He went on his US Passport you could travel to Pakistan when he went.
see
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/06/more-birther-nonsense-obamas-1981-pakistan-trip/More Birther Nonsense: Obamas 1981 Pakistan Trip
Posted on June 5, 2009
We continue to receive queries about claims and theories advanced by "birthers," who wish to believe that Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the USA or that he somehow gave up his citizenship and thus is not qualified to hold the office he occupies. One is a claim, first advanced last year, that his trip to Pakistan in 1981 proves he must not have been a U.S. citizen because Americans were not permitted to travel there at the time.
This one is not quite as transparent as the April Fools Day hoax that took in many of these deniers of Obamas birthplace bona fides. That one was a fabricated Associated Press story about Obamas student records from Occidental College. But the Pakistan theory is just as false. The truth, easily proven, is that American citizens traveled freely to Pakistan in 1981.
Obama did go to Pakistan that year when he was 20 years old with a college friend, after first seeing his mother and half-sister in Indonesia. That much is true. When he mentioned the 1981 trip during a campaign appearance last year, it came as news, because he had not previously written of it in his books.
Some then speculated, or claimed outright, that Obama must have gotten into Pakistan using an Indonesian passport obtained while his mother was married to Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian man whom she had divorced the previous year. Under this theory, the young Obama had somehow become an Indonesian citizen. "Birthers" claimed that the Pakistan trip constituted indirect proof of Obamas supposed Indonesian citizenship. Philadelphia lawyer Phil Berg even told the U.S. Supreme Court last year, before it refused to hear his case challenging Obamas qualification to be president, that Pakistan "was on the State Departments travel ban list for U.S. Citizens."
But that claim is quite false. There was no such ban. Americans traveled there without incident, as shown by a travel piece that appeared in the New York Times in 1981, dated June 14. Barbara Crossette, an assistant news editor of the Times, told her mostly American readers they could travel to Lahore, Pakistan, by air, rail or road, adding: "Tourists can obtain a free, 30-day visa (necessary for Americans) at border crossings and airports."
Her article prompted a letter to the Times from the U.S. consul general in Lahore saying he would "welcome an influx of Americans" to Lahore. He cautioned only that in addition to getting a visa for Pakistan, American visitors also should be careful to line up an Indian visa for the return trip if they planned to travel overland. The letter is dated Aug. 23, 1981.
Also, a travel advisory from the State Department dated Aug. 17, 1981 notes that Americans traveling to Pakistan require a 30-day visa, and that any staying longer must check in with Pakistans Foreigner Registration Office. A digital copy of the advisory is archived at the Electronic Research Collection, a partnership between the State Department and the Federal Depository Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
For those who missed it earlier, high-resolution images of Obamas birth certificate are displayed as supporting documents to our article "Born in the U.S.A." The document meets the U.S. State Departments requirements for proving U.S. citizenship. That, along with a 1961 newspaper announcement of his birth and statements last year by state officials in Hawaii, remove for us any doubt that Obama is indeed a natural-born citizen.
The "birthers" arent buying it. They, however, so far have produced what we judge to be zero credible evidence that Obama was born elsewhere, or that he later gave up U.S. citizenship. The false claim about a 1981 travel ban is typical of whats been offered along those lines.
Was he or wasn't he still employed by Baine when all that outsourcing went on. That would be answered by the tax returns.
Romney has flipped on just about every issue there is but he takes a stand on his Tax Returns. Makes me think he is hiding something.
Makes member of the GOP wonder what he is hiding. This is not only a Democrat issue. Even Christie said show the returns!
Danilo wrote:
ole sarg wrote:
I wonder why he won't show us his tax returns. What is he hiding?
Well, old sarg, if Mitt showed you two more returns, you'd want to see four. Neither you nor frenchcoast are going to vote Romney, anyway. And I think the IRS would take exception to frenchcoast's statement that they would likely look the other way concerning his off-shore accounts.
On the other hand: When conservatives (the wild-eyed, gun-totin' radicals) want to see Obama's records from Columbia or Harvard, or how he was able to travel to Pakistan in the middle of a "no-visit" policy, with a passport from where?...they are criticized as being unreasonable.
Sometimes you guys just make me feel old, and tired.
quote=ole sarg I wonder why he won't show us his ... (
show quote)