Fight To Reveal Obama's Birth Certificate

[sluggie24]

This looks interesting........



http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?f...w&pageId=83114

Obama's own Cabinet member: He's 'an immigrant'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 09, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

Don't believe Barack Obama's grandmother? Don't believe the ambassador to Kenya? How about Barack Obama's own Cabinet member?

That's right – former presidential candidate and Obama's choice for secretary of commerce, Gov. Bill Richardson, slipped up. In an effort to reach out to the Hispanic community, he admitted what Barack Obama has been trying to hide all these months: "Barack Obama is an immigrant." See it for yourself:




You don't need a translator to understand what Richardson admitted: Barack Obama is NOT a natural born citizen. That means we have a guy who's planning to take over the White House who is in direct violation of the Constitution. And his own Cabinet member says so. That's pretty big news, one would think. But the media has refused to cover it with anything more than a blurb laced with a "this is ridiculous" tone. It is ridiculous – ridiculous that the Constitution means so little that we can't even ensure that it's being followed. It's ridiculous that the story of the century is being ignored by those whose job it is to report it.

But now there's something even more ridiculous: Not only will Fox not report the news regarding Obama's citizenship, now we can't even buy an ad on Fox to allow others to hear about the constitutional crisis we're facing.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, sign WND's petition demanding the release of his birth certificate.

CNN is still considering it. Here's the ad text and, as they requested, the information to back up each line:

Heard the rumors about Barack Obama's citizenship?
These are the facts:

The Constitution requires the president to be a natural born citizen.

Text of Article II, Section 1.

Obama's grandmother said she was there when Barack was born in Kenya.

Two tapes of Obama's paternal grandmother:

1. "Native of this village" in Kenya

2. Phone conversation about visiting birthplace

Affidavit of Rev. Kweli Shuhubia

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=78931

Obama refuses to release his original birth certificate.

Obama's birth certificate sealed ... – Article by Dr. Jerome Corsi, Oct. 26

Instead of a birth certificate, Obama's campaign posted a certification given to those born abroad.

The alleged "Certification of Live Birth"

A document on Hawaii's official website stating "Certificate of Live Birth" is better than the "Certification" for native Hawaiians to obtain certain benefits

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd409.htm

Experts have called even that document an "obvious forgery."

Detailed Report by "Dr. Ron Polarik"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDIVEfVGLBQ

http://web.israelinsider.com/Article...tics/12956.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZwON...eature=channel

Obama attended school in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro, when only Indonesian citizens were permitted to attend.

Obama's school records list his father as Lolo Soetoro and Obama's citizenship as Indonesian.

For both of the above statements:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k...eature=channel

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72656

Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981 when it was illegal to enter as a U.S. citizen.

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/o...kistan-in-1981

http://www.pak-times.com/2008/07/10/...ana-cnnection/

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72656

Sixteen lawsuits in 12 states and two cases before the Supreme Court now challenge Obama's citizenship.

Tulsa Today article listing many of the individuals and organizations who are challenging Obama's eligibility

Fact: Our Constitution still matters. www.obamaforgery.com

Help us get this ad on television: Go to www.f2a.org and every dollar of your donation will go to airtime from now until Dec. 15 (when the Electoral College voters cast their ballots).

Then let Fox know what you think about the censorship of this ad: 212-301-3000. You can also call CNN and encourage them to take the ad and cover the critical citizenship story: 404-827-1500.

You can see the television ad and two more full-page ads that are running this week in the weekly edition of the Washington Times and Human Events at: www.ObamaForgery.com.

Yes, the Supreme Court said no to the New Jersey citizenship case. But they still have the Pennsylvania and Connecticut cases before them. And there are more than a dozen others that are making their way up to the Supreme Court. I, for one, will not stop asking the critical questions until we have the answers the Constitution demands.

And with all those legal challenges, Grandma, the Kenyan ambassador and now Obama's own Cabinet member all saying that Obama is not qualified to serve as president, rest assured, this issue is not going to go away time soon.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, sign WND's petition demanding the release of his birth certificate.

[tl_3237]

Originally Posted by Philbert

I see, so because Obama had British citizenship through jus sanguinis, he, John McCain, and every child born with a claim to dual citizenship are not natural born citizens. The question is then, what kind of citizens are they? They aren't naturalized citizens. Donofrio's assertion would invent a third category of US citizen: unnatural born?

'native' born.

[ThunderingWind]

Most people I have spoken with think "Natural Born" means NOT BY C-SECTION.

Why: 'cuz ah C-section wern't 'round back then.

[Kenshin]

Originally Posted by ThunderingWind

Most people I have spoken with think "Natural Born" means NOT BY C-SECTION.

Why: 'cuz ah C-section wern't 'round back then.

They were too. They just weren't nearly as good as the techniques we have today.

[tl_3237]

Tomorrow SCOTUS conferences on the Wrotnowski case.

There has been much bantering back and forth about O's qualification as to being a 'natural born citizen' and its definition. To the best of my knowledge and research this phrase was never defined by SCOTUS nor is it defined in the Constitution itself (much like the 'militia' phrase in the 2A prior to Heller).

Comments have surfaced incorrectly citing the 14 amendment as well as misunderstandings on the issue of allegience and whether a dual citizen at birth qualifies.

Mr Donofrio, whose stay was denied by SCOTUS last week, wrote the most clearest and succinct explanation that, instead of my butchering and plagiarizing, I will simply quote and attribute to him the authorship. You can read his full text http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/ on the 12/11 entry. He even references the same text that Scalia cited as authoritative in Heller (ironic, isn't it) so the 'Law of Nations' is a pertinent reference for the issue at hand.

Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirms the understanding and construction the framers used in regards to birthright and jurisdiction while speaking on civil rights of citizens in the House on March 9, 1866:

[i] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…[6]

It’s important to note this statement was issued by Bingham only months before the 14th Amendment was proposed.

In conclusion, I would like to thank reader “John Boy” for pointing to Justice Scalia’s opinion in District of Columbia Et Al. v. Heller. In that case, Justice Scalia took into consideration a certain historical legal reference:

The common references to those “fit to bear arms” in congressional discussions about the militia are matched by use of the same phrase in the few nonmilitary federal contexts where the concept would be relevant… Other legal sources frequently used “bear arms” in nonmilitary contexts.10

Now look at “footnote 10″:

E. de Vattel, The Law of Nations, or, Principles of the Law of Nature 144 (1792) (“Since custom has allowed persons of rank and gentlemen of the army to bear arms in time of peace, strict care should be taken that none but these should be allowed to wear swords”);

Since Justice Scalia cited to this legal textbook in March of 2008, it’s not outrageous to think he might also refer to “The Laws of Nations” on the natural born Citizen issue?

I’ll leave you now with the relevant textbook definition of natural born citizen. The following was published in 1758. This definition, added to all of the above, certainly establishes a rational legal basis to hold that Barack Obama is not a natural born Citizen. And more than that, it puts the burden on those who deny it to don the tin foil hat of despair and bring forthwith to the table of honest debate their own bed of authority to lie in:

§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot 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 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; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

Bottom line -a natural born citizen is born on US soil of exclusively US citizen parents. Qualifications that O by his own admission does not have!

[/ascending soapbox]
I hope and pray the SCOTUS will find the fortitude to take the issue under review and resolve it once and for all. If they issue a clarification of the definition and O qualifies then so be it but to let these issues, which are reasonably raised, to fester for 4 years with a signifiant segment of the population believing that O is a usurper will tear at the moral fabric of the country.

Also consider that if SCOTUS twists the definition for O then that twist becomes applicable to all future presidential candidates and the fears of the founders of a foreign prince someday taking the oval office may be someday realized.
[/descending soapbox]

[ThunderingWind]

Originally Posted by tl_3237

Bottom line -a natural born citizen is born on US soil of exclusively US citizen parents. Qualifications that O by his own admission does not have!

And if I am reading this correctly, the same would apply to Sen. McCain. He was born of exclusively US citizen parents but NOT on US soil.

So, if O can't be El Presdiente and McCain can't move in to 1600 Penn. then where does this leave us in legally selecting a President?

Under the laws we have now, how do we mvoe foreard without the spilling of blood of any patriots and tyrants?

[tl_3237]

Originally Posted by ThunderingWind

And if I am reading this correctly, the same would apply to Sen. McCain. He was born of exclusively US citizen parents but NOT on US soil.

So, if O can't be El Presdiente and McCain can't move in to 1600 Penn. then where does this leave us in legally selecting a President?

Under the laws we have now, how do we mvoe foreard without the spilling of blood of any patriots and tyrants?

Yes this would apply to McCain also unless SCOTUS were to declare a US military base as US soil for purposes of the definition (irrespective of the earlier resolution of Congress regarding McCain's citizenship that has no force of law or binding precedent). Actually both the Donofrio and Wrotnowski cases challenge three presidential candidates - a fact that some detractors claiming him to be part of a Republican conspiracy ignore.

Avoiding bloodshed would have been easy had SCOTUS taken up the issue prior to the primaries but they didn't and O's camp didn't help by delaying through legal maneuvering the various lawsuits in the lower courts thereby creating the constitutional crisis that we now find ourselves in.

If SCOTUS rules O qualified then there probably little if any bloodshed. If they rule him unqualified that surely riots will ensue (unfortunately) but we will remain a nation of laws.

There were several historical opportunities for SCOTUS to define the qualification (eg when Goldwater's qualification was challenged in 1964) but they always took the easy way out by keeping their ruling stringently narrowed. If you look at Donofrio's blog you see some revealing information about earlier presidents and how they stack up to the 'natural born citizen' clause.

[Philbert]

It all hinges on getting the Supreme Court to reverse US v Wong Kim Ark, which is very unlikely, and impossible if the best argument for it is that it was incorrectly decided for the benefit of the then-deceased Chester A Arthur.

[tl_3237]

Originally Posted by Philbert

It all hinges on getting the Supreme Court to reverse US v Wong Kim Ark, which is very unlikely, and impossible if the best argument for it is that it was incorrectly decided for the benefit of the then-deceased Chester A Arthur.

IIRC US v. Ark resolved the issue of citizenship for child born in US of resident non-citizen parents. It did not address the issue of 'natural born' which is a more stringent requirement placed on presidents.

I have started a new thread at http://forum.pafoa.org/national-11/4...ifies-him.html to separate the Donofri et al issues on 'natural born' from the Berg issue of whether O was born on US soil because the title of this thread does not accurately represent the dual citizenship issue now being raised.

[Kenshin]

Originally Posted by ThunderingWind

And if I am reading this correctly, the same would apply to Sen. McCain. He was born of exclusively US citizen parents but NOT on US soil.

So, if O can't be El Presdiente and McCain can't move in to 1600 Penn. then where does this leave us in legally selecting a President?

Under the laws we have now, how do we mvoe foreard without the spilling of blood of any patriots and tyrants?

Wasn't McCain born on a US military base? If so that is US soil and he can become president that way. I know he was born in Panama but I thought he was born on the base. Guantanamo Bay is considered US soil and it is in Cuba. I always assumed that US military bases are US soil. Because that's how the military sees it.