Enough said. This man did my radio show, he is a very good journalist. Listen to the one, two, three of this report. I’m not necessarily a fan of Alex Jones, but I am of Dr. Corsi
Politics, rantings, comments and such!
March 3, 2012
Enough said. This man did my radio show, he is a very good journalist. Listen to the one, two, three of this report. I’m not necessarily a fan of Alex Jones, but I am of Dr. Corsi
July 30, 2011
I love it when my friends come back with a bang. I keep hearing how we’re “birthers” because we legitimately question Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of President. It wouldn’t be a problem if he would have shown the proof from day one. Now, before you call me another “birther” loon, you might want to consider the following. Thanks Carl, you never disappoint, as well as “Where are His Girlfriends” from Bill. Even liberals are questioning now…oh, and you shouldn’t take a photoshopped document as proof before you examine it either. If you look at this, you’d think I was Iron Man. Great photoshop tools… Enjoy the stories.
Oh, you can also believe that Obama is Superman…
51 Bullet-Pointed Facts That Dispute Barack Obama’s Identity & Eligibility to be President!
1. The Unenforced Definition of “Natural-Born Citizenship”
The U.S. Constitution requires that a presidential candidate be a natural-born citizen in order to be eligible for the office of President.
In seeking to define the meaning of “natural born citizenship”, those who blindly support Obama desperately seek a minimalist’s definition of the term. They desire that a natural-born citizen is one to whom may be ascribed as few requirements as possible in order that a candidate, with whom they share ideological fetishes, can be president regardless of his actual fitness for the office. They seek to assume jurisdiction over the declaration of being “natural born” in the minds of as many as possible while contending that “natural born citizenship” means the fewest, most remedial natal circumstances possible, which will allow their politigod, Barack Obama, just enough legitimacy to squeak by and be eligible.
Their definition allows Obama to merely meet what they consider the most easily argued, though obviously unverifiable characteristics of Obama’s obscure citizenry, in this case, his birth place.
However, unfortunately for Obama supporters, the purposed intent of our founders was not so slight in this matter. They sought to make the meaning of being a natural born citizen the highest, most laudable position of all forms of citizenry. After witnessing the corruption and inbreeding and treasons of monarchal rule, America’s founders desired that becoming President of the United States to be as difficult as possible…politically, socially and biologically.
All arguments seeking to diminish this truth are reprobate and defamatory, made in the interest of serving one’s own political lust, not defending the sovereignty of our Constitution or upholding the value of the blood ransom paid by our people.
Hence, logically, our founders induced that the highest form of eligibility for the highest office would be a lawful mandate.
Consider the following:
Taking survey of all possible circumstances which, therefore, lend credibility to one’s claim to legitimacy, and thereby, eligibility to lead, there is much more to consider than simply one’s location of birth. In order to meet the highest standard intended by our founders, we must also consider that biology must also meet this standard. Not only is it essential that a presidential candidate be born under the sovereign geographic protection of our Constitution, he must also be conceived by two parents of native citizenry, possessing U.S. citizenship.
Moreover, let’s consider further extension of this ideal by commanding that a presidential candidate also be conceived legitimately within the bounds of legal marriage of their parentage. Having been measured and found wanton, those subservient to bias for persons over their respect for the office would not embrace this noble ideal. For them, uplifting the standard of the presidency remains an inferior cause to diminishing the requirements in order to provide access for their inferior candidate. Therefore, they seek to minimize the standard, not maximize the person.
Of course, this would disqualify many from being the President…as so it should!
However, let’s not even stop there. We should also assume that our founders sought to ensure that a presidential candidate had also preserved their natural-born citizenship from “conception to election”, never having allowed it to be revoked, or never having it revoked even against their will. For, even those who lose their eligibility to no fault of their own should bear up in faith that this is the intention of higher power, sacrificing for the sake of sovereignty of the office rather than opportunity for the man!
Let all of these metrics define the standards of natural-born citizenship in America. Bannish minimalism and seek the highest mark in the spirit of exceptionalism forged by our forefathers! Hold this mantle lest that crown be stolen by any upon the earth without seeking the interests of God and country first! Daringly and boldly, let these marks serve as the highest definition of humanity’s advanced citizenship and the prescribed metrics for eligibility to be President of the U.S.!
We should set a higher bar, not lower it. It is impossible to choose one’s own natural-born citizenship because it is preeminent and incumbent to one’s birth. Historical writings, along with related legal precedents strongly suggest this form of citizenship is achieved when natural circumstances make it impossible for that individual to have any citizenship or allegiances other than with the United States at the time they are elected as President. Research of America’s founding culture reveals that a very heavy emphasis was placed on legitimacy at birth.
Therefore, it is probable that one’s most authentic degree of natural born identity does not occur at birth, but at conception. With this in mind, we must consider that the framers of the Constitution assumed it was commonly understood that the definition of “natural-born citizenship” for a presidential candidate to mean a citizenship status that was not just acheived by the event of birth but that it was a maintained status from “conception to election” in order to qualify a sovereign candidate. This is the most complete definition of natural born citizenship possible. There is no other degree of more complete natural circumstances which can establish the status of one’s existence.
Therefore, theoretically, natural-born citizenship, in its purest, ineradicable form, could be measured by three metrics:
1) Biological conception by two U.S. citizen parents
2) Birth in a geographic region under the protection of the U.S. Constitution
3) Maintenance of that citizenship status without any unnatural interruption of parentage, legal process or administrative procedure.
This means that their citizenship has never been achieved by any legal or administration process at or after birth. Dual citizens and expatriates are not natural-born citizens. Those who lose their natural-born status by taking the citizenship of another country or denouncing their natural born U.S. citizenship cannot regain it. A natural-born citizen is one who was born within a geographic region under the protections of the U.S. Constitution AND to two U.S. citizen parents, they being either natural-born or legally naturalized through immigration or repatriation.
Despite ongoing, unanswered questions about his geographic origins, Obama does not meet the requirements to be a natural-born citizen for two possible other reasons:
1) His alleged biological father, Barack Obama Sr., was not a U.S. Citizen
2) He was adopted by his muslim, Indonesian step-father, Lolo Soetoro, in the mid 1960s thereby taking Indonesian citizenship, thus forfeiting natural-born status.
“Preventing an individual with plural loyalties, whether by biological, political or geographic origins, which may present lawful or perceptable doubt as to his allegiances thereof, other than one with the fullmost sovereignty of advanced citizenry, which is that of one who remains natural-born from conception to election, from assuming the great power of this fragile office, was, without tolerance or vulnerability, the exaction of purpose of our fathers to induce the mandate of presidential eligibility upon our blood-ransomed Constitution…”
2. The Suddenness of Obama
The American public was essentially made nationally aware of Barack Obama following his 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention. Obama’s emergence into national politics was not a gradual inception. It was a sudden, covert ascendance to power seemingly assisted by foreign-like forces as an assault on vintage American conscience.
Obama was elected to the U.S. Congress as a Democratic Senator from Illinois in November, 2004, after his candidacy was promoted in the state by a vastly corrupt, liberal, Chicago-based political cartel and a conglomeration of burned-out, 1960′s, radicals like Bill Ayers and Madeline Talbott. Then despite his lack of executive experience, in February, 2007, after only two years of serving at the federal level, Obama announced his candidacy for the 2008 Presidential election defeating Hillary Clinton, a 17-year veteran of federal politics and former First Lady, for the Democratic Party Nomination.
Obama went on to then defeat John McCain, a decorated war veteran and a 34-year seasoned expert in federal politics as a longstanding Arizona senator, having been elected by a bowing consensus of ashamed white liberals, Bush-hating radicals and angry, racist minorities seeking reparative justice.
By all observable metrics, Obama should have been considered nothing but a long shot to contend for the DNC nomination. Instead, he defied these odds and even his own advice when, in 2005, he said,
“In order to run for president, a person needs to know what they are getting into…I am not confident I have that experience yet.”
3. The Foundations of Natural Born Citizenry
When the founders of America wrote the Constitution, they included the “natural-born” mandate in order to ensure that no President would be subject to, or exercise, a plurality of political interests in their international relationships. Having experienced the corruption of a monarchy in Great Britain for generations, the founders of America, after declaring and defending their right to freedom from that corruption during the Revolutionary War, wrote the constitution within the legal framework of empowering inalienable rights and protection of the American people, not empowering the government.
Upon declaring independence from the crown, after seeing the destructive consequences of an intermingling of international loyalty through forced Royal intermarriage, in-breeding, monarchal polytheism, power sharing, birthright subversion and support of covert insurrections of inferior nations, the founders made it a law that any President had to be a natural-born citizen.
4. Logan Act Violated By Obama
With this mind, we learned, in October, 2008, that American author and columnist,Jerome Corsi was arrested while visiting Kenya during an investigation which revealed that Barack Obama had actively campaigned for and contributed money to Kenya’s Democratic Socialist Orange Party candidate, Raila Odinga, from 2006 to 2008. Corsi had traveled to Kenya and acquired correspondence and documented evidence showing that Odinga, a fellow Luo tribe descendant and alleged paternal cousin of Obama, had entered into a written agreement with the National Muslim Leaders Forum (NAMLEF), a highly influential and radical Kenyan Islamic foundation, seeking Odinga’s support for, among other things, Sharia Law, in exchange for the Islamic group’s support of Odinga’s candidacy.
The evidence acquired by Corsi also shows that Obama was aware of this agreement even while he was raising more than a million dollars of American money to support Odinga’s campaign. The Orange Party Movement is the communist opposition party to President, Mwai Kibaki’s Party of National Unity (PNU).
Obama’s involvement in the Kenyan election, while an elected official of the U.S., was clearly a violation the Logan Act which prohibits American politicians from influencing or participating in foreign elections. The Obama Administration’s U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, has refused to pursue any investigation of Obama’s activities with Odinga in Kenya in 2006 until 2008. In 2008, video of Obama’s speeches on behalf of Odinga surfaced on YouTube and several other websites which clearly show Obama stumping for Odinga.
In the aftermath of the December, 2007 election, which Odinga lost, the Orange party leadership and members of Kenya’s Luo tribe incited violence among his radical constituents. Kenyan Muslims engaged in a week long violent demonstration in which they burned nearly 1000 Christian churches and murdered almost 1000 of Odinga’s political opposition which are members of the predominantly Christian, Kikuyu tribe. Under the threat of this violence, with the support of Obama and the Bush administration, the Kenyan majority PNU Party was forced to take an unprecedented action in the history of its government by artificially amending its constitution in order to create a leadership position for Odinga who was ensconced as the country’s first Prime Minister in April, 2008.
The tragic events and violence of the 2007 Kenyan election were the exact consequences the founders of America were trying to prohibit U.S. government officials from instigating or being influenced by.
Obama’s geopolitical connections, along with his probable biological relationship with the Kenyan Communist Party, now an active part of the Kenyan government, creates a relationship vulnerable to illicit influence. Obama has now brought that illicit relationship, and all of its consequences, with him into the office of the U.S. Presidency. The founders wisely understood that the mandate of Natural born citizenry for a President is the best possible protection against such vulnerability.
5. Suspicious Nomination Certifications
In July, 2009, documents were revealed showing that Obama was never officially certified to run for president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, by the Hawaiian Democratic Party. On August 27, 2008, the Hawaiian Democratic Party created a customized Nomination Certification document for Obama containing the following words:
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado.”
In comparison, unlike the 2008 Hawaiian OCON for Obama, in every other previous Presidential election, the Hawaiian Democratic Party has certified the nomination of their state’s Democratic candidate with the following words:
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the United States Constitution…”
Notice that the wording of HDP’s 2008 Official Certification of Nomination omits the words “…under the provision of the United States Constitution…”
Upon receiving Hawaii’s State Nomination Certification for Obama, which omits the reference to the Constitutional legality of Obama’s nomination, the National Democratic Party Office created two separate documents with the same header title, “Official Certification of Nomination”, both versions were signed by Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Democratic National Convention, and Alicia Travis Germond, Secretary of the Democratic National Convention and notarized by a Denver notary. One of these versions was sent from the National Democratic Party headquarters to each of the 49 states’ Democratic Party headquarters.
However, only the State of Hawaii received an Official Certification of Nomination from the DNC containing the words:
“…the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution…”
The document then lists Barack Obama and Joe Biden as the candidates. However, the rest of the 49 states received a different Official Certification of Nomination containing the words:
“…the following were duly nominated as candidates of said party for President and Vice President of the United States, respectively…”
Why was the state of Hawaii’s local Democratic Party headquarters sent a different OCON document from the National Party headquarters than the other 49 states?
There is strong evidence suggesting that Hawaii’s local Democratic Party officials refused to certify Obama’s nomination as being Constitutionally eligible. As a result, Hawaii’s Election Commission, headed by Kevin Cronin, jockeying behind closed doors, refused to place Obama on the Hawaiian ballot under Hawaiian Election laws mandating that every candidate seeking placement on the Hawaiian presidential election ballot must be certified as “Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States”.
Since the DPH refused to place this language in its Official Certification of Nomination, Obama, therefore, required that the National Party Committee, headed by none other than Nancy Pelosi, take responsibility for declaring the constitutional eligibility of his nomination under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, even though his eligibility had never been vetted or verified as legal.
This has never happened in the history of America’s vetting endorsement process and indicates that the Democratic National Party leadership, including Nancy Pelosi, was made aware that there was a legal problem with Obama’s candidacy. However, the DNC certified it anyway and, in doing so, committed federal election fraud.
6. State Ballot-Fail!
It is the responsibility of each states’ party head office to certify that their candidate is Constitutionally eligible to serve in coordination with their state’s laws. Since Obama was not Constitutionally certified to run in the state of Hawaii in 2008, no other Secretary of State, in any state, ever confirmed that Obama was vetted by federal or party authorities in their state prior to being placed on the 2008 Presidential ballot there.
In fact, nearly a dozen Secretaries of State, including Hawaii’s, have officially refused to reveal any information about the vetting of Barack Obama in their state because they simply cannot even show that he was actually proven to be eligible there.
7. PUMA: The First Birthers
In early summer, 2007, the so called “Birther” conspiracy theory was first created by renegade members of an ultra leftist group known as the PUMAs. (That’s right! They were leftists). They were a splinter group of hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters who did not want to surrender the Democrat party nomination to Obama after a hard fought campaign leading to the 2008 Democratic nomination. In June, 2008, PUMAParty.com began promoting the idea that their party’s nomination of Barack Obama could be overturned on constitutional grounds that he was not eligible to be president based on the fact that he may not be a natural born citizen.
Thus, the Birther movement actually began in the minds of liberals, not “right-wing nuts” as Obama zealots love to claim.
8. Hawaiian Certi-Fiction
Shortly after PUMAparty.com began clamoring for a more thorough review of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility, the image of a document containing sparse information about Obama’s alleged birth was posted on the internet by undisclosed sources, from an unknown origin. The image appeared on extreme leftwing websites like the Daily Kos, The Huffington Post and later on two websites claiming to be non-partisan reviewers, Factcheck.org and politifact.com.
One of the fact checking sites is sponsored by the Annenberg Foundation from which the Chicago Annenberg Project received a large educational grant. Obama served as the chair on the board of directors for the Chicago Annenberg Project in 2002.
9. Certification of Identity, not Natural Birth
The 2008 document image was determined to be created by an unknown source from a digital template form of a Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” which is a surrogate, independently published, municipal cover document issued to those applying for copies of birth certificates in the state of Hawaii since 2000. In response to Y2K system updates the State of Hawaii began migrating from paper copies of original birth records to digitally created printed documents. The state of Hawaii openly admits to changing its document format under the guise of preventing identity theft.
10. Cartoon Fun
In 2009, it was demonstrated by three separate document specialists that an image of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was easily constructed and falsely authenticated using two different medical imaging software programs. This demonstration discredited the State of Hawaii’s claims that its “Certification of Live Birth” provided better protection against identity theft than old paper copies of the Certificate of Live Birth.
11. Department of Hawaiian Native Homelands
The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was found to be so unreliable in clarifying the bearer’s legal and demographic identity that the State of Hawaii’s own Department of Native Homelands refused to accept it as a primary source of identification for its applicants seeking to purchase Hawaiian land reserved for genealogically native Hawaiians. Before 2010, the agency’s website stated:
“In order to process your application for identification as a native Hawaiian, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands utilizes information that is found only on the Original (Long Form) Vault Birth Certificate (‘Certificate of Live Birth’, not ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’), which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of birth than the ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Long Form Birth Certificate will save you time and money since the computer-generated ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ requires additional verification…”
Only after it was determined that the Department of Hawaiian Homeland’s policy against the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” conflicted with another Hawaiian state agency, the Department of Health’s, political endorsement of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, was the policy changed and the wording against the credibility of the document scrubbed from its website. This led many to accuse the State of Hawaii government of selling out to protect against exposing the ineligibility of Obama rather than upholding the eligibility of thousands of potential native land owners in Hawaii. Some actually accused Hawaii’s land management of selling out to a liar while native Hawaiians were at risk of being deprived of their right to purchase native lands because non-natives could now use a less credible version of identification when applying for a land purchase.
12. Hawaii Denies COLB Image
After all was said and done, the State of Hawaii has refused to ever confirm that it issued the 2008 document image. In light of sophisticated, digitally based document imaging technology, the authenticity of the image remains highly questionable, especially without the official endorsement of the Hawaiian Health Department. Some independent reviewers have, unequivocally, determined the image to be a forgery.
13. The Million Dollar Birth Cerificate
On August 21, 2008, Philadelphia based attorney, Philip Berg, filed the first of several high profile cases attempting to force Obama to show authentic, legal, original documentation proving that he is eligible to be president of the U.S. Berg is a lifelong, registered Democrat with a history of running for Democratic office in Philadelphia. Following Berg’s case, other plaintiffs have filed similar suits including Alan Keyes and several military officers, all of which have been dismissed by irresponsible judges refusing to weigh the merits of evidence in the cases.
Some judges have even gone on record as saying the reason they dismissed their case was because “Questions about Obama’s eligibility had already been answered on Twitter.”
Since then, Obama has paid more than 1.6 million dollars to the Washington law firm, Perkins Coie to prevent the release of his original birth certificate, which costs about 20 dollars to order from the State of Hawaii.
14. Executive Order No. 13489
Obama was ensconced as President on January 20, 2009. Just one day after his inauguration, he signed Executive Order No. 13489 which essentially violates the Freedom of Information Act and prohibits the release of Obama’s personal and presidential records, during and after his presidency, by the National Archives without first being consulted by the National Archives Director and the Attorney General. Seven days later, Obama gave his famous “Transparency Will Be the Touchstone of This Administration” speech in which he hypocritically admonished previous administrations for what he feels are “too many secrets kept by government in Washington”. Obama vowed to change how government deals with secret information by making his administration more open.
Since this dishonest, landmark speech, the Administration has fought to keep Obama’s past secret more than any other President in American history.
15. Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin
In April, 2008, after the fraudulent dismissal of more than two dozen civilian court cases which had been filed against Obama attempting to force him to produce original documented evidence of his natal identity, a highly decorated officer with more than 17 years of unblemished service in the U.S. Army brought the Obama eligibility into the active military ranks. Lieutenant Colonel, Dr. Terrence Lakin, an active duty flight surgeon serving the President’s Chief of Staff and working as a commanding ranked physician of a critical care facility, refused to deploy for duty in Afghanistan under his legal right to refuse orders that he, as an officer, believes are illegal.
According to Lakin, Barack Obama has not demonstrated provable, documented evidence that he is eligible to hold the office of President and is, therefore, not legally qualified to issue orders to the United States military as Commander In Chief. Lakin’s oath upon becoming an officer is to defend the constitution, not the president. His duty, as an officer to refuse deployment orders he believes are illegal, are legitimate based on clear and concise legal grounds. Despite this fact, however, Lakin pleaded guilty to a circus court under the command of the Obama administration’s military staff, and was sentence to six months in prison and dismissal from the service.
He has since been lauded and exalted for his sacrifice and commitment to his duty to defend the Constitution. Supporters may contribute to his fund at TerryLakinActionFund.com
16. The History Of Standard U.S. Certificates of Live Birth
As census and vital statistics documentation methods evolved, the U.S. Department of Health has utilized a document template with the header title, “Certificate of Live Birth” since the early 1900’s. The U.S. National Vital Statistics Division, since its first published data report in 1915, refers to the U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” as “The standard ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, issued by the National Vital Statistics Division, has served for many years as the principal means of attaining uniformity in the content of the documents used to collect information on this vital event.” This document has evolved throughout a 110 year process with input from the National Conference on Vital Records and Statistics, the National Vital Statistics Division, The Census Bureau and the municipal state agencies are assigned with the responsibility of gathering, storing and reporting natal statistics to the U.S. Department of Health. Although it has undergone state specific revisions to support municipal laws and identity protection, it is important to note that it has never undergone a reduction in vital data content.
17. Hawaii’s Rogue Document
The standard, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document template has been slightly revised by various states for the purpose of meeting identification and formatting needs, such as concealing the social security numbers of the parents. However, no state, except one, has ever reduced the overall quantity of information contained about the bearer’s natal identity, such that it is now impossible to determine their natural-born status, and then used that reduction of vital information in an endorsed document form. Only the State of Hawaii has created this form of independently published, digital documentation.
18. Hawaii Violates Federal Guidelines
In the entire 110 year history of the standard, official, federal, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document’s existence, only the state of Hawaii has gone astray from the standard version to such a degree that it actually conceals one’s full natal identity rather than reveals it. When comparing document forms, the use of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” is an unauthorized reduction of content otherwise prescribed to confirm the bearer’s natal identity and, essential to verifying one’s eligibility to be a candidate for president, the bearer’s natural born status.
19. Exploitation of Hawaii’s Lost Culture
Because of its remote, water-locked, geographic characteristics; its tumultuous indigenous history; and a vulnerable culture altered by a transference of sovereignty in the late 1800’s, the Hawaiian islands gained a reputation for maintaining a vague process for documenting immigration, vital events and indigenous population. Historical archives dating between 1890 and 1941 reveal that the Hawaiian Islands served as an unofficial, but widely pursued, sanctuary for thousands of foreign expatriates seeking protection from political persecution in China, Japan, Southeast Asiatic nations, the Middle East and, later, the United States.
This multicultural instability resulted in the implementation of less than thorough procedures for recording and differentiating native born, immigrant and indigenous populations.
One example of this surrogate nativity was granted to a Mr. Sun Yat Sen, a Chinese expatriate who received an official Certificate of Hawaiian Birth in 1904 stating that his birth had taken place in Hawaii in November, 1870. However, later evidence revealed that Mr. Sun’s birth had actually occurred in China in 1866. Archives reveal that the state of Hawaii has provided similar documentation to thousands of immigrants over the years without ever confirming their age, the birth place or their actual identity.This murky process was further complicated when Hawaii became a state of the U.S. which demanded that it begin implementing the federal documentation standards for U.S. citizens as well, in 1959.
Vulnerabilities in Hawaii’s documentation process created passive conditions which allowed unidentified inhabitants to later proclaim any identity, or multiple identities, they desired to serve their individual interests.
20. Hawaii’s Communist Past
Based on investigations in the 1950’s and 1960’s, a disproportionate concentration of pro-communist activity was found to have become a part of Hawaiian culture. This is substantiated by an increase in the population and activity of communist sympathizers identified by the House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings conducted after WWII, during the beginning of the cold war between the U.S. and communist Russia. Evidence of pro-communist presence in Hawaii can be found in publications like the Honolulu Record in which one of Obama’s communist mentors, Frank Marshal Davis was a columnist.
Obama Sr. would later return to Kenya sometime in the mid 1960’s to promote his communist economic theories and work in government with his friend and leader of Kenya’s communist KANU party, Tom Mboya.
21. Hawaiian Document Proven Deficient
In August, 2008, a former U.S. Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics Registrar stated that the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” cannot be considered an original birth certificate created at the time of occurrence of the birth because
“…it does not contain the signature of the licensed medical professional qualified to determine the characteristics of a live birth in accordance with administrative requirements established by the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division, and it does not contain the name and location of the hospital which issued the original record, which would be a U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” if the child was born in the United States.”
Further investigation of Hawaii’s revised statutes reveal that the Hawaiian Department of Health not only contends with federal law, it also contradicts its own self-declared authority to issue falsified birth nativity under HRS 338-17.
22. Hawaii’s Self-endowed Permission To Violate Federal Law
Hawaii Revised Statute HRS 338-17.8 states:
“Certificates for children born out of State.(a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]”
The law permits anyone born to parents who claimed Hawaii as their residence within one year of their birth, at any time before or after the enactment of the law, regardless of the actual location of the birth, to receive an original birth record which states that the location of birth is Hawaii, and, therefore, occurred in the U.S. Hawaiian lawmakers have confirmed that the law is not constrained to the date of birth. It is applicable to the date of application for the certificate.
This means this law would enable Obama, anytime after the age of 21 to apply for and receive a newly created original Hawaiian birth certificate after providing evidence that his mother or father merely resided in Hawaii for one year prior to his birth. He could have applied for this certificate any time since is parents are known to have resided in Hawaii since 1960. He could have been born outside of the U.S., however, the State of Hawaii is obligated by law to grant him an original birth certificate stating that Hawaii is his birth place simply because he was able to show that his parents claimed Hawaii as their residence.
Moreover, the evidence provided with Obama’s application may not be reviewed by any third party under this law. Only the Director of the Department of Health is granted with the authority to determine the validity and deadlines required in providing such evidence. In essence, under Administrative Rule 91, the state of Hawaii has empowered a state-level, municipal employee to determine the federal, natural-born status and therefore, the Constitutional eligibility, of any individual, even a sworn enemy of the United States, seeking the most powerful office in the world.
23. Obama’s Own Words
On page 26 of his 1995 Autobiography, Dreams From My Father, Barack Obama admits to possessing a copy of his original birth certificate in the late 1970’s. This document was an official copy of an original vital record assumed to still be filed with the office of Vital Statistics in the city where Obama was born, wherever that is. Why does Obama not still possess this copy and where is the original used to produce it? Where is the official, original birth record used to produce the document which Obama himself admits to having more than thirty years before being issued a fake document from Hawaii?
Why is Obama lying about this document? What information does this document contain?
24. Obama Loses Natural-Born U.S. Citizenship By Adoption
Barack Obama claims to have lived in Indonesia with his mother from approximately 1967 to 1971 where he assumed the surname of his step father, Lolo Soetoro and became a citizen of Indonesia. Since Obama became a citizen of Indonesia, he forfeited any claim he may have had to Natural-born citizenship in the U.S. Recall, a Natural-born citizen is one whose citizenship is achieved by natural circumstances which, if unrevoked, make it impossible for them to have citizenship loyalties to any other governing power. If a Natural-born citizen becomes a citizen of another country at any time prior to running for the office of the president, he or she is no longer eligible.
Because of this forfeiture, Obama is not eligible to be president because his Natural-born status cannot be reclaimed once legal or administrative procedures are employed to repatriate him in the U.S.
Also, despite Obama’s claims that he remained in Indonesia during this time, there is photographic evidence placing him in Hawaii in 1969. Questions remain how and why Obama may have traveled to Hawaii at this time, including any documentation he used, which raises doubts about the validity of his origins narrative, and therefore, doubts about his identity.
25. What’s In a Name?
Barry or Barack, Soetoro or Obama, or Subarkah? Records from his time in Indonesia reveal that Barack Obama has used at least one other alias and possibly two. He was registered for school under the name Barry Soetoro as a muslim student. When Obama applied for state bar license in 1992 to practice law in Illinois, the application asked if he had ever used an alias. He stated that he had not at that time.
There is evidence that suggests Obama was not honest about his use of other names throughout his life. Recent passport application information submitted by his mother in the 1960’s reveals that Obama may have had a third surname of “Subarkah” which his mother had written on the application.
26. Dunham’s Secret Absence
Many records exist confirming Ann Dunham’s presence in Hawaii from late summer of 1960 until February of 1961. However, from February until September, 1961, there are no records or eyewitness accounts of her presence in Hawaii. In fact, the void is quite stark. Obama was allegedly born during this void of time in Dunham’s documented life. The next record indicating her possible location is a class registration record showing that she had enrolled in classes for fall term of 1961 at the University of Washington, just two weeks after allegedly giving birth to Obama in Hawaii.
27. Dunham Too Young To Confer Citizenship
Ann Dunham turned 19 years old in November, 1961, almost four months after Obama was allegedly born in August, 1961. Citizenship laws in effect in the U.S. in 1961 required the mother of a child born outside the U.S., to a foreign father, to have lived in the U.S. for 14 consecutive years, five of which had to be after the age of 14. Since Dunham had not yet turned 19, she was not legally able to confer citizenship to Obama if the birth occurred outside the U.S.
Therefore, Obama is, at a minimum, a citizen of Great Britain. The founding fathers, in writing the eligibility mandate, having fought a Revolutionary War against Great Britain, would have rejected Obama as a presidential candidate for this reason.
28. Hospital Mystery
No official records have ever been provided from any authoritative source to prove that Barack Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children. Not one administrative authority from Kapi’olani has ever verified or provided original patient records showing that Ann Dunham was ever a maternity patient there. As a testament to the longstanding controversy over Obama’s birth hospital, in the original ‘Early Life’ section of Barack Obama’s Wikipedia biography, beginning on March 3, 2004, it was stated that he was born in Queens Hospital. It was later clarified as Queens Medical Center.
In 2006, it was omitted and remained blank until June, 2008 when editors stated that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center. On January 24, 2009, Kapi’olani Medical Center, on the occasion of the hospital’s centennial celebration, allegedly received a letter in which Obama wrote, “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center – the place of my birth – I am pleased to add my voice to your voice of supporters.” It was later admitted by administrators at Kapi’olani that the letter was a facsimile created in a digital format.
To date, no administrator, or official of the Obama administration has ever confirmed that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center.
To date, Obama’s operatives have failed to identify the identity of Obama’s actual birthing doctor.
29. Obama’s Use of Multiple Social Security Numbers
In 2010, Ohio licensed private investigator Susan Daniels and Colorado private investigator John Sampson revealed that President Obama is using a Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state. In addition, the records indicate the number was issued between 1977 and 1979, not 1961 at the time of Obama’s birth. Moreover, Obama’s earliest employment reportedly was around 1975 at a Baskin-Robbins in Oahu, Hawaii. The Social Security website confirms the first three numbers in his SSN are reserved for applicants with Connecticut addresses and start with 040 through 049.
“Since 1973, Social Security numbers have been issued by our central office,” the Social Security website explains, “The first three (3) digits of a person’s social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number.”
In April, 2011, further investigation by ex-CIA personnel confirmed that Obama’s social security number was fraudulently issued after the original owner of the number, who had once resided in Connecticut, died in Hawaii in 1977. As a result, it is now supported by evidence that Barack Obama is committing social security fraud and that his number was issued through channels possibly provided by his grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, who worked in the financial and banking industry and who had ties to communist support organizations and international interests.
It is highly likely that Obama, when issued his current social security number, was not a legal citizen of the U.S. and, having access to records through his grandmother, was allowed to use the number after its original owner had died. It has been shown that the original owner of Obama’s social security number had opened at least one account at the bank where Madelyn Dunham was employed in Hawaii in 1965.
30. Obama’s Father Not a U.S. Citizen
Obama’s alleged father was a Kenyan national with citizenship in Great Britain. His birth registration is recorded in the British National Archives, General Register Office “Registers and Returns of Births, Marriages and Deaths in the Protectorates of Africa and Asia, 1895-1965″. Obama’s children are also contained in these registers. He attended the University of Hawaii from 1959 to 1961 before abandoning Obama Jr. and Dunham to attend graduate school at Harvard in 1962.
Since Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen, it is impossible for Obama to be a natural-born citizen.
The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” which has been misrepresented as the federally accepted, official document issued by the state of Hawaii for Barack Obama’s birth shows Obama’s father’s race as “African”. Unfortunately, this term violates the U.S. Department of Health’s acceptable classifications of race for official birth certificates. According to NVSD protocols, Obama Sr. is classified as a “Negro” in 1961, not “African”. The term “African” is not even an option in the NVSD manual. Africa is a continent not a race. For example, there are white people from Africa, but they would not be categorized as “African”. Using this premise, we could argue that Obama’s Certification of Live Birth should also list his mother’s race as “North American”?
If using geographic association in describing Obama’s mother’s race is so ridiculous, why is it acceptable to explain his father’s?
The use of the term “African” to describe the race of Obama’s father is yet another diminishment to the credibility and authenticity of Obama’s natal records. The inclusion of such a non-specific, vague, unclassifiable, misrepresentative term to describe an individual’s demography only raises yet more doubts about the ability of the Hawaiian Health Department to convey accurate vital statisics documentation.
31. Obama Marriage Mystery
To date, no documented evidence exists proving that a legal marriage between Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham ever occurred in the U.S. The two were allegedly married in Hawaii in early 1961, after Obama Jr. was allegedly conceived sometime in November, 1960. However, no public announcement, or eyewitness of the marriage or marriage license has ever been found.
In Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams From My Father”, he states,
“In fact, how and when the marriage occurred remains a bit murky. A bill of particulars I have never quite had the courage to explore. There is no record of a real wedding, a cake, a ring, a giving away of the bride. No family members were in attendance. It is not even clear that people back in Kansas were even informed.”
Obama’s admission that ‘There is no record of a real wedding’, raises yet another doubt about his long disseminated, life biography with regard to the status of the relationship between his parents. The unanswered questions about his parents marriage contradicts the accuracy of testimony and records declaring Obama’s identity, such as his birth announcements in two Honolulu newspapers which undeniably state that his parents were married, and divorce documents which do not contain any reference to a legal marriage license.
There are fundamental questions about the relationship between Obama’s parents which no one has been able to answer. If they were married in Hawaii, what is the name of the officiate presiding at the wedding? Where did it take place? Does the Hawaiian Vital Statistics office possess a copy of the Obama’s marriage license which they used to determined their marital status for the birth announcements? If so, why was the Obama marriage never announced in those same papers? Why was the wedding kept secret?
Was the marriage even legal given the evidence that Obama Sr. was already married to a woman in Kenya?
32. Divorce Decree and Custody Documents
In 2009, a set of what appears to be authentic document images of a Divorce Decree shows that Stanley Ann Dunham was awarded an uncontested divorce from Obama Sr. in March, 1964. The Divorce was granted in a Hawaiian civil Court on March 5, 1964 after a hearing to determine custody rights of the parents of Barack Obama Jr. According to the document images, Dunham had filed for divorce in January, 1964. The set of documents posted on the internet in 2009 are suspiciously missing the official birth certificate of Barack Obama Jr. which was requested by the court in order to confirm parentage.
33. Obama Sr. Already Married
Obama’s father was apparently a bigamist. He was allegedly already married to a woman in Kenya when he allegedly married Barack Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. Obama’s other wife’s name was Kezia Aoko (also found as other spellings). This would nullify any marriage to Dunham because it is illegal in the U.S. to be married to more than one person.
34. Suspicious Death
Obama Sr. died in 1982 after an alleged car accident. Recent investigations into his death reveal unanswered questions about his declining professional status and his strained relationship with Tom Mboya after he published a scathing report called, “The Problem with Our Socialism”, criticizing Mboya’s economic development plan for Kenya.
35. Birth Announcements
In early 2009, researchers discovered announcements of Obama’s birth in two separate Honolulu-based news papers. An investigation of the procedures used to publish birth announcements reveals that the information used by the news papers came directly from the Hawaiian Department of Health’s bi-weekly birth registration lists. These birth announcements are typically published for registrations over a two week period and do not contain the location of the birth. The announcements always assume, without exception, that the parents are married, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” reveals that of the 17,616 births in Hawaii in 1961, there were 1044 illegitimate births in which the father was not identifiable. An average of three per day!
In every case, without exception, both papers publish all announcements with the surname of the father as if they are always married and with the assumption that two parents always exist at the time of birth, even when the father is dead. The announcements do not publish the first names of the parents or child, nor do they identify the name of the registrant. They publish the sex of the child, the address of the registrant and the day and month of the birth. The announcements do not print the location of the birth, the name of the attending physician, the name of the hospital, the time of birth or the given name of the child.
36. The Paper Chase
An analysis of all of the birth announcements published along with Obama’s announcements in both newspapers reveals that both papers published the exact same announcements, including quantity of birth announcements, in the same exact order and in the same exact contextual format in both papers. The announcements are not published in alphabetical or chronological order which begs the question: What system was used to determine their order? They are obviously not randomly ordered since they appear in the same order in both papers. The possible answer: Geographic birth registration numbering. An investigation of the U.S. Department of Health’s archived natal data reports reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on the location of the registration office they are received in.
37. Obama’s Other Address
The birth announcements were published containing the registrant’s address at 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., Honolulu, HI. This address has been proven by investigators to be the residence of Obama’s grandparents, Stanley and Madeline Dunham, as well as Obama’s mother. Directory records available in 1961 show that Obama’s father, Obama Sr., resided in an apartment at 625 11th Avenue, near the University of Hawaii. Why would a married man list an address for the birth of his son that was not his address?
38. Birth Registration Protocols
An investigation reveals that birth registration numbers are assigned based on their associated location to the regional vital statistics registration office in which the vital event is recorded. There were four such offices available in Hawaii in 1961, two of which served immigration processing and vital events originating outside the Hawaiian Islands. Obama’s alleged birth registration number, 151-1961-010641, indicates that his birth was registered in one of these regional offices.
39. Non-Sequential Birth Registration
Obama’s birth registration number appears to be non-sequential with other births recorded at the time of his birth. One example cites the standard “Certificate of Live Birth” records of twins born to Eleanor Nordyke, whose births occurred 19 hrs after Obama’s alleged birth in Kapi’olani Medical Center. The twins were assigned birth registration numbers ending in 037 and 038, respectively. Obama’s birth was assigned number 041 despite the fact that his birth allegedly occurred before the twins in the very same hospital. If no other births occurred between Obama’s and the Nordyke’s, one would expect that Obama’s birth registration number would end in 036, not 041. If other births did occur in the 19 hours between Obama’s and the Nordykes’, Obama’s registration number would be expected to be even lower.
40. Chiyome Fukino, Hawaii’s Reluctant Accomplice
On October 31st, 2008, and, again on July 27th, 2009, the Director of the Hawaiian Department of Health released the only two official statements by the government of the State of Hawaii about Obama’s natal records. In her October, 2008 statement she release the following:
“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record. Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawaii.”
The statement does not specify the type of original birth certificate on record and directly contradicts statements made by an official of the Hawaiian elections Office that the State of Hawaii does not possess an original birth certificate for Obama. Fukino further clarified her statement eight months later with the following:
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
The problem with this second statement is, first, she, again, does not identify the title of the “original vital records” documents she has seen. Notice she uses the word “records”, plural. Whether they are a U.S. Certificate of Live Birth, a Delayed Certificate of Live Birth or a Certificate of Foreign Birth accompanied with testimonial documents, medical records or other evidence is not disclosed by Fukino.
Second, she violated Hawaii’s identity protection law, the very same HRS 338-18 she cited in her first statement, by disclosing information from the vital records about Obama’s unverified birth place. If she is so willing to provide this private information, why not disclose the rest of it? Answer: Because this information serves the bias of the State of Hawaii’s endorsement of Obama’s legitimacy. Otherwise, Fukino would also disclose the other information that perhaps is NOT so favorable to Obama, as well, such as the title of the ‘original vital records’ or whether the certificate had been amended.
Third, and most grievous, as a state-level, municipal employee way out in the State of Hawaii, Fukino neither has the federal authority, nor the qualifications to determine the Natural-born status of a candidate for federal office. In fact, Fukino’s audacious, bizarre proclamation is laughable and only exposes the State of Hawaii’s fragile confidence in their documentation procedures, let alone its ability to declare the historical meaning of Natural-born citizenship. That job falls under the federal authority of the Secret Service, the State Department in coordination with the state Elections Offices.
41. Hawaii’s Amazing Legitimate Birth Rate
Both papers also published the nearly two dozen announcements assuming that every child was born to married parents living at the same address, despite the fact that the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S.: Vol. 1 – Natality” shows that there were 1044 illegitimate births in Hawaii in 1961 in which the father was not identifiable. This is an average of three illegitimate births per day! Over the nine day period of births covered by the announcements in these two issues, one would expect to see at least one single mother, or unmarried couple, giving birth among the more than two dozen announcements surrounding Obama’s birth from late July to early August, 1961.
In fact, a review of every issue of the newspapers in the entire year of 1961 shows that all birth announcements were published by “married parents”. If the newspapers indeed printed accurate announcements based on testimony from the actual parents or family members there should be some information which does not conform to this cookie-cutter identical format when comparing each announcement between newspapers. However, the rigidity of the format, and the possibility of inaccuracies, led investigators to conclude that the originating information used to publish birth announcements in 1961 was not conveyed from the parents or family directly to the newspapers, but instead was first processed by a single municipal source, before being provided to the news papers.
Therefore, since we know Hawaii registers foreign births as being native births, the announcements would be published without the location of the birth, or marital status of the parents, as a consideration. This then would suggest that if there is any inaccuracy originating with the source information, which occurs in the transference between the registrant and the municipal authority, the newspapers would never see the necessity to confirm the accuracy of the information. Why would a newspaper take official information certified from a government agency in the form of a list and then expend resources to get a second opinion about its accuracy from the original registrant? They wouldn’t.
The newspapers print announcements without ever knowing if they are accurate or not when the information comes from the local municipal authority.
Therefore, since the municipal authority does not create its birth list discerning between native birth and foreign birth registrations it employs the policy of only publishing the address of the registrant, not the location of the birth. Since the municipal authority treats all births as legitimate, by default, it would construct the birth registration list as though the parents are married in every announcement and submit the list to the newspapers who would publish what appears to be all local, native births to married couples. The problem with this flawed procedure is that the announcements are not an accurate account of the actual facts of the natal event.
Unfortunately, there is no legal requirement that a birth announcement in a newspaper must match the metrics of an official birth certificate.
42. The Welfare of Baby Obama
Upon analyzing the procedures used to publish birth announcements, we discover vulnerabilities in the assumptions about the accuracy and content of the birth announcements. With a simple explanation, it becomes much more reasonable to assume that Obama’s birth announcements were never a part of some crazy-minded conspiracy but, instead, were simply the result of being included in the Hawaiian Health Departments birth registration lists after Obama’s birth was registered by Obama’s grandparents, more than likely, for the simple reason of making sure their daughter and grandson could receive state benefits as resident citizens of the U.S. Obama’s grandparents were indeed residing at the published address found in the announcements.
However, ignorant, hostile Obama supporters enjoy the opportunity to claim that so-called “birthers” believe a conspiracy of such magnitude that Obama’s birth announcements were planted in the Hawaiian papers in 1961 just in case Obama might run for president some day. This is a ridiculous canard. Only a blind ideologue would fail to realize that birth announcements do not verify Constitutional eligibility in the first place.
Therefore, both sides of the argument, either lauding birth announcements or ridiculing them, as a viable part of any conspiracy to promote the legitimacy of Obama is idiotic. If Obama’s birth announcements were not automatically conveyed by the registrar, they were more than likely submitted in collaboration with his mother or grandparents as a practical matter in order to simply share the news of Obama’s birth with the community and to, possibly, act to secure Obama’s eligibility for welfare and baby formula, not a nomination to the presidency.
However, without publishing the identity of the registrant, the editors of the newspapers printed all of the week’s announcements based on typically practiced protocols after receiving the official birth lists from the Hawaiian Department of Health. There was nothing premeditated or fraudulent about this. Municipal laws were followed and journalistic standards were correctly assumed considering the official source in the newspapers’ view. The possible breakdown in accuracy occurred as a result of the Department of Health’s legal ability to include foreign births in the Hawaiian birth registration lists and the registrant omitting birth location information, while the papers did not print it any way.
43. Obama’s Secret Natal Data
According to the “1961 Vital Statistics Report of theU.S. Volume 1 – Natality”, natal statistics were harvested using a “50% sampling method” and, furthermore, statistics were taken only from “even-numbered birth records” in 1961. Since Obama’s birth registration was allegedly an odd number, his unique natal statistics would remain ureported by the State of Hawaii, and unpublished as part of the U.S. Department of Health’s annual natal data report.
This is relative in the fact that, since Obama was a bi-racial, (categorized as non-white) baby allegedly born to an 18-year old, white mother and a non-white, non-citizen father, in an urban hospital in Hawaii in August of 1961, his natal statistics would be extremely notable and rare for this time and place. In fact, statistics show that less than 1 in 20,000 births occurred under these circumstances within the demographic classifications used by the National Vital Statistics Division in 1961.
The unconventional circumstances surrounding Obama’s birth are very conspicuous.
44. No Witnesses of Obama’s Birth Still Alive
To date, no living eyewitness of Obama birth exists. It is assumed that his birth was witnessed by at least three people including his doctor and his mother. However, no documentation of the birth has been provided containing the name of the doctor or eyewitnesses.
45. Obama’s Radicalism
Obama has lived a life wrought with radicalism. In his book, “Dreams From My Father”, Obama writes,
“…I chose my friends carefully, the more politically active black students, the foreign students, the Chicanos, the Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.”
In the late 1970’s a teenaged Barack Obama met Frank Marshall Davis while the two were both living in Hawaii. Davis, an avowed member of the Communist Party and one of the era’s poetic pioneers of fierce anti-American radicalism, developed a paternal-like relationship with Obama, which Obama acknowledges in his book, “Dreams From My Father”. The 1951 report of the Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified him as a Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA) member.
Obama has maintained lasting relationships with radicals throughout his entire life. He worked with ACORN activist and chapter leader, Madeline Talbott in 1992. He had a close personal relationship with domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers and served with Ayers on the board of the Woods Foundation, a radical Chicago-based education activism organization. Obama attended a church for 20 years where radical pastor, Jeremiah Wright, still maintains an anti-American ministry under the guise of Black Liberation Theology.
As the Obama presidency rampaged through its first year, Senior Environmental Advisor, Van Jones, resigned in early September, 2009 amidst a firestorm of controversy over his criminal and communist past. Then, in November, Anita Dunn resigned her position as White House Communications Director when video surfaced which exposed her as being in favor of the communist philosophy of Chinese dictator and mass murderer, Mao Tse Tung. Dunn admitted her communist inclinations in a speech to a group of high school students.
46. The Deaths of Lt. Quarles Harris and Donald Young
Quarles Harris was a key witness in a federal probe into charges that Obama’s passport information was stolen from the State Department, when he was fatally shot in front of a Washington D.C. church. Harris had been working as a contractor at the State Department and was cooperating with federal investigators when he was murdered.
In December, 2007, Donald Young was a choir leader at Obama’s church, First Trinity Baptist, and school teacher, who many believe had carnal knowledge of Obama’s past. Young was found shot to death in his Southside Chicago apartment.
47. Larry Sinclair’s Bizarre, But Probable Story
Of all the sordid stories circulating about Obama’s past, the one told by Larry Sinclair is the darkest. Sinclair posted a YouTube video alleging that he and President Barack Obama engaged in sexual acts and drug use together in 1999, when Obama was an Illinois State Senator. He claims that then-State Senator Obama procured powdered cocaine for Sinclair, and crack cocaine for himself, which Obama allegedly smoked.
Sinclair also alleges that their drug use was followed by sex acts that included Sinclair performing fellatio on Obama. These acts were alleged to take place in a limousine from which Sinclair provided cell phone records to prove his location on the dates in question. Testimony from the limosine driver has never been publicly published. Sinclair was asked to provide “intimate details” about Obama’s physical features which would prove Sinclair’s claims. His testimony has never been published or made public. Sinclair confesses openly that he is a convicted felon having served time for check fraud and drug possession.
Sinclair repeated his claims about his relationship with Obama in a highly publicized press conference at the National Press Club on June 18, 2008.
48. Passport Documents Released
Documents released in July, 2010, and posted on the Scribd.com website, show that Barack Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, applied for a passport in 1981, the same year Obama traveled to Pakistan. Dunham’s applications show that she had applied for and received three separate passports and a renewal between 1965 and 1981. However, in yet another example of convenient government complicity to obscure Obama’s actual past, the Hillary Clinton-led State Department claims that a General Services Administration directive in the 1980s resulted in the destruction of passport applications and other “non-vital” passport records, including Dunham’s 1965 passport application and any other passports she may have applied for, or held, prior to 1965. The released records also document that on Aug. 13, 1968, Ann Dunham applied to have her 1965-issued passport renewed for two years, until July 18, 1970.
The documents also reveal yet another possible name used to identify Barack Barry Hussein Obama Soetoro. According to the application for Dunham’s 1976 passport she uses the parenthetical name of (saebarkah), or perhaps “Subarkah”, which is a surname commonly found among Indonesian citizenry.
The existence of records of a passport or travel documents prior to 1965 would reveal information on Dunham’s circumstances at the time of Obama’s birth. Therefore, we can now add Ann Dunham’s original passport to the litany of records and documents now missing from Obama’s biographical history.
49. Tim Adams
In July, 2010, Tim Adams, a senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu Elections Office in 2008, made the stunning claim Barack Obama definitely was not born in Hawaii as the White House maintains, based on information he was told by the Vital Statistics Office in Hawaii that there is no original birth record on file for Barack Obama. In a televised interview, Adams reported that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama does not even exist in the Aloha State. Adams’ statements conflicted directly with repeated affirmations by public officials in Hawaii that they had seen or had inspected Obama’s birth records that would document his representations that he was born in the state.
“There is no birth certificate,” said Adams after leaving his position with the Elections Office and now teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green.
“It’s like an open secret. There isn’t one. Everyone in the government there knows this. I managed the absentee-ballot office. It was my job to verify the voters’ identity.”
50. Hawaiian Governor Offended
In December, 2010, newly elected Hawaiian Democratic governor, Neil Abercrombie proclaimed that he is undertaking an effort, in consultation with the Hawaiian Attorney General, to make Obama’s original birth documentation available to the public. In making his proclamation, Abercrombie claims that since he was a friend of the Obama’s during their attendance at the University of Hawaii and thereafter, he is personally offended by accusation from doubters that the Obama’s were involved in nefarious dealings with regard to Obama’s natal identity. Abercrombie said he also feels it is disrespectful to the office of the presidency to question Obama’s eligibility.
Despite being an alleged friend of the Obama family, Abercrombie was not invited to the couple’s alleged Hawaiian wedding in 1961, nor was he present at the alleged 1961 Hawaiian birth of Obama.
In response to Abercrombie’s proclamations, both Fox and MSNBC, while reporting on the story, admitted for the first time that Obama had not yet released an original version of his official, 1961, federal, U.S. Certificate of Live Birth signed by the attending physician bearing the name and seal of the hospital.
After exercising all of his gubernatorial power, Abercrombie later admitted to media that he could not find any official, original standard Certificate of Live Birth for Obama. Four months later, Hawaii released the image of the very document Abercrombie allegedly could not find.
51. Caught In the Lie
The Forgery of Obama’s “Long Form Certificate of Live Birth”. On April 27, 2011, the Obama White House confirmed the release of a digital image of a purported document claimed by White House officials and Obama himself as his official, original Long Form Certificate of Live Birth issued by the Hawaii Health Department.
In the months following the image’s release, multiple document analysts and computer experts have denounced the image as a forgery stating that it exhibits “…blatant and poorly concealed artifacts and characteristics which make it impossible to have been created in the 1960’s before printing and typographic technologies existed”… which are shown to have been used to produce the document.
One expert, with more than 30 years of experience with Adobe called the image a“literal joke”.
Among many of the document’s failures at authenticity are the artifacts revealing it was produced by a computer printer, not a typewriter, technology which did not exist in the State of Hawaii’s Health Department in 1961.
The aforementioned is an excerpt of an article by Dan Crosby of The Daily Pen:“Congress Refuses to Investigate Obama’s Illegal Presidency Because They Fear “Black People Behaving Like Animals” – Sentiment Among Congressional and Judicial Leadership Insults Black Americans While They Ignore a Greater “Silent” Threat From Vintage American Wrath”
Now, the story from Billy:
Obama: Where are your girl friends?????
Where are his girl friends??? Strange that none have popped up!!!!
Strange to the point of being down right WEIRD!
OK… this is past the ‘birthers’ questions…. this is just plain old
common sense, no political agendas for either side.
Just common knowledge for citizens of a country, especially American citizens, who even know that Andrew Jackson’s wife smoked a corn cob pipe and was accused of adultery, or that Lincoln never went to school or Kennedy wore a back brace or Truman played the piano.
We are Americans! We are known for our humanitarian interests and caring for our ‘fellow man.’ We care, but none of us know one single humanizing fact about the history of our own president.
Honestly, and this is a personal thing…but it’s niggled at me for ages that no one who ever dated him ever showed up. The simple fact of his charisma, which caused the women to be drawn to him so obviously during his campaign, looks like some lady would not have missed the opportunity….
We all know about JFK’s magnetism, McCain was no monk, Palin’s courtship and even her athletic prowess were probed. Biden’s aneurisms are no secret. Look at Cheney and Clinton–we all know about their heart problems. How could I have left out Wild Bill before or during the White House?
Nope… not one lady has stepped up and said, “He was soooo shy,” or
“What a great dancer!” Now look at the rest of this…. no classmates,
not even the recorder for the Columbia class notes ever heard of him.
I just don’t know about this fellow.
Who was the best man at his wedding? Start there. Then check groomsmen.
Then get the footage of the graduation ceremony.
Has anyone talked to the professors? It is odd that no one is bragging
that they knew him or taught him or lived with him.
When did he meet Michele and how? Are there photos? Every president
gives to the public all their photos, etc. for their library. What has
And who in hell voted for him to be the most popular man in 2010?????
Does this make you wonder?
Ever wonder why no one ever came forward from Obama’s past, saying they
knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc. ? Not one person
has ever come forward from his past.
This should really be a cause for great concern. To those who voted for him, you may have elected an unqualified, inexperienced shadow man.
Did you see a picture called The Manchurian Candidate?
Let’s face it. As insignificant as we all are… someone whom we went to
school with remembers our name or face … someone remembers we were the
clown or the dork or the brain or the quiet one or the bully or something
George Stephanopoulos of ABC News said the same thing during the 2008
campaign. He questions why no one has acknowledged the president was in
their classroom or ate in the same cafeteria or made impromptu speeches
on campus. Stephanopoulos also was a classmate of Obama at Columbia–the
class of 1984. He says he never had a single class with him.
While he is such a great orator, why doesn’t anyone in Obama’s college
class remember him? And, why won’t he allow Columbia to release his
NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA
Looking for evidence of Obama’s past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia
University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there,
but none remembered him. For example, Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama,
a political science major at Columbia, who also graduated in 1983. In
2008, Root says of Obama, “I don’t know a single person at Columbia that
knew him, and they all know me. I don’t have a classmate who ever knew
Barack Obama at Columbia … EVER!
Nobody recalls him. Root adds that he was also, like Obama, “Class of ’83
political science, pre-law” and says, “You don’t get more exact or closer
than that. Never met him in my life, don’t know anyone who ever met him.”
At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to
be the speaker of the class? Me. No one ever heard of Barack! And five
years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class
notes, who’s kind of the, as we say in New York, ‘the macha’ who knows
everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him.”
Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook, and Obama
consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia ,
provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or
friends while at Columbia …
NOTE: Root graduated as valedictorian from his high school,
Thornton-Donovan School , then graduated from Columbia University in 1983
as a political science major in the same class in which Barack Hussein Obama states he was.Some other interesting questions…
Why was Obama’s law license inactivated in 2002?
Why was Michelle’s law license inactivated by court order?
It is circulating that according to the U.S. Census, there is only one
Barack Obama but 27 Social Security numbers and over 80 aliases.
The Social Security number he uses now originated in Connecticut where he
is never reported to have lived. No wonder all his records are sealed!
Somewhere, someone had to know him in school…before he “reorganized” Chicago and burst upon the scene at the 2004 Democratic Convention and made us swoon with his charm, poise, and speaking pizzazz.
But who is it, and where are they?
August 29, 2010
Sent to me by a friend, with the following statement….watch for yourself. I’m tired of being called “birther”, “denier”, “looney” and whatever else just because I seek what is constitutional…vetting a president to make sure he is qualified…something Congress DID NOT do. The president certainly does NOTHING to disprove it, yet everything to keep it from being proved.
I say friends because I consider you all very dear to me. In one way or another you have touched my life in a positive way. In no way is this email to eliminate our friendship. I just felt it was necessary to share with you. We are living in times of great difficulty. The nation like never before is divided. There is a war among ourselves. America is in great danger.
I pray that when you finish listening to this clip you won’t be quick to judge. I pray that you will meditate on it for awhile before you let your lips speak on it. Do your own little investigation. Think like a detective. Gather all the evidence and let that speak for itself. Forget about the economy, illegal immigration, marriage, and all the other issues that are irrelevant to what is really at stake here.
Like I said earlier, ” I consider you all very dear to me.” I pray this will in no way separate us, but hopefully bring us closer together than ever.
January 31, 2010
October 15, 2009
What is it they call us? Birthers? People who want to know where Obama was born, and why is he hiding his birth certificate. If you wait long enough, it comes out. This was only a problem when you seek the office of President, when the Constitution forbids a foreign born person from holding the nations highest office. But, when Barrack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Sorieto, was running for Illinois senate, it wasn’t a problem. I give you the article from 2004, from the Associated Press:
Sunday, June 27, 2004
Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate
Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.
The allegations that horrified fellow Republicans and caused his once-promising candidacy to implode in four short days have given Obama a clear lead as Republicans struggled to fetch an alternative.
Ryan’s campaign began to crumble on Monday following the release of embarrassing records from his divorce. In the records, his ex-wife, Boston Public actress Jeri Ryan, said her former husband took her to kinky sex clubs in Paris, New York and New Orleans.
“It’s clear to me that a vigorous debate on the issues most likely could not take place if I remain in the race,” Ryan, 44, said in a statement. “What would take place, rather, is a brutal, scorched-earth campaign – the kind of campaign that has turned off so many voters, the kind of politics I refuse to play.”
Although Ryan disputed the allegations, saying he and his wife went to one ‘avant-garde’ club in Paris and left because they felt uncomfortable, lashed out at the media and said it was “truly outrageous” that the Chicago Tribune got a judge to unseal the records.
The Republican choice will become an instant underdog in the campaign for the seat of retiring Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald, since Obama held a wide lead even before the scandal broke.
“I feel for him actually,” Obama told a Chicago TV station. “What he’s gone through over the last three days I think is something you wouldn’t wish on anybody.”
The Republican state committee must now choose a replacement for Ryan, who had won in the primaries against seven contenders. Its task is complicated by the fact that Obama holds a comfortable lead in the polls and is widely regarded as a rising Democratic star.
The chairwoman of the Illinois Republican Party, Judy Topinka, said at a news conference, after Ryan withdrew, that Republicans would probably take several weeks to settle on a new candidate.
“Obviously, this is a bad week for our party and our state,” she said.
As recently as Thursday, spokesmen for the Ryan campaign still insisted that Ryan would remain in the race. Ryan had defended himself saying, “There’s no breaking of any laws. There’s no breaking of any marriage laws. There’s no breaking of the Ten Commandments anywhere.”
June 2, 2009
Politics Barack Obama, Barack Obama Citizenship, birth certificate, Constitution, Crooked Politicians, Crooked Politics, Economic Slowdown, Economy, founding fathers, government, supreme court Comments Off
From Carl, who does wonderful searches finding this material. It seems fitting, since a new Justice for SCOTUS is getting ready to be named, to bring up once again, the job that the current court is still not doing. You may or may not agree with some of this, but it’s worth reading. Then, PLEASE, read the letter at the end. Tell me this lady knows which side the bread is buttered on. Thanks again, Carl!
AKA Obama Fans: All together now – say OMG!!
by Aristotle the Hun
Somehow, you know it’s coming. That OMG moment is just around the corner. You can feel the inescapable reality creeping up on you. Something will leak. Someone will spill the beans.“For nothing is hid that shall not be made manifest, nor anything secret that shall not be known and come to light.” Luke 8:17
It isn’t hard to imagine the gnawing anxiety that AKA OBAMA (Also Known As: an acronym used to describe suspicious persons who use more than one name) lives with, day in and day out. Much has been written about AKA OBAMA’s behavior that reminds mental health experts and others of NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder.) A frequent manifestation of such a disorder is The Narcissist, as Liar and Con-man.This disorder is frequently misunderstood as “self-love.” A more accurate understanding is love of a reflection of one’s self. Abused, abandoned and neglected children will compensate for damaged egos by creating an ideal reflection of themselves that they then embellish and vigorously defend. A person with NPD is quite capable of a mind twisting position like, “I have nothing to hide but I am hiding things anyway.” AKA OBAMA certainly fits the model of having such a childhood. While I am not in the position to deliver an official In Absentia diagnosis of a full strength NPD case, many of the indicators are present.If AKA OBAMA were not in a position of public trust, most of us would probably overlook such deception and secrecy. For those of us who care about our Constitution and the rule of law, the issue becomes clear in this article that appeared in on-line Pravda by international columnist, Mark S. McGrew The Mysterious Shadow: Code Name Obama.Most Americans do not want their president to be secretive about his past. However, if one is living a lie to preserve the ego compensating, idealized reflection of self, one will go to great lengths to hide things that most would routinely reveal.For the person who has NPD tendencies, the lies used to create the reflection become so numerous that eventually the man in the mirror cracks, and so does the real human being hiding behind the reflection.A useful tool in evaluating things that are not known with certainty is Occam’s razor. When multiple competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam’s razor is usually understood. I condense this to the simple question; what is most likely? In our discussion of the documents which AKA has hidden, most of this article is an examination of which explanation is most likely.
For example; which is most likely;
(a) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are innocuous?
(b) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are damaging?What we know with certainty is that AKA OBAMA is not practicing the virtue of full disclosure. “ The biggest question, and the biggest reason for asking more questions, is the fact Obama has enlisted law firms across the nation to battle every attempt to access, among other documents, his birth, schooling, immigration or passport records.” New Jersey attorney Mario ApuzzoThere are so many potential sources that can end AKA OBAMA’s Presidency that it is impossible to keep them all quiet. It’s just a matter of time. As columnist Davvy Kidd says, IMPOSTOR PRESIDENT OBAMA: VICTORY WILL BE SHORT LIVED. First, let’s think of all the lawyers and support staff involved in keeping the birth certificate issue quiet. Isn’t it likely that some of them know what they are hiding? Isn’t it likely that several people at the Hawaiian Department of Public Health know what is, or is not, on the original birth certificate that AKA OBAMA refuses to release? Did you know that there is a one million dollar reward offered for AKA OBAMA’s Hawaiian birth certificate?Please get this straight: Hawaiian officials have not validated AKA OBAMA’s place of birth. What they have said is that they “have the original document” on file. They haven’t offered a clue as to what information is in that document. They can not legally validate what is on that document without a court order or permission from “our” Chicago con-man. Laws of the Territory of Hawaii ACT 96 To Provide For The Issuance Of Certificates Of Hawaiian Birth was in effect from 1911 until 1972 and allowed someone who was born outside the Hawaiian Islands to be registered as though he were born in Hawaii. Under that law, someone simply would have presented herself to the Hawaiian authorities and declared that the child was born in Hawaii. The person could have sworn under oath and presented witnesses and other evidence. If the authorities accepted it, that was the end of it. The only way to know where AKA OBAMA was actually born is to view AKA OBAMA’s original birth certificate from 1961 to see what kind of birth certificate it is, and to examine what corroborating evidence supports what its says about AKA OBAMA’s alleged place of birth. If the birth was in a hospital, as AKA OBAMA has maintained, such evidence would be the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor that delivered him.
The Certification of Live Birth that was published on AKA OBAMA’s campaign web site is not a Birth Certificate. It is easy to tell the difference between the two types of documents. It is very likely that the COLB used by AKA OBAMA’s campaign is a fraudulent document. Several forensic document examiners have carefully scrutinized the COLB and declared it suspicious or an obvious forgery. The best evidence presented so far is from the Ron Polarik, PhD.
Dr. Polarik writes: “There are laws on the books in Hawaii and the Federal Statutes that clearly spell out exactly what constitutes forgery, and in both Hawaii State Law and the Federal Statutes, the act of altering an official government document — even if it is just a facsimile of that document — constitutes forgery. The bogus COLB that Obama created is also considered to be a “false identification document, a felony forgery.” Dr. Polarik’s evidence is preserved online. There is also a YouTube video summary of the evidence.
After reviewing Dr. Polarik’s analysis, Sandra Lines says, “I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.” Sandra Ramsey Lines summary is posted at U. S. Law Blog.
As long as we are on the subject of falsified documents, it seems that AKA OBAMA never registered for the draft, as required by Selective Service laws. When his career began to be noticed by the public, suddenly draft registration records appeared. Unfortunately for AKA OBAMA these documents have also been exposed as forgeries.Another piece of information that many fail to realize is that in the birth certificate cases, all that is needed is for the case to be heard. This case will be over in the “Discovery” phase. Before a trial starts both sides are required by the court to put all their cards on the table to avoid “trial by ambush.” The judge orders all evidence to be presented by both sides. Since this case is about discovering documents that are hidden, the case will be decided by court-ordered presentation of all relevant records. Lawyers in birth certificate cases don’t need to win a trial; they only need to get a trial.Enough on the hidden birth certificate and forged documents.
For those of you who think ridicule and name calling are effective debate tactics, I refer your kool-aid drenched, tin foil protected brains (a dose of your own medicine) to this article from American Thinker; Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is LegitimateWhat about the legal team that is keeping AKA OBAMA’s college records hidden? Several people probably know what they are hiding. The best guess as to what is so secret isn’t likely to be bad grades. More likely his admission papers will say he was a foreign student, or that he was receiving financial aid as a foreign student. How many people do you estimate already know what is on AKA OBAMA’s college documents? Those records were handled routinely for more than 20 years. How many personnel in the registrar’s offices of Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard University have seen AKA OBAMA’s records and know what is in them? How many of those people would be willing to talk about it, or maybe even “leak” just one sheet of paper that would put even more cracks in AKA OBAMA’s mirror? Is that number likely to be zero?Do you think that AKA OBAMA worries about how many people know something that could destroy his career? Fear of being “found out” is an obsession for NPD types.So far we have only talked about the original birth certificate, supposedly locked up in Hawaii, and AKA OBAMA’s draft and college records. Already the potential sources for leaks are numerous. And you can bet that AKA OBAMA and his lawyers are concerned about many more possible leaks than these.There is a long list of vulnerability points for leaks, and there is a story behind every one of them:Soetoro adoption records –Punahou (Indonesia) School records –Passports records –Any INS (Immigration & Naturalization Services) or port of entry documentation which may have been generated in his infancy or childhood –Selective Service Registration (Released, but is possibly an altered document) –Harvard Law Review articles (None, maybe 1, not signed) –University of Chicago scholarly articles (None) –Law practice client list –Illinois State Senate records (locked up to prohibit public view) –llinois State Senate schedule (Lost. All other Illinois State Senators’ records are intact) –Baptism certificate –Medical records -International columnist Mark S. McGrew* sums it up succinctly: “With all of Obama’s different names, with his documented long term relations to convicted criminals, with his active efforts to prohibit us from knowing where he was born, with his active efforts to keep us from seeing his credentials, with his documented registration to practice law, professing to have only one name, with his being an ex-attorney not authorized to practice law, but representing himself as such, with his non-existent “Office of The President Elect,” with the dozen or so lawsuits against him to determine his citizenship status, with the various promises he made to voters and on which he has since reneged, with his documented lack of respect to America, with his refusal to salute the American flag with others on stage or even to stand at attention, and his other disrespectful actions, with his many millions of dollars in campaign funds suspected to be from foreign sources, with campaign donations accepted from possible terrorists groups, . . . Obama has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he can not in any way, shape or form be trusted.”* Mark S. McGrew frequently writes for Pravda and other foreign media outlets, because of the lack of free press in the United States.I would ask the reader to accept the premise that there are many potential leaks from those things that are being kept hidden by a man who promised transparency in government.But there are other problems from sources that are not hidden.AKA OBAMA himself has made it known that his father was from Kenya.We know that records indicate that AKA OBAMA’s biological father was Barack Obama Sr, a Kenyan native, and a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s offspring. We know that the geographical location of AKA OBAMA’s birth is not considered by British law. Who the father was determines citizenship, not where you are born. Had AKA OBAMA been born in Tokyo or Texas he would still be a citizen of the United Kingdom under The British Nationality Act. A similar practice governs who is considered a citizen in several countries. Judaism is matrilineal, meaning that your mother’ lineage determines whether you are a Jew. That is why Jews from all over the world can claim Israeli citizenship.British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.In other words, at the time of his birth, AKA OBAMA might have been a U.S. citizen (by virtue of his allegedly being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.Obama’s British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya is, on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963…2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), becomes a citizen of Kenya on the 12th of December, 1963.As a citizen of the UKC who was born in Kenya, Obama’s father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UKC status at birth and given that Obama’s father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), it follows that Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship after 1963.So we know for sure that, if OBAMA Sr is in fact his legal father, then AKA OBAMA was a citizen of the United Kingdom and then Kenya. Given all the efforts to keep his birth certificate hidden, it is reasonable to assume that he is not a citizen of the United States, but even if he were born in downtown Denver he would still have triple citizenship, and is thus ineligible to hold the office of President.There is a similar problem with AKA OBAMA’s possible Indonesian citizenship. School records have surfaced that clearly indicate AKA OBAMA being listed as a “Muslim” with “Indonesian” citizenship.So AKA OBAMA has been a citizen of the UK, Kenya, and there are inconclusive documents indicating that he was also a citizen of Indonesia. The missing birth certificate may be a false clue that leads away from the big crime. Even if Obama were born in Hawaii* he would still be ineligible to serve as President because of his dual (perhaps triple) citizenship.*not likely, given the effort expended to keep the information about his birth a secret. By AKA OBAMA’s and Bob Bauer, AKA OBAMA’s Lead Lawyer’s, own reports, AKA OBAMA has spent Six Hundred and Eighty Eight Thousand Dollars ($688,000.00) on legal fees defending against lawsuits claiming that he is not eligible. Why would AKA OBAMA spend that much money to hide a $10 Birth Certificate?
Pay attention to this next quoted paragraph:“Don’t be distracted by the birth certificate and Indonesian issues. They are irrelevant to Senator Obama’s ineligibility to be President. Since Barack Obama’s father was a Citizen of Kenya, and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Senator Obama’s birth, then Senator Obama was a British Citizen “at birth,” just like the Framers of the Constitution, and therefore, even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on US soil, he still wouldn’t be eligible to be President.” Leo C. DonofrioThe facts are clear, and the law is clear. All it will take is for a judge to issue a ruling. Do you think AKA OBAMA and his lawyers fret about this? They certainly are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight this issue. So far, no court or judge has issued a ruling on the merits of any legal case against AKA OBAMA. Cases have been dismissed on legal technicalities, but no actual case has yet been heard.There are other potential leaks that come from AKA OBAMA’s international history. If Obama was born in Kenya, there should be a record of that birth in UK records. There are probably people in England and Kenya who already have information that would put cracks in AKA OBAMA’s distorted reflection of himself, and there is other information that can be mined from archives. The same is true for Indonesia.In the unlikely outcome that none of the people talk, and none of the documents surface, would AKA OBAMA than be free of obsessive fear of being found out? No, even if none of his secrets are revealed and none of his lies are exposed, he will continue to remain vulnerable.Because of the way AKA OBAMA ran his campaign; donations from Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse, donations from illegal foreign sources, and ACORN’s crimes; More than half the voter registrations turned in by ACORN canvassers during the last election were not valid, according to testimony to be presented before a House Judiciary subcommittee, etc, AKA Obama is subject to criminal violations of the Internal Revenue Code, federal campaign finance laws, and laws against voter registration fraud, according to a memo by Cleta Mitchell, co-chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association. In spite of all this Congressional Democrats still want the group to be eligible for federal money.You may have noticed that the usual role of the media in ferreting out high jinks in high places has not been mentioned. There is no “All the President’s Men” movie in the making. No one is being considered for a Pulitzer Prize for investigating AKA OBAMA. Is journalism dead in America? Well no, not quite.Somebody, a major news outlet executive, has done the Pulitzer research.On his To The Point News website, Dr. Jack Wheeler said he will “Let the source of the information reveal it, in his own time. “…the details of what he told me are for him to reveal when he chooses, not me. I can tell you it is OMG wild.”So get ready folks. One of these days I will be asking all of you AKA Obama fans to, “All together now, say OMG!”My conclusion: Obama will be indicted and charged very soon. Keeping in mind that the role of a grand jury is to determine if enough evidence exists to refer a case to the courts for trial, can any objective person review information like that presented above and reject the premise that this case needs to be referred to the courts for prosecution?It is very likely that the American Grand Jury effort will result in an indictment by a conventionally impaneled Grand Jury.The American Grand Jury was designed in a unique and very creative manner. Bob Campbell, the Founder of American Grand Jury, wanted to find a way to impanel a grand jury that was convenient, available free of charge to all citizens, and had maximum impact. He came up with a brilliant plan!From across the nation citizens can collectively examine and discuss the evidence, make a decision whether to indict, and then act with the full power of the U.S. Constitution to present the indictment to local, state and federal authorities. American Grand Jury will also empower individual representatives to act on behalf of American Grand Jury Members and make presentments of evidence to jurisdictions anywhere in the United States. These representatives will be sworn in and subject to an oath similar to the American Grand Jury Members, and will then be authorized to make presentments to such authorities as Sheriffs, County, State and Federal Prosecutors.Even if the American Grand Jury were ignored, and deemed legally impotent, we can still expect a powerfully awakening increase in awareness and outrage on the part of the citizens. There are many potencies beyond the legal system.However, it is highly unlikely that not even one jurisdiction will take action on the indictment. All we need is one jurisdiction to order “Discovery.” The case against AKA OBAMA is unique because it will be over in the Discovery phase, as the first step in a criminal complaint. The goal of the project is to discover what AKA OBAMA doesn’t want us to know, and why he doesn’t want us to know it. Our goal will be achieved without a trial.
Our goal is to present indictments in every jurisdiction of the union;
3,007 entities named “County”16 Boroughs in Alaska11 Census Areas in Alaska (for areas not organized into Boroughs by the State)64 Parishes in Louisiana42 Independent Cities (1 in Maryland, 1 in Missouri, 1 in Nevada, and the remainder in Virginia)1 District – the Federal District or District of Columbia.For a total of 3,191 opportunities to bring criminal charges against offending politicians.
Even if an independently convened grand jury is mistakenly seen as merely people assembling to exercise their Constitutional right to “redress their grievances,” that is no small thing. Hundreds of people in such “assemblies” will be examining evidence and presenting the results of their investigation to appropriate county, state, and federal authorities, some of whom will almost certainly form more conventional Grand Juries to indict AKA OBAMA. Can one honestly surmise that there is not one prosecutor or judge in the entire nation who questions AKA OBAMA’s eligibility to be President?Once the American Grand Jury presentments are made, it is likely that many prosecutors and judges will want a copy of the evidence.The American Grand Jury organization with which I am affiliated is using recognized expert witnesses with a long professional history of forensic testimony. The guiding principles for the project are the usual protocols of epistemology, scientific methodology, and rules of evidence. Any prosecutor or judge who ignores such evidence and testimony is at risk of being seen as acquiescent.
WOW!!! This lady is right on the money, and she’s not afraid to take credit for it either!! She left her name and phone number at the end!
This letter you are about to read was written by a 4th grade teacher this past week. She even gave the world her telephone and fax numbers. We are in dire need of more true American citizens who are proud of OUR United States of America. WAKE UP AMERICA . . . please . . . before it is too late!April 27, 2009The White House1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NWWashington , DC 20500Mr. Obama:I have had it with you and your administration, sir. Your conduct on yourrecent trip overseas has convinced me that you are not an adequaterepresentative of the United States of America collectively or of me personally.You are so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans and the Muslim world thatyou have abdicated the responsibilities of the President of the UnitedStates of America. You are responsible to the citizens of the United States.You are not responsible to the peoples of any other country on earth. Ipersonally resent that you go around the world apologizing for the UnitedStates telling Europeans that we are arrogant and do not care about theirstatus in the world. Sir, what do you think the First World War and theSecond World War were all about if not the consideration of the peoples ofEurope? Are you brain dead? What do you think the Marshall Plan was all about?Do you not understand or know the history of the 20th century? Where do youget off telling a Muslim country that the United States does not consideritself a Christian country? Have you not read the Declaration ofIndependence or the Constitution of the United States? This country wasfounded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this country,at least until you came along, come directly from this heritage. Do you notunderstand this?Your bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans.OurPresident does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia.You don’t show Great Britain, our best and one of our oldest allies, therespect they deserve yet you bow down to the king of Saudi Arabia. How dareyou, sir! How dare you!You can’t find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generationbecause you don’t want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosquein Turkey. You offended our dead and every veteran when you give the Germansmore respect than the people who saved the German people from themselves.What’s the matter with you?I am convinced that you and the members of your administration have thehistorical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed ofyourselves, all of you. You are so self-righteously offended by the bigbankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about thereal thieves in this situation, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, JamieGorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses. What do youintend to do about them? Anything? I seriously doubt it.What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses totheir staff members — on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raisesthat lawmakers gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a17% bonus. I took a 5% cut in my pay to save jobs with my employer.You haven’t said anything about that. Who authorized that? I surely didn’t!Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million inbonuses over an eighteen-month period, that’s $45 million more than the AIGbonuses. In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded$51 million — not a bad take. Who authorized that and why haven’t youexpressed your outrage at this group who are largely responsible for theeconomic mess we have right now.I resent that you take me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead and notcaring about what you idiots do. We are watching what you are doing and weare getting increasingly fed up with all of you. I also want you to knowthat I personally find just about everything you do and say to be offensiveto every one of my sensibilities. I promise you that I will work tirelesslyto see that you do not get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.Sincerely,Every Real American
Ms Kathleen LydayFourth Grade TeacherGrandview Elementary School11470 Hwy. CHillsboro, MO 63050
- – - – - – - – - -
May 5, 2009
Ranting and Raving 1st amendment, 2nd amendment, Barack Obama Citizenship, Congress, Constitution, Crooked Politicians, Crooked Politics, Democrats, Economic Slowdown, founding fathers, free speech, Gay Rights, gun control, hate crime legislation, Republicans, states rights 2 Comments
Just the other day I saw a blog and got an email about how the legislators in Oklahoma had stood up for once and passed several distasteful conservative values. They voted for a monument to the 10 commandments, verified gun carry rights, and banned the marriage of homosexuals. Now, they are under attack by the left, the ACLU, and others saying that Muslims need equality, anti-Christians, perverts and so forth. Let me very simply fix this. If you don’t like it, go somewhere else that your hokey vision of rights is acceptable. See, the founders wrote our laws based on Christianity, and said we should be tolerable of other religions, not acceptable. Rights were unalienable, of God, not of law. We had the right of free speech, the ability to call a spade a spade, and the ability to do it under the protection of American law that no one seems to understand – most of all, our own government.
The Oklahoma legislature must have studied the Constitution and figured out they had the right to make law that trumped federal law. By the way, for all morons that disagree with that, you might read the 10th amendment. The feds have no right to peek at me, gps me, take my guns, keep me from talking about them, invade my privacy, or take my property. None, nada, nil, any. Read the Constitution. The 5th says they may offer just compensation, not take, and even then the right of due process is owed. They forget that part, because they know you can’t afford the fight. So, when will we wake up? When will something knock us out of “our own little world” bubble enough that we finally challenge the authority of the government against the Constitution? Our founders guaranteed it, they fought for it, and they died for it.
Are we willing to do the same, or are we going to watch each other roll over and show the whites of our soft bellies? I keep watching all the Dems defend Obama. Give him a chance they say. Let me set another scenario for you. If Al Franken is appointed the winner in Wisconsin, the state that elected Jessie Ventura governor, so be ready, Obama has the White House, Congress, and with a swift appointment or two, the Supreme Court. That is NOT balance of power, that is an instant ticket to socialism. It is dangerous for either side to wield that kind of power.
Attend the tea parties; speak out about all this unfair spending, high taxes and crooked government. Our children are counting on us for their future, God expects that of you, and remember, WE, AMERICANS, were guaranteed our rights by the Constitution, not by barter, not by attrition, and not by threat. Other religions are welcome, but are not to be forced upon us, nor used against us. Liberalism is good in balance, but not as the rule, it will in its current form, make America a third world country.
I am not ready for that, I don’t wish it on your children or mine, and I will fight for balance and the Constitution as long as I have breath. I hope you will also do the same in every way that you can. You owe it to the founders who gave you the freedom to read and understand that you can. You have the obligation to answer the call.
March 18, 2009
Common Sense Information, Politics, Ranting and Raving 1st amendment, Bailout, Barack Obama, Barack Obama Citizenship, Constitution, Crooked Politics, founding fathers, free speech, Stimulus bill, Tea Party 4 Comments
The Party may just be starting!!!! Coming to a city near you soon.
March 17, 2009
Thank the Lord this woman has moxey. After hearing that another liberal judge struck down Alan Keyes lawsuit on this in California, we can now see if our Chief Justice puts his money where his mouth is.
BORN IN THE USA?
Chief justice accepts ‘eligibility’ petition
Roberts agrees to read Obama docs, consider WND’s 330,000 signers
Posted: March 14, 2009
4:45 pm Eastern
By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A California lobbying the U.S. Supreme Court for a review of Barack Obama’s to be president confronted the chief justice yesterday with legal and a WND petition bearing names of over 325,000 people asking the court to rule on whether or not the sitting president fulfills the Constitution’s “natural-born citizen” clause.
According to Orly Taitz, the attorney who confronted Chief Justice John Roberts at a lecture at the University of Idaho, the promised before the gathered crowd that he would, indeed, read and review the briefs and petition.
“I addressed him in front of 800 people in the audience,” Taitz told WND, “including university officials, the president of the Idaho State Bar and the chief justice of the of Idaho, and in front of all them, [Roberts] promised to read my papers.”
, Idaho, university. Roberts has been chief justice of the Supreme Court since his nomination by President George W. Bush and subsequent confirmation in 2005.
Earlier in the week, Taitz confronted Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who told her the issue of Obama’s eligibility, which has been raised before the Supreme Court at least four times but has yet to be given a single hearing, still lacked the votes of the required four justices in conference before it would be officially heard.
Taitz said, “I told Scalia that I was an attorney that filed Lightfoot v. Bowen that Chief Justice Roberts distributed for conference on Jan. 23 and now I represent nine state reps and 120 military officers, many of them high ranked, and I want to know if they will hear Quo Warranto and if they would hear it on original jurisdiction, if I bring as an additional defendant to unseal the records and ascertain Obama’s legitimacy for presidency.”
The legal phrase Quo Warranto essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto “affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents.”
Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the “natural-born American” clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 325,000 others and sign up now!
“Tell me what to do, what can I do?” Taitz reports asking Scalia. “Those soldiers [her plaintiffs] can be court-martialed for asking a legitimate question, who is the president, is he legitimate?”
She says Scalia responded, “Bring the case, I’ll hear it, I don’t know about others.”
In Idaho, Taitz obtained the promise of one of the others, the chief justice, that he would read through the eligibility challenge, including the petition brought by WND readers.
As WND reported, Taitz is submitting a motion to the Supreme Court for re-hearing of Lightfoot v. Bowen, a case she is working on through her foundation Defend Our Freedoms, alleging some of her documentation may have been withheld from the justices by a court clerk.
She asserts docketing information about her case “was erased from the docket of the Supreme Court on January 21st, one day after the inauguration and two days before [the case was to be heard].”
At the lecture in Idaho, Taitz grabbed the attention of Justice Roberts by boldly addressing her allegation that a clerk had buried the case.
Taitz told WND that the forum rules required that those questioning Roberts announce their relationship to the University of Idaho and refrain from talking about cases currently before or likely to appear before the court.
“I said, ‘Justice Roberts, my name is Orly Taitz. I’m an attorney from California, and I got up at 3 o’clock in the middle of the night, flew and drove thousands of miles just to ask you a question. So please give me some leeway,’” Taitz told WND. “My question is, do you know there is illegal activity going on in the Supreme Court of the States?”
According to Taitz, the room was stunned silent as she continued, “I have presented my case to you, and you personally agreed to hear this case in conference. But your clerk refused to forward a supplemental brief to you. He has hidden this brief from you. He refused to put it on the docket. Additionally, my case was erased from the docket one day after the Inauguration, two days before my case was to be heard.
“Outraged citizens and members of the media and state representatives are calling the Supreme Court, demanding to have the case reentered on the docket,” Taitz told Roberts.
Then she held up the WND petition and continued, “Moreover, here are the names of U.S. citizens who signed this petition and who sent individual letters to individual justices, including you, Justice Roberts, all of them demanding the same thing – that you hear my case in regards to Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility for presidency.”
According to Taitz, Roberts approached the microphone and said, “I see you have papers. I promise you I will read all your papers, I will review them. Please give them to my Secret Service and I will review all of them.”
Shortly thereafter, Taitz told WND, a Secret Service agent identified by his badge as Gilbert Shaw accepted two suitcases of documents and pledged to deliver them to Roberts.
Taitz reports the documents included four major sections:
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, some suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Although Obama officials have told WND all such allegations are “garbage,” here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama’s eligibility:
In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama’s eligibility include:
March 5, 2009
Well, one of the 12 dwarfs is in the US Senate….Dopey. Enter Mel Martinez with this stroke of brilliance:
A U.S. senator has suggested that voters have made Barack Obama eligible to occupy the Oval Office, whether or not he meets the constitutional mandate of being a “natural born” citizen.
The comments from Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., came in an e-mail sent to a constituent shortly after the election, which just now was forwarded to WND.
The constituent had asked about Martinez’s perspective on the issue on which WND and others have reported: claims made by dozens of lawsuits around the country that Obama might not meet the constitutional for various reasons.
“Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history,” Martinez responded.
“And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of president,” he wrote.
Read the rest on wnd here:
Please, help me understand why people who learn the English language can’t understand English words. The Constitution is written in English. We have a senator that thinks a vote trumps the document. Please show these clowns to the door! Woe to us….it’s time for a Tea Party.