The Truth about U.S. Citizenship

& 14th Amendment Jurisdiction

~the quagmire of questionable & unnatural citizenship

Nations, -like their citizens, reserve for themselves certain unalienable rights which no other nation has a right to abrogate. The first and foremost of which is the right of survival via self defense.  The self-defense of nations can be characterized by bands of patriotic volunteers joining together to mutually take on the burden of armed combat.  But when the going gets seriously tough, such bands will crumble because they lack the iron hand of a powerful, dominating, merciless authority ruling over them.
The American revolution began as the former but would have crumbled if it had not evolved into the latter.  General George Washington hired a Prussian military officer to organized, train, discipline, focus and harden his troops for the long war ahead. Until their contract of service expired they were fully under the military discipline imposed by that trainer and Washington’s officers.  They had surrendered their right to do as they please, -to quit the fight, quit the war, quit obeying orders if they tired of the whole thing.  Their desires no longer mattered.  Their preferences were irrelevant.  Their personal choices were no longer legally possible.

When, after a long period of winter without adequate provisions, adequate protections from the elements, and without pay, a group of soldiers rebelled, -mutinied, and that created a horrible tension and schism that had to be resolved.  It was resolved, but not to their liking.  They were arrested and sentenced to death.  They had committed the treasonous act of disobeying lawful orders in a time of war.  Their hanging was scheduled for a certain day soon after their sentencing.  When it arrived, there was a great sadness enshrouding the entire camp.  The gallows had been prepared, and a hangman’s noose placed around each of their necks.

Everyone was about to have their heart broken.  But Washington was someone that they didn’t really know at that point.
He was someone wiser than they knew, and he knew that the damage of that execution would be worse for morale than it would be good for discipline.
And so, at the very last minute it was announced that the execution was canceled and their lives were spared.  A great sigh of relief was felt as that news lifted the spirits of the soldiers and united them in a bonding experience that only they had ever been through in American history.
The seriousness of such a war experience has been illustrated by other experiences depicted in many motion pictures.  The authority of military command over the actions and lives of those subject to it has been demonstrated in scenes in which an officer is confronted with a soldier who has had enough and is unwilling to carry out the possibly fatal orders he’s been given.
He refuses, and turns and starts to walk away.  The officer pulls out his pistol, aims it at him and warns the man to stop, -to obey the lawful order he’s been given.  Either he realizes the seriousness of his action or he stubbornly continues walking and consequently receives a bullet in the back of his head.
The point has been made that free-will is out, and total obedience is in.  Being less than fully subject to orders is forbidden.

Washington’s army had equal and greater suffering awaiting them a few years in the future.  Conditions got so bad that a rebellion resulted.  But they were fools to think they had any chance of succeeding in achieving their righteous goals since they were vastly out-numbered by the obedient.  Consequently they were captured, tried, and sentenced to death.  But that time was different.  The earlier lesson had been forgotten or ignored, and so the result was that no mercy could be shown.
The leaders were ordered to be executed by firing squad, and the soldiers who were ordered to form the firing squad were the mutineers’ second-in-command.  They had to kill their own friends and leaders, -men that they might have been willing to die for if necessary, but now it was a matter of carrying out the execution order or joining their companions in being executed.

What’s the point of sharing these scenarios?  It’s to illuminate the fact that the civilians in the federal government are oblivious to.  They who have never taken the oath, never worn the uniform, never been subject to the total absolute authority of military command, nor faced the danger, nor possibility of danger that comes with defending the nation, -they are completely ignorant of an important truth that’s been forgotten with the passage of time, and the result is that America is following and believing a false understanding of just what subjection really means.

The ignorance that is now almost universal is allowing foreign persons to be rewarded with the prize of American citizenship by their act of breaking our sovereign entry laws.  They don’t obtain it directly for themselves but obtain it for those dearest to them, -their newborn babies.
One such baby was Barack Obama.  Although not born to an illegal foreign mother but to a legal foreign student father, what they both have in common is that of not being subject to the full authority that a nation can require of the male  members of its society.

Obama’s father was not subject to the jurisdiction of Washington’s will over him as a citizen nor as a legal resident because he was neither.  He was merely a temporary guest of the government in order to obtain a college education.  Nothing more. He could not stay here.  He could not be drafted into the military.  He was not subject to being forced to undergo the tortures of boot camp nor orders to engage in combat unless they were given by Kenya or Great Britain, since he remained under the jurisdiction of his own government.
Similarly, a foreign woman is not subject to the same national responsibility, especially if she is in the country illegally.  But even if she’s not, it doesn’t make a difference, nor does it make a difference if she is an American woman.  Women have never been subject to the responsibility to defend the nation.
What about foreign immigrant women who become naturalized citizens upon completing the required process and taking:

The Oath of Allegiance & Renunciation
by which they pledge to bear arms to defend the nation?  Does that mean that they are subject to be drafted if needed?  No.  It means that the ancient oath was not written for women but only
for men.
What is the implication of that?  It’s a rather profound one since it indicates a significant fact about the role of women in the world and in American society in particular.  Women have never been subject to the authority of a nation’s government which governs men, with the except ion of Israel, because only men shoulder the burden of national defense.

The government does not retain for itself the authority to put a gun to the heads of American women and order them to advance against an enemy machine gun.  But it does retain the authority to do that to men.  And that is the ultimate true meaning of being subject to the national authority of a government.  It means being subject to orders to defend the nation, -even at the cost of one’s own life.
Women are exempt because they are women and that’s what makes all the difference in the world.  Men never have, and never will, tolerate putting women in danger, but they will and do tolerate putting themselves and other men in life-threatening danger and they tolerate allowing their government to do the same.

Men of a certain age are the members of a singularly responsible group that are subject to the most fundamental responsibility of national life and that is the ultimate inescapable obligation and responsibility that comes with membership in the nation.
That obligation is to fight in and possibly die in war.  Citizens are the most obligated, but if the threat is dire, then legal immigrants can also be called upon to defend the nation, as was the case during World War II.
But women can’t because they are in a deliberately protected class.  The men of no nation will ever require that their women be forced to fight, -although they may be allowed to do so if that is what they want and are as capable as men.
To what is this relevant?  It’s relevant to the national delusion that the 14th Amendment makes Barack Obama a constitutionally eligible President. That delusion results from a loss of the understanding of what its second citizenship requirement means.  The amendment reads as follows:  “All person born in the United States, or naturalized, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.”
Everyone understands what being born in the United States means, but their understanding ends there.  The delusion that has overtaken the entire government is that the jurisdiction referred to is something other than what it really is.  Civil authority and criminal law have become substituted for the authority that is the bedrock of a nation, and that is the right to require of its male members that they sacrifice their security, comfort, and possibly their life in order to preserve the nation from destruction.
General Robert E. Lee’s soldiers understood that authority as they were foolishly and recklessly order to march into the withering fire of the union soldiers defending a hill at Gettysburg.  The soldiers that stormed the beaches of Normandy, wading into German machine gun fire understood it as well, as did the Marines that confronted deadly Japanese Army resistance on one Pacific island after another.
But our leaders in Washington do not understand it at all.  That is part and parcel of a national landscape in which men who’ve never given nor received a military order in their lives are elected and appointed to the most powerful offices in the nation.
Ignorance is part of what they are because they do not have the experience that brings understanding.   As a consequence, no one realizes that neither the father nor the mother of Barack Obama were ever subject to the jurisdiction of our full national authority.
That means that they were incapable of bringing a child into this world which was born subject to that authority.  His father was not subject to it, nor was his mother, but he himself eventually became subject by remaining in the United States instead of living in places like Kenya and Indonesia.
But it’s doubtful that he ever felt subject because his Selective Service registration card appears to have been forged.
But if he had been born as a natural citizen of the United States, with American parents, then he would have been subject no matter where in the world he was born, raised, or lived.  Natural citizens cannot escape what they are by birth no matter where they live, unless they choose to become naturalized citizens of another nation.  The United States absolutely does recognize that choice because it was the very choice which created our nation.
But only a citizen himself can make that choice, -the choice to abandon his American citizenship. The government cannot make it for him because he is an American by nature and has no other national nature.  He was born as an American and as only an American, and being an American is his unalienable right, -just like the right to live.
But one born to a foreign father has no such right.  If he obtains membership in a nation it’s because the nation allows it for humane as well as practical reasons. But having it does not make him a natural member of the nation because he is a natural member of the nation of he who gave him life.  That nation has first claim on him unless his father has become an officially recognized legal member of a different nation, -with or without citizenship.  If he has, then he’s made himself one who is subject to the jurisdiction of that nation’s government and become responsible to defend it if needed and called.  He’s then subject to both governments.

But if a foreigner who is not a part of the nation in which he is temporarily dwelling, fathers a child which is born there, his child lacks the natural connection to that nation which the children of its citizens are born with, and therefore his child possesses no natural membership in it, even if the nation gives it to him by its laws or policy.  Barack Obama was such a child and being such does not meet the qualification to be the President because he is not, as the Constitution requires, a “natural born citizen”.
Until our modern era of ignorance, birth within the United States was not viewed as a prerequisite for citizenship, nor did such a meaningless fact automatically result in a natural American citizen, although it was the ancient law and custom in some colonies/states that those who were native-born were thereby citizens.
But that was never federal law, practice, nor policy.   The federal government required the children of immigrants to undergo the naturalization process if they reached adulthood before their father completed it.  It he completed it first, then through their blood connection to him, they became what he had become, -a new American citizen.
That was the American way, and remained so until it was replaced by the 14th Amendment in 1868, which was enforced regarding freed slaves but ignored regarding children of immigrants until in 1898 the Supreme Court interpreted its words to mean what they say [-the Wong Kim Ark decision].

Ever since then the meaning and significance of what federal jurisdiction involves has  faded from the collective consciousness of the American people, including those in its government, its Congress and its courts.  It’s possible, perhaps probable, that none of them understand it. And that is not likely to change.
As a result of their ignorance, the practice and policy of the executive branch is contrary to the Constitution and the 14th Amendment.  Their views and policies currently are law.  Everything that has been related here is irrelevant because the authority rests with them even if they apply it incorrectly and unconstitutionally.
What can change our current situation?  Nothing.  Regardless of which party is in power, neither will enforce the true meaning of  “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” because it would alienate Hispanics whose votes are needed.
The Supreme Court could turn everything upside down, but that would require an opponent to the current policy having standing to sue the government, and only states would possess that standing because illegal immigration affects them directly.  But if they did so, it would create an administrative nightmare involving unraveling decades of error, and children and grandchildren of citizens who should never have been viewed as citizens.  But I digress.
Just as correcting the mistake of the presumed citizenship of those born to illegals and non-immigrant foreigners would be a nightmare, so unraveling the impact of the execution of presidential authority by one ineligible to wield it would also be a nightmare, and that’s a headache that no one in government is willing to contemplate.  It’s the unthinkable thought.  The aversion to it is so strong that our leaders would rather hide in a closet than confront it.
Maybe they are right to fear it so.  Maybe they realize things that the rest of us don’t.  I hope so, because if their silence is strictly out of cowardice, or aversion to a sticky, messy situation, then the betrayal of the Constitution has been and remains totally unjustified because it is far more important than our or their comfort.

The constitutional criminality at the heart of an illegitimate presidency is accepted and unmentioned in the corridors of power in Washington, and around the world.  No competent government in the world is unaware that Barack Obama presented a nine layer fake image of a Hawaiian birth certificate because they have examined it just like tens of thousands of Americans have done, and found that it is totally unexplainable as being the result of the scanning of a real document.
The only conclusion that can be drawn from that fact is that no original exists, and that must be because his actual birth place was somewhere other than a hospital in the United States.

It’s evident that he’s boxed-in on every side when it comes to the nature of his citizenship and his unconstitutional presidency. But knowing about it and being able to do something about it are two very different things.  Congress definitely will not act since no one in it will speak the unspeakable truth, -especially if they’re ignorant of it.  So that leaves only the courts.

But they’ve been unwilling to get involved in a process that could de-legitimize their political champion, or, if they’re neutral, place themselves in the cross-hairs of nefarious men who will do anything to protect their usurper-in-chief.  So the status quo holds for now, but like a dam with a serious crack in it, time will eventually exact its toll and the truth will be spread far and wide.  Will you help spread it?

by a.r. nash 2012  http://obama–nation.com

[Update, Oct. 2012:  The U.S. Supreme Court declined, without explanation of any sort, to hear the appeal of the case (-rejected at every level in Georgia) which was decided in favor of a defendant whose lawyer refused to even appear before the court, -the defendant being Barack Obama who was unwilling and unable to defend his constitutional eligibility to be President, nor his counterfeit birth certificate image.]

 

About arnash
“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it’s time to pause and reflect.” - Mark Twain - Politicians and diapers - change 'em often, for the same reason. "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." Ronald Reagan "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley, Jr. “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell The people are the masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it. Abraham Lincoln “Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell “Satan will use a lake of truth to hide a pint of poison”.

2 Responses to The Truth about U.S. Citizenship

  1. I find myself completely fascinated by your ability to write reams and reams of prose, without ever saying anything of consequence. I am astounded that you can be so wrong, and yet be so committed to your error that you, a rank, uneducated amateur, will completely ignore the conclusions of every credentialed Constitutional expert, every judge, the entire Congress, and over 200 years of jurisprudence, in order to pretend that you somehow stumbled onto the secret of citizenship that the entire nation somehow missed….

    It’s too bad you can’t put that energy and commitment into something useful and beneficial to your country, rather than the sedition you currently foment. Perhaps you could actually join the army, so you could write about it from a position of knowledge, rather than the fantasy you currently employ.

    • arnash says:

      You are a blind and ignorant fool to think that what you get from the government and everyone in it is fidelity to the meaning and intent of the Constitution. Even a 5th grader can figure out that most of what the federal government does is unconstitutional. And it goes uncontested because the traitors in the Supreme Court commit treason against the Constitution on a regular basis.
      Are you so stupid as to think that a fine, a penalty, a punishment is equivalent to a tax? Do you really believe that Big Brother has the constitutional authority to order everyone to enter into a contract merely because they are a living breathing adult? Chief Judas Roberts has proclaimed as much, along with his fellow traitors on the left. The very essence of contract law is that contracts are invalid if they are not voluntary. If they are coerced then they are illegitimate, even if the coercion is by the government.
      Are you so ignorant as to not know that any fundamental alteration of American society must be approved by The People via an amendment to the Constitution? Do you believe that Big Brother can order Americans to do anything or not do anything that a mere majority decides on? Can Congress alone decide that all alcohol and tobacco products can be banned? Or would that require a constitutional amendment? Are you too stupid to realize that the socialists in Congress do not give a damn about obeying the Constitution? Can’t you grasp that they are all traitors to the oath they took to support and defend the Constitution?
      Your appeal to authority is juvenile at best and foolishly and dangerously naive at worst. When an entire establishment is corrupted by decades of anti-constitutional legislation and leftist hiring and appointments, then it, like an apple barrel, becomes completely filled with rot thanks to self-serving men who want to go along to get along, and along the way promote their socialist ideals, while the Constitution is betrayed. Such men are those who our founders warned us repeatedly about, and would have wanted to see slapped behind bars for being traitors to America’s founding principles.

      As for what I’ve written, it stand unassailed so far by anyone because all the superficial complainers have never countered one single issue with any logic or fact. All they have and all you have is a quiver full of the opinions of false experts who based their opinions on the false expertise of false experts that preceded them. It’s all hot air and no substance. The only principles that are part of the bedrock on which our nation is founded are the principles of natural law and natural rights. Nothing else is permanent and unalienable. If you can’t counter anything that I’ve written, then why don’t you find someone who can? News Flash. I’ve already heard and demolished their false logic and false impressions and shown why their opinions were erroneous and how they came about. There is nothing left in their arsenal to fire at what is uncontestable fact.

      As for joining the Army to get a realistic perspective on war, are you using a computer on the moon? Or some mini-hand-held device that can’t display my tiny avatar photo thumbnail? I suggest you click on it sometime and figure out where it was taken. I’ll give you a hint. It was taken in 1969.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68 other followers

%d bloggers like this: