Soldier doubts eligibility, defies president's orders

veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by crimzy
http:///forum/post/2967816
Then feel free to argue against his politics. But this baseless claim that he is deemed an imposter until he proves otherwise... this moron soldier may as well claim that he is a child molester, KKK member, or in a street gang until he proves otherwise.
I think that this soldier is either a coward or a racist... JMO
It's just funny to me that the Obama opposition rarely talks about his politics... remember those clips of people calling him a terrorist, or the press misspelling his name to be "Osama"... or our dear friend Oscardeuce implying that he is a Nazi...

I don't care if people like Obama or not, but please, please people... MAKE AN INTELLIGENT ARGUMENT ABOUT THE MAN OR HIS POLICIES!! That would be quite a refreshing change.

Im not hear to argue his politics,there is nothing to argue .THEY SUCK!
Now to the soldier in question, is this fact or just your opinion because you dont agree with it.Do you know that he is a coward or a racist?Maybe hes black,maybe he has earned a Purple Heart or maybe he takes the oath he swore seriously.
Here are some more baseless claims that the courts are contemplating hearing including the Supreme Court.
It appears some state lawmakers have some Conspiracy Theory's as well.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=88646
 
moprint

moprint

Member
Crimzy have you served in the military? I mean you personally not your dad, uncle, or your former room mates cousin. Because if you have not you have no place to call this person a coward or anything except sir. The U.S.A. armed forces are made up of volunters and should be shown some respect. So unless you have served please refrain from calling him a coward or anything else unrespectfull. You can question what he is doing that is your right, which the people in uniform insure you keep.
 
socal57che

socal57che

Active Member
socal57che

socal57che

Active Member
I also believe that Mr Easterling will reside in Kansas for a long, long time. Just what order from the Commander in Chief did he refuse? Looks like a refusal of any order, but I'm not there so I don't know exactly what he refused to do. Some of the orders are remaining orders from the former Commander. At least it seems that way to me.
 
tank a holic

tank a holic

Active Member
what i think is sad is the fact that instead of saying
"You know this soldier has a valid point even though I support Obama I also think he should prove eligibility"
you guys say
"$&@* that soldier lock him up he's an anarchist, that's treason, its mutiny throw away the key"
I think you all should think about this before you tie the noose around the soldiers neck and say
"I support you Mr. Obama so why not just show the proof and lets move on....."
Think what a moron you'll feel like when you find out the soldier was right.....

will you mend the wounds your rope left??
 
socal57che

socal57che

Active Member
Nobody has raised the issue of Obama's Indonesian citizenship. Indonesia evidently only allows single citizenship. He was an Indonesian citizen while traveling abroad to Pakistan and India. Even if he reapplied for US citizenship, he would be a "naturalized" citizen, NOT a "natural born" citizen. (the latter of which is required for elegibility to be President of the United States)
I still find it hard to believe that the Clintonites did not pursue this matter. That is the most compelling evidence regardless of which side you may be on.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member

Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/2967805
They can enter and leave as they wish...Hellooooo arent you paying attention.They swap SS# at the boarder coming and going.
It wasnt necessary and if it where i would think they would not hesitate to produce proof.
Helloooo again, havent you been paying attention.President Obamas own party questions his status, until he became President anyway.
Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1
"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."
So it dosent matter what the nationality of his mother or father is.
Im not even going to read or respond to WIKI
So now every Mexican citizen has a SS#? Give me a break. You make it sound like anyone who wants a passport can get one. I seriously hope you're being sarcastic.
Again, why is it necessary for Obama, but not for any other previous President? Hawaii is a STATE, Texas is a STATE. So if you want Obama to show proof of his birth, although it's been confirmed he was born in a STATE, the go ask Bush for his birth certificate since he was also born in a STATE.
Helloooo, being born in Hawaii would fulfill the qualifications of 'natural born citizen'.
Dude, where did you learn history? It doesn't matter what nationality his mother or father is? Take a look at this statement:
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
Anyone born inside the United States *
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
BTW, theis isn't from 'Wiki', but from http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member

Originally Posted by socal57che
http:///forum/post/2967952
Nobody has raised the issue of Obama's Indonesian citizenship. Indonesia evidently only allows single citizenship. He was an Indonesian citizen while traveling abroad to Pakistan and India. Even if he reapplied for US citizenship, he would be a "naturalized" citizen, NOT a "natural born" citizen. (the latter of which is required for elegibility to be President of the United States)
I still find it hard to believe that the Clintonites did not pursue this matter. That is the most compelling evidence regardless of which side you may be on.
Indonesia apparently only recognizes it's own citizenship. That has nothing to do with his US citizenship, unless Obama denounced that, which I find it hard to believe he would.
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2968042
So now every Mexican citizen has a SS#? Give me a break. You make it sound like anyone who wants a passport can get one. I seriously hope you're being sarcastic.
Again, why is it necessary for Obama, but not for any other previous President? Hawaii is a STATE, Texas is a STATE. So if you want Obama to show proof of his birth, although it's been confirmed he was born in a STATE, the go ask Bush for his birth certificate since he was also born in a STATE.
Helloooo, being born in Hawaii would fulfill the qualifications of 'natural born citizen'.
Dude, where did you learn history? It doesn't matter what nationality his mother or father is? Take a look at this statement:
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
Anyone born inside the United States *
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
BTW, theis isn't from 'Wiki', but from http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
No im not being sarcastic,Mexican Nationals here in Chicago use other peoples SS# to work and to get documentation.Chicago is a safe haven city,im a Union carpenter and see tons and tons of Mexican Nationals getting sent off jobs because they are either A. Without a SS# B. more than one person on the job is using the same SS#.
For clarification Being Naturalized and being Natural born are to separate definitions:
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;
For instance The Govenator Shwarzenegger although he is a citizen of the USA can not run for President of the United States
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Obama admits he was a British Citizen at birth and therefore, just like the Framers, he was not a “natural born citizen” of the United States
The Framers distinguised between”natural born Citizens” and all other “Citizens”. And that’s why it’s important to note the 14th Amendment only confers the title of “Citizen”, not “natural born Citizen”. The Framers were Citizens, but they weren’t natural born Citizens. They put the stigma of not being natural born Citizens on themselves by law.
[...]
The Framers were not natural born citizens because, “at birth” they were all British citizens. That’s why they included a grandfather clause in Article 2, Section 1. The Framers wanted to make themselves eligible to be President, but they didn’t want future generations to be Governed by a Commander In Chief who had split loyalty to another Country. They recognized that they were NOT “Natural Born Citizens”, because “at birth” they were subject to the British Crown as was Barack Obama.
The Framers were not comfortable with the possibility of future generations of Presidents being born under the jurisdiction of Foreign Powers. The Framers declared themselves not eligible to be President as “Natural Born Citizens” so they wrote the grandfather clause in for a limited exception.
Nobody alive today can claim eligibility to be President under the grandfather clause since nobody alive today was a citizen of the US at the time the Constitution was adopted.
Note, Article 2, Section 1 of our Constitution does not allow for dual citizenship, in fact, the Framers of our Constitution went out of their way to make sure that no person serving as President of these United States would have to suffer conflicting loyalties to more than one country. It has already been suggested that Barack has demonstrated divided loyalties because of his association with Raila Odinga in Kenya.
Why this is important; according to Fact Check, Obama was both a British Citizen and U.S. citizen, thereby making him ineligible to be POTUS.
http://hillarynme.wordpress.com/2008...n-plain-sight/
 
gypsana

gypsana

Active Member
Sorry if I missed this point being brought up already. The document present was not a birth certificate, it is a certificate of live birth, which you can obtain even if you were born outside of the US. Two other issues: Why would his Grandma in Kenya say she witnessed his birth and why is Mombasa Imam claiming he was born in Kenya? If he was born in the US where is his birth certificate?
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by crimzy
http:///forum/post/2967507
Now I'm confused... so the FACTS posted by GeriDoc and Bionicarm are not enough to convince the opposition... that does show that they (you) are, in fact, nothing more than whiny conspiracy theorists. Have you ever seen John McCain's or George Bush's birth certificates.
I was originally under the impression that the birth certificate was not released. But the link posts a picture of it!! What more can Obama do? You may claim that this "could" be a fake, but do you have any evidence showing that it is a fake? If not then this is just more conspiratorial nonsense who have serious underlying objections to Obama being our president.
In short, in view of the evidence supporting his citizenship, where is your evidence showing that he is NOT a citizen?
I posted that stuff months ago. I can't believe it's still an issue.
I can't believe people really think the Democrats would have put him up as the nominee if there was a serious question about his eligibility. Do you think the RNC would have pulled it out as an October surprise if they had something to show he wasn't a citizen.
I think the campaign deliberately refused to release the birth certificate like they should have just to stirr the pot and distract from real issues he was vulnerable on.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2968048
Indonesia apparently only recognizes it's own citizenship. That has nothing to do with his US citizenship, unless Obama denounced that, which I find it hard to believe he would.
No, It's we citizens who denounce Obama
 
mpdan

mpdan

Member
crimzy i know court marshall is different than regular law but if brought to trial wouldnt there have to be proof of birth if for him to be found guilty for any kind of slander wouldnt there need to be proof of the birth certificate? idk just thought it made sence i dont really care if it it shown but just a legal question
 
tank a holic

tank a holic

Active Member
yes court martial is different from civil court
and I don't think it's slander he's worried about
it's Disrespecting an officer and failure to follow orders
Although I feel he is (somewhat) justified in asking weather he is or is not qualified
 
mpdan

mpdan

Member
i didnt see in the article that he is not following orders nor is he questioning orders only the birth certificate im digging though my ARs to see if i can find something that goes with this topic will post if i find something
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top