Obama: Yes, I’m Muslim

If this is true it would certainly explain a lot of his actions of late wouldn't it? I would love to see the video from Nile TV, I wonder if its in English? I anyone finds a link please post it.

Since O's mother is definetly an American it really doesn't matter where he was born. I understand what and why the constitution is clear that the Pres cannot be anything other than American born. However, he is an American citizen because of his mother, who was a legal US citizen. His upbringing in another country that was obviously anti American I think holds more importance and gives credence to his anti America stand, though sorry to say no reason for impeachment or disqualification.

The key words are “natural born” Born overseas, of a non-citizen father kills that. Obama can be a citizen, but still not eligible for POTUS.

Even better, under the law at the time, since Stanley Ann was under age, and had lived outside the US too long, IF Obama was born in Kenya, he's not a citizen. Natural, or otherwise.

Except for the fact that to attend the Indonesian school it was required that he be a citizen of Indonesia. In order to become a citizen of Indonesia he had to give up his US citizenship.

I think many of you are missing the point (maybe intentionally)- It is not that he may be a Muslim that is the problem- the problem is that he would lie to the country he leads about a core belief. Such a core belief that, in Christianity, many would accept death before denying their God. Who can trust a man that would deny his God?

The secrecy about his history is not an issue at this point since he is the POTUS. What I think we should see (and what I mean by we is the American people) is the pressure from the media for a revelation of the same relevant issues for which GWB was excoriated.

I don't trust another country's media (hell, I don't trust my own), but I do trust my gut- and when my gut feeling is substantiated, I pay attention- regardless of who provides the information. We do not live in a world of too much information.

Uh, if that's the case then wouldn't this issue have been dealt with a really long time ago?

P.S. Just on a matter of intellectual rigor, the article begins by citing a translation of de Vattel that was published a decade or so after the constitution was written – there were previous translations that likely said the same thing, so I'd suggest you cite one of those. Incidentally, the Law of Nations was not adopted as our constitution and we're not bound by it, and pretty much every nation in the world, even the most bat$hit crazy jus sanguinis purist ones recognize citizenship at birth for only one parent. Your system essentially would lead to the birth of thousands more stateless people, which is generally not considered a good thing. Unless, of course, you don't reject the notion that he's a citizen, specifically that if he were born in Hawaii to an American mother he's a citizen and has been one from birth – in that case, well, current law only distinguishes between natural citizens (i.e. those born to a US citizen or on US soil) and naturalized citizens (who may do anything except, well, be president or vice president), and what you're essentially proposing is a system that stratifies birthright citizenship so that some babies are treated as “natural born” and some are treated as “naturalized” from birth.

But I digress, the article then concludes by citing a supreme court case that overturned the precedent on which your claim was founded, and includes only one passing mention of the case that you believe serves your point. May I suggest reading the entire court opinion and then making up your mind? It says things like….

“There is, therefore, little ground for the theory that, at the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, there as any settled and definite rule of international law, generally recognized by civilized nations, inconsistent with the ancient rule of citizenship by birth within the dominion…

…16 Wall. 83 U. S. 72. And, in treating of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, he said:

'The distinction between citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a State is clearly recognized and established. Not only may a man be a citizen of the United States without being a citizen of a State, but an important element is necessary to convert the former into the latter. He must reside within the State to make him a citizen of it, but it is only necessary that he should be born or naturalized in the United States to be a citizen of the Union.'

16 Wall. 83 U. S. 73, 83 U. S. 74.

Mr. Justice Field, in a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Chase and Justices Swayne and Bradley concurred, said of the same clause:

'It recognizes in express terms, if it does not create, citizens of the United States, and it makes their citizenship dependent upon the place of their birth, or the fact of their adoption, and not upon the constitution or laws of any State or the condition of their ancestry.'”

Or, how about just the last paragraph of the majority opinion…

“The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties were to present for determination the single question stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil [sic] and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative.”

So in addition to the fact that his mother's a citizen and he was born here, last I checked, Obama's father wasn't here on official Kenyan Business.

You can't just cherry pick the part of the 200 page decision that you like and ignore the other 199 pages – especially when the other 199 pages literally trace hundreds of years of history to show you exactly why your argument is flawed.

Better luck next time.

Obama: I have become all things to all men that some might be duped.

1 Alinsky 9:22

Your sources?

FYI parents can't renounce citizenship on behalf of minor children, who can't do it themselves until they're 18. I suggest you read US law.

I have read all of this 3 times now and still don't see what the title of the post said….

Um, people? This is the “muslim” thread, the Birth ceritificate thread is the second thread down from this.