Obomba birth certificate NEW news.

[Double D]

MT, Thank you. Back at ya....

[RunningOnMT]

Cycloneman, that does look like an official document....the kind issued by court houses. What you need to obtain for most legal reasons and are usually sufficient documentation of ones birth because they are USUALLY issued based on what the hospital reports to the registrars office, BUT, it's the hospital certificate that usually has the footprints and in this case is the most important one because it is a testimony of the persons actual birth in that hospital. The fact that not a single hospital in Hawaii has a record of Obama's birth is troubling to say the least.

[RunningOnMT]

And now there's this. One can only guess as to why Obama wouldn't give his consent.

http://patriotupdate.com/2037/hawaii...th-certificate

Hawaii Gov Waffles on Obama’s Birth Certificate
January 22, 2011

A privacy law that shields birth certificates has prompted Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie to abandon efforts to dispel claims that President Obama was born outside Hawaii, his office says.

State Attorney General David Louie told the governor that privacy laws bar him from disclosing an individual’s birth documentation without the person’s consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said Friday.

“There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to produce a document,” said Dela Cruz. “Unfortunately, there are conspirators who will continue to question the citizenship of our president.”

Abercrombie, who was a friend of Obama’s parents and knew him as a child, launched an investigation last month into whether he can release more information about the president’s Aug. 4, 1961 birth. The governor said at the time he was bothered by people who questioned Obama’s birthplace for political reasons.

[Double D]

Wont release documents= guilty.

[howlnmad]

Come now gentlemen. At the grand old age of 23, he has certainly been around the block several times, seen it all, done it all and knows all.

[Bobitis]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Cycloneman, that does look like an official document....the kind issued by court houses. What you need to obtain for most legal reasons and are usually sufficient documentation of ones birth because they are USUALLY issued based on what the hospital reports to the registrars office, BUT, it's the hospital certificate that usually has the footprints and in this case is the most important one because it is a testimony of the persons actual birth in that hospital. The fact that not a single hospital in Hawaii has a record of Obama's birth is troubling to say the least.

Put these together.

[gendoikari87]

hey look ANOTHER fake that doesn't list the nation as the Republic of Kenya this time. Overall a much better fake than the first one.

[Bobitis]

The 'Republic' of Kenya wasn't established until 1964.
Obie was born in 1961.

[gendoikari87]

yeah, this one seems ligit, but it's still comes on the heel of a really bad forgery, and it came out of the shadows by some anonymous person afraid for some reason or another. Given directly to Taitz who released it, she has been known for ... extreme legal methods to say the least, with several clients who have refused to keep her as their counsul.

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/w...irthers_kenya/

that link has some good points but the part about mombasa being part of zanzibar I don't think is true. Mombasa was for a time part of zanzibar, but I think that was well before the 60's

[Old Guy]

The comment about the ramifications has some validity. Yes, if it proven that he is fraudulently holding office it would call into question all of the things that he has signed his name to and people that he has appointed. But what is worse, dealing with the possibility of the fraudulent actions and the chaos that would cause for a period of time, or setting the precedent for future "illegals" to waltz right into the office? While it would be ugly to deal with, it would be better to get the truth out and let the chips fall where they may. The oath was to protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic! There are no if's, but's, and's, or gray areas in the oath.

[gendoikari87]

Yeah but see he is an american, not just born here, but by just sanguinary.

[RunningOnMT]

Originally Posted by gendoikari87

Yeah but see he is an american, not just born here, but by just sanguinary.

Just who???

[gendoikari87]

typo just sanguinus

[Martin S]

Here is what just recieved by e-mail.
Martin

[Double D]

Originally Posted by howlnmad

Come now gentlemen. At the grand old age of 23, he has certainly been around the block several times, seen it all, done it all and knows all.

+1

[RunningOnMT]

Originally Posted by gendoikari87

typo just sanguinus

OK, well it is JUS sanguinous and the definition is below:

Jus sanguinis (Latin: right of blood) is a social policy by which citizenship is not determined by place of birth, but by having a parent(s) who are citizens of the nation. It contrasts with jus soli (Latin for "right of soil").

At the end of the 19th century, the French-German debate on nationality saw Ernest Renan oppose the German conception of an "objective nationality", based on blood, race or even, as in Fichte's case, language. Renan's republican conception explains France's early adoption of jus soli. Many nations have a mixture of jus sanguinis and jus soli, including the United States, Canada, Italy, Israel, Germany (as of recently), Greece, the Republic of Ireland and others.

Apart from France, jus sanguinis still is the preferred means of passing on citizenship in many continental European countries, with benefits of maintaining culture and national identity[citation needed]. Some countries provide almost the same rights as a citizen to people born in the country, without actually giving them citizenship. An example is Indfødsret in Denmark, which provides that upon reaching age 18, non-citizen residents can decide to take a test to gain citizenship.

Unlike France, some European states (in their modern forms) are post-empire creations within the past century. States arising out of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires had huge numbers of ethnic populations outside of their new boundaries, as do most of the former Soviet states. Several had long-standing diasporas that did not conform to 20th century European nationalism and state creation. In many cases, jus sanguinis rights were mandated by international treaty, with citizenship definitions imposed by the international community. In other cases, minorities were subject to legal and extra-legal persecution and their only option was immigration to their ancestral home country. States offering jus sanguinis rights to ethnic citizens and their descendants include Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria and, from 2009, Romania. Each is obligated by international treaty to extend those rights.

But if I'm not mistaken for a child to be born a citizen of the U.S. in a country outside the U.S. requires both parents to be U.S. citizens.

Where did you get this term from anyway, Chris Matthews? Keith Olbermann?

[Bubblehead]

And now there is this announcement that there is no record of Obama's birth in the Hawaii archives:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvrb7YqdvxE

[Double D]

Matthews,Olbermann= Scum of the earth

[gendoikari87]

Where did you get this term from anyway, Chris Matthews? Keith Olbermann?

American Government. but it's been a while, so it might be that both parent's need to be citizens, i'm not sure. All I do know is that my fiancee' was born off base in what was then west germany.

[Bubblehead]

A question comes to mind. If there was proof that Obama was not a natural born citizen of the United States, and was not eligible to be the POTUS, would all legislation that he signed into law during his term be nullified?

[Haligan]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead

A question comes to mind. If there was proof that Obama was not a natural born citizen of the United States, and was not eligible to be the POTUS, would all legislation that he signed into law during his term be nullified?

T Sis gonna HtheF

I heard this one guy, who released a video a while back. He said "people always ask me when is this all gonna happen?" He responds by saying "What is it gonna take for you to realize it already is happening ?"

[gendoikari87]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead

A question comes to mind. If there was proof that Obama was not a natural born citizen of the United States, and was not eligible to be the POTUS, would all legislation that he signed into law during his term be nullified?

If it was prooven yes, but the only evidence is shaky at best and comes from people with obvious motifs for faking this stuff.

[Bubblehead]

Originally Posted by gendoikari87

If it was prooven yes, but the only evidence is shaky at best and comes from people with obvious motifs for faking this stuff.

I don't believe the burden of proof should rest on the citizenry. Since there is a controversy, Obama should put it to rest by providing evidence of his citizenship. He's avoiding doing so and there must be a reason as to why. If he is a citizen, then what else could he be hiding? An illegitimate birth perhaps? Something else that might be embarrassing but would not negate his qualification based on citizenship?

[patriotoutlaw]

AGREED!

Originally Posted by rentalguy1

The man was not born in the states...period! If he was, his camp would have produced a legal birth certificate a long time ago to shut up the masses. He was a half rate senator from IL that got noticed some time ago by the Soros goons, and was groomed from there to be "put" in the White House. He is there for a reason, and we are seeing it unfold on a daily basis. You can choose to believe it and prepare, or you can believe that this is just politics as usual. If the latter is your line of thought, please tell me anything that is "usual" about his presidency...

[Bobitis]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead

I don't believe the burden of proof should rest on the citizenry. Since there is a controversy, Obama should put it to rest by providing evidence of his citizenship. He's avoiding doing so and there must be a reason as to why. If he is a citizen, then what else could he be hiding? An illegitimate birth perhaps? Something else that might be embarrassing but would not negate his qualification based on citizenship?

The burden of proof lies upon the prosecutor in our society.
When the proof that's needed is locked up, there's little else one can do.
A normal inquisition would require that both parties be priveleged to all documents in the matter at hand. Not so in this case.

We still don't know the facts about JFK's assasination. How long ago was that?

Few times in our nations history have the citizens been subjected to this level of secrecy, and it's always been to cover something up. If you don't have access to the truth, the truth is what you claim it is.

History is made by the last person that wrote it.