We have seen that Obama cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen” because when hewas born, regardless of what place that may be, he was not born to a United States citizenfather and mother. The "natural born Citizen" clause of our U.S. Constitutionrequiresthat both of the child’s parents be U.S. Citizensat the time of birth. Rather, if Obama wasborn in Hawaii as he claims, then under the liberalized and questionable meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” he can be a born Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States” and a “citizen of the United States at birth” under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1401(a). Again, that citizenship status does not make him an Article II “natural born Citizen.”But what would Obama's citizenship status be if he was not born in the United States?First, let us examine why there is still existing doubts as to whether Obama was born inHawaii. Second, let us examine what law would apply to determine Obama’s citizenshipstatus should he not be born in Hawaii or any other part of the United States and what hiscitizenship status would be under that law.These are the reasons for the existing doubts regarding Obama's place of birth:1. What Obama or some other unknown person posted on the internet is not a birthcertificate (BC). Rather, he/she posted a digital image and picture of a questionable"certification of live birth" (COLB) which at best is only prima facie evidence of theplace of his birth. The prima facie value of this document fails in light of numerousexisting factual circumstances which contradict the COLB's validity and which have notbeen adequately explained by Obama.
2. According to Obama and his Press Secretary, Mr. Gibbs, this digital document alone issupposed to allow Obama to qualify to be President of the United States and Commanderin Chief of the Military. According to them, this electronic image alone is sufficient toprove that Obama is a U.S. citizen and therefore qualified to have the full power of theexecutive vested in him. It is unbelievable that Obama would expect the American peopleto grant him such license over their lives based simply upon an electronic image on acomputer screen. It is even more unbelievable that the Electoral College, our Congress,political institutions, security forces, and media would allow him to get away with it. Thisdocument, which in its paper form is undoubtedly a legal document, has no probativevalue given that it was posted by some unknown person on the internet as a digital imagewithout following any prescribed electronic media security protocols. We know thatdigital images can be easily manipulated through computer technology. Seehttp://technology.findlaw.com/articles/01102/010555.htmlfor an explanation of the needto follow defined federal and state standards when it comes to electronic/digitalinformation transmittal of legal documents. If Obama expects this digital image of aCOLB to have such unprecedented value which allows him to be President of the UnitedStates, then he should at least show that the electronic image he posted meetselectronic/digital security standards.3. While not officially confirmed, the authenticity of the COLB computer image has beenquestioned by at least two digital image experts who have concluded that the COLBimage is a forgery.4. Obama says he was born in a hospital. A birth certificate provides the name of thehospital where the birth occurred and the name of the doctor delivering the baby. TheCOLB does not have this vital corroborating information.5. The key point that Obama supporters are redirecting attention away from is that theunderlying foundational information supporting his Certification of Live Birth isunknown. This unknown information may not matter much when it comes to an ordinaryperson. But for someone running for President of the United States and currently sittingin that Office it is of crucial importance.6. When Obama was born in 1961, Hawaii had in effect the Certificate of Hawaiian BirthProgram which it established in 1911 and which it terminated in 1972. Someone couldunder Act 96 get a certificate claiming a Hawaiian birth even if he was physically born ina foreign country by an adult or parent falsely claiming to the director of health that hewas born in Hawaii when in fact he was born abroad. Hence, because of the contradictoryevidence that exists such as statements made by relatives and newspaper reporters inKenya and elsewhere regarding where he was born, plaintiffs are entitled to pierce thealleged COLB and examine the file that is in the possession of the Hawaiian Secretary of State which may contain a sworn application/petition in which some party set forthcircumstantially all the facts upon which the application rested and supporting sworn
affidavits of witnesses. The file could also contain the results of the Secretary or hisdesignee examinations under oath of the applicant or other person who may have beencognizant of the alleged facts regarding the application/petition along with otherdocumentary evidence that they may have obtained as a result of issuing subpoenas forbooks and other papers.7. The DoD 5220.22-M, "National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual,"2/28/2006 (NISPOM) provides baseline standards for the protection of classifiedinformation released or disclosed to industry in connection with classified contracts underthe “National Industrial Security Program (NISP). It prescribes the requirements,restrictions, and other safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classifiedinformation. It also states at 2-209 that only U.S. citizens are eligible to receive a securityclearance. The Manual requires a contractor to show proof of U.S. citizenship. It states at2-208: “For individuals born in the United States, a birth certificate is the primary andpreferred means of citizenship verification.”http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/522022mchaps.pdf . Surely, we shouldrequire such documentation of someone seeking to occupy the Office of President of theUnited States.8. At the time that Obama was sworn in as President, not even the Hawaii Department of Home Lands accepted a certification of live birth (COLB) as conclusive evidence of being a native of Hawaii for its Homeland program. From its web site: "In order toprocess your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the originalCertificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete recordof your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout).Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since thecomputer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL."9. Since the controversy over Obama’s alleged birth certificate, Hawaii has changed itsweb page to read as follows:"Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) andCertificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine nativeHawaiian qualification.The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts bothCertificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birthbecause they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. TheCertificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogicalpurposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generatedprintout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birthcertificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the StateDepartment of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a requestis made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of LiveBirth."http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl.