Can B. Hussein Obama say that?

I am protected by the US Government via International Law and signed Treaties, whereever I travel in the world. (Except maybe a few Rogue states)

Can B. Hussein Obama say that?

“Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person’s allegiance.”

US State Department

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html

§338-13 Certified copies. (a) Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant
a certified copy of any certificate, or
the contents of any certificate,
or any part thereof.

(b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.

(c) Copies may be made by photography, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved by the director of health. [L 1949, c 327, §17; RL 1955, §57-16; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-13; am L 1978, c 49, §1]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/passporthowto.htm
Quote:
‘Proof of US Citizenship Required: When applying for a U.S. passport in person, you will need to provide proof of US citizenship. The following documents will be accepted as proof of US citizenship:

* Previously issued, undamaged US passport
* Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state of birth
* Consular Report of Birth Abroad or Certification of Birth
* Naturalization Certificate
* Certificate of Citizenship

If you do not have primary evidence of U.S. citizenship or your birth certificate does not meet the requirements, you can submit an acceptable form of Secondary Evidence of US Citizenship.’

The site goes on to state ………..

Quote:

‘A birth certificate or a certified copy of an original birth certificate is becoming increasingly important as a required form of identification…………….
When ordering, be aware that shortened (abstract) versions of birth certificates offered by some states may not be acceptable for US passport purposes. Be sure to order only the full, certified copy of the original birth certificate bearing the registrar’s raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar’s office.’
The meaning of Article II is clear and justifiable, in that the founding fathers sought to have only the best imaginable citizen as eligible for the office of POTUS.
If they only sought to have any ‘born’ citizen eligible they would not have said ‘natural-born’.
Clearly there were and stil are other ‘born’ US citizens who are not ‘natural-born’ for example at the time of the adoption of the USC there were children of a patriot (revolutionary) US new-citizen father and an indigenous indian, mother, or a British loyalist mother, or a african-slave mother, or children of people resident in US at the time who neither had any allegiance to the newly found nation, but rather were fence-sitters who might have expected the British to win the place back.
The 14th made it possible for those born to such people or the like to be deemed ‘born’ citizens, but not ‘natural-born, because if they were intended to be deemed ‘natural-born’ by the 14th, it would simply say so …………. but it didn’t.
Obama may be a ‘born’ US citizen (still yet to be proven), but it is a clear fact that he is NOT by any stretch, an Article II ‘natural born’ US citizen.
Obama lied on his Arizona nomination.
Funny isn’t it how he doesn’t come right out and PUBLICLY claim ‘natural born’ US citizen status ….. don’t you think?
Even in the face of the legal challenges to his eligibility, which he has cunningly steered away from the courts through technicalities and the fact that he has made the claim IN PRIVATE, he has nothing to lose by stating now PUBLICLY his claim, it shouldn’t shock anyone because as you infer everyone who is not ‘sheer lunatic’ already ‘knows’ he is natural born …………. right? and it would be a normal thing to state.

2 Following the usage of Hawaii statute, when Fukino in her statement refers to Obama’s “original” vital records she means nothing more than Obama’s “CURRENT” vital records. Given Fukino did not cite the type or date of Obama’s original i.e. current vital records, then all evidence suggests that, if accepted, they were only legally completed very recently.

3 Hawaii DoH has confirmed through UIPA that Obama amended his birthdate; DoH also confirmed through UIPA that it holds Obama’s delayed birth certificate for which no affidavits or other evidence were supplied. These confirmations strip Obama’s COLB of its evidentiary status and mean he was not born in a Hawaii hospital as he claimed. Given the reason for the delay is illegally missing from Obama’s published COLB, this establishes it as fraudulent. The collusion of Hawaii DoH in the misrepresentation may be seen in the original date of the incomplete filing (August 8, 1961) appearing on the forged COLB as the date of its official acceptance, which was apparently delayed until 2007. The alleged newspaper announcements of Obama’s birth either originated from his family, or the few photo-archive “sources” were faked, and cannot substantiate the amended and delayed filing.

4 The application of Vattel and his international law of nations to Article 2(1)(5) is an untested interpretation of the Constitution, not settled law. It is not likely SCOTUS would apply Vattel to Article 2(1)(5) and exclude “dual foreign citizens” from the Presidency when legal precedent shows that all citizens born in the US have been deemed at birth to owe exclusive allegiance to the US. This has been seen when tax protesters have claimed that there are two different legal entities named respectively the “United States” and the “United States of America”, and that one does not have exclusive legal jurisdiction over citizens of the other. Given no separate category of “dual foreign citizen” exists in US law I suggest it would be unrealistic to expect federal courts, which have always punished the “split allegiance and obligations” theory of US–USA citizenship in tax protest cases, to apply a parallel interpretation of US citizenship in a constitutional case.

Furthermore, the US has always expected a loyal compliance with the US draft even during wartime by “dual foreign citizens” associated with enemy nations (for example, those of Japanese, German, and Italian parentage). Again, when “Tokyo Rose” (Iva Toguri, US born of Japanese parents) was tried for treason allegedly committed while resident in Japan during WW2, Toguri did not plead in her defense a “lesser loyalty”. Conversely, Tomoya Kawakita (US born of Japanese parents), convicted of treason for being an abusive civilian interpreter assigned to American POWs in Japan, did plead a “lesser loyalty” as a “dual foreign citizen” and appealed his conviction on that basis to SCOTUS. In 1952 SCOTUS found that since the US demanded the same loyalty from all US citizens then “dual foreign citizens” could not claim the privilege of a “lesser loyalty” or “fair weather citizenship”: the conviction was upheld (Kawakita v. United States, 343 U.S. 717). Toguri had resisted Japanese pressure to expatriate herself during WW2 and was always a loyal American despite her prison sentence and subsequent federal intimidation, such that when investigative journalists discovered that prosecution witnesses against her had lied, Toguri received a full, unconditional pardon from President Ford. By then, however, the point had been well made: federal authorities recognize no gradations of allegiance. Obama claiming to be a “dual citizen” effects a cunning distraction from his dubious immigration status when he knows he has the entire federal judiciary and precedent on his side regarding “dual foreign citizenship”.

“On June 12, 2008 the title for this form was Certification of Live Birth. The title for the form that this family received in the first week of June 2009 is Certificate of Live Birth. I called The Dept of Health and confirmed that the title of the form had been changed. The bureaucrat that I spoke to said the change had been made “recently”, but could not or would not tell me when. Sometime between June 12, 2008 and the first week of June 2009 the Hawaiian Dept of Health changed the title of this abbreviated form from “Certification of Live Birth” to “Certificate of Live Birth“. Why?

The use of the word “Certificate” rather than “Certification” makes the form feel somewhat more like a traditional birth certificate than the “Certification of Live Birth” that the Daily Kos website and subsequently the Obama campaign posted on the Internet even though, like the “Certification“, it also lacks any information about the hospital, doctor, or midwife. This renaming of the document will be very convenient for the Hawaiian Dept of Health in future stonewalling should any legal pressure be brought against them to produce Obama’s “Certificate of Live Birth”. Instead of producing the original “Certificate of Live Birth”, they will produce the “Certification of Live Birth” form that the Dept of Health has now renamed a “Certificate of Live Birth” and claim that they are doing so”

Obama Birth Announcement Forged
http://www.hoaxofthecentury.com/ForgedObama1.htm

View http://www.HoaxOfTheCentury.com to learn how US spies and Nazi Germany spies were MERGED after WWII to create the CIA and would you believe the Nazi spies were trusted?
—————
Mrs. Rondeau replies: We really don’t know anything about the man who occupies the Oval Office. He might have a completely different name. Obviously, he is hiding a tremendous amount of information. The Post & Email does not maintain the position that anything about Obama is true, but we do seek the truth about him and his past.

The Nazis in The White House Story: Part 6
Bush Ages Nix US Genealogy Claims
http://www.hoaxofthecentury.com/WhatBushesAges1.htm

http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/editing/

They were announced on the 16th of August, the Wednesday edition, after the Sunday edition that contained Obama’s announcement.