BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit ...

BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen...

There are 243319 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jan 8, 2009, titled BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting Obama's citizen.... In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider Friday whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama 's U.S. citizenship, a continuation of a New Jersey case embraced by some opponents of Obama's ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

Dale

Wichita, KS

#193653 Jun 16, 2014
Miller time!!!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#193654 Jun 16, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! You are correct!!!
And yet neither of Ted's parents were Canadian. Dufus Dale abandons play law!
Learn to Read

Indianapolis, IN

#193655 Jun 16, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LM<AO!!! If Obama's father had been Cuban, he would have a Cuban citizenship.
Obama didn't have to register, the Kenyan constitution amendment in 1963 took care of that.
Don't be stupid.
A Constitution amendment after he was born controlled his citizenship at birth? Play law AND time travel! A true double fantasy
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#193656 Jun 16, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Kind of like the inventor who doesn't have a brain.
<quoted text>
"Elite Scientist from 80s...AHahahahaha"!(Old Indian saying.)

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#193657 Jun 16, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! So, persons born of US fathers in a foreign country do not receive US citizenship.
Dufus does the LMAO dance while Atticus' explanation flies over his feeble head.
Atticus Tiberius Finch wrote:
<quoted text>
A foreign nation that bestows citizenship to children born to its subjects or citizens outstide its boundaries DOESN'T automatically gives that foreign nation jurisdiction over the child UNLESS that child resides in that foreign nation.
In other words, the power to grant citizenship doesn't include the power of jurisdiction unless the person receiving citizenship is within the jurisdiction of that nation.
Courts have been very clear on this subject.
"Without entering upon this subject (which properly belongs to a general treatise upon public law), it may be truly said that no nation is bound to respect the laws of another nation made in regard to the SUBJECTS OF THE LATTER WHICH ARE NONRESIDENTS. The obligatory force of such laws of any nation cannot extend beyond its own territories. Whatever may be the intrinsic or obligatory force of such laws upon such persons, if they should return to their native country, they can have none in other nations wherein they reside. Such laws may give rise to personal relations between the sovereign and subjects, to be enforced in his own domains; but they do not rightfully extend to other nations. Rundell v. La Campagnie Generale Transatlantique, 100 Fed. 655, 660 (7th Cir. 1900)(quoting Justice Story, Commentaries of the Conflict of Laws (section 22)(1834)(emphasis added)

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#193658 Jun 16, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not "all-encompassing", that would make them a citizen. The visitor is still a subject of his homeland, while he's here. That's where his allegiance is. Plain and simple.
Being a subject of his homeland does not make an alien not subject to the jurisdiction of his host country. Birfoon boy is confused between usage of the term "subject", which is a noun in the former instance, but not in the latter. Birfoons do not understand English.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#193659 Jun 16, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text> If aliens were subject to our jurisdiction, we wouldn't have to make treaties with their countries.
The US does not depend upon any treaty to enjoy the right of jurisdiction over everything within its domain.

The concept was explained quite nicely by E. de Vattel.

84. Jurisdiction.

The sovereignty united to the domain establishes the jurisdiction of the nation in her territories, or the country that belongs to her. It is her province, or that of her sovereign, to exercise justice in all the places under her jurisdiction, to take cognisance of the crimes committed, and the differences that arise in the country.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#193660 Jun 16, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text>LMAO!!! Sorry you can't grasp the idea of a solar panel that doesn't need sunlight.
Just a spoonful of gibberish helps the stupidity go down!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#193661 Jun 16, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Being a subject of his homeland does not make an alien not subject to the jurisdiction of his host country. Birfoon boy is confused between usage of the term "subject", which is a noun in the former instance, but not in the latter. Birfoons do not understand English.
What do you think my posts said, fool?
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#193662 Jun 16, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
The US does not depend upon any treaty to enjoy the right of jurisdiction over everything within its domain.
The concept was explained quite nicely by E. de Vattel.
84. Jurisdiction.
The sovereignty united to the domain establishes the jurisdiction of the nation in her territories, or the country that belongs to her. It is her province, or that of her sovereign, to exercise justice in all the places under her jurisdiction, to take cognisance of the crimes committed, and the differences that arise in the country.
"The US does not depend upon any treaty to enjoy the right of jurisdiction over everything within its domain". DUH!!! Way to go batboy!
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#193663 Jun 16, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Just a spoonful of gibberish helps the stupidity go down!
If that's a spoonful of gibberish, then your BS needs a semi to haul it in!

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#193664 Jun 16, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text> If aliens were subject to our jurisdiction, we wouldn't have to make treaties with their countries.
You really don't understand the concept, do you?

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#193665 Jun 16, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not "all-encompassing", that would make them a citizen. The visitor is still a subject of his homeland, while he's here. That's where his allegiance is. Plain and simple.
Here it is : He is a subject of his homeland, no one can take that away from him, BUT, and having established that, is SUBJECTED to the laws and regulations of the United States.

In another post, you opine that he is not subjected to the jurisdiction of the U.S. as he cannot vote. Wrong. Just like a felon, just like anyone under age 18, he cannot vote, and in his case, because he is NOT a citizen. However, should he vote fraudulently, not being a citizen, he would be punished to the full extent of the law UNDER U.S. JURISDICTION, as per a 17-yr-old or felon who fraudulently votes.

Under the U.S. jurisdiction, he cannot speed or driver recklessly, he cannot park illegally, he cannot rob banks or embezzle his employer, he cannot maim or kill in cold blood etc. He/she will be charged under state or federal law and, innocent or guilty, there is nothing his country can do for him, treaty or no treaty. He could be extradited if it so suits the U.S., treaty or no treaty. THAT is living subject to U.S.jurisdiction.

Hell, I don't even have to look it up, it's all common sense and, incidentally, applies to most "have" countries, OECD and others.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#193666 Jun 16, 2014
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Being a subject of his homeland does not make an alien not subject to the jurisdiction of his host country. Birfoon boy is confused between usage of the term "subject", which is a noun in the former instance, but not in the latter. Birfoons do not understand English.
You're quick. I didn't realise that LRS/Dale did not distinguish between "subject" as a noun and "subject" as a verb. Heavens to murgatroyd ! It does cloud the whole concept for them,. does it not? And both prefaced their moniker with "Justice". Wow.

Subject to and subject of. Yeah.

“Bonjour Hello Buongiorno Hola”

Since: Feb 12

Ottawa

#193667 Jun 16, 2014
Dale wrote:
<quoted text> If aliens were subject to our jurisdiction, we wouldn't have to make treaties with their countries.
Whoa, whoa, Dale. Whoa whoa. Would you mind telling us what treaties you are referrng to and how they apply to non-American citizens either living in the U.S. or just plain tourists? Have you any experience in international law, the Vienna convention and its many international treaties on various relations or consular affairs?
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#193668 Jun 16, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
Here it is : He is a subject of his homeland, no one can take that away from him, BUT, and having established that, is SUBJECTED to the laws and regulations of the United States.
In another post, you opine that he is not subjected to the jurisdiction of the U.S. as he cannot vote. Wrong. Just like a felon, just like anyone under age 18, he cannot vote, and in his case, because he is NOT a citizen. However, should he vote fraudulently, not being a citizen, he would be punished to the full extent of the law UNDER U.S. JURISDICTION, as per a 17-yr-old or felon who fraudulently votes.
Under the U.S. jurisdiction, he cannot speed or driver recklessly, he cannot park illegally, he cannot rob banks or embezzle his employer, he cannot maim or kill in cold blood etc. He/she will be charged under state or federal law and, innocent or guilty, there is nothing his country can do for him, treaty or no treaty. He could be extradited if it so suits the U.S., treaty or no treaty. THAT is living subject to U.S.jurisdiction.
Hell, I don't even have to look it up, it's all common sense and, incidentally, applies to most "have" countries, OECD and others.
I just said, while here, he must obey our laws. As he is under temporary jurisdiction. I said, "he is not subjected to the jurisdiction of the U.S."? I don't recall saying that. Not in that context, anyway. I thought my first post was; 'while here obey our laws'. Hell, I don't have to look it up, either.
LRS

Shreveport, LA

#193669 Jun 16, 2014
Jacques from Ottawa wrote:
<quoted text>
You're quick. I didn't realise that LRS/Dale did not distinguish between "subject" as a noun and "subject" as a verb. Heavens to murgatroyd ! It does cloud the whole concept for them,. does it not? And both prefaced their moniker with "Justice". Wow.
Subject to and subject of. Yeah.
Even though, as even you can plainly see, there is no "justice" in front of my name, I do appreciate you recognizing the fact anyway.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#193670 Jun 16, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you think my posts said, fool?
Furthermore, the alien owes temporary allegiance to the host nation. When you say his allegiance is with his homeland, you are talking about his love and regard for his home country, which is not the allegiance owed to the host country by the alien in return for protection by the sovereign.

What your posts said is that you are clueless and ignorant.
wojar wrote:
<quoted text>
Being a subject of his homeland does not make an alien not subject to the jurisdiction of his host country. Birfoon boy is confused between usage of the term "subject", which is a noun in the former instance, but not in the latter. Birfoons do not understand English.

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#193671 Jun 16, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
I just said, while here, he must obey our laws. As he is under temporary jurisdiction. I said, "he is not subjected to the jurisdiction of the U.S."? I don't recall saying that. Not in that context, anyway. I thought my first post was; 'while here obey our laws'. Hell, I don't have to look it up, either.
Birfoon boy is confused. He owes temporary allegiance while an alien in a foreign country. The alien is completely under the jurisdiction of the US while in the US. 100%

“Facts trump speculation”

Since: Dec 08

Bristol, CT

#193672 Jun 16, 2014
LRS wrote:
<quoted text>
If that's a spoonful of gibberish, then your BS needs a semi to haul it in!
Dale is totally FOS. A solar cell generates power from solar energy. If his solar cell is generating energy from some other source of light, such as electric light bulb, it will generate less power than the system consumes.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min OBAMA Muslim 1,708,010
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 15 min hojo 64,464
Should AR15 be banned? 3 hr Truth About AR15 2
TEACHER of year at FL. middle school posts mess... 5 hr READ The TEACHER 13
Married men in panties 5 hr OUTTA carry a GUN 2
Pure Nasty Gullible Fool. 5 hr LEFT Coast Shiff 14
Maybe We Outta Ban Knives? 11 hr 2nd AMENDMENT 3

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages