HOME Page ~Welcome to obama- -nation.com

providing insights into Presidential  eligibility and verification~

 an amalgam of original essays and comments
by a.r. nash and others, from many web sources, covering the Constitution, history, philosophy, the law, and the birth certificates.  You’ll find here insights found no where else, and an aggregation of information like no other site contains.

“There is a time for all things, a time to preach and a time to pray, but those times have passed away.  There is a time to fight, and that time has now come.” – Peter Muhlenberg

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTICE: DEAD LINK NOW FIXED; CLICK ON IMAGE

nazi-collage-thmb—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. 10 [1]

   “~All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.

   ~It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.

   ~For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, -a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“When an honest man discovers he is mistaken,
“he will either cease being mistaken,
“or cease being honest.”

Anonymous

“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. they are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”

Alexander Hamilton, “The Farmer Refuted”, February 5, 1775.

“As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people.  On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.”

H.L. Mencken, The Baltimore Evening Sun,  July 26, 1920.

Those who seek the truth should remember Joseph Story’s admonition that acceptable constitutional construction “can never abrogate the text; it can never fritter away its obvious sense; it can never narrow down its limitations; it can never enlarge its natural boundaries.”

“In religion and politics people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from “authorities” who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing.”

Autobiography of Mark Twain

In 1919, Theodore Roosevelt penned these words:

“We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.

But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American,
-and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here.
Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all.
~We have room for but one flag, -the American flag.
We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language
and… we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

a staunch constitutionist would be careful to remember Joseph Story’s admonition that acceptable constitutional construction “can never abrogate the text; it can never fritter away its obvious sense; it can never narrow down its limitations; it can never enlarge its natural boundaries.” – See more at: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/08/alan-keyes-non-birther-rand-paul.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BirtherReportObamaReleaseYourRecords+%28Birther+Report%3A+Obama+Release+Your+Records%29#sthash.iPIVtAGO.dpuf
a staunch constitutionist would be careful to remember Joseph Story’s admonition that acceptable constitutional construction “can never abrogate the text; it can never fritter away its obvious sense; it can never narrow down its limitations; it can never enlarge its natural boundaries.” – See more at: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/08/alan-keyes-non-birther-rand-paul.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BirtherReportObamaReleaseYourRecords+%28Birther+Report%3A+Obama+Release+Your+Records%29#sthash.iPIVtAGO.dpuf

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

WHY BABY OBAMA WAS BORN IN VANCOUVER   Pt. 2

Publius Huldah Exposition: natural born citizen explained by 18th century authors

A simulation of Obama’s Hawaiian archive vital record pdf   ~Print-size 860 Kb jpg

A Technical Analysis of Obama’s birth certificate PDF by Mara Zebest

Her exposition on the essence of her analysis

White House Xerox copier produces similar pdf results

Dissecting Obama’s Selective Service Card; Pro & Con views

Obama’s SSN Investigation Results: Inexplicable

FORGERY-GATE: A Nation-wide Conspiracy of Silence

The Obama File: the history and fraud of the first birth certificate

Birther Report; the history of fake first birth certificate, + links

FIAT JUSTITIA RUAT CAELUM;

  “Let Justice Be Done Though The Heavens Fall”

Principles of Citizenship explained in graphic form.

American Citizenship Explained

American Citizenship Explained

  Double Screen-size  Screen Size  Prints-size (8 x 11)

Large-Size png version  Medium Size   PDF Version

CONFLICTING PRINCIPLES DEFINING NATURAL BORN CITIZENS

PRINT SIZE

*   *    *    *    *    *    *

Don’t visit “American Sod”  (sowing the seeds-Of-Destruction) unless you can handle a big dose of reality. http://americansod.wordpress.com/

Pdf version; Citizenship illustration

half-size, negative

half-size, negative

Full-size

8 types of citizenship black & white

8 types of citizenship
black & white

8 Types of Citizenship Large view size, 190 Kb

8 Types of Citizenship Large size, small,  Print Size

8 types of citizenship 
black & white Adobe PDF versions (with some exceptions)

The presidential qualification  (“natural born citizen,”) was reported out of Committee on September the 4th , 1787, and adopted in the Constitution.
The Federalist contains a contemporary comment on it written by Alexander Hamilton. It reads:
“Nothing was more to be desired, than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.  These most deadly adversaries of Republican government, might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.

   How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?”
(Federalist, LXVIII.)

Natural Citizenship is not defined by anyone’s “common sense” but by Natural Law and Natural Law alone.  It is not Natural Law melded, blended, amalgamated, fused, grafted, or combined with border-based human law nationality mandates.
That is a bastardization of Natural Law, a freaky Frankenstein, Siamese twins combo of the natural with the unnatural.

  No where in the history of the world has there ever been such a fusion of jus soli and jus sanguinis.  It is as unnatural as a melding of dogs & cats, Angels & Devils.   It is nothing more than a fantasy dogma, -or as James Madison described it “a visionary principle” not grounded in any reality.    A. Nash

Titles listed below are not included in the Header Navigation:

PDF copies

TRANSCENDENT, INVIOLABLE, A PRIORI CITIZENSHIP

The Alpha & Omega of Belonging; Blood Citizens vs Soil Citizens

What the Supreme Court Should Know But Doesn’t

FOUR WAYS TO ACQUIRE UNNATURAL  CITIZENSHIP

Natural Nationality; Britain, U.S., and Mexico

American Foreigners and Native-Born Aliens

Our Asinine U.S. Citizenship Perversion

Oaths, Obedience, & Allegiance in Action

Of Truth & Fiction; Power & Treason

Who Is An American Citizen?

Why Baby Obama Was Born in Vancouver Pt.1

Why Baby Obama Was Born in Vancouver Pt.2

Of Children & Families; Citizens & Empires

The Da Vinci Code of American Citizenship

Citizenship: by Destiny or by Destiny Event

Of Presidents, Hybrids  & “Term of Art” Fantasies

When The SCOTUS Did Wrong for the Right Reasons

Citizenship Truths Learned from Apples and Antarctica

The Origins of Citizenship:   Predestination vs Permission

What the 14th Amendment Doesn’t Say and Doesn’t Mean

Understanding Vattel, Citizenship, and Presidential Eligibility

Naturalization: The Key to Understanding Presidential Eligibility

Martians, Koreans, Kangaroos, and Natural Citizens

The Quasi-Citizenship of Women and Immigrants

Citizenship Illuminated by Various Examples

Everything You Think You Know Is Wrong

Everything You Think You Know Is Wrong Pt.2

Comparing Opposite Forms of Citizenship

Historical Views of Natural Born Citizen

Respect for Obama; Why it’s Impossible

Obama & The Time Machine Revelation

TRAITORS IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

OBAMA’S SECRET ORIGIN

THE DANDELION ANALOGY

BARRY OBAMA: FRAUD TO THE CORE

WHY OBAMA IS NOT A REAL AMERICAN

THE GREATEST FRAUD IN HUMAN HISTORY

FUNDAMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY & PRIMAL LAW

WHY OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE CANNOT BE BELIEVED

OBAMA’S UNBELIEVABLE NEWSPAPER BIRTH LISTING

THE NATURE OF HUMAN ORIGIN AND CITIZENSHIP

THE BRITISH ROOTS OF PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY

DUMBOCRATS; DUMB ENOUGH TO ELECT A FRAUD

SLAVES, HALF-BREEDS, TRANSEXUALS, AND OBAMA

THE NATURAL CITIZEN IN AMERICAN LEGAL HISTORY

MENDACIOUS & FABRICATED LETTERS OF VERIFICATION

FROM CORRUPTED LANGUAGE TO CORRUPTED GOVERNMENT

CITIZENS AT BIRTH ARE INELIGIBLE TO BE PRESIDENT

ALLEGIANCE:  BASTARD CHILD OF ROYAL DESPOTS

CONSTITUTIONAL ERRORS OBAMA DEPENDS ON

THE PRESIDENCY AND THE 20TH AMENDMENT

ADAM AND EVE AND NATURAL CITIZENSHIP

THE RULES OF CITIZENSHIP AND ELIGIBILITY

JUS SOLI AND JUS SANGUINIS CITIZENSHIP

ALIEN BABIES VS IMMIGRANT BABIES

 CITIES & CITIZENS; NATURAL vs LEGAL

WHO IS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN?

THE OBAMA LIST OF FACTS

IS OBAMA A CAUCASIAN KENYAN?

NATIVE-BORN TADPOLE CITIZENSHIP

CITIZENSHIP BY LIFE & CITIZENSHIP BY LAW

PRINCIPLE vs POLICY; OBEDIENCE vs SUBJECTION

NATIVES, TRIBES, AND FORGOTTEN CITIZENSHIP TRUTHS

OFFICIAL STATE ERROR & A NON-CITIZEN PRESIDENT

   OBAMA vs The TRUTH ABOUT THE 14TH AMENDMENT

PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY CITIZENSHIP PRIMER

NATIONS, CITIZENS, RESPONSIBILITY & NATURAL LAW

THE BASTARDIZATION OF CITIZENSHIP LAW & PRINCIPLES

THE IRON GATE THAT NO LONGER PROTECTS THE PRESIDENCY

VARIOUS REJECTED PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

FESTERING CITIZENSHIP QUESTIONS THE PRESS WILL NEVER ASK

WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS

CITIZENSHIP BEYOND ALL LAWS

OBAMA: AN UNNATURAL HYBRID NATIVE

THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL MEMBERSHIP

A BRIEF HISTORY OF NATURAL CITIZENSHIP

WHAT NATURAL BORN CITIZEN MEANS  & WHY

THE SIMPLE FACTS OF CITIZENSHIP -from A to  Z

HYPOTHETICAL OBAMA CITIZENSHIP SCENARIOS

 DANGEROUS QUESTIONS  &  EXPLOSIVE ANSWERS

QUESTIONS THAT WILL NEVER BE ASKED OF OBAMA

A  CITIZENSHIP PRIMER FOR THE  SUPREME COURT

AMERICA’S PROGRESSIVE GANGRENE

A NEW CITIZENSHIP PRIMER

~     ~     ~     ~     ~     ~     ~

FACTS VERSUS CERTAINTY

YOU ARE NOT A “LEGAL” AMERICAN!

OBAMA’S  QUESTIONABLE & COVERT CITIZENSHIP

DELUSION, CORRUPTION, & A CHARLATAN PRESIDENT

NATIONAL IGNORANCE & A CONSTITUTIONAL TRAVESTY

(THE QUESTIONS NEVER ANSWERED NOR EVER EVEN ASKED)

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

US LAW vs OBAMA’S  UNNATURAL CITIZENSHIP

THE SOURCE OF OBAMA’S PRESIDENTIAL INELIGIBILITY

NATURAL vs ARTIFICIAL CITIZENSHIP/ the Gorilla Analogy

REALITY CHECK :  1789

~No Bastard Daughter of a Catholic African Alien Can Be President

THE VANCOUVER BIRTH SCENARIO

AN OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE SLUG-FEST

THE QUESTION REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS FEAR

THE THIEF-in-CHIEF WHO STOLE THE PRESIDENCY

THE WISDOM & INSIGHTS OF BHO’s  SPEECH WRITER

LARRY, MOE  and BARRY O.

OBAMA NEEDS TO BE OUTED

THE UNITED NATIONS OF AMERICA

OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE SHOOTOUT

A BLIND SHEPHERD & A NATION THAT’S LOST

THE  VAMPIRE PRESIDENCY Of  COUNT B. OBAMA

IS SURI CRUISE A NATURAL BORN SCIENTOLOGIST?

OBAMA: AN ADOPTED CITIZEN & ILLEGITIMATE PRESIDENT

BARRY’S BURIED PAST & COUNTERFEIT BIRTH CERTIFICATE

AN UNVETTED COUNTERFEIT PRESIDENT

ONE  IN 315  MILLION, -BUT THE WRONG ONE!

THE UNMASKING OF A COUNTERFEIT PRESIDENT

WHEN EXPERTS ARE IDIOTS & AUTHORITIES ARE FOOLS

OBAMA’S HALF-AMERICAN,  HALF-FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP

THE TRUTH ABOUT VATTEL’S DESCRIPTION OF SOCIETIES

SPOCK, OBAMA, JOHN THE BAPTIST & HEROD THE GREAT

FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS & FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS

OBAMA:  CITIZEN BY GRACE and PRESIDENT BY FRAUD

“NATIVE-BORN CITIZENS” CAN’T BE  PRESIDENT

NATURAL LAW AND UNNATURAL DUALITY

THE NATURE OF NATURAL CITIZENSHIP

WHEN BRILLIANT MINDS ARE MORONS

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

MINOR Vs HAPPERSETT  by LEO DONOFRIO

VERTICAL      HORIZONTAL     ONE PAGE

~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~

ANGELS, VIRGINS, NUNS,  & NATURAL CITIZENS

 THE PRINCIPLES of UNALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS

THE THINGS OF NATURE & THE NATURE OF THINGS

THE IMMUTABLE NATURE of NATURAL CITIZENSHIP

THE UNWRITTEN LAW of NATURAL CITIZENSHIP

NATURAL CITIZENSHIP:  BEYOND ALL LAWS

UNLIMITED & UNTOUCHABLE CITIZENSHIP

~ ~ ~

The BEAUTIFUL, BLISSFUL BLINDNESS Of OBAMA’S TRUE BELIEVERS

~ ~ ~

FROM SUBJECTS OF THE KING TO CITIZENS OF THE NATION

 A ZOMBIE PRESS, LOBOTOMIZED CONGRESS, & A NATURALIZED PRESIDENT

THE FOUNDATION of NATIONS/ NATURAL RIGHTS  & Unnatural Citizenship

The UNCONSTITUTIONAL  CARPETBAGGER PRESIDENCY of BARRY OBAMA

THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRUTH About An UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRESIDENT

NIXON’S PARDON, A NATIONAL DELUSION,  & OBAMA’S ELECTION

WHY AMERICAN’S BORN ABROAD ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE PRESIDENT

“NATIVE-BORN” CITIZENS ARE NOT   CONSTITUTIONALLY ELIGIBLE TO BE PRESIDENT

*

NATIVE BORN VS  NATURAL BORN   *   WHERE INMATES RUN THE ASYLUM

OBLIVIOUS TO THE ABSURDITY -14th AMENDMENT DELUSIONS

CONSTITUTIONAL FACTS & UNCONSTITUTIONAL FRAUD

CONSTITUTIONAL TREASON & AN AVATAR PRESIDENT

*

OBAMA:  A CITIZEN BY GRACE,  -THE PRESIDENT BY FRAUD

THE BAMBOOZLING of AMERICA At The HIGHEST LEVEL

THE ELIGIBILITY CREDIBILITY  Of ONE BARRY OBAMA

The LIBERAL LIE THAT ELECTED A PRESIDENT

THE FIRST AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PRESIDENT

INCOMPETENCE AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL

*

THE DNC & THE HALF-BLOOD PRESIDENT

 EVERY TOM, DICK, & HARRY BUT NOT MY SON?

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP via STATE CITIZENSHIP

FROM CERTAINTY TO CONFUSION, TO IGNORANCE, TO TREASON

*

CITIZEN ZERO & THE CONSTITUTION’S BAN AGAINST OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY

NATURAL CITIZENSHIP vs CITIZENSHIP BY SUBSTITUTION

NATIVE-BORN FOREIGNERS & FOREIGN-BORN NATIVES

THE NATURE OF VATTEL’S CITIZENSHIP DEFINITION

*

NATURAL CITIZENSHIP versus LEGAL CITIZENSHIP

WHO IS A NATURAL AMERICAN and WHO IS NOT?

THE AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP CONUNDRUM

WHEN NATIVE-BIRTH CONVEYS NOTHING

NATURAL NATIVE Versus HYBRID NATIVE

YOUR ARE NOT A “LEGAL” U.S. CITIZEN

*

How “LADY & The TRAMP” DEBUNKS OBAMA’S ELIGIBILITY

A MAN CALLED “HORSE” & A MAN CALLED “PRESIDENT”

SITTING BULL & OBAMA: A TALE Of TWO CHIEFS

JESUS & OBAMA: TWO UNNATURAL HYBRIDS

MOSES And THE HALF-BLOOD PRESIDENT

*

THE AUDACITY OF FRAUD; -AN UNNATURAL AMERICAN PRESIDENT

TALE Of A DEAD PRESIDENT‘ & HIS TWINS BROTHER’S CHARADE

AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL PATH TO THE PRESIDENCY

WHERE’S THE BEEF? – OBAMA’S TVP CITIZENSHIP

THE END OF EDEN & THE RISE OF OBAMA

*

CAN CHILDREN of MASS MURDERERS BE PRESIDENT?

HOW MARCO RUBIO COULD DESTROY The APPLE CART

US AMBASSADORS & An UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRESIDENT

THE AMERICAN HISTORY OF NATURALIZATION By MARRIAGE

AMERICA vs The CONSTITUTION -WHAT’S RIGHT vs WHAT’S BEST

*

THE TYRANNY OF GOOD INTENTIONS  WHEN THE EXPERTS ARE IMBECILES

FROM A NATION Of LAWS TO A NATION Of LAW-BREAKERS

MISSING THE POINT & IGNORING THE FACTS

THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN AMERICA

 THE PROBLEM THAT CAN’T BE SOLVED

MY MAJOR RANDOM THOUGHTS

  ~EQUAL RIGHTS & EQUAL LIBERTY

State seal appears as if by Magic!                                           all  essays except the last one are by

A. R. Nash  arnash1@gmail.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NEW WEBSITE:  All images of  CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH pdf -layers revealed

NEW WEBSITEAMERICAN S.O.D.   sowing the SEEDS Of DESTRUCTION         

About Mr. Obama’s Birth Certificate  by Paul Murphy

When Is A Citizen Not A Citizen?  by Cindy Simpson

Alexander Hamilton & John Jay’s Letter to Washington   by John Woodman

Link to the original WH 9-layer PDF -376 Kb

There are several pertinent questions that people fail to ask, such as: By what principle is John McCain a natural born citizen even though not a native-born citizen?
By what principle could Obama be a U.S. citizen, and is it the same principle as that by which McCain is a natural born citizen?
Would Obama be a U.S. citizen if he had been born in a foreign location like John McCain?
Is Obama’s presidential eligibility not affected by his parentage while McCain’s was?
Can birth as a subject of a foreign sovereign nation make one a natural American citizen?

No person whose U.S. citizenship is derived from any legal source is a natural born American.  Any legal citizenship, including constitutional citizenship, is artificial citizenship because it is not the product of natural law, but of human law,  it’s membership-by-permission.  No one whose citizenship is by permission of the government is eligible to be the President of the United States.  The citizenship of natural citizens is beyond the authority of the government.  It cannot bestow it, nor rescind it, nor regulate it, nor infringe upon it.  The unalienable nature of natural citizenship supersedes the legitimate authority of all human forms of legitimate government because the right of the government to exist is granted by the will and choice of natural citizens, -not the other way around.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Obama was a provisional Commonwealth subject via birth in wedlock (?) to a named British subject father.  By not renouncing his American citizenship as an adult, his connection to Kenya thereby expired, along with his Commonwealth membership.  His Indonesian citizenship via adoption also was provisional if he did not live in Indonesia, requiring that he renew his Indonesian passport every two years following the first renewal at four years.  That was something that he would have done because it was his only form of official government identification since he had no birth certificate from any nation.

NEW: Feb. 2014:  It is a mistake to assume the Lolo Soetoro adopted Barry Obama under Hawaiian law even though he had a year to do so before returning to Indonesia.  It is also a mistake to think that the “original” birth certificate reveals it was amended to show a legal change of parentage which would have named Lolo as Barry’s father.  Such a secret is NOT what Obama has been hiding because no such alteration of the original Certificate of Live Birth would have been made because of Barry’s age at adoption (not an infant).  Adoption is only secret if the birth mother wants to keep her identity secret, which is only the case soon after birth, -not 6 years or 16 years.
The reasons that these three presumptions (birth in Hawaii, existence of a Hawaiian birth certificate, and adoption in Hawaii under its laws) are false is due to the fact that Barry’s mother was not able to acquire a Hawaiian birth certificate for him since the home-birth claim she made in an affidavit to the Dept. of Health could not be corroborated by evidence, as required, that she had lived for one year in Hawaii.

  That would be totally impossible if she spent the last couple months of her pregnancy in Seattle (seeking an adoptive couple) where she registered for college just two weeks after giving birth .
Without such proof, no birth certificate could be legally issued.  But assuming that a birth certificate was issued, Lolo would have no motive or need to adopt him under Hawaiian law since he was going to live in and grow up in Indonesia as his son.
Why not just adopt him in Indonesia since he could do that after returning there, even in the absence of Barry?  Or, better still, adopt him in Hawaii but through the Indonesian Embassy?
Who knows any reason why he could not and would not have done that?  That would have given little identity-less Barry official ID, which he lacked due to having no birth certificate.  The Embassy might have had to bend a rule or two but that’s how human affairs are conducted.
His mother could have shown them their marriage certificate and filled out an affidavit as evidence that she was his mother and guardian.  No problem.  Instant Indonesian citizenship, -the passport to his future identity being, literally, *a passport* from a foreign country which he obtained in order to return to Hawaii at age 7 or 8 for a Christmas visit, and later at 10 for good.

He then would have obtained a permanent resident Green Card, for which proof would still exist if it hasn’t  been purged from the archive.  Plus, his grandparents would have obtained legal custody in order to be his legal guardians.   ~   ~   ~

Obama’s narrative is that he was not born abroad but born in Honolulu of an alien father.  That fact, like the 14th Amendment, comes with additional baggage besides native-birth and it concerns those who were not subject to the full jurisdiction of the U.S. government that rules over all citizens and immigrants.  His father, like foreign diplomats, tourists, and all forms of guests of the U.S. government (i.e. transient Visa Card holders, -not Green Card holders) was not subject to that authority and could not be drafted as can citizens and immigrants, thus his son was born also not subject to it through him as a British subject under the protection of British law, as well as international laws and treaties.

Thus, with foreign birth not acknowledged, provisional U.S. citizenship was not a possibility since it does not pertain to anyone born on U.S. soil, and… was also not possible because U.S. nationality law at that time required that his mother be 19 years of age and she was only 18 when he was born.

 Barack Obama admited he was born a British citizen on his “paid for by Barack Obama” fightthesmears,com website (now shutdown):    “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on the 4th of August, 1961,  Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.”

Obama-is-only-a-Usurper said…
You know if you read the Civil Rights Act of 1866 it makes amply clear that someone who was born “not subject to any foreign power” was a US Citizen.
Now Obama admits he was subject to a foreign power at birth.

 1866 Civil Rights Act   14 Stat. 27-30, April 9, 1866 A.D.   CHAP. XXXI.
“An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States;…”

It’s crystal clear that if in 1866 a person of dual citizenship was not a US Citizen, then by all means in 1776 the founders would not consider a person who was not even a citizen to be a natural born citizen!!

Obama Agrees That Natural Citizenship Requires both Parents Be Citizens:  Senate Resolution 511 2008
“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.”–Barack Obama, co-sponsor

At the peak of the Rev, Wright flare-up, Obama played his Michelle trump card. “I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slave owners,” he boasted in his bellwether speech on race, “an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters.”

What if Barry O.  had married a Kenyan woman?  Would he have been viewed as presidential candidate material then?  What kind of citizen would he have been viewed as, natural? or something else?  What if he had married a white woman? Would he have been viewed as presidential candidate material then?  How many black women would have voted for him?

What if his mother had been the Kenyan wife of his father?  What kind of citizen would he have been viewed as then?  Natural? or something else?  But what difference would it have really made?  Well, he wouldn’t have been seen as being a citizen at all through his mother nor able to pull off the greatest deception since traitors in the upper management levels of the FBI and CIA were discovered.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense.” –Thomas Jefferson

In Dec. 2011 I discovered that NATURALIZED, NATIVE-BORN, and NATURAL BORN ARE DISTINCT in the official Immigration Service website which includes Attorney General Interpretations of Supreme Court decisions and Congressional Naturalization law.

I shared what I discovered with attorney Leo Donofrio .  Read his response on his blog NaturalBornCitizen  (Since Leo Donofrio no longer publishes comments to his site, I’ll publish my own comments in reply here. )      It states the following:

UPDATE: THE PAGE HAS BEEN MOVED ON THE CIS WEBSITE! The page displayed  now states:

404 – Requested Page Not Found on Site

This was the url perhaps for many years, possible a decade:  http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45104/0-0-0-48602.htm

But the puppet-masters changed its address so the link that I’d found would no longer lead to it.  But by using the site’s search function I was able to relocate it.

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45077/0-0-0-48575.html

   Also, even though the CONSPIRATORS in Obama’s inner circle  altered the CIS website, the internet archive site “the WayBack Machine” has it recorded.  Here’s its copy of the moved page: http://web.archive.org/web/20110711184242/http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45104/0-0-0-48602.html  (the rats are on the run)

The pertinent sentence is the second-to-last stand-alone sentence.

Interpretation 324.2 Reacquisition of citizenship lost by marriage.
Repatriation
(7) Restoration of citizenship is prospective . Restoration to citizenship under any one of the three statutes is not regarded as having erased the period of alienage that immediately preceded it. ["paragraph 6"] but to restore the person to the status if NATURALIZED, NATIVE, or NATURAL-BORN CITIZEN, as determined by her status prior to loss. [plus two more instances]

~NOTE: UPDATE: Check-out Found: The Toxic Terms Scrubbed from the Web~

Natural citizens can be born anywhere in the world because their parents are Americans, but “native-born” citizens, with immigrant parents, must be born in the U.S. or else the 14th Amendment does not apply to them.  They are constitutional citizens by the grace of the American people who passed the 14th Amendment, whereas natural citizens are citizens by nature, and no law grants, governs, regulates, restricts or defines their citizenship.  It doesn’t come from government.  It precedes government.  Government can’t exist without naturally connected members to create it.

Natural citizenship is bestowed as an unalienable natural right just like Life, Liberty and and many others, including the right to marry & divorce, and own and inherit property. The Bill of Rights was written to protect and declare rights undeclared in the body of the Constitution, and one of those undeclared rights is the inherited citizenship of children born to Americans without regard to where they are born.

“There are only two classes of citizens of the United States, native-born citizens and naturalized citizens; and a citizen who did not acquire that status by birth in the United States is a naturalized citizen. Zimmer v. Acheson, 191 F. 2d 209, 211 (10th Cir. 1951) “

There are actually five classes of citizens:  1. the natural born citizens, -who are one type of “born citizen”,  2. the native-born citizens who are born to foreign immigrants, also describe by me as constitutional citizens via the 14th Amendment) 3. the naturalized citizens, and 4. the derivative citizens who are automatically naturalized (children and wives of newly naturalized fathers, -or foreign brides marrying American husbands, -no longer the policy in the U.S.)  5. Provisional citizens; children born abroad to only one U.S. parent.  Their citizenship will become permanent but with the provision that they live x number of years in the U.S. during their youth.

There are eight  types of people in America; natural American citizens, naturalized American citizens, American Nationals, Native Americans without US citizenship, legal immigrants, illegal immigrants,  foreign guests and diplomats, and children of unions of various combinations of the preceding groups,

There are seven  types of children born in America; children born to natural citizens, children born to naturalized citizens, children born to legal immigrants, children born to illegal immigrants, children born to American nationals, and children born to foreign guests and diplomats, and those with mixed parentage combining the preceding groups.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. CONSTITUTION Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5

  “No person except a natural born Citizen…shall be eligible to the Office of the President,…”

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The TEN RULES of Natural & Naturalized Citizenship

1.  No American is a natural American unless born to American parents.
2. Only children of American  parents are eligible to be President.
3.  American parents produce natural American children regardless of where they’re born.
4.  No American can father a child that’s a natural citizen of a foreign nation -even if born within that foreign nation, nor can a foreigner beget a natural citizen of a nation foreign to him, (such as the United States) even though his child may be born within its borders.

5.  No one born to a foreign Diplomat, Ambassador, Consul, soldier, visitor, tourist, worker, professor, or student is constitutionally an American citizen because he is what his father is, and his father is a foreigner who lives in a foreign nation and remains subject to its foreign jurisdiction, -not that of the United States.   As such, his child is not covered by the 14th Amendment.

6.  A foreigner, whether immigrant or non-immigrant, cannot father a natural American because his children will either be foreign citizens only or be both foreign and native-born naturalized-at-birth U.S. citizens. They won’t be native-born natural American citizens free of any alien nationality by blood.

7.  Anyone “native born” but with legal immigrant parents is a citizen by 14th Amendment automatic naturalization, having their foreign citizenship overlaid with naturalized American citizenship. They are dual citizens.

8.  Citizenship acquired by naturalization, (whether automatically or via process) is not natural citizenship because it was not naturally acquired.  Rather, it’s acquired via legal mean through the laws & policies of the nation.

9.  No foreigner who’s subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign government, (nor one who is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. government), can father a constitutionally eligible candidate for President because his children come into the world with foreign alienage attached to them.

10. No one born with foreign alienage is eligible to be President because they are/were dual citizens, not natural citizens, and are “tainted” with non-American foreignness.

Obama’s father was a foreigner who was not an American immigrant, but even if he had been, his son still would not be a natural born American because his father would be an un-naturalized  foreigner, -not an American father, making him only a constitutional naturalized citizen and not a natural citizen.  Any person with such citizenship is constitutionally ineligible to hold the Office of the President. Barack Obama, if such a citizen, would consequently be an unconstitutional President.

The Ten Rules of Natural Law Membership & Citizenship

1.  Everyone possess a natural right to be accepted as an equal member of the group into which they are born.
2.  No one possesses a natural right to be accepted as an equal member of any group into which he or she is not born.
3.  No natural group has a right to decide that the children of its natural members are not members.
4.  All natural groups have the right to decide when, how and why non-members are allowed to join their group
5.  All natural groups have a right to decide that the children of non-members are not members, even if born within the group’s territory.
6.  The location of one’s birth conveys no natural right whatsoever.
7.  No non-member who inhabits the land of a group other than his own and does so without the permission of the group, possesses any natural right to the full protection of the group in regard to defense against enemies or the violation of rights possessed by the members.
8.  Only non-members who have the official permission of the group to live among them are covered by the protections of the group’s rules.
9.  Children born to non-members are not natural native members of the group because they come from a mixed-blood or a foreign-blood origin.
10. Children who are not natural native members of the group, but are given permission to be members, possess no natural right to be equally eligible to be the Chief of the group.  Only natural members possess that right which they inherit from their member parents.

No one who is not a natural citizen of the United States, -who was not born to American parents, -who was born with mixed-blood or fully-foreign blood connections to a foreign power and is considered one of that foreign nations natural members through the father, is eligible to be entrusted with the knowledge of, access to, keys to and codes to nuclear weapons.  No nuclear nation on earth allows dual-citizens such access and permissions.

If immigrant parents from the former Soviet Union (or Iran) had received legal residence in the U.S. and produced children here who were constitutional citizens via the 14th Amendment, those children would never be allowed into the inner circle of Americans entrusted with the keys and launch codes for American nuclear-armed ICBMs, nor allowed to be a member of a nuclear submarine, nor a nuclear bomber squadron.  They would fail the test of possessing the necessary background criteria of full American parentage and American roots.  They would never be trusted like natural American citizens are trusted.

Yet the people of America placed into the position of Commander-in-Chief of all American military and nuclear might someone who could never be qualified to be a commander, nor even a crewmen, of any of our nuclear forces.  He wouldn’t even be trusted to serve to protect the President with a loaded weapon.  Thus, Barack Obama could never pass the requirements of natural US citizenship via birth to American parents which is required to guard himself as President.

Obama’s citizenship is not via the 14th Amendment as written because when it was written his citizenship would have been viewed as being solely that of his British-subject father.  His father could not produce a child that was not subject to the same jurisdiction as himself,  which, not being an immigrant, was British, not American.    Since he was only a transient alien here on a Visa and not a legally sanctioned immigrant his son was born as a British subject of the United Kingdom and Colonies (UKC subject).
Obama appeared with a highly questionable and almost mysterious citizenship, with a mysterious past, with a mysterious fake non-physical birth certificate, with mysterious hidden collegiate records and accomplishments, with a private, guarded law practice, law student/ law professor records, with mysterious friends with subversive backgrounds yet wants us all to just trust him and give him another chance to wreck the country further for another four years.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

SEVEN LIES THAT ELECTED AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRESIDENT

Ignorance is everywhere, -the deception universal.
The delusion infects all minds that are not seeking the truth.
SEVEN LIES that perpetuate Obama’s illegitimacy.

Lie #1. Anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen from birth.
Lie #2  Anyone who’s a citizen from birth and can prove it is a natural born citizen.
Lie #3. Anyone with a State birth certificate is “officially” eligible to be President.
Lie #4. Only naturalized citizens are ineligible to be President.
Lie#5.  All “born citizens” are alike, whether born to foreigners or Americans.
Lie#6.  Constitutional citizenship, and natural citizenship are indistinguishable .

Lie#7.  Foreigners can be President if they’re born in the United States.

Ignorance?  Stupidity?  Group-think?  A combination of the three?  These delusions are so wide-spread that it’s unrealistic to assume that a great teacher will appear to make the American public aware of the truth.

Consolidated Fake COLB

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

   Delegates at the Constitutional Convention who were concerned with:

  “admitting strangers into our public Councils,” and feared that
foreigners without a long residency in the country …
bring with them, not only attachments to other countries,

but ideas of Govt. so distinct from ours that in every point of view they are dangerous.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Presidential Eligibility Primer Regarding Citizenship

~Guidelines for Presidential Candidates~
~Seven Truths About Eligibility

1.  The Constitution bars anyone with only foreign citizenship from being the President.

2.  The Constitution bars anyone not born with American citizenship from being President.

3.  The Constitution bars anyone with a father who is/was a foreigner from being President.

4.  The Constitution bars all immigrant naturalized citizens from being the President.

5.  The Constitution bars any mere  “native-born citizen” from being President.

6.  The Constitution bars all but a “natural born citizen” from being President.

7. The Constitution requires age discrimination & residency discrimination.

These facts demolish the legitimacy of Barack Obama as an eligible candidate for the presidency.

He inherited only a British nationality from his father, he wasn’t “a born citizen” by being born in the U.S. because he was not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States through his father (as required by the 14th Amendment) but instead was subject to the jurisdiction of Britain.  Only American citizens and legal “Green Card” permanent residents are subject to U.S. jurisdiction, -not foreign tourists, diplomats, visitors, or students.

In summation: no citizenship from his father, no citizenship from his mother, no citizenship from the 14th Amendment, and no natural citizenship via any of the above.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The truth is what determines the legitimacy of the presidency of Barack Obama,  and it is not on his side.  He has not even attempted to provide any authentic authoritative and truthful refutation regarding the nature of his citizenship at birth, nor the authenticity of the birth document images that have been concocted on his behalf, which were not the product of the State of Hawaii, since no state in America releases digital image files as authentic birth evidence because digital files can be manipulated and counterfeited with ease on any computer, just like printing counterfeit money is now so easy to do (except for the extraordinary anti-counterfeiting measures that are now employed). Instead he has declared that he was born subject to British jurisdiction.  Therefore he would not have even been a U.S. citizen of any type for most of American history.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, Article II, Section 1

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.   No person except a natural born Citizen… shall be eligible to the Office of the President.

ONLY NATURAL BORN CITIZENS ARE ELIGIBLE

Emmerich de Vattel in The Law of Nations Bk 1 Sec. 212, states the following:

“Citizens and natives:  The natural [members] or natives, [Les naturels ou les indigenes] are those born in the country of parents who are its citizens. As a 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.

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.  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.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is a misunderstanding and misapplication of the word “natural” to ascribe place-of-birth to its meaning.  In the Natural realm the pro-creation of a natural off-spring does not depend on place of birth, but only on two things, which are:  two parents of the same species.

It’s the same in the political realm.  A natural citizen only needs two things; namely, a mother and father of the same nationality.

Is Barack Obama Constitutionally eligible to be President?   Is he a natural American citizen?  Or something else?

Natural  Natives  only come from Natives.

 Natural Citizens only come from Citizens

  What do we know about the circumstances of  Barack Obama’s origins?  The nature of his U.S. citizenship is rooted in the circumstances of his birth and parentage.  His eligibility for the office of President hinges on whether or not he can be described as a natural born citizen.

While that phrase, as used in the Constitution’s Presidential requirements, could be claimed to have a general meaning as well as a Constitutional meaning,  no Supreme Court has ever ruled on the issue regarding any President’s eligibility, but if one did, they would have to decide whether or not to ascribed a broader general meaning or the limited meaning which the framers had in mind.

They had in mind only one thing, and that is a citizen with no connection of attachment to any foreign power, -no loyalty-allegiance to, nor inherited citizenship with a foreign  potentate, nation or geo-political group.  Citizens with foreign fathers and dual-citizenship, with the resultant dual allegiance and duties of nationality, were not to be entrusted with the most powerful office in the land.

Hence, only those born to American citizens, in particular an American father (from whom citizenship was inherited by birthright) -having no connection to a foreign power, were allowed to hold the office of the President (and later, by Constitutional amendment, the Vice-President as well).

No other form of citizenship was sufficient.  No son of a loyal subject of a foreign King, whose wife happened to deliver on U.S. soil, was to be allowed to hold the office of President, especially one raised in his father’s country to be a proud subject and supporter of His Royal Highness and a believer in his infallibility and Divine appointment to power.

Hence, without an American father one cannot be considered to be a natural  American citizen because the only citizenship that could be viewed as natural was the citizenship passed naturally from the parents to the children.   To learn more read my treatise on Birthright Citizenship.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Obama was born as a British subject by descent from a father born in a land governed by Great Britain.
Applying the British Nationality Act of 1948 to the accepted claim that Barack Obama Jr. was fathered by Barack Obama Sr. the deduction is that Jr. was born as a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (-a type of British subject which later became by The British Nationality Act of 1981 a “British Overseas Citizen” or a citizen of the Commonwealth).

Who is a British “citizen by descent”?  The British Consular Registry determines that which defines one by this section: Section 5-1
5.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

Then in 1963, Obama became a Kenyan citizen according to The Constitution of Kenya, Section 87, by virtue of the fact that his father was born in the Kenya colony. “Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on llth December, 1963, as a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person, shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.”
Thus, Obama Jr. became a citizen of Kenya, Dec. 12, 1963, when his father became a citizen.  While the Kenyan constitution prohibits dual citizenship for those 21 years old or older, it does not do so for minors.  But without taking steps to renounce his U.S. citizenship in a formal manner before Kenyan authorities, his Kenyan citizenship expired two years after he turned 21.  He therefore was no more a Kenyan citizen via birth to a Kenyan father overseas, nor through his Kenyan expired citizenship was he any longer connected to the British Commonwealth and therefore was solely an Indonesian citizen by adoption.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When the Constitution was written, it was universally understood that a child born to a living foreign father was not a natural born American.  But the Supreme Court of today might choose to impose its view of how “natural born citizen” should be understood and might expand its parameters to include not just birth-right citizenship being passed from the father, but also from the mother, meaning from the mother in the absence of a father.  If they so chose, then they would also have to present some guidelines for finding a father to be absent and irrelevant.

If the parents of a Presidential candidate weren’t married, nor living together when he was born, then the American mother and her child were not under the jurisdiction of a foreign father, nor that of a foreign power.  In that case, even though the child was not born to an American father, does the MIA foreign father’s nationality have any impact on whether or not his off-spring is a natural born citizen?  No one can say for certain.  The question has never been considered nor adjudicated,  -nor even arisen.

The Constitution gives Congress no power to legislate regarding natural citizens, only immigrants and foreigners.

If he were born  to married parents, -with an American mother,  and the foreign father was a naturalized citizen, the son would be deemed a natural born citizen via birth to citizen parents.

The nature of his citizenship is not determined solely by his place of birth but by his parentage and the jurisdiction his parents were, or were not, under.  But being deemed to be a U.S. citizen is quite different from being born a natural  citizen.
If a child was under British jurisdiction through the connection with the father, that would deny him birth as a natural  American citizen, even though he would be entitled to US citizenship due to his blood connection to  his American mother -if he were not born in the US.

Foreign citizens are under the protection of their own nation’s sovereignty over its own so not being citizens of the U.S., they are not subject to its political jurisdiction. Thus, if one is born on US soil to foreign tourists, he/she is not a US citizen by native-birth. But if foreign parents are no longer fully under foreign jurisdiction due to legal residence here, then their off-spring would rightly be considered US citizens at birth, but not natural born citizens because they lacked American parents.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The First U.S. Congress included in the 1790 Immigration & Naturalization Act language to alert the State Department to the fact that Americans born abroad are (“natural born” citizens”  and are not to be viewed as foreigners due to foreign birth.  They were not “granted” citizenship via that US statute, -rather their automatic citizenship was stated as a fact that must be recognized by possibly ignorant immigration authorities, and the nature of their citizenship had to be recognized by voting officials who might ignorantly deem them unqualified to be President.  They were not citizens by any other means than Natural Law, and statutory law was written solely to insure that their natural citizenship was recognized and protected from disenfranchisement if they choose to run for the presidency one day.

If it were certain that everyone in the State Department would always get it right, then the statute would not need to have been written nor included in an immigration statute.  But confusion and ignorance are unavoidable in the people who administer the regulatory power of the nation.

Therefore for unusual circumstances (birth abroad), codifying natural law eliminated confusion and misunderstanding.    Consequently, they could be described as both natural citizens and statutory citizens since the statue did not explain the principle by which they were recognized as citizens.  It’s left as an unanswered question, a question answerable only by the principle of natural law.

The next Congress repealed that Act and re-wrote it, dropping the reference to natural born citizen because the Act was unrelated to the issue of Presidential eligibility.  The phrase “nature born citizens” has never since been included in any United States statute.  It remains as it was in the beginning, -a term defined by its common language meaning and has never yet been defined by the Supreme Court.  If they can avoid it, it never will be.  And it doesn’t need to be if one realizes that neither “citizen” “born” nor “natural” need to be defined by anyone because they are plainly defined by the English language.  Stringing them together does not change their meaning in any way, but it eliminates two ambiguities.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FACTORS INVOLVED IN THE ISSUE OF CITIZENSHIP

The conduct of a foreign person and his compliance with U.S. policy, tradition, and law.
The circumstances of one’s birth, i.e. its location and the nationality of the parents.
The actions and guidelines of the INS officers who administer immigration policy.
The directives of their superiors who head the CIS.
The opinions, written and spoken, of the Attorney General -the head of the Justice Dept.
The policy stance of the White House.
The force of Congressional legislation.
The force of constitutional law, in particular the 1st section of the 14th Amendment.
The Constitution is not underlying the above factors because it doesn’t deal with citizenship issues.
Underlying all of the above is unwritten fundamental natural law and the principle of natural membership.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

While it can’t be proven that Obama is not a U.S. citizen, it can’t be proven that he was one at birth since it can’t be proven that he was even born within the United States.  The digital images that his office has posted online are rife with signs of manipulation that can’t be explained as legitimate and are not backed-up by any hard-copy that has ever been shown to the public or to experts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If he was born in Vancouver…

(http://h2ooflife.wordpress.com/the-vancouver-scenario/  and  http://h2ooflife.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/reverse-engineering-dunham-obama/  and… http://h2ooflife.wordpress.com/2013/10/13/born-in-vancouver-the-seattle-scenario-pt-ii/)

-or Kenya, then he definitely was not an American citizen at birth because his mother was too young to convey American citizenship to him under U.S. law in effect at that time.  So he’s not natural born via natural law, nor “native-born” via the 14th Amendment since his father was not a legal registered immigrant and therefore was not “subject to (U.S.) jurisdiction” a la the 14th Amendment.

But the ignoramuses who administer immigration law view him, and every Tom-Dick-&-Harry illegal immigrant born here, as being a citizen, leading his bamboozled supporters to make the gigantic leap of proclaiming all domestically born citizens to be natural born citizens.  To them the word “natural” has no meaning whatsoever because if it does, then it means he is illegitimately serving as President.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse found that records of INS cards filled out by passengers arriving on international flights originating outside the United States in the month of August 1961, examined at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., are missing records for the week of President Obama’s birth.

The Meaning of Natural Born

The legitimacy of the presidency of Barack Obama rests on the meaning of the words “natural born citizen”.  Those words were not invented by a King, a Pope, a Lord, a Judge, a Parliamentarian, a Governor, or a legal scholar.  It is not an invented phrase with a meaning assigned by its inventor.  It is nothing more than simple English words used in conjunction for emphasis of what they were intended to describe.  They were intended to describe Americans who are the off-spring of American parents and no others.
The words “natural” and “born” are closely connected and related in a semi-redundant way that reinforces the purpose and meaning of both of them.

Natural relates to natural law, and how in nature things are what they are due to natural processes, such as pro-creation, as opposed to unnatural or artificial processes that do not follow a natural pattern.

Born refers to the natural pattern of conception, gestation, and birth.  That process produces a natural entity, -such as a cub, a kitten, a puppy, a pony, or a child.  Born does not have any connection to geography, nor man-made boundaries, nor made-made rules.  It has no connection to location.  In the natural realm, the location where a birth takes place has no connection to the origin of that which is born.
Born only refers to the conclusion of the organic process of the reproduction & transmission of life and nature from parents to child.  It is not dependent on boundaries, soil, gravity, or even the earth itself.  It can occur in outer-space.  The product of birth is a replication of the nature of the parents, whether it be their species, breed, race, or group affiliation.

By the process leading to birth, the one born is endowed with the same nature as the parents.  And group membership, along with that nature, is also transmitted to them.  That membership can be in a clan, a tribe, a colony/state, or a nation.   They are born into it, -not adopted nor granted membership as is required for outsiders .  Membership is theirs by birth.   Their membership is natural membership because it is by natural reproduction.

Natural reproduction does not include reproduction via a union with one who is not a member.  Such a union only produces a hybrid, -half member, half outsider.  That membership is not describable as natural because its origin is not via the pattern of natural-birth membership because hybrids of all kinds are unnatural, whether they be in botany, animal husbandry, wild nature, human society, or politics.
Any type or source of membership that is other than that produced by the natural pattern fails the test of being natural.  The source of its legitimacy is not natural inheritance but human choice, human permission, human law.

No one whose membership is via human permission is a natural member of any group.  No one whose citizenship is via human law is a natural member of any nation.
In America, there is no law by which natural citizens possess citizenship.  It is an unwritten law.  It never needed to be written because it was an unalienable right and an element of Natural Rights that humans are endowed with by their Creator.

With a visiting student foreigner (non-immigrant, non-permanent resident), as a father whose membership in the British Empire was the natural inheritance transmitted to his child, Barack Obama possessed no unalienable right to American citizenship because he was not a natural born citizen, but was instead a hybrid with no natural citizenship in any nation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I ask;  “What is the nature of Panamanian-born John McCain’s citizenship?  Is it natural citizenship or statutory citizenship?”  Congress has proclaimed him to be a natural born citizen by a vote of 99-0. Those who claim that native-birth creates natural citizens will avoid attempting to answer it because they know that the answer undermines the entire basis of their fallacious notion about why Obama should be accepted as legitimate.  McCain’s natural citizenship came from his American parents, not where he was born.

Failure to answer my question shows that all of the Titanic captains (which they worship as infallible experts) have made the same grave error by doing what they’ve been doing, namely, relying on  opinions of previous “experts” who relied on earlier “experts” who made erroneous assumptions based on the unnatural institution of monarchical rule legitimized by “the Divine Right of Kings” during the one & a half centuries of colonial rule, and not on the natural law of Natural Rights endowed to man by the Nature’s God.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An inescapable fact is that even Republicans are mentally bound by group-think, and thinking that the President of the United States is illegitimate is beyond where their minds are capable of going.  They are a part of the process and power structure and thus were complicit in allowing his election.

That guaranteed them that no objection would be raised to John McCain’s eligibility.  They thought he might win so they were silent and unthinking.  Now they are painted into a corner in which it is unacceptable to question the legitimacy of the President of the United States, -as if that would be an affront to the Office of the President and the dignity of the first mixed-race victor in the battle for the White House, when in fact, not doing so is an affront to the Constitution.

Even so, speaking the truth may be calling for the dispensing of medicine that is worse than the disease, -the disease that’s part of the gangrene of the body politic which is rotting from within with each new unconstitutional mandate passed by Congress or the Supreme Court or Executive Order.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The loyalty of only the President is an issue addressed in the Constitution because of the power he wields.  The holders of no other federal offices are required to be natural born citizens, only the President.

Here’s the United States Oath of Allegiance for Naturalization  (it shows the length to which foreigners with dual allegiance must go to strip themselves of it and the doubt as to their loyalty to America and the Constitution that a second allegiance raises:

( The first officially recorded Oaths of Allegiance were made on May 30th, 1778 at Valley Forge)

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;… so help me God.”

compiled by a.r. nash

continued on Page 2   Click Here

The Obama File -dark suspicions

Natural Born Citizenship blog

Obama Presidential Eligibility – An Introductory Primer

The Patriot Post

American Thinker -Conspiracy to Hide a Supreme Court Holding

Constitutionally Speaking -Conspiracy to Alter the Constitution

Liberty Legal Foundation -Government Proclaims “No Limits on Congressional Power”

http://www.westernjournalism.com/media-cover-up-of-obama-impeachment-exposed/

PriklyPetesays:

This is not just about “BO”, it’s about the entire White House and the pigs now feeding from the public trough. They’ve trashed our Constitution, opened our borders, stole our social security, and all tax dollars the American Public have paid, borrowed more money than god could have ever imagined and continue their smoke screen while making this country a third world nation. Our war should not be with third world nations but with Washington, [Republicrats included] these pigs need to be removed physically before this nation is gone. DO NOT SIT FAT, DUMB, AND HAPPY, GET UP AND DO SOMETHING BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!

Patriot1776 says:

The man who calls himself the President of the United States should not only be removed from that position but tried for his crimes against the United States. His co-conspirator, Nancy Pelosi should also share his demise. She knew when she sent his nomination papers to the Democrat National Committee that he was not eligible to be President. She removed from that document the words :”natural born citizen” before submitting it. However, the Democrat Committee in charge of the nomination did not challenge the removal of that passage, therefore, they, as well as she, have committed Treason long before the imposter did and should suffer the same consequences, whether they are re-elected or not. The sooner we rid our nation of these traitors, the sooner we can bring this nation back to what is was meant to be.

flag

Old Glory

The David Ramsay Dissertation Revelation

~A DISSERTATION~
on the MANNER OF ACQUIRING
THE CHARACTER & PRIVILEGES
of a CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES

by David Ramsay; Printed 1789
(a modernized and corrected version
with remarks by Adrien Nash Feb./ Aug. 2014)

David Ramsay Dissertation on Citizenship, redux  PDF

The united States are a new nation, or political society, [right off the bat we encounter a different frame of reference from our own, with attention being paid, not to a central government or national name but to a country composed of separate nations united in a compact of close alliance.] formed at first by the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, out of those British subjects in America who were thrown out of royal protection by act of Parliament, passed in December, 1775.

[That act in effect meant that the Americans were no longer considered British subjects like all others who were under the sovereign protection of the United Kingdom but instead, like rejected step-children, were still required to do their chores and support the household, via stiff taxes and oppressive regulation.]

A CITIZEN of the United States means a member of this new nation. [“a member”, -as of a connected group, like a family, or clan or tribe of people with a common connection, typically by bloodline or common nativity.]

~Besides the principle of government being radically changed by the revolution, the political character of the people was also changed from subjects to CITIZENS. The difference is immense.

[Never having lived as subjects, we fail to comprehend how immense it is, especially in the colonists’ case, after they were, in effect, disowned by Parliament as Englishmen and dispossessed of many of the rights of Englishmen. -Take note of reference to “the political character” having changed.
There is a big difference between the origin of nationality in the two different worlds. The original version was; “I’m an Englishman, -a subject of the Crown”, being replaced by “I’m an American, a subject of no one. I do not ‘have’ citizenship. But like a British subject who is a subject, and doesn’t “have” subject-ship, I similarly am a CITIZEN not because of what I “have” but because of what I am.” In the U.S. “having” citizenship is a fundamentally flawed concept vis a vis natural citizenship. ~]

“Subject” is derived from the Latin words; sub and jacio, and means one who is under the power of another; but a CITIZEN is a unit of a mass of free people, who, together, possess the whole of SOVEREIGNTY.
Subjects look up to a MASTER, but citizens are so entirely equal, -that none have hereditary rights superior to others.
Each citizen of a free State contains, within himself, -by nature and the Constitution, as much of the common sovereignty as another.

[That speaks of the doctrine of CITIZENSHIP EQUALITY. Whether rich or poor, new or multi-generational, well educated or poorly educated, all citizens were identical members of the nation in the view of American Natural philosophy. Like a bee hive without a queen bee; everyone is identical. No classes of superior & inferior citizens.

That view is derived from humanity’s common origin, -being descendant not of different races of Man but of only one race, all having the same original parents and thus all being equal. The British also embraced that view regarding the common subjects who were not nobles or royals. They were considered to have full equality no matter what the origin of their British citizenship was (subject-born, native-born, naturalized, or recognized by statute (the foreign-born). People were viewed as being in different social classes but not in different nationality classes since all were equal before the law no matter what their position in society was. ~]

In the eyes of Reason and Philosophy, the political condition of CITIZENS is more exalted than that of noblemen. Dukes and Earls are the creatures of Kings, and may be made by them at their pleasure: but citizens possess, in their own right, original SOVEREIGNTY.
There is also a great difference between citizens and inhabitants -or residents. Any person living within a country or state is an inhabitant of it, or resident in it.

Negroes are inhabitants but not citizens. [as were some citified Indians] Citizenship confers a right of voting at elections, and many other privileges not enjoyed by those who are no more than inhabitants.
The precise difference may be thus stated: The CITIZEN of a free State is so united to it as to possess an individual’s proportion of the common sovereignty; but he who is only an inhabitant, or resident, has no further connection with the State in which he resides than its umbrella of security for his person and property in accord with its fixed laws, without any participation in its government.   ~ ~ ~
[ That speaks of the positional status of immigrants and transient foreigners. Neither were under the duty of citizenship and had no mandatory connection to the nation. There was an across-the-board disqualification regarding the civic rights and duties of citizens, but not the protections.
That position of the nation continued onward until the Civil War when vast numbers of soldiers were needed, and the government turned to immigrants to help fill the ranks. They were members of American society and were thus obligated to defend their adopted nation in time of war.
That duty was never directly put into writing but it was adopted at that time as U.S. policy. Of course the immigrant male was free to leave the country, -but he would likely not be allowed back in after the war was over.
That was their right because they were still subjects of a foreign power even though that power could not be exercised over them in the U.S.
Socially, they were domiciled members of American society, but legally they were still aliens owing allegiance to a foreign king or government.
Out of necessity, the government chose to order their participation in the war based on their social membership, and ignore their political non-membership and foreign membership.
But in the citizenship case of Wong Kim Ark in 1898, the Supreme Court ruled against previous Supreme Court holdings, as well as the stated intent and meaning of the words of the 14th Amendment, written three decades earlier.
But those words were ambiguous enough that they could apply a different meaning to them, -to what it means to be subject to the sovereign jurisdiction of the American government.

It had always appeared, until the Civil War draft, that foreigners were either fully subject to American national authority after taking the oath of Allegiance & Renunciation to become citizens, or they were fully subject to the foreign nation in which they were still a member. But by drafting them into the war, a new middle-ground gray area was created based on the British doctrine of temporary allegiance to the authority of the land of one’s domicile.
That temporary allegiance was an obligation in return for all of the benefits and protections of the laws and forces of their adopted new American residence.
That gray area in which they had serious obligations but no political rights resulted in a gift to such immigrant fathers when the Supreme Court ruled that their permanent residency came with an inference that they were subject to the full authority of Washington D.C., as the 14th Amendment requires, and therefore any child born to them in America was therefore deemed to be a 14th Amendment citizen.

Its opinion in 1898 resulted in citizenship for the native-born of alien fathers who were then, in effect, openly considered subject to the full authority of the United States government even though not by actual statute. But the court’s opinion served as a substitute for an actual statute.
By deciding and overtly stating that alien-born children in America were U.S. Citizens, they were in effect, covertly also stating that it was because they met the two requirements of the 14th Amendment; namely birth in the U.S. and subjection to U.S. authority.
Since babies are not subject to governments, the vague and ambiguous language of the amendment had to be taken to be in reference to inherited subjection that one was born under, -via being born to a father who was fully subject.
If he was fully subject, then he certainly could be drafted, and his child should certainly be provided citizenship in the nation of its birth and probable up-bringing, -a nation for which the father may die in battle.

Who was not fully subject to that authority? Transient visitors & guests from abroad, as well a ambassadors, Native Americans, and vagabonds with no permanent domicile anywhere. So when the nation was founded, no foreigner was viewed as fully subject, including those described by Ramsay as having no connection to the citizenship responsibilities of American men, namely resident foreigners who were all free from shouldering the obligation to support the function and defense of the government and nation.

The government did not accept them as obligated, -nor as citizens because they were neither. That would require a willful choice to become an American. Many did not make that choice.
But after the Supreme Court declared their native-born children to be citizens, then they found that they had no choice when it came to the primal obligation to defend one’s own home, land, country, or nation (which one had adopted with, or without, citizenship). ~ ]

Ramsay continued:
Republics, both ancient and modern, have been possessive of the rights of citizenship. The new Constitution carries this matter so far as to require not only present citizenship in Representatives and Senators, but prior citizenship for the term of seven and nine years. [for Senate candidates for the first Congress, that meant they had to have become Americans by 1780]
The time and manner of acquiring the high character of a CITIZEN of the United States is therefore quite worthy of public discussion.
The following appear to be the only modes of acquiring this distinguishing privilege:
[It was definitely distinguishing because there were no other national citizens on Earth but U.S. citizens. All of humanity was subject to dictators & kings.]
1st. By being parties to the original compact, The Declaration of Independence.
2nd. By taking an OATH OF FIDELITY to some one of the united States according to law.

[Silently being party to the declaration was not enough. One was forced to take sides, openly before all. -”With us” or “against us”. Now swear on your honor, before God & man, your allegiance, your dedication and fidelity to our State and its cause without limits. Liberty or death.]

3rd. By tacit consent and acquiescence.
[That describes one’s uncontested acceptance of their new national character. Before victory, a minor who reached maturity during the war might not acquiesce to the rejection of his British subjectship resulting from his father’s pledge of allegiance to the revolution.]

4th. By birth or inheritance.
[somewhat “tacitly” uncontestable following the victory over the British. Those born after the victory were no longer capable of being born as or viewed as British subjects. They were born being a citizen of the sovereign State of their birth through their citizen-father whose character they inherited.]

5th. By adoption.

Of each of these in their order:
1st. By the Declaration of Independence Congress proclaimed to the world, that their constituents, “the People of the united colonies, were absolved from all allegiance to the Crown of England,” and that the late colonies were “free and Independent States.”
For the support of this bold measure, they confederated together, by pledging to each other “their LIVES, FORTUNES, and SACRED HONOR.”

[They bound themselves to each other with chains of sworn undying loyalty, as blood brothers in the blood that would have to be shed. They put themselves on a one-way street, which held, up ahead, either Liberty or destruction, either defeat, imprisonment & death, -or Victory and Independence.
There were no side streets and no turning around. Surrender as an option could be a fate worse than death. It was either “Onward to Victory!” or forward to the gallows.]

~By this eventful declaration, “a nation was born in a day.” Nearly three millions of people who had been subjects, became CITIZENS.
[That was something mankind had not seen since the Romans overthrew their Etruscan masters who had subjugated them for ages, -2,000 years earlier.]
~Their former political connection with George III was done away, [-like the cutting of an umbilical cord] and a new one was formed, not with another king, but among themselves, by which they became CO-EQUAL CITIZENS, and, collectively, assumed all the rights of SOVEREIGNTY.

[Under the monarch, the lines of connection to others was not direct, but through their direct connection of subjection to the king. He was like the hub of a wheel to which the individual spokes are attached.
With independence, there was no more hub. The lines of connection changed from being all centered on an all-important individual to being centered on only... the Constitution?
It was still unwritten and unimagined. Instead, their bonds of attachment were to each other directly because they all became co-responsible to defeat the British and achieve Independence for their allied sovereign States.
Also of major note is “all the rights of SOVEREIGNTY”. One of those rights which only the sovereign (the king of Britain) possessed was the right of any children born abroad to him or his ambassadors to be recognized as members of the nation even though not born on its soil.
That right was then assumed by the Americans as their natural right. Thereafter it did not matter where the child of an American father was born, -it was automatically deemed a fellow natural citizen of the nation via its father’s sovereign right to pass his national membership to his progeny. ~ ]

As this was done by the Representatives of the people of this country, and in their name, and on their behalf, all who had concurred in investing Congress with power, acquired citizenship, by being parties to this solemn act. [of severing ties] These original citizens were THE FOUNDERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

[We need to always bear in mind that there was no passivity possible for those who compacted together for liberty-or-death. They were the founders because they dared to defy an empire. They took democracy where it had never gone before. Their positive concurrence with the authority and final decision of those they choose to represent them bound them in a mutual liberation pact or mutual suicide pact. They would either fulfill it by emerging alive and free or they were not getting out alive or not punished to the maximum. ~ ]

CITIZENSHIP could not be acquired in this way by absentees from America for two reasons;
1st. They were not thrown out of British protection by the restraining act of Parliament, and therefore continued as British subjects, -under the obligations and in quiet possession of their presumed British allegiance.
And, such foreign residents could not be parties to the declaration of the Continental Congress. The members of that body were not their deputies or agents, and therefore could not bind them nor act for them.

2nd. To cement the people of America more firmly together, OATHS of FIDELITY to the STATES were administered soon after the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE to all above a certain age.
By these oaths, a compact was established between the STATE and the individuals; and those who took them acquired or confirmed their CITIZENSHIP by their own personal act.

By swearing to do the DUTY of CITIZENS, they, by law, acquired a right to the privileges and protections of CITIZENS. Those who refused, were ordered to depart, as being persons unfriendly to the revolution. [some choose security, obedience, and subservience over danger, rebellion and liberty.]

3rd. As the war neared its end, the administration of oaths, being less necessary, was less frequent. Citizenship was then, and now is, daily acquired by tacit consent or acquiescence.

[Emmerich de Vattel (a major influence on the rebels) observed in The Law of Nations (1758): “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. (“were raised” is preferable)
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 one is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
[The father determined his son’s identity and nationality, -not the soil. Notice he ignores native birth in his mention of what is necessary for a person to be “of” a country. ~ ]

Minors who were not old enough to be parties to the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, or to take the oath of FIDELITY to their State at the time they were imposed, became citizens as a result of their continuing to reside in the united States after they reached adulthood, especially if at the same time they claimed the protection and performed the duties of citizens.

[This statement is packed with significance that is easily overlook, -as I did initially. The first thing of significance is that if a minor emigrated to or moved back to Britain during or following the war, he was thereby recognized as being a British subject and not an American (unless, I assume, the move was only temporary to attend college).
One could not be both British and American because neither nation allowed dual-nationality. A second thing is that such minors were not actually citizens in any real sense until they reached the age of maturity. They were American subjects, via subjection to their father. Only adult men were fully CITIZENS.
Wives and children were attachments, not unlike property, making them U.S. Nationals, with women having civil rights (inheritance, due process, right to sue, etc. but not civic rights, (the right to vote or serve in public office and on juries).

Thirdly, there was no law that delineated the rules of national membership because there was no national government to write such a law. People were recognized as citizens (or not) based purely on the facts regarding them, or on State Constitutions and statutes. (No U.S. natural nationality law has ever been written).
Their children were citizens via fathers who became citizens by their solemn oath of allegiance to the revolution, and their renunciation of all loyalty and obedience to their foreign dictator. Those fathers, (-the founders) were citizens by solemn oath. Their children were citizens by inheritance, -by bloodline descent.

Citizenship did not attach to that first generation of American minors until either victory or their reaching adulthood and choosing to not emigrate to Britain with other loyalists who were not welcome to stay. Of those who stayed and assumed the role of citizen, it was “a given” that they were fellow citizens, -in the absence of any law making it so other than the law of fraternal unity. ~ ]

At twenty-one years of age, every freeman is at liberty to choose his country, his religion, and his allegiance. Those who continued after that age in the allegiance under which they have been educated, become, by tacit consent, either subjects or citizens, as the case may be.
[In the eyes of the British, they had no such right since by British doctrine subjects were born with a national character that they could not shed, making them subjects for life under the doctrine of perpetual allegiance. ~ ]
In this manner, young men are now daily acquiring citizenship, without the intervention of an oath.

[Note that young women are not included. That is because they carried the nationality of either their father or their husband (who was their head once they gave themselves to him and took his name via the marriage vow of obedience and fidelity). ~ ]

Note that in order for young men to acquire citizenship in this way, their residence following the revolution is indispensably necessary, -before the beginning of their citizenship. For no man can be said to accept by tacit consent the citizenship of a government under which he has never lived.
Citizenship, when acquired in this tacit way by an absentee at the time of the Declaration of Independence, can therefore only be dated from the time in which the claimant of that high privilege became a resident under the independent government of the State of which he claims to be a citizen.

[Wow! I never expected I’d ever read such words although I suspected they were reflective of the view at that time. “independent government of the State” speaks to the status quo of that founding era in which each nation-state was an independent sovereign nation although bound to others by a charter of alliance of some centralized powers, but mostly possessing horizontal, separate, independent rights.
“of which he claims to be a citizen” reveals that CITIZENSHIP was essentially and directly a State issue, a State allegiance, and that did not change until long after the Civil War. General Robert E. Lee and all Southerners felt their first and foremost allegiance was to their homeland, -the nation-State of their birth and upbringing.
Even though he was a graduate of West Point, and had fought valiantly in the Mexican-American War, his nation came second to his country, which was Virginia, -not the Union.
The office of President required one to be “a natural born citizen” of... their home State (which was where their citizenship was based).]

~4th. None can claim citizenship as a birth-right except those who have been born since the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, for this obvious reason: no man can be born a citizen of a State or government which did not exist at the time of his birth.
CITIZENSHIP is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken a part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens.

[Wow! That is not a smoking gun... like I’ve been searching for since 2010, but is an unmistakable firing gun!  It is incontrovertible proof about the nature and origin of natural citizenship. It is not, as the “native-birth” proponents deceitfully proclaim, based solely on nativity. Instead it is solely a result of inheritance by descent from citizen fathers.
It also destroys the claim of their opposition that it is nativity plus descent that makes a natural born citizen. Rather, the fat lady has now sung and it is inescapably clear that national citizenship by natural membership is via nothing other than Natural Law. Nativity is not related to it. Nativity is strictly tangential, collateral, coincidental and proximal to it, but not causative nor integral.

The game is over. We can dismantle the tent and go home. The issue is settled. The “native-born = natural born” fools have not a foot of ground to stand on, -nor do the “native-born-plus-natural-born” crowd.
The “three legged stool” doctrine is defunct. Like humans, only two legs are needed. Have you ever seen a primate that needed three legs? Natural Law certainly has not. By it, one only needs two parents of the same nature in order to be what they are.
No off-spring needs to be born in a certain place in order to “inherit” its nature. That fallacy is pure foolishness no matter who promulgates it, (and there are plenty who do).
“But it just sounds too good to not be true”, and so they embrace it as if it is true, -like a rational and idealistic religious doctrine. But nature doesn’t care about anyone’s doctrine. Its laws are what they are, immutable and unchanging. “Like” gives birth to like. Americans give birth to Americans. Citizens give birth to citizens... on Earth, -or on the Moon. It’s “a given”. It’s a natural fact. ~ ]

Those who died before the Revolution could leave no political character to their children but that which they themselves possessed, -namely that of subjects . If they had lived, no one could be certain whether they would have adhered to the King or to Congress. Their children, therefore, may claim by inheritance the rights of British subjects, but not of AMERICAN CITIZENS.
5th. Persons born in any country may have acquired citizenship by legal adoption by legal means. The citizenship of such persons must be dated from the time of their adoption.

[In some countries, “naturalization” is akin to legal adoption, but not in the United States. Here it is akin to the genetic replacement that happens via a bone marrow transplant. Under the American doctrine of CITIZENSHIP EQUALITY, all national members (citizens) are natural members; -natural citizens, including the naturalized members.
Like the bone marrow recipient, all of their original bone marrow is killed (equivalent to taking the Oath of Allegiance and Renunciation) and then new marrow from a donor is seeded into the bones, resulting in a new and different type of bone marrow.

It’s not so drastic with various other nations, such a Mexico, because they don’t view their “naturalized” citizens as having lost their old original national membership. Consequently, Mexico does not allow them to serve in the military, as police, mayors, governors, legislators, judges or President.
They do not adhere to our philosophy of Citizenship Equality. They have two or more classes of citizens. We have only one. ~ ]

~From these observations, the following inferences result:
Citizenship is an adventitious character to every adult in the united States; and there was a certain period in the lives of the first generation of liberated Americans when they ceased to be subjects, and began to be citizens.

[There is no transition period where one is a citizen of two countries. Instead it is “BOOM”, -one day you are what you’ve been all of your life, and the next that is vanished and you are something all together different.
Like an infant who one minute is ensconced in the womb, and the next is out and cut off from its only previous existence.
It, at that moment, officially becomes “a person”. Or a bride and groom who are as single as they’ve always been until the binding vows are spoken. Then presto! They are husband & wife for life, -like the newly naturalized person becomes an American for life. ~ ]

The [U.S.] citizenship of no man could be previous to the Declaration of Independence, [only colony citizens & royal subjects preceded it] and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776.
[~just for the sake of added emphasis: BORN OF CITIZENS!!!  -not “born in America”, ]

~But to proceed with inferences; From the premises already established, it may be further inferred that citizenship by inheritance, belongs to none but the children of those Americans, who having survived the War of Independence, acquired that adventitious character in their own right, and transmitted it to their offspring.

The children of those who died before the revolution, who were not citizens, must have acquired that privilege in their own right, and by their own personal act; that is, by joining their country at or since the revolution.

[Native-birth to colonists did not confirm citizenship because it was only transmitted via one’s father; -inherited membership unrelated to nativity or geographical boundaries at birth. ~ ]

~Citizenship, acquired by passive consent, is exclusively confined to the cases of persons who have lived within the United States since the Declaration of Independence, and could not have begun before their actual residence under their new and independent governments. [plural]
From the whole it’s clear that no private individual, tho’ a native, who was absent from this country at the time independence was declared, could have acquired citizenship with the United States before his returning and actually joining his countrymen following the beginning of the revolution.
Dangerous consequences would follow from holding that before the Declaration of Independence birth and residence in the nation now called the United States, were sufficient to confer the rights of citizenship on persons who were absent during the late war, before they returned to their native country.
If this should be established, many persons hostile to our liberties and independence might put in their claim to be citizens.
All the children born in the interval between the peace of Paris, 1763, and the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE in 1776, within the British posts on our north-western frontier now wrongfully held from us, would be citizens.

Our East-India trade would be laid open to many adventurers who have contributed nothing towards the establishment of our liberties: for the natives of this country, born before the revolution, who are now dispersed over the world, might, on that principle, fit out ships, make voyages to India, come here and sell their goods under the character of citizen, from the circumstance of their having been born among us thirty or forty years ago, and return with the net proceeds of their cargoes, to their present residence in foreign countries.

[ No devotion to native-birth citizenship existed because the rebellion demolished the birth-based unity of identity under the king. Once the rebellion was launched, one’s American identity and belonging were determined by one’s actions and one’s oath. Native-birth as a unifying bond ended. Many natives were treasonous loyalist, and many foreigners were patriots, (-as was one of my ancestors).]

These, and many other consequences, injurious to the liberties and commerce of these States, would result from admitting the dangerous position that birth and residence in this country before the revolution, conferred citizenship on absentees, before their return after the revolution.   ~FINIS~

His focus in all that he wrote regarding native-birth and citizenship was in the context of national citizenship, national membership as a citizen of The United States of America. But what he overlooked was citizenship within the sovereign States of America.
They each had their own citizenship, and laws regarding it. Most of them continued to support the age-old common law practice of ascribing citizenship to children of immigrants. Such citizenship was diametrically opposed to the national citizenship whose origin Ramsay explained. What he illuminated was the founding generation and the nationality of their children.
Their children were born as natural citizens, but the case that prompted Ramsay to write his Dissertation was not about national citizenship but State citizenship and its origin. By their on-going custom and law, the native-born colony subjects who were children of subjects became State citizens automatically unless they rejected allegiance to America and embraced loyalty to Britain.
Parents who died before the Declaration could do neither, so the question was in regard to the son of such deceased colonists, -a son who was absent from America while studying in Britain during the War.
Neither he nor his parents ever swore allegiance to the Revolution and were never under the authority of the independent government of their State. Thus neither were a party to what made one a citizen of the United States.

Ramsay argued that such a son could not be viewed as a citizen of the United States, while his opponents argued that by inheritance, he was a natural member of the society of his parents’ colony and therefore could not be disenfranchised from his birth-right inclusion in the new nation-state which that colony turned into.
Thus, they were arguing in favor of his natural State citizenship while Ramsay was arguing against his natural national citizenship.
They were on two different pages and both were simultaneously correct because national sovereignty was one matter, while State sovereignty was another. Neither could trump the other because there was no authority to enforce superiority of one over the other.
That fact goes almost entirely unnoticed in all of the talk about citizenship, -failing to grasp that there were in fact two types of citizenship, State, and National. All State citizens were “Americans” but not all Americans were “citizens of The United States”, even though they might be a citizen of “the united STATES of America”.

All States had to recognize national citizenship, but the national government was not required to recognize all State citizenship. If a State naturalized foreigners or Blacks who did not meet the criteria of the national rule passed by Congress, then they would not be considered as Citizens of the United States and the other States were no compelled to recognize them either. No slave State was going to recognize an African or one of African descent as being a citizen of the State or nation. For most Americans, their State citizenship was all that mattered since that was where they lived.

by Adrien Nash Feb/ August 2014
Obama–nation.com

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
David Ramsay, Historian (1749-1815)
President of the South Carolina Senate
In office 1792–1797
Alma mater Princeton University
University of Pennsylvania
Occupation Physician, Historian

David Ramsay was an American physician, public official, and historian from Charleston, South Carolina. He was one of the first major historians of the American Revolution.
During the American Revolutionary War he was, from 1776 to 1783, a member of the South Carolina legislature. When Charleston was threatened by the British in 1780, he served with the South Carolina militia as a field surgeon.
After the city was captured in 1780, Ramsay was imprisoned for nearly a year at St. Augustine, Florida, until he was exchanged.

From 1782 to 1786 he served in the Continental Congress. In the absence of John Hancock, Ramsay served as chairman of Congress, from November 23, 1785 to May 12, 1786.
In the 1790s he served three terms in the South Carolina State Senate, and was president of that body until retiring from public service. He was murdered in 1815 by a mentally ill man whom Ramsay had examined as a physician.

In his own day, Ramsay was better known as a historian and author than as a politician. He was one of the American Revolution’s first major historians. Ramsay writes with the knowledge and insights acquired by being personally involved in the events of the American Revolution.

In 1785 he published in two volumes History of the Revolution of South Carolina (this was the first book to receive a copyright in the United States), in 1789 in two volumes History of the American Revolution, in 1807 a Life of Washington, and in 1809 in two volumes a History of South Carolina.

In 1789 he also wrote A Dissertation on the Manners of Acquiring the Character and Privileges of a Citizen. Ramsay was also the author of several minor works, including a memoir (1812) of his third wife Martha Laurens Ramsay, a well-educated woman who had served as a political hostess for her father, Henry Laurens, during the 1780s.

Ramsay’s History of the United States in three volumes was published posthumously in 1816–1817, and forms the first three volumes of his Universal History Americanized, published in twelve volumes in 1819.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ramsay_%28historian%29

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 69 other followers