Why is the birth certificate a dead issue?

500grains

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
15
I have not dropped in to this forum in a long time, but I see no discussion of Obama's citizenship status, including his missing birth certificate and the issue of what passport he travelled to Pakistan on and whether he was accepted to Occidental College as a foreign student.

If this topic is verboten here, please advise me.
 
I think it serves mostly as a calculated distraction. We waste all kinds of time on a triviality that they can easily quash at the last minute, rather than focusing on important things like defeating health care or getting the Fed's secrecy into the public sphere.
 
It's not "verbotten". But I personally haven't seen any "earth shattering" information on that front and there's a lot of other more pressing issues. Still if you have links to what you're talking about please post them.
 
From what I read, there will be a trial in January.

But for the most part, it is seen as an issue that is as significant as the Democrats who didn't believe that Bush got enough votes in 2000 to win.

Look at what good it did them.

It's an interesting sidebar but will go nowhere.
 
I have not dropped in to this forum in a long time, but I see no discussion of Obama's citizenship status, including his missing birth certificate and the issue of what passport he travelled to Pakistan on and whether he was accepted to Occidental College as a foreign student.

If this topic is verboten here, please advise me.

It's a dead issue because it's a non-issue and merely a distraction.
Biden/Pelosi/McCain and anyone else the elites come up with would all be equally as bad as Obama, so no use wasting time trying to pin something on him that will never work anyway.
 
From what I read, there will be a trial in January.

But for the most part, it is seen as an issue that is as significant as the Democrats who didn't believe that Bush got enough votes in 2000 to win.

Look at what good it did them.

It's an interesting sidebar but will go nowhere.

The cast was dismiss last month, Orly is appling it so there is no trial in January.

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a Precedential Opinion in Berg v. Obama, with its Order affirming the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s decision to dismiss. Philip Berg, whose financial situation has been in disarray for a while now, is ordered to pay costs. He is not out of options: He still can apply for a rehearing in the same court or for a writ from the Supreme Court.

Whatever he decides to do, a Precedential Opinion is serious business. Within the Third Circuit, which consists of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and the Virgin Islands, all lower courts are now obligated to find that voters do not have standing to challenge Obama’s eligibility. In other federal appellate circuits, the same obligation does not exist, but it will be considered persuasive evidence that precedence has been ordered elsewhere.



Leo Donofrio is making some progress.

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress...rd-for-obama-dated-from-august-1961/#comments
 
I have not dropped in to this forum in a long time, but I see no discussion of Obama's citizenship status, including his missing birth certificate and the issue of what passport he travelled to Pakistan on and whether he was accepted to Occidental College as a foreign student.

If this topic is verboten here, please advise me.

let go:o
 

That article contains some good information:

Obama was born before 1986 to married parents, and his father was an alien. Thus if it were an overseas birth, his mother would have to have lived in the U.S. for 5 years after age 14 in order for her child to be a natural-born American. Mrs. Obama was only 18 when Barack was born, so she had not even lived 5 years after age 14.

This is something of a technicality: Someone born overseas and after 1986, but otherwise in identical circumstances to Obama, would be a natural-born citizen thanks to a law signed by President Reagan. We don’t recall any outcry back then about the threat that some such person could grow up to be president, nor, as far as we are aware, are any birthers calling for a change in this law to return to the status quo ante 1986. Even if the birthers’ conspiracy theory were true...


The rest of it is total crap statist collectivist propaganda bs. I hope that's why you posted it :confused:


The funny thing I just noticed is, I was born before 1986.. and I'm not even eligible to be President yet.. Therefore this law will not actually apply to a Presidential candidate for some time..
 
Last edited:
I have not dropped in to this forum in a long time, but I see no discussion of Obama's citizenship status, including his missing birth certificate and the issue of what passport he travelled to Pakistan on and whether he was accepted to Occidental College as a foreign student.

If this topic is verboten here, please advise me.

It's a valid issue, but the issue is that all the evidence we need to prove it is sealed. Since the courts are corrupt, and won't rule to open such sealed information, it's really a "no win" scenario.

And the birth certificate wouldn't even matter if you could find a passport or school record where he declared himself a foreigner.

Maybe he's legit. I highly doubt it, but maybe. Anyway, I will not make up my mind on the issue until I see all available information with my own eyes. Accepting the government's word for it is an Appeal to Authority fallacy.
 
The funny thing I just noticed is, I was born before 1986.. and I'm not even eligible to be President yet.. Therefore this law will not actually apply to a Presidential candidate for some time..

Here's a thought. If our rulers really do think/plan in terms of decades and generations instead of months and years....I wonder if they had a particular person in mind when they passed that change? They'd be about 23 now....
 
Last edited:
That article contains some good information:




The rest of it is total crap statist collectivist propaganda bs. I hope that's why you posted it :confused:


The funny thing I just noticed is, I was born before 1986.. and I'm not even eligible to be President yet.. Therefore this law will not actually apply to a Presidential candidate for some time..

So according to this article if I was to break a law that was changed two years later I would not be guilty of a crime? The fact that the law was changed would make my breaking of the law a nonissue? I wonder if this logic applies to all citizens and all crimes or just certain select citizens and select crimes.
 
So according to this article if I was to break a law that was changed two years later I would not be guilty of a crime? The fact that the law was changed would make my breaking of the law a nonissue? I wonder if this logic applies to all citizens and all crimes or just certain select citizens and select crimes.

Ya know I was gonna say the same thing and be witty about it.
BUT I couldn't think up another instance in recent times where the laws got LESS restrictive.....
 
There is a theory on RT where essentially they pushed the issue as a way to gain abit of leverage during the talks about settlement freeze. Once it died down they stopped pushing. WND hasnt really reported it in some time.
"Israeli government and US conservatives behind Obama’s birth certificate"
http://rt.tv/Politics/2009-08-10/israeli-government-us-conservatives.html

This doesnt mean it is a non issue, only that it was temporarily amplified for that purpose.

###
Another is that Obamas real dad was Frank Marshal Davis a communist. The story of "dreams of father" was about his father MFD the commie pedophile.
http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2008/09/obamas-real-father-connecting-dots.html
 
Last edited:
Diogenes looking for an honest judge....

the issue is not dead, but it is on life-support. it will take perhaps not only an honest judge, but one that will also stick his neck out. we thought we might have one in the California case, it didn't turn out that way. still looking.....



lynn
 
Back
Top