RED ALERT!!! Massive cover-up underway in the White House! Natural Born Citizen Definition SCRUBBED FROM ALL ONLINE DICTIONARIES!!!

Again here ladies and gentleman the big link to this is the ssn.....keep your eyes on the ball....it all ties together, amazing thread

Remember the flap a few years ago to not call illegal aliens by such a term, and how it was decreed they should henceforth be known as???

MIGRANT WORKERS.

The arguement then was that they were not "aliens."

Aliens then meant, at that time, that which was not born of the land.

They were so insulted by the definition they thought it meant "not of this earth" (extraterrestrials) so therefore it was made to look politically correct by the term "migrant workers."

This term still is not a correct definition of those foreigners who squat on US soil, sorry to say.

It was on the agenda of Bush and as well, now with Obama, to change our immigration laws.

The real problems are that the laws we have in place are fine but the US Government chose not to enforce them for the sake of workers to lower wages and to entice illegal aliens the world over to come to America to work.

Classic!!

You're the one who needs to
If you believe we actually killed him last week. Sorry but my bs meter went off the charts when I got to that part.

Did you know:

Only six other U.S. presidents had a foreign-born parent. Mr. Obama will be the first in nearly ninety years, since President Herbert Hoover was inaugurated in 1929.

Andrew Jackson (1829-1837) is the only president born of two immigrants, both Irish. Presidents with one immigrant parent are Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809), whose mother was born in England, James Buchanan (1857-1861) and Chester Arthur (1881-1885), both of whom had Irish fathers, and Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) and Herbert Hoover (1929-1933), whose mothers were born respectively in England and Canada.

[link to community.myvoa.com]

More from the United States Supreme Court:

<snip>
The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

... Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says:

“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

In this case, Wong Kim Ark, the son of 2 resident Chinese aliens, claimed U.S. Citizenship and was vindicated by the court on the basis of the 14th Amendment. In this case the Justice Gray gave the opinion of the court. On p. 168-9 of the record, He cites approvingly the decision in Minor vs. Happersett:

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

</snip> read more here: [link to www.thepostemail.com]

.


OP,

In the last 150 years, Congress has tried -- and failed --
nearly 30 times to define National-born Citizen.


The last attempt was in 2004, with "S. 2128: Natural
Born Citizen Act", which like all its predecessors
never made it out of committee.


It's OBVIOUS that Congress believes Natural-born Citizen
currently requires TWO parents to be U.S. Citizens, and that
"natural born Citizen" means something DIFFERENT when applied
to the Constitutional requirement to be President (as opposed to
how the term might be derived from granted naturalized Citizenship).


Look at the language of the 2004 Bill: [link to www.govtrack.us]

108th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 2128

To define the term ‘natural born Citizen’ as used in the
Constitution of the United States to establish eligibility
for the Office of President.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 25, 2004

To define the term ‘natural born Citizen’ as used in the
Constitution of the United States to establish eligibility
for the Office of President.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘Natural Born Citizen Act’.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF ‘NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’.

(a) IN GENERAL- Congress finds and declares that the term
‘natural born Citizen’ in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5
of the Constitution of the United States means--

(1) any person born in the United States and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof; and

(2) any person born outside the United States--

(A) who derives citizenship at birth from a United States
citizen parent or parents pursuant to an Act of Congress; or

(B) who is adopted by 18 years of age by a United States
citizen parent or parents who are otherwise eligible to
transmit citizenship to a biological child pursuant to an
Act of Congress.

(b) UNITED STATES- In this section, the term ‘United
States’, when used in a geographic sense, means the several
States of the United States and the District of Columbia.

.

The exact wording of article two,

"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."

----------------

notice the or, meaning a different clasification from natural born citizen

[link to www.wordiq.com]

Natural-born citizen - Definition

In general, a natural-born citizen of a country is someone who is legally recognized as that country's citizen as of the moment of birth, rather than by acquiring citizenship afterwards through naturalization.

In the United States, a person is considered to be born a citizen either due to place of birth within U.S. territorial jurisdiction (jus soli) or through descent from a U.S. citizen (jus sanguinis), or through some combination of those two elements.

"Natural born citizen" as presidential qualification
The special term "natural born Citizen" is used in particular as a requirement for eligibility to serve as President or Vice-President of the United States. Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution states that:

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.
The fourteenth amendment to the United State Constitution provides an additional source of constitutional doctrine that emphasizes birth "in the United States" and subjection to U.S. jurisdiction at the time of birth, as the defining elements of citizenship (other than citizenship by naturalization):

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. . ." Amendment XIV, section 1.
However, the full text of the fourteenth amendment does not mention the phrase "natural-born citizen" nor does it address Presidential qualifications in any way and thus provides little guidance in this matter. In fact, the phrase "natural born Citizen" isn't defined anywhere in the Constitution and its interpretation has never been squarely the subject of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling. Significantly, however, Congress, in which a number of Framers sat, provided in the Naturalization Act of 1790 that "the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, . . . shall be considered as natural born citizens. . . ." This strongly suggests that the framers of the Constitution understood this phrase to refer to citizenship acquired at birth (whether or not that birth had taken place on U.S. soil).

The current effective federal statute, Title 8, Section 1401 ( [link to frwebgate.access.gpo.gov] first passed by Congress on June 27, 1952 and last amended on October 25, 1994, of the U.S. Code provides details on the circumstances under which persons are legally recognized by the United States to be "nationals and citizens of the United States at birth".

Some legal experts interpret "natural-born citizen" to mean a "citizen at birth." Under one such interpretation, anyone who is duly recognized as a "citizen at birth" persuant to the requirements of Title 8, Section 1401 of the U.S. Code would be considered eligible for the Presidency or Vice-Presidency.

However, this statutory argument is weakened by the following considerations:

Congress probably did not intend to address presidential qualifications in the statute codified at 8 U.S.C. Section 1401, because the law actually passed by Congress does not purport to relate to the "natural born Citizen" qualification for president under Article II; and
Even assuming that it was the intent of Congress to define the constitutional qualification "natural born Citizen," an enactment by Congress would be insufficient to change the Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court's reasoning in United States v. Won Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)(which held that a person born within the jurisdiction of the U.S. but to noncitizens is thereby automatically a citizen) has been viewed by some legal scholars as indicating that a person born abroad, even to parents of U.S. citizens, does not constitue a "natural born" citizen. Likewise, Weedin v. Chin Bow, 274 U.S. 657, 663 (1927) recites that "under the common law which applied in his country, the children of citizens born abroad were not citizens but were aliens." But no Supreme Court case has yet squarely addressed what "natural born Citizen" means in the context of Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.

The only way for this issue to be conclusively determined would be for the United States Supreme Court to decide this precise question in an actual case. This means that someone who was born abroad, but who held U.S. citizenship from birth through a parent, would have to run for the presidency and be challenged, and then the case would have to make its way to the Supreme Court for a decision.

Throughout American history, several persons born abroad to U.S. citizen parents have sought the Presidency and none were challenged on their eligibility during their election campaigns. The most recent example of such a person was John McCain, born in Panama, who sought the Republican nomination for President in 2000. However, Senator McCain was actually born in the Panama Canal Zone, which means that he was born in a territory subject to United States jurisdiction. It seems likely that a person born on a U.S.-flag boat, or born in a territory under U.S. jurisdiction (for example, Barry Goldwater, who was born in Arizona before it became a state), or possibly even a person born in a U.S. embassy or consular office inside another country, would be included as "natural-born," under the legal fiction that a U.S. consulate is within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

Of historical note, Martin Van Buren was actually the first "natural born citizen" to become President. Prior Presidents had been born British subjects and were not "natural-born Citizens" but were eligible because they qualified by being "a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution."

[link to www.wordiq.com]

Official:

[link to www.archives.gov]

And on the site [link to constitution.org] (which loads fine, and I've used before).

But strangely, when you click on the link to the actual Constitution on the site [link to www.constitution.org] you get:

Warning: Something's Not Right Here!

www.constitution.org contains content from globalpoweringgathering.com, a site known to distribute malware.

Your computer might catch a virus if you visit this site.

Google has found malicious software may be installed onto your computer if you proceed.

If you've visited this site in the past or you trust this site, it's possible that it has just recently been compromised by a hacker.

You should not proceed, and perhaps try again tomorrow or go somewhere else.

And a warning from Eset that it's blocked the HTML/ScrInject.B.Gen virus.

On Constitution.org???



Last Edited by ScrumpTheTexan on 05/06/2011 12:06 AM

yes, it would be a citizen
but, not from two married U.S. citizens who are the parents

it would be a citizen because only the U.S. mother is claimed as the parent

whether it would be a natural born citizen is a different matter -- maybe because there is only one parent claiming the child and that parent is a U.S. citizen then yes, it would probably be a natural born citizen, too.

what folks are not realizing is that "citizen" and "natural born citizen" are not necessarily the same definition.

My copy is from '95 and doesn't define it either.

If the immigrant parents naturalized, then they became naturalized Citizens, making their subsequent children natural born Citizens, if born on US soil.

Well they can't scrub all the books with this information which are located worldwide.

Unfortunately for those pieces of poop...many people actually already looked these terms up already. I WOULD get incredibly angry about this, but I think that is their goal and they FEED on emotions. Did any of you foreigners actually look the terms up out of curiosity? NOW do you see why so many Americans detest that POS?

Last Edited by weegie on 05/06/2011 12:06 AM

This information we learn in school it is written in the textbooks.

.


If Big Brother had the internet in 1984
it would have been so much easier to rewrite history.



.

"For instance, Mexicans who give birth to a child right after they swim the Rio Grande have natural born citizens as babies. They call them anchor babies and they are natural born citizens."


Wrong....those who swim the Rio Grande and give birth to babies..here...those babies are Called: NATIVE BORN, NOT "NATURAL BORN"----There is a difference. Natural Born means BOTH parents hold citizenship.

Good thing I read the red amendment book, it's the father not the mother that must be a US born citizen for Obama to be a natural born citizen.

I checked Wayback Machine at archive.org and none of the dictionary references posted I checked came up.

I didn't try checking them all though, I gave up after 5 or so.

Last Edited by izezi on 05/06/2011 12:09 AM

i have caught Google doing this a few times where i thought Google was just trying to keep people away from hot potato information. another form of google censorship.

Could you please tone it down with the death/cancer stuff?
Waay too angry-it could be a personal problem?
IF this is true, it isn't even the fault of Obama you know. If it is true, can't you imagine what a terrible position he really would be in?
Also, there are many people who have suffered from cancer in one way or another, (lost loved-ones or suffered from it...), and seeing someone cursed with it tends to make people wonder/ or even think that they have suffered from cancer because they deserved it.-
Cancer is horrible and wishing it on people that you are angry-with condemns everyone who has been afflicted by it in my opinion.

OP has an interesting and compelling-maybe important topic here. Only on page 4 but it has veered-away from the idea that someone/something is changing the truth/facts right before our eyes.

Even the question of The President's birth is irrelevant to the topic, except for possible motive for this particular instance of reverse-propaganda, or info.-scrubbing, censorship, whatever it is called these days.

I'm wondering if there is an effort to derail this topic with the intense anger? It makes me personally uncomfortable seeing it and this topic deserves better.

Please stop saying that. I can't disagree with your feelings more on this. Don't pray for ANYONES death.

I'm sick of seeing you post this repeatedly on my thread, so please stop.

Stop trying to argue Obama's case here troll. We know what you are, and that you will never agree with the truth even though you know it to be so.

Face it, the idiots on Capitol Hill screwed up, and are in absolute cover mode now - with you likely being a part of that. Neat thing is that it's gonna get even more fun soon when Corsi's book is released (which is what started this whole thing).

Obama and his ilk have been lying for so long, I don't think they even know how to tell the truth. Unfortunately for them, there's enough of us that do...

We are in the MATRIX.

why do you peeps give a shit?? really?? youre the same fucking tards preaching that it doesnt matter who the president is anyway.???

i get it youre racist and dont want a black pres, get over it already. maybe put down the fuckin twinkies next election, roll off your fat ass, and waddle into a voting booth. til then shut the fuck up

OP Oxford still does have a definition for "natural born".

[link to oxforddictionaries.com]

So have I... they've become the Info-Police.

Just tried the two i have in my bookmarks and the definition is there:
[link to www.answers.com]

[link to encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com]

You people really need to make up your minds on this.

Foreign parents have child on US soil = citizen ('anchor baby')

American parents have child on foreign soil = citizen (McCain)

Single mother, American, has child anywhere in the world = no-mans-land?

Given above example of US woman on vacation in Paris with no clue as to who the father is. Her child is thus condemned to second-class citizenship for the rest of his/her life?

You can't have it both ways. Birtherism + anchor baby Doom don't play well together.