.
This explains Obama's strange behavior in all of his documents and records being SEALED and why he has already spent over $800,000.00 saying NO DOCUMENTS WILL BE ALLOWED UNSEALED or made public.
Barack Hussein Obama Junior is at the epicenter of the greatest national disaster in the history of the United States. NOTHING which Obama would ever do in the office of US President could ever be anything other than FRAUD and ILLEGAL.
I like the way brother Ted said it - The consequences of the Supreme Court declining to address the US Constitution's "natural born citizen" clause on the morning of Monday 12/15/08 thereafter enabling the College of Electors to transform the crisis from "law" to "political and Congressional", leading to the `inauguration' of Mr. Obama, are nothing less than catastrophic. Lawsuits by members of the military challenging his `commander in chief' status are INEVITABLE. And a military takeover to oust the "usurper" may be inevitable as well. Where is the media? This is no "tin foil hat" joke.
AN-OBAMA-NATION CAN BE NOTHING BUT FRAUDULENT AND ILLEGAL.
How would he go about avoiding “WE THE PEOPLE?” Just like it is being done. What is the purpose of so many different names? Not as easy to track? I see...AKA more on criminal records than on your average everyday American.
Republican or Democrat...we are ALL..”WE THE PEOPLE!”
Each and everyone of us should have the concern that we are losing what our ancestors...republican or democrat have bled and died for!! We are losing it...or IT IS GONE!!
To BLINDLY accept and NOT QUESTION something of such catastrophic proportions where this country is concerned is LUNACY!! UNITE..don't fight amongst yourselves...United WE STAND...divided we fall..remember?????????? WHAT do we UNITE for?? The preservation of A REPUBLIC that we ALL love...WHAT is bad about that?
And you view these as unbiased sources?
I don't think that's the case. I seem to recall that the confidentiality privilege then becomes the "property" of the estate of the deceased person. Otherwise, medical personnel could sell all kinds of embarassing medical details to the tabloids after a celebrity died. Obama is the only person (barring some sort of court order) who could permit the hospital to discuss his medical records and the medical records of his deceased mother.
For instance, suppose you walked into a Hawaii hospital and asked this question: Was president Bush born there?
The legally correct response, if hospital personnel were trained to comply with privacy laws, would be for them to neither confirm nor deny that fact. Otherwise, people could do an end run around privacy laws- if a hospital will tell you that someone was not a patient, then if they refuse to comment on a particular person, then you know that person was a patient.
They are several sources that say one thing. I've yet to see the sources that contradict them.
My Dear Blade...I think this country needs a little paranoia directed properly...maybe there won’t be so much apathy and non-concern for such huge matters...EXCLUDING my fellow Freepers as those who are not concerned of course! :)
I think it has been more than proven “WE THE PEOPLE” can be moved by paranoia and fear. Maybe it is time to use the same tool that has been used against us to work for us!!
We just had $700Billion of our hard earned money handed to
elite companies and CEOs who have raped their companies to the point of financial extinction....why did we hand it over??....FEAR and paranoia of what would happen if we didn’t!!!
This may be a discussion of opinions on facts and law but the very basis, mystery and unknowns of the subject matter SHOULD spark paranoia and conspiracy fears among the people.
Caution is a good thing...being blindly led is not.
I suppose we shall agree to disagree.
And I don't have a problem being skeptical. So point me to an unbiased source that contradicts what Wikipedia and the newspapers said and it'd be a start.
U.S. law is clear.
If Obama was born in Hawaii to Stanley Ann Dunham, a U.S. citizen, he is a “natural born citizen” i.e. a “U.S. citizen at birth” according to U.S. law.
The opinion of the Secretary of State in these matters is not determinative. The court's decision in thr Ark case overrode Mr. Bayard's views.
If Obama is proved to have been born in Hawaii, he is a "citizen of the United States"-- no more, no less -- thanks to the Wong Kim Ark ruling. Neither Hausding, nor Greisser, nor Wong Kim Ark, and by extension Obama, would have been eligible for POTUS.
The Ark case did not address the issue of who is a natural born citizen. Ark only dealt with the issue of whether someone born on US soil to non-citizens qualifies as a citizen. The court was silent on the natural-born citizen issue, IIRC.
What is the age requirement of Senators? 21?
30
Justice Gray did say in his decision that there are two classes of citizen - citizen at birth and naturalized citizen. It also said that a child born in the U.S. was a citizen at birth, regardless of the nationality of the parents. So according to the decision citizen at birth and natural born citizen are synonmymous. And if he was born in Hawaii then Obama is a natural born citizen.
Another link.
http://www.theobamafile.com/NaturalBornCitizenChart2.htm
Am I allowed to link like this guys?
The problem I have with that chart is that nothing in law or the Constitution define three classes of citizen - they define two. And the Ark and Elg cases do not support the claim that natural born and citizen at birth are not one and the same.
Point me to links for the stories you cite and I’ll see what I can find. I have not seen those claims anywhere.
See update #108
Supreme court justices also 'disagree' with each other on points of law.
Lacking specifics your post is meaningless.
If you would like to have a fruitful discussion, you might want to comment on what YOU believe the framers intent was in drafting the 'natural born' directive for those that wished to serve as president: as that was the substance of my post.
Thanks ahead of time for your opinion.
Have a nice day.
STE=Q
We don’t know if they have reached it yet because we don’t know if they have yet found a petitioner that they believe has Article III standing.
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.