I haven’t banged the gong very much about Obama’s birth certificate, proving that he’s a natural born citizen. He’s authorized the production of a copy of a document from a Hawaiian hospital, and that seems to have set the matter at rest. In any event, there’s no getting around the fact that most people view this issue as a tar baby, one that’s likely to do more damage than good to those pursuing it.
Having said all that, I periodically get things in the mail that just make me go “hmmm.” The following email is one of those things. The full disclosure here is that I have absolutely no idea whether a single fact in the email is true. I therefore have no idea whether the conclusion has any validity whatsoever. I simply pass it on to you guys for your insight, analysis, factual data, deconstruction, etc.:
Whether or not Barack Obama is a “natural-born” American (as required by the Constitution to be president) can be resolved by Obama’s answering two simple questions.
Perhaps Fox News’ brave correspondent Major Garrett, who yesterday bluntly asked Obama why it took him “so long” to criticize Iran’s vicious crackdown on its people, will pose these straight-forward queries at the next White House press conference:
1) “How did you (one year after becoming a teenager) arrive at age 20 in New York City in early June 1981 – without the price of a hotel room in your pocket, according to your own book – suddenly come up with the airfare for a round-the-world trip one month later?”
2) “Once you were on a plane, shuttling between the U.S., Indonesia, and Pakistan, what passport did you offer as you passed through each country’s Customs and Immigration?”
President Obama’s answers would make the simmering but media-ignored debate over his citizenship disappear. They also might make Obama himself disappear. Here’s why:
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A: Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities: 1) He traveled with a U.S. passport; 2) a British passport, or 3) an Indonesian passport. Which is it?
Q: Is it possible Obama traveled with a U.S. passport in 1981?
A: No way. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981. If Obama insists with a straight face that he carried a U.S. passport, he must be asked a final question: “Who in the State Department or other U.S. government agency under Ronald Reagan authorized you to break the law against traveling to Pakistan?”
Conclusion (unless Reagan personally blessed the peripatetic young Marxist From Parts Unknown): When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British or Indonesian passport.
A British passport would prove he was born in Kenya August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. An Indonesian passport would indicate he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian stepfather in 1967.
Hat tip: Expreacherman
UPDATE: Rhymes with Right has the flaws:
Actually, it would have been possible for him to claim dual citizenship with the UK because of his father’s citizenship, or possibly with Indonesia due to his step-father. Neither would in any way impact his status as a natural-born citizen under the US Constitution — any more than an American bishop traveling on a Vatican passport is not a natural-born US citizen, or an American Jew with an Israeli passport is not a natural-born citizen.
Next line of argument?
This document might also help show that the email in question is bogus.
Clearly it was not illegal to travel there.
And remember, he was traveling with an Pakistani citizen who had the money and connections to travel to the US for college. Such an individual (or his family) would likely have had the connection to get him the appropriate visa to travel in the country.
You guys do the work, so I don’t have to, right?Email This Post To A Friend
6 Responses to “I assume there’s a flaw in this logic *UPDATED — there are a couple of major flaws*”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.