Georgia Judge Rules Children of Foreigners Can Become President

Last week, a Georgia judge ruled in favor of Barack Obama’s “natural born” status based on an Indiana court case Arkney v. Governor. Judge Michael M. Malihi stated this in his decision:

Indiana court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens regardless of the citizens of their parents.

So basically, any foreigner who happens to squat on American soil even though they have no allegiance to this country -- maybe even foster hatred of our institutions and peoples -- their child can become president of the United States. In other words, a terrorist like Anwar al-Awlaki has every right to become commander-in-chief of our armed forces. Isn’t that comforting?

Anwar al-Awlaki’s parents were Yemeni citizens who came to the United States on student visas. Anwar just happened to be born in New Mexico. Does anyone doubt the animosity this man had for his “country?” Does anyone doubt that this man wanted to kill his “fellow countrymen?”

A rogue ruling on the 14th Amendment has set a dangerous precedent and now we have judges forsaking our founding fathers vision of natural law and rights. And because of precedent (stare decisis) we have invited a nest of vipers to conspire and obtain one of the highest offices in the country.

Let’s give a golf clap to the Indiana and Georgia courts for opening the door wider for a future president Anwar al-Awlaki. Their rulings give a whole new meaning to “We are the world. We are the children.”


Source: http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/a/anwar_al_awlaki/index.html

http://constitution.org/col/0610staredrift.htm

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/judge-says-obama-can-be-on-georgia-ballot/

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_KEK8-LWmzhNWQ4MmI2ZGUtZDMwYi00ZGU4LTkxZTUtZjNkNjNhOGY2YWQ4&hl=en_US

Birth Right Citizenship is the Bane of the United States

Birth right citizenship is the bane of the United States. And you don’t have to look any further than Anwar al-Awlaki. His parents are Yemeni citizens who were granted student visas in the early 70's. Upon their short stay in America they gave birth to a Mohammedan terrorist. The Awlakis had no allegiance to the United States and neither did their son. How could this happen? Why of course, it is the 14th Amendment.

The professor in the above video demonstrates that the 14th Amendment has been bastardized. It is folly to allow children of foreigners to become citizens of the United States just because they were born on American soil. There is danger in allowing this kind of policy to exist.

American culture is imbued with liberty, responsibility and self-governance. We can’t allow a flood of illegal aliens from the third world into our country who have no idea what that means. To do so is to invite not only parasites, but potential predators who will devour those of us who respect limited government. Look at what is happening with organizations like La Raza. They are openly advocating for the overthrow of our government.

The professor provided a number of solutions to rid us of birth right citizenship. Regrettably, he didn’t propose the abolition of the 14th Amendment.

Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan Shoud Not be Considered American Citizens

A great debate has sprung about the legality of the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan: two sworn enemies of the United States that have incited mass murder. Civil libertarians and some constitutional scholars have claimed the Obama administrations execution of two “American citizens” is a violation of the Constitution:

“The US Government has seized and exercised exactly the power the Fifth Amendment was designed to bar (‘No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law’), and did so in a way that almost certainly violates core First Amendment protections,” writes Glenn Greenwald, a former constitutional law and civil rights litigator, in his Salon column.

“This is a program under which American citizens far from any battlefield can be executed by their own government without judicial process, and on the basis of standards and evidence that are kept secret not just from the public but from the courts,” says Jameel Jaffer of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), one party in a lawsuit seeking to prevent targeted killings.

“The government's authority to use lethal force against its own citizens should be limited to circumstances in which the threat to life is concrete, specific, and imminent,” he said in a statement Friday. “It is a mistake to invest the President – any President – with the unreviewable power to kill any American whom he deems to present a threat to the country.”

The premise of these civil libertarians is based on American citizenship. I contend that neither al-Awlaki nor Samir Khan were citizens of the United States at the time of their execution.

Anwar al-Awlaki’s parents are Yemeni citizens who were granted student visas. During their brief stay in the United States they gave birth to a son. Because of a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment by the Supreme Court and a complete bastardization of Natural Law, citizenship was conferred unto this Mohammedan. It is perverse and unnatural to politically separate a child from his parents. Anwar al-Awlaki was a Yemeni citizen at the time of his birth to his death.

Samir Khan was Saudi born. He and his family immigrated to New York City where they became naturalized citizens. Later they moved to Charlotte, North Carolina where Samir started a blog inciting terrorism on American Citizens. He then fled to Yemen. These are the words of Samir Khan:

“I am a traitor to America, because my religion requires me to be. We pledge to wage jihad for the rest of our lives, until either we implant Islam all over the world or meet our Lord as bearers of Islam.”

Samir Khan never took his oath seriously. He proclaimed himself a traitor, in essence renouncing his citizenship.

So to sum it up: Anwar al-Awlaki should never have been considered a citizen to begin with, and Samir Khan renounced his. They made allegiance with sworn enemies of the United States, thus making them enemy combatants and viable targets.

Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/1001/Anwar-al-Awlaki-Is-killing-US-born-terror-suspects-legal

http://www.newsmax.com/JamesWalsh/Birthright-Citizenship-security-SupremeCourt/2010/10/25/id/374772

Anwar al-Awlaki and the 14th Amendment

The life and death of Anwar al-Awlaki should bring about a debate of what constitutes American citizenship. Awlaki’s parents are Yemini citizens who came to New Mexico on student visas. And during their brief stay in the United States gave birth to a future terrorist who could claim citizenship because of a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment.

The 14th is a post Civil War amendment that was designed to confer citizenship and all rights and privileges thereof to ex-slaves and their progeny. By no means was it designed to confer citizenship to those whose parents are foreigners:

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article

And to have a better understanding of the jurisdiction clause in the amendment, Senator Jacob Howard spelled out the intent in 1866:

"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."

We no longer have to worry about states denying ex-slaves due process and equal protection of the law. The 13th Amendment has abolished that heinous institution for all times. And the nation is no longer saddled with Civil War debt as outlined in Section Four.

The 14th Amendment has served its purpose. Now it is time to repeal it.


Source: http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html