He is NOT a “natural-born citizen” of the United States of America, all laws and orders given while he fraudulently holds that office are null and void
Our Undocumented White House Resident
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
“I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
This quote is taken directly from Vattel’s book on the Law of Nations, which has been a world recognized and time honored reference guide to understanding “natural law,” and the natural birthrights of national citizenship recognized by all civilized nations for more than two-hundred and fifty years.
Emerich de Vattel was a Swiss philosopher, diplomat, and legal expert who lived from 1714 – 1767, and whose theories laid the foundation of modern international law and political philosophy. Vattel’s book on the Law of Nations was released in 1758; in English, The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law Applied to the Conduct and to the Affairs of Nations and of Sovereigns.
Vattel’s book established many time honored standards of natural law recognized the world over and it is an historical reference regarding the Constitutional eligibility requirement for the offices of President and Vice President, Natural Born Citizen, found in Article II – Section I – Clause V.
“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.”
Vattel confirms in clear concise language what a “natural-born citizen” of a nation is…
“The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent.”
In other words, by “nature’s law” - not by way of man-made statute. In fact, unalienable by way of man-made statute, as mans law cannot alter or overcome the laws of nature. This is in fact “international law” via the Law of Nations. It is not enough that a sovereign nation identify its citizens. Other nations must recognize the rights of sovereign citizens from foreign lands.
Unconfirmed Obama Scenarios
- Obama was not born in Hawaii, but rather Kenya. He would in this case be a “naturalized” citizen (IF) he went through the standard US Naturalization process. He would in no way be a “natural-born citizen” in this possible scenario. Obama has thus far refused to prove beyond any doubt that he was born in Hawaii.
- Obama was born in Hawaii, but to a US mother and Kenyan Father. In this possible scenario, Obama could be a “native-born” citizen of the US. He would certainly be a “natural-born” citizen of Kenya, due to the birthrights of his father. This would make Obama a “dual citizen” with “divided” national loyalties. On this basis, he would not pass the test for office, but would be the poster-child for why the natural-born citizen clause exists.
- Following scenario (1) or (2), Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetoro. In this case, Obama’s mother would have exchanged his US claim to citizenship for citizenship of Indonesia, as the adoptive son of Lolo Soetoro, for which he has at times claimed the name “Barry Soetoro,” citizen of Indonesia. Even if Obama had endured a naturalization process to return to US citizenship status, he would then be a “naturalized-citizen” rather than a “natural-born” citizen eligible for the office he currently holds.
As the term “citizen” is very broad and includes “naturalized” citizens, it is NOT the requirement for the office of president or vice president.
As the term “native-born” relates only to “place of birth,” and is also not the stated requirement for the Oval Office mentioned in Article II – Section I, it has no bearing on the matter of Obama’s eligibility for office.
Our Founding Fathers could not have been any more specific about the requirements for the office of president, “NO PERSON except a NATURAL-BORN Citizen.” It isn’t their fault that too many Americans don’t care about or can’t comprehend this term or the purpose behind it today.
Vattel could not have been any more clear about the definition of “natural-born citizen,” “I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
The 14th Amendment Obama Defense
The Dred Scott Decision - was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants —whether or not they were slaves—were not protected by the Constitution.
Elks Vs Wilkins (1872) - was an issue concerning “native born” Indian’s born on Indian reservations and whether or not their loyalty to the Indian tribe was enough to deny them US citizenship, unrelated to the subject of natural born citizenship and Article II.
Slaughterhouse Cases (1872) was a case on the 14th Amendments, once again, regarding immigration and naturalization, which of course does not pertain to natural born citizens at all.
Minor vs Happersett (1874) - is another 14th Amendment case, regarding women’s right to vote, as equal “citizens.”
US Vs Wong Kim Ark (1898) - was a case of “native born citizenship” - when both parents were immigrants from China, naturalized US citizens who gave birth to a son on US soil before returning to China. The son was held up upon returning from a trip to China, but was granted re-entry as a “native-born” citizen, having been born on US soil to two immigrant parents. Once again, immigration and no relationship whatsoever to natural born citizenship.
Perkins Vs Elg (1939) - also a ruling on “acquired citizenship” for children of alien parentage…. immigration and naturalization.
Schneider Vs Rusk (1964) - was a 5th Amendment case, relative passport and travel rights to immigrant citizens…
Rogers Vs Bellei (1971) - Appellee challenges the constitutionality of § 301(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which provides that one who acquires United States citizenship by virtue of having been born abroad to parents, one of whom is an American citizen, who has met certain residence requirements, shall lose his citizenship unless he resides in this country continuously for five years between the ages of 14 and 28.
Now, every case listed is completely unrelated to natural born citizen and Article II of the Constitution. All of them were cases revolving around immigration and naturalization laws.
So, are the people ignorant or unable to read? Or are they simply willing to stretch the truth, assuming that you won’t bother to check their facts?
The Bottom Line on Obama
He is NOT a “natural-born citizen” of the United States of America, no matter which Obot propaganda argument you choose to buy. He can, therefore, not legally hold the office of President or Vice President of the United States and all laws and orders given while he fraudulently holds that office are null and void.
Legal US citizens or sovereign states are NOT obligated to follow illegal laws from a fraudulent resident of the people’s White House. Obama has “no constitutional standing” as an “undocumented resident” of the Oval Office.
Running Out of Options
With each passing day, our nation is being driven deeper and deeper into irreversible disaster. Obama & Co. have no intention of backing up or backing off their anti-American agenda of global Marxism via American assets.
The courts have never ruled on Obama’s constitutional standing. In fact, they have refused to hear evidence from the people on the matter, or force Obama to unseal all of his records to answer legitimate questions coming from a growing number of US citizens.
Before only violent options for upholding the rule of law remain, the people MUST find a peaceful means by which to force Obama to become “transparent.”
Vattel’s book on the Law of Nations (internationally recognized citizenship laws) was released in 1758. Unlike modern society, many of our Founding Fathers were quite familiar with the language of the original book. They did not need to wait for English translation in order to read or understand the book, or the Law of Nations at the foundation of Vattel’s book.
For the record, pretty much all informed people recognize Vattel’s writings as the authority on the subject, even those who have trouble understanding what he wrote and don’t agree with his opinions. He was in fact a well-known “legal scholar” of that era, one that most Founding Fathers were quite familiar with.
The book was released eighteen years before our Declaration of Independence and twenty-nine years before those words “natural-born citizen” appeared in Article II of our US Constitution.
Our Founders were VERY well read individuals.
Further, it is NOT enough for each nation to recognize only their own citizens. Other nations MUST recognize and respect the sovereign citizens and related rights of other nations, hence the purpose for the Law of Nations, or a set standard recognized by all civilized nations.
Cut off from all peaceful remedies, I hate to think of what happens when patriotic American souls take matters into their own hands.
One thing is certain, however… It is NOT within the U.S. DNA to live in fear of our government for very long. Americans prefer peace, but will in the end defend freedom, liberty, and our rule of law at any cost. We will not leave this nation in ruins for future generations. We hate tyranny worse than death…
I call upon all peace-loving patriots to find a peaceful solution before only violent solutions remain.
There is no such thing as a “pro-war” American citizen. There are only “pro-American” citizens unwilling to exchange their freedom and liberty for a moment of faux temporary peace.
May God guide the hearts, minds and hands of all patriots, in this time of great national challenge.