Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
had a question about this "anchor baby" term. Am I correct to assume that while a baby born on US soil would be a natural born citizen regardless of the citizenship of their patents? I also assume that this natural born citizenship status of the baby does NOT change the citizenship of the baby's parents. If the parents were foreign born they would have to be naturalized to become US citizen and would NEVER be natural born citizen(s).
So, am I correct to assume that the citizenship of Obama's parents is irrelevant? If so, isn't the only remaining issue for these after-birthers, their only remaining hope, is to prove this document is a fake?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough
Two points:
1. There is no such thing as an anchor baby. Contrary to the false claims of conservatives, being the parent of a child born in the United States does not give a person the right to U.S. citizenship. It is time that conservatives stop repeating this lie.
2. The language of the Fourteenth Amendment is clear. If the Congress which drafted the Amendment and the states which ratified it had meant to limit its application to former slaves there is no doubt that they could have devised language to accomplish that.
Or maybe you want to be like those so-called activist judges you undoubtedly decry and interpret the Amendment to mean what you want it to mean.
i guess you would NEVER be able to be president, these birthers would never let that get by.... (unless of course, you are white...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by progmac
my original birth certificate literally has white-out on it. my parents changed my middle name when i was a few days old.
I'm just not getting it, they analysis a digital copy (the PDF image the WH prepared), that they pulled of the internet, that was a digital copy (the photo of the Hawaii DOH prepared) as if they are holding the original.
Let's look the chain of custody:
The original BC is in a bound ledger style book in the Hawaii DOH.
The Hawaii HOH folds open the book and makes a copy of the original.
The Hawaii DOH adds the hatching pattern, with unknown software, to the background. It is possible that the image is now a PDF and they added a hatch pattern to it creating this layer affect.
Hawaii DOH prints out 2 paper copies (probably a handful, I imagine every one at Hawaii DOH has a copy hanging on their wall)
The Hawaii DOH officials apply the certification to the PAPER copies.
The WH receives their two certified PAPER copies and use one is used to prepare a PDF to put out onto the internet.
These document "experts" download a copy they find on the internet, now a third generation digital image, and begin the "examination" of this digital image on their computer.
Chain of custody is everything in any legal case, Examining a copy of a copy of a copy is not quite the same as examining a real document.
Finally, for a purported document "expert" to examine this image on is puter and jump to the conclusion that Obama has committed an impeachable offense is ludicrous.... He has skipped numerous proofs to get where he landed, his conclusions are a joke.
i guess you would NEVER be able to be president, these birthers would never let that get by.... (unless of course, you are white...)
I'm just not getting it, they analysis a digital copy (the PDF image the WH prepared), that they pulled of the internet, that was a digital copy (the photo of the Hawaii DOH prepared) as if they are holding the original.
Let's look the chain of custody:
The original BC is in a bound ledger style book in the Hawaii DOH.
The Hawaii HOH folds open the book and makes a copy of the original.
The Hawaii DOH adds the hatching pattern, with unknown software, to the background. It is possible that the image is now a PDF and they added a hatch pattern to it creating this layer affect.
Hawaii DOH prints out 2 paper copies (probably a handful, I imagine every one at Hawaii DOH has a copy hanging on their wall)
The Hawaii DOH officials apply the certification to the PAPER copies.
The WH receives their two certified PAPER copies and use one is used to prepare a PDF to put out onto the internet.
These document "experts" download a copy they find on the internet, now a third generation digital image, and begin the "examination" of this digital image on their computer.
Chain of custody is everything in any legal case, Examining a copy of a copy of a copy is not quite the same as examining a real document.
Finally, for a purported document "expert" to examine this image on is puter and jump to the conclusion that Obama has committed an impeachable offense is ludicrous.... He has skipped numerous proofs to get where he landed, his conclusions are a joke.
^^This is why the head of the RNC and other serious republicans pretty much hate the birthers. They are seriously so bat$hit crazy that they are actually helping Obama and the democrats.
They sound like Charlie Sheen spouting about 9-11 or his warlock blood and early onset dementia is a sad sad thing.
Whats even sadder is that they can't even recognize that this issue is doing them political damage and distracting from the real issues. Most sane people would recognize that even if they feel they are correct on the birther issue that it will never be proven and concede that beating the dead horse makes them sound just like the people saying Bush planned 9-11.
you've been shown before that this was an intentional hoax. why submitted it again as fact?
No, there were 2 from Kenya. One purported to be a fake, probably put out by the Obama camp to discredit the skeptics . This one remains credible. Until all the evidence is before a court of law, and examined, no one has conclusively proved anything.
Scanned documents aren’t valid evidence of anything even if they are legitimate. The entire reason there is a professional field known as forensic document examination is that a great deal can be told from examination of the original document itself. Much, much less can be told by looking at a photocopy of a document and very little, if anything at all, can be told from looking at a digital image that purports to be an image of an original document. Too much opportunity for adulteration, no opportunity to examine the paper, the ink, and any impressions made on the paper, etc.
As long as the Supreme's dodge the issue, we will never be able to prove where he was born, but we know that he is a compulsive liar, and the media is actively assisting him in this fraud.
The short form was inadequate to prove anything, that is why he was forced to compose a long form, which is also fraudulent. Only an honest forensic examination in a court of law can end this debate. Until then, we have a hung jury, but circumstances suggest we have been conned.
It's clear the "Kerner" subset of the Placentists (after-birthers) and their poseur document specialists, who have not examined any document, have zero knowlege of or experience with old manual typewriters, which is likely what O's BC was typed on. It used to be that real document specialists could determine which typewriter a document was typed on by various irregularities in the type. Each typewriter was unique. Some had bent keys, some letters tended to skip, etc.
Jerome Corsi -- Where's the Birth Certificate?: The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President
He has verification that Obama was definitely born in Kenya. Ann Dunham & Barack Obama, Sr. never married. Ann Duncan coaxed Obama, Sr. into putting his name on the birth certificate of a child that he did NOT father, she hoping they would marry, and thinking he would eventually become a high-anking Kenyan official, although he had a wife in Kenya.
Not only does he have documentation as to the Kenyan hospital where Obama was born, but he is also very certain who forged the recently released long-form birth certificate because of the "signatures" left by the forger. He explained that the forger is not very good, but when the president needs a forged document, he can't easily advertise in hopes of getting the best!
Ann Duncan coaxed Obama, Sr. into putting his name on the birth certificate of a child that he did NOT father, she hoping they would marry, and thinking he would eventually become a high-anking Kenyan official, although he had a wife in Kenya.
huh??!!!???........
so now the story line is that ann dunham had absolutely no connection to kenya but decided to have her baby there?
so now the story line is that ann dunham had absolutely no connection to kenya but decided to have her baby there?
does this honestly make sense to you?
Rational thought is in short supply here. It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to replace the theory before it that went belly-up due to sheer
ignorance and paranoia. Arus debunked it all last night...great posts. But they don't want the truth...the b.s. is so much more fun.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
