What if Hawaii was not state in 1961? Is President Obama still a lawful President? I

On November 23, 1993, President Clinton signed United States Public Law 103-150, which not only acknowledged the illegal actions committed by the United States in the overthrow of the legitimate government of Hawaii, but also that the Hawaiian people never surrendered their sovereignty.

The latter is the most important part of United States Public Law 103-150 for it makes it quite clear that the Hawaiian people never legally ceased to be a sovereign separate independent nation. There is no argument that can change that fact.

United States Public Law 103-150, despite its polite language, is an official admission that the government of the United States illegally occupies the territory of the Hawaiian people.

In 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii's statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations' charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding. (The same is true of the Alaska plebiscite).

In a world where nations are as governed by laws as are men, Hawaii is not and has never legally been a part of the United States. Hawaii was stolen from the Hawaiian people, and they want it back.

So what does this mean, even if Barry Soetoro (Obama) was born in Hawaii 1961, Hawaii wasn't legally a State of the United States but a sovereign independent nation. Barry Soetoro (Obama)is not a natural born citizen. Thank you Bill Clinton.


See Elk v. Wilkins, 83 U.S. 36 (1872)

The Court denied Elk, a Native American, the right to vote as a US citizen even though he was born on US soil, because he was born on an Indian Reservation. Elk was not born subject to the jurisdiction of the US, because he “owed immediate allegiance to” his tribe, a vassal or quasi-nation, and not to the United States. The Court held Elk was not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States at birth.