- + - + - + - + - + - + -

Friday, March 20, 2009

Simplified: The Eligibility Issue

It is a popular topic of discussion in political circles these days, and as the weeks pass more and more people are asking, “Is Barack Obama really a natural born citizen of the United States? Is he eligible to serve as President, or isn’t he?” If he is, then so be it. We’ll just have to grit our teeth until this long dark nightmare comes to an end… one way or another.

But what if he is not eligible? What then? Well, in that case we have a problem… a very large problem, the solution to which could tear asunder the fabric of American society.

Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that, “No person except a natural born citizen… shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”
That’s pretty straightforward, yet, when confronted with the possibility that the man who sits in the Oval Office may be a usurper, a great many otherwise patriotic Americans can be heard to say, “What difference does it make? The election’s over; the people have spoken. Get over it!”

Well, it’s not quite as simple as all that and the sooner we can all be satisfied that Obama is or is not a natural born citizen, the better. To postpone that finding for a year or two and then find, conclusively, that Obama is not eligible to serve as president would be disastrous. Every new law and every executive order he had signed, every political appointment, every judicial appointment, every order he had given to the military, and every act and every decision of all of his appointees would immediately become null and void. How could we ever undo all of that?

The American people would quickly learn that it is not much easier to undo two or three years of history than it is to undo a decade or a century. It is imperative that we get to the bottom of this mystery as quickly as possible so that all Americans, regardless of party affiliation, can finally accept that, like it or not, Barack Obama is our president. In order to do that, and to force Obama to end his stubborn refusal to produce his birth certificate, his passports, his visas, and his college records, it's imperative that Americans to insist that he do so.





To do that, it is not necessary to prove that he was born in Kenya, not in Hawaii… as his paternal grandmother, a Kenyan half-brother, and a Kenyan half-sister insist… or who his natural father may have been. (And the State of Hawaii, statute 338, allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to get a Hawaiian birth certificate. Mr. Obama has never presented any corroborating evidence that he was actually born in Hawaii.) The proof of Obama’s failure to meet the “natural born citizen” standard is much simpler than that.

To convert a non-believer… one who insists that the Constitutional requirements must be met, but who believes that questions about Obama’s citizenship status are nothing more than sour grapes… it is only necessary to establish the facts surrounding Obama’s travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in the summer of 1981.

Although Obama fails to mention that trip in either of his memoirs… not in Dreams from My Father and not in The Audacity of Hope… he made a potentially fatal error when he mentioned the Pakistan trip during an April 6, 2008 speech in San Francisco… the same speech in which he referred to rural Pennsylvanians as “bitter” people who “cling to guns or religion…” In that speech, Obama explained in an offhand manner the value of that trip, vis-à-vis his knowledge of foreign affairs, saying, “I knew what Sunni and Shia was (sic) before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”

When questioned about that trip, Obama’s campaign press secretary, Bill Burton, confirmed to the New York Times, and others, that Obama had visited Pakistan in 1981 on his return from Indonesia, traveling there with a Pakistani friend from Occidental College, Wahid Hamid. According to Burton, Obama stayed in Karachi with the family of another Pakistani friend, Mohammed Hasan Chandoo. Obama has never mentioned the Pakistan trip again.

So it is well established that Obama did travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in 1981. What is not established, and what is critically important, is what passport he used during that trip. There are only three possibilities: Obama could have traveled under a U.S. passport… a passport first issued when he and his mother moved from Hawaii to Indonesia in 1967; he could have traveled under an Indonesian passport, issued following his adoption by his Indonesian stepfather; and it is conceivable that, if he was, in fact, born in Kenya in 1961, he could still have been a British subject, traveling with a British passport. So which is it?

Unfortunately for Obama, in the present circumstance, Pakistan was under martial law in 1981 and certain undesirables… Christians, Jews, and Americans… were prohibited from entering the country. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list, making a U.S. passport no more valuable than an empty chewing gum wrapper at the Karachi Port of Entry.

So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later? And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi, what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration? The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers.

It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.

Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A: Yes, by his own admission.

Q: What passport did he travel under? A: There are only three possibilities.
1) He traveled with a U.S. passport,
2) He traveled with a British passport, or
3) He traveled with an Indonesian passport.

Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.

Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.

If he was traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he was traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.

Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008. Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.

Contrary to popular belief among those who are even remotely aware of Obama's eligibility issue, the lawsuits brought by several attornies and citizens have NOT all been dismissed, several are still pending with the courts and there are many more coming down the pipe. It's also noteworthy that not a single one of the higher level cases has actually been heard on its merits.

In addition, it would appear that not even the Supreme Court is out of the Obama administration's tentacled reach. I have to admit, when I first started becoming less of a casual observer of the eligibility cases and more of an avid follower, the notion of corruption in the office of the ultimate law of the land was almost enough to make me question the legitimacy of the whole issue. It just seemed too far-fetched. But watching the events surrounding Orly Taitz's case (that was supposed to have been held in full conference before the court) unfold has at least opened my eyes to the possibility. Dr. Taitz has these details and many more on her site. Her Affadavit in Support of Demand for Information lays out the specifics of her initial case. The case she is currently drafting sports 9 state representatives and multiple retired and active members of our military as plaintiffs.

You can also hear her interview on Rollye James(audio only):












(H/T Family Security Matters and Curmudgeounly & Skeptical)

Stumble Upon Toolbar

4 COMMENTS:

mewize said...

This whole issue has become very disturbing because otherwise patriotic Americans have ignored the necessity for a constitution in the first place. Like George Bush, they have become so complacent that they regard it as 'just another g-d piece of paper'

I caught a radio show where this issue was being debated yesterday, and a caller actually thought that Obama had more standing to hold the office of president than John McCain did. The caller cited that McCain was matter-of-factly born in The Panama Canal Zone: which is true. He then reasoned that because of that fact, McCain was inelligible because he was not a citizen: which is not true.

The citizenship laws regarding persons traveling abroad are written in such a way as to include children born in foreign countries. The law, in effect, says that as long as the child is born to two parents who are American citizens at the time of birth, then that child is granted citizenship without restrictions and without questions.

I know this because I was born in Cuba. Both my parents were Americans who happened to be deployed to a foreign country. Since I was born abroad, my birth records are maintained by the Department of State because, clearly, it is not the responsibility of any individual state to keep them. I am sure McCain is in this same situation.

This deal with Obama goes so much deeper because no one is forcing the issue. Me, I can't even get a driver's license without showing my birth certificate, but this guy gets to fly on Air Force One without one! He would be detained in every airport in the world as a terror suspect with his lack of credentials!

SCOTUS let Madelin Murray O'hare, with her lone voice, corrupt the consciences of a whole country, but for some reason they won't hear this case even though millions of Americans want to know the truth!

What are we without our constitution? The Constitution is the deal we made with the government, and they are not keeping their end of the bargain!

Every time we turn around they are ignoring some constitutional clause. It has become so obvious that powers not given the federal government are being assumed by them without restraint; they have no right getting involved in business decisions. They have become so invasive that states are beginning to declare soverignity over the fed.

Globalization is afoot in the US and the biggest obstacle to its spreading is the constitution. If they can minimalize that, make it of none-effect, or even cause Americans to reject it and call for a new constitutional congress (which I believe they will soon do), then communists, like Hugo Chavez, can take over our county without ever firing a shot!

Right now, dollars are their best weapon, and Obama is giving away so much of it that he should be tried for treason! He and his socialist congress is arming the enemy with our best defensive weapon: our financial independence.

I really think it is all staged with a purpose in mind. There is no way that teleprompter-reading actor could do this on his own. He just isn't that smart. He insults Christians, disabled persons, coal miners, energy companies, just about everyone when he ad-libs.

There is something up, and it is taking America down, and I have no clue how to live like a socialist, do you?

Lizzi said...

mewize:

I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. However, I need to clarify a position within the eligibility debate.

Your citizenship, having been born in Cuba, would not be called into question with our laws as they stand. Per the NBC clause in the Constitution, you could not run for president, as you would not qualify as such. Technically, neither does McCain, as I understand it. His citizenship is not the issue, but rather the NBC part. Had he been born on a base overseas, it would be a different story, but as he was born in a hospital in Panama, it's my understanding that he wasn't really qualified either. I think the Donofrio suit pointed that out as well.

There are some that question the actual citizenship as a whole of Obama, but without having access to ANY of his records, it remains, like everything else, unknown.

I'm glad it's finally being brought to light bit by bit on radio shows. If only we could get it featured on one of the larger ones ... if only someone on Fox or on Beck had the cajones to address it. Once you get the past the initial "tin hat" stereotypes the mainstream blogs have laden the issue with when talking to people, they're blown away.

The facts don't lie.

mewize said...

That's just it; Why is it not being featured on all the big networks? Millions of Americans are asking that question and are ignored like a bunch of crack pots! Alan Keyes won't even recognize Obama as president because of this issue. He is like so many of the rest of us who realize that Obama and his handlers would not hide this if there were nothing to hide.

The COLB that we were all treated to during the campaign has been examined by experts and proven to be a forgery,(http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-tech-expe.html) which is a felony! Investigators were dispatched to determine who owned the residence referenced in Obama's newspaper-birth announcement, 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy, and found that it belonged to Orland and Thelma Lafforge!

The question is what are they hiding? But the bigger question is, why are they hiding it?

Lizzi said...

All true, but the "beauty" of Obama's travel admission relies only on his passport, not the birth certificate. It doesn't matter whether he was born on the White House lawn.

If you listen to Dr. Taitz's interview or read any of her information, it's amazing the things in Obama's past that he's tripped over, but is not being examined by ANY major media outlet. On his application to practice law in Illinois, for example, he answered the question about having ever used another name blank, when it's been shown multiple times that he went by Barry Soetero as a student in Indonesia.

His passport misstep may or may not be directly related to that nasty little passport scrubbing attempt last year. Makes you wonder, at the very least.

There's nothing conspiratorial about anything involved in the passport issue. What type of passport did he travel under? It's cut and dry.